And whoever does not know them is not obligated to learn them, and their specific meaning in every language is sufficient for him.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "And whoever does not know them is not obligated to learn them". This is the beginning of the new lesson. "Whoever does not know them" means that a person does not know the terms of marriage and contracting marriage because his language is not Arabic. Do we say that he must learn the specific words for marriage and contracting marriage, or not? We say he is not obligated to do so, as the author (may Allah have mercy on him) stated. He said: "He is not obligated to learn them, and their specific meaning in every language is sufficient for him". This is the truth. We do not say to a non-Arab that you must learn the specific words for marriage and contracting marriage to contract the marriage of your daughter, for example. We say that the specific meaning in your language is sufficient, and "specific meaning" means the meaning that is exclusive to marriage, by which the marriage is contracted from you. Meanwhile, if an Arab were to use the specific words you used to contract the marriage, the marriage would not be contracted, even if the meaning was understood.
He said: "In every language". The meaning of "in every language" is in every tongue. Now, if we adopt the stronger position that the marriage is contracted by what indicates the meaning, and the guardian obligates the contract in a language other than Arabic, but it is known to the husband and the two witnesses, is the marriage contracted? Yes, according to the stronger position, it is contracted. For example, if the guardian obligates the contract in English, and he knows the meaning, the husband knows the meaning, and the two witnesses know the meaning, the stronger position is that it is contracted. Because what is considered is what? The wording or the meaning?
The questioner : The meaning.
The Shaykh : It is the meaning. However, he is disciplined for contracting the marriage, which is a religious contract and one of the best and most important contracts in the Shari'ah, in a language other than Arabic, even though he knows it. For this reason, the Commander of the Faithful, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), would strike those who spoke in the non-Arabic tongue with a severe beating. Yes, and some of our Muslim brothers, due to the weakness of faith in their hearts and the weakness of character in their souls, go and speak in English. You find that when he speaks to his companion in English and that companion responds to him in English... he puffs up as if he has attained the east and west of the earth because he has become able to speak in English. Yes, and at that time, he embodies the saying of the poet: "I am the son of Jalaa' and the one who shows his teeth *** When I remove my turban, you will know me"
Why? Because he knows how to speak in English. It has even reached me that some people, and I seek refuge in Allah, teach their children English. The children, and when he wants to bid them farewell or greet them, he says: "Bye bye". Glory be to Allah, you bring this papal language and leave off "As-salamu alaykum" or "Alaykum as-salam." It is a disgrace and a shame. If the matter were not religious, it should at least be national. I go to the language of my people, and I have the Arabic language in this form, Arabic, inflected, and eloquent, the most eloquent of languages, the language of the Arabs. And I go to the other languages. For this reason, in my view, the one who teaches his child English from a young age will be held accountable for it on the Day of Resurrection, because it leads to the child's love for this language and preferring it over the Arabic language, and consequently leads to loving those who speak it from among its people and despising those who speak other than this language. So the man will be held accountable on the Day of Resurrection if he puts his children to learn English while they are young. As for one who has grown up and matured and says, "I want to learn English or other foreign languages to call to Allah by them," we say to him, this is good, and we will help you with this and encourage you. Or if he says, "I need a language other than Arabic because I conduct trade with these people, so I want to learn to be able to do so," we say there is nothing wrong with this. This is a purposeful action with a correct objective, so there is no harm. But if a person does that out of infatuation with it, exalting its people, and preferring it over the Arabic language, then this is an error. Now, the important point: a man who knows Arabic obligates the marriage in English to another who knows English, and he responds or accepts in English, and the two witnesses know that. What do you say about his marriage? According to the correct position, it is valid. And according to the madhhab, it is not valid, because it must be in the Arabic language.
He said: "In every language". The meaning of "in every language" is in every tongue. Now, if we adopt the stronger position that the marriage is contracted by what indicates the meaning, and the guardian obligates the contract in a language other than Arabic, but it is known to the husband and the two witnesses, is the marriage contracted? Yes, according to the stronger position, it is contracted. For example, if the guardian obligates the contract in English, and he knows the meaning, the husband knows the meaning, and the two witnesses know the meaning, the stronger position is that it is contracted. Because what is considered is what? The wording or the meaning?
The questioner : The meaning.
The Shaykh : It is the meaning. However, he is disciplined for contracting the marriage, which is a religious contract and one of the best and most important contracts in the Shari'ah, in a language other than Arabic, even though he knows it. For this reason, the Commander of the Faithful, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), would strike those who spoke in the non-Arabic tongue with a severe beating. Yes, and some of our Muslim brothers, due to the weakness of faith in their hearts and the weakness of character in their souls, go and speak in English. You find that when he speaks to his companion in English and that companion responds to him in English... he puffs up as if he has attained the east and west of the earth because he has become able to speak in English. Yes, and at that time, he embodies the saying of the poet: "I am the son of Jalaa' and the one who shows his teeth *** When I remove my turban, you will know me"
Why? Because he knows how to speak in English. It has even reached me that some people, and I seek refuge in Allah, teach their children English. The children, and when he wants to bid them farewell or greet them, he says: "Bye bye". Glory be to Allah, you bring this papal language and leave off "As-salamu alaykum" or "Alaykum as-salam." It is a disgrace and a shame. If the matter were not religious, it should at least be national. I go to the language of my people, and I have the Arabic language in this form, Arabic, inflected, and eloquent, the most eloquent of languages, the language of the Arabs. And I go to the other languages. For this reason, in my view, the one who teaches his child English from a young age will be held accountable for it on the Day of Resurrection, because it leads to the child's love for this language and preferring it over the Arabic language, and consequently leads to loving those who speak it from among its people and despising those who speak other than this language. So the man will be held accountable on the Day of Resurrection if he puts his children to learn English while they are young. As for one who has grown up and matured and says, "I want to learn English or other foreign languages to call to Allah by them," we say to him, this is good, and we will help you with this and encourage you. Or if he says, "I need a language other than Arabic because I conduct trade with these people, so I want to learn to be able to do so," we say there is nothing wrong with this. This is a purposeful action with a correct objective, so there is no harm. But if a person does that out of infatuation with it, exalting its people, and preferring it over the Arabic language, then this is an error. Now, the important point: a man who knows Arabic obligates the marriage in English to another who knows English, and he responds or accepts in English, and the two witnesses know that. What do you say about his marriage? According to the correct position, it is valid. And according to the madhhab, it is not valid, because it must be in the Arabic language.