Die islamische Position zur Zwangsheirat

.:: The Islamic Position on the "forced marriage"::.

Abdurrahman Reidegeld notes: Marriages by force are illegal in Islam

(iz) Lately the expression of "Forced marriage" runs through the press, usually combined with appalling incidents in which young Muslim women were forced married into Turkey. This type of reporting is pimped with an indication which now a days always guarantes obligations that this is just an "Islamic forced marriage". Now in this contribution a question-answer form will be set out showing that any kind of compulsion, threats, etc.is rejected by the classical Islamic marriage law and therefore an "Islamic forced marriage" per se does not exist. Unfortunately, it is significant for the current media and information situation that misrepresentation is not only un-verified, but is propagated to increase the sell, the bogeyman "Islam" is currently the money maker for the mass media and increases unscrupulous and uninhibited in senseless way, hate and prejudices.

This contribution is considered a scientific correction of genuine Islamic sources.

Question 1: What are the relevant places to this topic in the Quran and Ahadith, and how are these interpreted by the scholars?

A marriage according to the Fiqh, the Islamic right and duty doctrine, is understood as a reciprocal action , in which the main actors, the spouses and the Wali of women (see below), have an honest intention that marriage comes to existence for the benefit of all stakeholders. Here is the Hadith: "Verily the actions are depending on the intentions (Nijjat), and every one becomes what he intended." (As-Sahih tradition in the great Hadith-collectors). Who, for example, has the intention, to give away his entrusted daughter because of money, can not be a Wali according the islamic marriage law.

If some one as a man or woman does not wish to marry, but only wants to break out of family ties, without seriously has the descission at the time of wedding to acceopt the other as wedding partner has according to islam not conducted a valid marriage..

A bad treatment of women by the husband is prohibited and the the Quran expresses ther Prohibition :

" But consort with them in kindness, for if ye hate them it may happen that ye hate a thing wherein Allah hath placed much good." (Surah 4, Verse 19).

A sinful, evil or indecent man is not allowed to be Wali or husband of a honest woman. The following Quranverse is understood in this sense:

"Is he who is a believer like unto him who is an evil liver? They are not alike.." (Surah 32, Verse 18).

From the field of Hadith is about the many famous collections of Hadith-Sahih-Overdelivery used:

"A Marriage (Nikah) exists only with a Wali."

Will say: Without the involvement of a Wali (trustees of the woman speaking the the first prenuptial marriage formula), a valid marriage can not exist. This is supported by the Fiqh schools with the exception of Hanafija as mandatory and binding, while the Hanafija, from law theoretical perspectives and for reasons of considering other sources use this Hadith only as strict recommendations, but not compulsory elementary character.

The explicit commitment to present entrusted women only good male persons as future spouses and to marriafge them with their agreement is to be found in some well-known Hadith, where the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) says:

"Selects the best / decent people for the women for whom you take care and marry each other, wo are similar (in its goodness), and let the [you entrusted] find of such [good men] spouses." (As transmitted in Sahih Al-Hakim).

Question 2: What rules can be made in this aspect by the example of the Prophet (peace be upon him) ie from the relevant Ahadith and Sunnah, and by his companions and the early caliphes?

A key role for understanding are the two terms of Wilaja and Wikala. "Wilaja" means a protective role, which means from the principle of Islamic teachings that a woman always has to be protected and provided with food, clothing and housing. So a young, unmarried woman, from an Islamic understanding ideally goes from the responsibility of her father or family to the executive responsibility of the husband. This is not to be understood that the woman is not allowed to perform work or teaching practice, etc. but that all the money that she earns is only her´s alone, while all the money, that a husband earns principly also belongs to all of his whole family. He has take care for the women and children, in some cases also the parents and other relatives. Already the oldest scholars - until today in the consensus - assume that even a rich woman who has her own income may not be forced to give anything from her personal property and income for her clothing, housing and food, but this is the job of the husband. This was consistent practice by all scholars, from the prophet´s time, the era of the rightly caliphs , the dynasties of Umajjaden, the Abbasid, later as the Ottomans and the others up to the present time.

The "Wilaja" is a protective role and -utility and in this sense, the Wali (the one who precisely has the Wilaja) takes the active part for the woman during the Islamic marriage contract, the other part is taken by the future husband. But the Wali may act only with the consent of the woman. so in the classical Fiqh it is stated that the woman must be present during the marriage contract to eventually at the last moment before the marriage take back her agreement.

There is a difference in the views of Fiqh schools concerning the necessary requirement of a Wali, the hanafitic school can under certain circumstances accept a marriage without a Wali while the malic, schafi'itic and hanbalitic school demand a wali in any case .

From the field of Hadith a Sahih tradition from the Prophet used: "A Marriage (Nikah) exists only with a Wali." This means that, without involvement of a Wali no valid marriage contract can be made. This tradition is, as already mentioned, by the Fiqh schools except Hanafija regarded as mandatory and binding.

All scholars however emphasize, if a household theoretically can be Wali of a woman, but it wants to force a marriage without regarding her well-being she is no longer bound to him and can chose her own Wali from a particular part of their relatives. If this is not possible (eg no one would exist, or no relationship of trust exists or because the person concerned has a sinful and indecent life path), so she can also in accordance with the highest opinions of scholars released a decent, ask any Muslim to be Wali . Always from the perspective that the Wali is her her protector and is a trustee to her interests and be honest.

"Wikala" however means in the representation of a person by another during the Islamic matrimonial. Significantly a Wali or the husband can be represented by a trustees (Wakil) (such as when the father of the bride is in another country and appointes a Wakil, who together with the bride, the groom and the witnesses conducts the marriage ceremony). The woman, however (and also the witnesses practically can never be be replaced during the marriage contract by a representative or a representative - she is the central person, and the validity of marriage dependent of her agreement.

Question 3: What are the judgments of the law schools to look like? And there are differences between Sunnis and Shiites? How did the practice in the Islamic history?

All schools of Fiqh, whether Sunni or Shiite, are consistently of the opinion that a marriage is invalid, when a woman against her will is forced to express a certain man to marry. In general: If one or both future spouses at the time of the marriage contract do not wish to marry but are forced (through violence or threat thereof, "Ikrah"), and this marriage is invalid. The proper and sincere intention to perform a marriage is absolutely necessary - and this even apart from the question of "Ikrah": If a marriage contract is received, but inside it rejects the Eheführung and later before a Muslim judge (Qadi) confirmed its marriage may in certain circumstances for dissolved (Faskh) explained, or he or she can - in the past "Ikrah" - to obtain the divorce. Therefore, in accordance with Islamic matrimonial a married woman - when she is forced to marry - at any time to obtain a divorce. That was already 1400 years before the event and applies to today, where Islamic marriage is valid and in force is applied, for example, in Syria, Jordan and other countries.

Question 4: What is the practice among Muslims in Germany? What role play aspects which do not have to do anything with Islam? What is the quantity of these involved incidents ?

First, I have to emphasize that here in Germany a descision on n marriage among Muslims has to deal with the general civil German matrimonial law aswell as well as the Islamic religious law. De facto, therefore first a civil marriage has to take place, which for Muslims (by the way analogous to the Catholic Church opinion) becomes legitimate before God only by the religious-legitimated part of marriage. That menas that an Islamic marriage is added which from the German Law has no judical relevance but is the important aspect for the Muslim.

The level of misunderstanding is created by the fact, that - concerning part of the national Turkish Muslims in Germany - neither in Germany nor in today's Turkey exist any kind of state-approved "Islamic marriage". By this the situation is much more different than to members of nationals countries such as Morocco or Jordan, where only the Islamic marriage rules for Muslims as the governmental legitimated form of marriage. In these cases there are also special bilateral agreement between Germany and these countries concerning marriages which demand a certain ability-for-marriagage-document from the Jordanian citizen in Germany which concretly in the Jordanian understanding is an agreement from the Wali of the woman. For Muslims from all countries, in which for Muslims (largely or entirely) matrimonial is according the Islamic law, de facto a forced marriage is not possible and also not legitimate and even in extreme cases, when a young woman is brought against her will to foreign countries in order to marry, even then it would not be possible to legalise it by the orign country. In these countries it is for a woman relatively easy to get a divorce, because there are also government-authorized Islamic marriage courts.

Proven fact is also

(1) that there is no compulsion associated with a valid marriage under the Islamic marriage law. Not in the early days, not in the classical era, and still not even today.

(2) that such women usually come from families who are not practicing Islamic in the classical way of life, rather they are much more only nominally Muslim.

(3) that the de facto, unjust force on women are in fact not based on Islamic scholars or leaders and these practices occur in more than 90% in the Turkish national milieu, because since the founding of the Turkish Republic the Islamic matrimonial no longer officially exists. So there are no supervisory marriage courts authorized by state. This situation, however, is neither present in Arab countries nor in the Indo-Pakistan region, where a woman can demand very easily a divorce or annulment and can also often call for punishment for the restraint.

(4) that this is currently much debated phenomenon of "forced marriage" (in the sense of a pseudo-marriage conducted by an "Imam", most often only a Leader-Prayer, so no real scholars) - has thank God, become a rarity in the second and even more in the third generation of Turks living in Germany.

We are talking about maladministration, which appeared socially-traditional (in scense of a Islamic laminated abuse of religion) a long time ago secular Turkey, was carried several decades ago to Germany and appear today in connection with uneducated Muslims which are practical non practising their faith.

However, to regard this as rule, an Islamic legitimacy or legitimate is a sign of total ignorance about the history, the legal position and the de facto state outside the old National Turkey (ie up until the 1980s).

Especially the new awareness of a rather intellectual Islam, who works more source-oriented and no longer under pseudo-Islamic folk traditions, has in recent years placed such practices finally where they belong: in the corner of decades of ignorance especially by the loss of being monitored by a true marriage judgmentship.

Source: http://www.islamische-zeitung.de/home/artikel.cgi?nr=5245