How sex before Marriage is not haram (prohibited) according to the Quran
-
Have you completely missed that Allah is telling the woman to lower her gaze, do not shake her booty, and the best dress is the dress of righteoussnes?
You are debating with a devout muslim sister, my brother.......do not confuse her with whatever perception you have of the people of Australia.we've already mentioned lowering gaze in earlier posts and the definition of that and showing respect. As a muslim I presume rank is higher than non-muslims, that is within the patriarchal muslim community, highest rank being that of Allah followed by the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam, is the actual ranking system.
-
@nimnimak_11 you must re-read verse 2431
It says the woman wasn't allowed tho eksploit their private part or aurat to non mahram man except on the list
2431 And tell the believing females to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those maintained by their oaths, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.
I looked at it again. It is on the list.
One possible meaning of Ma malekat aymunkum= fiance, girlfriend concubine etc.Peace
-
434 Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, beat them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means For Allah is Most High, Great.
There, stamped it, took out the brackets if that's ok. I suppose I'm bias or that I'm not allowed to interpret without getting disrespected. ok I'll just post and stamp....it's a bottom up approach instead of a top to bottom. How do you put the whole thing together? Biased is the western system for not understanding the nature of man.
-
we've already mentioned lowering gaze in earlier posts and the definition of that and showing respect. As a muslim I presume rank is higher than non-muslims, that is within the patriarchal muslim community, highest rank being that of Allah followed by the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam, is the actual ranking system.
You forgot all the other prophets, please show them respect as well. Here is a list of them in case you didnt know
- Adam
- Idris (Enok)
- Nuh (Noa)
- Hud
- Salih
- Ibrahim (Abraham)
- Isma'il (Ismael)
- Ishaq (Isak)
- Yaqub (Jakob)
- Lut (Lot)
- Shu'ayb
- Yusuf (Josef)
- Ayoub (Job)
- Dhul-Kifl
- Yunus (Jona)
- Musa (Moses) and Harun (Aron)
- Hizqeel (Hesekiel)
- Elyas (Elia)
- Shammil (Samuel)
- Dawud (David)
- Sulaiman (Salomo)
- Shia (Jesaja)
- Aramaya (Jeremia)
- Daniel
- Uzair (Esra)
- Zakariyah (Sakarias)
- Yahya (Johannes)
- Isa (Jesus)
- Muhammad
What I mean is that a woman talking back to you (because you are a man) has nothing to do with respect. It has nothing to do with any of the prophets and it definately has nothing to do with the Quran. Not agreeing with you has nothing to do with disobedience. You are clearly confused as to why women do not show you the respect you feel you deserve according to Islam........What you have failed to understand is that according to Islam you do not get respect unless you self is respectful.
-
To whomever posted this topic
If you weren't socially programmed to think that getting married is long process and you need dozens of years to get to know someone before you marry them (if at all) and you should get married in your late 20 or 30, you would probably already be married and wouldn't be looking for justification for immorality.
My personal opinion is get married young and there would be no need for many kinds of question regarding dating or any other similar topic I see posted on this forum. -
Peace t -hamzei
No disrespect intended but did your mother treaty you badly ,you seem to have a great hatred for women sorry if I have caused any offence.Peace Salim
Salim,
not at all, we were speaking about the situation getting out of hand in Australia with non-muslim women becoming too dominant, being given management roles, having too many sex partners...and muslim women taking some, even if the slightest bad example from the culture here and not realising it, not realising the differences between men and women.
-
Emil
Some people do not understand the nature of "conversation".t-hamzei
if some women are more successful than some men that is not necessarily "bad".432 (Asad) Hence, do not covet the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on some of you than on others. Men shall have a benefit from what they earn, and women shall have a benefit from what they earn. Ask, therefore, God out of His bounty behold, God has indeed full knowledge of everything
Both sexes, men and women can adopt bad examples, the sole blame is not on the women. The blame is on men and women who choose to commit to bad acts.
3335 (Asad) VERILY, for all men and women who have sur?rendered themselves unto God, and all believing men and believing women, and all truly devout men and truly devout women, and all men and women who are true to their word, and all men and women who are patient in adversity, and all men and women who humble themselves , and all men and women who give in charity, and all self-denying men and self-denying women, and all men and women who are mindful of their chastity, and all men and women who remember God unceasingly for them has God readied forgiveness of sins and a mighty reward.
peace.
-
2431 And tell the believing females to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those maintained by their oaths, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.
I looked at it again. It is on the list.
One possible meaning of Ma malekat aymunkum= fiance, girlfriend concubine etc.Peace
I still do not agree with 'sex outside of marriage' esp. promiscuity. On the other hand I do have reason to believe that MMA could refer to fiances/"girlfriends".
However the NUMBER ONE rule is that the relationship is entirely in the open and you go towards them with your wealth. This is explicit, anything else is purely transgression and no amount of rationalisation or reading into words will change this.
-
2431 And tell the believing females to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those maintained by their oaths, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.
I looked at it again. It is on the list.
One possible meaning of Ma malekat aymunkum= fiance, girlfriend concubine etc.Peace
Ma malekat aymunkum can translated "posses their right hand"
Posses their right hand is allogarical setence and its reffering to "slave/maid" if you read the whole ayah in Quran
Word "hand" means employee, this means another "hand" of the boss to accomplish some works.Quran itself contains some allogarical words/sentences, like verse 2188 "... takulu (eat) your property..." this not means literally you eat your property.
In verse 236, if you look on entire ayah in the Quran again this slave means slaves who was liberated and already married with you
Quran never mentioned of any girlfriend-boyfriends things.
Slave in the Quran actually was slavery tradition in Arab in the past time and no courtship tradition in Arab in that time too.We also ordered to meet non mahram woman with hijab/barrier 3353-5, also ordered to protect our wild gaze 2430-1 3748
-
To whomever posted this topic
If you weren't socially programmed to think that getting married is long process and you need dozens of years to get to know someone before you marry them (if at all) and you should get married in your late 20 or 30, you would probably already be married and wouldn't be looking for justification for immorality.
My personal opinion is get married young and there would be no need for many kinds of question regarding dating or any other similar topic I see posted on this forum.It's not a question of whether marriage is a short or long process. It's a question of whether marriage is necessary for engaging in sexual activity. From the thread I concluded that marriage is primarily for the sake of starting a family. Sex isn't for the sake of starting a family. So I don't see the need for marriage if all that was sought was sex.
-
I still do not agree with 'sex outside of marriage' esp. promiscuity. On the other hand I do have reason to believe that MMA could refer to fiances/"girlfriends".
If you take MMA to encompass finances or girlfriends, where is the prohibition on sexual activity with the MMA?
More importantly if you were to pin it down from A Quranic perspective, what constitutes sex? As in at what point could it be said that a couple have gone too far with regards to their physical interactions with each other?In trying to answer the second question I came to the realisation that there is nothing in the Quran that conveys this sort of guideline. The only implication I got from the Quran is don't have kids until after marriage. Don't have illegal sex (zina) don't engage in lewdness (fahisha) such as sexual acts that involve degradation, fetishism and so on.
Given that you can have kids without having sex (sperm donors for example) I thought it necessary that the Quran's message regarding the purpose of marriage is for the sake of having kids rather than for the sake of sex.
So in my opinion, this answers how far one can go in terms of physical interactions with one's legitimate unmarried partner
So long as the odds of having a child is 0%, and so long as the physical interaction involved is not lewd or illegal (for example someone who under the legal age to have sex) then the Quran's guidelines have been met.
-
Ma malekat aymunkum can translated "posses their right hand"
Posses their right hand is allogarical setence and its reffering to "slave/maid" if you read the whole ayah in Quran
Word "hand" means employee, this means another "hand" of the boss to accomplish some works.Quran itself contains some allogarical words/sentences, like verse 2188 "... takulu (eat) your property..." this not means literally you eat your property.
In verse 236, if you look on entire ayah in the Quran again this slave means slaves who was liberated and already married with you
Quran never mentioned of any girlfriend-boyfriends things.
Slave in the Quran actually was slavery tradition in Arab in the past time and no courtship tradition in Arab in that time too.We also ordered to meet non mahram woman with hijab/barrier 3353-5, also ordered to protect our wild gaze 2430-1 3748
I don't think slave/maid makes sense with regards to Quran's overall usage of the phrase Ma Malekat aymunkum. I also don't think it to morally make sense for us to understand MMA as slave/maid. Why would it be ok to have sex with our maids/slaves but not our girlfriend with whom there is mutual consent?
3353-55 is about the prophet and his wives only. It doesn't make a distinction between mahram and non-mahram women as far as I can see.
-
If you take MMA to encompass finances or girlfriends, where is the prohibition on sexual activity with the MMA?
More importantly if you were to pin it down from A Quranic perspective, what constitutes sex? As in at what point could it be said that a couple have gone too far with regards to their physical interactions with each other?In trying to answer the second question I came to the realisation that there is nothing in the Quran that conveys this sort of guideline. The only implication I got from the Quran is don't have kids until after marriage. Don't have illegal sex (zina) don't engage in lewdness (fahisha) such as sexual acts that involve degradation, fetishism and so on.
Given that you can have kids without having sex (sperm donors for example) I thought it necessary that the Quran's message regarding the purpose of marriage is for the sake of having kids rather than for the sake of sex.
So in my opinion, this answers how far one can go in terms of physical interactions with one's legitimate unmarried partner
So long as the odds of having a child is 0%, and so long as the physical interaction involved is not lewd or illegal (for example someone who under the legal age to have sex) then the Quran's guidelines have been met.
I have not seen anything in the quran that talks about when sexual interaction may begin between a couple.
However there is a clear sign here
420 (Asad) But if you desire to give up a wife and to take another in her stead, do not take away anything of what you have given the first one, however much it may have been. Would you, perchance, take it away by slandering her and thus committing a manifest sin?
So we see that surely sexuality and finance exchange is identical in the eyes of God, to the point that taking the finance out of a sexual relationship is considered a grave wrong, and consequently a kind of retroactive zina.
Perhaps fiancee relationship can count as MMA. But the key is that money must change hands from the man to the woman, always. So a person cannot hold a relationship or contract as such without finance, as the finance is what actually makes that contract valid.
I do not agree with it being to do with children as the punishment on Zina is for illicit sex with no doubts, not children - a pregnancy from zina would of course likely dissolve the need for four witnesses. Contraception is not available to everyone, so are these to be left out? Of course, this is not the strongest argument against it as surely there are many commands of God which only apply here and there to relevant people.
Whatever is the case, we maintain that
1.) Relationship must entirely be in the open
2.) Wealth must change hands from male to female
3.) Contract/witnesses is necessary, to prevent accusations of zina -
So we see that surely sexuality and finance exchange is identical in the eyes of God, to the point that taking the finance out of a sexual relationship is considered a grave wrong, and consequently a kind of retroactive zina.
I agree that there is a clear wrong in giving up on a fiance to be with another girl and taking back what's been given to the fiance because most likely, with a finace there is intimacy as well as a solid oath in place. But I don't think this relates to the wrong of zina. Zina is illegal sex as far as I understand it.
420 (Asad) But if you desire to give up a wife and to take another in her stead, do not take away anything of what you have given the first one, however much it may have been. Would you, perchance, take it away by slandering her and thus committing a manifest sin?
The verse that follows this states "And how can you take it when you have become intimate with each other, and they have taken from you a solemn covenant."
The important question is does sex necessarily entail intimacy anda solemn covenant
It doesn't necessarily entail a solemn covenant but it does necessarily entail intimacy.
From a purely logical perspective of 420-21, the idea of taking back what one has given to their partner only applies if and only if they have become intimate with their partner and made a solemn covenant with their partner. If either one of these two components are missing then the idea of not being able to take back what was given does not apply because the word and logically demands that both components be in place.I do not agree with it being to do with children as the punishment on Zina is for illicit sex with no doubts, not children
I see your point. But the Quran's outline on the punishment of zina (illegal sex) and the the Quran's outline on when one should marry are two different things. Zina is the breaking of one of the most (if not the most) serious commitments one can make to another person. This is surely a punishable act. Having kids outside of marriage appears to be advised against in the Quran but not seen as a punishable act.
2433 says that those who don't have the means for marriage, should abstain. Abstain from what? Having kids or having sex? Given that one can have sex without having kids and one can have kids without having sex, I think it more reasonable in the context of 2433 to say that the Quran is advising against having kids outside of marriage rather than sex because having kids requires certain resources whereas sexual activity does not need certain resources. I think this fits well with 43
Contraception is not available to everyone, so are these to be left out?
Sexual activity can happen without contraception. So long as sperm is not directed at the female in anyway, the odds of pregnancy are 0% (unless there's a miracle). For extra safety if there is no contraception, I don't think there should be any penetration whatsoever.
it as surely there are many commands of God which only apply here and there to relevant people.
I completely agree. That's why we should neither add or take away from the commands.
Whatever is the case, we maintain that
1.) Relationship must entirely be in the open
2.) Wealth must change hands from male to female
3.) Contract/witnesses is necessary, to prevent accusations of zina- I think I agree based on the notion of not meeting the women secretly.
- Only in marriages this must become the case. I have not seen this be demanded outside of marriage. Even in a marriage it's not a must. It depends on the bride as far as I know.
- Contract and witnesses is demanded in the case of when someone wants to get married. As far as I know, he demand of contract doesn't apply to other types of intimate relationships. Witnesses might be necessary in the sense that the relationship is not kept in secret. I think zina can only apply to a person who is already married or to someone who engages in sex with under-aged kids or other illegalities such as bestiality. If there are witnesses to those things, then there can be conviction of zina.
-
All I can say is what's the purpose...you've been socially programmed by the current state of the society...If you love someone and want to be intimate then there is no reason why you shouldn't marry, if you don't love someone enough to get married than why be intimate?
Marriage is the beginning not the end...3021
You probably don't have daughter or sister and you can't see things clearly...
(I am repeating myself...)
brickwall -
This may have already been answered, but,,,
2431 Tell the acknowledging women to lower
their gaze and guard their private parts,
and that they should not show off their
attraction except what is apparent, and
let them cast their clothes over their
cleavage. Let them not show off their
attraction except to their husbands, or
their fathers, or fathers of their husbands,
or their sons, or the sons of their
husbands, or their brothers, or the sons
of their brothers, or the sons of their
sisters, or their children that come after
them, or those who are still their
dependants, or the male servants who are
without need, or the child who has not
yet understood the nakedness of women.
Let them not strike with their feet in a
manner that reveals what they are
keeping hidden of their attraction.
Repent to God, all of you
acknowledgers, so that you may succeed.Are they not allowed to show off their attraction to their boyfriends before marriage? How does that work when having sex before marriage?
Edit With a quick search I found out that this was addressed \
-
-
All I can say is what's the purpose...you've been socially programmed by the current state of the society...If you love someone and want to be intimate then there is no reason why you shouldn't marry, if you don't love someone enough to get married than why be intimate?
Why is it necessary for them to get married before they can have sex?
Ok let's go with the idea of sex can only happen after marriage.Let's say a couple decide to not to have sex until after they are married. Unfortunately for the guy, the girl was just marrying him for sex and nothing more. She has sex with him and then demands a divorce breaking the guy's heart.
In reverse let's say another couple also decide not to have sex until after they are married. Unfortunately for the girl, the guy was just using her for sex. Again another heartbreak.How are the above scenarios less damaging than the idea of having sex before marriage?
If you love someone and want to be intimate, there is no reason why you should restrain yourself from what is a clear blessing and provision for humanity, (if done correctly). Just as one needs to exercise caution with regards to choosing the right marriage partner, one also needs to exercise caution with regards to whom they choose to engage in sexual activity with. Some may not be ready for sex until after 1 day, perhaps 1 month or maybe a year or even 10 years. The point is that when they are ready, they shouldn't restrict themselves for the wrong reasons.
Based on the above, saying something like there isn't enough love between them because they are unwilling to get married therefore they should not have sex isn't a justified position in my opinion.
You probably don't have daughter or sister and you can't see things clearly...
I don't. I'm guessing you do. How would it make a difference for you if your daughter or sister got married before they had sex? What's the difference in the eyes of a father or brother?
Peace