Is it zina?

Taro_Hiroshi

Peace truthseeker11,

Thank you for showing me the disrepancies/contradictions in my post. I commend you for your analysis.

Come on brother, I really expected you to be more careful in quoting and translating a verse from al-quran.

You are right. I should have been more careful.

YOU STILL HAVEN'T QUOTED ANY VERSE FROM AL-QURAN THAT FORBIDS SEX OUTSIDE MARRIAGE WITH MMA.

Well, what if mma means partner with a marriage contract?

In verse 236, the Quran suggests that mma are partners that one have a marriage contract with, and that giving away to ones desires with mma is not considered as extra-marital sex. Also the above-mentioned verse suggests that mma are spouses. In other words, mma and spouses are the same.

Quran 236 with any but their spouses - that is, those whom they rightfully possess for then, behold, they are free of all blame,

How do you interpret the above mentioned verse? What do you think mma means in that verse? Does it mean girlfriend, engaged partner or wife?

truthseeker11

Peace Taro Hiroshi,

Brother, you have to be very careful of other's translations. You should always check any translation yourself by figuring out the roots, then looking up their meanings, and looking at context of the verses, and cross referencing with other usages in al-quran.

The translation you have provided smells fishy and fails the cross reference test. Whenever you see words inserted in brackets which are not in the original Arabic to force a meaning on the verse, your alert and BS meter should go to defcon 5.

In verse 236, the Quran suggests that mma are partners that one have a marriage contract with, and that giving away to ones desires with mma is not considered as extra-marital sex. Also the above-mentioned verse suggests that mma are spouses. In other words, mma and spouses are the same.

Quran 236 with any but their spouses - that is, those whom they rightfully possess 3for then, behold, they are free of all blame,

Most translators (I know you didn't translate this yourself) want to invent lies about allah, but they cannot change the original Arabic, so to deliberately and knowingly twist the words, they resort to these bracket techniques by deceptively inserting words in translation that aren't there in the original Arabic. You were also deceived in another translation of 2433 that you quoted earlier, by the deliberate deceptive mistranslation from the source where you quoted it from. Brother, you have to be very careful in this matter. This is how billions have been deceived and continue to be deceived, even by these "reliable" sites you quote your translation from. I'll come to your quoted translation of 2433 later, first let's address this MMA issue.

Please look at 3350

3350 O prophet, we have made lawful for you your azwaaj/mates to whom you have already given their dowries, and MMA/those who are maintained by your oath, as granted to you by allah; ................

You don't even have to know Arabic to figure this out. The same words AZWAAJ and MMA have been used in 3350 that are used in 236.

In 3350 CLEARLY they mean different categories of people and they cannot be the same. MMA CANNOT BE AZWAAJ according to 3350 because they are mentioned as SEPARATE categories. So MMA CANNOT MEAN SPOUSES according to 3350. See the indisputable quranic evidence about this?

See how the translator deceived you in 236 by first deceptively translating "aw" as "that is" and then inserting (through wedlock) in brackets, whereas 3350 PROVES THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE.

So MMA, whatever they are, CANNOT BE MATES/SPOUSES.

In my understanding, MMA are any category of people that you make an oath with. The context will tell you what kind of oath it is. Cross referencing with other parts of al-quran, and looking at the context, MMA has been used for 2 categories of people in al-quran

Those you make an oath of support with
Those you make an oath of engagement for the purpose of marriage with.

Please read this article by Dr. Ayman for details

http//free-minds.org/rules-engagement

A girlfriend/boyfriend who have not made an oath of engagement for marriage with each other cannot be MMA.
A fianc?/fianc?e who have made an oath of engagement for marriage with each other can be MMA.

In my understanding in 236 MMA refers to fianc?/fianc?e and they are allowed to unguard their private parts to each other.

I personally didn't want MMA to mean this here because of the implications and my brainwashing by society and my preconceived notions of "morality", but I was not left with any other logical choice of meaning, so I had to accept this understanding that allah does allow this.

This doesn't mean that you blindly accept and trust my understanding. You should do your own home work and feel free to discard this understanding if you think it is faulty.

Now coming to how you were deceived by the mistranslation of 2433.

I think that the only true/honest/sincere commitment is a heart-commitment. That being said, I still believe that a "marriage contract" is important/useful. Because in verse 2433, the Quran suggests that one should document ones commitment with an engaged partner. And I believe that there is a purpose/wisdom behind this Quranic guideline. Without a heart-commitment to someone, a marriage contract does not seem to have any value at all. But it seems that if a man and a woman have a heart-commitment to eachother, then a marriage contract can solidify their commitment and make it stronger.

In verse 2433, the Quran suggests that a couple should document their marriage (i.e. have a marriage contract).

English transcription
Quran 2433 WalyastaAAfifi allatheena layajidoona nikahan hatta yughniyahumu Allahumin fadlihi waallatheena yabtaghoona alkitabamimma malakat aymanukum fakatiboohum inAAalimtum feehim khayran waatoohum min mali Allahiallathee atakum wala tukrihoo fatayatikumAAala albigha-i in aradna tahassunanlitabtaghoo AAarada alhayati alddunyawaman yukrihhunna fa-inna Allaha min baAAdi ikrahihinnaghafoorun raheemun

Quran 2433 And let those who are not able to marry continue to be chaste until God enriches them of His Bounty. And if those who are maintained by your oaths seek to consummate the marriage, then document it with them if you find that they are ready, and give them from the wealth of God which He has bestowed upon you. And do not force your young women to need if they have desired to be independent, in order that you may make a gain in the goods of this worldly life. And if anyone has compelled them, then for their compulsion, God is Forgiving, Merciful.

According to verse 2433 above, those maintained by your oaths (i.e. Ma Malakat aymanukum) should document their marriage if they want to consummate/fulfill their marriage.

See how the translator deceived you by translating "yabtaghoona alkitaba" as "seek to consummate the marriage"? Do you see any word in the original Arabic that means "consummate marriage"?

"Yabtaghoona" comes from the root Ba-Ghayn-Ya meaning "seeking"
"Al-kitab" means "the book/writing".

"Yabtaghoona alkitaba" means "seeking the writing".

Another word not properly translated is "yasta3fifi".

This word comes from the root Ayn-Fa-Fa meaning "be abstinent", "restrain". There is no connotation of "sex" in the root meaning. It just means abstinence, and the context will tell what from, so it should be translated as "abstain" and not "chaste".

Now let's retranslate 2433 to see what it implies

2433 And let those who are not able to marry continue to ABSTAIN until allah enriches them of his bounty. And if those who you have made oaths with SEEK THE WRITING, then WRITE IT FOR THEM if you find that they are ready, and give them from the wealth of allah which he has bestowed upon you ..............

It is clear from the context that some people are unable to get married. Why are they unable to get married? Because they don't have the financial capability to fulfill their marital responsibilities, as is obvious from "until allah enriches them of his bounty". So the abstinence is abstinence from marriage, and not abstinence from sex.

Do you have to be financially capable before you can have sex? So how can it be abstinence from sex here? If it is abstinence from sex here then it will sound like this

"And let those who are not able to marry continue to ABSTAIN FROM SEX until allah enriches them of his bounty"

Does that make sense? Do you have to be financially capable before you can have sex?

Ok even if you insist it is abstinence from sex here then it would logically mean that once you are financially capable you can have sex, because the abstinence was from sex and not from marriage. Does that make any sense?

Someone can be poor but can still get married. All the poor couple have to do is go to the church and get married. You don't need to have money to get married. So not being financially capable does not mean one cannot get married at all. That is why it tells them to abstain from marriage until they are financially capable, because marriage is about being able to fulfil your financial marital responsibilities. Marriage is not only for sex but to have a family and kids also, and to be able to support your spouse and kids, which is why they are told to wait and not get married until they are financially capable. So they are being asked not to abstain from sex but to abstain from marriage until they are financially capable.

Where it says "those who are not able to marry", it cannot mean those who are not able to marry at all, but it means those who are not able to marry because they cannot fulfill their marital responsibilities financially, because of the usage of words "until allah enriches them of his bounty". So it is telling them not to get married if they cannot fulfill their marital financial responsibilities.

It is just like if I say

If you are unable to marry because you can't fulfil your marital financial responsibilities, then don't get married until you have the money to support your marital responsibilities.

Ok now coming to second part.

The MMA being talked about here are not "those who you made oath of engagement with" but "those who you made an oath of support with". It is clear by the usage of "give them the wealth of allah bestowed upon you", that the MMA are poor and needy and you made oath of support with them that you will financially support them.

It is clear that the verse is telling us that such MMA who you made an oath of support with and therefore they are under your care i.e. your dependent, if they ask your permission in writing to not be your MMA/dependent anymore (for example by getting married to someone else), then give them that permission in writing, and also give them from the wealth bestowed upon you. In USA, kids under 18, or under 16 in some states, get emancipation from their parents, which is a written legal document, usually to get married to someone of their choice or to live independently. This is something similar to what is being talked about in 2433.

So it is not talking about "consummation of marriage" and "documenting a marriage contract", but giving them permission in writing to not be your MMA/dependent anymore.

Hope that clarifies some things. Once again this doesn't mean that you blindly accept and trust my understanding because it might be wrong. You should do your own home work and feel free to discard this understanding if you think it is faulty.

Peace and best regards.

unknownuser

Peace Taro & All,

I'll repeat what I said previously. I do not agree with people referring to their other half as "boyfriend" or "girlfriend". Ever since I was young I really didn't like that connotation. If i ever was to have a man, which I have done, they will be my partner. In my head I might refer to them as my husband. Only reason I wouldn't say husband to everyone else is because others might not understand how I think. My parents for one would probably lose the plot if they knew I for example fell in love with someone after a month and he was my "husband" - hence why I say partner.

But anyway, aside from that, I'm seeing a lot of "illicit sex" and "secret lover" references getting thrown about. I'm sorry but, if 2 people are in love and happy being together, who in the right mind would want to keep them a secret? As much as i don't like "bf" and "gf" references, bear in mind these are ONLY LABELS! These labels or words have no weight on them unless we evaluate the actions of someone. Do you call someone "muslim" if they kill people and bomb places and kill christians? Does that name "muslim" actually have any weight on them? No... it doesn't.

I severely have an issue with what defines marriage. What difference does it make if i referred to my lover as a partner or a husband? What about people who are pissed out of their heads, barely know each other, go to Las Vegas, get "married" in the presence of a priest after 5 minutes, and have sex. Is that marriage? Sorry, to me that is NOT marriage. And what exactly is a "marriage contract" anyway? "Document it". How so? How should it be documented? What constitutes documentation? A text between one another? A declaration of your love to the whole of the social network via Facebook? I know one day i'll probably HAVE to sign the register in the UK to declare myself as "married", but I really don't put alot of weight into that "requirement" to be "married". One and only "one" benefit I can see is when it comes to financial dealings - sharing property or assets that are owned by the couple. If "shit hits the fan" (lets be blunt), and the guy wanted to be a right arsehole, he could say right, thanks for the awesome relationship but i don't want to be with you anymore. Yes, it's heartbreak, yes it's painful. BUT, if you were a "married" couple (using my personal definition of marriage) and you DIDN'T own a house or have any shared ownership of anything financially, how is that different to the normal male/female couples you see out there?

People don't get into a relationship to have sex. People get into a relationship because they love each other. They feel they can be with this person for as long as possible. They might have their own idea of marriage in the sense that a marriage is between the man, the woman and God. A marriage is NOT kept secret. You declare each others love and a set of parents know about it. The person(s)'s friends know about it. They know you are taken and he is taken. The relationship status is "documented" in digital formats, not necessarily going to a registry office and signing your name on some piece of paper just because the "law" would deem you married. What about people who used to write on a piece of paper back in the 18ths that said "i am forever yours and you are forever mine. My life partner". What is a life partner? Is a life partner not a wife/husband? Which is more a marriage? An arranged marriage between 2 people who don't know eachother and do not LOVE eachother, yet they are just present in front of some imam and said "yeah we are married" with their parents around. OR, is a marriage when 2 people LOVE eachother, there are many witnesses/people/parents who know/acknowledge that these 2 people are TOGETHER for as long as they hopefully can be, and that it can be found "documented" in multiple places.

I think care needs to be taken into "how" a "marriage" can be documented, because I see multiple ways. Strip out the pagan crap, strip out giving a ring, having a white dress, saying vows and singing with the choir. Take that all out and what are you left with. There should NEVER be any secrecy in love UNLESS you fear for your life/well-being (parents might hate you/want to kill you/tear you apart), but even then, there will be other people in the world who will know your relationship status. If someone asks me why I didn't go to the registry office each time (i've had 3 partners in my 23 years of my life) I committed myself to a man, it would SIMPLY be because of how my parents and perhaps other people in society (who believe in just normal boyfriend/girlfriend crap) would perceive it. Also, perhaps the man might also not think that signing the registry is a declaration of marriage and maybe they had the same mentality as me. Maybe the important thing to both the man and female was that others knew what they were... and most importantly, God knew what they were and what was in their hearts.

As Huruf mentioned earlier and as I have mentioned above, the "marriage contract" in the sense of, for example, the UK where you sign a book, would be beneficial, is that the man can't screw you over with financial assets you share.

Let's not be a little close minded and not see how these things can be interpreted differently. A relationship or a marriage is not about sex or intimacy. It can be a part of it. It's not necessary either! But it is a small part of it, but not at all the most important.

Sorry if i side-tracked...

Peace,
Sushi

I agree with what you said above, i think like you since i was a kid, i was always wondering how an imam or a priest can grant a permission from God to bestow a married label to the couple or a dowry(money is used in my country) to determine that the couple is married or not(Pretty shirk come to think of it), Glad i'm not the only one, thought i was bat-sh*t crazy when i started to think like this. Never really see difference either.

Both marriage by dowry or a marriage committed by oath(couple/ love partner relationships) is pretty much the same, both has it's ups and down and in both marriage one of the couple can betray one another, and both probably won't last long either if God willing.

Taro_Hiroshi

Peace truthseeker11,

By saying that I have been deceived, you are partly focusing on me. But you should not be focusing on me at all. You should ONLY address the content of my arguments. I don't like being called deceived. To me, such behaviour is unacceptable. Never mistake my kindness for weakness.

Please ponder on this You would not like others to call you deceived. Thus, you should not call others deceived. I advice you to treat others how you would want them to treat you. There is a quote which goes like this

"Do not do to others what you would not like yourself."

Please ponder on this If you disrespect someone, you can not expect him/her to respect you. Because respect is a two-way street. Let me repeat this one more time "Respect is a two-way street."

Also, see this article

http//www.free-minds.org/islamic-etiquette

If you respect me, then I will respect you. That's my rule. And for me, that rule is set in stone.

I like your posts in this forum. I also like your rational and evidence-based approach to islam. Also, I have learned important things about the teachings of the Quran from you. I appreciate your efforts for the true islam. Try to understand, that I see you as a brother. But I can only discuss/debate with you if you adress the content of my arguments. I can not discuss with someone if he/she focus on a person (i.e. Ad hominem) instead of adressing the arguments of that person. That's my policy.

I expect you to only adress the content of my arguments from now on.

I might answer your post in due time.

truthseeker11

Peace Taro Hiroshi,

I never disrespected you. I never said you made a wrong translation. I was very careful to say what I said. I never said that you have deceived.

You quoted a translation by someone else. I was calling that translator a deceiver and not that you are deceiving, and I was trying to give you sincere advice to be careful.

If someone is robbed and I say he has been robbed, am I disrespecting him? Then if I give him sincere advice how to take necessary precautions next time, is that disrespecting him?

You are the one ad homining me by falsely accusing me of disrespecting you. If you ad hominem me again like this, I am sorry I won't be able to participate in a discussion with you. I have always respected you.

I am not going to make any more posts in this thread. You have really disrespected me by falsely accusing me of having disrespected you, and I am very upset about that.

I was up until 2 am last night spending hours writing that post, just for you, and this is how I am treated for making a sincere effort. I had to get up early today and didn't get enough sleep. I didn't have to go out of my way like that.

Actually I am done with this forum for now and I am going to take a break for a while.

Keep up the good work and may ALLAH bless you for your efforts.

Peace and best regards.

JavaLatte

I am not going to make any more posts in this thread. You have really disrespected me by falsely accusing me of having disrespected you, and I am very upset about that.

I was up until 2 am last night spending hours writing that post, just for you, and this is how I am treated for making a sincere effort. I had to get up early today and didn't get enough sleep. I didn't have to go out of my way like that.

Actually I am done with this forum for now and I am going to take a break for a while.

No, please don't leave, truthseeker11! (

Perhaps there's misunderstanding between you and Hiroshi, I hope we can fix this.

I think you both should be good friends - I truly hope so. Please don't lose a good relationship just because of this issue.

Peace.

Taro_Hiroshi

Peace truthseeker11,

You told me that I have been deceived 4 times (in your post). And that is why I reacted the way I reacted. Perhaps your intention was good. If that is the case, then I misunderstood your intention. I guess I overreacted. I just wanted to tell you that I don't like being called deceived. That's all. But perhaps I should have told you through a PM instead. I am an imperfect human being. And I often make mistakes. I did not mean to make you upset my friend. No hard feelings.

I never directly said that you disrespected me. Nowhere in my post did I say the following "You have disrespected me." Therefore I don't think that I have disrespected you. I appreciated your post and appreciated the advice you gave me about taking necessary precautions the next time. I thought your post was a good post. And I will answer your post in due time (in the future). You have written a lot of good posts in this forum. Believe me. And apart from telling me that I have been "deceived" (in your post), I liked your post. As mentioned earlier, I don't think that I have disrespected you. Actually, I respect you a lot man. Someone who does not respect you, would probably resort to name calling and insults. Right? But I did not do that. And I never do that. Because I don't like to hurt anyone or say/do something that is not right. I believe in being kind. And the Quran has taught me to be kind and say kind things to the people.

Quran 4114 There is no good in most of what they privately confer, except whoever orders a charity or kindness or reconciliation between the people. And whoever does this seeking the grace of God, We will give him a great recompense.

Quran 283 And We took the covenant of the Children of Israel "You shall not serve except God, and do good to your parents, and regard the relatives, and the orphans, and the needy, and say kind things to the people, and hold the contact prayer, and contribute towards purification." But then you turned away, except for a few of you; you were objecting.

I think that taking a break from a forum from time to time, is a good idea. Because I think that it can enable a person to learn more, grow more and give more. Also, I think that that it can enable a person to focus more on his/her work and career.

I wish you the best in your journey. And I hope that we can still be brothers )

I look forward to read your posts in this forum in the future.

Take care trutseeker11.

May the God bless you.

Much respect,

Taro.

JavaLatte

I think that taking a break from a forum from time to time, is a good idea. Because it can enable a person to learn more, grow more and give more. Also, I think it can enable a person to focus more on his/her work and career.

Hmm yea... that might be right... http//emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/sigh-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862519

sushi1992

Truthseeker just take a few days out or something. Sometimes I leave this place for a month and then come back to it to see if people have responded or anything interesting has come up in conversation or if I need to start battling people P with kindness of course. But like Taro, I've had my mind opened quite alot in regards to certain aspects of the Quran by yourself, wakas, and especially by Ayman (who I seriously miss on this forum....).

Anyway, I hope you don't leave for too long mate... But your post was awesome and I totally agree/respect it and I'm sure you meant no harm if you did tell Taro he is a deceiver which he is not (he might just need to not get so excited sometimes P).

Peace peace

unknownuser