69 million page views

Marriage in Islam

Reader comment on item: Resisting Islamic Law
in response to reader comment: We cannot Compete Hindus...Thanks to Allah

Submitted by Thiagan (India), Apr 27, 2008 at 06:14

Mansoor says:

"Firstly Nikah...is a very noble relationship between opposite sex...and agreement with certain clauses well under favour of Muslim Woman who is getting married."

If it s a noble relationship between a man and a woman, who does the omniscient Allah make the divorce so easy and simple? It is neither noble nor sacred as in the case of Hinduism or Christianity; yes it a case for increasing the family size by continuously making women produce children. The Book says women are your tilth and exhorts men to go and maximize the harvest.

Regarding clauses favourable to women, recently the muslim women's association produced a revised marriage contract that gave the women the right to ask for divorce. All India Muslim Personal Law Board rejected the draft saying it is anti shariaa. Your other claims are false.

"As for Dowry or Meher. It is your own perception that it is a fee to use female body...Islam respects women and their rights and discourages marriages purely for lust or sexual satisfaction...Marriages are meant to enhance your family through children. Islam permits sex only when lights are off...and even if you are married you cannot see private parts of your partner...which you find not important to highlight."

I have quoted from an article by an author who is Ph.D on Islamic studies and Middle Eastern affairs. Your refutation is weak, void of substance and unconvincing. I stand by what I have stated. If marriage is a sacred, please explain the following: I have already said in Hindu society dowry is abolished by a law; sati has disappeared 100 years ago and today girls lodge FIR in the All Women Police Station and have their in laws and the groom jailed, if there is any dowry harassment.

Temporary Marriage. (Muta marriages) How do you explain the following:

The Indian Mullahs and Maulvies are very much aware of this lack of divine sanction in Islamic marriage. In Hyderabad, a mega-city of India, these Mullahs and Maulvies work as pimps for old Arabs. Many heavily rich but morally bankrupt Arabs visit Hyderabad and marry young Indian Muslim girls in assistance with the local Mullahs for a period of 15-30 days. After satisfying their lust using these poor Muslim girls and enjoying the Indian hospitality, these Arabs divorce (Islamic divorce - triple talaq) the girls after robbing them of their virginity and respect and return to their lands as respectable grand-fathers and fathers. In one incident, an old man called Muhammad Zafer Yaqub Hassan al Jorani from Sharjah married Haseena Begum; a 19 year old girl on May 7, 2004 and after two days divorced her. Again on May 24, he married another 16 year old girl Ruksana Begum. Haseena, reported the matter to police and the culprit was arrested together with the shameless Mullah-pimp Shamsuddin who received 40,000 Indian rupees from Jorani. Jorani already had two wives and 11 children back home. As per another report published on Hindu-Voice January 2007 issue, a 60 year old rich Arab married 3 girls, Afreen, Farheena and Sultana, at a single sitting within ten minutes in Hyderabad. (Brahmachari, 2008).

There are about 35 to 40 reported fake marriages occur every year between rich Arabs and young Indian Muslim girls in Hyderabad. The actual figure is much higher. In fact, the Mullahs start chasing these Arabs right at the International airport of Hyderabad. As soon as an Arab lands at the airport, the Mullah pimps target him and the negotiation starts then and there. Photographs of young girls are shown, financial matters are settled and date and place for such marriages are finalized. It's a big racket. Their shameful acts remain unknown to their own daughters and grand daughters of equal age back home. What is disturbing is that these Arabs are even rented out rooms made conveniently in the homes of these Maulvies who perform these fake marriages. In some cases these Islamic marriages last only 24 hours (Sheikh, 2005). This is how, using Islam, the Mullahs are promoting Islamic prostitution and filling up their pockets with money. Majhar Hussain, the president of the Confederation of Voluntary Agencies said, "This [Mutah marriage] is turning the young Muslim girls into prostitutes". (cited Brahmachari, 2008). If this practice keeps on going unabated and these Mullahs are not stopped, then very soon Hyderabad might become the centre of legalized, Sha'ria-approved Islamic whore city, sought by Muslim men mostly from the Arab world. Many Muslims will be seen coming to India for Sex-Hajj (i.e, Islamic sex pilgrimage). Once there is shortage of young virgin girls, Mullahs will probably look for young Muslim housewives to carry on the prostitution. "

Intermediate Marriage

Dar al Uloom, Deoband is a well known Islamic learning centre. It is rated as Al Azar of India and is comparable to Harward Law School in Islamic law. They have a separate department for issuing fatwas and it is said they have issued more than three lacs fatwas. The fatwas are collated and are published and I am quoting from the 23edition. Here is a case referred to them:

Case No.407: Niamat Khan gave triple talaaq to his wife Gabro in a drunken state. Later he repented and on the advice of others agreed to take back his wife. As the woman had been divorced and had not married another man, she was married to Mangal Khan on the condition that he would divorce her immediately after marriage. But after the marriage Mangal Khan delayed the divorce and ultimately refused to divorce. The lady did not want to be the wife of Mangal Khan. Now the question arises whether the divorce given earlier by Niamat Khan is valid; whether Mangla Khan's marriage is valid or not and what is the refusal of the lady to join Mangal Khan mean. The lady has not joined Mangal Khan and she had not cohabited with him. What is way so that she may be separated or divorced?

Let us see what the Supreme Court of Islamic jurisprudence say. I give the reply verbatim

Fatwa: Niamat Khan's triple talaaq in the first instance has become effective and he cannot marry her again without halalah.(purification ceremony). His intention for restitution of marriage has no meaning. Mangal Khan stands properly married. Unless he cohabits with her and divorces her and the period of iddad passes, Niamat Khan can not marry her legitimately. Suppose Mangal Khan divorces her without sexual intercourse with her she will not become halal for Niamat Khan. Mangal Khan's statement that he will divorce her after a few days does not effect a divorce. The woman's statement she does not want to be Mangal Khan's wife, after she has married him, is nonsense. It does not make any difference to the marriage. And a married woman retains no right to live separately after she has married. She can not get away from her husband without divorce nor marry another man. The only way for Niamat Khan to marry her is that Mangal Khan cohabits with her and divorce her. Please note that this not the fatwa of some cleric. This also the law of the land and is enforced in courts. The courts have particularly held that remarriage shall not create a presumption of validity; there must be proof of the intermediate marriage and that marriage having been consummated, if the husband divorced the wife, repented and wanted to remarry. If the procedure is not adopted the children born subsequently will be illegitimate. See Mulla's Principles of Mohammedan Law, 18th edition by M.Hidayathulla and others 1977 Sec.257 and 336 pp.286, 354. Hidayathulla was the Chief Justice of India. The mistake was made by the husband and why the wife should pay for it? What is this purification all about? Do you think it is sane and sensible. It is plainly barbaric.

"I plead to all participants to read the above links....which are the eye openers...and the reality about Hindus and their barbaric religion. I must say that every Hindu who is pointing finger on Islam over here is the cherisher and supporter of black and ugly religious practices...which are beyond comparison to any other religion of the world."

I need not read all that articles of the stupid left lunatics to know about Hinduism. This is how the Indian Supreme Court described Hinduism:

"The development of Hindu religion and philosophy shows that from time to time saints and religious reformers attempted to remove from the Hindu thought and practices element of corruption and superstition and that led to the formation of different sects. Buddha started Buddhism; Mahavir founded Jainism; Basava became the founder of Lingayat religion; Dhyaneshwar and Tukaram initiated the Varakari cult; Guru Nanak inspired Sikhism; Dayananda founded Arya Samaj, and Chaitanya began Bhakti cult; and as a result of the teachings of Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, Hindu religion flowered into its most attractive, progressive and dynamic form. If we study the teachings of these saints and religious reformers, we would notice an amount of divergence, there is a kind of subtle indescribable unity which keeps them within the sweep of the broad and progressive Hindu religion."

SC ruling on 11-12-95


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)