How sex before Marriage is not haram (prohibited) according to the Quran

szuberi

You can't commit adultery unless you are married.

adultery

voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse.

please dont get hung up on the literal word here. the arabic words "azzaniyatu wauzzani" are also translated as "the fornicatress and the fornicator". Fornication is a term that typically refers to consensual sexual intercourse between unmarried heterosexual adults

it is the MOST rediculous idea imaginable that the Quran (or any other religion whatsoever) allows pre-marital sex. this is exactly why Allah tells us in 21 that "This book is a guidance for those who fear God" and those who believe premarital sex is allowed or is OK conceptually, are certainly on the wrong path.

Leyna

those who believe premarital sex is allowed or is OK conceptually, are certainly on the wrong path.

Fine, I'm on the wrong path. tempt

You beleive it's forbidden, refrain from it. You believe it's ok in certain circumstances, go for it. I will never understand why people get so hung up about what others do in their private life.

peace

liquiddharma

I will never understand why people get so hung up about what others do in their private life.

peace

It's because it is so powerfully tied to social issues, the way in each gender regards each other, and social well-being. In marriage husband and wife have a responsibility to each other and to their children. In a non-married relationship, do you regards this as the case? Does your partner? Do informal relationships not objectify women and men, encouraging them to think of each other as a notch in the belt? How do you know that your expectations from the relationship are the same as your partners? Marriage seeks to solve or at least reduce these problems by mutually making a public promise. Why reinvent the wheel?

Leyna

It's because it is so powerfully tied to social issues, the way in each gender regards each other, and social well-being. In marriage husband and wife have a responsibility to each other and to their children. In a non-married relationship, do you regards this as the case? Does your partner? Do informal relationships not objectify women and men, encouraging them to think of each other as a notch in the belt? How do you know that your expectations from the relationship are the same as your partners? Marriage seeks to solve or at least reduce these problems by mutually making a public promise. Why reinvent the wheel?

I understand what you're saying, liquiddharma, but I believe the issue is not as black and white as you and some others present it here. Sex without a marriage contract does NOT automatically mean that people don't care for each other, don't feel committed, or that one of the partners is being abused and / or objectified. Neither does being married mean that people act responsibly and lovingly towards each other.

I think I explained it before somewhere in this long thread, but let me try to give an example.

My friend and her partner have been together for about eight years. Everyone knows they are a couple, the extended family is involved; the parents of my friend's partner see her as the daughter in law.
They recently bought a house together, and they have two small children. She is staying at home at the moment, and he is providing for all of them; he is also paying for her education, debts she had previous to their relationship and other stuff. Should they ever decide to separate, he will still be responsible for his children under the law.

So how is this objectifying anyone? Is their relationship immoral, just because they don't have a signed contract? I don't believe so. And I believe the keyword here is "public promise". Isn't it one of the key points that a couple declares to everyone that they belong together and are committed to each other?

Regarding reinventing the wheel -- I am not sure how marriages were conducted at the time of the prophet, but I am sure it was not as complicated, bureaucratic and expensive as it is nowadays. So in my eyes, a relationship such as the above described is pretty much the equivalent to an official marriage. And there are countless people living like that.

Also, I have seen so many people getting married in the Middle East just so they can move out from their parents' home and officially have sex. Is that inherently more moral than two people living together as I described above? Personally, I think no.

unknownuser

Peace Leyna )

I want to write some comments on what you have said in your post. With some of the things you have said i will agree, and with some of the things you have said i will write some constructive critisism. I think that in a philosophical discussion it is important to test the ideas of people and see if they are based on logic and reason, and to see if their arguments are valid.

I understand what you're saying, liquiddharma, but I believe the issue is not as black and white as you and some others present it here. Sex without a marriage contract does NOT automatically mean that people don't care for each other, don't feel committed, or that one of the partners is being abused and / or objectified.

True. And it is the same the other way as well Sex without a marriage contract does not automatically mean that people will care for eachother, feel commited, or that one of the partners will not be abused and / or objectified.

Neither does being married mean that people act responsibly and lovingly towards each other.

True. And it is the same the other way as well Neither does being in a relationship mean that people act responsibly and lovingly towards each other. I think responsibility is based on how much a person fear/are aware of the almighty.

I think I explained it before somewhere in this long thread, but let me try to give an example.

My friend and her partner have been together for about eight years. Everyone knows they are a couple, the extended family is involved; the parents of my friend's partner see her as the daughter in law.
They recently bought a house together, and they have two small children. She is staying at home at the moment, and he is providing for all of them; he is also paying for her education, debts she had previous to their relationship and other stuff. Should they ever decide to separate, he will still be responsible for his children under the law.

So how is this objectifying anyone? Is their relationship immoral, just because they don't have a signed contract?

From my understanding of the Quran, it teaches us that if two persons want to get commited/married they do should make a promise to God. As far as i know, there are no verses in the scripture of the creator that tells us that we have to have a signed contract to get commited. As mentioned above, a couple should make a promise to God if they want to get commited. Signed contracts are most likely based on man-made culture and has nothing to do with islam. So to answer your question No, i don't think it is immoral because they don't have a signed contract. However, it might be immoral because of other reasons. Moral and immoral things we need to know about is written in the Quran. So if we check the Quranic verses, we can find the things which are moral and immoral. From my study of the Quran, those who are following other systems/religions than islam have their own rules and they will be judged according to their scriptures. So if your friend and her partner are following another system/religion, they will be judged according to their system/religion. Therefore we can not say that they are immoral. But those who are following the Quran will be judged according to the permanent and timeless laws in the Quran. From my study of Quran, if two persons are muslims, they should not follow man-made laws from culture when it comes to commitment. From my understanding of the Quran, If two persons who are muslims are following man-made laws when it comes to commitment, then they are being immoral. When it comes to moral issues, i think muslims should not follow their selfish desires/lust. I think it is vital that muslims do their best to follow the Quranic laws.

I don't believe so. And I believe the keyword here is "public promise". Isn't it one of the key points that a couple declares to everyone that they belong together and are committed to each other?

Yes. You are right.From my study of the Quran, one of the key points is that a couple declares to people that they belong together and are commited together. However, in Quran, there are other key points when it comes to commitment as well.

Regarding reinventing the wheel -- I am not sure how marriages were conducted at the time of the prophet, but I am sure it was not as complicated, bureaucratic and expensive as it is nowadays. So in my eyes, a relationship such as the above described is pretty much the equivalent to an official marriage.

I think it is a shame that many marriages are complicated, bureaucratic and expensive nowadays. And i think you have some good arguments. However, saying that relationships is pretty much the equivalent to an official marriage requires evidence from the Quran. I think it is important to bring our evidence from the Quranic verses when we are claiming something about a Quranic issue.

And there are countless people living like that.

Yes there are countless people living like that. And there are countless people telling lies, but their great number does not make lying right. If many people do something that does not mean that what they are doing is right (see 6116). Argumentum ad populum http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

Also, I have seen so many people getting married in the Middle East just so they can move out from their parents' home and officially have sex. Is that inherently more moral than two people living together as I described above? Personally, I think no.

No it is not more moral. However, "two wrongs does not make one right"
http//www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#you_too

liquiddharma

I understand what you're saying, liquiddharma, but I believe the issue is not as black and white as you and some others present it here. Sex without a marriage contract does NOT automatically mean that people don't care for each other, don't feel committed, or that one of the partners is being abused and / or objectified. Neither does being married mean that people act responsibly and lovingly towards each other.

I think I explained it before somewhere in this long thread, but let me try to give an example.

My friend and her partner have been together for about eight years. Everyone knows they are a couple, the extended family is involved; the parents of my friend's partner see her as the daughter in law.
They recently bought a house together, and they have two small children. She is staying at home at the moment, and he is providing for all of them; he is also paying for her education, debts she had previous to their relationship and other stuff. Should they ever decide to separate, he will still be responsible for his children under the law.

So how is this objectifying anyone? Is their relationship immoral, just because they don't have a signed contract? I don't believe so. And I believe the keyword here is "public promise". Isn't it one of the key points that a couple declares to everyone that they belong together and are committed to each other?

Regarding reinventing the wheel -- I am not sure how marriages were conducted at the time of the prophet, but I am sure it was not as complicated, bureaucratic and expensive as it is nowadays. So in my eyes, a relationship such as the above described is pretty much the equivalent to an official marriage. And there are countless people living like that.

Also, I have seen so many people getting married in the Middle East just so they can move out from their parents' home and officially have sex. Is that inherently more moral than two people living together as I described above? Personally, I think no.

What is immoral is the refusal to make a public promise. It shows a psychological refusal to consider yourself committed.

And whilst everything may look caring and loving, with no objectification or abuse, still there can be different expectations so one partner is using the other. Usually the woman may think they are not getting married because of the expense and inconvenience, but the man may still consider himself "unattached" and entitled to have sex with other women without considering it adultery. Because he hasn't made a public promise.

That's why I say "reinventing the wheel" because talking about couples who love each other and are living together without being married is like trying to invent a "2nd degree" marriage whereby there are a set of duties and expectations from each other which are in some way less than those you expect from a full marriage but enough to allow the couple to think they are behaving morally. This is a doomed endeavour - pretending you can have it both ways, with and without commitment - which is why such unmarried sexual relationships are frowned upon by most religious people. And this is why unmarried couples, even with children, are much more likely to split up than married couples.

Bigmo

What is immoral is the refusal to make a public promise. It shows a psychological refusal to consider yourself committed.

And whilst everything may look caring and loving, with no objectification or abuse, still there can be different expectations so one partner is using the other. Usually the woman may think they are not getting married because of the expense and inconvenience, but the man may still consider himself "unattached" and entitled to have sex with other women without considering it adultery. Because he hasn't made a public promise.

That's why I say "reinventing the wheel" because talking about couples who love each other and are living together without being married is like trying to invent a "2nd degree" marriage whereby there are a set of duties and expectations from each other which are in some way less than those you expect from a full marriage but enough to allow the couple to think they are behaving morally. This is a doomed endeavour - pretending you can have it both ways, with and without commitment - which is why such unmarried sexual relationships are frowned upon by most religious people. And this is why unmarried couples, even with children, are much more likely to split up than married couples.

But I think the Koran did talk about some form of finanacial obligation which non married couples in many societies do not have. It also talked about family involvement to some degree. Anyways we are not talking about non religious couples but religious couples. Non religious couples are driven by different forces. And plus the divorce rates in many countries that outlaws couples without a formal marriage are very high. Look at Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Survey reveals 46pc divorce rate in UAE By a staff reporter

16 September 2005 DUBAI ? The divorce rate in the UAE has touched 46 per cent, the highest in the AGCC. The divorce rate in Qatar is 38 per cent; it is 35 per cent in Kuwait and 34 per cent in Bahrain. A study conducted in 2003 at the Prince Salman Social Centre in Riyadh has revealed that divorce rates in AGCC countries are rapidly increasing. Official statistics from various Islamic countries showed that the divorce rate is increasing annually and that it was higher in the Arab countries, ranging between 30 to 35 per cent, according to a Kuwaiti news agency.

Yet another study conducted by the Ministry of Planning in Saudi Arabia has shown that since the year 2003, the divorce rate in the kingdom has been witnessing a 20 per cent increase and that 33 women get divorced every day. In Riyadh alone, divorced women numbered 3,000 compared to 8500 marriages.

These statistics were revealed at a symposium titled 'Divorce and its Consequences on Local and International societies' organised by Juma Al Majid Centre for Culture and Heritage in cooperation with the Diplomatic Ladies Association

Marwa Kraidieh, a social researcher at Juma Al Majid Centre, said, "The statistics seem to be not very accurate but are nevertheless alarming. As part of my work and my communication with others, I found out that there are a number of hidden reasons why couples decide to get divorced and they seldom talk about the real reasons to others, claiming reasons that are far from reality as the cause.

"The way couples were raised during childhood, when they were prevented from expressing themselves freely and clearly, is considered one of the reasons for the increasing divorce rate. Some couples prefer to keep quiet rather than come out into the open. Some men intending to divorce their wives say that the wife is reckless and disobedient and prefer not to cite the real reason such as being bored with their wives or that they were having affairs. The majority of women intending to get divorced usually claim that their husbands are misers or are reckless whereas the actual reason remains hidden."

Dr Mohammed Fathi Al Hariri blamed the media for playing a strong role in increasing the divorce rate by regularly showcasing family life as a suffocating commitment and not as a paradise of love and stability.

Soaring Saudi divorce rate sparks new law
by Amy Glass on Monday, 14 July 2008

RECKLESS DIVORCE Saudi Arabia?s Shura Council is considering implementing a law to halt the surging numbers of divorces in the kingdom. (Getty Images)Saudi Arabia?s Shura Council is considering implementing a law to halt the surging numbers of divorces in the kingdom.

Talal Bakri, head of the committee for family affairs at the council, told media the authority is set to begin deliberations on various provisions of a draft divorce law, UAE daily Gulf News reported on Monday.

Bakri said some husbands were resorting to reckless pronouncements of divorce, and not informing their wives, who were then ?shocked? to receive divorce papers.

The law would prevent husbands from pronouncing divorce in the absence of their wife, while divorce would only be valid if it was registered in a courtroom in the presence of the estranged couples.

The number of divorces is increasing in the kingdom, with nearly 62 percent of marriages ending in divorce.

According the newspaper, there are more than 1.5 million spinsters in Saudi Arabia - meaning women who have missed the ?optimum age? of marriage.

http//www.arabianbusiness.com/524652-surging-saudi-divorces-rate-sparks-new-law

Saudi Divorce Rate on the Rise

13/08/2007
By Sawsan Homeidan

Riyadh, Asharq Al-Awsat- according to a Saudi family counselor ,the divorce rate in Saudi Arabia is on the rise, revealing that 38 percent of marriages end in divorce and that 33 percent of these divorces take place within the first three years of the marriage.

Dr. Laila al Hilali, who owns and runs a family counseling center by the same name, believes that the reason behind this increase is a result of the lack of understanding between couples, and the fact that they do not fully comprehend the proper foundations of a marriage.

Based on the cases she receives at her clinic, Dr. al Hilali said that the marital problems prevalent in Saudi Arabia stem from the fact that couples are quick to jump to conclusions without evaluating the situation properly. She believes that marriages in Saudi are bereft of the dialogue and patience required to make a marriage work.

Furthermore, she noted that spouses like to keep a record of one another's mistakes and shortcomings. They forget that they represent a united front rather than two independent individuals so that each party ends up doing what it pleases without taking the other into consideration. Dr. al Hilali also believes that the lack of romance between couples is a key factor that leads to an unfulfilling marriage. This, she upholds, can be traced back to both spouses? upbringings.

The center, she said, was established to cater to the middle- and upper-middle- class families in Saudi Arabia. It coaches young women approaching marriage by making them aware of what they can expect and what will be expected of them in return. They are also exposed to the problems that could become aggravated and lead to divorce if not immediately treated.

Moreover, al Hilali center offers counseling sessions for one or more family members, with the intention of resolving dysfunctional relationships. Dr. al Hilali revealed that group therapy is ineffectual in Saudi Arabia because Saudis are still skeptical about it.

Generally speaking, Saudi society is a private one. Most women guard their privacy very well, even during therapy. The majority of women prefer to discuss their issues in private, despite the fact that the problems they face are common ones shared by many, such as disobedience from children towards their parents.

"There are no more than five such centers in all of Saudi Arabia;" Dr. al Hilali said, "three of which are nonprofit. This is a meager number considering the size of the population. What this society really needs is at least one in every neighborhood if not more so that family problems like these can be addressed before they are allowed to fester." She speaks admiringly of a new law introduced in the UAE that prohibits couples from filing for divorce until after counseling is sought. Should the counseling fail, they can then proceed with the process.

She stressed the importance of instructing young men and women approaching marriage, claiming that it is as important as the blood test required before marriage. "We must encourage flexibility, and teach them to not consider every good deed they do in a marriage as a favor because a good marriage reflects on both the spouses,? she said.

Dr al Hilali called upon the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Justice to establish more family counseling centers in the country so as to remedy the rising divorce rates. Moreover, she believes that stable and loving families prevent young men from being drawn into a life of fundamentalism, since they would not feel the need to fill a void with religious extremism.

"A recent study conducted on high school students about their priorities in life shows that Saudi children place friends and reality TV before family," she revealed.

In response to the question of domestic abuse, Dr. al Hilali said that it has been an enduring predicament, but that it has come to occupy center stage due to the increased media attention and various prominent figures addressing the matter. It is her belief that domestic violence is a result of women's submissiveness and their apathy towards abuse. This is furthermore intensified, she said, by their upbringing in which they are taught to blindly obey their husbands.

Dr. al Hilali called for the collaboration of various institutions to put an end to this phenomenon which, if left untreated, will destroy the country's social infrastructure, of which family is a main constituent.

http//www.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=7&id=9875

So I don't think your answer is very accurate.

Leyna

Peace, David. peace

True. And it is the same the other way as well Sex without a marriage contract does not automatically mean that people will care for eachother, feel commited, or that one of the partners will not be abused and / or objectified.

True. And it is the same the other way as well Neither does being in a relationship mean that people act responsibly and lovingly towards each other. I think responsibility is based on how much a person fear/are aware of the almighty.

Of course. That goes without saying.

You are right.From my study of the Quran, one of the key points is that a couple declares to people that they belong together and are commited together. However, in Quran, there are other key points when it comes to commitment as well.
...

I think it is a shame that many marriages are complicated, bureaucratic and expensive nowadays. And i think you have some good arguments. However, saying that relationships is pretty much the equivalent to an official marriage requires evidence from the Quran. I think it is important to bring our evidence from the Quranic verses when we are claiming something about a Quranic issue.

You are right. But I was not so much arguing from a Qur'anic viewpoint but addressing the argument that a relationship without a marriage contract automatically means people are not serious / not dedicated to each other / abusing their partner and so on.

I know the Qur'an mentions various things in regards to marriage, such as mahr etc. But personally, I am not sure if those rules should be applied nowadays exactly as they were applied back then. So I am rather looking at the intention behind them. The intention was to protect families, protect women from being kicked out on the street without means to support themselves, make sure that lineage is being protected etc.

Nowadays many countries have laws that serve this purpose very well. Plus, women are able to support themselves, they don't depend on a man to provide for them materially. And, as I mentioned before, there are laws forcing fathers to pay child support regardless of the marital status. In fact, if you take a look at countries applying secular law versus countries applying "sharia law", it becomes very obvious that the former protects women and children much better.

Yes there are countless people living like that. And there are countless people telling lies, but their great number does not make lying right. If many people do something that does not mean that what they are doing is right (see 6116). Argumentum ad populum http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

David, if you've read some of my other posts on this board, you will see that I don't believe the majority is always right, quite the opposite!

The reason I mentioned that many people are living like that was because I gave a positive example of people being together without a marriage certificate, and I was expecting some people to argue that my example was an exception rather than the norm. Which is exactly what the next poster did.

Usually the woman may think they are not getting married because of the expense and inconvenience, but the man may still consider himself "unattached" and entitled to have sex with other women without considering it adultery. Because he hasn't made a public promise.

According to my observation, this is NOT how it usually is. In fact, I find this statement quite strange.

That's why I say "reinventing the wheel" because talking about couples who love each other and are living together without being married is like trying to invent a "2nd degree" marriage whereby there are a set of duties and expectations from each other which are in some way less than those you expect from a full marriage but enough to allow the couple to think they are behaving morally.

I disagree. As I said, I know many couples living like this, and in no way do their expectations towards each other differ from those you would find in an official marriage.

I guess part of the problem in discussions like this is that we all come from different cultural and religious backgrounds, so our observations will of course be different too.

And this is why unmarried couples, even with children, are much more likely to split up than married couples.

Are they? Do you have statistics for that?

nimnimak_11

Peace Leyna

What is your take on 2433?

And let those who are not able to marry abstain until God enriches them of His Bounty....

What are we advised to abstain from? I orginally thought it to be marriage but that wouldn't be logical.

Bigmo

Peace Leyna

What is your take on 2433?

And let those who are not able to marry abstain until God enriches them of His Bounty....

What are we advised to abstain from? I orginally thought it to be marriage but that wouldn't be logical.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Thats how I read it.

unknownuser

Peace Leyna

What is your take on 2433?

And let those who are not able to marry abstain until God enriches them of His Bounty....

What are we advised to abstain from? I orginally thought it to be marriage but that wouldn't be logical.

Peace Nima

I have some comments to your question regarding 2433.

To say that the verse is talking about abstaining from marriage is like telling us that
We should not get married until we are able to marry (have the means to marry).
Which is like saying Let those who are not able to eat, not eat until they are able to eat.
Or to make it more simple Do not eat until you are able to eat. Don't we know that we should not eat
until we are able to eat? Off course we know. It is common sense.

From my understanding of 2433, it is not telling us to abstain from marriage until
we have the means/resources to marry. But it is telling us
"To abstain (be chaste) until we have the means/resources to get the means/resources to get married".
By abstaining, we abstain from sex/intimacy before marriage. We should be patient until we have the resources which enable us to marry. Until God enriches us of his bounty (2433). What do i mean by being chaste/abstain(patient)? That we should not have intimacy (intercourse) before marriage. I think this explanation is a rational explanation. You may wonder why. Here are some reasons why

Because many verses tells us to not come near lewdness (See 6 151, 733).
Because we are told to not even look at the opposite sex in a bad or horny way (2430). How can we have sex before marriage when we are told to not even look at the opposite sex in a bad or horny way? Let me give you an example. If you are told to not even mock a person verbally, then you can not say that hitting the person is okay. When you are told to not even mock the person verbally (which is something minor compared to hitting), then it is logical that hitting the person (which is a physical act) is something you ABSOLUTELY not should do. So if we are told to not even look at girls in a bad or horny way (which is something minor compared to having sex with someone), then having sex is a serious thing which we absolutely not should be done before marriage.

Verse 2430, and other verses, tells us to guard our private parts (before marriage). To guard something is to protect it. To not hurt it, not use it. If you guard a castle, you do not let anyone come into the castle that are not allowed to come in.

Because if you do not have the means/resources to get married/commited, by being intimate with a girl, this may lead to unwanted pregnancy, and when you and your partner get a child you will not have the money for child support.
Because intimacy can lead to breaking someones heart (hurting them) if you leave them. Because if you are not commited you are not obligated to stay with your partner and then you might leave at any moment. And the Quran tells us to not hurt people. We should be kind to people. If someone hurt another person, they hurt themselves. It will affect their Soul.
Because if you do not have the means to get married, it is better to focus on the other laws of the Quran which tells us to change ourselves, and to contribute to the society (doing good). Contribution is more important than getting married.

Quran 6415
Your money and children are a test, and with God is a great recompense.

Quran 314
It has been adorned for people to love the desire of women, and sons, and ornaments made from gold and silver, and trained horses, and livestock, and fields. These are the enjoyment of the world, and with God is the best abode.

No one dies or gets hurt if they don't have intercourse before marriage, or if they don't get married today or even the next 10 years, but thousands of people starve, get diseases and die everyday because of poverty in their countries. And even in rich countries, many people need support and help. Many people in the west have psychological problems and physical problems (they are not healthy). Listen to this metaphor. If you a guy is working for a store each tuesday, and he starts to work 12 am, and the clock is 10 am, and it takes at least to hours to drive to the store. Then he has to start to drive before 10 am if he want to arrive on time. So if he starts to drive to the store at 9 am, but gets trouble with the engine of his car at 9.30, he has to immediately fix the engine and then drive to the store if he wants to arrive on time. He can not leave the car, take a fotball he has in his car and start to play soccer with strangers in the street outside his car for 3 hours. There is no time for enjoyment at that moment, because fixing the car and arriving his work on time is more important. If he plays soccer 3 hours, then it is obvious he will be late for his work. He has to arrive at his work at 12 am, and then work until his job is finished at 3 am, and then, only then he can do what he want to play soccer with people. First you work, then you get the time to reward yourself. Contribution is more important than marriage. Marriage is great, but people should be patient. There are more important things to focus on first. We will hopefully become commited when the time is right. But i think we should not chase after something when there are more important things to do first. If we go after something when the time is not rights, it slowly gain control our life and suddenly transform the door of freedom into a heavy door of lust that will be impossible to open, so that we will be trapped in room of weakness, in the house of despair.

unknownuser

Peace Leyna )

You are right. But I was not so much arguing from a Qur'anic viewpoint but addressing the argument that a relationship without a marriage contract automatically means people are not serious / not dedicated to each other / abusing their partner and so on.

Ahh, i see. I misunderstood then. At first, I thought you was adressing the argument from a Quranic viewpoint. I think it's no problem that we express ourselves. Not everything we say have to be related to the Quran. I think it is actually interesting to hear the opinions and thoughts of members on this forum )

I know, some people think that marriage will automatically save them from all of their problems and make them happy and loyal. Those who think marriage is the solution to most problems or all problems are living in a fantasy land. Marriage just like everything else can be used both positively and negatively.

I know the Qur'an mentions various things in regards to marriage, such as mahr etc. But personally, I am not sure if those rules should be applied nowadays exactly as they were applied back then. So I am rather looking at the intention behind them. The intention was to protect families, protect women from being kicked out on the street without means to support themselves, make sure that lineage is being protected etc.

You say you are not sure if those rules should be applied nowadays exactly as they were applied back then. And i can relate to this understanding. I understand this interpretation, because the world has changed a lot since back then. However, in my opinion, in an ideal society those rules should be applied. Because the Quran is from the creator, and it is timeless, and it is the natural system of mankind.

I think the rules in the Quran are flexible, and adaptable, therefore they can be applied at all times. Just like oxygen has existed for millions of years, and still consists of H20, and still has not changed, i think the Quranic rules are also meant to be applied at all times. They can not be changed, but they can bended to fit in. Let me give you a metaphor. Water is flexible, if you put water in cup, on a table or in the refrigarator, it changes its form, but it do not change what it consist of. It is still water. Whether water is in a cup, on a table or in a refrigerator, it still consists of H20. So it changes its form, but not what it consists of which is H20. So we can see that water is higly flexible. Another example is the law of gravity, it lasts at all times. I believe the Quranic laws/rules are also higly flexible and last at all times. Or to be more clear, as long as mankind exists, if you will. I think there is no change in the system of allah

Quran 1777
Such was the way of those whom We had sent before you of Our messengers. And you will not find any change in Our way.

Nowadays many countries have laws that serve this purpose very well. Plus, women are able to support themselves, they don't depend on a man to provide for them materially. And, as I mentioned before, there are laws forcing fathers to pay child support regardless of the marital status. In fact, if you take a look at countries applying secular law versus countries applying "sharia law", it becomes very obvious that the former protects women and children much better.

You are right, many countries have laws that serve this purpose well. And i think it is great that women can support themselves. I am for this. I think that neither men or women should be dependendent on eachother. We are born free. And i agree that secular law is much better than the laws of sharia. Actually, i don't support sharia at all. Sharia law is not based on Quran alone or the true teachings of the Quran. And yes, it is obvious that secular law protects women and children more. But no secular laws protects women and children as the laws in the Quran. The system of islam (not religion) in the Quran, have laws in it that are ahead of time and have not even been established in secular countries. It may take hundreds of years before these laws will be accepted, appreciated, and established. The Quranic system is superior to all man-made systems. The Quranic system is superior to Capitalism, Communism, Humanism, and even Democracy. You see, in life there are two things. There are things which are god-made, and things which are man-made. Things which are made by god will always be more advanced than things which are made by humans. For example, today we look at the helicopter and think that this invention is amazing, original and radical. But the design of the helicopter is copyed by the design of the dragonfly. As you know, dragonflies have wings that spin in circles just like the wings of the helicopter. The complex system of the wings and its rotation has existed in nature for millions of years. It has existed even before human beings created helicopters. Scientists are still studying the wings of the dragonfly, because still there are things they can learn from it. That which is made by our creator is always more advanced than that which human beings make. This is the truth.

David, if you've read some of my other posts on this board, you will see that I don't believe the majority is always right, quite the opposite!

I'm glad that you don't believe that majority is always right. You seem like an open-minded girl, which i think is good. How old are you? And are you a convert? just curious.

I think we should gather knowledge at all times in life. Knowledge leads to self realization, and then we will transform ourselves and become what we are supposed to be reach our dreams and unleash our potentials.

unknownuser

Peace nima

I look forward to hear your thoughts and views on my last post.

liquiddharma

Are they? Do you have statistics for that?

Yes, this is well known

The article (There's a paywall)
http//www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_JNTRTNS

Link behind the paywall
http//cpffoundation.org/frayedKnot.html

Co-habiting couples have the same number of hands as married couples, so they ought to make equally good parents. Many do, but on average the children of co-habiting couples do worse by nearly every measure. One reason is that such relationships are less stable than marriages. In America, they last about two years on average. About half end in marriage. But those who live together before marriage are more likely to divorce.

Many people will find this surprising. A survey of teenagers by the University of Michigan found that 64% of boys and 57% of girls agreed that ?it is usually a good idea for a couple to live together before getting married in order to find out whether they really get along.? Research suggests otherwise. Two-thirds of American children born to co-habiting parents who later marry will see their parents split up by the time they are ten. Those born within wedlock face only half that risk.

The likeliest explanation is inertia, says Scott Stanley of the Centre for Marital and Family Studies at the University of Denver, Colorado. Couples start living together because it is more fun (and cheaper) than living apart. One partner may see this as a prelude to marriage. The other?usually the man?may see it as something more temporary. Since no explicit commitment is made, it is easier to drift into living together than it is to drift into a marriage. But once a couple is living together, it is harder to split up than if they were merely dating. So ?many of these men end up married to women they would not have married if they hadn't been living together,? says Mr Stanley, co-author of a paper called ?Sliding versus deciding?.

Think about it logically - this is about the psychology of motivation - when a person promises to do something, it makes it more likely they will follow through. Whey make that promise in front of friends and family, that is every stronger motivation. The way peer pressure influences human beings is very well established. That's the whole point of marriage.

nimnimak_11

Peace David

To say that the verse is talking about abstaining from marriage is like telling us that
We should not get married until we are able to marry (have the means to marry).
Which is like saying Let those who are not able to eat, not eat until they are able to eat.
Or to make it more simple Do not eat until you are able to eat. Don't we know that we should not eat
until we are able to eat? Off course we know. It is common sense.

From my understanding of 2433, it is not telling us to abstain from marriage until
we have the means/resources to marry. But it is telling us
"To abstain (be chaste) until we have the means/resources to get the means/resources to get married".
By abstaining, we abstain from sex/intimacy before marriage. We should be patient until we have the resources which enable us to marry. Until God enriches us of his bounty (2433). What do i mean by being chaste/abstain(patient)? That we should not have intimacy (intercourse) before marriage. I think this explanation is a rational explanation.

I agree that the word abstain in 2433 applies to sex but doubt that it applies to other things such as sleeping together or other matters which does not = sex.

Because many verses tells us to not come near lewdness (See 6 151, 733).

Yes but i sincerely doubt that sleeping with your girlfriend whom you've know for a while can qualify as lewdness. I would not think sex would count as lewdness but 2433 does imply this to be exclusive to marriage.

Because we are told to not even look at the opposite sex in a bad or horny way (2430). How can we have sex before marriage when we are told to not even look at the opposite sex in a bad or horny way? Let me give you an example. If you are told to not even mock a person verbally, then you can not say that hitting the person is okay. When you are told to not even mock the person verbally (which is something minor compared to hitting), then it is logical that hitting the person (which is a physical act) is something you ABSOLUTELY not should do. So if we are told to not even look at girls in a bad or horny way (which is something minor compared to having sex with someone), then having sex is a serious thing which we absolutely not should be done before marriage.

OF COURSE I AGREE. How can you look at some one on the street or someone whom you are not in a relationship with in that way?! But if your with someone (fiance/girlfriend) then it's completely different is it not? We don't lower our gaze with our zawj. Equally we don't lower our gaze with our MMA (whom i still think has some association with being a fiance or girlfriend amongst other things)

Verse 2430, and other verses, tells us to guard our private parts (before marriage). To guard something is to protect it. To not hurt it, not use it. If you guard a castle, you do not let anyone come into the castle that are not allowed to come in.

Yes but verse 235-6 make zawj and MMA an exception to this as we can unguard our private parts to them. So parts can be unguraded to the MMA also which i take to possibly mean a g/f or fiance.

Because if you do not have the means/resources to get married/commited, by being intimate with a girl, this may lead to unwanted pregnancy, and when you and your partner get a child you will not have the money for child support.

Yes if you have unprotected sex, most likely this will = pregnancy. If you have protected sex there is still a chance of pregnancy (this could happen in marriages also as Leyna pointed out) so obviously you should do everything within your power to prevent pregnancy untill you are ready for a child. Extreme measures (perhaps necessary) would mean to abstain from sex. But other options are still open.

Because intimacy can lead to breaking someones heart (hurting them) if you leave them. Because if you are not commited you are not obligated to stay with your partner and then you might leave at any moment. And the Quran tells us to not hurt people. We should be kind to people. If someone hurt another person, they hurt themselves. It will affect their Soul.

You can do the same in marriage. You can break someone's heart then. If you start a relationship, you are discovering whether this person is right for you and you are trying to get closer to them. In all this commitment is involved and you should morally be commited to try and make things work. This commitment is not exclusive to marriage. Howver the commitment in marriage implies a more certain and serious commitment which follows after you become close to someone enough to propose to them.

Because if you do not have the means to get married, it is better to focus on the other laws of the Quran which tells us to change ourselves, and to contribute to the society (doing good). Contribution is more important than getting married.

Quran advises us to marry. It is an important part of life IMO. It is part of the progression of character. It adds a new field to progress in. Such as being a good spouse or the possibility of being a good father.

Quran 6415
Your money and children are a test, and with God is a great recompense.

All of this life is a test. How you are as a father and a husband is amongst it. If sincerely someone does not have the means to marry, then they cannot be blamed. But if someone does have the means to marry but refuses or does not try hard enough, whilst not necessarily worthy of blame, they are still missing out on something important. Kind of like a person having the opportunity to go and study and progress academically to become let's say an astronomer but not doing so.

Quran 314
It has been adorned for people to love the desire of women, and sons, and ornaments made from gold and silver, and trained horses, and livestock, and fields. These are the enjoyment of the world, and with God is the best abode.

No one dies or gets hurt if they don't have intercourse before marriage, or if they don't get married today or even the next 10 years, but thousands of people starve, get diseases and die everyday because of poverty in their countries. And even in rich countries, many people need support and help. Many people in the west have psychological problems and physical problems (they are not healthy). Listen to this metaphor. If you a guy is working for a store each tuesday, and he starts to work 12 am, and the clock is 10 am, and it takes at least to hours to drive to the store. Then he has to start to drive before 10 am if he want to arrive on time. So if he starts to drive to the store at 9 am, but gets trouble with the engine of his car at 9.30, he has to immediately fix the engine and then drive to the store if he wants to arrive on time. He can not leave the car, take a fotball he has in his car and start to play soccer with strangers in the street outside his car for 3 hours. There is no time for enjoyment at that moment, because fixing the car and arriving his work on time is more important. If he plays soccer 3 hours, then it is obvious he will be late for his work. He has to arrive at his work at 12 am, and then work until his job is finished at 3 am, and then, only then he can do what he want to play soccer with people. First you work, then you get the time to reward yourself. Contribution is more important than marriage. Marriage is great, but people should be patient. There are more important things to focus on first. We will hopefully become commited when the time is right. But i think we should not chase after something when there are more important things to do first. If we go after something when the time is not rights, it slowly gain control our life and suddenly transform the door of freedom into a heavy door of lust that will be impossible to open, so that we will be trapped in room of weakness, in the house of despair.

People should be patient as it is a good attribute. But patience should not get in the way of motivation and determination. In the case of someone who is studying to be an astronomer, they should go out and look for a course in astronomy as soon as they have the money for the course. If they don't have the money, they should put time and effort in to making that money. Now let's say that this individual wants to study at harvard but he can't afford. There are other options available to him. Though not as good as harvard, still good options.

My point with other options is that sometimes it's wiser not to wait. You have to weigh things out. In the case of harvard, this person has already spent x years saving up. How much longer is he gonna wait. He still has to study and then get the job. Once he gets the job then how much progress is available to be made with respect to the amount of time he has left?

Similarly with marriage. Shoudn't be left till to late. Should not be stingy nor the opposite to the extent that you just go for any female. IMO middle ground for when searching for someone. So patience would still apply if you have a middle ground approach.

If we were to take MMAs as Girlfriends or fiances, then close physical relations are possible (excluding sex). In the other thread, i noticed you were against physical relations unless with spouse. Considering the topic of MMA, what is your view on this?

nimnimak_11

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Thats how I read it.

But what is the kitchen in this case?
If you can't find/don't have the means for marriage, then abstain....

Can it be anything other than sex? It may even entail all forms of relations with a girl but then what becomes of the MMA?

Heres how i view it now.

We can unguard parts to MMA 235-6 (meaning we can even have sex)
This is to some extent limited by 2433 (........abstain.........)

Now considering the verses on divorce and pregnancy and how mostly they are associated with zawj with the exception of one verse. Also considering the issue of divorce in which not having sex or having sex will effect the process of divorce significantly, I think that all acts that you can do with your zawj, you can do with your MMA with the exception of sex. and by sex i am talking of actual penetration with no protection. Which would make it questionable as to whether the use of condoms and other forms of protection, would still qualify it as sex in Quranic fashion.

Honestly i'd think yes becuase there is still the chance of pregnancy.

So overall at the moment i think that the abstain in 2433 referes to any act that would result in pregnancy.

unknownuser

Peace Nima

I agree that the word abstain in 2433 applies to sex but doubt that it applies to other things such as sleeping together or other matters which does not = sex.

I disagree. I think it applies to more than just sex. From my understanding of 2433 and other verses, being chaste/abstaining, is more than just sex. When we look at the verses in Quran and intergrate them, we will understand that being chaste/abstaining is a mentality. And it's an integrated mentality, not just about sex( which is a one-dimensional view).

Yes but i sincerely doubt that sleeping with your girlfriend whom you've know for a while can qualify as lewdness. I would not think sex would count as lewdness but 2433 does imply this to be exclusive to marriage.

It's good that you have accepted that sex is to be exclusive to marriage. And when it comes to knowing someone, this is what i think Knowing someone for a while does not count if you do not make a commitment. You can know an employer in a store for 20 years, but if you do not have money, you can not get any products. If he give you something, he is breaking the rules. Rules are rules. Rules should be followed. And rules are the same for everyone.

OF COURSE I AGREE. How can you look at some one on the street or someone whom you are not in a relationship with in that way?! But if your with someone (fiance/girlfriend) then it's completely different is it not? We don't lower our gaze with our zawj. Equally we don't lower our gaze with our MMA (whom i still think has some association with being a fiance or girlfriend amongst other things)

I agree with you, except when it comes to girlfriend. The word girlfriend and the concept of having a relationship don't exist in the Quran.

Yes but verse 235-6 make zawj and MMA an exception to this as we can unguard our private parts to them. So parts can be unguraded to the MMA also which i take to possibly mean a g/f or fiance.

I take it to mean fiance, and to mean other things.

Yes if you have unprotected sex, most likely this will = pregnancy. If you have protected sex there is still a chance of pregnancy (this could happen in marriages also as Leyna pointed out) so obviously you should do everything within your power to prevent pregnancy untill you are ready for a child. Extreme measures (perhaps necessary) would mean to abstain from sex. But other options are still open.

Okay.

You can do the same in marriage. You can break someone's heart then. If you start a relationship, you are discovering whether this person is right for you and you are trying to get closer to them. In all this commitment is involved and you should morally be commited to try and make things work. This commitment is not exclusive to marriage. Howver the commitment in marriage implies a more certain and serious commitment which follows after you become close to someone enough to propose to them.

You do not need to have a relationship to discover if someone is right for you. First you get a fiance, then you get the resources, then you get married with her. You do not need to have a physical relationship to get close to someone.

Quran advises us to marry. It is an important part of life IMO. It is part of the progression of character. It adds a new field to progress in. Such as being a good spouse or the possibility of being a good father.

Good points. I agree.

All of this life is a test. How you are as a father and a husband is amongst it. If sincerely someone does not have the means to marry, then they cannot be blamed. But if someone does have the means to marry but refuses or does not try hard enough, whilst not necessarily worthy of blame, they are still missing out on something important. Kind of like a person having the opportunity to go and study and progress academically to become let's say an astronomer but not doing so.

Good point.

People should be patient as it is a good attribute. But patience should not get in the way of motivation and determination. In the case of someone who is studying to be an astronomer, they should go out and look for a course in astronomy as soon as they have the money for the course. If they don't have the money, they should put time and effort in to making that money. Now let's say that this individual wants to study at harvard but he can't afford. There are other options available to him. Though not as good as harvard, still good options.

Ahh, so you are saying that there are other options than marriage/commitment available. If i read between the lines, you are saying that the options available will be physical relationships or sleeping instead of having sex. I don't believe in these options. I think people should get engaged and then get married.

Similarly with marriage. Shoudn't be left till to late. Should not be stingy nor the opposite to the extent that you just go for any female. IMO middle ground for when searching for someone. So patience would still apply if you have a middle ground approach.

I agree.

If we were to take MMAs as Girlfriends or fiances, then close physical relations are possible (excluding sex). In the other thread, i noticed you were against physical relations unless with spouse. Considering the topic of MMA, what is your view on this?

In life, we can not fill a pot with a new substance if it is already full with an old substance. I have already given my view on MMA, on the thread "Having relationships not compatble with the Quran?". However, my view on MMA has changed. Not much, but changed. So maybe i will explain my view on MMA another time.

nimnimak_11

Peace Nima

I disagree. I think it applies to more than just sex. From my understanding of 2433 and other verses, being chaste/abstaining, is more than just sex. When we look at the verses in Quran and intergrate them, we will understand that being chaste/abstaining is a mentality. And it's an integrated mentality, not just about sex( which is a one-dimensional view).

Other verses talk of being chaste and guarding our private parts to others. This however is an exception to MMAs and zawjs. I've not made a definate decision on what i think an MMA is but at the moment, i consider the possiblity that it could mean girlfriend as in a relationship with a girlfriend. If you take it to mean finace, then may i ask why you would think it a fiance but not girlfriend?

You do not need to have a relationship to discover if someone is right for you. First you get a fiance, then you get the resources, then you get married with her. You do not need to have a physical relationship to get close to someone.

You do not necessarily even need to look at the person to see if they are right for you. But the question is why should we not if it not be forbidden?
Similarly why should a couple not have a physical relationship (excluding sex) when they are close enough or comfortable enough with each other and both mutually want it if it is not restricted in the Quran?

Ahh, so you are saying that there are other options than marriage/commitment available. If i read between the lines, you are saying that the options available will be physical relationships or sleeping instead of having sex. I don't believe in these options. I think people should get engaged and then get married.

No what i meant was that an approach in which where we think by waiting for the perfect person we are being patient, is wrong. We are not being patient, we are being lazy or lacking in determination or being too stingy in such cases IMO. That is what i meant. Whilst we are young, we should be meeting girls and searching for someone whom we could love and spend the rest of our lives with IMO. If leave it till late, it is a mistake IMO.

In life, we can not fill a pot with a new substance if it is already full with an old substance. I have already given my view on MMA, on the thread "Having relationships not compatble with the Quran?". However, my view on MMA has changed. Not much, but changed. So maybe i will explain my view on MMA another time.

No problem. I have not yet made a solid decision on MMA yet. There are about 3 verses which convey differently to MMA being finaces or girlfriends although i feel the other verses all point to MMA being possibly a girlfriend or an MMA as well as other things.

unknownuser

Peace Nima

In your last post you asked two questions. I don't have any comments to them at the moment. I have explained my views on the thread "Having relationship before marriage?". You may wish to read the posts in that thread one more time if you want to learn more about my views and arguments and why i believe what i believe. My time is valuable, so i consider myself finished with the topic of marriage and relationships for now. I think there are more important things in life to do than to use so much time on those topics (when i have gotten the answers i need to know). I think it is good that you ask questions, and it is important with discussion. However, i am not a supporter of rationalization. Looking to find the concept of girlfriend in the Quran is rationalization. Making a conclusion, then looking for the evidence = Rationalization. Finding the evidence then looking for a conclusion = Reasoning. Look at the superstitions and falsehoods people believe. They believe in code 19, they believe vaccines being good for your health and that the theory of evolution is flawless. You know why? Because they rationalize. They make a conclusion first, then they look for the evidence. And when the evidence don't fit into their conclusions, they dismiss it. They base their understanding on superstition and fantasy instead of facts and reality. And they do not look for arguments for and against and then make an opinion. They have an opinion and ignore the arguments which are against that opinion. They only accept the arguments which support their opinion.

When it comes to their decisions in life, most people rationalize. And i must admit that i have been guilty of rationalization as well in the past. But when it comes to quran, or knowledge, i think there is no excuse. I believe we must do our best when studying the quran or when we gain knowledge. We should base our conclusions on evidence. Because if we look for something that can not be found, we will look forever. And it will waste our valuable time.

nimnimak_11

Peace Nima

In your last post you asked two questions. I don't have any comments to them at the moment. I have explained my views on the thread "Having relationship before marriage?". You may wish to read the posts in that thread one more time if you want to learn more about my view and arguments and why i believe what i believe. My time is valuable, so i consider myself finished with the topic of marriage and relationships for now. I think there are more important things in life to do than to use so much time on those topics (when i have gotten the answers i need to know). I think it is good that you ask questions, and it is important with discussion. However, i am not a supporter of rationalization. Looking to find the concept of girlfriend in the Quran is rationalization. Making a conclusion, then looking for the evidence = Rationalization. Finding the evidence then looking for a conclusion = Reasoning. Look at what people believe. They believe in code 19, they believe in superstition like vaccines being good for your health and the theory of evolution being flawless. You know why? Because they rationalize. They make a conclusion first, then they look for the evidence. And when the evidence don't fit into their conclusions, they dismiss it. They base their understanding on superstition and fantsasy instead of facts and reality. And they do not look for arguments for and against and then make an opinion. They have an opinion and ignore the arguments which are against that opinion. They only accept the arguments which support their opinion. But this way of thinking is wrong.

Most people rationalize when it comes to their decisions in life. And i must admit that i have been guilty of rationalization as well in the past. But when it comes to quran, or knowledge, i think there is no excuse. I believe we must do our best when studying the quran and when we gain knowledge. We should base our conclusions on evidence. Because if we look for something that can not be found, we will look forever. And it will waste our valuable time.

Peace David

I used the verses of the Quran to back my points. We cannot make the assumption that physical relations with girlfriends are forbidden unless we see verses that imply this. What is wrong with this statement? Why should we be determined to side MMA as a finace when there is no obligation for us to do so nor is there any verse that suggests doing so would count towards a good deed.

I have read your posts in the other thread you began and feel i am fairly familiar with your views. We make our own choices and are accountable for them.
You advised me not to conform the Quran to my beliefs and that to confrom my beliefs to the Quran. To a good degree, I would advise the same. Never approach anything with preconcieved notions. So if you see the word chaste, do not assume that it implies 0 physical relations UNTILL you come across evidence either in the scripture (and if not there) then the heart and reasoning. Similiarly if you come across the phrase MMA don't assume it means fiance or girlfriend or slave untill you see evidence for such things.