Marriage: "'Uqdata al-Nikah" and Written Contract vs Verbal Agreement
-
I am trying to come to a conclusion regarding this issue and have been leaning towards verbal agreement. I have seen numerous irrelevant verses being thrown around - e.g. 2282 - that try to prove/justify the need of a marriage contract and two outside witnesses.
420 If you wish to replace one wife in place of another, and you have given one of them a large amount, then do not take anything from it. (Would you take it by slander and evident harmdoing?)
421 How can you take it when you have become intimate with each other, and the women have taken from you a strong pledge/verbal contract?
Moreover, I am trying to figure out to what the term "'uqdatu al-nikah" refers.
2235 There is no blame upon you if you openly propose marriage to these women*, or you keep it between yourselves. God knows that you will be thinking of them, but do not promise them secretly, unless you speak a fair saying/opinion. Do not set/resolve 'uqdata al-nikah until the law/decree reaches its end**. (Know that the god knows what is in your consciousnesses, so be prudent of him, and know that God is forgiving, compassionate.)
*i.e. widows (see previous verse)
**i.e. 4 months and 10 days (see previous verse)2237 If you divorce them before you touched them, but you have already assigned for them an assignment*, then you must give half of what you assigned, unless they forgo or 'uqdatu al-nikah forgoes. (If you forgo, it is closer to prudence. Do not forget the favor between you. The god is seer over what you do.)
- i.e. dowry
Also nowhere is a contract/written legal document ("kitab" explicity mentioned for marriage, as far as I am aware.
-
peace,
Your translation of 2237 is missing a portion.
Wonderful contribution!
-
Thanks, I like to be concise.
I guess I could have added "...which if added back in would likely cause problems for your view hence I'm wondering if it was omitted on purpose."
;D
My point was you could have pointed out what was missing IYO...
Are you here for verbal gymnastics and debate competition or learning and helping others to learn?Also, verses that you have used in your article and other threads to claim a contract with witnesses is necessary for marrying
"To have the marriage contract/oaths witnessed "First off, there's quite a difference between an oath and a contract.
2282 deals with recording debt and even says trade doesnt need to be recorded - of which a dowry is neither, and definitely far from debt. 2282 has nothing to do with marriage. Dowry is sadaqat. Thats also why the god is leaving it up to the huband/wife to settle half the return in case of divorce before sex. 652 deals with divorce, not marrying! That is more careless on your part than I'd expect.
If we leave aside 'uqdatu al-nikah, 421 and absence of kitab (decree/something of legal nature/contract) or verb form thereof (writing, contracting, decreeing) for nikah "causes problems for your view."
So back to my main question for anyone reading this To what does "'uqdatu al-nikah" refer? It is used differently across translation and even within a given translation.
2235 is not relevant to marriage of women that arent in a waiting period.
What I think 'Uqdata literally means knot. In 2235 it talks about tying the knot of marriage ("'uqdatu al-nikah" which basically means committing to the marriage, going through with it, etc.
2237 says something different - it says "the one in whose hand uqdata al nikah" is. (The fact that it uses the singular alladhi negates this referring to a witnesses or contract holders. Either way, witnesses either dont hold contracts or there would be more than one person.) Hand is obviously used figuratively, as in many verses and can mean resources or actions. Here it means the one among husband and wife who initiated the divorce. Thus, Rashad Khalifa's and Shabbir Ahmed's translations make the most sense for this verse.
