Are Moslem women free to marry christian men ? I believe so. Here's why

88 views
Skip to first unread message

phil

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

I am a Christian, not particularly dogmatic. I appreciate and read a lot
of philosophy and religious texts. I have been studying the Quran for a
number of years now, and I can appreciate some of its beauty and poetry,
to the limits that are imposed from the fact that I do not read Arabic.
One argument I cannot accept as valid, though, is that certain things
are not translateable.
I have various translations, and even if they differ in their choice of
words, the message and the meaning is very consistent. After all, isn't
this text for all of humanity ? Let's not get into Arab chauvinism.

I have seen some of my friends in difficult situations when getting
romantically involved with moslem women. Here's my opinion.

I have always been dumbfounded by the traditional interdiction
that prevents moslem women from having meaningful relationships
with non-moslem, monotheist men.

The confusion in my opinion comes from the misinterpretation of
verse 221 in the second surat (the cow). Some translations speak
of 'polytheists' as being the forbidden husbands, other speak of
'associators' (i.e. those who make use of a physical representation
of divinity, an act totally in opposition with the transcendance of
God, as expressed by islamic theology).

Never does one see in the Quran a definite interdiction that women
cannot love and marry monotheistic believers, be they Christians.
Women seem to be treated with equality in the Quran, so why would
men only have the opportunity to seek a sister-soul ?

Isn't Islam embracing Christians ?

In my view, the problem, as always is not in the text, it is in the
hearts and minds of the followers. Religions are pure, their followers
are infinitely less so. The latent machismo that is perpetuated in
moslem circles does not come
from Islam, but from the earthly cultures that predate the advent of
Islam.

Please comment. In a dialectical manner. Remember that the first moslem
philosophers were great admirerers of Aristotle, and that we get most of
Aristotle from Arab manuscripts. So there IS a dialectical tradition in
Islam, a rich one that should put to shame the blunt rethoric of the
gun-toting peasants that make all the noise in the world. Unfortunately,
these are the jerks that yell out loud that they're moslem, and these
are the jerks that most non-moslem associate with Islam. As the Quran
wisely states (I paraphrase), just because you turn your face towards
Mecca, does not a Muslim make you.


Altway001

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

In article <6kkg5b$nr$1...@shell3.ba.best.com>, phil <ab...@dial.pipex.com>
writes:

"One argument I cannot accept as valid, though, is that certain things
are not translateable. I have various translations, and even if they differ in
their choice of words, the message and the meaning is very consistent. After
all, isn't
this text for all of humanity ? Let's not get into Arab chauvinism.

Reply :-
You can certainly get some of the meaning from reading the translations of the
Quran and comparing several of them. The Quran, however, is not really paper
with words in ink, but a recitation. Its transforming force lies in this. The
meaning and understanding one acquires from the recitation is not the same as
the intellectual meaning one gets by reading - it affects the heart, i.e the
feelings as well as the intellect - A form of gnosis rather than cognition.
This is untranslatable. However, some people who know only a little arabic, but
who follow the english translation while the recitation is taking place also
find that they are affected. On the other hand there are people with an
anti-islamic bias or a reserve who are not affected at all.

"I have seen some of my friends in difficult situations when getting
romantically involved with moslem women. Here's my opinion. I have always
been dumbfounded by the traditional interdiction that prevents moslem women
from having meaningful relationships with non-moslem, monotheist men.

Never does one see in the Quran a definite interdiction that women
cannot love and marry monotheistic believers, be they Christians.
Women seem to be treated with equality in the Quran, so why would
men only have the opportunity to seek a sister-soul ?
Isn't Islam embracing Christians ?

Reply :-
Muslims may marry People of the Book i.e Christians or Jews. Perhaps the word
Book or Scripture could be extended to any religion based on a Scripture. But
it usually understood that the person does not worship idols and does not
associate partners with God. It is likely that this will create great tension
in the marriage unless of course the people concerned do much care about their
religion. But then they would not take any notice of the rules either. Most
objections are not on religious grounds but on cultural, social, economic or
political grounds.

"In my view, the problem, as always is not in the text, it is in the
hearts and minds of the followers. Religions are pure, their followers
are infinitely less so. The latent machismo that is perpetuated in
moslem circles does not come from Islam, but from the earthly cultures that
predate the advent of Islam.

Reply :-
I am glad that there are people who realises all this. It is human beings who
have Fallen. Religions have come to transform sinners, to improve them, but
suceed to various degrees depending on how seriously the followers understand
and undertake the discipline.

H.S.Aziz


For more Info read "The Alternative Way"
www.argonet.co.uk/education/haziz


Syed Yusuf

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

Thus spake phil (please don't post email addresses):

Muslim women are forbidden from marrying non-muslim men.
a Muslim husband will not obstruct his Jewish or Christian wife's
practice. Islam cannot restrain a non-muslim husband from obstructing
his wife's religion. Exceptions prove the rule.

--
Syed Yusuf
http://www.uidaho.edu/~yusuf921
__

"If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the
police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our
rulers. Only the govern- ment--and a few outlaws. I intend to be among
the outlaws."

--Edward Abbey (1927-1989), _Abbey's Road,_ p.39_(Plume, 1979)


Osman Ullah

unread,
May 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/29/98
to

On 28 May 1998 17:43:09 -0700, yusu...@newshound.csrv.uidaho.edu

(Syed Yusuf) has been reported to have said:

|| Thus spake phil (please don't post email addresses):
||
|| Muslim women are forbidden from marrying non-muslim men.
|| a Muslim husband will not obstruct his Jewish or Christian wife's
|| practice. Islam cannot restrain a non-muslim husband from obstructing
|| his wife's religion. Exceptions prove the rule.

With all due respect brother, his whole post was to point out that he
feels this is not true. All you did was say it was, without giving
and quotes from the quran or hadith to back it up.

Wasalam,

Osman
|=------------------------------------------=|
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte213f


Syed Yusuf

unread,
May 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/30/98
to

Thus spake Osman Ullah (please don't post email addresses):

> feels this is not true. All you did was say it was, without giving
> and quotes from the quran or hadith to back it up.


Non-Muslim men not to marry Muslim
60:10
O you who believe! When believing women come to you as emigrants,
examine them, Allbh knows best as to their Faith, then if you ascertain
that they are true believers, send them not back to the disbelievers,
they are not lawful (wives) for the disbelievers nor are the
disbelievers lawful (husbands) for them

--
There are two major products to come out of Berkeley:
LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence.


phil

unread,
May 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/30/98
to

Your comment on the dynamic, spoken aspect of the coranic revelation is
well taken. I have experienced one morning, in a state of half-sleep, a
strange and beautiful event that had the effect of a shining light in my
mind. I was sleeping on the roof of a house in a remote village at the
border of Mali and Senegal. The local mosque was right next to the roof
and the five o'clock prayer was recited, then followed by a very long
and hypnotic repetition of "la-ilallah...". I felt like a bystander
watching the sun rise. Only on another occasion did I experience a
similar effect - on the third day of a funeral, at a friend's house, the
whole Quran was recited by five or six men. We mourned and the
experience reminded me of some of the best moments in Christian sacred
music- a combination of deep sorrow and pure joy.

Yet, there is an earthly meaning in the Quran, one that has material
implications. The 'illumination' that may come from hearing the Quran in
all its verbal splendour I believe is real, and a phenomenon probably
similar to the Bhuddist mantras. This illumination may well sustain and
harmonise the meaning of the written text.

My reading of the Quran reveals to me an ardent conviction about the
unicity of mankind and God. It is this unicity that is to be explained
and promoted, and it is the nihilists that have to be fought. The Quran
asks one fundamental thing to be believed, and derives all other
behaviours from this simple, central belief. By placing the notion of
universality at the center of mankind, the Quran rejects divisions based
on any material criteria. Those the Quran calls the fools and the blind
are those vehement sectarians who believe they are pious because they
practice a religion- that their religiosity is established in the
symbols that they identify with. If you follow this logic, then all the
external symbols of Islamic culture are so many fetishes and blasphemous
pretentions. Not only the visual elements, but the customs as well. That
is, only if they are identified with the divine. And more often than
not, this is the case; the multiplication of the symbols in Islamic
culture is a modern form of fetishism that only serves to divide people
and make Islam look like a regional folkloric manifestation. It is only
in the utmost dematerialisation that the message of the Quran can attain
its true universality. Mankind is far more diverse than what
arabo-centric devouts would imagine. The founding principle of Islam is
simple but terse, and it demands a high degree of selflessness to be
understood.

I cannot imagine that the role of women that is prescribed by
traditional persian, berber and arabic cultures is what is prescribed in
the Quran. It simply does not survive scrutiny. Those who sheepishly
follow the collective rule without reading and thinking for themselves
are blind and pathetic. God have mercy on them.

I am what the Quran calls a Mumin-A believer, although I do not call
myself a Muslim. I have yet to be called by fate to become a
practitioner. I am merely a friend and supporter of my muslim brothers
and sisters. I have grown up in a family that advocated very simple
principles based on compassion; political ideas like Pluralism are what
I was raised on.

I have too many things to do to yet become a devout of any practice, I
simply try to act with righteousness and compassion, and for the rest I
am respectfully skeptical. Skepticism is an doctrine of honesty, an
intellectual pause, while things take on a meaning - better than
believing readily in things one doesn't understand or feel.

I am glad there are intellectuals out there with both a brain and a
heart.
Good will can change the world.

Phil


IBN ADAM

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to


The Prohibition of a Muslim Woman's Marrying a Non- Muslim Man

It is haram for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man,regardless of
whether he of the People of the Book or not. We have alredy mentioned the
saying-of Allah ,
... And do not marry (your girls) to idolaters until they believe .... (2:221)

And He said concerning the immigrant Muslim women,
... Then if you know them to be Believers, do not send them back to the
unbelievers. They are not halal for them (as wives), nor are they halal for
them (as husbands). (60:10)

No text exist which makes exceptions for the People of the Book; hence, on the
basis of the above verses, there is a consensus among Muslims concerning this
prohibition.
Thus, while a Muslim man is permitted to marry a Christian or Jewish woman,
a Muslim woman is not allowed to marry a Christian or Jewish man. There are
many sound reasons for this defference. First, the man is the head of the
household, the one who maintain the family, and he is responsible for his wife.
And while Islam guarantees freedom of belief and practice to the Christian or
Jewish wife of a Muslim, safeguarding her rights according to her own faith,
other religions, such as Judaism and Christianity, do notguarantee the wife of
different faith freedom of belief and practice, nor they safeguard her rights.
Since this is the case, how can Islam take chances on the future of its
daughters by giving them into hands of people who neither honor their religion
nor are concerned to protect their rights?

A marriage between a man and woman of different faiths can be based only on
the husband's respect for his wife's beliefs; otherwise a good relationship can
never develop. Now, the Muslim believes that both Judaism and Chtistianity
originated in divine revelation, although later distortions were introduced
into them. He also believes that God revealed the Taurat to Moses and the
Injeel (Gospel) to Jesus,' and that both Moses and Jesus (peace be on them)
were among the messengers of Allah who were among the messengers of Allah who
were distinguished by their steadfast determination. Accordingly, the Christian
or Jewish wife of a Muslim lives under the protection of a man who respects the
basic tenets of her faith, her scripture, and her prophets, while in contrast
to this the Jew or Christian recognizes neither the divine origin of Islam, its
Book, or its Prophet (peace be on him). How then could a Muslim woman live with
such a man, while her religion requires of her the observance of certain
worships, duties, and obligations, as well as certain prohibitions. It would be
impossible for the Muslim woman to retain her respect for her beliefs as well
as to practice her religion properly if she were opposed in this regard by the
master of the house at every step.

It will be realized from this that Islam is consistent with itself in
prohibiting the Muslim man to marry a mushrik woman, for since Islam is
absolutely opposed to shirk, it would obviously be impossible for two such
people to live together in harmony and love.

Cher...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to

What you are saying in regard to Muslims being allowed to marry Christian
women is very misleading to both Muslim men and the Christian women who
desire to marry each other. Islam says a Muslim man can marry a Christian
woman but what does that mean? You say "Islam guarantees freedom of belief

and practice to the Christian or Jewish wife of a Muslim, safeguarding her
rights according to her own faith," but ask a few questions and see if this
is true.

Can a Christian woman truly practice her faith in such a marriage? Will a
Muslim man truly respect her beliefs, scriptures, and practices? How can a
Muslim husband who believes the Christian scriptures are distorted allow his
wife to practice her faith? Is she free to openly display a Bible and read
aloud from it? Can she pray aloud in Jesus' name? Is she free to attend
church services that worship Jesus as commanded by her scripture? Is she
free to associate on a regular basis with other Christian believers as
directed by her scriptures? Is she free to tell everyone, including Muslims,
the Good News of Jesus the Messiah laid out in her scripture as commanded by
Jesus himself? Is she free to sing Christian songs and listen to Christian
music in their home? Is she free to give money to the church as prescribed
in her scriptures? Does she have freedom to teach their children
Christianity as directed by her scripture even if it contradicts Islamic
teaching? Is she free to take their children to church with her? How will
he feel if his children are drawn toward Christianity and away from Islam?
Considering these questions, will the Muslim husband honestly be able
guarantee her freedom of belief and practice?

<<Now, the Muslim believes that both Judaism and Chtistianity originated in
divine revelation, although later distortions were introduced into them. He
also believes that God revealed the Taurat to Moses and the Injeel (Gospel)
to Jesus,' and that both Moses and Jesus (peace be on them) were among the
messengers of Allah who were among the messengers of Allah who were
distinguished by their steadfast determination. Accordingly, the Christian or
Jewish wife of a Muslim lives under the protection of a man who respects the
basic tenets of her faith, her scripture, and her prophets>>

What basic tenets of Christianity does the Muslim respect? The very basic
tenet of Christianity is "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be
saved." Will a Muslim husband be able to respect her belief in this?

For the most part, Muslims mistakenly believe that Christians either believe
in 3 gods (polytheism) or have joined partners with God (shirk). The Qur'an
forbids Muslims to associate with such persons so how can he marry one?
Perhaps this verse will provide the answer

2.221
Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe

The last phrase here "until they believe" seems to be the qualifier. A
Muslim should not marry a Christian until she has embraced Islam.

You said correctly "A marriage between a man and woman of different faiths


can be based only on the husband's respect for his wife's beliefs; otherwise

a good relationship can never develop." But, because it is unlikely that a
Muslim will be able to respect his wife's belief in Jesus, it is better for
Muslims to say they can marry a Christian woman if she is willing to become
Muslim. Just as you said " for since Islam is absolutely opposed to shirk,


it would obviously be impossible for two such people to live together in
harmony and love."

<<And while Islam guarantees freedom of belief and practice to the Christian


or Jewish wife of a Muslim, safeguarding her rights according to her own
faith, other religions, such as Judaism and Christianity, do notguarantee the
wife of different faith freedom of belief and practice, nor they safeguard
her rights.>>

Obviously, I don't agree that the woman will experience freedom of belief and
practice under Islam. However, the Christian husband is commanded to love
his wife (regardless of her faith) the way Christ loved the Church, i.e.,
love her so much that he is willing to lay down his life for her. When you
love someone to that degree you don't need all the rules/rights spelled out
because you naturally want the best for her. You naturally put her first and
have her best interests at heart. Though you are the head of the household,
because of your love, you become a servant to her. What woman, when so
loved, could do anything but love and respect her husband and want to do
everything he asks?

Cheryl
>


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Jul 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/4/98
to

as-salamu 'alaykum.

yusu...@newshound.csrv.uidaho.edu (Syed Yusuf) wrote:

>Non-Muslim men not to marry Muslim
>60:10
>O you who believe! When believing women come to you as emigrants,
>examine them, Allbh knows best as to their Faith, then if you ascertain
>that they are true believers, send them not back to the disbelievers,
>they are not lawful (wives) for the disbelievers nor are the
>disbelievers lawful (husbands) for them

Christians and Jews, per se, are not kafiruwn in Qur'anic usage, so
this verse does not prove the matter. "Kafir" and "non-Muslim" are not
synoynms, rather, they are categories which overlap to a great degree.
But "minhum man amana wa minhum man kafara," among them are those who
believe and among them are those who do not believe.

So this verse would forbid marriage to kafiruwn. Good advice, by the
way.

Legally, if a person is considered "muslim," he or she is also to be
considered a believer. But it is quite apparent that the reverse is
not an absolute, and therefore could not be the sole basis of an
absolute prohibition.


AbdulraHman Lomax
mar...@vom.com
P.O. Box 423
Sonoma, CA 95476
USA

AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
as-salamu 'alaykum.

ibn...@aol.com (IBN ADAM) wrote:

>The Prohibition of a Muslim Woman's Marrying a Non- Muslim Man
>
> It is haram for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man,regardless of
>whether he of the People of the Book or not. We have alredy mentioned the
>saying-of Allah ,
>... And do not marry (your girls) to idolaters until they believe .... (2:221)

If this verse is understood as applying to Christians and Jews, then
we must note that it would apply equally to Muslim men marrying women
of these religions. However, the verse is referring, not to
"non-Muslims," a term which is not found in the Qur'an, but to
mushrikiyn, "idolaters." Now, some argue that Christians are
idolaters, but this position, as a logical necessity, is defective.
Some might be, some might not be. And it is *very* difficult to make
such a generic statement about Jews, who generally reject idolatry,
quite strictly (or at least we can say this about the believers among
them).

>And He said concerning the immigrant Muslim women,
>... Then if you know them to be Believers, do not send them back to the
>unbelievers. They are not halal for them (as wives), nor are they halal for
>them (as husbands). (60:10)

Here the term used, translated as "unbelievers," is "kuffar." It is
quite clearly in reference, again, to the Makkan mushrikiyn. The word
kuffar means, according to Kassis, "ingrate, froward unbeliever,
unthankful, impious." It is a stronger term than kafir; here it refers
to those who were "froward," that is, active, in opposition to Islam.
How could a Muslim marry such a person?

>No text exist which makes exceptions for the People of the Book; hence, on the
>basis of the above verses, there is a consensus among Muslims concerning this
>prohibition.

Now, it must be said that there is, to this observer, an appearance,
at least, of consensus on this issue. But the basis of that alleged
consensus (and I say "alleged" not to deny that it exists) has not
been established to me. So the situation is that I remind Muslim
women, when the question comes up, that, if they marry a non-Muslim,
they will be facing unanimous -- or nearly unanimous -- disapproval
from the entire Muslim community. But as the divine origin of this
prohibition, I must return to: Allah is the Best Knower, and those
firmly established in knowledge, and I am not among the latter.

[...]


> It will be realized from this that Islam is consistent with itself in

>prohibiting the Muslim man to marry a mushrik woman, for since Islam is


>absolutely opposed to shirk, it would obviously be impossible for two such
>people to live together in harmony and love.

Now, as to a mushrik, that is another matter. The verses establish the
case with the mushrikiyn.

It is rather obvious, I would think, that even if it were not
prohibited, to marry someone stubbornly opposed (that is the meaning
of 'kuffar') to Islam would be highly inadvisable for a Muslim. Unless
the Muslim does not care about his or her own religion, in which case
it might not make any difference, since this alleged Muslim is already
headed for the fire.

But as to those among the Christians and Jews who are believers, who
show by their conduct in their lives that they trust in God, these
verses, by themselves, do not prohibit marriage. And we know by the
example of the Prophet, SAS, that he allowed men to marry such women.
Therefore he did not consider the verses cited above as prohibiting
such marriage, and therefore they do not apply to the case under
discussion, the marriage of Muslim women to Muslim men, for the verses
do not discriminate between men and women (in spite of the incomplete
quotation above of 2:221).

So if there is a consensus on prohibition, it must be based either in
hadith or on public policy or other issues. An example of a public
policy consideration would be the argument given by Ibn Adam
rationalizing the prohibition.

Now, if a consensus of the scholars is based on public policy
considerations rather than what is explicit in the Qur'an or hadith,
does this consensus remain binding on the community if the conditions
of public life change?

One *might* think that hadith allowing Muslim men to marry non-Muslim
women from among the people of the Book would be taken as a *general*
permission for such marriages, rather than being specific to men
alone. After all, the male includes the female, we so often hear. On
what grounds is the permission restricted to men alone?

Without a knowledge of the specific hadith used by the scholars, I
could speculate for a long time....

Does anyone know or have access to a sound daleel on this issue?

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages