Is it zina?
-
Haha, see if you can sort the jokes from the truth in these (I joke actually to trigger that you THINK, think about what is right and what is wrong, SORT, DECIPHER, use your DISCERNING ABILITY to REASON, but I make it EASY so that you can see the jokes are jokes and the serious parts are serious, but the people on this website often seem HUMORLESS, and HUMORLESSNESS may actually be akin to a lack of intelligence and ability to distinguish things or reason properly (it is all connected (all of it (even this))))
S But is the bonding part before marriage allowed? They have to learn to know each other right.
S that seems logical
yeah
no it is necessary
not just
allowed
why?
because how can you test
the belief of a person
without knowing them
and the test of the belief is a requirement
you can not know if they are a believer
or test their beliefs
if you are not able to observe them
naked
take your clothes off!
haah
but yeah
there is a whole thing about
interacting with them
enough to test their beliefs
plus they can not
choose to marry
the woman is the final chooser
and they can not choose
what they don't know
it is practically forced marriage if you don't even know
she needs to be able to give the final approval and can't do so without having any information on the matter
she needs to know the person
and if they are a believer
she can not make an assessment baselessly to make a good choice
she too needs to be observing and testing if this is one of those disqualified groups that she is not allowed to marry
a polytheist, etc
this is important as she is going to be in the task of
having babies potentially or whatever too
and laying there with her legs opened under this guy
and its a horrible thing
to be under an evil person
shirk person
unclean person
all these things need to be tested and known
and since I am the only one free of shirk among the men, it is your duty to lay under me!
we have to repopulate this world with shirk free babies!
sister! listen to me! shut up! listen to me sister! shut up!
HAHA made myself laugh
bu
but
the harlot!
the harlot!!!!!!!!!!!!!
shall not!!!!!!!
mingle!!!!!!!
and bond
with many men! or any men!
but the idea is just
that if she is planning on getting married
she needs to get to know the guy
but shouldn't be going around randomly mingling with guys and checking them out for marriage
that is a yucky way
would make the actual guy she does marry unhappy maybe
but he can do whaaatever the heck he wants!!!!!! girls everywhere! -
The bonding is the marriage itself, the mithaq ghalith, God speaks about.
All the other "requirements" are that requirements so as not to provide an escape to lawless or "forgetful" men who might do the real flesh marriage and then take it lightly since nobody comes after them to exact anything and actual flesh marriage might be difficult to prove the one of them (usually the man) defaults or betrays the mithaq. A piece of paper or some words said are not marriage, marriage is the act whereby procreation can take place. Papers do not get pregnant.
Salaam
-
The bonding is the marriage itself, the mithaq ghalith, God speaks about.
All the other "requirements" are that requirements so as not to provide an escape to lawless or "forgetful" men who might do the real flesh marriage and then take it lightly since nobody comes after them to exact anything and actual flesh marriage might be difficult to prove the one of them (usually the man) defaults or betrays the mithaq. A piece of paper or some words said are not marriage, marriage is the act whereby procreation can take place. Papers do not get pregnant.
Salaam
Yeah, this is how it basically was, there really was no written contract, it was an obligation and in ancient times whoever you had sex with was basically your wife and you had all these obligations and she did as well, but people were abusing this as they do today and are without obligations or rights and are doing crime and injustice across all humanity.
-
How can you make marriage sacred when God has made the bond of sex as a glorious gift to tranmit life and preserve the species and then you come ans say that no, that is not sacred, what is sacred are the papers. It seems to me as a real monstrosity, the mithaq ghalith disposed by God s means of furthering th species and the artifices human make to have their way as against the marvels of God.
If people do not consider that sexual bonding between those who transmit life is the mithaq ghalith and the godly thing, how can they after oppose same sex marriage. According to them the marriage is in the papers or the formulas not in the bonding itself, so there you are, your papers and your formulas stick to them and invent a new way of having children.
Salaam
-
How can you make marriage sacred when God has made the bond of sex as a glorious gift to tranmit life and preserve the species and then you come ans say that no, that is not sacred, what is sacred are the papers. It seems to me as a real monstrosity, the mithaq ghalith disposed by God s means of furthering th species and the artifices human make to have their way as against the marvels of God.
If people do not consider that sexual bonding between those who transmit life is the mithaq ghalith and the godly thing, how can they after oppose same sex marriage. According to them the marriage is in the papers or the formulas not in the bonding itself, so there you are, your papers and your formulas stick to them and invent a new way of having children.
Salaam
True, definitely great points. Though as a side note, just in case anyone is getting confused, sex without the necessary intent of having children seems to be an acceptable practice, but what you said is true and cool and I believe the same, the papers are not sacred.
-
Generally though, when people say "it is no big deal, it is not sacred" it means the kind of sex they do, the two second masturbation in someones body business, is not sacred, and basically they are correct, but it shouldn't be that way.
-
True, definitely great points. Though as a side note, just in case anyone is getting confused, sex without the necessary intent of having children seems to be an acceptable practice, but what you said is true and cool and I believe the same, the papers are not sacred.
right, and in fact there is an age when women can no longer have children. But the point is that having children still is through that means and God made it so and it is the way Gdo wants it, up till now at least.
The point is that there is a mithaq ghalith and that is is the effect of furthering the species which makes of collective value. The good time anybody can have with somebody else is of no consequence for society at large. But female.male bonding on the other hand is the source of the most important object of the human species as such ans as a society.
As to the sex part, it is plausible that the mithaq ghalith may extend beyond the procreation part in the sense that still is a strong bonding for even when the children are already there, continue to be bonded and also from another point of view it is like a "sacred" object like for instance a medical coat or marriage suit, even when thy are not used for curing or for marriage, there is already a reverence for them, or in the catholic church a holy chalice. When it is clean and empty it is still a sacred object that one respects and reverences because of what its destined use is.
So once sacred, always sacred, once mithaq ghalith, always mithaq ghalith.
Salaam
-
Generally though, when people say "it is no big deal, it is not sacred" it means the kind of sex they do, the two second masturbation in someones body business, is not sacred, and basically they are correct, but it shouldn't be that way.
It is a bit like thirst. Thirst if for us to get enough liquid and not faint or die or whatever. But one can also drink for pleasure, but not out of measure, because healthwise we pay for it.
Same with this, ok to drink for leisure, but within bounds so that we do not loose the grace God gave us through that means.
Coca cola by the gallon I think it is zina, now that renninglike zebras was wondering about.
Salaam
-
It is a bit like thirst. Thirst if for us to get enough liquid and not faint or die or whatever. But one can also drink for pleasure, but not out of measure, because healthwise we pay for it.
Same with this, ok to drink for leisure, but within bounds so that we do not loose the grace God gave us through that means.
Coca cola by the gallon I think it is zina, now that renninglike zebras was wondering about.
Salaam
Interesting yeah, transgression, good points.
-
Man... that chick and her family is kinda messed up, from my understanding of the quran i think there's a difference between being Legally married and Religiously married, and you may not agree with me on this but i kinda see today's couple as technically religiously married according to the Quran, they both support each other financially, and the Guys today seem to be taking care of the girl right than any messed up couple in today's society.
Legal marriages according to the state they're in mostly ended up being used as an advantage to rob the husband's inheritance, i see today's couples(Girlfriend-boyfriend relationships) that are not legally married as Religiously married from my understanding of the quran if the man can provide for her of course and treat her and love her as a human being and a respectable women. They usually last longer than Legally married couples from what i see
Not trying to promote free sex here though...i only see that couples don't need to be legally married as long as they can provide and love each other
On this current condition, I cant help except agreeing with you. Yes we need to be idealist, but we need to be realistic too. Once I saw a widow who aggresively looking for a partner, her desire made her badly look for a man, in the end, they did just exactly what we expected. As for man, hah, even the one who got wife still looking for a prostitute. The point is, when men or woman had no partner, each of them will destroy the social system.
-
On this current condition, I cant help except agreeing with you. Yes we need to be idealist, but we need to be realistic too. Once I saw a widow who aggresively looking for a partner, her desire made her badly look for a man, in the end, they did just exactly what we expected. As for man, hah, even the one who got wife still looking for a prostitute. The point is, when men or woman had no partner, each of them will destroy the social system.
Very good! One must look at the reality of things, and the reality can be quite ugly! Then, we should not give into the ugliness, but strive against it by seeing what is unpleasant and defying it in our own manner.
-
I think that the sexual bonding is the marriage and that many times it is betrayedm but society does not have the courage to fight betrayal and instead falls for the legal or seudoreligious tricks, and offers again leeway to those who do not take seriously real marriage and make a joke of it, of God, and of humanity.
Things being as they are, while insisting that the real marriaga is the sexual bonding itself, I WOULD NEVER advise a womanm unless a powerful woman, to give in to the "no need of papers" or no need to formalise anything line. That puts her square in the hands of every slandering mobs and in the hands of any male without a conscience.
No I affirm the principle that marriage is the bond of flesh, but I also warn candid women that those who use them shit on anything that is holy an shits on them.
That is why the Qur'an insists on publicity and involving as many people as possible in the commitments, so that those without honour find it more difficult to be without honour in a males world.
Salaam
-
I think that the sexual bonding is the marriage and that many times it is betrayedm but society does not have the courage to fight betrayal and instead falls for the legal or seudoreligious tricks, and offers again leeway to those who do not take seriously real marriage and make a joke of it, of God, and of humanity.
Things being as they are, while insisting that the real marriaga is the sexual bonding itself, I WOULD NEVER advise a womanm unless a powerful woman, to give in to the "no need of papers" or no need to formalise anything line. That puts her square in the hands of every slandering mobs and in the hands of any male without a conscience.
No I affirm the principle that marriage is the bond of flesh, but I also warn candid women that those who use them shit on anything that is holy an shits on them.
That is why the Qur'an insists on publicity and involving as many people as possible in the commitments, so that those without honour find it more difficult to be without honour in a males world.
Salaam
Yep, good clarifications, I would also advise such.
-
from my understanding of the quran i think there's a difference between being Legally married and Religiously married, and you may not agree with me on this but i kinda see today's couple as technically religiously married according to the Quran, they both support each other financially, and the Guys today seem to be taking care of the girl right than any messed up couple in today's society.
Legal marriages according to the state they're in mostly ended up being used as an advantage to rob the husband's inheritance, i see today's couples(Girlfriend-boyfriend relationships) that are not legally married as Religiously married from my understanding of the quran if the man can provide for her of course and treat her and love her as a human being and a respectable women. They usually last longer than Legally married couples from what i see
Not trying to promote free sex here though...i only see that couples don't need to be legally married as long as they can provide and love each other
I think this post could be the most telling. I'm going to tell you a little secret that very few muslims seem to know. The Quran screws men over. That's right, men get screwed over. Why? Because "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women)." 434. The Quran at multiple points makes men responsible generally for the financial and physical responsibility for others, the young, Women and the elderly. It does not mean that these groups of people are incapable of protecting themselves, nor do men become the masters of Women, but men are responsible, it is their curse and it is what every God fearing man's responsibility is.
To describe my own experiences, I've had 'relationships' with four Women in my life, I'll describe them as such
1 Before I was Muslim and God fearing, I was in a relationship for about 12 months (ironically, her parents were Muslim but gave it up before she was born).
2 After I converted, I had to wait nearly 2 years to marry a Woman who I spent 6 years with and gained two children from.
3 After separating from the second, I had a mild thing which was a lot of fun and I thought I loved with someone else which turned into nothing, who was separated from her own husband.
4 My current wife of about 5 months.The only relationship I regret is the third. Why? Because it was the only one which didn't have strings attached, there was no attempt by her to make anything serious of it and that bothered me and for her the idea was opposite to her sense of freedom. Even the first relationship had some degree of commitment despite both of us being atheist at the time. I know better now, that 'boyfriend-girlfriend' status doesn't really work. That might sound rich from someone who got married then divorced, I'm not claiming that marriage is a band aid for all time and it will prevent separation, but marriage, true marriage; not one where you pick and choose at will is the stable safety net that people need in the horrible event that it doesn't work and separation happens.
For my first wife I didn't marry legally in terms of the state (United Kingdom) only an Islamic wedding. Through that, while there was no 'legal' reason to support her in divorce I did so because it was my duty as a Muslim, as a maintainer to do so and I'm proud of doing it. I'm proud to say that I didn't leave my ex-wife in a ditch that despite our issues I acted as I was ordained to do; possibly the first man to ever do that in her immediate family and I hold an immense sense of pride in that.
Islam, God, the Quran, whichever or all you follow, places a huge weight on the responsibilities of couples, you need to ask yourself if you really are 'married' living together as boyfriend and girlfriend or if true marriage, yes with conditions of dowry to her and the event of divorce, with witnesses to accept it as a legal act is true. The way of God is not meant to be easy, it places a huge responsibility on us all to support each other despite all difficulties. Marriage does not have to be expensive, you don't even need an imam to host or bless it, but you do need to make a public commitment and outline what happens if it fails.
-
I think that the sexual bonding is the marriage and that many times it is betrayedm but society does not have the courage to fight betrayal and instead falls for the legal or seudoreligious tricks, and offers again leeway to those who do not take seriously real marriage and make a joke of it, of God, and of humanity.
Things being as they are, while insisting that the real marriaga is the sexual bonding itself, I WOULD NEVER advise a womanm unless a powerful woman, to give in to the "no need of papers" or no need to formalise anything line. That puts her square in the hands of every slandering mobs and in the hands of any male without a conscience.
No I affirm the principle that marriage is the bond of flesh, but I also warn candid women that those who use them shit on anything that is holy an shits on them.
That is why the Qur'an insists on publicity and involving as many people as possible in the commitments, so that those without honour find it more difficult to be without honour in a males world.
Salaam
It's true, I'll put my emotion aside. Yes, we need a solid rule about this, and the law has to be able to make people enforcing it. But what kind of rule will applied? In on side we passed the time where woman was enslaved, and then, it is time for the men to be controlled. I think anyone who make the rule is lucky enough that he never had any problem with his marriage, but how long it will last? When we talked about men, we face a great danger. Have a look at the past time? What so hard for men to take a shortcut? War? Rape? Literally enslaving woman? It's all written on their instinct. Now, since Im a fanboy of evolution, why should we take another way arround by trial error rather than a million years method which is effective? If you try to apply it to me, the new method, you can find me obey the law, but will most people follow it?
Lets say on the advance techonological society, or so they called, for example, japan, america, or somewhere else, where they at least having a tivi, even indonesia if you consider one. Most of them, had no problem with prostitution. Even legalized it. So here is what is common practice in there, teenager worked as a prostitution, in the other name form, in the name of education, or carrier. And all of it accepted as a normal social norm. We're talking about men nature here. We need something easy, fast and cheap.Okay, we regulate it. There is no way woman can enforce it without men help, at least, the police got to be men. What kind of law do you think will fit with all of this?
-
Very good! One must look at the reality of things, and the reality can be quite ugly! Then, we should not give into the ugliness, but strive against it by seeing what is unpleasant and defying it in our own manner.
Seriously, since 5 years ago Im on progress to accept the standard thinking set called instinct. I almost give up my idealistic.
-
It's true, I'll put my emotion aside. Yes, we need a solid rule about this, and the law has to be able to make people enforcing it. But what kind of rule will applied? In on side we passed the time where woman was enslaved, and then, it is time for the men to be controlled. I think anyone who make the rule is lucky enough that he never had any problem with his marriage, but how long it will last? When we talked about men, we face a great danger. Have a look at the past time? What so hard for men to take a shortcut? War? Rape? Literally enslaving woman? It's all written on their instinct. Now, since Im a fanboy of evolution, why should we take another way arround by trial error rather than a million years method which is effective? If you try to apply it to me, the new method, you can find me obey the law, but will most people follow it?
Lets say on the advance techonological society, or so they called, for example, japan, america, or somewhere else, where they at least having a tivi, even indonesia if you consider one. Most of them, had no problem with prostitution. Even legalized it. So here is what is common practice in there, teenager worked as a prostitution, in the other name form, in the name of education, or carrier. And all of it accepted as a normal social norm. We're talking about men nature here. We need something easy, fast and cheap.Okay, we regulate it. There is no way woman can enforce it without men help, at least, the police got to be men. What kind of law do you think will fit with all of this?
The choice is between bad and worse. If there is no paper work for the marriage the woman is alone in the face of a man who can do whatever he choses, with the papers, at least some men are good men and even if they are not, there is at least a semblance of legality which must be upheld, which would always be better than nothing at all.
The worst case of course is where all people in society are rogues and paper is shit same as everything else, but still no worse than no paper at all.
But the "how do you say you love me if you do not trust me, has long, long history of landing women in trouble through the ages.
It is not that there are not good men, but the fact that those who are not good do not go around showing it, you find out the hard way.
Salaam
-
The choice is between bad and worse. If there is no paper work for the marriage the woman is alone in the face of a man who can do whatever he choses, with the papers, at least some men are good men and even if they are not, there is at least a semblance of legality which must be upheld, which would always be better than nothing at all.
The worst case of course is where all people in society are rogues and paper is shit same as everything else, but still no worse than no paper at all.
But the "how do you say you love me if you do not trust me, has long, long history of landing women in trouble through the ages.
It is not that there are not good men, but the fact that those who are not good do not go around showing it, you find out the hard way.
Salaam
Okay I agree. Even it is unessecary. I prefer the old fashion way, get permission from her dad, give him something to show you're responsible, get some people as withness, and you're good to go.
-
The question is that nobody is cheated and nobody is used, particularly the women since in a males society (and all societies I know of are males societes to a lesser or greater degree) they are likely to be abused and used.
But ultimately those requirements for partners no to be heated or used are that, requirements for marriage, not marriage itself. Requirements established so that abusers don't use marriage for their own self-interested consumption against the other partner.
There awe and reverence should be for the substance of marriage, the divine grace for giving life.
Salaam
-
I think this post could be the most telling. I'm going to tell you a little secret that very few muslims seem to know. The Quran screws men over. That's right, men get screwed over. Why? Because "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women)." 434. The Quran at multiple points makes men responsible generally for the financial and physical responsibility for others, the young, Women and the elderly. It does not mean that these groups of people are incapable of protecting themselves, nor do men become the masters of Women, but men are responsible, it is their curse and it is what every God fearing man's responsibility is.
To describe my own experiences, I've had 'relationships' with four Women in my life, I'll describe them as such
1 Before I was Muslim and God fearing, I was in a relationship for about 12 months (ironically, her parents were Muslim but gave it up before she was born).
2 After I converted, I had to wait nearly 2 years to marry a Woman who I spent 6 years with and gained two children from.
3 After separating from the second, I had a mild thing which was a lot of fun and I thought I loved with someone else which turned into nothing, who was separated from her own husband.
4 My current wife of about 5 months.The only relationship I regret is the third. Why? Because it was the only one which didn't have strings attached, there was no attempt by her to make anything serious of it and that bothered me and for her the idea was opposite to her sense of freedom. Even the first relationship had some degree of commitment despite both of us being atheist at the time. I know better now, that 'boyfriend-girlfriend' status doesn't really work. That might sound rich from someone who got married then divorced, I'm not claiming that marriage is a band aid for all time and it will prevent separation, but marriage, true marriage; not one where you pick and choose at will is the stable safety net that people need in the horrible event that it doesn't work and separation happens.
For my first wife I didn't marry legally in terms of the state (United Kingdom) only an Islamic wedding. Through that, while there was no 'legal' reason to support her in divorce I did so because it was my duty as a Muslim, as a maintainer to do so and I'm proud of doing it. I'm proud to say that I didn't leave my ex-wife in a ditch that despite our issues I acted as I was ordained to do; possibly the first man to ever do that in her immediate family and I hold an immense sense of pride in that.
Islam, God, the Quran, whichever or all you follow, places a huge weight on the responsibilities of couples, you need to ask yourself if you really are 'married' living together as boyfriend and girlfriend or if true marriage, yes with conditions of dowry to her and the event of divorce, with witnesses to accept it as a legal act is true. The way of God is not meant to be easy, it places a huge responsibility on us all to support each other despite all difficulties. Marriage does not have to be expensive, you don't even need an imam to host or bless it, but you do need to make a public commitment and outline what happens if it fails.
Fantastic post! Totally right, and yeah the 3rd one is the one that bothers me too the most, those are the scariest interactions.
This is about doing justice and being obligated towards being noble and doing what is right, as you said above. Perfect! I wish you felicity in your new marriage.
Allah may be proving by these interactions who is just and who is unjust, and really a happy marriage is not a necessary sign of any "blessing", but right actions throughout any interaction is indeed a blessing upon the righteous one!