Defenition of marriage suggests sex before marriage permitted?!

Samia

You wrongly infer from 2282 that it is talking about the marriage/nikah when it mentions a written contract and then you start making silly statements about how marriage can be for a fixed period of time. A written contract is for AJR/reward/gift and not nikah/marriage. According to 2282 we are commanded to have a written document in case of any transaction (tijarat) in which you lend or borrow something (tadaayantum) for a fixed period of time. In other words, we are asked to have a written document in case of ANY kind of DEBT to be paid back over or after a certain time period.

The ajr due after nikah/marriage can be such a kind of debt which the husband owes to the wife after nikah/marriage. It can be either paid in full at the time of nikah/marriage, in which case The God says that there is no blame if we do not record it in writing, or it can be paid later over or after a fixed period of time, in which case a written contract is ESSENTIAL. It still does not say "do not write it if given on the spot". So my understanding is that it is still PREFERABLE to have a written document but it is NOT REQUIRED if ajr is paid on full on the spot at the time of nikah/marriage. The two male witnesses are ALWAYS necessary.

Nikah/marriage itself is a form of Ba-Ya-Ayn (tabaaya3tum) so two male witnesses are ESSENTIAL for nikah/marriage.

In summary

Nikah/marriage performed and ajr paid in full at the time of nikah ------> two male witnesses essential but written contract not necessary but preferable.
Nikah/marriage performed but ajr to be paid over or after a fixed period of time -------> two male witnesses essential + written contract essential.

Salaam Truthseeker1

I do not know if I am misunderstanding this post, because I see contradictions
-You blame your interlocutor for considering that verse 2282 is about marriage, but then you adopt it in your expalnation of the two witnesses.
You also take ajr/rward and gift as synonymes. You do not need witnesses for a gift; as for a reward or an ajr, witnesses are only essential in case it's denied that the ajr has been paid. For marriage, witnesses are not mentioned anywhere, so the mere fact that these people are kown by otheres to be living as husband and wife is enough testimony, and ajr here is not necessarily to be paid at the time of nikah (if there's a point in time for that).
You also equate ajr with dayn /debt . Is there any verse that tells us that this "debt" will be repaid? And you equate it to bay3 Is there anyway this "ajr" might not be justly " weighed and measured" as per 6151, for example a too much ajr being asked for an old ugly wife? Is it a price? In fact it has to do with the wealth of the "buyer" and not the quality of the "goods".
Ajr for marriage is neither trade nor debt. It's a wage. No witnesses for that matter.

Samia

Peace Nyma,

We are asked to GIVE THEM THEIR UJOOR wherever it is mentioned in the context of marriage. So it has to be something physical. The only way you can give her HALF as per 2237 also proves it has to be something physical and also something which can be divided in half. How can you reward someone with something that has no intrinsic value to that person?

2282 talks about anything that can be borrowed/lent/owed. When you don't give the ajr to the wife on the spot at the time of nikah, you owe it to her and hence comes under "tadaayantum".

Salaam Truthseeker1
What's mentioned in 237 is not an ajr, but "fareeda", a pay-off or something like a divorce settlement to be paid in case of divorce. The verse says it would be half as much if the marriage was not yet consumated.

nimnimak_11

Peace truthseeker

First of all
You are welcome. I thank you also because this discussion has clarified certain things for me too and I also have learnt from it
bravo handshake peace

The level of intrinsic value does not matter as long as it is of intrinsic value to the wife and she agrees to it. No matter what the intrinsic value, if it is given on the spot at time of nikah/marriage then no written contract required but if it is delayed then written contract necessary.

Once agreed, if the ajr isn't of great enough intrinsic value in the married people's judgement, then how can it be in anyway related to 2282?
If it was of enough intrinsic value in their sight, then if would fall under tejarat. If the ajr is not of enough value in the couple's judgement, i don't see how it can be related to either the root Ba-Ya-Ayn or tejarat in verse 2282

In 3350 we hear about the prophet having already paid the ujoor of his wives, so it cannot be an ongoing thing throughout marriage.

I will get back to you on the ongoing thing after i look into it properly.

That is incorrect. In the qur'aan, we are commanded to give AJR only after nikah/marriage, so you have to be married to give AJR to your wife

I agree. This dosn't however mean that i am restricted to giving ajr to someone right? I could be giving ajr to someone before i propose to them. Then i propose to them (in the manner which fulfills Quranic criteria) and i continue to give them ajr. Difference is we are now married.

You are also forgetting permission of the guardian/family in case of FATAYAAT/guardian/family protected young women (425).

I havn't forgotten. It's just i'm trying to first understand this on the bases of two free believing individuals.

just "will you marry me" is not sufficient

Why? This proposal is serious. It is an invitation to an important commitment (if you are believers, it is implied that you will take faithfulness and other responsibilities in a relationship seriously) It is the same as
I take an oath before The God that I will marry you
because by proposing you are taking an oath before God as God is witness to everything and encompasses all things.

I now think that this oath should also have two witnesses because it is also a form of BA-YA-AYN

I currently agree.

Today in the west no one asks for ajr BECAUSE THE WOMEN ARE NOT AWARE THAT THEY HAVE THIS RIGHT AFTER MARRIAGE. If they don't ask because they are not made aware of this right then IT IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY FOREGOING.

Makes sense.

A written ajr contract is not required if the ajr is given at the time of nikah but is required if its payment is delayed. The marriage contract/knot mentioned in 2237 is compulsory because the phrase "allathee biyadihi oqdat al-nikah" can only be referring to the husband. Whether it is written or verbal depends on what this phrase implies. This phrase translates to "the one with/in his hand the marriage contract/knot" which makes me think that it is talking about a written marriage contract because of the wording "with/in his hand". If it had said "the one who entered the marriage contract/knot" then it could have been verbal.

2237 does not imply or say that you HAVE to have a
allathee biyadihi oqdat al-nikah
. It only says that if one exists then they can forgive.

peace peace

nsws1988

Peace everyone,

I just want to say thank you to everyone contributing to this thread.
I am planning on getting married soon, God willing, and have been reading your comments from a distance.
I've learned a lot already and hope that we can come up with a consensus very soon. Keep it up!

God bless

nimnimak_11

Peace Samia

You blame your interlocutor for considering that verse 2282 is about marriage

There was a misunderstanding. I thought that in the first half of 2282 that which was translated to finance (tejarat) was actually a word from the root of Ba-Ya-Ayn where as this root only occured in the second half of 2282.

I considered it to be about marriage because of the presence of Ba-Ya-Ayn.

For marriage, witnesses are not mentioned anywhere

Would nikah not fall under Ba-Ya-Ayn? It is a serious commitment.

= Ba-Ya-Ayn =

Selling or buying
Exchanging or exchange of property
Gaining mastery over someone, superceding or occupying their place also by superior power or force
Making a covenant, an engagement, a contract (e.g. promising allegiance, swearing, oaths)
Hire or hiring of land
Sealing the deal, also striking together hand of two contracting parties in token of the ratification of sale
Manner of selling/buying
An article of merchandise

Ajr for marriage is neither trade nor debt. It's a wage. No witnesses for that matter.

Can you please clarify your understanding of ajr to be wage. What kind of wage? Financial? Is it even physical?

What's mentioned in 237 is not an ajr, but "fareeda", a pay-off or something like a divorce settlement to be paid in case of divorce

Thanks for pointing that out. This might mean that ajr is not physical. I'll check this out.

peace

nimnimak_11

Peace everyone,

I just want to say thank you to everyone contributing to this thread.
I am planning on getting married soon, God willing, and have been reading your comments from a distance.
I've learned a lot already and hope that we can come up with a consensus very soon. Keep it up!

God bless

bravo peace group

Samia

Would nikah not fall under Ba-Ya-Ayn? It is a serious commitment.

= Ba-Ya-Ayn =

Selling or buying
Exchanging or exchange of property
Gaining mastery over someone, superceding or occupying their place also by superior power or force
Making a covenant, an engagement, a contract (e.g. promising allegiance, swearing, oaths)
Hire or hiring of land
Sealing the deal, also striking together hand of two contracting parties in token of the ratification of sale
Manner of selling/buying
An article of merchandise

Well, unless you understand MMA as a slave, I do not see how human can be a subject of "trade", nor would you find this understanding in the qur'aan.

Can you please clarify your understanding of ajr to be wage. What kind of wage? Financial? Is it even physical?

What's the difference between a reward and a wage?
What do you mean by "physical"? How can someone pay you a "non physical" reward/wage?

nimnimak_11

peace

Well, unless you understand MMA as a slave, I do not see how human can be a subject of "trade", nor would you find this understanding in the qur'aan

I don't understand it like that.
Basically when you propose or promise something serious in which i think a proposal to a relationship will count, then it is a form of Ba-Ya-Ayn (Making a covenant, an engagement)

As verse 2282 says "except if it is a trade to be done on the spot between you" and trade here has the root Ba-Ya-Ayn (if i'm not mistaken)
Then i understand this to mean that serious promises or proposals must have at least two people who know this.

Does trade come frome Ba-Ya-Ayn?? I currently can't tell.

What's the difference between a reward and a wage?

I've always though of wage as money paid for work but actually it's just a reward for a work so no difference. Thank you for the reminder.

What do you mean by "physical"? How can someone pay you a "non physical" reward/wage?

Well sometimes people get rewarded by praise for their works. By non physical i meant something like that.

If Ajr can be understood to be not limited to something physical, then the ajr requiered could just be understood as something on the lines of as long as you make them happy.

I was looking at the places where the word dower came using globalquran.com and so far found out that the word ajr is never used in a sentence where it is implied that it has to be physical.

I havn't looked at this in proper detail though and chapter 60 has two verses on ajr which i want to look at in more detail. So far to me it seems that ajr can be non physical.

Can someone with arabic knowledge help me with 6010

O you who acknowledge, if the acknowledging women come emigrating to you, then you shall test them. God is fully aware of their acknowledgement. Thus, if you establish that they are those who acknowledge, then you shall not return them to those who do not appreciate. They are no longer lawful for them, nor are those who do not appreciate lawful for them. Return the dowries that were paid. There is no sin upon you to marry them, if you have paid their dowries to them. Do not keep the wives who do not acknowledge, and ask back what dowries you paid. Let them ask back what dowries they had paid. Such is God's judgment; He judges between you. God is Knowledgeable, Wise.

Can someone have a look to see if the Ajr occures in any of these dowries that are stated in 6010

Depending on where it occures, then ajr might be limited to something physical.

Thanks

Samia

Basically when you propose or promise something serious in which i think a proposal to a relationship will count, then it is a form of Ba-Ya-Ayn (Making a covenant, an engagement)

As verse 2282 says "except if it is a trade to be done on the spot between you" and trade here has the root Ba-Ya-Ayn (if i'm not mistaken)
Then i understand this to mean that serious promises or proposals must have at least two people who know this.

Does trade come frome Ba-Ya-Ayn?? I currently can't tell.

Salaam

I think you are mixing between two different verbs related to the same root baya3a/ , verb form III (only the verb is used in the qur'aan) to promise allegence to an authority/ plight one's fealty; and bay3 / , noun/verbal noun from verb form I (only the noun is used) sale/trade.

Verse 6010 does not contain any of these two words, but has (they spent) and their (ajr)

O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them Allah knows best as to their Faith if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers. They are not lawful (wives) for the Unbelievers, nor are the (Unbelievers) lawful (husbands) for them. But pay the Unbelievers what they have spent, and there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr to them. But hold not to the guardianship of unbelieving women ask for what ye have spent, and let the (Unbelievers) ask for what they have spent . Such is the command of Allah He judges between you. And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom.

Well sometimes people get rewarded by praise for their works. By non physical i meant something like that.

This is called being thankful and/ or grateful.

nimnimak_11

peace

I think you are mixing between two different verbs related to the same root baya3a/ , verb form III (only the verb is used in the qur'aan) to promise allegence to an authority/ plight one's fealty; and bay3 / , noun/verbal noun from verb form I (only the noun is used) sale/trade.

So there's no way it can mean making a covenant or an engagement?

Verse 6010 does not contain any of these two words, but has (they spent) and their (ajr)

O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them Allah knows best as to their Faith if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers. They are not lawful (wives) for the Unbelievers, nor are the (Unbelievers) lawful (husbands) for them. But pay the Unbelievers what they have spent, and there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr to them. But hold not to the guardianship of unbelieving women ask for what ye have spent, and let the (Unbelievers) ask for what they have spent . Such is the command of Allah He judges between you. And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom

Thank you for responding to my request.
This does not mean that ajr has to be physical then if that's the only occurence of ajr in that verse.

What do you mean by "physical"? How can someone pay you a "non physical" reward/wage?

to award someone, it could be saying nice things to them (which would be praising someone) or buying them flowers (which is buying something) One is physical the other is not. The purpose of both however is to give happiness.

The thing which could prevent ajr from being non physical is when part of the translation of 6010 comes out as "payment of their ajr" In english it is payment which implies money or something of financial value is it similar in arabic? Does the arabic of the word payment imply in arabic that the ajr is money?

Thanks

Samia

So there's no way it can mean making a covenant or an engagement?

If you mean ajr, no. It follows this agreement. Even when it's by God, it's not unconditional.

Thank you for responding to my request.
This does not mean that ajr has to be physical then if that's the only occurence of ajr in that verse.
to award someone, it could be saying nice things to them (which would be praising someone) or buying them flowers (which is buying something) One is physical the other is not. The purpose of both however is to give happiness.

The verse is speaking of paying back the expenses paid by their previous husbands. How can they payback thanks and gratitude?
And if my husband keeps thanking me and sending me fllwers, and that's all he "pays", would I be happy? nope

The thing which could prevent ajr from being non physical is when part of the translation of 6010 comes out as "payment of their ajr" In english it is payment which implies money or something of financial value is it similar in arabic? Does the arabic of the word payment imply in arabic that the ajr is money?

The word "ajr" intself means reward/wage. Yes, there's of a course a verb, which is ( aatuuhunna give them), but the verb itself can be used to give non physical things, just as in English where it does not necessarily mean give physical/financial thing or even has a positive meaning. Yet, it's not used for "giving" thanks! (Thanksgiving, when translated, omits the verb because it's not used in Arabic with thanking)

nimnimak_11

peace

The verse is speaking of paying back the expenses paid by their previous husbands. How can they payback thanks and gratitude?

They cannot, but when you translated the verse for me, the place where you made clear that the word ajr actually appeared

O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them Allah knows best as to their Faith if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers. They are not lawful (wives) for the Unbelievers, nor are the (Unbelievers) lawful (husbands) for them. But pay the Unbelievers what they have spent (No ajr here right?), and there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr(This ajr is addressed to the women only) to them. But hold not to the guardianship of unbelieving women ask for what ye have spent(Again no ajr), and let the (Unbelievers) ask for what they have spent(No ajr) . Such is the command of Allah He judges between you. And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom

The places where it is said to pay them what they have spent means it is physical but the word ajr does not occure in these places. Where ajr does occure is when it is addressed to the believer giving the women

"there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr"

And if my husband keeps thanking me and sending me fllwers, and that's all he "pays", would I be happy?

fair enough. What I'm trying to convey is that where it says there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr It might also mean There is no blame upon you to marry these women once you make them happy. I think this because ajr means reward and the purpose of reward in this context is to make the person being rewarded happy.

Do you think this is possible?

You said

"The word "ajr" intself means reward/wage. Yes, there's of a course a verb, which is ( aatuuhunna give them), but the verb itself can be used to give non physical things, just as in English where it does not necessarily mean give physical/financial thing or even has a positive meaning. Yet, it's not used for "giving" thanks! (Thanksgiving, when translated, omits the verb because it's not used in Arabic with thanking)"

aatuuhunna. Thank you for explaining this. Now that this means that it can be used in a non physical manner would happiness apply to it?
You can't give "thanks" as you say. But what kind of things can you give that's not physical?

Samia

Salaam

They cannot, but when you translated the verse for me, the place where you made clear that the word ajr actually appeared

O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them Allah knows best as to their Faith if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers. They are not lawful (wives) for the Unbelievers, nor are the (Unbelievers) lawful (husbands) for them. But pay the Unbelievers what they have spent (No ajr here right?), and there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr(This ajr is addressed to the women only) to them. But hold not to the guardianship of unbelieving women ask for what ye have spent(Again no ajr), and let the (Unbelievers) ask for what they have spent(No ajr) . Such is the command of Allah He judges between you. And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom

The places where it is said to pay them what they have spent means it is physical but the word ajr does not occure in these places. Where ajr does occure is when it is addressed to the believer giving the women

"there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr"

fair enough. What I'm trying to convey is that where it says there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr It might also mean There is no blame upon you to marry these women once you make them happy. I think this because ajr means reward and the purpose of reward in this context is to make the person being rewarded happy.

Do you think this is possible?

Do you understand this verse? What's this that the believers, or the non believers, spent and should have it back? Thanks? Does the verse tell us anything else but ajr?
Making someone happy or elevating their sorrow and sadness is a trait of a believer to anybody, even if they do not know them personally.

"there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their ajr"

According to you "there's no blame on you if ye marry them on the promise of making them happy". A promise, of course, you cannot equally make to your parents or family, because you are not obliged to pay them "ajr".

aatuuhunna. Thank you for explaining this. Now that this means that it can be used in a non physical manner would happiness apply to it?
You can't give "thanks" as you say. But what kind of things can you give that's not physical?

A few examples
Wisdom 454; 3112; 4516; 3820 reasoning/guidance 2151; knowledge 2174;

4127
They ask thy instruction concerning the women say Allah doth instruct you about them And (remember) what hath been rehearsed unto you in the Book, concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed, and yet whom ye desire to marry,

Here you have the verb "aata" with a description of "ajr" as "what is prescribed to them".

nimnimak_11

peace

Do you understand this verse? What's this that the believers, or the non believers, spent and should have it back? Thanks? Does the verse tell us anything else but ajr?

I think i understand the translations. If i understand correctly, then i may have a good point !.
I went on islamawakened.com to look at the literal translation but i cannot copy and paste it here so i will have to try and write key parts as best as i can

6010 Give them what they spent (disblievers).....No sin if you marry them if you gave them their ajr....and ask for what you spent and they should ask for what they spend....

Ok. What i'm suggesting is that in all the parts that ajr does not occure, that COULD mean that it is not ajr. Instead of ajr it could be something like "fareeda" as you pointed out in 2237

I tried thinking about this logicaly. How can you pay back someone's wages/reward if you don't know the exact amount? The exact amount of wage/reward would not be known unless if it was kept account of. Sort of like what truthseeker was suggesting Ajr to be a lump sum or something that is paid over a fixed period.

Instead, if it was something like fareeda, then the amount would be obvious and can be paid back. Hence they are paying back what they spent on them when they pay back something like the fareeda. Then they don't HAVE to pay fareeda to these women to marry them but they HAVE to give Ajr.

This might possibly be why the word "ajr" in the verse only occured at that place.

According to you "there's no blame on you if ye marry them on the promise of making them happy". A promise, of course, you cannot equally make to your parents or family, because you are not obliged to pay them "ajr".

Not making the promise but making them happy. You are hence giving happiness and not giving the promise to happiness.
With regards to parents, you do not seek them to become your parents. They are already your parents. Even if you don't give them ajr, they are still your parents. Making them happy is righteouse. But if you seek a partner then you have to give them ajr (happiness) in order to achieve that status of married one possible reason for this is so that you are close and intimate enough to have sex which would possibly further strengthen your bond.

A few examples
Wisdom 454; 3112; 4516; 3820 reasoning/guidance 2151; knowledge 2174;

4127
They ask thy instruction concerning the women say Allah doth instruct you about them And (remember) what hath been rehearsed unto you in the Book, concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed, and yet whom ye desire to marry,

Here you have the verb "aata" with a description of "ajr" as "what is prescribed to them".

Thank you for the examples.

On verse 4127 I have two issues

How do we know that the portions prescribed is ajr and not something else.
Who prescribed what?

If there was a verse where in which the word ajr was used such that it said something like "half of" or "payback" the ajr then that would make clear that this ajr is physical. But as i have not come across such verse though admitively i have not yet looked properly, i currently believe that ajr can be something nonphysical such as happiness as this also agrees with my reason and logic.

peace

Samia

6010 Give them what they spent (disblievers).....No sin if you marry them if you gave them their ajr....and ask for what you spent and they should ask for what they spend....

Ok. What i'm suggesting is that in all the parts that ajr does not occure, that COULD mean that it is not ajr. Instead of ajr it could be something like "fareeda" as you pointed out in 2237

I tried thinking about this logicaly. How can you pay back someone's wages/reward if you don't know the exact amount? The exact amount of wage/reward would not be known unless if it was kept account of. Sort of like what truthseeker was suggesting Ajr to be a lump sum or something that is paid over a fixed period.

Instead, if it was something like fareeda, then the amount would be obvious and can be paid back. Hence they are paying back what they spent on them when they pay back something like the fareeda. Then they don't HAVE to pay fareeda to these women to marry them but they HAVE to give Ajr.

This might possibly be why the word "ajr" in the verse only occured at that place.

The "fareeDa" is paid to the woman when she is divorced. The kafirs did not pay them a fareeDa because they did not divorce them. It's the believers who kept these believng women from returning to the kafirs. So until these women came to the believing community they were still married and not yet paid their fareeDa. So "what they spent" cannot be "fareeDa"
And why not keep account of what ajr has been paid? Is this a problem? If it's not kept, how about an approximate amount according to the custom? The verse is addressing the community. These matters are not decided by individuals. Like any law, it's the community. The quraan gives the guidelines and every community sets its laws and how to apply them, basd on these guidelines.

if you seek a partner then you have to give them ajr (happiness) in order to achieve that status of married one possible reason for this is so that you are close and intimate enough to have sex which would possibly further strengthen your bond.

If they are your partner they are already close enough to have sex....what "happiness" that's exclusive to the partner? Aren't you also happy? Is she asked to pay you ajr? No, but nevertheless you are automatically "paid ajr"!

Thank you for the examples.

On verse 4127 I have two issues

How do we know that the portions prescribed is ajr and not something else.
Who prescribed what?

If there was a verse where in which the word ajr was used such that it said something like "half of" or "payback" the ajr then that would make clear that this ajr is physical. But as i have not come across such verse though admitively i have not yet looked properly, i currently believe that ajr can be something nonphysical such as happiness as this also agrees with my reason and logic.

The part is about nikah marriage. What's prescribed for marriage? Use your logic. This question can be valid if we have more than a thing prescribed. But if it's one thing, why look further?
God. When the law of employment, for example, says that employees should be paid "ajr", it does not go into details.

If you believe that ajr can be happiness, then why do you debate and argue a word that has no meaning other than reward, and that "happiness" cannot be awarded?

nimnimak_11

peace

If you believe that ajr can be happiness, then why do you debate and argue a word that has no meaning other than reward, and that "happiness" cannot be awarded?

I agree on the meaning of ajr being reward. But i believe that the reward can be understood as happiness. If God rewards happiness and humans are capable at times of making others happy, then as an ajr happiness can be applicable.

The part is about nikah marriage. What's prescribed for marriage? Use your logic. This question can be valid if we have more than a thing prescribed. But if it's one thing, why look further?

I thought about this. Mutual agreement and Ajr are amongst the things prescribed for marriage BUT

434 "The men are to support the women by what God has gifted them over one another and for what they spend of their money...." IF this is not ajr, then this is prescribed also BUT if it is ajr then i agree with your point on Ajr being physical
I don't want to sound like i'm just rejecting but the thing is, i'm confused on this verse. In some of the translations, there is no mention of the mother of the orphans. It just talks of the orphans.

Rashad khalifa They consult you concerning women say, "GOD enlightens you regarding them, as recited for you in the scripture. You shall restore the rights of orphaned girls whom you cheat out of their due dowries when you wish to marry them you shall not take advantage of them. The rights of orphaned boys must also be protected as well. You shall treat the orphans equitably. Whatever good you do, GOD is fully aware thereof."

Why is this? Is this translation acceptable in terms of arabic?

God. When the law of employment, for example, says that employees should be paid "ajr", it does not go into details.

Do you mean God's reward to the servants?
If so then ultimately could God's reward in this life be anything better then happiness? Is there anything better than happiness in this life? As you say, it does not go into details this is similar to the ajr we are required to provide our partners with in which i see no wrong in the understanding of happiness as ajr. Unless 434 refers to Ajr.

If they are your partner they are already close enough to have sex....

They aren't your proper partner (spouse) untill you give them ajr. How can you be close enough to have sex when you are failing to make each other happy?

what "happiness" that's exclusive to the partner? Aren't you also happy? Is she asked to pay you ajr? No, but nevertheless you are automatically "paid ajr"!

Good point. I'll get back to you on this one.

And why not keep account of what ajr has been paid? Is this a problem? If it's not kept, how about an approximate amount according to the custom?

Sounds ok.

The "fareeDa" is paid to the woman when she is divorced

When they are abandoning their former husbands, couldn't this be divorce? Why is "fareeda" exclusive to divorce?

I'll get back to you on that other point i said either tonight or tomorow.

peace

savage_carrot

After reading most of the thread, I have to agree with Samia on this one as she makes valid points. Happiness as ajr is kinda iffy.

Samia

Salaam

I agree on the meaning of ajr being reward. But i believe that the reward can be understood as happiness. If God rewards happiness and humans are capable at times of making others happy, then as an ajr happiness can be applicable.

Why do you put "human are capable of making others happy" en par with "God rewards happiness"? Who says people are capable of making others happy? You make yourself happy. My children make me happy, but they do not do any specific thing other than being my children. The go away and I feel sad. Are they responsible for this "unhappiness"? God tells us how to be happy, not how to make others happy.

Mutual agreement and Ajr are amongst the things prescribed for marriage BUT

434 "The men are to support the women by what God has gifted them over one another and for what they spend of their money...." IF this is not ajr, then this is prescribed also BUT if it is ajr then i agree with your point on Ajr being physical

This is neither ajr, nor is it between "men" and "women". And definitely not couples. What's the relation between these "men" and "women"? Does the verse tell you that they are married to each other?

Rashad khalifa They consult you concerning women say, "GOD enlightens you regarding them, as recited for you in the scripture. You shall restore the rights of orphaned girls whom you cheat out of their due dowries when you wish to marry them you shall not take advantage of them. The rights of orphaned boys must also be protected as well. You shall treat the orphans equitably. Whatever good you do, GOD is fully aware thereof."

Why is this? Is this translation acceptable in terms of arabic?

What do you think? Do you find it ethical, logical or in line with the spirit of the qur'aan? What about non orphaned girls? It sounds from this translation that it's OK to cheat them of their dowries!
The funny thing is that the same word "yataamaa" is used twice, and linguistically it's a masculine plural. It's used for males only or for a mixed group of both genders. There's another plural for females, which is "yateemaat". Why a native speaker would twist the translation in this way must be out of preconception. He is definitely not thinking. Secondly, where did he get "girls" in "orphaned girls" from? The phrase is "yataamaa al-nisaa'". In Arabic the adjective follows the noun, except in cases which this is not one of them. If the translator translates "yataamaa" as orphaned boys (there's nothing to show that they are specifically boys only, as we can use this plural with mixed gender too) then he should have expected to have "yateemaat" instead of "orphaned girls",.
In short, this translation is logically and linguistically wrong.

Do you mean God's reward to the servants?

This was in response to this part of your post

Who prescribed what?

If there was a verse where in which the word ajr was used such that it said something like "half of" or "payback" the ajr then that would make clear that this ajr is physical.

I was explaining that existence or lack of details has no bearing on ajr being physcal or not.

They aren't your proper partner (spouse) untill you give them ajr. How can you be close enough to have sex when you are failing to make each other happy?

Then when do you intend to make them happy? If you are not yet intimate with them, how do you know what makes them happy? So it's a promise as I first said, and you said not a promise, but make them happy! Now make your mind is it a promise (no intimate knowledge required) or actually making them happy (you have to know them very intimately to know what makes them happy)?

When they are abandoning their former husbands, couldn't this be divorce? Why is "fareeda" exclusive to divorce?

Consider it a "redundancy package" since we are talking "ajr" ;D

Fahad1

delete.

Fahad1

No, accusation is not of zina, but of committing fornication, which when proven , becomes zina. And if not proven (less than 4 witnesses) would remain an accusation, and that is precisely being discouraged with dire consequences of 80 lashes.

I cannot agree, you have shown me no evidence for that.

I would agree with you here, there is no direct verse stating so, We have deduced this by interpolating different verses on the subject,

Which verses?

and this deduction is not 100% but is most likely, we do need to work and fill up this gap.

But you have not shown me a single verse that even indicates that zina is public sex. How then can your deduction be any more than 0% correct?

But so far, any other explanation, specially yours, is no where close, and till the time we come up with such deductions, which improve upon the %tage , I would stick with the Most likely scenario.

But have you refuted my explanation or cited any evidence against it? Why is my understanding erroneous? Where does it contradict the Quran? What is the evidence for your deduction being the most likely scenario? You said 4/25 disproves my understanding, but you haven't shown me how.