format_quote Originally Posted by
strider
But the thing is, Christians and Jews are not mushriks. Christianity and Judaism are monothestic faiths, but i think you will be hard pushed to find a Christian woman who doesn't associate Jesus to be the son of God.
Sister, you say christians and jews are not mushriks, then you say you'd be hard pushed to find a Christian woman who doesn't associate Jesus partners with Allah. How else do you define a mushrik then? :)
format_quote Originally Posted by
Ahmed Al Ansari
:sl:
Sister, I will not debate issues of Fiqh as there are differences of opinion, and there are more pressing matters. And the majority opinion of the Sahaba and the Scholors was that it is permissible. And in their differing over a matter, there is a wide mercy for us therein. So before you go on and try to argue your point further, bear in mind that they already knew all that you and I are saying and yet they still held it permissible. And times then are very different then the times now, they lived under a Muslim Khilafa, whilst today there is none. That makes the greatest difference between them and us, and the reason why it is inadvisable now. Things are not simply Halal and Haram. Things permissible may be Makrooh (disliked), yet they are allowed. Abu Bakr r.a. used to say: “What earth will hold me and what heaven will protect me if I say something concerning the Book of Allah which I do not know.” So before we go on and say if a Quranic verse is subject or not to another verse, lets ask ourselves are we qualified to say that?
:w:
No bro, plz let's debate lol..jk... as far as we're concerned, there are differences of opinion. But there is no difference in the interpretation of the Quranic verses amongst the scholars right?
According to scholars it was a straight interpretation that such marriages are permissable. There was no in-between, no makrooh, no 'inadvisable' until today. If such marriages were makrooh or as you say it's not simply a case of halal and haram, then it would've been stated in the Quran. Surah al Bakarah has explicitly stated the laws regarding marriage and divorce.
Let's take verse Q:2:234 as an example of how clear and explicit the is regarding marriage issues. This verse deals with wet-nurses. (last sentence)
"And if you desire to engage a wet-nurse for your children, there shall be no blame on you, provided you pay what you have agreed to pay in a fair manner. And fear Allah and know that Allah sees what you do."
Such is the explicitness in which Allah has decreed what is permissable for us.
*****
If muslim-non muslim marriages were inadvisable it would be stated in the Quran, considering a good part of surah al Bakarah deals with matrimonial issues.
What's more is that if we go to verse 2:235, it speaks of a widows mourning period of 4 months and 10 days. To abide by islamic shariah laws's therefore a wife has to be a muslim. A non-muslim woman cannot be forced or expected to abide by these laws, and she may get married within the idah period and if pregnant, not know who the father of her child is.
****
This verse also proves that the wife must be a muslim.
"The good women in the absence of their husbands guard their rights as Allah has enjoined upon them to be guarded."
(4:34)
'as Allah has enjoined upon
them' <~~ does a non muslim wife believe in Allah or obey His commands? Only a muslim wife can do that.
Furthermore, Allah instructed in the Quran to man to save himself and his family from hell-fire. In the case where the wife is non-muslim, maybe drinks alcohol, maybe believes Jesus is God and perhaps engages in other haram stuff, how is the husband supposed to try and save her from hell-fire? Considering wine is permissable for Christians and jews, he's going to have a heck of a time try to keep her away from the odd tipple, isn't he? :giggling:
“O you who believe, save yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is men and stones over which are (appointed) angels, stern and severe, who flinch not (from executing) the commands they receive from God, but do (precisely what) they are commanded.” (Quran 66:6)
So unless both husband and wife are muslim, a husband will have to compromise his deen in one way or another. Can you see a horrible picture emerging?
***
Ok, one more question..
I've seen a lot of Modz and Admins declare many a time that Bukhari is authentic. Correct? Then why is this hadith being ignored?
Then what do you say about the hadith of Ibn Umar (in my previous posts).
According to that hadith Ibn Umar was asked what he thought about marrying a Christian/jew woman and his reply was, "Allah has made it unlawful for the believers to marry ladies who ascribe partners in worship to Allah." (edited)
According to Ibn Umar (may Allah's peace and blessing be upon him) marriage to christians and jews is not permissable, never mind inadvisable.
Only in this age have scholars declared it inadvisable, yet the Quran clearly stated 1400 years ago, not for today, but for all time, that disbelievers will lead us astray. Perhaps in times to come when scholars see 'inadvisable' is not good enough, they may even declare it impermissable. Then who is going to stand up and say the Quran permits it?
So before we go on and say if a Quranic verse is subject or not to another verse, lets ask ourselves are we qualified to say that?
"Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?" 6:114
Allah gave the Quran to the whole of Mankind. And neither is it a puzzle which can be deciphered by scholars only.
:w: