Defenition of marriage suggests sex before marriage permitted?!
-
Peace
Almarh0m peace
Thank you for sharing your opinion but have you read the posts and ideas on this thread? If not, then they might be of interest to you.
I am not sure of 2282. If i assume that it is related to the marriage proposal, then it does not change much. I propose to a girl and others find out thus 2282 fulfilled.
What do you think of this example Almarh0m
I propose to a girl (believer) and i have a good intention (oath) she accepts. We are both commited and at the minimum remain faithful to one another. I take her out somewhere (ajr). From this point on, once we are both comfortable to have sex we can do so without doing anything wrong in the sight of God.
peace
Firstly , this thread is about 'Definition of marriage and sex before marriage as per this definition , how am I doing so far ? So I gave my opinion on the definition as well as what I understood of marriage is according to the law and the Qur'an , which I understood to be a 'civil contract' , in most countries anyway .
Secondly , If I understood you correctly in your earlier post and , which you re-iterated in your example , then you have already considered yourself and the girl as "married" by proposing to her and by your intention and exchange of oaths and commitment to be faithful to each other , as well as giving her AJR . If you follow this line of reasoning , then the subsequent sexual relationship with the girl ( who is now your wife ) , there is no sex before marriage at all , because "the sex you would have" is sex after marriage by your very own definition of it as per 'example'   .
Seriously , what you have in the example is an agreement and not a contract of marriage , as a contract of marriage requires the parties to it to confer Rights and Obligations to both man and woman which is enforcable in a court of law . Whereas the mere agreement that you had is not legallly binding at all for the simple reason that It does not satisfy the requirement of the law in whatever country you are residing , nor does it conform to 2282 . ( What recourse to the law would the girl have should you decide to renege on your promise/agreement ? She cannot sue you for breach of Promise , at least not anymore ).
I do realize of course that in real life the practice of sex before marriage is a reality which no one can deny , however I don't know any religion or culture that encourages this sort of behaviour . Having said that , personally I have not problem with adults doing their own things provided that it is consensual .
Cheers
almarh0m
-
The word used in the qur'aan for "slave" is RQB (2177, 492, 589 etc.)
ONCE AGAIN, SLAVE IS RAQABAT (SINGULAR) OR RIQAAB (PLURAL) IN THE QUR'AAN.
Dear brother truth seeker
Your definition of the word Raqaba as slave is wrong.
Raqab is the bridle which is used to control the horse,
What is Tehreer? Tehreer is a written document, any written document, when we combine Tehreer with Raqaba , that means , A deed to unbridle, Quran uses this idiomatically to mean , Setting a slave free.
"Fi il tehreer e raqaba momina", conveys , Setting a believing slave free, or Making a deed for a believer to be unbridled.
Raqab literally does not translate as "A slave". If you have some idea as to how does Arabic work , you would understand me.
siki
-
Ma malakat aymanukum DOES NOT mean slave. That is the twisted and corrupted mistranslation based on unverifiable hearsay. If "ma malakat aymanukum" means slave then putting slave instead of ma malakat aymanukum in 424-25 will result in a NONSENSICAL interpretation.
Whoopsie! I should've read the Arabic before using that translation. You are right it is MMA.
ONCE AGAIN, SLAVE IS RAQABAT (SINGULAR) OR RIQAAB (PLURAL) IN THE QUR'AAN.
Aha! Thanks!
2282 refers to DYN, TIJARAT HAAZIRAT, AND BAAYA3. It refers to three things.
Yes I found that part now )
AJR is a form of DYN, because if not paid on the spot at the time of nikah, it is owed by the husband to the wife. Such an AJR will be DYN, and a written contract compulsory and two witnesses compulsory. Please see my above post for details.
When AJR is paid on the spot at the time of marriage, then it will be a form of TIJARAT HAAZIRAT, and then written contract is not compulsory but two witnesses still compulsory.
Thanks. Makes more sense now handshake
-
Dear brother truth seeker
Your definition of the word Raqaba as slave is wrong.
Raqab is the bridle which is used to control the horse,
What is Tehreer? Tehreer is a written document, any written document, when we combine Tehreer with Raqaba , that means , A deed to unbridle, Quran uses this idiomatically to mean , Setting a slave free.
"Fi il tehreer e raqaba momina", conveys , Setting a believing slave free, or Making a deed for a believer to be unbridled.
Raqab literally does not translate as "A slave". If you have some idea as to how does Arabic work , you would understand me.
siki
Dear Brother
I have differences with TS but he is right in this respect.- ( 1 / 11319)
neck
slave, bondman
? bridle braydal
, , ,
freeing, liberation, liberalization, disengagement, emancipation
editing, redaction
Regards
- ( 1 / 11319)
-
Peace everyone,
It is clear that Samia is confused on certain issues.
I have already shown from the qur'aan that AJR CANNOT MEAN WAGE.
Salaam Truthseeker, all
I haven't seen how, from the quraan, you showed that "ajr" cannot be wage. The word "ajr" in the qur'aan is "payed" by God, and there's the "ajr" by husband.. As for God, He "rewards" us or "pays" us once we meet Him, and it will be an ongoing payment. The discussion is whether the "ajr" by husband is an ongoing thing or not. It does not matter how you translate it, but its meaning is an ongoing payment as long as the service is being carried out.
Here is the usage of the verb "hire" which is derivd from the word "ajr". It's the story of Moses with his future father-in-lawSaid one of the (damsels) "O my (dear) father! engage him on wages truly the best of men for thee to employ is the (man) who is strong and trusty"....
2827He said "I intend to wed one of these my daughters to thee, on condition that thou serve me for eight years; but if thou complete ten years, it will be (grace) from thee. But I intend not to place thee under a difficulty thou wilt find me, indeed, if Allah wills, one of the righteous."
2828He said "Be that (the agreement) between me and thee whichever of the two terms I fulfil, let there be no ill-will to me. Be Allah a witness to what we say."
I do not think there's a point for these two people to discuss the length of time if the payment is a "reward" paid "once", because it's clear it's for a job.
-
Peace Samia,
AJR in the context of marriage cannot mean an ongoing wage in the qur'aan. This is proved by 3350 which mentions the prophet having already paid the ujoor to his wives.
Furthermore, if you study the passage quoted by you (2826-2, the reward of Moses working for his future father in law was nikah with his daughter, which is clearly not a wage but is a reward. So actually your quote disproves that AJR is an onging wage as used in 2826.
-
Eid,
It is clear from this that you haven't grasped a thing about my interpretation.
Go back to my post about the definition of zina and tell me what you understand. And only the command about zina has anything to with marriage, not the rest of the commands.
How are you using both meanings, chaste and married? Do you realize it doesn't make any sense?
(chaste) -- Pure from unlawful sexual intercourse; virtuous; honorable, the opposite of adulteress harlot.
1928 O sister of Aaron, your father was not (a) man of evil, and your mother was not unchaste.
I asked how you can use both meanings, one that I don't agree with and one that you don't agree with, in that same sentence, and still make sense? Only one of those meanings can be true, that's what we are disputing, remember?.
These 'al-muhsinaat' are already from the "malakat aymanukum".
What else does it say?
425
What?
The verse does not mention "al-muhsinaat". Tch tch.
2433 And those who do not find marriage should refrain??
Refrain from what, refrain means what -- stay chaste/honorable?
'Al-muhsinaat' is still not there. Shows 'al-muhsinaat' does not mean what you want it to mean.
Does it say that "only" al-muhsinaat are allowed?
Are non believing prostitutes permitted too?
55
Today is permitted for you the goodness, and those who were given The Book's food is permitted for you, and your food is permitted for them, and the chaste from the believers, and the chaste from those who were given The Book from before you, if you gave them their Mahr (reward), marrying not fornicating/adulterating, and not taking lovers, and who disbelieves with the faith, so his deed had failed, and he in the end from the losers.
No, "non believers" are not permitted and neither are prostitutes. That's what I have been saying. But you don't want to weigh and consider. You just want to contradict and refute.
How? What did I say az-zina is?
You asked a simple question
What will the "slander" mean for an unmarried woman?
To which I gave you a simple answer and depending on location sound advice.
You wrote
It means her reputation, honor, chastity, and dignity as a lady is being challenged.Why, what did she do so wrong?!
Oh?
Yes people get shot for slandering chaste women -- married or single.
People are to be FLOGGED, and not to be killed, for slandering al-muhsinaat(24/4), and ONLY al-muhsinaat, and ONLY when the slanderer is someone other than the husband(24/6-9).
I do. You on the other hand need to make sense of what you read and what you say, stop relying on translations, and read my post about az-zina. Here http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598241.msg199786#msg199786
What you conjectured on zina and marriage contradicts;
How? Where?
suggest take my advice on slandering.
Advice without evidence?
-
- According to your interpretation, al-muhsinaat is married (contradicts 425)
How does it contradict? Pay close attention to 4/25, you will see that the fatayat become al-muhsinaat AFTER nikah.
First understand that al-muhsinaat are only allowed from the "MMA" category(4.24). Ok?
Then 4/25 says if you cannot "marry" or do nikah with al-muhsinaat al-mominaat(from the "MMA", so anyone from the "MMA" from your fatayaat al-mominaat.
Afterwards it says to do nikah with the fatayat(who are NOT al-muhsinaat ) with the permission of their 'ahl'.
But then it goes on to say "fa iza uhsinna(the same root as al-muhsinaat)", which tells that they have NOW become al-muhsinaat, i.e. AFTER NIKAH.
Please let me know if you now agree. If you still think I am mistaken, please correct me.
- Marriage does not make a woman chaste (this is about her character not marital status).
425 And who is not able, from you wealth that he marries almuhsanati
Did I say al-muhsina means chaste?!
- Says to marry a good woman (the chaste) not marry the already married.
Evidence? 4/25 also says to marry the fatayat instead of al-muhsinaat. So are the fatayat "unchaste"?
-
Almarh0m peace
If you follow this line of reasoning , then the subsequent sexual relationship with the girl ( who is now your wife ) , there is no sex before marriage at all , because "the sex you would have" is sex after marriage by your very own definition of it as per 'example' .
That is my entire point. You are having sex inside marriage. In this thread, I never went into discussing sex before marriage.
My entire point is that when you start a relationship, you are quranically classed as married thus sex is morally ok.What is being discussed is when you've actually attained the marriage stage.
Seriously , what you have in the example is an agreement and not a contract of marriage , as a contract of marriage requires the parties to it to confer Rights and Obligations to both man and woman which is enforcable in a court of law
I don't currently agree with you on this. I want to look at truthseeker's posts in detail first before i respond to you on this with any sort of proof.
Truthseeker peace
I'm glad your back welcome bravo
I've skimmed your posts and most interesting so far is your quote of 424. Please give me time to reply as i have exams on thursday and friday and i will be working tomorow night so it might take till saturday.Also please stop accusing Samia of misguiding others. She is giving her opinion/understanding. Let's keep this discussion as friendly as possible handshake peace
For now,
Thanks -
Fahad,
I asked how you can use both meanings, one that I don't agree with and one that you don't agree with, in that same sentence, and still make sense? Only one of those meanings can be true, that's what we are disputing, remember?.
You asked this, remember?
Quote from Fahad on May 11, 2009, 105923 PM
How are you using both meanings, chaste and married? Do you realize it doesn't make any sense?Do you realize a married woman can be chaste/honorable?
People are to be FLOGGED, and not to be killed, for slandering al-muhsinaat(24/4), and ONLY al-muhsinaat, and ONLY when the slanderer is someone other than the husband(24/6-9).
Advice without evidence?
Flogged if following Qur?an in an Islamic society and that was my advice in general; go slander a young lady or married woman especially in some cultures and when her brother or relative hits you with a blunt object, you will have evidence.
How does it contradict? Pay close attention to 4/25, you will see that the fatayat become al-muhsinaat AFTER nikah.
First understand that al-muhsinaat are only allowed from the "MMA" category(4.24). Ok?
Then 4/25 says if you cannot "marry" or do nikah with al-muhsinaat al-mominaat(from the "MMA", so anyone from the "MMA" from your fatayaat al-mominaat.
Afterwards it says to do nikah with the fatayat(who are NOT al-muhsinaat ) with the permission of their 'ahl'.
But then it goes on to say "fa iza uhsinna(the same root as al-muhsinaat)", which tells that they have NOW become al-muhsinaat, i.e. AFTER NIKAH.
Please let me know if you now agree. If you still think I am mistaken, please correct me.
I see now, your presumptions are
-
almuhsanati are ONLY married.
-
punishment for zina ONLY applicable to almuhsanati (the married) women.
-
singles can have unlimited sex; zina not applicable because they are not married.
Which contradicts
243 The male whore does not marry only the female whore
Who is allowed to marry whom above?
425 And who is not able, from you capability that he marries almuhsanati (the married)
Who is not able to marry the married, how does that work?
2433 And those who do not find marriage should refrain...
re?frain curb, restrain
intransitive verb
to keep oneself from doing, feeling, or indulging in something and especially from following a passing impulseRefrain from what? What do married people do?
55
Today is permitted for you the goodness, and those who were given The Book's food is permitted for you, and your food is permitted for them, and almuhsanati from the believers, almuhsanati from those who were given The Book from before you, if you gave them their Mahr (reward), marrying not fornicating/adulterating, and not taking lovers, and who disbelieves with the faith, so his deed had failed, and he in the end from the losers.How does that work again, permitted for you are almuhsanati (the already married) ?
-
-
Dear Brother
I have differences with TS but he is right in this respect.- ( 1 / 11319)
neck
slave, bondman
?
RAQAB's closest expression is "tie by the neck", The thing with which we tie by Neck is Raqaab, which is a kind of bridle that is used to control horses , Raqaab is a very common word in urdu.
What you are talking about , is the evolved specific meanings in a certain context which is being derived with combination of words, where as what i am trying to convey is the basic route.
What i was trying to convey to TS was , that we can not translate a single word out of this combination(idiomatic use) literally, to what they all convey when grouped together.
siki
- ( 1 / 11319)
-
RAQAB's closest expression is "tie by the neck", The thing with which we tie by Neck is Raqaab, which is a kind of bridle that is used to control horses , Raqaab is a very common word in urdu.
What you are talking about , is the evolved specific meanings in a certain context which is being derived with combination of words, where as what i am trying to convey is the basic route.
What i was trying to convey to TS was , that we can not translate a single word out of this combination(idiomatic use) literally, to what they all convey when grouped together.
siki
DEar brother
I respect your opinion. No doubt as a verb
= Raqaba hoo = means He tied around his neck
But when its noun is used it means "neck" /nape of the neck /figuratively "mamlook " (slave).-
( 1 / 755)
( ) -
( 1 / 116)
-
( 1 / 264)
I do not insist on it.If you accept ,so much the better.If not ,absolutely no objection .
handshake
Regards -
-
Fahad,
You asked this, remember?
Quote from Fahad on May 11, 2009, 105923 PM
How are you using both meanings, chaste and married? Do you realize it doesn't make any sense?Do you realize a married woman can be chaste/honorable?
Yes, a married woman can be a chaste woman, but your use of al-muhsinaat to refer to both married and chaste is illogical because that is what we are disputing, that whether it is referring to the married or the chaste.
This is what you initially asked me
244 those who accuse (chaste/honorable women) ? only married women are honorable.
Therefore, according to your interpretation (in context) single women cannot be chaste.I don't believe al-muhsinaat means 'chaste/honorable', and you don't believe that it means 'married', so why ask me whether only married women are chaste in 24/4?! It wouldn't make sense. It makes your question sound as if I believe al-muhsinaat means chaste and you believe it means married. You have used the same illogic in some of your other questions as well. If you still haven't understood this, just leave it and move on to the next argument.
Flogged if following Qur?an in an Islamic society
Ok, and that's what matters in this discussion.
and that was my advice in general;
Your advice was to replace the Quranic commandment
Very serious and those who continue to spread such lies should be dealt with mercilessly.
go slander a young lady or married woman especially in some cultures and when her brother or relative hits you with a blunt object, you will have evidence.
No thanks. But even if the accuser brings witnesses, maybe he will still hit him. Maybe he'll even shoot his sister alongwith the accuser. But what's the point of all that? I don't see how all that is relevant to the discussion.
I see now, your presumptions are
- almuhsanati are ONLY married.
Yes, that's what I think so far. A woman becomes al-muhsina after nikah/marriage. Are there other ways for women to become al-muhsinaat? I don't know.
- punishment for zina ONLY applicable to almuhsanati (the married) women.
Her and the participating man.
- singles can have unlimited sex; zina not applicable because they are not married.
But then they are not singles anymore, are they? And zina is only applicable when polyandry is committed.
Which contradicts
243 The male whore does not marry only the female whore
Who is allowed to marry whom above?
The momineen are not allowed this.
425 And who is not able, from you capability that he marries almuhsanati (the married)
Who is not able to marry the married, how does that work?
These women are from the milkal ayman/MMA. I am not exactly sure who the MMA are, but one thing I know is that they are dependent upon the momineen. I think these women may be the ones who migrated to the momineen, women who are not allowed for the kuffar any longer.(60/10)
2433 And those who do not find marriage should refrain...
re?frain curb, restrain
intransitive verb
to keep oneself from doing, feeling, or indulging in something and especially from following a passing impulseRefrain from what? What do married people do?
Refrain from zina/fahisha? What else?
55
Today is permitted for you the goodness, and those who were given The Book's food is permitted for you, and your food is permitted for them, and almuhsanati from the believers, almuhsanati from those who were given The Book from before you, if you gave them their Mahr (reward), marrying not fornicating/adulterating, and not taking lovers, and who disbelieves with the faith, so his deed had failed, and he in the end from the losers.How does that work again, permitted for you are almuhsanati (the already married) ?
60/10, I think.
-
DEar Brother Truthseeker
I am not in your discussion and do not intend to be. But just want to draw your attention to one point.You said
2282 .............................. If the one to whom is the right is immature or weak or he cannot dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate with justice; and bring two witnesses from amongst your men
The underlined sentence gives the impression that commandment is to the "3rd person singular", which is not true.
The actual verse isI have put it in three colors
1Red it is the Protasis of the conditional sentence
2Green color is the apodosis of the conditional sentenceBlue color does not seem to be a part this conditional sentence because there is suddenly a change of address from 3rd person singular male to 2nd person plural males
Regards -
Peace student,
So do you mean to say that the blue clause applies to the complete sentence before it? If that is true then at least two witnesses will always be required.
BUT if the blue clause is also the apodosis of the conditional clause, then what I said in my above post will be correct.
My question is that why can't the blue clause be the apodosis of the conditional clause. Switching from 3rd person singular to 2nd person plural does not mean that it cannot be the apodosis.
For example I can say in English
If he is immature or weak or unable to dictate, then have his guardian dictate, and bring two witnesses from among your men.
Here, the blue clause is the apodosis of the conditional clause before it, even though it switches to 2nd person plural from the third person singular.
Samia's or Anwar's or Ayman's comments on this issue are invited.
-
Peace student,
So do you mean to say that the blue clause applies to the complete sentence before it? If that is true then at least two witnesses will always be required.
BUT if the blue clause is also the apodosis of the conditional clause, then what I said in my above post will be correct.
My question is that why can't the blue clause be the apodosis of the conditional clause. Switching from 3rd person singular to 2nd person plural does not mean that it cannot be the apodosis.
For example I can say in English
If he is immature or weak or unable to dictate, then have his guardian dictate, and bring two witnesses from among your men.
Here, the blue clause is the apodosis of the conditional clause before it, even though it switches to 2nd person plural from the third person singular.
Samia's or Anwar's or Ayman's comments on this issue are invited.
Dear Brother
It was just my opinion which may be wrong.But my impression is Quran's general strategy is that it addresses in '2nd person plural" in general. Once it has to be specific then it changes the "pronouns" accordingly. (Again just an opinion).
What was hindrance to use the word " " which is in line with 3rd person singular in the previous phrases.Anyway
1Change in number
2Change in Addressee (from 3rd person to 2nd person)
shows that it is not part of the conditional sentence.
Anyway again I say it is just an opinion you may accept or reject.
Regards -
Yes, a married woman can be a chaste woman, but your use of al-muhsinaat to refer to both married and chaste is illogical because that is what we are disputing, that whether it is referring to the married or the chaste.
Contradiction
If married can be chaste one cannot dispute if it is referring to the married or the chaste.I don't believe al-muhsinaat means 'chaste/honorable', and you don't believe that it means 'married', so why ask me whether only married women are chaste in 24/4?! It wouldn't make sense. It makes your question sound as if I believe al-muhsinaat means chaste and you believe it means married. You have used the same illogic in some of your other questions as well. If you still haven't understood this, just leave it and move on to the next argument.
No, I believe almuhsanati means 'chaste/honorable' and applicable to all females regardless of marital status married, separated, widows, singles ? all except those which are harlots (i.e. loose). What you believe almuhsanati means you yourself admit you are not sure...
Yes, that's what I think so far. A woman becomes al-muhsina after nikah/marriage. Are there other ways for women to become al-muhsinaat? I don't know.
...Her and the participating man.
You are unsure yet at the same time adamant that it?s ?married? women.
But then they are not singles anymore, are they? And zina is only applicable when polyandry is committed.
Again, without being sure you propose ideas with question marks and no, if someone decides to have a quickie or whatever every other day with a different person, they are not married; there is a process marriage, divorce, waiting, before re-marriage?
The momineen are not allowed this.
Right, all believers regardless of marital status are told to avoid
1732 Az-Zin? 'Innahu Kna Fishatan
The adultery/fornication, it is part of a larger category of filth.
These women are from the milkal ayman/MMA. I am not exactly sure who the MMA are, but one thing I know is that they are dependent upon the momineen. I think these women may be the ones who migrated to the momineen, women who are not allowed for the kuffar any longer.(60/10)
Again, you are not sure and contradict the rest of Qur?an, the verse and sentence prior, making almuhsanati only applicable to ma malakat aymanukum.
Refrain from zina/fahisha? What else?
Right, applicable to all believers regardless of marital status.
60/10, I think.
Then read the rest of the chapter in context with verse prior to get the clear meaning?
609-13
(٩ (٠ (١ (٢ (٣Peace
-
Contradiction
If married can be chaste one cannot dispute if it is referring to the married or the chaste.No, I believe almuhsanati means 'chaste/honorable' and applicable to all females regardless of marital status married, separated, widows, singles ? all except those which are harlots (i.e. loose). What you believe almuhsanati means you yourself admit you are not sure...
Sigh...
You are unsure yet at the same time adamant that it?s ?married? women.
I am unsure whether there are other ways of becoming al-muhsina. I do believe nikah makes a woman al-muhsina. But I am willing to reconsider my views if given some evidence against it. Which only shows my willingness to correct myself.
Again, without being sure you propose ideas with question marks and no, if someone decides to have a quickie or whatever every other day with a different person, they are not married; there is a process marriage, divorce, waiting, before re-marriage?
But what is "marriage"? Divorce and waiting is what should be conducted before re-"marriage", but isn't always. When it isn't, it is az-zina.
Right, all believers regardless of marital status are told to avoid
1732 Az-Zin? 'Innahu Kna Fishatan
The adultery/fornication, it is part of a larger category of filth.
Right, applicable to all believers regardless of marital status.
But then again, what is az-zina?
These women are from the milkal ayman/MMA. I am not exactly sure who the MMA are, but one thing I know is that they are dependent upon the momineen. I think these women may be the ones who migrated to the momineen, women who are not allowed for the kuffar any longer.(60/10)
Again, you are not sure and contradict the rest of Qur?an, the verse and sentence prior, making almuhsanati only applicable to ma malakat aymanukum.
-
How does my unsurity of "MMA" effect the outcome of this discussion?
-
Which part of my statement contradicts "the rest of the Quran"?
-
I am not making al-muhsanaat only applicable to "MMA", I am saying that to marry someone who is al-muhsina, she has to be from the "MMA". I am not saying that only MMA are al-muhsinaat.
Then read the rest of the chapter in context with verse prior to get the clear meaning?
609-13
(٩ (٠ (١ (٢ (٣Does it contradict my understanding in anyway?
-
-
Peace Nyma, everyone,
I made some errors in my previous post and I am re-posting it after correction of my errors
I was pondering on 2282 when it occurred to me that I could be wrong about the number of witnesses and also about whether a written marriage contract is always required.
Let's study 2282 step by step.
2282 O you who believe, if you borrow for a future period, then you shall record it. And let a scribe of justice record it for you; and let not the scribe refuse to record as God has taught him. Let him record and let the person who is borrowing dictate to him, and let him be aware of God, and let him not reduce from it anything.............
The first part of 2282 quoted above talks about normal procedure for DYN/debt/loan. It is obvious that there is only one witness in this scenario, i.e. the scribe who is writing the contract.
Now let's see the second part
2282 .............................. If the borrower is immature or weak or he cannot dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate with justice; and bring two witnesses from amongst your men; if there are not two men, then a man and two women from whom you will accept their testimony, so that if one of them becomes occupied, then the one can reminds the other. And let the witnesses not refuse to come if they are called.............
This part starts with an IF so everything that is said relevant to this scenario is applicable ONLY to this scenario. This part talks about if the borrower is either immature, or weak, or cannot dictate. I now have the understanding that requirement of the two extra male witnesses applies only to this scenario. This part is of the form IF .............. THEN ............ and the two male witnesses come after the THEN so I think those two extra male witnesses are needed only if the borrower is immature, weak, or cannot dictate. Actually in such a case there will be THREE witnesses. The scribe who writes the document + two male witnesses.
It makes sense that two extra male witnesses will be required because the borrower is immature or weak or cannot dictate, to prevent any possible injustice.
Now let's see the third part
2282 ............... And do not fail to record it no matter how small or large until its maturity. That is more just with God and better for the testimony, and better that you do not have doubts; except if it is a trade to be done on the spot between you, then there is no sin upon you if you do not record it...............
God reinforces the necessity of having a written contract and gives an exception which is that if the transaction is done on the spot then it is not required to write it down.
Let's see the fourth part
2282 ................ And have it witnessed if you conduct business/make an allegiance/covenant..............
This is a continuation of the third part. This would mean that ANY BAAYA3 requires it to be witnessed, no matter what. Here it does not specify how many witnesses so the minimum necessary would be one witness.
Applied to the first two parts it would mean the following
-
Normal circumstances, but transaction carried out on the spot ------> written contract not required but at least one witness.
-
Borrower immature or weak or cannot dictate, and transaction carried out on the spot ------> written contract not required but two witnesses required.
Now let's see how that would apply to nikah/marriage.
There can be the following four scenarios
-
Two parties enter nikah/marriage, and ajr to be paid later, and the husband is not weak, or unable to dictate ------> written contract required and only one witness necessary (the scribe who writes the contract).
-
Two parties enter nikah/marriage, and ajr to be paid later, and the husband is weak, or unable to dictate ------> written contract required and three witnesses (scribe + two male witnesses).
-
Two parties enter nikah/marriage, and ajr paid on the spot, and the husband is not weak, or unable to dictate ------> written contract not required and only one witness necessary (because we are told to have the transaction witnessed in the fourth part as described above).
-
Two parties enter nikah/marriage, and ajr paid on the spot, and the husband is weak, or unable to dictate ------> written contract not required but two male witnesses necessary.
As we can see that at least one witness will always be necessary but a written contract may or may not be required depending on whether the transaction was carried on the spot or was delayed.
In the 3rd and 4th scenario above, there is no written contract and one can then argue that in those cases no written marriage contract is necessary. This may be true because even in 2237, a written marriage contract is mentioned but it is in the context of AJR not yet paid, so it is one of the first two scenarios described above. 2237 talks about divorce, without sexual intercourse, and AJR has been stipulated/specified but not yet paid, thereby necessitating a written contract and this contract is what is referred to in that sign as "oqdat al-nikah"/marriage contract.
EVERYONE PLEASE RE-READ WHAT I HAVE SAID ABOVE CAREFULLY BECAUSE IT CAN APPEAR TO BE A LITTLE COMPLEX, BUT ONCE UNDERSTOOD IT IS NOT THAT COMPLEX.
Summary
SCENARIOS 1 & 2 above written contract necessary + one witness or three witnesses (scribe and two male witnesses) required depending on condition of the husband.
SCENARIOS 3 & 4 above written contract not required + one witness or two male witnesses required depending on condition of the husband. -
-
Sigh...
I am unsure whether there are other ways of becoming al-muhsina. I do believe nikah makes a woman al-muhsina. But I am willing to reconsider my views if given some evidence against it. Which only shows my willingness to correct myself.
Sigh... is a sign of boredom.
If nikah makes a woman almuhsanati then contradiction to say
425 And who is not able, from you capability that he marries almuhsanati
They cannot be referred to as almuhsanati before marriage (according to you).
But what is "marriage"? Divorce and waiting is what should be conducted before re-"marriage", but isn't always. When it isn't, it is az-zina.
But then again, what is az-zina?
Marriage is a commitment; families and community know they are married. Having sex with a prostitute doesn?t mean you are married to her and already gave definition which in English two words are needed
1732 Az-Zin? 'Innahu Kna Fishatan
Adultery or fornication, which are a sub category Fahisha.
-
How does my unsurity of "MMA" effect the outcome of this discussion?
-
Which part of my statement contradicts "the rest of the Quran"?
-
I am not making al-muhsanaat only applicable to "MMA", I am saying that to marry someone who is al-muhsina, she has to be from the "MMA". I am not saying that only MMA are al-muhsinaat.
Does it contradict my understanding in anyway?
Yes, that nikah makes a woman almuhsanati
1st be clear who is married
2nd be clear on ?ma malakat aymanukum?
3rd be clear on almuhsanatiThen finally you can put together an argument and regardless of exact meaning, almuhsanati minimally needs to be applicable to single and married women (e.g. honorable, etc) to not contradict other verses.
Peace
-