Got Orfy? Urfy? Orfi? Urfi?

[Nagishkaw 510]

[Ihavequestions 419]

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

Q: Do you, Groom, take this woman .... ?

A: I do.

Q: Do you, Bride, take this man ... ?

A: I do.

How is that not a contract?

Isn't marriage a full half of each Muslim's duty to God (Allah)? And, if so, how is it that's not a sacrament?

ALL marriages, everywhere, whether they are religious or civil, are contracts. The problem with the orfi marriage is it's a limited contract and the limited rights are unenforceable outside of countries in which they're recognized.

[notime4haterz 0]

I looked up information online, in books that I have, and asked a learned person about this subject. The sources all agree with Karamella.

And good thing too! Because for 6 months I only had an unregistered religious marriage with my husband! God knows our families would never allow us to spend time alone together, so we did our nikah/keetab/whatever you want to call it. This allowed us to be together without it being haram. To say that such a thing (unregistered marriage) is haram is wrong in the opinion of all well known scholars. Their argument is that in Islam we only need to meet the requirements you both agreed on (2 witnesses, mahr, etc) ...we don't need the permission or recognition of any government entity (especially non-Muslim one) to be considered married and living in halal.

If a man doesn't fulfill his responsibilities and duties that Islam gives the wife in the marriage (orfy or otherwise), that doesn't make the marriage invalid or haram. It makes the man a sinner who doesn't fulfill his responsibility. I think the argument that orfy marriages are haram because the man doesn't give what is due to his wife are incorrect. The problem is with the man, not the marriage.

[~Jackie~ 30]

In the real world, it doesn't matter which marriage or paper you have. If a divorce is inevitable, not one paper or ceremony is gonna make a ratz azz difference.

Who is right or wrong? Certainly will not be agreed upon here, so why continue to beat this dead horse?

Edited January 11, 2009 by just_Jackie

[JeanneVictoria 55]

In the real world, it doesn't matter which marriage or paper you have. If a divorce is inevitable, not one paper or ceremony is gonna make a ratz azz difference.

Who is right or wrong? Certainly will not be agreed upon here, so why continue to beat this dead horse?

[SaadBell 0]

For your viewing pleasure, than back to the show.

[Beauty for Ashes 257]

In the real world, it doesn't matter which marriage or paper you have. If a divorce is inevitable, not one paper or ceremony is gonna make a ratz azz difference.

Who is right or wrong? Certainly will not be agreed upon here, so why continue to beat this dead horse?

You got it Jackie. Your marriage is actually more in the heart than any piece of paper. If you are married orfi and he loves you..or legally and you are nothing to him...does marriage really mattr anyway? One piece of paper means nothing either way ( by the way married Islamically AND legally and it hasnt made a hill of beans in how I have been treated or perceived) If someone loves you for real, paper doesnt make it better or worse.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I looked up information online, in books that I have, and asked a learned person about this subject. The sources all agree with Karamella.

And good thing too! Because for 6 months I only had an unregistered religious marriage with my husband! God knows our families would never allow us to spend time alone together, so we did our nikah/keetab/whatever you want to call it. This allowed us to be together without it being haram. To say that such a thing (unregistered marriage) is haram is wrong in the opinion of all well known scholars. Their argument is that in Islam we only need to meet the requirements you both agreed on (2 witnesses, mahr, etc) ...we don't need the permission or recognition of any government entity (especially non-Muslim one) to be considered married and living in halal.

If a man doesn't fulfill his responsibilities and duties that Islam gives the wife in the marriage (orfy or otherwise), that doesn't make the marriage invalid or haram. It makes the man a sinner who doesn't fulfill his responsibility. I think the argument that orfy marriages are haram because the man doesn't give what is due to his wife are incorrect. The problem is with the man, not the marriage.

The problem is with the marriage contract.

As I said before, the list contains the requirements for a wedding, those requirements alone don't make the marriage valid. This is a subtle point that you and Karmella are not grasping. Scholars who do not make that distinction are failing you.

So, let's be clear, the conditions of a WEDDING and the conditions for a MARRIAGE CONTRACT are two very different and distinct things. I am not arguing the conditions for a wedding, I am arguing that an empty contract that obligates no one to anything is not Islamic, and signals the entering into of a lower value sexual union, like that of slave woman to her master. Nothing to brag about.

Karmella claims I am wrong in this argument, but I am not. I practiced human rights agency with emphasis in family law along side scholars for more than 20 years ad I know my stuff, Its not out of books or websites, it's from real life, and I've taught it, too. I'm only sharing what I know, take it or leave it.

It is also not a personal attack to state such, nor is a discourse between those who disagree automatically consistant with merciless attacks. Let's not get hysterical here. Let's just talk straight.

An unregistered marriage that must be subsequently rcognized by the state in order to be enforced still has the ability to be ruled invalid, which means that you were not married, but engaging in sin. Karmella's second post stated as much, recommending that such invalid couplings be punished as adultary.

What do you do then? Make the hysterical claim that "We were married in God's Eyes?"

The fact, the contract doesn't say, as long as your ceremony meets these requirements, your arrange is valid. The contract contains much more than the wedding requirements; it dictates the marriage life and obligations to each other. A contract that has no obligations and is not enforceable is not a contract.

Besides, as karmela has herself noted, urfi is not intended for foreign women and Egyptian men, so why did you engage in it?

I will continue this discussion in a few, however, it is worth noting that this is like most warnings to women who become involved with men whose culture and religion they have sparse familiarity with. You can warn, but if they are intent on making excuses, finding loopholes and ignoring the signs, they will do so and no warning can stop them.

While this may not matter to some of you, this matters much to those of us who recommend public policy based on sharia.

Edited January 11, 2009 by Virtual wife

[missmissy 38]

What is the bottom line here - or what am I supposed to be learning from reading all of this?

[doodlebugg 10]

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).

Actually the only true way a Roman Catholic (I'm not familiar with the Orthodox Catholic laws) can divorce is if they get an annulment which is a very tedious process at best. I had started the procedure and gave up a year into it. I was so frustrated at the church saying that I was still married....my husband had already been married for about 6 years at that point and yet I was supposed to consider myself married. Never understood that even when I squinted really hard.

What is the bottom line here - or what am I supposed to be learning from reading all of this?

You are supposed to be learning that whenever the subject of urfi marriage is brought up it will turn into a long azz thread and no one will leave it thinking any differently than when they came into it so either pull up a chair and bring munchies or just breath in and out and play solitaire instead.

[~Jackie~ 30]

Well I dont know sh*t about it so I will now shut the h e Ll up and leave this up to the brains of the group.

[tmma 467]

YAY!!!

It's been way too long since the last Urfi marraige thread! Now, where's VP?

[RAKASA 0]

What is the bottom line here - or what am I supposed to be learning from reading all of this?

You are supposed to be learning that whenever the subject of urfi marriage is brought up it will turn into a long azz thread and no one will leave it thinking any differently than when they came into it so either pull up a chair and bring munchies or just breath in and out and play solitaire instead.

[desert_fox 32]

What is the bottom line here - or what am I supposed to be learning from reading all of this?

......that ppl are never gonna agree on religious dogma, and that there are more important things in life than in trying to convice someone else how wrong they are, for not believing the way you do.....boring.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Let's call urfi what it is. It is not marriage. As has been admitted repeatedly, it is a way to make a couple feel that its ok with God to "be alone" together without having any obligations or rights toward each other, and then, if they like each other enough afterward, they can still get married "for real".

PLEASE SHOW US WHERE ISLAM ALLOWS THIS AS A VALID CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT.

Oh, and Karmella, you said there is no such thing as regional schools of jurisprudence that set the validity of marriage contracts. Are you sure?

Edited January 11, 2009 by Virtual wife