Marriage to a woman with no religious views

[kamhan]

is the view on people with no beliefs the same as for people of the book( jews, catholics etc)
what sins am i committing all the time she is a non believer

[hafs]

:salam:
Brother you would probably have to explain more fully what you mean when you say no beliefs .Is your wife atheist or just doesn't care to practice ?
What exactly does she believe or not believe etc.

[krazy_angel23]

being allowed to marry the women of the people of the book apllied to when the books, injeel and tauraat were being read in their original forms. nowadays there are no ahle-kitab people of the book left because those books do not even exist anymore in their original form that is.

[Salahuddin92]

:salam: brother, i really can't understand a thing about the question ur asking....but if my interpretation is rite, u are married and ur have did not practice Islam,[if interpretate it wrong, sorry then].in other words, u are comparing it whether it is same as the ahlil-kitabs.Well, if her childhood and teenage days, she was practising Islam, and then when she grew older, she left the practice it means u must guide her back[dude, it's a husband's job!].Well that means he is and unobidient muslim.IF she was not a muslim at all, but ur married to her somehow, it means [if u live together] ur doing zina...so, that's the only thing i can tell, because i'm just guessing the question.

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

is the view on people with no beliefs the same as for people of the book( jews, catholics etc)
what sins am i committing all the time she is a non believer

I think he means whether it is allowed to marry people who don't have any faith at all. He has to confirm it, though.

[kamhan]

Im sorry this has been confusing. her family were catholic and she practiced this when she was a child. as she grew older she has withdrawn from religion and now does not follow or practice any.
my aim was to get her to convert to islam. my mother was a convert and is one of the best muslims i know, so i hoped my wife might be the same one day.
unfortunately her outlook on religion is not good, and i fear the task of getting her to accept islam will be harder than i expected.
i will keep trying to lead her to islam but the original post was to find out how this situation affects me??

i hope that makes it a bit clearer.

[krazy_angel23]

if you r married 2 a woman with no religious views then i would advice u to re-look at ur relationship and decide wheter u want 2 go on with it. because even though at the moment you may not see any dissadvantages of her irreligousness but once you have kids it will become very hard for you. my father is married to an ex-catholic but who is muslim only by name. now no matter how hard my father tries the child is inclining towards her mothers religion and is being brought up unislamically. that woman has no islam in her and as a result of that the child has no love for Islam n the sad thing is all d sin is on my father because that is his responsibility but he has no say in d matter.

maybe you should do istikhara and ask Allah for help in guiding u 2 make d right decision. which will be beneficial 4 u in this world n the hereafter.

[Salahuddin92]

Im sorry this has been confusing. her family were catholic and she practiced this when she was a child. as she grew older she has withdrawn from religion and now does not follow or practice any.
my aim was to get her to convert to islam. my mother was a convert and is one of the best muslims i know, so i hoped my wife might be the same one day.
unfortunately her outlook on religion is not good, and i fear the task of getting her to accept islam will be harder than i expected.
i will keep trying to lead her to islam but the original post was to find out how this situation affects me??

i hope that makes it a bit clearer.

thanks for making it clearer.Well the first case here, she WAS a catholic and then she became atheist as she is not practising any other religion at the time being.So how on earth u married a non muslim??? Anyway, you could still attract her to islam and your job will be easy :insha: as she had long left her original religion. well here are the stpes u could take:


first, bring your wife to you mother's home and let them be alone[women's time] so that your mother somehow could attract her with her akidah
Second,try tuning to islamic based tv or radio often and turn up the volume[if she is somewhere far from there] so that she is exposed with how islam works
Finally, does it affects you? well to be honest, i'm still confused how u r married to her.Well the effects i could predict is as you being a leader[a husband] is that well carrying you wife sins IF u did not act quickly and ur marriage institution is weak as you partner is not well practising the religion u r in.


With that i hope that it could help you in figuring things out:cheesygri :D ;) :) :rolleyes:

[umar_italy]

being allowed to marry the women of the people of the book apllied to when the books, injeel and tauraat were being read in their original forms. nowadays there are no ahle-kitab people of the book left because those books do not even exist anymore in their original form that is.

:salam:

At the time of RasuluLlah :saw: the precedent Books were just been manipulated: in fact the Qur'an abrogated all them, but still in the very Qur'an there is the permission to marry women of Ahl al-Kitab, even if their beliefs were corrupted.

Take a look here :insh:: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=317334&postcount=3

:ws:

[kamals]

being allowed to marry the women of the people of the book apllied to when the books, injeel and tauraat were being read in their original forms. nowadays there are no ahle-kitab people of the book left because those books do not even exist anymore in their original form that is.

They were most certainly NOT in their original forms at the time of Rasulullah, salallahu alaihi wa salam. baring the remote possibility of some text squirled away somewhere remote.

This is a frequently heard assertion but it is untrue, though the Injeel is certainly corrupt now, it was corrupt then as well, and there are copies of manuscripts dating from that time. The books of the Gospel

As for the modern Jewish version of the Taurat, based on the Masoretic text, it has been better preserved than the Injeel since that period, and it was already corrupt in that age and the version we have today is pretty consistent with the version then, the modern torah, or "tanakh" (interestingly enough, called by the early Rabbis the Miqra, a word that is a cognate of Quran) was compiled in its present form by about 200 AD, 400 years before the time of the Sahabah (ra)

The modern Samaritan's version of the taurat is arguably a more ancient version than that of the modern Jews (and thus likely to be better preserved since they rejected the Talmudic innovations that the Judeans brought with them from Babylon, preferring closer to the original teachings of Musa (as) to remain to to authenticity) but it is still rather close to the Masoretic text.

The general gist is that the Taurat of the Samaritans, the Jews, and the Christian Old Testament today is pretty close to if not identical in some cases with that recited by the Samaritans, Jews, and Christians during the first century of Islam.

As for the Injeel of the Christians, the numerous differing versions (from the Syrian's, the Egyptian Copts, the Ethiopians, the Eastern Orthodox and the Western Christians) they all had similar levels of corruption in the first century of Islam and there are manuscripts backing this up.

So they were all reciting texts then similar to the texts their ancestors read and recite today. We consider all of it corrupt. And marriage with Kitabis was permissible then, so what has changed in this one aspect?

[umar_italy]

They were most certainly NOT in their original forms at the time of Rasulullah, salallahu alaihi wa salam. baring the remote possibility of some text squirled away somewhere remote.

This is a frequently heard assertion but it is untrue, though the Injeel is certainly corrupt now, it was corrupt then as well, and there are copies of manuscripts dating from that time. The books of the Gospel

As for the modern Jewish version of the Taurat, based on the Masoretic text, it has been better preserved than the Injeel since that period, and it was already corrupt in that age and the version we have today is pretty consistent with the version then, the modern torah, or "tanakh" (interestingly enough, called by the early Rabbis the Miqra, a word that is a cognate of Quran) was compiled in its present form by about 200 AD, 400 years before the time of the Sahabah (ra)

The modern Samaritan's version of the taurat is arguably a more ancient version than that of the modern Jews (and thus likely to be better preserved since they rejected the Talmudic innovations that the Judeans brought with them from Babylon, preferring closer to the original teachings of Musa (as) to remain to to authenticity) but it is still rather close to the Masoretic text.

The general gist is that the Taurat of the Samaritans, the Jews, and the Christian Old Testament today is pretty close to if not identical in some cases with that recited by the Samaritans, Jews, and Christians during the first century of Islam.

As for the Injeel of the Christians, the numerous differing versions (from the Syrian's, the Egyptian Copts, the Ethiopians, the Eastern Orthodox and the Western Christians) they all had similar levels of corruption in the first century of Islam and there are manuscripts backing this up.

So they were all reciting texts then similar to the texts their ancestors read and recite today. We consider all of it corrupt. And marriage with Kitabis was permissible then, so what has changed in this one aspect?

:salam:

Exact!!

:ws: