Defenition of marriage suggests sex before marriage permitted?!
-
If you analyse the context, It is being conveyed by sighting the example of MMA, that you never make them equal to yourself or make them partners in the blessings which God bestows upon you, Then how do you think that God who is Almighty ,and to whom every thing belongs, would create partners for himself.
siki
16.71 And God has preferred some of you over others in provision. Those who have been preferred will not relinquish their provision to MMA, so they may become equal in it. Are they denying the favour of God?
Verse 16.71 clearly states that any one who does not make them equal is denying the favour of God.
-
16.71 And God has preferred some of you over others in provision. Those who have been preferred will not relinquish their provision to MMA, so they may become equal in it. Are they denying the favour of God?
Verse 16.71 clearly states that any one who does not make them equal is denying the favour of God.
If the humans do not give up power to that extent, why do they expect God to do that and create partners for himself ?
16-71 GOD has provided for some of you more than others. Those who are given plenty would never give their properties to their subordinates to the extent of making them partners. Would they give up GOD's blessings?
16-72 And GOD made for you spouses from among yourselves, and produced for you from your spouses children and grandchildren, and provided you with good provisions. Should they believe in falsehood, and turn unappreciative of GOD's blessings?
16-73 Yet, they worship beside GOD what possesses no provisions for them in the heavens, nor on earth, nor can provide them with anything.
siki
-
4.33 And for each (men and women) We have made inheritors for what was left behind by the parents and the relatives, and MMA. So you shall give them (the inheritors) their portion. God is witness over all things.
Does this verse tells us that we inherit from MMA?
-
4.33 And for each (men and women) We have made inheritors for what was left behind by the parents and the relatives, and MMA. So you shall give them (the inheritors) their portion. God is witness over all things.
Does this verse tells us that we inherit from MMA?
4-43 uses "Aqdatu emnakum" which is not what Ma Makakat emnakum are. It probably conveys a different meaning.
siki
-
I agree that azwaj is better translated as spouse or pair , but here the address is male, so logically the spouse here is a wife,
Who is this "male"? Musal-leen? As I mentioned in my post, this is a generic male, not gendered, meaning that it contains females too. Otherwise, almost the whole of the quraan is addresses to "males" and "females" have nothing to to do with it.
I agree that azwaj is better translated as spouse or pair , but here the address is male, so logically the spouse here is a wife,
33-52 It is not allowed to you to take women afterwards, nor that you should change them for other wives, though their beauty be pleasing to you, except what your right hand possesses(MMA) and Allah is Watchful over all things.
If this is where you concluded this
meaning he could increase that kitty.
Then this is a special case, and still does not mean they are sex slaves. And it's not the only "special case" in this verse.
MMA are particularly not to have sex with them. it's a sexless marriage , whether by at least one of them not being able to or not wnating/supposed to have sex. There are many people like that and they are not ignored by the quraan. And maybe God is asking him not to marry= to limit his intimate relations to his wives, or even to remarry/change his wives, but since MMA marriage is a sexless one, he could have as amny as he wanted. Otherwise, what's the point of forbidding him any more marriage, but allowing him as amny MMA as he wanted? -
Who is this "male"? Musal-leen? As I mentioned in my post, this is a generic male, not gendered, meaning that it contains females too. Otherwise, almost the whole of the quraan is addresses to "males" and "females" have nothing to to do with it.
If this is where you concluded this
Then this is a special case, and still does not mean they are sex slaves. And it's not the only "special case" in this verse.
MMA are particularly not to have sex with them. it's a sexless marriage , whether by at least one of them not being able to or not wnating/supposed to have sex. There are many people like that and they are not ignored by the quraan. And maybe God is asking him not to marry= to limit his intimate relations to his wives, or even to remarry/change his wives, but since MMA marriage is a sexless one, he could have as amny as he wanted. Otherwise, what's the point of forbidding him any more marriage, but allowing him as amny MMA as he wanted?Dear Samia
You saidbut since MMA marriage is a sexless one,
What is this "sexless marriage "? Never heard of it.
How come a marriage is sexless unless there is some really medical problem ?
What is the use of such a marriage ?
If you say financial support ,then it can be without marriage even.
If a man takes a lady in marriage and does not does not have sex with her ,do you think it is is justified with that lady. Will she commit Zina for her psychological demands ?
Regards -
Who is this "male"? Musal-leen? As I mentioned in my post, this is a generic male, not gendered, meaning that it contains females too. Otherwise, almost the whole of the quraan is addresses to "males" and "females" have nothing
When HE needed to address both , He clearly demonstrated it by starting with "Oh you believe!
MMA are particularly not to have sex with them. it's a sexless marriage , ?
How did you conclude the red part? where as i have clearly shown you the evidence from quran in the shape of 70-29.30 and there is a repetition of this advice in quran as well.
And maybe God is asking him not to marry= to limit his intimate relations to his wives, or even to remarry/change his wives, but since MMA marriage is a sexless one, he could have as amny as he wanted. Otherwise, what's the point of forbidding him any more marriage, but allowing him as amny MMA as he wanted?
The sexual contract with MMA is with least obligation , whereas the women who are taken in contract through Nikah have significant rights, and addons, like "Ajar", "inheritance" , "divorce", "maintenance" etc, which is quite burdensome. May be that is why he was stopped at a certain stage but MMa were excluded.
siki
-
Fahad
salam brother
sorry i had to butt-in,
Wsalaam bro.
You are welcome .
I guess you have a wrong understanding due to erroneous translation of the word Mohsinna by most of the translators , specially 24-4,
I am willing to re-consider my understanding if I can see some solid evidence against it. My understanding is based upon verse 4/25, not upon translations of a single word.
The Mohsinnats, or the mohsinna is ,NOT, a married women, but a label that Quran likes to call the women who are chaste, or in other words are not proven fahishas/zanias(every one is chaste unless proven otherwise)
I'd like to see evidence for that.
A clear proof against your understanding is 4-25, kindly go through that, it says , If you do not have the means to nikkah a Mohsinna from Mominats category , then you should marry a maiden mohsinna from Ma malakat category.
Bro, 'al-muhsinaat al-mominaat' are already from the 'milk-al-ayman', IMHO. Al-muhsinaat are only allowed if they are from the 'milk-al-ayman' category(4/24). But I am sorry I don't get how that disproves my understanding?
-
The only exception is 246
246 And those who accuse their spouses, but they have no witnesses except for themselves, then the testimony of one of them is to be equivalent to that of four witnesses if it is sworn by God that they are being truthful.
It still says that their testimony is EQUAL TO THAT OF 4 WITNESSES, which again implies that IN GENERAL ZINA IS PUBLIC SEX.
Zina is definitely public sex, 24-6 has no relevance with the issue, this is a peculiar case and if you note
no word like zina zani or zania is used in 24-6.It is an accusation for adultery and what is going to be proven in this case is a fahash act,
Brother, 24/6 itself doesn't mention the words zina, zaaniya or zaani but what is the context about? It is about zina. 24/4 has relevance with zina, but 24/6 does not? Why not?
Not zina, until or unless he/she is caught by 4 witnesses.
So 24/4 is about zina even though it does not mention the word "zina", "zaaniya" or "zaani". But 24/6 is not about zina because it does not mention "zina", "zaaniya" or "zaani" either. Bro, please help me understand this logic. Thanks.
-
Ma Malakat emnakum are rated along with your azwaj, you can have sex with them , the only difference being that you possess them for free, No wages/ajar/reward before enjoying them.
They are not for free. They are dependent upon you, so you have to take care of their needs.
-
Dear Samia
You said What is this "sexless marriage "? Never heard of it.
How come a marriage is sexless unless there is some really medical problem ?
What is the use of such a marriage ?
If you say financial support ,then it can be without marriage even.
If a man takes a lady in marriage and does not does not have sex with her ,do you think it is is justified with that lady. Will she commit Zina for her psychological demands ?
RegardsHow old are you, student?
-
Brother, 24/6 itself doesn't mention the words zina, zaaniya or zaani but what is the context about? It is about zina. 24/4 has relevance with zina, but 24/6 does not? Why not?
So 24/4 is about zina even though it does not mention the word "zina", "zaaniya" or "zaani". But 24/6 is not about zina because it does not mention "zina", "zaaniya" or "zaani" either. Bro, please help me understand this logic. Thanks.
IMO, context in 24-4 is an accusation , and the subject is an unproven accusation so it is not zina, That is why the word zina has not been used in 24-4.
Again in 24-6 ,the issue can not be categorised as zina due to absence 4 witnesses, but as the matter is extremely important/sensitive for the witnessing spouse, as such he can not keep his mouth shut and go on living, just because he can't produce 4 witnesses , and if he bursts out with it, 80 lashes are waiting for him, so to avoid false accusation charge , a special procedure has been formulated.
But this sole witnessing can not be termed as public sex , that is why No Zee word has been used in 24-6 as well.
siki
-
Wsalaam bro.
You are welcome ) .
I am willing to re-consider my understanding if I can see some solid evidence against it. My understanding is based upon verse 4/25, not upon translations of a single word.
I'd like to see evidence for that.
Bro, 'al-muhsinaat al-mominaat' are already from the 'milk-al-ayman', IMHO. Al-muhsinaat are only allowed if they are from the 'milk-al-ayman' category(4/24). But I am sorry I don't get how that disproves my understanding?
I have been studying this subject for the last two years ,so to have some idea about this issue, kindly start with studying "Mohsinnats ,a new understanding" thread.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13799.0
siki
-
Dear Samia
You said What is this "sexless marriage "? Never heard of it.
How come a marriage is sexless unless there is some really medical problem ?
What is the use of such a marriage ?
If you say financial support ,then it can be without marriage even.
If a man takes a lady in marriage and does not does not have sex with her ,do you think it is is justified with that lady. Will she commit Zina for her psychological demands ?
RegardsThis post definitely proves that you are mentally very much an adult , and that is what is important for discussing this issue on the forum.
siki
-
MMA are particularly not to have sex with them. it's a sexless marriage , whether by at least one of them not being able to or not wnating/supposed to have sex. There are many people like that and they are not ignored by the quraan. And maybe God is asking him not to marry= to limit his intimate relations to his wives, or even to remarry/change his wives, but since MMA marriage is a sexless one, he could have as amny as he wanted. Otherwise, what's the point of forbidding him any more marriage, but allowing him as amny MMA as he wanted?
Dear samia
This sexless marriage argument is by far the most senseless argument that you have ever come up with, and on top of it , ridiculing Q student? who , in my opinion was asking you very intelligent questions very humbly.
siki
-
Dear samia
This sexless marriage argument is by far the most senseless argument that you have ever come up with, and on top of it , ridiculing Q student? who , in my opinion was asking you very intelligent questions very humbly.
siki
In fact I was not rediculing student, I laughed at the way he understood my question. It has nothing to do with the discussion being for adults only. What I meant is that the older the men the nearer their expiry date, though it does not apply to all, but to a good percentage. Besides, primary impotence, secondary impotence or malformations are more than you can imagine. Not to mention the gay who cannot marry "fully" the opposite sex nor are allowed to marry into their own sex. Just because people do not talk does not mean that a good portion of the population are not suffering in silence.
And you say sexless marriage is none sense or does not/cannot exist?
What do the doctors on this forum think? -
IMO, context in 24-4 is an accusation , and the subject is an unproven accusation so it is not zina, That is why the word zina has not been used in 24-4.
The accusation itself is not zina, but the accusation is about zina, is it not? Why would the context be about one thing and the accusation about another?
Again in 24-6 ,the issue can not be categorised as zina due to absence 4 witnesses,
But where is that verse that requires 4 witnesses for az-zina to take place, the verse that defines az-zina as public sex, the verse that mentions "zina" and "four witnesses" together?
but as the matter is extremely important/sensitive for the witnessing spouse, as such he can not keep his mouth shut and go on living, just because he can't produce 4 witnesses , and if he bursts out with it, 80 lashes are waiting for him, so to avoid false accusation charge , a special procedure has been formulated.
Bro, the Quran does not tell us this reason.
But this sole witnessing can not be termed as public sex , that is why No Zee word has been used in 24-6 as well.
The 'Zee word' has not been used anywhere in the Quran with "four witnesses".