Salam

Is epoling is forbidden in Islam?

Why are some girls and boys being killed for eloping.

It seems barbaric and cruel.

I know adultery is forbidden in Islam.

Prophet Mohammed said that you cannot mate before marriage.

But what about eloping.

I think you can elope if you want to.

What do you say?

Please vote and give your reasons.

Omrow

[quote=Omrow]Salam

Is epoling is forbidden in Islam?

Why are some girls and boys being killed for eloping.

It seems barbaric and cruel.

I know adultery is forbidden in Islam.

Prophet Mohammed said that you cannot mate before marriage.

But what about eloping.

I think you can elope if you want to.

What do you say?

Please vote and give your reasons.

Omrow

[/quote]

I dont think u can

because

well a girl especially needs her parents permission to get married

men dont need permission (isnt life easier for the Y chromosomed) but its best if they get blessings obviously

soooo....no I dont think its allowed

[quote=1R4M]I dont think u can

because

well a girl especially needs her parents permission to get married[/quote]

I have been told that there are many ahadith on this issue and that only some are publicised deeply as they push the agenda that a parents permission is necessary, but that may not be the case. I would go by there is nothing legally wrong with it - as long as the marriage is not delayed or anything. Get hitched quick. It only takes a few witnesses.

As for socially, in real life - the parents are important and not having their blessing can be a very big problem. Some parents will never come around to it and the problems would be so big that I doubt some people would get married without permission if they had realised how stubborn their parents will remain - even in life and death situations.

But here the problem almost squarely lies with the parents. If their kids want to get married, they should be allowed to do so, and standing up as an obstacle in such a case is wrong and immoral IMO.

Last year I did see a case where the stubbornness of the parents was beyond cruel. A level of cruelty I did not think was possible by parents against their kids.

As for Omrow's question, I would assume that it related to the Taliban in Helmand Province in Afghanistan where when a couple eloped, they caught them and executed them outside a mosque. Allah (swt) is the most just and there will be justice. If not in their world then in the next.

The murders were totally wrong and abhorrent. If the families were involved, they also committed pure unadulterated evil.

As far as I know secret marriages are haraam, but the sin of commiting sex outside of marriage is a far worse sin.

So if the only way to avoid illegal sex is to get married secretly, then it is allowed.

But I may be wrong.

Its interesting actually. Coz alot of the time people confuse an action thats "recommended" but not "compulsary". And ppl say that asking the girls parents for permission is necessary but is it really something thats compulsary? And not just something thats recommended?

And technically no it doesnt take alot to get hitched. The guy, the girl and 2 witnesses. As some of you may know im in the middle of organisng my brothers wedding (major headache i can tell u) and i was considering getting licensed just so i can perform the ceremony instead of some Imam... who will then ask for payment. But parents wouldnt go for it.

But as YOU said; parents are important... especially in the first few years of marriage.... i would assume.

[quote=Sunnipath]Question:

I've been hearing that in the Hanafi school one can actually marry in secret. The woman I want to marry and I will be 'engaged' in a month. And then the ACTUAL nikah is going to be next summer. Due to our parents narrow mindedness .....that is the ONLY path we are allowed to take, nothing else . We both feel as if we are going to want to see each other during the school year privately, talk privately, etc. There will be no sexual intercourse involved . . . we just want to see and talk intimately w/out others always having to be around as as mahrams. Is there any way we can get married secretly 'temporarily' w/ an official Islamic judge and w/out a Wali.. . so we can do this and then have the 'actual' nikah as our parents wanted next summer? No one will know . . . . . . please advice for we fear transgressing the boundaries of Ya Rabb while being 'engaged' during the course of the school year!



Answer:

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Walaikum assalam,

Your question was dealt with in a previous post on the Hanafi list:

According to the famous relied upon position within the school, the marriage of a woman without the approval of her wali is only valid if the person she is marrying is legally considered a suitable match (kuf') .

Otherwise, the marriage is invalid, and they would be considered to be living in zina.

This is the position adopted by the overwhelming majority of the Hanafi fuqaha, and was chosen by Ibn Abidin in his Hashiya as well. Shaykh Mahmoud Ashraf Usmani says that this is the generally adopted position of the fuqaha of the Subcontinent, and this is what I heard Shaykh Adib al-Kallas of Damascus say is generally adopted.

Given the danger of this issue, each specific case should be referred to a qualified God-fearing scholar .

It is very important to note that the fuqaha point out that even when a woman's marriage without the explicit approval of her wali is *valid*, it is: (a) going against the Sunna and (b) may well entail being bad to one's parents, which is among the most serious of enormities.

The fuqaha explain that the "approval" is not a general "acceptance" to marry but, rather, an approval of the actual marriage contract taking place, because at the legal level, the marriage contract must be seen as a civil contract where the approval of the wali is an expected part .

As for who the guardian (wali) is supposed to be, this is known, and the order of closeness of guardianship must be followed.

As such: In order to do that which is best, the two parties should press their parents to allow them to have the nikah as soon as possible, which adhering to good manners and respect. It must be noted that it is very much possible to be firm and insistent while adhering to good manners, a point lost on many. If the parents are being 'unreasonable' then the reasonable solution is to take the case to a qualified God-fearing scholar.

If such scholars seem few, then we should ask ourselves what we are doing to change this situation.

Wassalam,

Faraz Rabbani.[/quote]

[quote]Does the Hanafi School encourage marriage without the guardians (wali) approval?

In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,

The short and simple answer to your question is that: No, the Hanafi School does not, in any way, promote or encourage a marriage without the approval of one’s parents or a legal guardian (wali).

To elaborate: It is a common misconception that the Hanafi School unreservedly allows a marriage without the consent of the womans parents or her guardian (wali). However, the matter is not as simple as that, and one must understand the Hanafi position properly before coming to any sort of conclusion.

In contrast to the position of most other scholars including the three Sunni Schools of Islamic law, the Hanafi School indeed has some leeway in regards to the necessity of obtaining the consent of the womans guardian. The relied upon position within the School is that the marriage of a free, sane and adult woman without the approval of her guardian (wali) is valid if the person she is marrying is a legal and suitable match (kuf) to her. Conversely, if the person she is marrying is not a legal match to her, then her marriage is considered invalid. (Radd al-Muhtar ala l-Durr al-Mukhtar 3/56-57 & Ila al-Sunan 11/69. For more details and the relevant evidences, please refer to the answer previously posted on this website titled: Divorced woman marrying without her guardians approval).

However, this does not mean that such a marriage is encouraged or permitted without any blame. Disobeying ones parents is one of the most serious of sins in Islam, and as such, no School would, and can, allow going against the wishes of ones parents outright. Many Hanafi jurists (fuqaha) have pointed out that it is generally blameworthy and going against the Sunnah to marry without the consent of the Wali regardless of whether the spouse is a legal match or otherwise due to the many Hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) emphasising the importance of having the approval of ones guardian such as: Any woman who marries without the permission of her guardian, her marriage is invalid, invalid, invalid (related by Ibn Hibban, Tirmidhi and others, and Tirmidhi considered it a sound/hasan Hadith) and: There is no marriage without the [permission of a] guardian (related by Hakim and Abu Dawud). (See: Imdad al-Muftin P: 527)

As such, this Hanafi position is merely a concession (rukhsa) which may be resorted to in situations of need, and a blessing for those sisters who fall victim to their parents mistreatment and abuse. In cases where parents force their daughters to marry against their wishes based purely on caste, wealth and other similar preferences, and not Islam, and they give importance to their personal gains over and above the interests of their daughters; this position of the Hanafi School can be an important haven. However, the Hanafi School, in no way, gives a green light for sisters to marry themselves without parental approval in all situations, and as such, this position must not be taken as a standard norm upon which marriage contracts are based.

Thus, a woman must first try and convince her parents or Wali to allow her to marry according to her wishes. She may use the intermediary of someone who may be able to influence her parents. Despite trying, if her parents are still being difficult, and her wish is to marry someone based on religious piety, she should present her case to a knowledge, wise and god-fearing scholar who may be able to advise whether she may marry without her guardians approval or not.

And Allah knows best

Muhammad ibn Adam

Darul Iftaa

Leicester , UK [/quote]

"No marriage is valid without a wali."

[related by Ahmed and others and deemed sound by Ahmed, Ibn Hajar and others]

The Prophet SAllallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam said: "There is no marriage without the permission of a guardian." [Sunan of Abu Dawood 2080, Narrated Abu Musa]

"When a woman marries without the permission of her wali, then her marriage is not valid, not valid, not valid." [Related by Ahmad, Tirmidhi and others. Tirmidhi said, this is a hasan Hadith]

Only the Hanafi School gives women the option to marry without their guardian's permission, provided the husband is kuf' or legally suitable.

[quote=Ya'qub]As far as I know secret marriages are haraam, but the sin of commiting sex outside of marriage is a far worse sin.

So if the only way to avoid illegal sex is to get married secretly, then it is allowed.

But I may be wrong.[/quote]

I did not think the topic was about secret marriages, but about marriages where one or both of the people have run away from home to get married - and the marriage being open and announced.

@ Noor - there are also other ahadith, and the arabic language can be rather nuanced. where the translation may not convey its full meaning. Like in those ahadith, does it mean its a compulsion or a preference?

There are ahadith where it says you cannot have imaan etc til you do/feel x. Once again that is not an absolute, but the arabic language can be nuanced.

If there was no nuance, the hanafi position would not be different as when there is direct ecidence from the qur'an and sunnah for a position, it is taken without question.

we are not talking about other ahadith. the ahadith mentioned above are pretty clear, the hanafi madhab doesn't really give a clear answer on this, why you can marry without the consent of the wali. the fact that all other schools say you can't must mean something.

yes, it means they took a different interpretation.

But when something is totally clear cut in any hadith, it does not get to the stage of madhabs anyway. the order is:

1. Qur'an,

2. Sunnah,

3. Ijma,

4. Qiyas.

Or something like that. and if there is no room to manouvre in the hadith, the madhabs do not come into it at all.

From what Noor has posted up, and searches I've done, i think you'll get a different answer depending on which scholar you refer to. So maybe refer to the scholar you usually refer to, rather than selecting a scholar that agrees with your whims on one issue and reject him for another when he doesn't.

Generally I think elopement is wrong. People usually elope in secret, because parents have already rejected the marriage idea, or the individuals know parents will never permit the marriage. Marriage is not just about 2 individuals but the bringing together of 2 families also, so this should be considered.

But I think elopement is better when parents go against the laws of Allah, and try to force their unislamic beliefs on their children. i.e may be forcing them to marry a guy who is not religiously inclined, but very wealthy and ugly to boot. Whereas the girl is gorgeous, and very pious, and has made it clear she wants a brother who practices his faith and is a good match for her physically.

Likewise If the girl or guy has a very poor family life, physical/mental abuse from parents or siblings, marriage would seem like a good prospect, one of hope and happiness, so elopement may be better for these individuals.

Note i don't agree with relationships outside marriage, but sadly it occurs even amongst muslims. So if nikah is a way of preventing physical contact, and physical Zina then it is far better than allowing two individuals to carry on meeting up, calling each other etc etc, because sooner or later shaytan will tell them to commit a greater sin.

I assume this topic is based on this news story:

Taleban 'kill love affair couple'

The Taleban in Afghanistan have publicly killed a young couple who they said had tried to run away to get married, officials say.

The man, 21, and woman, 19, were shot dead on Monday in front of a mosque in the south-western province of Nimroz.

Nimroz is an area where the Taleban have a strong influence.

Governor Ghulam Dastageer Azad told the AFP news agency the killings followed a decree by local religious leaders and were an "insult to Islam".

Dangerous region

Mr Azad said: "An unmarried young boy and an unmarried girl who loved each other and wanted to get married had eloped because their families would not approve the marriage."

Officials said the couple were traced by militants after they tried to go to Iran. They were made to return to their village in Khash Rod district.

"Three Taleban mullahs brought them to the local mosque and they passed a fatwa (religious decree) that they must be killed. They were shot and killed in front of the mosque in public," the governor said.

He said there were some reports that the families of the young couple could have links with the Taleban. The Taleban could not be immediately reached for comment...

Read more @ BBC News

[quote=You]yes, it means they took a different interpretation.

But when something is totally clear cut in any hadith, it does not get to the stage of madhabs anyway. the order is:

1. Qur'an,

2. Sunnah,

3. Ijma,

4. Qiyas.

Or something like that. and if there is no room to manouvre in the hadith, the madhabs do not come into it at all.[/quote]

What is Ijma and Qiyas? :S

Ijma = concensus between the scholars.

Qiyas = guesswork. Well not guess work really, but looking at other similar issues and extending the rules etc to make structures etc. or something like that. I am sure others cna explain better.

acha.

I hear it means a Vote and Imagination.

It is said we can use our Imagination to make up a law

and then Vote on it to impliment it.

Thats Ijma and Qiyas.

Sounds artistic and democratic to me.

As far as I know it's Makruh, you should make it open. At the end of the day it comes down to the situation, generally you have to have the blessing, just incase it doesn't work out, but there are always exceptions.

[quote=Noor]we are not talking about other ahadith. the ahadith mentioned above are pretty clear, the hanafi madhab doesn't really give a clear answer on this, why you can marry without the consent of the wali. the fact that all other schools say you can't must mean something. [/quote]

The question we need to ask is would Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) accept or allow narrow mindedness, which exists now but at the time of the Prophet is was frowned upon. Or would Islam allow some pragmatism, we've got the ability to think for ourselves and we should use it.

Who decides what is narrow minded? That is not a valid argument on religious principles.

Its all about how the qur'an and sunnah are read and interpreted and there are bounds on how far you can go. Anyone can say those who stick to what is in there is "narrow minded", especially if it contradicts their personal viewpoint.

What I was trying to say was something else - that there are loads of ahadith on the matter, and according to someone else who has read them, he mentioned that it was not as clear cut as there are many ahadith that need to be taken into account and the full picture is not as simple.

What's narrow mindedness? Basically not even considerring what someone else has said. That includes being racist or prejudiced, which is haram ofcourse.

Thinking that one race is superior to another is haraam.

As for prejudice, it can have its reasons and they can be real.

Prejudice is unfair discrimination, I don't think it's justified.

[quote=wednesday]Aint Narrowmindness where you think about personal gain and that's it?[/quote]

or when you think about the benefit of others and that's it?

Noty really, that's being selfish. But there is a hadith that if a wali is happy with the guys Din (way of life) then he has to give the blessing.

[quote=1R4M]

a girl especially needs her parents permission to get married

men dont need permission (isnt life easier for the Y chromosomed)[/quote]

That was funny.

I didnt know you had it in you Miss Iram.

Only if you want to get third degreed and heavily monitored afterwards.

[quote=wednesday]Do you think It's a bad idea if I ask my mother that question? I mean I'm just curious to know her opinion but I don't want her thinking otherwise... [/quote]

its pretty obvious what your mum is going to say? why ask?

Some mothers actually help their daughters elope.

Banks use girls as slaves.

Girls in London are being used as slaves and they are being paid slave labour.

If men get 10 pounds per hour,

then girls get only 4 pounds for doing the same job.

This is disgusting.

Its supposed to be 21st century.

How come in our country women get in one year

20,000 pounds, while men get 40,000 for doing exactly the same job!!

This is totally out of order.

Also, men shove women to do secretarial work,

and only very few women are allowed top jobs in management.

These lucky ones probably have their dad to help them climb the ladder easily.

Out of 100 men and women in London, 90 men are given top posts, while

only 10 women are allowed these big jobs in London.

What do you guys think?

The Guardian, Thursday 9 April 2009

City's 'shocking' gender pay gap revealed in equality report

Women working full-time in the financial sector earn 55% less a year on average than their male counterparts, with those in some of the most lucrative areas, such as fund management and futures trading, suffering the greatest disparities, according to research published today.

The report from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) also contains further evidence that women struggle to land senior management roles in the City. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research found large gender pay gaps "whichever measure is taken", with full-time female employees receiving 39% less per hour than men. The pay gap in the finance sector - already under fire for its role in the current recession - is approximately double that for the economy as a whole, both on an hourly and annual basis. Women working full-time in so-called auxiliary activities, including fund management, stockbroking and futures trading, suffer the largest pay gap in the financial services sector, earning on average 60% a year less than men.

Among the highest earners in the finance sector, full-time female employees earn 45% less an hour than men, while in the lowest-paid roles women receive 16% less on average. Jessica Woodroffe, from the Fawcett Society, which campaigns for gender equality, said the figures showed it was not just a case of women being in part-time roles or less-skilled jobs - they suffered "straight discrimination", receiving less pay for doing the same job. "The financial sector is due for an overhaul on many fronts and sexual discrimination has to be one of those," she said.

Although the number of men and women in the financial sector is approximately equal, the report found women to be highly concentrated in administrative and secretarial jobs and "substantially under-represented in managerial jobs, including at the most senior level". Only 11% of senior managers in the sector are women, compared with 28% in the economy as a whole. That contributed to a 79% gender gap for annual incentive pay, which includes bonuses, for full-time workers.

In 2007-08, 70% of men in the financial sector earned more than £29,400, while 70% of women earned less than £29,500.

Trevor Phillips, chair of the EHRC, described the statistics as "shocking". He said the report came "at a time when the City's reputation is under attack" and called for "significant steps" to address pay gaps in this month's equality bill: "We are losing or not taking advantage of talented women from a crucial industry."

The Fawcett Society is campaigning for the bill to impose transparent pay structures on all companies and force them to address inequalities. It also wants women fighting pay discrimination to be able to submit group claims in the courts.

Harriet Harman, minister for women and equality, said the inquiry "proves that the finance sector is a breeding ground for discrimination and unfairness" and promised "tough new measures" in the equality bill.

Would any girl out there like it if her boss gave her a

wage packet of £400 and, gave her male friend doing the same task £1000.

Women are getting only 40 percent of what men are being paid.

Men are earning more than double. 60% more !!

This is slavery of women.

I suppose its "NEW LABOUR".

This is U.K. in 2009 !!!

God !!

And then our PM goes around telling Yemen to give equal pay to the ladies.

What the.

Why pick on poor old YEMEN !!

Why cant Gordan Brown tell his Darling to make sure that

our own ladies get treated equally in our own backyard.

Jesus !!

Well according to this document we obviously we dont!!

Why is it like this?

You cannot just look at one specific sector and decide that due to that there is gender inequality everywhere and that it is always against women.

Try to get a receptionist job as a man, and you will fail.

Besides £4 an hour is below minimum wage (for above a certain age - no idea what that is), so those paying such sums need to be reported.

I voted "I don't know who gets better treatment" because there are swings and round abouts. benefits and pitfalls.

Besides, the first second option does not say who gets "treated better".

well i can't say i'm surprised i remember studying this at one point. It's true over many sectors particularly more corporate, higher paid positions women are paid less for doing exactly the same job. It's like having two male candidates and telling A you will get paid 1000 a wk and B you will get 500 for the same job, of course it's unfair. I'm more shocked that there is no law preventing this, especially when the western world harks on about how it offers women equality and freedom, and how they are equal to their male counterparts blah blah blah, when it comes to the crunch there are many things in western society that suggest otherwise, not just this pay issue.

Equality is just a ruse anyway - you can have fairness but not equality.

You cannot judge on just the level of pay as different people have different strengths weaknesses and liabilities. And that is not a bad thing.

I think in Wimbledon there is currently equal pay for the winners of the men's and the women's tournaments. The difference is that the women's matches can be between 33-40% shorter. Equal pay there is actually unfair. Unless they base the prize money on how many spectators there are in which case it would be interesting to know if the men's version gets watched more than the women's version.

Saying that, there are many many inequalities out there that are also unfair.