Can Non-Syeds Marry Women of Syed Families?

[Zainab_M]

Can Non-Syeds Marry Women of Syed Families?

Adil Salahi, Arab News


Question:
In our part of the world, women belonging to Syed families are often told that they cannot marry anyone who is not a Syed. In fact some mullahs force the divorce of women who marry non-Syeds because they consider such a marriage a dishonor to the family. Please comment.

(Name and address withheld)


Answer:
There is absolutely no truth in this tradition, which is contrary to Islamic values and principles. God has stated people’s equality in many ways.

To give but one example, we may refer to the verse that states: “Mankind! We have created you all out of a male and a female, and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another.

Truly, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most genuinely God-fearing. God is All-Knowing, All-Aware.” (49: 13) From the Islamic point of view, a man gains esteem by his actions, not by his descent. The Prophet (peace be upon him) married his cousin, Zaynab, to a former slave, Zayd. Three of his own daughters were married to people totally unrelated to him.

Nevertheless, we should give the descendants of the Prophet their due respect, but this does not exempt them from any religious or civil duty, nor does it deprive them of any right due to other people.

If a divorce is forced on a couple for no reason other than this difference of status, such a divorce is a gross injustice and its perpetrators have much to answer for before God.

Depending on the circumstances, the divorce could well be invalid. The so-called mullah who tries to enforce it is either totally ignorant of Islamic values or has some sort of interest in the matter.


Source:  Arab News

[Heba E. Husseyn]

The question has been very well answered.  It goes without saying that in Islam there is no room for determining one's ethical status on the basis of family titles.  The Noble Quran has made this point crystal clear, and the Prophet (pbuh) and his family proved it through their own examples. 

Such titles began much after all important descendents of the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away.  Again, it goes without saying, if people came up with ideas of such titles in the lifetime of the Prophet, he (pbuh) would have never given his permission for introduction of such traditions. 

Those people of much later times by introducing such titles were actually reviving the customs that existed in the pre-Islamic era where class distinctions and caste systems were rampant.  Giving special titles to 'notable' families brings out the same trend. 

I am posting an interesting read on the origin of the term 'Saayid' or 'Syed.'

[muslima]

hmm i also heard from shias (circles of their ulmas) ONE MUST KEEP IN MIND Respect for Syed family the condition of marriage with syeds to non syed.
non syed male must show his respect and kind treatment to syed wife bcoz she is syed zadi( from al rasool )
non syed wife must show her high respect, must not disobey her husband syed husband..

[Ruhi_Rose]

hmm i also heard from shias (circles of their ulmas) ONE MUST KEEP IN MIND Respect for Syed family the condition of marriage with syeds to non syed.
non syed male must show his respect and kind treatment to syed wife bcoz she is syed zadi( from al rasool )
non syed wife must show her high respect, must not disobey her husband syed husband..

I think those ulemas who talk as such are really crazy.  If the husband is a nice man, the wife should also be nice to him.  And if the wife is a nice lady, the husband should be nice to her too.  That goes without saying, syed or no syed.  Being a "syed" or "syeda" is no guarantee for being worthy of respect.  What about those husbands who pick the title of "syed" but are abusive  .. who drink, commit zina, neglect their children and disrespect their wives?  Is the wife still supposed to be respectful to such a husband just because he's a "syed" ?   I wonder what answer the ulemas would have for my query.  Surely they cannot say that syeds are perfect and never unworthy of respect.  My family and I personally know dozens of people with the caption "syed" or "syeda" tagging along their names who are super jerks!

[Zainab_M]

Yes, exactly.

[muslima]

I think those ulemas who talk as such are really crazy.  If the husband is a nice man, the wife should also be nice to him.  And if the wife is a nice lady, the husband should be nice to her too.  That goes without saying, syed or no syed.  Being a "syed" or "syeda" is no guarantee for being worthy of respect.  What about those husbands who pick the title of "syed" but are abusive  .. who drink, commit zina, neglect their children and disrespect their wives?  Is the wife still supposed to be respectful to such a husband just because he's a "syed" ?   I wonder what answer the ulemas would have for my query.  Surely they cannot say that syeds are perfect and never unworthy of respect.  My family and I personally know dozens of people with the caption "syed" or "syeda" tagging along their names who are super jerks!
[/quote]


u are right sister Ruhi but shia's ulmas have their own criteria to prove themselves superiors i have personal experience to spend sometime with them they do disrespect their wives and syadas too disrespect their syed husbands hippocrate conditions are only for non syed lol

 they had legalized the zina with mut'a ? what mor worst ?

[Ruhi_Rose]

Yes sister Muslima.  But I'll tell you something.  Many of the Sunni ulemas are no different.  If you read the following carefully and check all the given links, you will understand what I mean.  The Sunni ulemas are just as responsible (if not more) for corrupting our society.  And if Shiias think themselves to be superior, so do the Sunnis.  I've also had plenty of personal experience of that.  Putting aside the issue of "syed," Sunnis openly and forcefully claim they are the "true Muslms" accusing shiias of being "rafidis."  Apart from being a wholly false judgemnt, frankly I dislike such an attitude.  

The opinion of mainly Sunni ulemas of husbands dominating wives has spread throughout the Muslim community.   The Sunni "scholars" in particular have misinterpreted the Quranic Verse 4:34 to enforce their own ideas against women and to justify wife-beating.  The fact is that V.4:34 of the Noble Quran is NOT about husbands beating their wives.  But there are numerous Sunni Ahadith I've read myself which literally permit husbands to treat their wives like servants or slaves.  And thus these ulemas misinterpret Quranic verses to make them compatible with those Ahadith.
Please refer to our posts:
- Wife beating not allowed in the Quran
-  Much ado about nothing - Noble Quran does NOT allow wife beating

Another common misconception in mainly Sunni minds to promote a male dominated society is the misinterpretation of the Quranic expression "right hand possesses."  Mainly sunni males often use this expression to justify zina.  This is a specific reference in the Quran only as long as the culture of slavery was rife around the world.  But that kind of slavery which existed in medieval times is now officially non-existant.  Therefor the Muslim men should not misinterpret this expression to justify their zina, but unfortunately many of them do.
Please refer to our post for more information:
- Quranic expression "right hand possesses"

Then again, many Sunni imams have used the Quranic expression "men are a degree above women" to condone gender superiority.  This is also a misinterpretation by them.  This Quranic expression doe NOT mean men are superior to women.  Rather it's a reference to financial responsibilities and it refers to men having greater financial responsibilities for taking care of their families compared to women.
Kindly refer to our post for more explanation:
- The expression "men are a degree above women

Lastly, you are also right that some shiias justify zina through temporary marriages called Mutah.  But again, shiias are not the only ones.  Sunnis indulge in temporary marriages just as much, only under different titles.  The equivalent of Mutah among sunnis is called "Misyar" in Saudi Arabia and "Urfi" in Egypt, Jordan and other sunni countries.  Here are the references.
- Wikipedia: temporary marriage in sunni Islam, 'Misyar'
- Nikah 'Urfi" from Wikipedia
- 'Urfi' temporary marriage is Egypt
- Misyar - the sunni equivalent of Mutah

However, not all sunnis and not all shiias indulge in such violations as described in this post of mine..  The educated ones think better.  No doubt about that.  But by and large, both sunnis and shiias have made (and are making) big blunders.  Therefore, we cannot only hold the shiias responsible for their mistakes but exonerate the sunnis.  I blame both in their own different ways.  However, what disgusts me more about the Sunnis is their habit of perpetrating violence and indulging in sectarian killings against the Shiias.  This is unforgivable and it's the primary cause for wrecking the atmosphere of the Ummah .... much to the amusement of our enemies.

[Heba E. Husseyn]

Hummm, very interesting and intelligent discussion.  Let me add one more misinterpretation through which Muslims try to promote zina.  It's through the Bukhari Hadith.  I'm not sure about the Shiias, but various communities of Sunnis do use it as an excuse to justify zina. 

In the Noble Quran there is no death penalty for zina, instead the punishment is 100 lashes.  But the Hadith has introduced the law from the altered Christian & Jewish bibles of death penalty for zina.  Since the Quran confirms that punish for such a violation is 100 lashes and not death, therefore the Hadith has twisted this law and made its own rule by separating adultery and fornication.  The Hadith law claims that punishment for adultery (i.e. extra-marital sex by married people) is death, but punishment for fornication (i.e. extra-marital sex between two unmarried people) is 100 lashes. 

With the passage of time, as the Muslim community has blended with western culture, it ignores the punishment of 100 lashes for fornication and only upholds that the punishment for adultery is death.  So you can see how much they have deviated from the actual Quranic law.

Now, my point here is, in view of the changes brought by Hadith, there are many sunni Muslim men who think that extra-marital sex with a married woman is zina but if that woman gets a divorce and is single, then sexual relations with her is okay.  That's how far many Sunni men have been misguided by the Hadith into condoning their sin.   I remember reading a story about the late Diana Spencer Windsor and one of her many lovers.  One of her boyfriends was a Pakistani sunni doctor living in UK.  This doctor gave his story to a British newspaper in which he mentioned that he did not consummate his relationship with Ms. Spencer as long as she was legally married.  But he considered it fine to consummate their relationship when she got her legal divorce because according to him, sexual relations between two unmarried people was fine.  May the curse of Allah Almighty be on such degraded minds !!

[Zainab_M]

Excellent points.  JazekAllah khair sisters. 

[muslima]

Yes sister Muslima.  But I'll tell you something.  Many of the Sunni ulemas are no different.  If you read the following carefully and check all the given links, you will understand what I mean.  The Sunni ulemas are just as responsible (if not more) for corrupting our society.  And if Shiias think themselves to be superior, so do the Sunnis.  I've also had plenty of personal experience of that.  Putting aside the issue of "syed," Sunnis openly and forcefully claim they are the "true Muslms" accusing shiias of being "rafidis."  Apart from being a wholly false judgemnt, frankly I dislike such an attitude.  

The opinion of mainly Sunni ulemas of husbands dominating wives has spread throughout the Muslim community.   The Sunni "scholars" in particular have misinterpreted the Quranic Verse 4:34 to enforce their own ideas against women and to justify wife-beating.  The fact is that V.4:34 of the Noble Quran is NOT about husbands beating their wives.  But there are numerous Sunni Ahadith I've read myself which literally permit husbands to treat their wives like servants or slaves.  And thus these ulemas misinterpret Quranic verses to make them compatible with those Ahadith.
Please refer to our posts:
- Wife beating not allowed in the Quran
-  Much ado about nothing - Noble Quran does NOT allow wife beating

Another common misconception in mainly Sunni minds to promote a male dominated society is the misinterpretation of the Quranic expression "right hand possesses."  Mainly sunni males often use this expression to justify zina.  This is a specific reference in the Quran only as long as the culture of slavery was rife around the world.  But that kind of slavery which existed in medieval times is now officially non-existant.  Therefor the Muslim men should not misinterpret this expression to justify their zina, but unfortunately many of them do.
Please refer to our post for more information:
- Quranic expression "right hand possesses"

Then again, many Sunni imams have used the Quranic expression "men are a degree above women" to condone gender superiority.  This is also a misinterpretation by them.  This Quranic expression doe NOT mean men are superior to women.  Rather it's a reference to financial responsibilities and it refers to men having greater financial responsibilities for taking care of their families compared to women.
Kindly refer to our post for more explanation:
- The expression "men are a degree above women

Lastly, you are also right that some shiias justify zina through temporary marriages called Mutah.  But again, shiias are not the only ones.  Sunnis indulge in temporary marriages just as much, only under different titles.  The equivalent of Mutah among sunnis is called "Misyar" in Saudi Arabia and "Urfi" in Egypt, Jordan and other sunni countries.  Here are the references.
- Wikipedia: temporary marriage in sunni Islam, 'Misyar'
- Nikah 'Urfi" from Wikipedia
- 'Urfi' temporary marriage is Egypt
- Misyar - the sunni equivalent of Mutah

However, not all sunnis and not all shiias indulge in such violations as described in this post of mine..  The educated ones think better.  No doubt about that.  But by and large, both sunnis and shiias have made (and are making) big blunders.  Therefore, we cannot only hold the shiias responsible for their mistakes but exonerate the sunnis.  I blame both in their own different ways.  However, what disgusts me more about the Sunnis is their habit of perpetrating violence and indulging in sectarian killings against the Shiias.  This is unforgivable and it's the primary cause for wrecking the atmosphere of the Ummah .... much to the amusement of our enemies.

very interesting to know something about double standared sunnis. .muta is quite well known hmm shias are on front fire on muta issue . many of not much aware of sunni world i guess misyar is not popular amongs sunnis    in my limited knowledge i know they do commit zina shamlessly being male its their Right. adultery is pride for them too..surprising they pointing fingers on others and their own hands are not clean 

Sunni-Ulma's ONLY imam followers imam bukhari, scholars etc imam imam imam , they can't even explain quran with out bukhari,they are biggest bukhari supporters they spread hadith culture they keeps people away from studying the Quran no one allow to talk about islam in front of them they are Aqal--e-kul .Not only wife beating any thing can be expected from bukhari followers.now i am sure they have changed everything to make male dominated society  i got ur point u are right..

on sectarian killings against the Shias i am totally agree with you sisiert ruhi yes its a shame

   urfi  ?? i don't know about it but yes saudis are sex sick ?? beyond belief  how could they neglect the divien law.if anybody steal they cut their hands off ?? what is the punishment against this dirty act ?? on the day of judgment they will be questioned first inshallah on many islamic issues..

i will definitely read sister

[muslima]

Hummm, very interesting and intelligent discussion.  Let me add one more misinterpretation through which Muslims try to promote zina.  It's through the Bukhari Hadith.  I'm not sure about the Shiias, but various communities of Sunnis do use it as an excuse to justify zina. 

In the Noble Quran there is no death penalty for zina, instead the punishment is 100 lashes.  But the Hadith has introduced the law from the altered Christian & Jewish bibles of death penalty for zina.  Since the Quran confirms that punish for such a violation is 100 lashes and not death, therefore the Hadith has twisted this law and made its own rule by separating adultery and fornication.  The Hadith law claims that punishment for adultery (i.e. extra-marital sex by married people) is death, but punishment for fornication (i.e. extra-marital sex between two unmarried people) is 100 lashes. 

With the passage of time, as the Muslim community has blended with western culture, it ignores the punishment of 100 lashes for fornication and only upholds that the punishment for adultery is death.  So you can see how much they have deviated from the actual Quranic law.

Now, my point here is, in view of the changes brought by Hadith, there are many sunni Muslim men who think that extra-marital sex with a married woman is zina but if that woman gets a divorce and is single, then sexual relations with her is okay.  That's how far many Sunni men have been misguided by the Hadith into condoning their sin.   I remember reading a story about the late Diana Spencer Windsor and one of her many lovers.  One of her boyfriends was a Pakistani sunni doctor living in UK.  This doctor gave his story to a British newspaper in which he mentioned that he did not consummate his relationship with Ms. Spencer as long as she was legally married.  But he considered it fine to consummate their relationship when she got her legal divorce because according to him, sexual relations between two unmarried people was fine.  May the curse of Allah Almighty be on such degraded minds !!

you are right sister heba  Sunni men's are misguided by the Hadith,ulmas give them extra unquranic rights on behalf of bukhari

these bukhari follower fixed death penalty for zina only for women 
 i  have never heard that men get death penalty of zina ? punishment of 100 lashes ? never ?