The Hadith @Omar del Sur quoted has been debunked centuries ago as fabricated. Even his own source mentions that.
It’s even in his explanation….
I felt that it didn’t need much explanation if the source itself says that the Hadith is munkar.
I don't know who needs to hear this..
- Thread starter Periplus
- Start date
The Hadith @Omar del Sur quoted has been debunked centuries ago as fabricated. Even his own source mentions that.
It’s even in his explanation….
I felt that it didn’t need much explanation if the source itself says that the Hadith is munkar.
In Islam, you do not have power over who your son marries.
However, it is honourable for your son to ask for your approval. But they can marry without it.
For your daughter, she must ask for approval.
I have power over it u just hypacrit
Like i said i reject same reason as i would reject my daughter potential spouse
A son does not need permission to marry but a daughter does need permission.
I don’t know how much more clearer I can make this statement.
AdoonkaAlle
Ragna qowl baa xira, dumarna meher baa xira.
The Hadith @Omar del Sur quoted has been debunked centuries ago as fabricated. Even his own source mentions that.
It’s even in his explanation….
I felt that it didn’t need much explanation if the source itself says that the Hadith is munkar.
That's besides the point as your comment was about the suitability of ethnicity/race not the soundness of the hadith. You were implying that the hadith only related to arabs and couldn't be used as evidence by other ethnicities to reject others ie only arabs could reject others on their background as such somalis etc can't use this is as evidence to reject non-somali
There's other hadith that classical scholars used as evidence to support the non-suitability of arabs for marriage that are sound, one of which was included in the post that @Tamir shared. This is what you had to say
The concept of Kaf'ah is extremely contentious, to the point that the only thing all madhabs can agree on when it comes to kaf'ah is compatibility of religion.
That screenshot only talks about Arab and non-Arab marriages due to the hadith of Arabs being above all others.
Your screenshot says "as for colour, it is of no consideration in suitability".
In both statements you highlight that it relates to only arabs and explicitly state
Meaning you only accept rejection of non-arabs and wouldn't deem it to be racism or nationalism when an arab father rejects a non-arab guy for his daughter. Laakin the moment a somali father rejects a non-somali for their ethnicity it suddenly is racism.
How is this in any way correlate with your OP where you stated the following ?
But a parent cannot reject a potential spouse for their daughter in Islam due to race or ethnicity.
If the daughter wants to marry that potential spouse and the parent has no other reason for rejecting apart from their race or ethnicity, they lose their guardianship status over their daughter. The next male relative (generally grandfather) is expected to take over and if they're reject it, then the local Islamic leader will take guardianship status.
Islam does not believe in nationalism, so do not tie your nationalism to Islam.
Do you see the contradiction ? In your attempt to limit rejection based on ethnicity to ONLY arabs you ended up negating your OP where you clearly made no exceptions and made it clear that parents can't reject potential suitors due to their ethnicity.
It was obvious why you were so adamant to limit rejection to only arabs because you fully understood that if arabs can reject non arabs then this is evidence that other groups can reject others based on the same criteria as arabs ie ethnicity/race. This didn't sit well with you as it negates your main argument that a person can't be rejected due to their ethnic background.
So whether you limit it to arabs only or not it doesn't change the fact that both views contradict your main premise and argument.
It is not about permission rather why i reject it like i said u double stander and hypacrit
I was pointing out the contradiction in the source. Again, I thought this was obvious.
It said that Arab fathers can reject their daughters marrying non-Arab men…
But also said…
“Colour is of no consideration” as a criteria for rejecting marriage.
It also conflicts with this sahih Hadith:
“There is no virtue of an Arab over a foreigner nor a foreigner over an Arab, and neither white skin over black skin nor black skin over white skin, except by righteousness. Have I not delivered the message?”
It has everything to do with it most of the reverts do it out of 'love' or sexual acess to the women. If thats the case why not marry into muslim family. Its becausd these women truly want gaals but use the deen as a cover. Its reason revert obsession and not marry non somalis muslims obsession. These niggas convert for access. Muslims women prefer converts thinking they less traditional conservative and more libera progressives.
Every community is racist and xenophobicImagine getting mad at people for marrying who they love because of their race, y’all are proving the point that somalis are more racist than cadaans
Mozart
You need people like me
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Bundasliga
VIP
We appreciate your offer to diversify our gene pool, but we humbly declineOkay, I’ve been asleep for a few hours now and damn, you guys have been busy.
Its been almost 24 hours and no one has provided any evidence that proves me wrong.
At this point, it’s an easy dub.
AdoonkaAlle
Ragna qowl baa xira, dumarna meher baa xira.
Sxb you were not, you were arguing that those hadith couldn't be used to justify rejecting anyone on race/ethnicity unless the said people were arabs. This what you wrote
In that statement you're not contesting that arabs can reject non-arabs nor did you reject it. What you disagreed with is that this can't be used as evidence by any non-arab to reject someone based on their race etc. Lineage and colour are two distinct qualities, other scholars & madhabs had the view that colour is a trait of consideration
It contradicts according to your understanding of it but not that of scholars etc. This is why it's important to learn about diinta and the evidences for any particular issue. Islamic rulings especially with regards to the issue we're discussing most of the time are context based, this is why any 1 issue can have different rulings based on the circumstance behind it.
Due to your lack of knowledge and nuance in this issue all together you end making huge mistakes. The right of the father can not be taken away from him due to the whims and desires of people there has to be clear cut islamic violations for that to be considered.
Even then the pros and cons of taking guardianship away from the father has to be weighed up, given that this topic is one where there's valid differences it makes it even more complicated.
No man is entitled to or even has the right to marry another man's daughter. if the father doesn't like you and won't allow you to marry his daughter then the best thing to do is accept it and try your lack elsewhere. There's no benefit in causing problems between a father and his daughter.
This is why there's an increase in marriage bandits who bypass the father using this exact reasoning "your father has no right to refuse me because of my ethnicity, his guardianship is revoked" get's a dodgy imam. After getting what they want from the daughter they divorce them just as easily as they "married" them.
Lol if he's Muslim and has a good family y the duck do u care about his race even if he came from a racist sect of society like eastern European or Japanese u have no right to say no dumbass
Nilotic
VIP
Yes, why not just let your daughter desperately attempt to make her way in a community with over a millennia of accumulated and terribly caustic prejudice and enmity for her people? That will surely end well.
It's not as if people actually marry into a community; it's not as if they will be exposed to that community and be subject to their collective thoughts and perceptions of other cultures, peoples and history.
@the rest of the forum
Waa kuma kan?
Probably habar yonis.Waa kuma kan?
Are you a Muslim?
nope
