Can a Muslimah marry a non-Muslim?
-
Aparently 30 million more men then women according to http//www.socyberty.com/Issues/The-imbalance-of-the-male-to-female-ratio.8138.
Hmm, interesting. However, I dont think 30 million is that much of a gap compared to the total population of the world.
Is this a book? If so, where could I find it?
Lol, the Great Reading is referring to Al Quran.
-
Salaam siki
First allow me to correct your translation
"...and your food is lawful for them and the (mu7sanaat) among the believers and the (mu7sanaat) among the followers of the previous scripture...."The reason for this literal correction is to ask you What makes the address change (from addressing both genders) to addressing (the male gender only) after the bolded "and" ?
Samia!
The addressess, still are both the genders.
It is like, if some one is addressing a group/crowd ( muslim men and women) , and that "some one" says that you are hallal for each other as well as the Women belonging to the followers of previous scriptures for you , Now in this you , this command can only be fulfilled by the male section of the group. (unless you suggest some other method to full fill this command by both)
Another reason that i can think of is, Probably the women are being made aware of this instruction/permission so that, they do not /cannot object to it ;D
siki
-
Salaam siki
Thanks for the prompt reply
What's the difference between the construction of this verse and the following one
443 "...and if you are ill or on a journey or come from answering the call of nature or have been in sexual contact with women and you find no water, perform tayammum..."
If this verse addresses both genders, whom is it addressing by the phrase (have been in sexual contact with women)?
-
Salaam siki
Thanks for the prompt reply
What's the difference between the construction of this verse and the following one
443 "...and if you are ill or on a journey or come from answering the call of nature or have been in sexual contact with women and you find no water, perform tayammum..."
If this verse addresses both genders, whom is it addressing by the phrase (have been in sexual contact with women)?
samia!
where were you when i posted the following, in http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12100.15 , and asked your opinion.
I requote
Sister Twilight! How are you?
I appreciate your keen sense of observation. There is no confusion on marrying a women belonging to the people following previous scriptures, and their men, not being authorized. However you have a point here, in the verse 5-6 ,
First of all , in case of ceremonial impurity, the arabic word is "Janabat" , ( which is a condition after sex resulting into discharge of semen) , The bath is a must for both, because this particular condition is described for both by calling , O you believe,,,,
The second part of the verse which says "lamastum un nissa", however is not as dirty a condition and hence is, grouped along with some other less than clean situations. It can be explained as "sexual touchings", not resulting into an intercourse.
I find your objection to be valid. This sentence should have been worded in a manner , leaving no room for such an objection, but it does not . It means only two things,
1, the women have been intentionally exempted from this clause.
2, the word nissa may have some different meanings which i am not knowledgeable enough to answer. Sister Samia some time back did mention, that in Arabic Grammer , the word Rijjal and nissa contain both. May be now she is required to explain. However till then, i would go with your objection and consider the first option to be more valid.
siki
peace
siki
-
samia!
where were you when i posted the following, in http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12100.15 , and asked your opinion.
I am really sorry. I was away from home, on a job from morning to night, hardly having time to scroll all the threads.
As for the word "nisaa'", my understanding is that it bears two meanings, one of them being "women". In the verse I quoted, it has to mean "women". Both verses (443 and 55) address both genders. The point is that the qur'aan has its exclusive sociolinguistics rule where "she" contains "he". In such a case, the translation should be "the opposite gender/sex" "..or (if) you have been in sexual contact with the opposite sex"; "and the "mu7sins of the opposite sex among the followers of the previous scripture" ...
-
Salam all,
I wonder if anyone here ever consider the term almushrikati/mushrikatin/almushrikeena/mushrikin in Q2221 is referring to a person that is single/not having partner? Hence the context of the ayat is advocating monogamy that lead "Garden" as oppose to "Fire" when one practices polygyny/polygamy.
Any comments?
Thanks,
-
Salam all,
I wonder if anyone here ever consider the term almushrikati/mushrikatin/almushrikeena/mushrikin in Q2221 is referring to a person that is single/not having partner?
Thanks,Salaam phil
The verse mentions the mushrik/mushrika in opposition to mu'min/mu'mina. Unless there is a way to understand "mu'min/mu'mina" as single people, I do not think we can take mushrik/mushrika as married persons!
-
Salaam phil
The verse mentions the mushrik/mushrika in opposition to mu'min/mu'mina. Unless there is a way to understand "mu'min/mu'mina" as single people, I do not think we can take mushrik/mushrika as married persons!
Peace Samia,
Thanks for the prompt reply.
I'm still searching and analyzing the meaning of "mu'min/mu'mina" and its roots from other verses in al Qur'an and cross checking with Lanes. But is there any justification of the addition (with God) which commonly attached to words mushrik/mushrika in Q2221 as found in most of Qur'an translations? In other words, why the terms almushrikati/almushrikeena has to be understood as seting up partners (with God)?
Regards,
-
Lol, the Great Reading is referring to Al Quran.
Coincedentally the Quran was my first guess.
-
As for the word "nisaa'", my understanding is that it bears two meanings, one of them being "women". In the verse I quoted, it has to mean "women". Both verses (443 and 55) address both genders. The point is that the qur'aan has its exclusive sociolinguistics rule where "she" contains "he". In such a case, the translation should be "the opposite gender/sex" "..or (if) you have been in sexual contact with the opposite sex"; "and the "mu7sins of the opposite sex among the followers of the previous scripture" ...
Salam Samia
I am not in a position to comment on Rijjal and Nissa as to weather they contain both the genders , or Not, but one thing i am quiet sure, " Moh7sinnats"( specially in 5-5) do not contain Moh7sineen.
peace
siki
-
Salam Samia
" Moh7sinnats"( specially in 5-5) do not contain Moh7sineen.
peace
siki
Why?
If you believe that the whole verse addresses men only, then you can say that. But that will not be the end of the problem. You will have to
- prove why you believe that a verse is exclusively for men (not based on muhsanaat)
- that food of "ahlul kitaab" is not lawful to women
Otherwise
3. how an address suddenly changes from (to all mu'mins/people) to just men -
Peace Samia,
Thanks for the prompt reply.
In other words, why the terms almushrikati/almushrikeena has to be understood as seting up partners (with God)?
Regards,
You're welcome, phil
It is understood in this way from the context of verses and by understanding the root of the word. Sometimes it is even explained in this manner when it is explicitly mentioned "shrik billahi" as in the first commandment of the Straight Path and in many other verses.
-
Peace,
In old Classical Arabic
- Groups of people that include males are reffered to as male groups.
- Women don't have sex, Men have sex with women.
- Women don't marry, Men marry or marry off women.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam Anwar
-
Universal sociolinguistics...not specific to Arabic. The quraan is not to be subjected to universal sociolinguistics or grammar.
-
?
-
In the qur'aan there is no "marry off women". There is "marry off (yunki7) to men".
How old is "old classical Arabic"? What is the oldest document in classical Arabic you know of?
-
Why?
If you believe that the whole verse addresses men only, then you can say that. But that will not be the end of the problem. You will have to
- prove why you believe that a verse is exclusively for men (not based on muhsanaat)
- that food of "ahlul kitaab" is not lawful to women
Otherwise
3. how an address suddenly changes from (to all mu'mins/people) to just menbecause no where in quran mohsinnat,Mushrikat or Mominat can ever mean to include both genders, where as Mohsineen, Momineen or Mushrikeen is always taken for both.
siki
-
Otherwise
3. how an address suddenly changes from (to all mu'mins/people) to just menSome times simple things become so hard to understand..... There is nothing wrong in changing the addressee in one sentence!
-
Peace,
I use Old Classical Arabic to refer to all early Islamic Arabic and pre-Quranic Arabic. I would say that this Arabic goes up to the rennaissance period. I can't speak for Arabic documents of the 18-19 century, unless they are religious documents, which still count as early Islamic. When I say Old Classical Arabic I am specifically eluding to the Arabic used in Pre-Islamic poetry, Hadeeth literature, the Quran and early Islamic treatises.
I'm not sure what you mean about universal sociolinguistics. However, in Old Arabic as you know only a man can yankih a woman. (nakaha also means to have sex). So when you say yunkih you cause to marry i.e. facilitate a man marrying a woman.
Only men can have sex with women in Old Arabic, not the other way around. Not to be too specific but is probably because the male is proactive in this role.
So when talking about sex these will obviosly be addressed to men. We should read it literally as (When your men have sex with your women then all of you . . . )
I also ran into trouble with this when it came to washing for prayer etc. when I read this in the Quran.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Oh, as it concerns the issue of Muslim women marrying non-muslim men, i think that firstly it is better put as Non-Muslim men marrying Muslim women (semantics, but this is how the Arabic approaches it).
Secondly the issue is not about Muslims marrying Muslims. But about the faithful to God marrying those faithful to God, and not marrying those who make equals with God or deny or are unfaithful to him.
In my opinion it is obvious that women who are faithful to God and believe in the Quran should not marry those who take others as equals with God or deny Him or are unfaithful to Him all together. That means that Quranist women should allow themselves to marry Unitarian Christians, Messianic Unitarian Jews, Theists, Deistic Gnostics other Quranists and anyone who believes in the god of Abraham, makes no equals with him and rejects none of His prophets and their messengers and angels. The message of the Quran is have faith in God, make none equal to Him, and do not reject his prophets, his angels and their messages.
What problem an a true believer in the god of Abraham have with the Quran when they intelligently study it?
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
That means that Quranist women should allow themselves to marry Unitarian Christians, Messianic Unitarian Jews, Theists, Deistic Gnostics other Quranists and anyone who believes in the god of Abraham, makes no equals with him and rejects none of His prophets and their messengers and angels. The message of the Quran is have faith in God, make none equal to Him, and do not reject his prophets, his angels and their messages.What problem an a true believer in the god of Abraham have with the Quran when they intelligently study it?
Godbless,
AnwarBro Anwar!
I can not agree with the above. These are precisely the people quran mentions as followers of the previous scriptures, and the Mohsinnats(only)belonging to such group have been declared Hallal for the believers.
And now, definitely there is a difference between Mominneen , followers of previous scriptures, and Mushrikeens.
siki