It appears to me that some of the Muslims here selectively promote and respect only the parts of Islam that they like, then dump or makeover the others, using the right to an opinion as their excuse. This is even to the extent that when they want to ignore laws in Muslim countries, they just do. Can't blame the "kuffar" for that.
What's up with that?
Full Version: The Laws of Islam
We'll see if the ones guilty of this will stay away or own up!
Load up on the refreshments, Charles. I believe it will be a long wait. Those who do so do not recognize themselves and are busy making excuses and blaming others for expecting more from them.
(disclaimer: i do reserve the right to comment further on should this turn into a flame war!
)
Don't hold your breath, gimy. No one wants to claim this. They are so busy with their posse making up stories about me right now.
Here's a question szsz and nope i'm not muslim, but what's your opinion about these countries, say like egypt and morroco and algeria where it's so difficult for people to regisiter their islamic marriage. I know in Jordan you can register your islamic marriage the same day or the next, but it seems like for other islamic countries from what I read on here that it's difficult for a foreign person to register their marriages. Do you think people of the same nationality born in the same country have a difficult time registering their marriages to?
Thanks for the question, angel. For nationals, marriage requirements are more minimal than they are between foreigners and nationals. Some reasons include:
The government doesn't want to lose their citizens,
Marriage between Muslims and non-Muslims are discouraged,
They figure that those who are SERIOUS about each other will make the sacrifice.
I tend to go with the latter.
This being what it is, is no reason to ignore the laws. You need them when you screw up, so keep the good will for when you need it, so you won't need a lawyer later.
The government doesn't want to lose their citizens,
Marriage between Muslims and non-Muslims are discouraged,
They figure that those who are SERIOUS about each other will make the sacrifice.
I tend to go with the latter.
This being what it is, is no reason to ignore the laws. You need them when you screw up, so keep the good will for when you need it, so you won't need a lawyer later.
You know szsz from your previous postings. I can see that you are so against orfi marriages, but maybe you can explain to "me" why that is if you want to. I can see where you are coming from after talking with my husband, but maybe there is something else that I am not seeing or someone else is not seeing.
QUOTE(angelk96 @ Sep 15 2006, 08:02 PM) 
You know szsz from your previous postings. I can see that you are so against orfi marriages, but maybe you can explain to "me" why that is if you want to. I can see where you are coming from after talking with my husband, but maybe there is something else that I am not seeing or someone else is not seeing.
szsz you don't have to answer I got my answer
Well, ok, angel. What did you learn? I'd like to hear it, please.
Ok, I know. Nevermind. Thx!
Ok, I know. Nevermind. Thx!
Chnou?!
I was hoping to see you answer Angel's question szsz.
I was hoping to see you answer Angel's question szsz.
Well I learned that the prophet mohammed said that a time will come when the honest is called a liar and the person who tells the people about the truth and tries to show them the right and right faith that person will be called majnoon/crazy in other words will believe the liar and don't believe the honest.
Well, ok, angel. What did you learn? I'd like to hear it, please.
Ok, I know. Nevermind. Thx!
QUOTE(szsz @ Sep 15 2006, 08:38 PM)
Well, ok, angel. What did you learn? I'd like to hear it, please.
Ok, I know. Nevermind. Thx!
well in Pakistan it was very easy to registar the marriage took no time at all < 1 day >. we did have to go to court and that. it was simple enough.
Ok, Sarah. I'll provide one soon. I want to compose it, then post it, so please be patient.
PS- Someone pmed me, but their box is full and I can't respond, so if you read this, please make some room in your box and expect a response soon. Thx!
Well I learned that the prophet mohammed said that a time will come when the honest is called a liar and the person who tells the people about the truth and tries to show them the right and right faith that person will be called majnoon/crazy in other words will believe the liar and don't believe the honest.
My life creed is found among the many ayat in the Quran about doing justice:
[4.135] O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for God can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily God is well- acquainted with all that ye do.
None of us will know God's Judgement until we stand before Him. Until then, all you can do is your best!
PS- Someone pmed me, but their box is full and I can't respond, so if you read this, please make some room in your box and expect a response soon. Thx!
Well I learned that the prophet mohammed said that a time will come when the honest is called a liar and the person who tells the people about the truth and tries to show them the right and right faith that person will be called majnoon/crazy in other words will believe the liar and don't believe the honest.
My life creed is found among the many ayat in the Quran about doing justice:
[4.135] O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for God can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily God is well- acquainted with all that ye do.
None of us will know God's Judgement until we stand before Him. Until then, all you can do is your best!
shokran for allowing me to participate in your muslim debate
Anytime!
I totally agree and you know, someone mentioned orfi weddings. They're haram!
QUOTE(mellaliya @ Sep 16 2006, 03:54 AM)
I totally agree and you know, someone mentioned orfi weddings. They're haram!
I'm trying to figure out what the heck an Orfi wedding is? I have never heard this term. Can someone please explain? Thanks!
QUOTE(Mrs. Forgetful @ Sep 16 2006, 08:08 AM)
QUOTE(mellaliya @ Sep 16 2006, 03:54 AM)
I totally agree and you know, someone mentioned orfi weddings. They're haram!
I'm trying to figure out what the heck an Orfi wedding is? I have never heard this term. Can someone please explain? Thanks!
i was wondering too.... if it's haram, it must not be a legal marriage
.
Mrs Forgetful, I love that you always ask questions!
This issue of orfi marriages is going to be a heated and long debate. Pay your bills, stock up on refrehments and strap yourself in. I have been on vj a long time and not too many topics will take off like this one.
I admit I don't know much about it either. I am sure we will learn today! It might need it's own thread tho'.
Jackie
This issue of orfi marriages is going to be a heated and long debate. Pay your bills, stock up on refrehments and strap yourself in. I have been on vj a long time and not too many topics will take off like this one.
I admit I don't know much about it either. I am sure we will learn today! It might need it's own thread tho'.
Jackie
Mrs. Forgetful, google it, I just did...you'll get some interesting hits and information.
I don't know anything about it...never heard of the term...I wouldn't mind knowing about it..but I'm afraid it's not going to be pretty.....
I googled it. And learned that Saudi men use it when they vacation to Egypt. 
Whatcha all learning?
Jackie
Whatcha all learning? Jackie
QUOTE(mellaliya @ Sep 16 2006, 03:54 AM)
I totally agree and you know, someone mentioned orfi weddings. They're haram!
I will ask you the same as I asked the other person who issued this fatwa in the past.... can you please provide us with proof from the Quran and Sunnah that registration with the local government is a requirement for a valid marriage in Islam?
Thank you in advance.
So are ya'll saying the contract marriages that many of us had to do to even see our men are orfi?
I thank you all for your patience waiting for a response. I conquered my family last night in bowling, got a great night's sleep and had a wonderful breakfast as I spoke with my husband on the phone.
The question by Laya, who had an urfi marriage, is an attempt to try to derail the discussion. What she is asking for are direct statements that require state regulation of marriage, but, because she has little knowledge of how Islamic jurisprudence is formed, she believes that an inability to provide an explicit and direct command to do so will negate my position against urfi marriages and allow her to claim that they are halal. Not so.
Islamic law is in intricate business that is composed of far more than explicit quotes from the Quran and the Sunnah, and she knows that. For example, she may argue that headcovering is mandatory, but there is nothing in the Quran that explicitly commands headcovering/concealing hair, or for that matter, any particular style of dress. Therefore, the Sunnah is employed, and the most popular hadth cited is weak with a broken chain. Thus, the rulings from mortals directing that women's hair be covered are primarily interpretations based on tradition, commands for modesty and how modesty was defined in the early societies that defined the issue. There is no punishment in sharia for not wearing headcovering or a specific mode of dress, but there are those who will say if you do not, your piety will suffer and you will go to hell.
The issue of urfi marriage is a controversial one and it is complex, requiring an examination of history, legal methodology, tradition and culture, for sometimes, Islam is the last consideration made when establishing law and precedent. So, the first thing I must do is give you a background of how law is formed, its elements and sources, and the most common methodologies and considerations from sharia and extra-shariac.
I will return soon to begin with that portion of the discussion.
The question by Laya, who had an urfi marriage, is an attempt to try to derail the discussion. What she is asking for are direct statements that require state regulation of marriage, but, because she has little knowledge of how Islamic jurisprudence is formed, she believes that an inability to provide an explicit and direct command to do so will negate my position against urfi marriages and allow her to claim that they are halal. Not so.
Islamic law is in intricate business that is composed of far more than explicit quotes from the Quran and the Sunnah, and she knows that. For example, she may argue that headcovering is mandatory, but there is nothing in the Quran that explicitly commands headcovering/concealing hair, or for that matter, any particular style of dress. Therefore, the Sunnah is employed, and the most popular hadth cited is weak with a broken chain. Thus, the rulings from mortals directing that women's hair be covered are primarily interpretations based on tradition, commands for modesty and how modesty was defined in the early societies that defined the issue. There is no punishment in sharia for not wearing headcovering or a specific mode of dress, but there are those who will say if you do not, your piety will suffer and you will go to hell.
The issue of urfi marriage is a controversial one and it is complex, requiring an examination of history, legal methodology, tradition and culture, for sometimes, Islam is the last consideration made when establishing law and precedent. So, the first thing I must do is give you a background of how law is formed, its elements and sources, and the most common methodologies and considerations from sharia and extra-shariac.
I will return soon to begin with that portion of the discussion.
PS - Misyar is another name for urfi marriage, if you would like to google that term as well.
QUOTE(Zoloft Needed @ Sep 16 2006, 11:45 AM)
So are ya'll saying the contract marriages that many of us had to do to even see our men are orfi?
Yes that's what they are saying is haraam. Basically they are calling every sister here with that contract, a fornicatress.
I don't read SZSZ's posts and my question was not directed at her... it was directed at the other one who declared it haraam. I already know SZSZ will not or can not provide the proof from either source.
I ask again for proof from the Quran or Sunnah that it is required to register it with the government to make it valid.
I will begin to add basic knowledge to so that we all can know the term and concepts used. Layla, because she has me on ignore, will miss a lot of this, so someone may want to clue her in so she will learn as well that little of Islamic law is simply about what is explicitly in the Quran or Sunnah. The Quran is only about 10% law, and, in conjunction with the Sunnah of the Prophet, it makes up the sharia, which is then discerned by qualified scholars who have studied specific areas of law. Few know it all.
This is not "boyfriend Islam", i.e., whatever your SO tells you about Islam is what you believe.
I am not here to lecture; please consider this exercise to be interactive. Also, do not accept all that I say at face value. I expect you, challenge you, to check out anything you are wary of or want to know more about. Some do not want to do the work and would rather scoff, insult, and call me names, but to those who make the effort, Allah will reward you. That is His promise, not mine.
The Quran: aka the Sunnah (traditions) of Allah, the Holy and Indisputable Word of God for all believing Muslims.
The Sunnah of the Prophet: There are several separate collections of ahadith of the Prophet Muhammad. The two considered to be the most authoritative are the collections of Al-Bukhari and Muslim. Others are also used.
These are the two primary sources of Sunni Islamic law. Together, through their authority, derives the:
Shari`a, the immutable divine law as ascertained by mortals.
Fiqh: often confused with sharia, is the use of prescribed methodologies to discern the divine law. It is the mutable compilation of man's knowledge of God's law.
Madhahib: the guilds of Islamic jurisprudence, the schools of thought in religious law, each known as a madhab. At this time, the four most prominent schools in Sunni Islam are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali, each of which are prominant in some area of the Muslim world. In the west, we tend to pick and choose among them.
In Islamic jurisprudence, there are five legal qualifications of acts, known as the ahkam:
Wajib or fard: these are acts that are compulsory or binding on a believer. Examples include, but are not limited to, daily prayer, observation of Ramadan rites, and zakat (charity).
Madub or Mustahabb: recommended, but not essential acts.
Mubah: religiously neutral acts, neither forbidden nor recommended.
Mukruh: disliked, but not forbidden acts.
Haram: forbidden act
In addition, halal are the allowed acts.
More to come . . .
This is not "boyfriend Islam", i.e., whatever your SO tells you about Islam is what you believe.
I am not here to lecture; please consider this exercise to be interactive. Also, do not accept all that I say at face value. I expect you, challenge you, to check out anything you are wary of or want to know more about. Some do not want to do the work and would rather scoff, insult, and call me names, but to those who make the effort, Allah will reward you. That is His promise, not mine.
The Quran: aka the Sunnah (traditions) of Allah, the Holy and Indisputable Word of God for all believing Muslims.
The Sunnah of the Prophet: There are several separate collections of ahadith of the Prophet Muhammad. The two considered to be the most authoritative are the collections of Al-Bukhari and Muslim. Others are also used.
These are the two primary sources of Sunni Islamic law. Together, through their authority, derives the:
Shari`a, the immutable divine law as ascertained by mortals.
Fiqh: often confused with sharia, is the use of prescribed methodologies to discern the divine law. It is the mutable compilation of man's knowledge of God's law.
Madhahib: the guilds of Islamic jurisprudence, the schools of thought in religious law, each known as a madhab. At this time, the four most prominent schools in Sunni Islam are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali, each of which are prominant in some area of the Muslim world. In the west, we tend to pick and choose among them.
In Islamic jurisprudence, there are five legal qualifications of acts, known as the ahkam:
Wajib or fard: these are acts that are compulsory or binding on a believer. Examples include, but are not limited to, daily prayer, observation of Ramadan rites, and zakat (charity).
Madub or Mustahabb: recommended, but not essential acts.
Mubah: religiously neutral acts, neither forbidden nor recommended.
Mukruh: disliked, but not forbidden acts.
Haram: forbidden act
In addition, halal are the allowed acts.
More to come . . .
I've been reading about this and I'm a bit confused. I remember reading an article about "convenience" marriages - for example that a man can "marry" a woman say while he's vacationing in the Emirates or something and then simply divorce them when he leaves. Any children that come out of the arrangement are considered illegitimate and not his responsibility. I don't remember if this was simply done Islamically or if the marriage/divorce was registered with the civil court. I'm going to dig and see if I can find it. Anyway I don't know where this thread came from (which discussion) but it could be taken several ways I think.
1) Women are doing this because they don't want to be alone (nor do the men) but they can't afford to get married. My thoughts on this are varied, from a western perspective and from my husbands POV. I understand the man is suppose to pay the woman a dowry and that he is suppose to take care of her but it seems some of these women are being unrealistic and even ridiculous in what they are asking. I know a lot of marriages are arranged or semi-arranged so I guess I would want a decent financial situation if I hardly knew the person I was marrying. (This is another topic I disagree with so I won't go there!) But I think that the women's ideas of what to expect are so far out there because in most Islamic countries they have no concept of money, how hard it is to earn it and how much it takes to run a house, family etc. Which is too bad I believe. They have unrealistic expectations that ultimately hurt themselves and any children they may have. Unfortunately not everyone can live like a princess which seems like what most of these girls have envisioned. My dowry was $1 and I felt ridiculous asking for anything in the first place, I'm not property and I can support myself if need be why would I ask for more. I also love my husband and want to be with him and would do anything to make that happen, instead of making it more difficult.
2) Some of these arrangements are made in good faith. While there is the chance the husband may take advantage of the situation and the woman may have little legal recourse what about the situations that are done in good faith with every intention of registering the marriage at a later time. I know the Qu'ran is suppose to be read literally however I doubt the Prophet (pbuh) had any clue that at some point in time the situation of the world and relationships would be what it is today. In his time it was very localized and there was no need for some arrangements. Obviously this idea of marriage (ofri) came from somewhere, and I can't imagine someone just throught it up last year.
3) Sexual repression. I'm not really going to delve into this. Fatima Mernissi has written a lot about this topic in many of her books. Granted Islam is one of the more "sexually" ok religions (in marriage). Men have contorted a lot of Islam to fit their needs (can anyone say Taliban?) this might just be one more of those situations. Honestly I give them a little credit. At least they are bothering to "marry" the girl and not just going out and finding a prostitute.
I'm still thinking about this and reading but there's some thoughts off the top of my head.
1) Women are doing this because they don't want to be alone (nor do the men) but they can't afford to get married. My thoughts on this are varied, from a western perspective and from my husbands POV. I understand the man is suppose to pay the woman a dowry and that he is suppose to take care of her but it seems some of these women are being unrealistic and even ridiculous in what they are asking. I know a lot of marriages are arranged or semi-arranged so I guess I would want a decent financial situation if I hardly knew the person I was marrying. (This is another topic I disagree with so I won't go there!) But I think that the women's ideas of what to expect are so far out there because in most Islamic countries they have no concept of money, how hard it is to earn it and how much it takes to run a house, family etc. Which is too bad I believe. They have unrealistic expectations that ultimately hurt themselves and any children they may have. Unfortunately not everyone can live like a princess which seems like what most of these girls have envisioned. My dowry was $1 and I felt ridiculous asking for anything in the first place, I'm not property and I can support myself if need be why would I ask for more. I also love my husband and want to be with him and would do anything to make that happen, instead of making it more difficult.
2) Some of these arrangements are made in good faith. While there is the chance the husband may take advantage of the situation and the woman may have little legal recourse what about the situations that are done in good faith with every intention of registering the marriage at a later time. I know the Qu'ran is suppose to be read literally however I doubt the Prophet (pbuh) had any clue that at some point in time the situation of the world and relationships would be what it is today. In his time it was very localized and there was no need for some arrangements. Obviously this idea of marriage (ofri) came from somewhere, and I can't imagine someone just throught it up last year.
3) Sexual repression. I'm not really going to delve into this. Fatima Mernissi has written a lot about this topic in many of her books. Granted Islam is one of the more "sexually" ok religions (in marriage). Men have contorted a lot of Islam to fit their needs (can anyone say Taliban?) this might just be one more of those situations. Honestly I give them a little credit. At least they are bothering to "marry" the girl and not just going out and finding a prostitute.
I'm still thinking about this and reading but there's some thoughts off the top of my head.
First of all I should not have asked my question in Henia's thread yesterday, as it was a general question about Islam and had nothing to do with Henia. SZSZ responded to my question, and as I said before, the post was in the wrong place at the wrong time. She was replying in a general manner, it's just too bad it was in that thread. I do think that what she wrote was used against her and blown up by those who don't seem to like her.
Either way, I am glad SZSZ started a new thread to talk about it because I also have some questions about this topic. I wonder why some women get so offended when talking about this subject. I know this is a personal matter and many will not want to reply but I always wonder for those who are Muslim, do you have a religious ceremony in their country in order to now be chaperoned while visiting? Does this happen? Again I know this is personal but I am curious and thanks to those who answer.
More questions to come I'm sure.
Have a good day!
Sarah
Either way, I am glad SZSZ started a new thread to talk about it because I also have some questions about this topic. I wonder why some women get so offended when talking about this subject. I know this is a personal matter and many will not want to reply but I always wonder for those who are Muslim, do you have a religious ceremony in their country in order to now be chaperoned while visiting? Does this happen? Again I know this is personal but I am curious and thanks to those who answer.
More questions to come I'm sure.
Have a good day!
Sarah
I'm not a scholar... I don't have a lot of knowledge regarding what makes something haraam or halal either.... all that I can do is what Allah commands me to in the Quran...
[004:059] O you who believe! Obey Allâh and obey the Messenger (Muhammad [sal-Allâhu 'alayhi wa sallam]), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allâh and His Messenger [sal-Allâhu 'alayhi wa sallam], if you believe in Allâh and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination.
I believe the scholars who refer matters to the Quran and Sunnah (refer it to Allah and His messenger) are the ones in authority to make these types of rulings and this is what one of those scholars has to say about ruling by other than what Allah sent down. It's a very interesting read IMHO....
[004:059] O you who believe! Obey Allâh and obey the Messenger (Muhammad [sal-Allâhu 'alayhi wa sallam]), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allâh and His Messenger [sal-Allâhu 'alayhi wa sallam], if you believe in Allâh and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination.
I believe the scholars who refer matters to the Quran and Sunnah (refer it to Allah and His messenger) are the ones in authority to make these types of rulings and this is what one of those scholars has to say about ruling by other than what Allah sent down. It's a very interesting read IMHO....
QUOTE
Ruling by Other than the Law of Allaah
by Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-Uthaymeen
Taken from ‘al-Qawl al-Mufeed `alaa
Kitaab at-Tawheed’ [2/263-269]
Translation by Abu Rumaysah [Triod Publications]
The following is taken from the Shaykh’s concluding remarks to the hadeeth of `Adee bin Haatim that he heard the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) reciting the verse,
"They (the Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and monks to be their lords besides Allaah."
[at-Tawbah (9): 31]
Upon which I said, "indeed we did not worship them." [The Prophet (SAW)] said, "did they not make unlawful that which Allaah made lawful and so you too did the same? [Did they not] make lawful what Allaah made unlawful and so you too did the same?" I replied, "verily." He said, "this then was the worship of them." Reported by Ahmad and at-Tirmidhee who declared it hasan.
[The following points] are derived from the hadeeth:
That obedience with the meaning of worship is a specific type of uboodiyyah.
Obedience in that which contradicts the Law of Allaah constitutes worship of the one obeyed. As for [obedience] in the worship of Allaah then this is [truly] worship of Allaah.
That following the scholars and servants in that which contradicts the Law of Allaah constitutes taking them as lords [besides Allaah].
Know that following the scholars or leaders in their making lawful what Allaah has made unlawful or the opposite [causes that person] to fall into one of three categories:
That he follows them while being pleased with their opinion and giving it precedence and being displeased with the ruling of Allaah - such a person is a kaafir because he has disliked what Allaah has revealed and as a result Allaah made his actions to be of no avail. No one but a kaafir has his actions rendered futile.
That he follows them while being pleased with the ruling of Allaah, knowing that it is the most ideal and best suited for the servants and the lands. However due to his following his desires he chooses this [other ruling] for example due to his [being offered] a position of responsibility. Such a person is not declared to be a kaafir, rather he is a faasiq.
That he does not know and neither is it possible for him to learn, so he blindly follows them thinking [that what he follows] is the truth. Such a person incurs no blame for he merely follows what he has been commanded and he is excused for this. This is why there occurs from the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) that he said, "indeed whosoever is given a verdict not based upon knowledge then his sin is upon the one who gave him the verdict." If we were to say that this person is sinful due to the error of someone else then this necessarily leads to oppression and difficulty, and no person would trust any other due to the possibility of bearing responsibility for that persons error.
{The hadeeth is reported by Ahmad (2/321, 365), Abu Daawood (4/66), ibn Maajah (1/20), ad-Daarimee (1/53) and al-Haakim (1/126) who said, "saheeh, meeting the conditions of the Two Shaykhs, I know of no defect [in it]." Adh-Dhahabee agreed.}
If it is asked: why are not the second category [of people] declared to be kaafir? I would reply: if we were to say that they are kaafir then this would necessitate the disbelief of every person who commits a sin while knowing that he has disobeyed Allaah and knows that [what he has contradicted] is the ruling of Allaah.
A Benefit:
Allaah has described those who do not rule by what Allaah has revealed with three descriptions:
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the disbelievers [kaafiroon]."
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the oppressors [dhaalimoon]"
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the sinners [faasiqoon]."
The People of Knowledge have differed concerning this. So it is opined that these descriptions in fact describe one and the same thing because the kaafir is a dhaalim due to the saying of Allaah,
"And the disbelievers are the oppressors." [al-Baqarah (2): 254]
[Similarly the kaafir] is a faasiq due to the saying of Allaah,
"As for the sinners then their abode will be the Fire…" [as-Sajdah (32): 20]
It is also opined that these are distinct descriptions and that they are [applied] in accordance to the situation:
So [one] becomes a kaafir in three circumstances
When he believes that it is permissible to rule by other than what Allaah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in the saying of Allaah,
"So is it the rule of Jaahiliyyah (ignorance) that they seek?" [al-Maa`idah 5: 50]
Everything that opposes the rule of Allaah constitutes the rule of Jaahiliyyah. [Also the evidence for this] is the definitive consensus that it is not allowed to rule by other then what Allaah has revealed. Therefore the one who considers it lawful and permissible to rule by other then what Allaah has revealed has contradicted this definitive consensus and such a person is a kaafir and an apostate. This [is similar to the case of one] who considers fornication or alcohol to be permissible or considers bread or milk to be unlawful.
When he believes that ruling by other then what Allaah revealed is equivalent to ruling by the rule of Allaah.
When he believes that ruling by other then what Allaah revealed is better than ruling by what Allaah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in the saying of Allaah,
"And who is better than Allaah in judgement for a people who have certainty?" [al-Maa`idah 5: 50]
So this verse states that the ruling of Allaah is the best of rulings as is further proven by the saying of Allaah, endorsing this,
"Is Allaah not the best of judges?" [at-Teen 95: 8]
So when Allaah is the best of the judges in ruling and He is the most just of the rulers then whosoever claims that the rule of other than Allaah is equivalent or better than the rule of Allaah is a kaafir because he has denied the Qur`aan.
[One] becomes a dhaalim
When he believes that ruling by what Allaah has revealed is the best of judgements and the most beneficial for the servants and the lands and that it is obligatory to apply it. However hatred and jealousy lead him to rule by other than what Allaah revealed over his subjects - such a person is a dhaalim.
[One] becomes a faasiq
When he follows his own desires. For example he rules in favour of a person due to being bribed by him, or due to his being a close relative or friend, or [because the ruler] seeks the fulfillment of a need from his comrades or the likes. This along with the belief that the rule of Allaah is the ideal and it is obligatory to follow it - such a person is a faasiq. Even though he is also a dhaalim, describing him as a faasiq is more befitting.
The strongest opinion is the second that these descriptions are distinct and that they are [applied] in accordance to the situation.
As regards the one who lays down legislative laws, despite his knowing the judgement of Allaah and that these laws are contrary to Allaah’s judgement - then this person has substituted these laws in place of the Sharee`ah. Therefore he is a kaafir - this because he does not choose these laws and turn away from Allaah’s Sharee`ah except due to his belief that they are better for the people and the land than the law of Allaah. But when we say that he is a kaafir, then the meaning of this is that this action leads to disbelief.
However the one who [legislates these rules] may have an excuse - for example he may be one who has been deluded: such that it has been said to him that this does not conflict with Islaam, or that it is something allowable as a case of benefiting the people (masaalih al-mursala), or that it is something that Islaam has left up to the [custom of] the people.
So there are some scholars - even though they are in error - who say that social transaction (mu`aamalaat) is something not dealt with by Islaam, and that rather it is referred to whatever is found to benefit the economy in each particular time. So if the situation requires us to establish usury banks or to tax the people then there is no problem with this.
There is no doubt concerning the error of [such a claim]. So if these people performed ijtihaad then may Allaah forgive them. Otherwise they are in a situation of very great danger and it is befitting that they are entitled ‘scholars of the state’ and not ‘scholars of the Religion.’…
Ruling by other than the law of Allah
by Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-Uthaymeen
Taken from ‘al-Qawl al-Mufeed `alaa
Kitaab at-Tawheed’ [2/263-269]
Translation by Abu Rumaysah [Triod Publications]
The following is taken from the Shaykh’s concluding remarks to the hadeeth of `Adee bin Haatim that he heard the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) reciting the verse,
"They (the Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and monks to be their lords besides Allaah."
[at-Tawbah (9): 31]
Upon which I said, "indeed we did not worship them." [The Prophet (SAW)] said, "did they not make unlawful that which Allaah made lawful and so you too did the same? [Did they not] make lawful what Allaah made unlawful and so you too did the same?" I replied, "verily." He said, "this then was the worship of them." Reported by Ahmad and at-Tirmidhee who declared it hasan.
[The following points] are derived from the hadeeth:
That obedience with the meaning of worship is a specific type of uboodiyyah.
Obedience in that which contradicts the Law of Allaah constitutes worship of the one obeyed. As for [obedience] in the worship of Allaah then this is [truly] worship of Allaah.
That following the scholars and servants in that which contradicts the Law of Allaah constitutes taking them as lords [besides Allaah].
Know that following the scholars or leaders in their making lawful what Allaah has made unlawful or the opposite [causes that person] to fall into one of three categories:
That he follows them while being pleased with their opinion and giving it precedence and being displeased with the ruling of Allaah - such a person is a kaafir because he has disliked what Allaah has revealed and as a result Allaah made his actions to be of no avail. No one but a kaafir has his actions rendered futile.
That he follows them while being pleased with the ruling of Allaah, knowing that it is the most ideal and best suited for the servants and the lands. However due to his following his desires he chooses this [other ruling] for example due to his [being offered] a position of responsibility. Such a person is not declared to be a kaafir, rather he is a faasiq.
That he does not know and neither is it possible for him to learn, so he blindly follows them thinking [that what he follows] is the truth. Such a person incurs no blame for he merely follows what he has been commanded and he is excused for this. This is why there occurs from the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) that he said, "indeed whosoever is given a verdict not based upon knowledge then his sin is upon the one who gave him the verdict." If we were to say that this person is sinful due to the error of someone else then this necessarily leads to oppression and difficulty, and no person would trust any other due to the possibility of bearing responsibility for that persons error.
{The hadeeth is reported by Ahmad (2/321, 365), Abu Daawood (4/66), ibn Maajah (1/20), ad-Daarimee (1/53) and al-Haakim (1/126) who said, "saheeh, meeting the conditions of the Two Shaykhs, I know of no defect [in it]." Adh-Dhahabee agreed.}
If it is asked: why are not the second category [of people] declared to be kaafir? I would reply: if we were to say that they are kaafir then this would necessitate the disbelief of every person who commits a sin while knowing that he has disobeyed Allaah and knows that [what he has contradicted] is the ruling of Allaah.
A Benefit:
Allaah has described those who do not rule by what Allaah has revealed with three descriptions:
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the disbelievers [kaafiroon]."
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the oppressors [dhaalimoon]"
"Whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then they are the sinners [faasiqoon]."
The People of Knowledge have differed concerning this. So it is opined that these descriptions in fact describe one and the same thing because the kaafir is a dhaalim due to the saying of Allaah,
"And the disbelievers are the oppressors." [al-Baqarah (2): 254]
[Similarly the kaafir] is a faasiq due to the saying of Allaah,
"As for the sinners then their abode will be the Fire…" [as-Sajdah (32): 20]
It is also opined that these are distinct descriptions and that they are [applied] in accordance to the situation:
So [one] becomes a kaafir in three circumstances
When he believes that it is permissible to rule by other than what Allaah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in the saying of Allaah,
"So is it the rule of Jaahiliyyah (ignorance) that they seek?" [al-Maa`idah 5: 50]
Everything that opposes the rule of Allaah constitutes the rule of Jaahiliyyah. [Also the evidence for this] is the definitive consensus that it is not allowed to rule by other then what Allaah has revealed. Therefore the one who considers it lawful and permissible to rule by other then what Allaah has revealed has contradicted this definitive consensus and such a person is a kaafir and an apostate. This [is similar to the case of one] who considers fornication or alcohol to be permissible or considers bread or milk to be unlawful.
When he believes that ruling by other then what Allaah revealed is equivalent to ruling by the rule of Allaah.
When he believes that ruling by other then what Allaah revealed is better than ruling by what Allaah has revealed. The evidence for this lies in the saying of Allaah,
"And who is better than Allaah in judgement for a people who have certainty?" [al-Maa`idah 5: 50]
So this verse states that the ruling of Allaah is the best of rulings as is further proven by the saying of Allaah, endorsing this,
"Is Allaah not the best of judges?" [at-Teen 95: 8]
So when Allaah is the best of the judges in ruling and He is the most just of the rulers then whosoever claims that the rule of other than Allaah is equivalent or better than the rule of Allaah is a kaafir because he has denied the Qur`aan.
[One] becomes a dhaalim
When he believes that ruling by what Allaah has revealed is the best of judgements and the most beneficial for the servants and the lands and that it is obligatory to apply it. However hatred and jealousy lead him to rule by other than what Allaah revealed over his subjects - such a person is a dhaalim.
[One] becomes a faasiq
When he follows his own desires. For example he rules in favour of a person due to being bribed by him, or due to his being a close relative or friend, or [because the ruler] seeks the fulfillment of a need from his comrades or the likes. This along with the belief that the rule of Allaah is the ideal and it is obligatory to follow it - such a person is a faasiq. Even though he is also a dhaalim, describing him as a faasiq is more befitting.
The strongest opinion is the second that these descriptions are distinct and that they are [applied] in accordance to the situation.
As regards the one who lays down legislative laws, despite his knowing the judgement of Allaah and that these laws are contrary to Allaah’s judgement - then this person has substituted these laws in place of the Sharee`ah. Therefore he is a kaafir - this because he does not choose these laws and turn away from Allaah’s Sharee`ah except due to his belief that they are better for the people and the land than the law of Allaah. But when we say that he is a kaafir, then the meaning of this is that this action leads to disbelief.
However the one who [legislates these rules] may have an excuse - for example he may be one who has been deluded: such that it has been said to him that this does not conflict with Islaam, or that it is something allowable as a case of benefiting the people (masaalih al-mursala), or that it is something that Islaam has left up to the [custom of] the people.
So there are some scholars - even though they are in error - who say that social transaction (mu`aamalaat) is something not dealt with by Islaam, and that rather it is referred to whatever is found to benefit the economy in each particular time. So if the situation requires us to establish usury banks or to tax the people then there is no problem with this.
There is no doubt concerning the error of [such a claim]. So if these people performed ijtihaad then may Allaah forgive them. Otherwise they are in a situation of very great danger and it is befitting that they are entitled ‘scholars of the state’ and not ‘scholars of the Religion.’…
Ruling by other than the law of Allah
I am composing and compiling this in real time, so please bear with me. If you believe it to be too much simply to explain the relevent issues surrounding urfi/misyar marriage, I assure you, it is not. Besides, there is no such thing as too much knowledge!
‘aql: reasoning.
fatwa (pl. fatawi): an opinion by a qualified scholar on a point of law, not necessarily binding.
hadith (pl. ahadith): literature narrating sayings, action or acquiescence of the Prophet. Similar to the Sunnah, but not quite the same.
ijtihad: the application of individual, independent reasoning in matters of fiqh by mujtahid, fiqh scholars. The matter of the validity of ijtihad in forming law has been debated for centuries.
ikhtiyar: choice by a scholar among competing views.
`illa: ratio legis; term used for the basis of analogy in qiyas (see qiyas below).
‘ilm: deep knowledge, the obtainment of which is encumbant upon every Muslim.
istishab: utility of legal reasoning, relates to certain probative presumptions, precendent.
istihsan: "approval", a discretionary opinion in breach of strict qiyas, juristic preference.
istislah: taking the public interest, maslaha, into account when establishing a fatwa or binding law. Related terms: maslaha: public interest; masalih mursala: "unrestricted" utility in the public interest, utility not enjoined or excluded by revelation. A useful example of this is how Singapore, despite the Quranic directive allowing Muslim men to marry among chaste ahl al kitab women, requires brides to convert to Islam prior to marriage, disallowing interfaith marriage for either males or females.
Jahiliyya: the time of ignorance before Islam came to the Arabian pennisula.
mu`amalat: law pertaining to the social and legal transactions among humans, in contrast to ibadat acts of worship in the domain of the Creator. Sing. mu`amala.
More to come.
‘aql: reasoning.
fatwa (pl. fatawi): an opinion by a qualified scholar on a point of law, not necessarily binding.
hadith (pl. ahadith): literature narrating sayings, action or acquiescence of the Prophet. Similar to the Sunnah, but not quite the same.
ijtihad: the application of individual, independent reasoning in matters of fiqh by mujtahid, fiqh scholars. The matter of the validity of ijtihad in forming law has been debated for centuries.
ikhtiyar: choice by a scholar among competing views.
`illa: ratio legis; term used for the basis of analogy in qiyas (see qiyas below).
‘ilm: deep knowledge, the obtainment of which is encumbant upon every Muslim.
istishab: utility of legal reasoning, relates to certain probative presumptions, precendent.
istihsan: "approval", a discretionary opinion in breach of strict qiyas, juristic preference.
istislah: taking the public interest, maslaha, into account when establishing a fatwa or binding law. Related terms: maslaha: public interest; masalih mursala: "unrestricted" utility in the public interest, utility not enjoined or excluded by revelation. A useful example of this is how Singapore, despite the Quranic directive allowing Muslim men to marry among chaste ahl al kitab women, requires brides to convert to Islam prior to marriage, disallowing interfaith marriage for either males or females.
Jahiliyya: the time of ignorance before Islam came to the Arabian pennisula.
mu`amalat: law pertaining to the social and legal transactions among humans, in contrast to ibadat acts of worship in the domain of the Creator. Sing. mu`amala.
More to come.
here's a question
How important is an registered islamic marriage to some of you?
This moring my husband was talking to his cousin who's a lawyer in Jordan about not registering a marriage with the islamic court or gov't. He didn't offer a leeway time about registering it, but if you wanted to go register the marriage way after the fact. He told us you will be fined and will have to do an islamic marriage ceremony all over again, but that's in Jordan. I don't know about other islamic countries.
How important is an registered islamic marriage to some of you?
This moring my husband was talking to his cousin who's a lawyer in Jordan about not registering a marriage with the islamic court or gov't. He didn't offer a leeway time about registering it, but if you wanted to go register the marriage way after the fact. He told us you will be fined and will have to do an islamic marriage ceremony all over again, but that's in Jordan. I don't know about other islamic countries.
I will offer you more than cut and paste from sources without explanation or the ability to dissect the background for what they have determined. Islam is not just about pick and choose and that is why I began this thread to demonstrate that the picking and choosing that some exercise here is fine for their lives, if that is what they want, but is insufficient to lay a groundwork for an UNDERSTANDING of how to discern if something in offered in the manner of the Prophet or the intent of Allah.
What do you think are the most likely things that are subject to "pick and choose" in Islam?
I hope that makes sense.
I hope that makes sense.
This moring my husband was talking to his cousin who's a lawyer in Jordan about not registering a marriage with the islamic court or gov't. He didn't offer a leeway time about registering it, but if you wanted to go register the marriage way after the fact. He told us you will be fined and will have to do an islamic marriage ceremony all over again, but that's in Jordan. I don't know about other islamic countries.
I will offer two examples. Tunsia considers an unregistered marriage to be null and void. Algeria will allow for an unregistered marriage to be validated in court. Some allow for a time period after the religious ceremony for the registration to take place.
What do you think are the most likely things that are subject to "pick and choose" in Islam?
I saw this after composing this comment, but it conveys my motivation in partial response to your question, Sarah:
The irony I find in complaints like Layla's is that she rejects the authority of non-Muslims, believing rhat Muslims should make their own laws in abidance with the sharia, yet, still also rejects the authority of the ulema (sharia scholars) in Algeria to require registration married in their Muslim country before you can be validly married. That irony is primarilywhy I wish to discuss this topic in depth, for the element of "I want what I want the way I want it" in some of the Muslimas here is dispairing in that they reject what is of Islam and want to disparage someone who points that out to them.
Another irony is that she is willing to accept the authority of a non-Muslim government in the immigration process and will marry legally after the K1 goes thru and he is here. There are obvious contradictions with this manner of action and thinking, imho.
Sarah, honey. Your apology is accepted. You have suffered with guilt enough, and I hope you will soon be serene. What has happened has happened. That is behind us.
More to come
I will offer two examples. Tunsia considers an unregistered marriage to be null and void. Algeria will allow for an unregistered marriage to be validated in court. Some allow for a time period after the religious ceremony for the registration to take place.
What do you think are the most likely things that are subject to "pick and choose" in Islam?
I saw this after composing this comment, but it conveys my motivation in partial response to your question, Sarah:
The irony I find in complaints like Layla's is that she rejects the authority of non-Muslims, believing rhat Muslims should make their own laws in abidance with the sharia, yet, still also rejects the authority of the ulema (sharia scholars) in Algeria to require registration married in their Muslim country before you can be validly married. That irony is primarilywhy I wish to discuss this topic in depth, for the element of "I want what I want the way I want it" in some of the Muslimas here is dispairing in that they reject what is of Islam and want to disparage someone who points that out to them.
Another irony is that she is willing to accept the authority of a non-Muslim government in the immigration process and will marry legally after the K1 goes thru and he is here. There are obvious contradictions with this manner of action and thinking, imho.
Sarah, honey. Your apology is accepted. You have suffered with guilt enough, and I hope you will soon be serene. What has happened has happened. That is behind us.
More to come
QUOTE(angelk96 @ Sep 16 2006, 02:36 PM)
here's a question
How important is an registered islamic marriage to some of you?
This moring my husband was talking to his cousin who's a lawyer in Jordan about not registering a marriage with the islamic court or gov't. He didn't offer a leeway time about registering it, but if you wanted to go register the marriage way after the fact. He told us you will be fined and will have to do an islamic marriage ceremony all over again, but that's in Jordan. I don't know about other islamic countries.
I'm not really so concerned with what the governement of any country has to say about it.
I have stated my opinion about this in the past but I will again... I don't have a problem following the laws of the country and registering my marriage when I'm able...
My problem comes from someone who issues fatawa that something is "haraam " because it doesn't agree with the man-made laws of the country. Allah forbids us from following laws of men over His laws.
The article I pasted explains that obeying a man-made law as opposed to following Allah's law is a path to disbelief because you worship the one you obey. We should only obey Allah.
There is no country on the face of the Earth today that rules 100% by the laws of Allah.
QUOTE(Veiled Princess @ Sep 16 2006, 12:10 PM)
QUOTE(angelk96 @ Sep 16 2006, 02:36 PM)
here's a question
How important is an registered islamic marriage to some of you?
This moring my husband was talking to his cousin who's a lawyer in Jordan about not registering a marriage with the islamic court or gov't. He didn't offer a leeway time about registering it, but if you wanted to go register the marriage way after the fact. He told us you will be fined and will have to do an islamic marriage ceremony all over again, but that's in Jordan. I don't know about other islamic countries.
I'm not really so concerned with what the governement of any country has to say about it.
I have stated my opinion about this in the past but I will again... I don't have a problem following the laws of the country and registering my marriage when I'm able...
My problem comes from someone who issues fatawa that something is "haraam " because it doesn't agree with the man-made laws of the country. Allah forbids us from following laws of men over His laws.
The article I pasted explains that obeying a man-made law as opposed to following Allah's law is a path to disbelief because you worship the one you obey. We should only obey Allah.
There is no country on the face of the Earth today that rules 100% by the laws of Allah.
I'm sorry maybe this is a stupid question but how can there be in any order if we only obey the laws of Allah and not those that man have made, especially in a country with religious diversity where not everyone believes in Allah. I obey the IRS and I fle my taxes every year however I do not worship them by any means.
I'm not really so concerned with what the governement of any country has to say about it.
I have stated my opinion about this in the past but I will again... I don't have a problem following the laws of the country and registering my marriage when I'm able...
My problem comes from someone who issues fatawa that something is "haraam " because it doesn't agree with the man-made laws of the country. Allah forbids us from following laws of men over His laws.
The article I pasted explains that obeying a man-made law as opposed to following Allah's law is a path to disbelief because you worship the one you obey. We should only obey Allah.
There is no country on the face of the Earth today that rules 100% by the laws of Allah.
This is a wonderful example of the "pick and choose" that I'm concerned about. Simply saying that there is no country that follows God's laws 100% is not a logical nor a religious excuse for exempting yourself from laws on general principle. Allah and the Prophet have told us to follow the laws of the country we are in as long as they do not VIOLATE God's laws. Registering one's marriage is not in violation of God's laws, especially in a country that upholds Islam as God's truth and has qualified alim (scholars) that have determined that registration of marriages is for the benefit of public interest (maslaha) and the protection of the mutual rights and responsibiities held by the couple.
Unfortunately, even God's law is filtered thru human reasoning; that's why we have scholars, such as the one she relied to explain her viewpoint. Oddly enough, she doesn't have the self-awareness to know that she is relying on his human reasoning and fatwa, and then employing her own human reasoning to decide that there is no law she is bound to respect, even in a country of co-adherents. Because there is no place on earth that has authority over her, she can pick and choose what is Islamic and what she wishes to do with it.
This chaotic and dangerous thinking, not condoned in Islam, which promotes order.
I have stated my opinion about this in the past but I will again... I don't have a problem following the laws of the country and registering my marriage when I'm able...
My problem comes from someone who issues fatawa that something is "haraam " because it doesn't agree with the man-made laws of the country. Allah forbids us from following laws of men over His laws.
The article I pasted explains that obeying a man-made law as opposed to following Allah's law is a path to disbelief because you worship the one you obey. We should only obey Allah.
There is no country on the face of the Earth today that rules 100% by the laws of Allah.
This is a wonderful example of the "pick and choose" that I'm concerned about. Simply saying that there is no country that follows God's laws 100% is not a logical nor a religious excuse for exempting yourself from laws on general principle. Allah and the Prophet have told us to follow the laws of the country we are in as long as they do not VIOLATE God's laws. Registering one's marriage is not in violation of God's laws, especially in a country that upholds Islam as God's truth and has qualified alim (scholars) that have determined that registration of marriages is for the benefit of public interest (maslaha) and the protection of the mutual rights and responsibiities held by the couple.
Unfortunately, even God's law is filtered thru human reasoning; that's why we have scholars, such as the one she relied to explain her viewpoint. Oddly enough, she doesn't have the self-awareness to know that she is relying on his human reasoning and fatwa, and then employing her own human reasoning to decide that there is no law she is bound to respect, even in a country of co-adherents. Because there is no place on earth that has authority over her, she can pick and choose what is Islamic and what she wishes to do with it.
This chaotic and dangerous thinking, not condoned in Islam, which promotes order.
QUOTE(sarah and hicham @ Sep 16 2006, 03:19 PM)
I'm not really so concerned with what the governement of any country has to say about it.
I have stated my opinion about this in the past but I will again... I don't have a problem following the laws of the country and registering my marriage when I'm able...
My problem comes from someone who issues fatawa that something is "haraam " because it doesn't agree with the man-made laws of the country. Allah forbids us from following laws of men over His laws.
The article I pasted explains that obeying a man-made law as opposed to following Allah's law is a path to disbelief because you worship the one you obey. We should only obey Allah.
There is no country on the face of the Earth today that rules 100% by the laws of Allah.
I'm sorry maybe this is a stupid question but how can there be in any order if we only obey the laws of Allah and not those that man have made, especially in a country with religious diversity where not everyone believes in Allah. I obey the IRS and I fle my taxes every year however I do not worship them by any means.
You didn't read my whole post Sarah.... I didn't say not to follow laws... I said not to place man-made laws over the laws of Allah and when someone declares an action haraam based not upon the Quran or Sunnah but rather upon the man-made laws of a country then that leads to disbelief.
In a muslim community, we shouldn't need anything other than the laws of Allah because He provides us with everything we need. To claim that we (any human) can make better laws than Him is disbelief.
Messed up my quotes there somehow
You didn't read my whole post Sarah.... I didn't say not to follow laws... I said not to place man-made laws over the laws of Allah and when someone declares an action haraam based not upon the Quran or Sunnah but rather upon the man-made laws of a country then that leads to disbelief.
In a muslim community, we shouldn't need anything other than the laws of Allah because He provides us with everything we need. To claim that we (any human) can make better laws than Him is disbelief.
This is another example of the confusion available to the uninitiated here. Layla seems to not be able to understand that the sacred text, the Sunnah, the laws to determine what is haram, halal or anything in between have ALWAYS been interpreted thru human filters! Even the Prophet debated with the early Muslims. Umer, especially, was a hard case, rejecting many rights given to women. Muhammad's wives and other women came to him and demanded to know why some of their concerns were not addressed in prior revelations, leading to scripture that dealt with the issues of what is expected of all Muslims and the prohibition against suspending women in a marriage.
Even her Salafi sect has order and law discerned by man filtering God's law. That's all that fiqh is. They have their revered scholars and fatwas, so what he hell is she talking about, don't follow man-made law? If it weren't for interpretation (the Quran is 10% law), we would have no diversity of thought, no law at all.
In a muslim community, we shouldn't need anything other than the laws of Allah because He provides us with everything we need. To claim that we (any human) can make better laws than Him is disbelief.
This is another example of the confusion available to the uninitiated here. Layla seems to not be able to understand that the sacred text, the Sunnah, the laws to determine what is haram, halal or anything in between have ALWAYS been interpreted thru human filters! Even the Prophet debated with the early Muslims. Umer, especially, was a hard case, rejecting many rights given to women. Muhammad's wives and other women came to him and demanded to know why some of their concerns were not addressed in prior revelations, leading to scripture that dealt with the issues of what is expected of all Muslims and the prohibition against suspending women in a marriage.
Even her Salafi sect has order and law discerned by man filtering God's law. That's all that fiqh is. They have their revered scholars and fatwas, so what he hell is she talking about, don't follow man-made law? If it weren't for interpretation (the Quran is 10% law), we would have no diversity of thought, no law at all.
QUOTE(szsz @ Sep 16 2006, 03:36 PM)
prohibition against suspending women in a marriage.
Can you elaborate? I don't understand what this means.
QUOTE(Veiled Princess @ Sep 16 2006, 12:26 PM)
QUOTE(sarah and hicham @ Sep 16 2006, 03:19 PM)
I'm not really so concerned with what the governement of any country has to say about it.
I have stated my opinion about this in the past but I will again... I don't have a problem following the laws of the country and registering my marriage when I'm able...
My problem comes from someone who issues fatawa that something is "haraam " because it doesn't agree with the man-made laws of the country. Allah forbids us from following laws of men over His laws.
The article I pasted explains that obeying a man-made law as opposed to following Allah's law is a path to disbelief because you worship the one you obey. We should only obey Allah.
There is no country on the face of the Earth today that rules 100% by the laws of Allah.
I'm sorry maybe this is a stupid question but how can there be in any order if we only obey the laws of Allah and not those that man have made, especially in a country with religious diversity where not everyone believes in Allah. I obey the IRS and I fle my taxes every year however I do not worship them by any means.
You didn't read my whole post Sarah.... I didn't say not to follow laws... I said not to place man-made laws over the laws of Allah and when someone declares an action haraam based not upon the Quran or Sunnah but rather upon the man-made laws of a country then that leads to disbelief.
In a muslim community, we shouldn't need anything other than the laws of Allah because He provides us with everything we need. To claim that we (any human) can make better laws than Him is disbelief.
Messed up my quotes there somehow
Layla, I did read your whole post.
So did you have a religious ceremony in Egypt? What do you mean when you say "I don't have a problem with registering my marriage when I am able". Were you not able to do so in Egypt? If one is married religiously and believes that under Allah they are married, then how can one come back to the US and file a K-1 petition? Even if that is obeying the law of the land, isn't it wrong since you see yourself as married and the K-1 petition is for a fiance? Even if you are married in a Muslim community, isn't it important to obey the laws of that community as well?
Here's the catch that Layla is in. She explained before that because she has no recourse in the courts of law in either country, she would have depend on her husband;s good will to do right by her, and/or the good will of the commnunity that recognizes her marriage. In other words, she is not relying on God's law, but that those who care to involve themselves will hold to her best interests. That is relying on human reasoning.
QUOTE(szsz @ Sep 16 2006, 12:42 PM)
Here's the catch that Layla is in. She explained before that because she has no recourse in the courts of law in either country, she would have depend on her husband;s good will to do right by her, and/or the good will of the commnunity that recognizes her marriage. In other words, she is not relying on God's law, but that those who care to involve themselves will hold to her best interests. That is relying on human reasoning.
Does a woman have many rights in a marriage such as this kind?
QUOTE(sarah and hicham @ Sep 16 2006, 03:39 PM)
Layla, I did read your whole post.
So did you have a religious ceremony in Egypt? What do you mean when you say "I don't have a problem with registering my marriage when I am able". Were you not able to do so in Egypt? If one is married religiously and believes that under Allah they are married, then how can one come back to the US and file a K-1 petition? Even if that is obeying the law of the land, isn't it wrong since you see yourself as married and the K-1 petition is for a fiance? Even if you are married in a Muslim community, isn't it important to obey the laws of that community as well?
I'm not misrepresenting anything Sarah. You don't know anything about my case. I have not lied to immigration at all.
Filing a K-1 petition is me following the laws of the land. 
I didn't say you lied and I never accused you of anything... just curious to see your take on this.
prohibition against suspending women in a marriage.
Can you elaborate? I don't understand what this means.
I'm trying to remember the name of this custom, it was outlawed in the Quran. It consisted of a husband declaring his wife to be like his sister. After doing so, it was forbidden for him to lay with her, but she wasn't divorced from him, nor could not divorce him and marry another. A woman approached the Prophet and complained of how awful and unfair the practice was and it was ended in sharia.
Can you elaborate? I don't understand what this means.
I'm trying to remember the name of this custom, it was outlawed in the Quran. It consisted of a husband declaring his wife to be like his sister. After doing so, it was forbidden for him to lay with her, but she wasn't divorced from him, nor could not divorce him and marry another. A woman approached the Prophet and complained of how awful and unfair the practice was and it was ended in sharia.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.