Can a Muslimah marry a non-Muslim?

siki

Salaam siki

Thanks for the prompt reply

What's the difference between the construction of this verse and the following one

443 "...and if you are ill or on a journey or come from answering the call of nature or have been in sexual contact with women and you find no water, perform tayammum..."

If this verse addresses both genders, whom is it addressing by the phrase (have been in sexual contact with women)?

samia!

where were you when i posted the following, in http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12100.15 , and asked your opinion.

I requote

Sister Twilight! How are you?

I appreciate your keen sense of observation. There is no confusion on marrying a women belonging to the people following previous scriptures, and their men, not being authorized. However you have a point here, in the verse 5-6 ,

First of all , in case of ceremonial impurity, the arabic word is "Janabat" , ( which is a condition after sex resulting into discharge of semen) , The bath is a must for both, because this particular condition is described for both by calling , O you believe,,,,

The second part of the verse which says "lamastum un nissa", however is not as dirty a condition and hence is, grouped along with some other less than clean situations. It can be explained as "sexual touchings", not resulting into an intercourse.

I find your objection to be valid. This sentence should have been worded in a manner , leaving no room for such an objection, but it does not . It means only two things,

1, the women have been intentionally exempted from this clause.

2, the word nissa may have some different meanings which i am not knowledgeable enough to answer. Sister Samia some time back did mention, that in Arabic Grammer , the word Rijjal and nissa contain both. May be now she is required to explain. However till then, i would go with your objection and consider the first option to be more valid.

siki

peace

siki

Samia

samia!

where were you when i posted the following, in http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12100.15 , and asked your opinion.

I am really sorry. I was away from home, on a job from morning to night, hardly having time to scroll all the threads.

As for the word "nisaa'", my understanding is that it bears two meanings, one of them being "women". In the verse I quoted, it has to mean "women". Both verses (443 and 55) address both genders. The point is that the qur'aan has its exclusive sociolinguistics rule where "she" contains "he". In such a case, the translation should be "the opposite gender/sex" "..or (if) you have been in sexual contact with the opposite sex"; "and the "mu7sins of the opposite sex among the followers of the previous scripture" ...

Phil

Salam all,

I wonder if anyone here ever consider the term almushrikati/mushrikatin/almushrikeena/mushrikin in Q2221 is referring to a person that is single/not having partner? Hence the context of the ayat is advocating monogamy that lead "Garden" as oppose to "Fire" when one practices polygyny/polygamy.

Any comments?

Thanks,

Samia

Salam all,

I wonder if anyone here ever consider the term almushrikati/mushrikatin/almushrikeena/mushrikin in Q2221 is referring to a person that is single/not having partner?
Thanks,

Salaam phil

The verse mentions the mushrik/mushrika in opposition to mu'min/mu'mina. Unless there is a way to understand "mu'min/mu'mina" as single people, I do not think we can take mushrik/mushrika as married persons!

Phil

Salaam phil

The verse mentions the mushrik/mushrika in opposition to mu'min/mu'mina. Unless there is a way to understand "mu'min/mu'mina" as single people, I do not think we can take mushrik/mushrika as married persons!

Peace Samia,

Thanks for the prompt reply.

I'm still searching and analyzing the meaning of "mu'min/mu'mina" and its roots from other verses in al Qur'an and cross checking with Lanes. But is there any justification of the addition (with God) which commonly attached to words mushrik/mushrika in Q2221 as found in most of Qur'an translations? In other words, why the terms almushrikati/almushrikeena has to be understood as seting up partners (with God)?

Regards,

Lost_Philosopher

Lol, the Great Reading is referring to Al Quran.

Coincedentally the Quran was my first guess.

siki

As for the word "nisaa'", my understanding is that it bears two meanings, one of them being "women". In the verse I quoted, it has to mean "women". Both verses (443 and 55) address both genders. The point is that the qur'aan has its exclusive sociolinguistics rule where "she" contains "he". In such a case, the translation should be "the opposite gender/sex" "..or (if) you have been in sexual contact with the opposite sex"; "and the "mu7sins of the opposite sex among the followers of the previous scripture" ...

Salam Samia

I am not in a position to comment on Rijjal and Nissa as to weather they contain both the genders , or Not, but one thing i am quiet sure, " Moh7sinnats"( specially in 5-5) do not contain Moh7sineen.

peace

siki

Samia

Salam Samia

" Moh7sinnats"( specially in 5-5) do not contain Moh7sineen.

peace

siki

Why?

If you believe that the whole verse addresses men only, then you can say that. But that will not be the end of the problem. You will have to

prove why you believe that a verse is exclusively for men (not based on muhsanaat)
that food of "ahlul kitaab" is not lawful to women

Otherwise
3. how an address suddenly changes from (to all mu'mins/people) to just men

Samia

Peace Samia,

Thanks for the prompt reply.

In other words, why the terms almushrikati/almushrikeena has to be understood as seting up partners (with God)?

Regards,

You're welcome, phil

It is understood in this way from the context of verses and by understanding the root of the word. Sometimes it is even explained in this manner when it is explicitly mentioned "shrik billahi" as in the first commandment of the Straight Path and in many other verses.

progod

Peace,

In old Classical Arabic

Groups of people that include males are reffered to as male groups.
Women don't have sex, Men have sex with women.
Women don't marry, Men marry or marry off women.

Godbless,
Anwar

Samia

Peace,

In old Classical Arabic

Groups of people that include males are reffered to as male groups.
Women don't have sex, Men have sex with women.
Women don't marry, Men marry or marry off women.

Godbless,
Anwar

Salaam Anwar

Universal sociolinguistics...not specific to Arabic. The quraan is not to be subjected to universal sociolinguistics or grammar.
?
In the qur'aan there is no "marry off women". There is "marry off (yunki7) to men".

How old is "old classical Arabic"? What is the oldest document in classical Arabic you know of?

siki

Why?

If you believe that the whole verse addresses men only, then you can say that. But that will not be the end of the problem. You will have to

prove why you believe that a verse is exclusively for men (not based on muhsanaat)
that food of "ahlul kitaab" is not lawful to women

Otherwise
3. how an address suddenly changes from (to all mu'mins/people) to just men

because no where in quran mohsinnat,Mushrikat or Mominat can ever mean to include both genders, where as Mohsineen, Momineen or Mushrikeen is always taken for both.

siki

unknownuser

Otherwise
3. how an address suddenly changes from (to all mu'mins/people) to just men

Some times simple things become so hard to understand..... There is nothing wrong in changing the addressee in one sentence!

progod

Peace,

I use Old Classical Arabic to refer to all early Islamic Arabic and pre-Quranic Arabic. I would say that this Arabic goes up to the rennaissance period. I can't speak for Arabic documents of the 18-19 century, unless they are religious documents, which still count as early Islamic. When I say Old Classical Arabic I am specifically eluding to the Arabic used in Pre-Islamic poetry, Hadeeth literature, the Quran and early Islamic treatises.

I'm not sure what you mean about universal sociolinguistics. However, in Old Arabic as you know only a man can yankih a woman. (nakaha also means to have sex). So when you say yunkih you cause to marry i.e. facilitate a man marrying a woman.

Only men can have sex with women in Old Arabic, not the other way around. Not to be too specific but is probably because the male is proactive in this role.

So when talking about sex these will obviosly be addressed to men. We should read it literally as (When your men have sex with your women then all of you . . . )

I also ran into trouble with this when it came to washing for prayer etc. when I read this in the Quran.

Godbless,
Anwar

progod

Peace,

Oh, as it concerns the issue of Muslim women marrying non-muslim men, i think that firstly it is better put as Non-Muslim men marrying Muslim women (semantics, but this is how the Arabic approaches it).

Secondly the issue is not about Muslims marrying Muslims. But about the faithful to God marrying those faithful to God, and not marrying those who make equals with God or deny or are unfaithful to him.

In my opinion it is obvious that women who are faithful to God and believe in the Quran should not marry those who take others as equals with God or deny Him or are unfaithful to Him all together. That means that Quranist women should allow themselves to marry Unitarian Christians, Messianic Unitarian Jews, Theists, Deistic Gnostics other Quranists and anyone who believes in the god of Abraham, makes no equals with him and rejects none of His prophets and their messengers and angels. The message of the Quran is have faith in God, make none equal to Him, and do not reject his prophets, his angels and their messages.

What problem an a true believer in the god of Abraham have with the Quran when they intelligently study it?

Godbless,
Anwar

siki

Peace,
That means that Quranist women should allow themselves to marry Unitarian Christians, Messianic Unitarian Jews, Theists, Deistic Gnostics other Quranists and anyone who believes in the god of Abraham, makes no equals with him and rejects none of His prophets and their messengers and angels. The message of the Quran is have faith in God, make none equal to Him, and do not reject his prophets, his angels and their messages.

What problem an a true believer in the god of Abraham have with the Quran when they intelligently study it?

Godbless,
Anwar

Bro Anwar!

I can not agree with the above. These are precisely the people quran mentions as followers of the previous scriptures, and the Mohsinnats(only)belonging to such group have been declared Hallal for the believers.

And now, definitely there is a difference between Mominneen , followers of previous scriptures, and Mushrikeens.

siki

Samia

Peace,

I'm not sure what you mean about universal sociolinguistics. However, in Old Arabic as you know only a man can yankih a woman. (nakaha also means to have sex). So when you say yunkih you cause to marry i.e. facilitate a man marrying a woman.

Only men can have sex with women in Old Arabic, not the other way around. Not to be too specific but is probably because the male is proactive in this role.

So when talking about sex these will obviosly be addressed to men. We should read it literally as (When your men have sex with your women then all of you . . . )

I also ran into trouble with this when it came to washing for prayer etc. when I read this in the Quran.

Godbless,
Anwar

Salaam Anwar

By USL I meant it is not an Arabic language characteristic, but a universal one, all languages have this characteristic. Only recently has the English language introduced terms like "chairpersons"....to include women.

As for the verb "naka7a" which could mean "to have sex/marry", I agree with you. Because this verse includes women as well, this verb is not used. Instead, the neutral participle "7illun lakum lawful to you" is used, (so that siki will not say women cannot marry men ;D), just like food is lawful to both genders, and also u7saneen/mu7sanaat.

Samia

Some times simple things become so hard to understand..... There is nothing wrong in changing the addressee in one sentence!

Salaam Hamsa

Can you give me a sentence , not necessarily from the qur'aan,( you can make it up), where the address is changed from a group/person to another, without explicitly mentioning the other addressee/s?

progod

I can not agree with the above. These are precisely the people quran mentions as followers of the previous scriptures, and the Mohsinnats(only)belonging to such group have been declared Hallal for the believers.

I would say that these are the truly faithful is it concerns people of previous scriptures. Not all people who associate themselves with a scripture or law are faithful. Consdier the Jews who reject Christ (God bless him). These are not among the faithful. Yes the Muhsanaats are the only ones allowed. These are the morally established/fortified. Remember even we are supposed to marry the muhsanaat among our own. Muhsanaat is passive muhsinaat is active. You can see that this means that these girls have been raised well. I would say that in the Quran muhsanaat is used for girls who have been raised with good morals (fortified through upbringing), women who are married (fortified through marriage) or older women (fortified through age).

We see this word used in all these senses in the Quran being contrasted to musaafihatun (loose or lecherous), fatayaatun(young girls) and single ( I can't think of the word used in this comparison I'll have to back check).

The qualifications is that they have to be muhsanatun and mu'minatun (lillaahi). That means that they have to be fortified morally and faithful to God, and this classfication is accross the board for those the Quran addresses as ahl-al-kitaabi (specifically including Chrisitans and Jews and in some cases us Quran followers) or otherwise people who have not followed any ascribed to any scripture but have faith in God and are morally upright.

I have seen the form yunkihu (to facilitate the marriage of a man to a woman) in the Quran. I'm sure if we find its occcurences we can solve the confusion about who can marry believing women. It might even be in something that states 'The believing man is for the believing woman.' Let's look for it guys.

Godbless,
Anwar

Phil

You're welcome, phil

It is understood in this way from the context of verses and by understanding the root of the word. Sometimes it is even explained in this manner when it is explicitly mentioned "shrik billahi" as in the first commandment of the Straight Path and in many other verses.

Salam Samia,

"shrik billahi" as in the first commandment of the Straight Path and "shrik" in Q2221 are two different issues, I believe. You are right when saying that the answer lies when we see through the context of the message.

If indeed "shrik" in Q221 refers to God, then aren't we putting God and almushrikati "whom she pleased/marveled you" in the same hierarchy? Do we need to have God competing with "beautiful woman/macho man" in the context of marriage? Or perhaps my understanding is merely an overstrained and unfounded assumption.

Any comments?

TQ in advance.

Regards