Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Right to know or not?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Right to know or not?

    Originally posted by aadil77 View Post
    This is the dumbest thing I've heard, how can someone who has had sex outside of marriage call themself chaste?

    The physical act has been commited that is what defines chastity, what does repentance have to do with it?

    Sometimes I get the impression that peope on here have been living under a rock, chastity has been around for donkeys years, even the jews and christians know what chastity is, how can a muslim struggle to understand it?

    I've already given you proof, go and look at the fatwa I posted, the Mufti clearly shows that the person who commits zina has become unchaste, if there was a way of becoming chaste again I'm sure he would have mentioned it.
    Salaam

    The fataawa have been given bro, it's not upto me to make anyone accept them. I will give one final narration (paraphrased as I do not have it in front of me). A man came to Umar (RA) during the time of his Caliphate and told him that his daughter had committed an indiscretion but had repented. He asked whether he should tell her potential husband about it. Umar (RA) forbade him to do so, threatening to whip him if he mentioned it to anyone.

    First thing to note, is that the potential husband would have been assumed to be chaste but if the woman was not, why would Umar (RA) allow the marriage? Unless the repentance changes her status with regards to chastity?

    Second thing to note, is that obviously he ensured that her sin was hidden from her future husband, yet some on this thread consider this deception or wrong based on their own emotions rather than based on the Sharia itself. Do you know more or did Umar (RA) know more?

    I now excuse myself from this thread, there is nothing more to say other than argue in circles

    :jkk:

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Right to know or not?

      Originally posted by ahmad12 View Post
      Second thing to note, is that obviously he ensured that her sin was hidden from her future husband, yet some on this thread consider this deception or wrong based on their own emotions rather than based on the Sharia itself. Do you know more or did Umar (RA) know more?
      Brother I gave you my proof, the Mufti clearly says its deception, so please don't say it's based on emotions.

      And we've already covered this issue. You brought no proof stating that repentance can get your chastity back.

      :jkk:
      Last edited by aadil77; 14-03-12, 05:25 PM.

      He it is Who sends blessings on you, as do His angels, that He may bring you out from the depths of Darkness into Light: and He is Full of Mercy to the Believers. [Quran {33:43}]
      www.QuranicAudio.com
      www.Quran.com

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Right to know or not?

        Originally posted by ahmad12 View Post
        Salaam

        I think clear references have been given to show that a person may withhold information regarding past indiscretions from a future spouse. On the other hand, we have people saying 'I don't think they should, etc, etc'. Islam is not based on the opinions of the laymen, nor is it based on what we deem acceptable behaviour. The Sharia comes from four sources: Quran, Sunnah, Consensus and Analogy. Please not that your own personal preferences/opinions do NOT constitute a source of Sharia.

        It has been established in various fataawa quoted in this thread that a zani does need to reveal his/her sin if repentance has occurred.
        :wswrwb:

        You realise copy and pasting fatwas on this topic is pretty pointless as you can go to several scholars and come away with several different opinions. For example, you get scholars saying:

        1) The fiance doesn't have the right to ask anything - Sheikh Al Munajjid (I think?) - http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/127587/

        2) If the husband doubts the potential wife's chastity then he has the right to find out - Shaykh ‘Abd al-Kareem al-Khudayr - http://islamqa.info/en/ref/21566

        3) It is necessary to inform the potential spouse and hiding it is deception - Mufti Ebrahim Desai http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.p...6a7215d95aeb12

        4) A person has the right to enquire and investigate any matter relevant to marriage concerning the potential spouse and not doing so would be negligence and being misled is deception - Mufti Ebrahim Desai http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.p...d7b3f51403b95b

        5) The person is allowed to remain silent and if asked after marriage then its allowed to speak a white lie if the husband has sincerely changed his life and feels that informing her of the past will cause problems in their marriage - Mufti Muhammad Ashraf http://www.islam.tc/cgi-bin/askimam/...14594&act=view


        So to act as if there is only one ruling on this topic seems naive.
        Last edited by Khalid b. Walid; 14-03-12, 05:33 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Right to know or not?

          Originally posted by aadil77 View Post
          This is the dumbest thing I've heard, how can someone who has had sex outside of marriage call themself chaste?

          The physical act has been commited that is what defines chastity, what does repentance have to do with it?

          Sometimes I get the impression that peope on here have been living under a rock, chastity has been around for donkeys years, even the jews and christians know what chastity is, how can a muslim struggle to understand it?

          I've already given you proof, go and look at the fatwa I posted, the Mufti clearly shows that the person who commits zina has become unchaste, if there was a way of becoming chaste again I'm sure he would have mentioned it.
          This is why I said to you chastity and virginity are 2 different things you seem to be confusing chastity with virginity.

          If sme1 commits zina and repents then they are considered chaste, as its haraam to marry a person who is unchaste. Which you would have realised had you bothered to read the fatwa I posted. If some commits zina they are no longer a virgin. You obviously have no clue what your talking about, and are coming across very argumentitive if you would have read my post you would have seen you are correct in what you are saying you have the right to know.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Right to know or not?

            Originally posted by mizfissy815 View Post
            Why is it a risk, if there are no health issues involved? Every sin, every single one can come back to haunt you. Drug and Alcohol addiction are actual disease and you are treat it as such and make your decisions based on that. To claim it's a risk because repentance may not be accepted is the worst type of suspicion a Muslim can have. If what is apparent to you is a repentant person, to claim it's still a risk is pathetic.

            But aside from that, whether it's someone who has problems with controlling their anger, tongue, attitude, etc...there's a risk. The risk that every single one of us as fallible humans live with every day anyway.

            With zina in particular there's no risk of relapse, you don't 'accidentally' fall into it, it's not uncontrollable. As for a past partner coming back, life by and large isn't bollywood movie and even if it were, you can treat the bugger the same way the hero/heroine would and ever so gently put your foot down.

            Allah(swt) is the Most Just and a repentant person will be judged as someone who hasn't committed the sin. And if we as Muslims are supposed to be just with one another, then we should do the same. We'll never be as Just as the Al-Mighty, but Allah(swt) Justice is the epitome of it surely that's the standards we should be trying to achieve in justice? Instead, you want to do the complete opposite, judge based on the possibility repentance is not accepted despite be warned of suspicion.

            I don't have any issues with someone wanting to marry someone who is chaste (and that includes people who repent btw), or even people who lack tact enough to straight up say they want a virgin. I don't have issues with that at all.

            My issue is with equating chastity with virginity as the OP did, excluding repentants from the definition of 'chaste' and this notion that it's your right to 'know'. It isn't.

            It's your right to want something, it's not your right to know sins of others. The solution is simple, request what you want but don't ask as that's not your place. It's up to the potential to proceed or back away at that point.

            Note- Muslims aren't allowed to marry unchaste people anyway. Man, woman, Muslim, Ahl Al-Kitaab, whatever...So this thing with chastity being important isn't an option. But as you are allowed to marry some who has repented, they are chaste. You couldn't marry them if they weren't.
            eh?

            When you marry someone who has committed Zina, you take a risk, because you assume that they have repented, and Hope that a Former Zani relation won't come back to cause trouble in your marriage. Which is permissible as far as I am aware ...

            likewise if you married a Former Druggie/Alcoholic, you would assume that they have repented, and hope that they do not Relapse ... again the Risk is there, but this is permissible ...

            sister do you read my full post before making accusations and posting red herrings?

            I know we aren't allowed to marry Unchaste people, I did not say that they were, so you posted another red herring into the mix.

            I did not say that you cannot marry someone who has repented from Zina etc, so please stop posting false assertions.

            I said and I repeat, Someone who has kept themselves Pure throughout their Life, abstaining from Illicit relations deserves a Spouse likewise ...

            read brother Khalid's post with the Verdicts of various Ulema ....

            http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...=1#post4613560

            :jkk:
            Last edited by Saif-Uddin; 15-03-12, 12:05 AM.
            http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

            "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

            – Imam al-Shafi’i (Rahimahullah)

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Right to know or not?

              Originally posted by zakariyya21 View Post
              If sme1 commits zina and repents then they are considered chaste,=
              Seriously bro what have you been smoking?

              It's as dumb as saying 'If sme1 kills someone and repents, the dead person will come back alive'

              unlawful sexual intercourse

              If some commits zina they are no longer a virgin
              You don't just lose your virginity by commiting zina, its lost by any sexual intercourse whether in marriage or outside of marriage.

              Please go and educate yourself
              Last edited by aadil77; 15-03-12, 10:07 AM.

              He it is Who sends blessings on you, as do His angels, that He may bring you out from the depths of Darkness into Light: and He is Full of Mercy to the Believers. [Quran {33:43}]
              www.QuranicAudio.com
              www.Quran.com

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Right to know or not?

                Originally posted by aadil77 View Post
                Seriously bro what have you been smoking?

                It's as dumb as saying 'If sme1 kills someone and repents, the dead person will come back alive'

                unlawful sexual intercourse

                You don't just lose your virginity by commiting zina, its lost by any sexual intercourse whether in marriage or outside of marriage.

                Please go and educate yourself

                ok we all know you dont just loose your virginity by commiting zina but no one was talking about sex in marriage otherwise the issue of being unchaste wouldn't be discussed.
                This is stating the obvious you obviously are not intelligent enough to understand context.


                ok so you go and read shaykh muhammad al jibaly's book where he discusses this issue and call him dumb because he discusses the issue of chastity and says the same thing I said, the book is called the quest for love and mercy.

                And your statement go educate yourself LOL

                Is it halal for an unchaste person to marry?

                If you awnser that you'll understand what most ppl are saying.
                Last edited by zakariyya21; 15-03-12, 11:11 AM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Right to know or not?

                  brother aadil, if a person has commited zinah then at that time they are unchaste, but once they repent they are considered chaste. the definition that you have given with regard to chastity is 'abstention from unlawful intercourse'. So the one who has repented from zinah is chaste because part of repentance is to vow never to return to that sin again. Therefore, they are abstaining from the sin and are now considered to be chaste, whereas before when they were upon the sin, they were considered unchaste.

                  we cannot label a person as being unchaste because of a sin that they have commited years ago and have repented from. For example, let's say there is a lady who did the deed at the age of 15 and later repented and became a good muslimah, always lowers the gaze and doesnt even speak to non mahram, at the age of 30 would she be considered to be unchaste due to the sin that she committed and repented from at the age of 15? La, wallah!

                  In short, as long as you are abstaining from the unlawful, you are considered to be chaste but as soon as you step upon the haraam then it is the opposite. Nobody is saying that the one who has commited zinah is suddenly a V, but they can still be chaste once they repent.

                  the ulema say with regard to not being allowed to marry unchaste people, that this refers to the one who is still upon zina. The ulema have agreed that the one who has repented from zina is chaste, so long as they dont return to the sin, w'allahu aalum.

                  at the end of the day, people have their own preferences if someone wants to marry someone who has never been touched by the opposite gender then that is their preference and we shouldnt judge these people. It's up to them. However, it would become an issue if the person who has never commited zina thinks they are better in eeman than the one who has.
                  Last edited by sis_on_sunnah; 15-03-12, 11:43 AM.
                  http://www.deenulhuq.wordpress.com

                  Don't depend on anyone too much in this world because even your own shadow leaves you when you are in darkness ~ibn taymiyyah

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Right to know or not?

                    Whilst it's a high sensitive topic, I think it's best advised that you marry someone of a similar background to yourself, if you can find out that info without being without anyone's feelings.

                    Ie. if you are not a virgin, try to go for someone who's not a virgin too. I don't see the justice in a man/woman remaining pure all their lives and remaining untouched in the hope they are rewarded in this life and the next and they end up with 2nd hand goods. Where's the justice.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Right to know or not?

                      Originally posted by aadil77 View Post
                      Seriously bro what have you been smoking?

                      It's as dumb as saying 'If sme1 kills someone and repents, the dead person will come back alive'

                      unlawful sexual intercourse



                      You don't just lose your virginity by commiting zina, its lost by any sexual intercourse whether in marriage or outside of marriage.

                      Please go and educate yourself
                      first of all, your attitude is very bad. Educate yourself in that first.

                      second, LOOK at the definition of chaste you posted. That is exactly what everyone is telling you about. "unlawful" sexual intercourse. If someone engages in it and repented and stops engaging in it till marriage, he/she is still chaste.
                      "They are Shuhadaa (witnesses) to the fact that this Deen is greater than life, that values are more important than blood and that principles are more precious than souls" - Sheikh 'Abdullah Azzam

                      Lost in Islamic History :inlove:

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Right to know or not?

                        Originally posted by samin62 View Post
                        first of all, your attitude is very bad. Educate yourself in that first.

                        second, LOOK at the definition of chaste you posted. That is exactly what everyone is telling you about. "unlawful" sexual intercourse. If someone engages in it and repented and stops engaging in it till marriage, he/she is still chaste.
                        No one is disputing that, but here's the main question.

                        Is it fair for someone who has remained untouched all their lives in the hope of marrying someone else who is untouched all their lives, only to end up with someone who's been touched before and repented? Where is the justice?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Right to know or not?

                          Originally posted by kong View Post
                          No one is disputing that, but here's the main question.

                          Is it fair for someone who has remained untouched all their lives in the hope of marrying someone else who is untouched all their lives, only to end up with someone who's been touched before and repented? Where is the justice?
                          who is forcing you? If you prefer someone untouched and if you are untouched then I can totally understand. I am not going to dispute that.
                          "They are Shuhadaa (witnesses) to the fact that this Deen is greater than life, that values are more important than blood and that principles are more precious than souls" - Sheikh 'Abdullah Azzam

                          Lost in Islamic History :inlove:

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Right to know or not?

                            Originally posted by kong View Post
                            No one is disputing that, but here's the main question.

                            Is it fair for someone who has remained untouched all their lives in the hope of marrying someone else who is untouched all their lives, only to end up with someone who's been touched before and repented? Where is the justice?
                            Nobody is saying thats fair or should happen.

                            The main point I and other ppl are trying to get through to aadil is that if a person repents they are chaste. He is saying they are not chaste. I'm saying virginity and chastity are two different things. He is making no distinction between the 2.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Right to know or not?

                              Originally posted by samin62 View Post
                              who is forcing you? If you prefer someone untouched and if you are untouched then I can totally understand. I am not going to dispute that.
                              But here's the difficulty in it all.

                              You are requested to cover up your sins, as you should and we do not dispute that which comes from the Almighty. However if you conceal your sins and you end up with someone who claims to be completely untouched, but isn't actually, is that not a recipe for disaster.

                              I know I wouldn't want to marry a girl who's been touched before, irrespective of whether she's repented or not, I guess many others believe in this too.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Right to know or not?

                                Originally posted by sis_on_sunnah View Post
                                the ulema say with regard to not being allowed to marry unchaste people, that this refers to the one who is still upon zina. The ulema have agreed that the one who has repented from zina is chaste, so long as they dont return to the sin, w'allahu aalum.
                                Salam,

                                Sis I'd have to see this to believe it, because it would literally throw the value of chastity out the window. Chastity would be meaningless if someone could commit zina repent and then be chaste again. It would literally make fornicators equal to those who struggle all their lives with their nafs till they get married.

                                JazakhAllah khair

                                He it is Who sends blessings on you, as do His angels, that He may bring you out from the depths of Darkness into Light: and He is Full of Mercy to the Believers. [Quran {33:43}]
                                www.QuranicAudio.com
                                www.Quran.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X