Why can't a Muslimah marry a Jew of a Christian? (Split)

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I don't understand your question, dearest brother.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

It strictly prohibits idolaters, and it does not mention whether Muslim women can or cannot marry People of the Book. However, there is great wisdom here why it is not mentioned.

Allow Qrratagai sister to bring the verses, I will show you what I mean.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

What and where is the wisdom?

I am waiting for my beloved sister Qrratagai to post the verses. If she does not, then I will post them and then we can all analyze those verses. I am with you guys, I will help you.

I am just waiting for my sister.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

mwmn doesnt that make us inferior?

Dearest sister,

It has nothing to do with inferiority or superiority, it has to do with human nature and the purpose of life.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

No, dearest sister.

There is no compulsion in religion. <----This is a commandment of the Quran.

You can marry anyone whom you wish sister. ANYONE.

Islam gives you reasoning to help you reach your purpose of life. Nothing else. If you have no care for the purpose of your creation then Allah says that there is no compulsion for you to follow religion.

That said, you can marry a non-Muslim if you wish, but what is the purpose of marrying such men?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Where is the contradiction my dear sister?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Bring those posts, please.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Dear sister,

Marrying idolators is strictly forbidden. The verses are clear about this, whether it is a woman and or a man. However, when it comes to the People of the Book it only mentions that a Muslim man can marry a woman from the People of the Book. Nonetheless, preference is still given that Muslim men should marry Muslim women. That said, the reason is because a Muslim man will not lose his faith, because a man is usually more dominant. A Muslim woman, if she wishes, can marry a man from the People of the Book because the prohibition is not mentioned. However, it brings to question why was it not mentioned.

The reason being is not to encourage it for she will lose her religion and go off the path of what Islam has taught of what the purpose of life is. However, you might find a sister who is dominant and thinks that she can control her husband and dictate what the religion of the household should. If this is the case even then it is impossible, because for a Muslim man to marry a woman from the People of the Book he still has to perform an Islamic marriage. For a Muslim woman there are no guidelines as to what she should follow, therefore it indicates that it is not allowed. Unless, the sister, manages to bring a Christian and Jewish man to perform an Islam marriage and to abide by Islamic traditions, which I find impossible.

Do you see how beautifully the Quran prohibits something without actually prohibiting it?

[Roshina]

Dearest sister, bring all the verses that talk about marriage. Let us analyze them together.

My sister, don't look at the Quran like a novel that you pick up from the bookstore. Without the sunnah of the Prophet (saw) one can never understand the Quran. Therefore, please have fear of Allah when you analyze the Quran and make sure that you are in-line with his (saw) interpretation.

Anyhow, bring all the verses and let us see what they say.

I like to read the Quran in Arabic and compare the Arabic phrases/words used for both women and men, and then I like to compare the translations. You'll be amazed that oftentimes, they're translated differently. One example of this difference is the term "nushooz." (Ref. to verses 4:34 and 4:128 for details.)

Then what I like to do, and I think this is VERY important, is to check what classical scholars, interpreters, jurists, etc. have defined the meanings of those verses and what their exegeses say. After that, I look into contemporary ones. Since my studies deal with such verses and their interpretations, both contemporary and classical ones, it's a part of my life -- and quite an exciting and worthwhile one.

That's just to say that I'm not the type of person to read something and say, "Okay, everyone else is wrong, and what I'm concluding is right, so bah. End of story." No, I've made it an obligation upon myself to consider many possible interpretations. Since they don't often concern me as an individual (e.g., I'm not in a situation in which I've to decide whether to marry a non-Muslim man or a Muslim man), I don't have to make any individual decisions. BUT they're a major part of my study and my future profession, so I in a way have no choice but to understand all sides as thoroughly as I can.

Now, since you and I would both be using the same Quran, would you mind taking on the responsibility to compile the Quranic verses that talk about marriage, please? I'm in the middle of an assignment right now so can't do it, but I REALLY wanna discuss this. It's important to me.

Please also include the actual Arabic (in large readable fonts) because, to me, that's more important than the translations. There are some websites that offer both the original Arabic as well as English translations. Lemme know if you've difficulty finding those. I can help.

Thanks, wror gula! Looking forward to it now!

[Roshina]

mwmn doesnt that make us inferior?

I can understand your point of view, Jasmine Guley.

In a society and at an era in history in which marriage is overall seen as a kingdom where the husband is dominant (I've seen this word used throughout this discussion, interesting; I thought we'd gone passed this idea now, but I guess not yet), it'd make sense to disallow women to marry men from other religions. But if the marriage is seen more as something that needs hard work to be kept intact and hard work required by both partners, not just the wife, then it makes no sense. If they're supposed to be garments of each other like the Quran says they are, then they'd work together and decide together what values the kids will hold, what they'll call themselves, how they'll identify themselves, and so on. No doubt, however, that for simplicity's sake, we should marry people who share our exact values so that we don't have to go go through any complications in marriage or when the time comes to raise our kids.

We're also clearly denying that the wife is the one who has more -- if not all -- say in how the children are raised. If the mother speaks Pashto, the kids are bound to speak Pashto; if the mother is Muslim, the kids are bound to be Muslims.

HOWEVER! Reality, experiences, and observations teach us that that's not always the case. I've a Peshawari friend whose mother is Christian and whose father is Muslim. The kids are all Muslims.
I've a classmate whose mother is Christian but father is Muslim; he and his siblings are all Christians.
A close friend of mine is an agnostic while her mother is Muslim (this friend has vowed never to be a Muslim no matter what) and her father is a Christian. Her siblings follow different religions, and her eldest brother is an atheist.

So for us to say, "Women are forbidden to marry non-Muslims because the husband usually decides what the religion of the children will be," -- like it or not -- subjugates the woman by NOT giving her the power to raise her kids according to her wishes, her faith, her culture, her values, etc. And this is untrue for many, many women.

Also, facts remain facts: The Quran never tells women that they cannot marry men from the People of the Book; it only tells men that they CAN. If we're gonna decide that Christians and Jews are disbelievers, then we have to admit that the Quran contradicts itself when it says "never marry disbelievers" but at the same time makes it clear that men CAN marry them, as long as they're chaste.

Now, what does "chaste" mean? Scholars have not come to a conclusion on the definition of "chaste."

Classical Muslim scholars spent hours and hours debating what every verse, even certain terms, mean, and we're sitting here talking about Quranic verses as if everything's conclusive. If things were this simple, we wouldn't have any disagreements, and all would be well. Sure, one can say, "Well, things ARE simple, but we just complicated them FOR ourselves," but who said they're simple? For us to agree that things are simple, we'd have to agree on what a certain verse means -- and that's not happened during the last 1400 years, so . . . yeah.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I waited for you, but then I just gave the answer. Look at post 49.

[Roshina]

By the way, I've seen a thousand different translations of verse 2:221, which is the most commonly-quoted verse used to justify the misconception that the Quran prohibits Muslim women from marrying non-Muslim men (including Christians and Jews.)

We are utterly DENYING the fact that the verse starts out telling men not to marry polytheist women (literally, mushrikoon) until they believe; then it says Muslim women may also not marry polytheist men (mushrikoon) until they believe.

Why, oh why, is it that we quote it half and say, "Seee? The Quran DOESN'T let women marry People of the Book!"

The command is the exact same to both men and women. Let's please, please quote the verses in full context in the future, especially something as misconceived as this one.

Anyway, here are the different translations of the same verse.

- Islam-qa.com uses the following (half!) verse to say that Muslim women are forbidden from marrying all non-Muslim men, including Jews and Christians.

“And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al Mushrikun (atheists) till they believe (in Allah Alone)” (Al-Baqarah: 221)

The Arabic term used is "mushrik." They translated it to "atheists" and even added "in Allah alone," although that's not clear in the Arabic text at all.

Mohammad Asad's translation says:

AND DO NOT marry women who ascribe divinity to aught beside God ere they attain to [true] belief: for any believing bondwoman [of God] is certainly better than a woman who ascribes divinity to aught beside God, even though she please you greatly. And do not give your women in marriage to men who ascribe divinity to aught beside God ere they attain to [true] belief: for- any believing bondman [of God] is certainly better than a man who ascribes divinity to aught beside God, even though he please you greatly. [Such as] these invite unto the fire, whereas God invites unto paradise, and unto [the achievement of] forgiveness by His leave; and He makes clear His messages unto mankind, so that they might bear them in mind.

Pickthall translates it to:

Wed not idolatresses till they believe; for lo! a believing bondwoman is better than an idolatress though she please you; and give not your daughters in marriage to idolaters till they believe, for lo! a believing slave is better than an idolater though he please you. These invite unto the Fire, and Allah inviteth unto the Garden, and unto forgiveness by His grace, and expoundeth His revelations to mankind that haply they may remember.

Yusuf Ali:

Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But God beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise.

There are more. Check out Compared Translations of the meaning of the Quran - 2:221

I only chose the ones that are supposed to be the most popular (or most trusted) translations.

So, my question is:

When the command is to both men and women, why do we always ignore or cut out or deny the part where the exact same command is given to men?

And when the Quran CLEARLY distinguishes between the People of the Book and those non-Muslims who are not People of the Book, who are we to sit here and say, "No, that verse applies to People of the Book, too"?

My point remains proven: The Quran tells both men and women not to marry disbelievers/mushriks, BUT it makes it clear to men that they can marry "chaste" women from the People of the Book while never saying clearly whether Muslim women can marry "chaste" men from the People of the Book or not.

[Roshina]

I waited for you, but then I just gave the answer. Look at post 49.

Oh! So sorry about that, wrora. I was busy.

[Roshina]

A Muslim woman, if she wishes, can marry a man from the People of the Book because the prohibition is not mentioned.

Exactly! Now, we should not make something forbidden upon ourselves unless it's strictly stated as forbidden. Yes, yes, hadiths might say don't marry them. But since it's the Quran we'd been wondering whether it allows or disallows, our point has been made.

You gave your reasons for why it must not have been mentioned by God, but I'm sure that the reasonable person that you are, you admit that that MAY not be the actual reason at all. Perhaps it is, but we won't know. What's important is that we don't mix that reason with God's words or with actual facts. It certainly doesn't apply in all cases, although they might be very few.

We all agree, again and again, that it's best to marry your own people so as to keep things simple for yourselves, but when people tell us that "the Quran forbids women to marry Christians and Jews," they need to read the Quranic verses that prohibit certain marriages and allow others.

And we also need to read them in full, including the Arabic text, before accepting or rejecting them as true or untrue.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Dear sister, you can't just quote that. You have to reply to the whole thing.