Got Orfy? Urfy? Orfi? Urfi?

[Staashi 371]

What is the big deal? Are we saying some women here have these types of marriages?

You couldnt petition if you were "unregistered" correct?

So, is this directed towards the K-1 applicants? or is this just a read and discuss kinda thing?

Why am i even asking, im lost and it doesnt apply to me so im moving on (feeling selfish today)

I'm just guessing that many that are coming in on K1 visas - their fiances/"husbands" have an orfi marriage so that they can sleep aka "live in sin" together before a "legal" marriage or could be that you get married orfi style to then someday have a justice of the peace marry you in the US and not get married islamically, thus not having to abide by the rules of an islamic marriage. Just my ruminations.

It's ironic, but in Latin America, you have to marry civilly before a religious ceremony can take place - this makes the marriage legal. The Catholic Church will not grant the sacrament of marriage without the civil registry.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

While I understand that you do't intend an endorsement of urfi, I also have very strong feelings about the sad and sorry representation of Islam as a religion with make it up as you go rules that allow for the mitigation of rights and responsibilities in our adherence to faith and the laws of Allah. Islam is a precious gift to us, and I fail to grasp why it is that the past several decades have presented to the west the worst of the faith instead of its highest calling.

Just to be clear, Urfi is the excuse that some Sunnis use to be like Shias and have conditional unions that supposedly allow for sex without commitment. If there are Sunnis who want to be Shia, I say go for it, but do not try to justify an intro of this practice into Sunni Islam as if it is a religious norm. It is not. Sunnis abide by the command of the Prophet not to enter into such unions, and Shia have their sources that negate that command. That the sects have that difference is well known, and the attempt by some Sunni scholars to legitimize urfi is a scam that Sunnis should not allow to go unchallenged.

Before I get into the meat and potatoes of why urfi marriage is not sanctioned in Sunni Islam, I first want to say that I dont undertand why there is such a willingness to adhere to the rules of the US when applying for a visa, but reasons abound when attempting to marginalize Islamic practice, according to Allah and the practice of the prophets.

While there were not governmental entities in the Prophet's day, as we know them now, there were means of authentiating marriages and means of enforcing the rights and responsibilites that the parties have between them.

As you have explained, a couple in an urfi marriage as no protection, and that is not limited to civil protection, for there is no way to enforce the boundaries and obligations Islam requires. That pretty much means they don't exist.

The list you posted regarding the conditions for an Islamically sound marriage are really the bare bones conditions for an Islamically sound WEDDING. The very fact that there is no way to implement rights and responsibilities - inheritance, parental responsibilities, lineage, divorce, etc., make that not an Islamc MARRIAGE at all.

The very fact that Egypt requires the legalization/registration of such a union is evidence that, even tho there was a ceremony, a marriage didn't exist until it was recognized by the state. Muslims should not recommend or enjoin practices that limit or take away the blessings and protections that Allah has offered to us. To do so because it is an available means of fooling yourself into thinking that sex without responsibility is halal is an afront to Isalm.

Islam is a faith that requires faith, discipline, committment, endurance and continutity. None of these are ineret in a marriage that strips away the laws dictated to us by Allah himself. If you cannot apply for a marriage visa in the US because you are not really married in a Muslim country, an immigration board is not a place to come to tell unaware non-Muslims that it's ok to perform a ceremony that doesn't cmplete the union with someone whose culture and religion you do not understand. That is a fake marriage and not the best way to begin a life where cultural and religious misunderstandings are bound to reoccur.

While it is convenient to employ urfi as a means to achieve carnal knowledge, it is an insult to those of us who know better to pronounce yourself married in Islam when you can't even apply for a marriage visa. Islam is the law of God to Muslims,not the law of scholars who often change the law to suit the circumstances of their societal norms. Islam is to not take a back seat to a mortal autority, and by committing urfi and coming home to file a K1, one is only demonstrating that they perceive marriage in Islam as lesser to US immigration laws.

We are not to present marginal MAN'S LAWS, such as a determination by scholars that a half-### marriage is the same as the gift of marriage in Islam. One should, instead, practice the discipline and committment expected of us, and create your union in whole, not in part, so that you will not be ashamed to say that you were so easily persuaded to settle for less and that you present Islam as a faith that finds that to be acceptable.

Edited January 11, 2009 by Virtual wife

[Y's_habibitk 2]

What is the big deal? Are we saying some women here have these types of marriages?

You couldnt petition if you were "unregistered" correct?

So, is this directed towards the K-1 applicants? or is this just a read and discuss kinda thing?

Why am i even asking, im lost and it doesnt apply to me so im moving on (feeling selfish today)

I'm just guessing that many that are coming in on K1 visas - their fiances/"husbands" have an orfi marriage so that they can sleep aka "live in sin" together before a "legal" marriage or could be that you get married orfi style to then someday have a justice of the peace marry you in the US and not get married islamically, thus not having to abide by the rules of an islamic marriage. Just my ruminations.

It's ironic, but in Latin America, you have to marry civilly before a religious ceremony can take place - this makes the marriage legal. The Catholic Church will not grant the sacrament of marriage without the civil registry.

Aha, sounds like a logical guess.

My husband has not much good to say about the K1's living together while the USC is there. He's not judgmental, just says..I wouldnt/couldnt do that.

I would venture to say that this is probably why alot of marriages take place very quickly after the USC arrives to the SO's country. ??

[KHPerfectMatch 1]

What is the big deal? Are we saying some women here have these types of marriages?

You couldnt petition if you were "unregistered" correct?

So, is this directed towards the K-1 applicants? or is this just a read and discuss kinda thing?

Why am i even asking, im lost and it doesnt apply to me so im moving on (feeling selfish today)

I'm just guessing that many that are coming in on K1 visas - their fiances/"husbands" have an orfi marriage so that they can sleep aka "live in sin" together before a "legal" marriage or could be that you get married orfi style to then someday have a justice of the peace marry you in the US and not get married islamically, thus not having to abide by the rules of an islamic marriage. Just my ruminations.

It's ironic, but in Latin America, you have to marry civilly before a religious ceremony can take place - this makes the marriage legal. The Catholic Church will not grant the sacrament of marriage without the civil registry.

No one knows for sure what anyone else's intentions are... and a player is a player is a player for sure...

One distinctive difference between Catholic and Muslim marriage is that Muslim marriage is not a sacrament, it's a contract.

[Staashi 371]

What is the big deal? Are we saying some women here have these types of marriages?

You couldnt petition if you were "unregistered" correct?

So, is this directed towards the K-1 applicants? or is this just a read and discuss kinda thing?

Why am i even asking, im lost and it doesnt apply to me so im moving on (feeling selfish today)

I'm just guessing that many that are coming in on K1 visas - their fiances/"husbands" have an orfi marriage so that they can sleep aka "live in sin" together before a "legal" marriage or could be that you get married orfi style to then someday have a justice of the peace marry you in the US and not get married islamically, thus not having to abide by the rules of an islamic marriage. Just my ruminations.

It's ironic, but in Latin America, you have to marry civilly before a religious ceremony can take place - this makes the marriage legal. The Catholic Church will not grant the sacrament of marriage without the civil registry.

Aha, sounds like a logical guess.

My husband has not much good to say about the K1's living together while the USC is there. He's not judgmental, just says..I wouldnt/couldnt do that.

I would venture to say that this is probably why alot of marriages take place very quickly after the USC arrives to the SO's country. ??

I would think you are correct. I just know that for me and my husband as Catholics, we had to go through a discernment to our priest, classes, a weekend retreat, tons of paperwork etc. Did we have fun when I was in Argentina - hell yeah! Did we sin? Yeah. Have we made up for it? I believe so - we went to confession. It is just one's personal decision. But we knew that even though we married at the courthouse (just to keep things moving immigration wise) we knew we had to get married in the Church.

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

Ok I know two cases of orfi marriage on VJ in MENA both from Egypt. One got the approval for their visa and their spouse is here. How that happened I don't know but I've heard this isn't the only case in MENA like that from Egypt. The other person I know had their spouse taken into the Egyptian Military until they registared their marriage the official way. They didn't even have to be together to do it the lawyer took care of it and suddenly the Egyptian Military let him go right after that. This all happened six months after my own Husband was taken into the Egyptian Military and we'd had the legal minstray of marriage wedding. My husbands a doctor though and this other guy was a high school graduate. Guess they didn't need him after all? I haven't heard any updates on if they released him fully or if he's still waiting or if they are taking him back or if they got their visa or not.

[Staashi 371]

What is the big deal? Are we saying some women here have these types of marriages?

You couldnt petition if you were "unregistered" correct?

So, is this directed towards the K-1 applicants? or is this just a read and discuss kinda thing?

Why am i even asking, im lost and it doesnt apply to me so im moving on (feeling selfish today)

I'm just guessing that many that are coming in on K1 visas - their fiances/"husbands" have an orfi marriage so that they can sleep aka "live in sin" together before a "legal" marriage or could be that you get married orfi style to then someday have a justice of the peace marry you in the US and not get married islamically, thus not having to abide by the rules of an islamic marriage. Just my ruminations.

It's ironic, but in Latin America, you have to marry civilly before a religious ceremony can take place - this makes the marriage legal. The Catholic Church will not grant the sacrament of marriage without the civil registry.

No one knows for sure what anyone else's intentions are... and a player is a player is a player for sure...

One distinctive difference between Catholic and Muslim marriage is that Muslim marriage is not a sacrament, it's a contract.

Catholic marriage is a contract - an indissoluble union. You can never divorce in the Church - never. One can get a divorce civilly, but it won't be recognized in the Church. That's why they normally make it so hard to get married in the Church.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

One distinctive difference between Catholic and Muslim marriage is that Muslim marriage is not a sacrament, it's a contract.

That is a debatable point in Sunni Islam, for marriage is much more than just promises, it is the foundation of an Islamic society, how its citizens relate to God, to each other, and to generations to come. Unlike a civil contract, it is not about something that will happen or that occurs within a fixed period of time. It is also an emotional connection, not the cold bartering of goods or services. Islam requires the maintainace of a family, the passing on of proper inheritance, the right of divorce, the recognized legitimacy of children born of the union. Islamic marriage is intended to create rights and responsibilites between a husband and wife, to ensure justice, not to diminish or negate it. Since urfi doesn't legalize contractual obligations, or create rights or responsibilities that can be enforced or even expected, it is not a valid means of unifying a couple in marriage.

Edited January 11, 2009 by Virtual wife

[KHPerfectMatch 1]

Just to be clear, Urfi is the excuse that some Sunnis use to be like Shias and have conditional unions that supposedly allow for sex without commitment. If there are Sunnis who want to be Shia, I say go for it, but do not try to justify an intro of this practice into Sunni Islam as if it is a religious norm. It is not. Sunnis abide by the command of the Prophet not to enter into such unions, and Shia have their sources that negate that command. That the sects have that difference is well known, and the attempt by some Sunni scholars to legitimize urfi is a scam that Sunnis should not allow to go unchallenged.

You are referring to Mu'taa Marriage, please do not confuse the two, or use the term Orfy to mean Mutaa.. The terms are not interchangeable.

The term "Orfy" did not exist in the time of the Prophet, (PBUH), so he couldn't have possibly commanded anyone not to "enter such a union". ALL MARRIAGES WERE "ORFY". Because all it means is "Unregistered with a Civil Government".

While there were not governmental entities in the Prophet's day, as we know them now, there were means of authentiating marriages and means of enforcing the rights and responsibilites that the parties have between them.

Not registering your marriage with a Government doesn't mean that you don't have a contract. And having your marriage registered with ANY Government won't ensure that your rights are enforced.

As you have explained, a couple in an urfi marriage as no protection, and that is not limited to civil protection, for there is no way to enforce the boundaries and obligations Islam requires. That pretty much means they don't exist.

Getting married in the USA without a prenup or "contract" pretty much means you don't have much in the way of rights (Islamically speaking) either. I am not certain how terms and conditions agreed upon in an contract are enforced in Egypt. But having a "legal" marriage in Egypt doesn't give you Islamic "rights" either. Does that mean a marriage "doesn't exist"? Hardly!

The list you posted regarding the conditions for an Islamically sound marriage are really the bare bones conditions for an Islamically sound WEDDING. The very fact that there is no way to implement rights and responsibilities - inheritance, parental responsibilities, lineage, divorce, etc., make that not an Islamc MARRIAGE at all.

Show me daleel for this. Don't tell me your opinion, show me. Where does it say that you aren't married if the terms and conditions of your contract are not enforceable by a civil government... And show me where you get all of your Islamic "rights" by having a civil marriage in ANY country!

Are you saying there are different rules for a wedding and a marriage??? Don't marriages take place at weddings???????????????

A "marriage" in Islam is when the parties come together to sign the marriage contract. (Kitab) In Egypt a wedding party is held when the couple are ready to consummate the marriage. Sometimes this is the same day, sometimes it's much later, even years.

The very fact that Egypt requires the legalization/registration of such a union is evidence that, even tho there was a ceremony, a marriage didn't exist until it was recognized by the state. Muslims should not recommend or enjoin practices that limit or take away the blessings and protections that Allah has offered to us. To do so because it is an available means of fooling yourself into thinking that sex without responsibility is halal is an afront to Isalm.

Are you under the false impression that the Egyptian government is an Islamic one? And that if they make a civil law that it is some sort of "fatwa"? Are you also under the impression that the Egyptian Ministry that performs "marriages" is going to protect anyone???

And that "sex without responsibility" statement just came flying out of the air without ANY justification. This is an afront to intelligence!

Islam is a faith that requires faith, discipline, committment, endurance and continutity. None of these are ineret in a marriage that strips away the laws dictated to us by Allah himself.

Islam also requires PROOF when someone makes claims about the religion. Where is YOUR PROOF! You haven't given one Ayah or Hadith in this entire post to support your position!

What laws dictated by Allah (swt) were stripped away because a paper wasn't filed in a court?

Hezbi allah wa nam al wakeel

If you cannot apply for a marriage visa in the US because you are not really married in a Muslim country, an immigration board is not a place to come to tell unaware non-Muslims that it's ok to perform a ceremony that doesn't cmplete the union with someone whose culture and religion you do not understand. That is a fake marriage and not the best way to begin a life where cultural and religious misunderstandings are bound to reoccur.

Uh Oh, excuse me, just WHERE is the "Islamic Country"???? And who's telling "Unaware non-Muslims" that it is OK to enter into a "fake" marriage? If you read the article I posted, in Egypt Orfy marriages are not supposed to be done between a Muslim and a Non-Muslim! Or between an Egyptian and a Foreigner!

While it is convenient to employ urfi as a means to achieve carnal knowledge, it is an insult to those of us who know better to pronounce yourself married in Islam when you can't even apply for a marriage visa.

Oh my, I didn't know the ONLY PURPOSES for marriage were "carnal knowledge" and filing for a VISA!!!! You are insulted??? Istaghfirallah... I never would have imagined this..

Islam is the law of God to Muslims,not the law of scholars who often change the law to suit the circumstances of their societal norms. Islam is to not take a back seat to a mortal autority, and by committing urfi and coming home to file a K1, one is only demonstrating that they perceive marriage in Islam as lesser to US immigration laws.

First of all, show me something in Quran that requires registered marriages... or ANY OTHER CONDITION FOR MARRIAGE, that I didn't put.

And then tell me why on earth you can't seperate man's laws (Immigration, Visas, etc.) which are constantly changing and have nothing to do with morality or religion... from Allah's Laws which NEVER CHANGE, and have everything to do with morality.

We are not to present marginal MAN'S LAWS, such as a determination by scholars that a half-### marriage is the same as the gift of marriage in Islam.

Again, back it up sister... where's your daleel for these outrageous statements.. what is "Half anything" about a marriage that simply hasn't been registered with a secular government?

One should, instead, practice the discipline and committment expected of us, and create your union in whole, not in part, so that you will not be ashamed to say that you were so easily persuaded to settle for less and that you present Islam as a faith that finds that to be acceptable.

The ones who settle for less are the women who don't know their rights and don't negotiate a contract and document the agreement into a PreNup if in the USA, or an Islamic Marriage contract (registered or NOT) in Egypt.

If one were to believe what you are posting and simply go to the Ministry in Egypt fill out the forms, pay the fee, and recieve a 1 LE Mahr (worth 17 cents) sign the forms in front of the clerk and his colleague, they would have your version of an "Islamic Marriage" because it was registered with the government... And all their rights would be protected and enforced forever ameen.

Hezbi allah wa nam al wakeel

[Sofiyya 1,687]

You are referring to Mu'taa Marriage, please do not confuse the two, or use the term Orfy to mean Mutaa.. The terms are not interchangeable.

The term "Orfy" did not exist in the time of the Prophet, (PBUH), so he couldn't have possibly commanded anyone not to "enter such a union". ALL MARRIAGES WERE "ORFY". Because all it means is "Unregistered with a Civil Government".

The concept of urfi existed at the time of the Prophet, as you stated, and he ruled against it. You are not correct in saying that there were no means to authenticate marriages during the Prophet's time. There certainly were ways to validate marriages, provide for mediation and dissolution. The Caliph Umar, in refusing to recognize marriages between Muslim men and non-Muslim women demonstrated that there were means of regulating the validity ad invalidity of marriages.

I am not confused between muta and urfi. I know that urfi is the Sunni attempt to mimic muta, and muta is not condoned in Sunni Islam.

Not registering your marriage with a Government doesn't mean that you don't have a contract. And having your marriage registered with ANY Government won't ensure that your rights are enforced.

The are valid marriage contracts and invalid marriage contracts. One that does not provide for maintanance, inheritance, parenting, divorce, and the like, as does an urfi contract, is invalid in Islam. One that is inherently unenforceable is invalid in Islam. What you are saying is that since there is no enforcement or protection of the rights and obligations in Islamic marriage, why bother with Islamic marriage? That is sad, indeed.

Getting married in the USA without a prenup or "contract" pretty much means you don't have much in the way of rights (Islamically speaking) either. I am not certain how terms and conditions agreed upon in an contract are enforced in Egypt. But having a "legal" marriage in Egypt doesn't give you Islamic "rights" either. Does that mean a marriage "doesn't exist"? Hardly!

Urfi marriage doesn't exist in Islam, and your negative view of rights in marriage may hint at why you are fighting so hard to present urfi as legitimate. Essentially, it is legally equivelent to the marriage between a master and a slave in Islamic law. The terms of marriage between free women and men granted far greater rights and value to the union than did a marriage between a slave and her owner. You are advocating a slave/master relationship, and I bet you don't even know it.

Show me daleel for this. Don't tell me your opinion, show me. Where does it say that you aren't married if the terms and conditions of your contract are not enforceable by a civil government... And show me where you get all of your Islamic "rights" by having a civil marriage in ANY country!

Are you saying there are different rules for a wedding and a marriage??? Don't marriages take place at weddings???????????????

A "marriage" in Islam is when the parties come together to sign the marriage contract. (Kitab) In Egypt a wedding party is held when the couple are ready to consummate the marriage. Sometimes this is the same day, sometimes it's much later, even years.

Are you under the false impression that the Egyptian government is an Islamic one? And that if they make a civil law that it is some sort of "fatwa"? Are you also under the impression that the Egyptian Ministry that performs "marriages" is going to protect anyone???

And that "sex without responsibility" statement just came flying out of the air without ANY justification. This is an afront to intelligence!

A nikah is a contract permitting legal sexual intercourse. The word "nikah" means sexual intercourse. An urfi contract is also known as "fvcking papers" because it essentially a salve that is not halal, not binding, not legal and entered into for the purpose of cohabitation and/or sex. Marriage in Islam is more than a contract. You can sign all the nikah contracts you want, but if they do not conform to the laws of continuity in marriage, or the rules of the regional madhab they fail to provide validity. If your contract is not valid, as an urfi contract is not, and you have to marry again to have a real marriage, then all you have is "fvcking papers", and God is not in that.

Conditions of Valid Marriage

Islam also requires PROOF when someone makes claims about the religion. Where is YOUR PROOF! You haven't given one Ayah or Hadith in this entire post to support your position!

What laws dictated by Allah (swt) were stripped away because a paper wasn't filed in a court?

You posted earlier that urfi provides for no rights or protections, so essentially, all rights that could be granted are not even a part of this farce that is being represented as Islamic.

Read Al-Nisa. It's clear that you haven't.

Uh Oh, excuse me, just WHERE is the "Islamic Country"???? And who's telling "Unaware non-Muslims" that it is OK to enter into a "fake" marriage? If you read the article I posted, in Egypt Orfy marriages are not supposed to be done between a Muslim and a Non-Muslim! Or between an Egyptian and a Foreigner!

If they are not to be done between Muslims and non-Muslims or Egyptians and foreigners, why are you defending it on a board consisting primarily of MENA Muslim men marrying non-Muslim foreigners? You should be warning them against it.

First of all, show me something in Quran that requires registered marriages... or ANY OTHER CONDITION FOR MARRIAGE, that I didn't put.

And then tell me why on earth you can't seperate man's laws (Immigration, Visas, etc.) which are constantly changing and have nothing to do with morality or religion... from Allah's Laws which NEVER CHANGE, and have everything to do with morality.

Show me something in the Quran that condones urfi. There are many conditions for marriage that you didn't post because marriage laws vary between schools of jurisprudence.

I do separate man's laws from God's. That's why I remarked at how people are willing to flaunt God's laws regarding marriage, but unwilling to come home and apply for a CR1 or K3 after an urfi ceremony. They KNOW they're not really married, Islamically or otherwise.

Again, back it up sister... where's your daleel for these outrageous statements.. what is "Half anything" about a marriage that simply hasn't been registered with a secular government?

My claims are outrageous? Did you read your original posts, sis? It says a VALID marriage requires a VALID contract. Urfi is not a valid contract if it doesn't allow for the rights and protections that Allah requires. You admit it doesn't do that. Will you also admit that that is a contradiction between what the Quran requires and what Eyptian law allows, as you said in your second post. You post that you can't rely on Egyptian law to protect you while at the same time, citing it a the means of validating urfi. You can't have it both ways.

The ones who settle for less are the women who don't know their rights and don't negotiate a contract and document the agreement into a PreNup if in the USA, or an Islamic Marriage contract (registered or NOT) in Egypt.

If one were to believe what you are posting and simply go to the Ministry in Egypt fill out the forms, pay the fee, and recieve a 1 LE Mahr (worth 17 cents) sign the forms in front of the clerk and his colleague, they would have your version of an "Islamic Marriage" because it was registered with the government... And all their rights would be protected and enforced forever ameen.

It's hard to believe that you are arguing so strongly for a "marriage' which isn't a marriage at all. You pick and choose what about Islam to advocate, and it is sad that this is where you come down.

Who would want to be "married" in a way that grants them no rights and call it Islamic to do so? I remind you of these passages in your second post:

According to the report Legal Rights of Egyptian Women in Theory and Practice by the Communication Group for the Enhancement of the Status of Women in Egypt, "orfy" marriages have the effective of limiting the rights of women in marriage and divorce:

For example, a "orfy" wife is not entitled to alimony in case of divorce or to her husband's pension on his death, and the marriage relationship does not enjoy judicial protection unless it is officially acknowledged by the husband. Moreover, the wife in an "orfy" marriage must institute legal proceedings to establish her children's parentage (1992, 21).

This assessment is corroborated in a Middle East Times article of 6 April 1997, which cites several lawyers and academics, emphasizing the effective loss of women's rights in "gawaz urfi" or "unofficial" marriages. In February 1999, leading Egyptian Imam Shaikh Mohammad Sayed Tantawi declared his opposition to "urfi" marriages because of their secrecy and failure to protect the rights of wives (Sun-Sentinel 11 Feb. 1999; Al-Ahram Weekly 18-24 Feb. 1999).

There is also evidence that the term "customary marriage" is used equivocally, referring in some cases to a Shari'a compliant, but non-registered marriage, and in others to a secret non-registered marriage that does not comply with Shari'a requirements (Al-Ahram Weekly 18-24 Feb. 1999).

In February 1999 it was reported that an amendment to the Personal Status Law of Egypt was proposed which would better protect the rights of women in "urfi" marriages (ibid.). However, in the same report, several jurists suggest that "urfi" marriages that do not comply with the Shari'a ought to be subject to the same penalties as adultery (ibid.).

Do not try to argue the Islamic validity of this loss of rights in marriage. You will fail.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

PS - Urfi predates Islam and was reserved for those who were perceived in social circles to be "lesser women", women such as those past child-bearing age, divorcees, never married non-virgins, slaves and concubines. It is note-worthy that, while the Prophet married among such women, he did not strip them of their rights thru urfi. Islam and the Prophet came to demonstrate the error of jahillyah ways, not to reinforce or reproduce them.

No human can concoct and perform a ceremony that contradicts the beauty, character and value of long term Islamic marriage and deem it valid before Allah. It is obvious that the requirements for a wedding are not all that make a marriage. Contracting a marriage is done in one day, going forward successfully takes much more than that. Trust is an important element that is lost when a woman begins by forfeiting to her man the rights granted to her and their progeny by Allah. She eventually comes to know that she does not have the elevated contractual stipulations granted to other women by men more honorable than her own. That must be a painful way to start. I wouldn't recomend it.

Edited January 11, 2009 by Virtual wife

[KHPerfectMatch 1]

The concept of urfi existed at the time of the Prophet, as you stated, and he ruled against it. PROOF PLEASE...

I am not confused between muta and urfi. I know that urfi is the Sunni attempt to mimic muta, and muta is not condoned in Sunni Islam. Wrong again... Mu'taa is a time specific marriage.. one year, 2 years, etc. There is no time frame in an Orfy marriage.. Orfy means UNREGISTERED WITH A GOVERNMENT

The are valid marriage contracts and invalid marriage contracts. One that does not provide for maintanance, inheritance, parenting, divorce, and the like, as does an urfi contract, is invalid in Islam. PROOF PLEASE... Where is the CONTENT of an Islamic Marriage contract specified in Quran or Hadith? And there is NO LIMIT on what can be written into an "orfy" contract... Orfy means UNREGISTERED WITH A GOVERNMENT

One that is inherently unenforceable is invalid in Islam. PROOF PLEASE... Muslims who marry in MENA countries and have marriage contracts have discovered that when they immigrate to the USA those marriage contracts are not recognized (UNENFORCEABLE) in the USA. Does that mean they are not married here??? What you are saying is that since there is no enforcement or protection of the rights and obligations in Islamic marriage, why bother with Islamic marriage? That is sad, indeed. Don't try to put words in my mouth! That is YOUR statement, NOT MINE. I didn't even come CLOSE to saying that. Off to the corner! 100 Istaghfirallah's for you...

Urfi marriage doesn't exist in Islam, PROOF PLEASE and your negative view of rights in marriage may hint at why you are fighting so hard to present urfi as legitimate. There you go again... I didn't say that at all!

Essentially, it is legally equivelent to the marriage between a master and a slave in Islamic law. The terms of marriage between free women and men granted far greater rights and value to the union than did a marriage between a slave and her owner. You are advocating a slave/master relationship, and I bet you don't even know it. Where do you get this nonsense! You say it's illegal, then it's the legal equivalent... master? slave? Marriage? When a "master" married a "slave", the "slave" was granted FREEDOM! There are no master/slave relationships in marriage!!!!

Masters did not need to marry their slaves in order to have sex.. BUT THERE IS NO 2nd CLASS MARRIAGE in Islam! If a female slave became pregnant her master could either marry her (thereby granting her freedom) or FREE HER.

A nikah is a contract permitting legal sexual intercourse. The word "nikah" means sexual intercourse. An urfi contract is also known as "fvcking papers" because it essentially a salve that is not halal, not binding, not legal and entered into for the purpose of cohabitation and/or sex. Marriage in Islam is more than a contract. You can sign all the nikah contracts you want, but if they do not conform to the laws of continuity in marriage, or the rules of the regional madhab they fail to provide validity. If your contract is not valid, as an urfi contract is not, and you have to marry again to have a real marriage, then all you have is "fvcking papers", and God is not in that.

This is really getting out of hand... Your description of nikah as "_ _ _ _ papers" is HIGHLY OFFENSIVE. And additionally TOTALLY INCORRECT... It is simply the word for MARRIAGE CONTRACT! (even Wikipedia got that one right!)

And the nonsense continues when you came up with the concept of a "regional madhab"????????????? I can't even begin to guess where that came from! Madhab is a school of thought or jurisprudence within Islam! You refer to it as REGIONAL????? Again, Wikipedia got it and you didn't...

Conditions of Valid Marriage

Good link, exact same list of REQUIRED ELEMENTS for MARRIAGE in ISLAM. The author recommends legal papers.... and so do I. But never states that a marriage is INVALID without them.

You posted earlier that urfi provides for no rights or protections, so essentially, all rights that could be granted are not even a part of this farce that is being represented as Islamic.

I said that I didn't know if the terms and conditions of an orfy contract were enforceable in Egypt. I said contacts in my state (even verbal) ARE legally binding. I have since discovered that they ARE enforceable. However even a registered marriage affords only what is covered in the contract, with the exception of providing the standard inheritance and nafaka (as determined by the Judge). How many Orfy Contracts have you read? Precious FEW is my guess. And by the way, there is NO DIFFERENCE between an Orfy or "Un" Orfy contract. Your contract in Egypt stays with you. If your marriage is registered, only the government's form is on file with the ministry, NOT YOUR CONTRACT. Did you call marriage a farce? Ayeb!

Read Al-Nisa. It's clear that you haven't.

Clearly you are treading on thin ice... Another 100 Istaghfirallah's...

If they are not to be done between Muslims and non-Muslims or Egyptians and foreigners, why are you defending it on a board consisting primarily of MENA Muslim men marrying non-Muslim foreigners? You should be warning them against it. I didn't do a nose count before I posted to see how many of each we have here... If the shoe fits wear it... My post was for anyone who is concerned about their marriage being halal. And your post on the other thread castigated ALL orfy marriages. Do you really think that the majority of Non-Muslim women who go to Egypt to meet their SO's are concerned about having an Islamically correct marriage??? Oh for heaven sakes... What would I warn them about related to Orfy marriage? I would rather warn them about mixed faith marriages, even though technically they are halal... (many differences of opinion on that subject too)

Show me something in the Quran that condones urfi. There are many conditions for marriage that you didn't post because marriage laws vary between schools of jurisprudence. I gave you the list and your link said the same thing I did...

NAME ONE DIFFERENCE between the 4 Madhabs related to requirements for a valid marriage, except the one I mentioned about whether or not you need a wali if you have been previously married. Furthermore, no Muslim has to subscribe to ANY Madhab and all are considered equally valid, and you don't have to stick with one for all issues...

I do separate man's laws from God's. That's why I remarked at how people are willing to flaunt God's laws regarding marriage, Proof please... What law is being "flaunted"? but unwilling to come home and apply for a CR1 or K3 after an urfi ceremony. How do you know what everyone is applying for? And the fact that a marriage is not recognized by the USCIS dosn't make it Islamically Incorrect! They KNOW they're not really married, Islamically or otherwise. There you go again reading minds... I don't think this is Islamically correct...

My claims are outrageous? Did you read your original posts, sis? Even better, I WROTE THEM! It says a VALID marriage requires a VALID contract. Urfi is not a valid contract if it doesn't allow for the rights and protections that Allah requires.You can put anything that both parties agree to in your contract. Your contract is no different whether you file a form with the government or not. The contract is whatever you make it! You admit it doesn't do that. I can't admit something I didn't say! Will you also admit that that is a contradiction between what the Quran requires and what Eyptian law allows, as you said in your second post. You post that you can't rely on Egyptian law to protect you while at the same time, citing it a the means of validating urfi. You can't have it both ways. You can't seem to grasp the concept that whether or not anything can be enforced at a later date has no bearing on it's validity at the time it is entered into.

It's hard to believe that you are arguing so strongly for a "marriage' which isn't a marriage at all. You pick and choose what about Islam to advocate, and it is sad that this is where you come down. But that's YOUR opinion, not mine... don't feel sad..

Who would want to be "married" in a way that grants them no rights You are making stuff up again...you have whatever rights you put in your contract... it's in YOUR hand.... and call it Islamic to do so? I remind you of these passages in your second post:

According to the report Legal Rights of Egyptian Women in Theory and Practice by the Communication Group for the Enhancement of the Status of Women in Egypt, "orfy" marriages have the effective of limiting the rights of women in marriage and divorce:

For example, a "orfy" wife is not entitled to alimony in case of divorce or to her husband's pension on his death, and the marriage relationship does not enjoy judicial protection unless it is officially acknowledged by the husband. Moreover, the wife in an "orfy" marriage must institute legal proceedings to establish her children's parentage (1992, 21). None of these issues make the marriage "haram"... and are exactly the reasons I am totally opposed to living in Egypt with an Orfy marriage only. And I'd never marry a man orfy or not that didn't acknowledge our relationship!

This assessment is corroborated in a Middle East Times article of 6 April 1997, which cites several lawyers and academics, emphasizing the effective loss of women's rights in "gawaz urfi" or "unofficial" marriages. In February 1999, leading Egyptian Imam Shaikh Mohammad Sayed Tantawi declared his opposition to "urfi" marriages because of their secrecy and failure to protect the rights of wives (Sun-Sentinel 11 Feb. 1999; Al-Ahram Weekly 18-24 Feb. 1999). KEY WORD - SECRET ... THAT'S A DEAL BREAKER... IF IT'S SECRET IS ISN'T HALAL...

There is also evidence that the term "customary marriage" is used equivocally, referring in some cases to a Shari'a compliant, but non-registered marriage, and in others to a secret non-registered marriage that does not comply with Shari'a requirements (Al-Ahram Weekly 18-24 Feb. 1999). YOU MUST HAVE MISSED THE PART ABOUT SHARI'A COMPLIENT NON-REGISTERED MARRIAGES!

In February 1999 it was reported that an amendment to the Personal Status Law of Egypt was proposed which would better protect the rights of women in "urfi" marriages (ibid.). However, in the same report, several jurists suggest that "urfi" marriages that do not comply with the Shari'a ought to be subject to the same penalties as adultery (ibid.).OOPS YOU MISSED IT AGAIN.... THERE ARE SOME THAT COMPLY AND SOME THAT DO NOT!!!!!

Do not try to argue the Islamic validity of this loss of rights in marriage. You will fail.

THERE YOU GO AGAIN... Putting words in my mouth... I never ONCE advocated for the loss of rights in marriage! You have failed to make the tiniest dent in my opinion... about the criteria for Halal Marriage in Islam. I never have been an advocate for marrying Orfy is you can avoid it. But it is NOT HARAM.

You have misrepresented, twisted and misconstrued most of what I have posted.

You are frankly misinformed and sorely off base about much of what you are writing about. (Especially when it comes to my intentions, oh wait, that AND the SUBJECT!!!!)

I was warned that you would attack me mercilessly... and turn a discussion into a PERSONAL attack... which is exactly what you did... (now I get the popcorn and cookies comments..)

I can hear them now "Karmella is going to get run over by a VW... let's sit and watch!!!" Well I don't need to keep letting you back up and go over me again and again... so I'll get out of the road and let you keep going along your merry (destructive) way...

Volumes of rhetoric is no substitute for facts. And ignoring facts, even your own, is really just weird.

"Marriage (nikah) is a solemn and sacred social contract between bride and groom. This contract is a strong covenant (mithaqun Ghalithun) as expressed in Quran 4:21). The marriage contract in Islam is not a sacrament. It is revocable." From Marriage and Family in Islam by Sheik Mohammad Mazhar Hussaini

For calling Nikah "....... papers" I'd recommend about 1,000 Istaghfirallahs...

Hezbi Allah....................................

[KHPerfectMatch 1]

PS - Urfi predates Islam and was reserved for those who were perceived in social circles to be "lesser women", women such as those past child-bearing age, divorcees, never married non-virgins, slaves and concubines. It is note-worthy that, while the Prophet married among such women, he did not strip them of their rights thru urfi. Islam and the Prophet came to demonstrate the error of jahillyah ways, not to reinforce or reproduce them.

No human can concoct and perform a ceremony that contradicts the beauty, character and value of long term Islamic marriage and deem it valid before Allah. It is obvious that the requirements for a wedding are not all that make a marriage. Contracting a marriage is done in one day, going forward successfully takes much more than that. Trust is an important element that is lost when a woman begins by forfeiting to her man the rights granted to her and their progeny by Allah. She eventually comes to know that she does not have the elevated contractual stipulations granted to other women by men more honorable than her own. That must be a painful way to start. I wouldn't recomend it.

Did you make this stuff up??? If so, Your imagination is working overtime! If not, please quote your source.

[bhajishah 4]

I was watching on the history channel last week , they were doing specials on the seven deadly sins. Pride was the worst, it mad Shaytan fall and all other sins can fall under pride (I can do anyting coz im important) they even showed the Amish on how they do away with things and belongings that make them more boastful and prideful, however they easily fall into competing on who is the most humblest, thereofore making them guilty of the sin of pride. (ie God loves me more because my buggy is more primitive than your buggy)...

[Ihavequestions 419]

I would think you are correct. I just know that for me and my husband as Catholics, we had to go through a discernment to our priest, classes, a weekend retreat, tons of paperwork etc. Did we have fun when I was in Argentina - hell yeah! Did we sin? Yeah. Have we made up for it? I believe so - we went to confession. It is just one's personal decision. But we knew that even though we married at the courthouse (just to keep things moving immigration wise) we knew we had to get married in the Church.

Actually, if two Catholics want to marry and there is no Priest around, they can marry each other and just do the formalities later.

It's true.

Look it up.

Catholic marriage is a contract - an indissoluble union. You can never divorce in the Church - never. One can get a divorce civilly, but it won't be recognized in the Church. That's why they normally make it so hard to get married in the Church.

Catholics divorce and divorce is absolutely allowed under certain conditions (ie., adultery).