Rani

I've noticed recently that I know of one or two baha'is who believe in the concept of trial marriage.

At least one of them seems to think it is okay as she reasons that you don't know how well someone will treat you until you live with them.

So I ask, if it were to become common that baha'is were living together before marriage in order to see what it is like as man and wife, how would we set ourselves apart?

Signed, Somewhat surprised.

arthra

I don't know how many are aware of this but there is a communication on the subject of "trial marriages":

1269. The Bahá'í Faith Does not Contemplate any form of 'Trial Marriage'

"Concerning the three definitions of 'companionate marriage' which you give in your letter,

the first, which is defined as living together without being married, on either a trial or immoral basis, is obviously unacceptable in Bahá'í teachings and is, moreover, an offence which, if persisted in, could call for deprivation of voting rights.

The second and third, namely (2) a marriage where the couple agree ahead of time that they will not have children, ever, and

(3) an marriage in which the couple would not have children until they are sure that they wish to stay married, divorce by mutual consent being envisaged before children are born, are private situations which would be undetectable by anyone who has not been confided in by either the husband or the wife. thus, unlike the first type of "companionate marriage" they do not constitute blatant immorality and no question of removal of voting rights would arise.

Nevertheless they are also both contrary to the spirit of Bahá'í Law.

The Bahá'í Teachings do not contemplate any form of 'trial marriage'.

A couple should study each other's character and spend time getting to know each other before they decide to marry, and when they do marry it should be with the intention of establishing an eternal bond.

They should realize, moreover, that the primary purpose of marriage is the procreation of children. A couple who are physically incapable of having children may, of course, marry, since the procreation of children is not the only purpose of marriage. However, it would be contrary to the spirit of the Teachings for a couple to decide voluntarily never to have any children."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, November 3, 1982)

(Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 379)

Rani

Yea, I am aware of that quote, but it doesn't always feel like the right time to quote the Writings to a friend in a given situation.

LordOfGoblins

Tell your friend to do a teaching trip with him.
God has provided other means to get aquanted. Tell her dont think he hasnt taken that into account already when he made the laws?
Anyway doing service with them is the best way to get to know their character IMO.
Specially if its in a tough or remote place..

Rani

Well, for clarity, actually, this friend is married so it is not an issue for her, at least not at the moment.
But for some reason, she seems to think along those lines.

But your idea of serving together is good.
Two people can still spend a lot of time together without having a trial marriage.

Fadl

Rani,

I think all we can do in a situation like this with a friend is lovingly share the guidance on the matter, then revert to "sin covering eye" mode, and pray for them. This is a matter for the the individual, the instituitons and God to resolve. I'm sure your concerns are legitimate, and you have the best interest of this friend in your heart but at the end of the day it won't help us or anyone else to worry about how firmly another believer is on the path. We have to keep our focus on our own path because that is what we will answer for.

cire perdue

Any Baha'i who believes in trial marriage is a victim of fashion, fashionable values, and hopefully will come to understand that the ideas practiced today like attraction is love, will grow and have a real chance for happiness.

wombatwolf

Mayhaps someone could explain why cohabitation and trial marriage are considered bad? The letter doesn't seem to explain the reason for it.

Is it because of the possibility of sex?

or is there some other factor as well?

cire perdue

It is not a standard that is controllable. It is in fashion. People need to be more mature than they currently are to form stable relationships. It's about healthy family values, committment, and knowing who one is before getting in a relationship. What do you think this does to a child to have a broken home and parents that are not married and don't love each other? Children pay a price with unstable parental relationships.

danieldemol

Sex is not inherently against faith within the bounds of permanent monogamy, however sex outside the intention of permanent relationship does leave open the risk of various things - the risk of children being left without a garantee of having a pair of parents to support them, the risk of sexually transmitted disease since this could potentially lead to an unbounded number of "trial relationships".

When your parents yell at you as a kid because you are about to touch a live power point, as you get older you understand that the harm in being yelled at was only a warning of far greater harm to come if you carried through with the action.

So I'm inclined to think that harms in this life are somewhat of a warning of greater harm to come in the next life.

That is, if non-monogamous relationships can harm humanity in this life, then that harm is somewhat of a compassionate warning that these things have a destructive effect on the soul worthy of escaping before it is too late.

Rani

Actually, the idea that it is okay to live with someone, -having sex with them, for a while before marriage, -just because you are monogamous, is in my opinion, part of the whole problem /issue.
From my understanding, Baha'u'llah, or the Faith doesn't say it's okay to have sex with someone just because you intend to get married to them in a year or so. Or am I wrong here?? Gee, if I am, I think my life would have been a whole lot easier than it has been.

I am aware that if an unmarried cohabiting couple weren't baha'is, or weren't aware of the Faith when they started living together, later become baha'is, then they are not obliged to marry, but I am talking about when at least one of the people in the partnership is already baha'i.

I have seen this happen where baha'is have lived with someone for quite some time before getting married, (at least a year) and my feeling was that the Assembly was a touch soft.
Is that what people will come to expect from baha'is? -That they move in together as a couple first and then get married a couple of years later?

And I totally understand it's not my business how well someone else might be able to live by the teachings. But I thought that at least the intention (and effort) to not have sex before marriage is what is expected of baha'is.

Gee, being monogamous doesn't seem that much of a challenge to me. Living together while being in a full-on sexual relationship until one gets around to getting married would seem to me to be taking the easy way out.

Surely it is the harder way to use self-control, and to get married not knowing for sure whether you're going to physically enjoy having sex with your partner. But from what I understand this is the baha'i way, or at least what is expected.


On a different note I would think there are some situations where people are cohabiting but are making the effort to not be involved sexually -maybe there are extenuating circumstances.. Maybe they have few options of places to live.

Rani

[QUOTE=Rani;32253]
Surely it is the harder way to use your self-control, and to get married not knowing for sure whether you're going to physically enjoy having sex with your partner. But from what I understand this is the baha'i way, or at least what is expected.


QUOTE]

And as I understand, this is what is expected, because, while the physical (sexual) aspect of marriage and its value is recognised, it is seen as subordinate to the spiritual union that the couple intend to establish and grow.

arthra

"Is that what people will come to expect from baha'is? -That they move in together as a couple first and then get married a couple of years later?"


Problem is this ... The people directly involved may believe there's no harm in it ... and mutually go along with the behaviour...

however, this can be a poor example for others and affect them too.

Rani

Dear Fadl,

For explanation, I don't believe I posted this for the purpose of seeking to judge anyone else. I think I posted on the topic, because when we're aware of what is a norm in everyday society and then some baha'is have similar attitudes it makes one seek confirmation and reaffirmation as to the spiritual reasons behind the Baha'i laws.
I live somewhere where there's almost no other baha'i single people, and we're spread out so I don't tend to talk of these issues much in my community.

And again, this is what is disturbing to me; that some baha'is think a scenario such as a girl and guy becoming girlfriend/ boyfriend.. moving in together a year later, and then marrying some time later, maybe quite a while later, is okay, simply because it was with one person.

But baha'is are meant to try their best to be pure and wait for the ceremony before having sex, right?
I thought it was obvious, but I'm starting to question if I'm crazy..
Sorry for any repitition on my part.

BruceDLimber

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rani I am totally aware that if an unmarried cohabiting couple aren't baha'is when they declare, then they are not obliged to marry; but I am talking about when at least one of the people in the partnership is already Baha'i.

This is totally misleading!

The correct statement would be:

If an unmarried cohabiting couple aren't baha'is when they declare, then they are obliged either to marry or to establish separate living quarters immediately.

And if one of the individuals is already Baha'i, then that situation should never have arisen in the first place!

Peace, :-)

Bruce

Rani

What I should have said was if a cohabiting couple weren't baha'is when they started living together, but then later found out about the Faith and became baha'is, then if they were generally considered by the wider Community as a committed couple then they are usually not expected to marry.

That is my understanding of the Writings. My original sentence didn't make sense. (mental fatigue).

BruceDLimber

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rani What I should have said was if a cohabiting couple weren't baha'is when they started living together, but then later found out about the Faith and became baha'is, then if they were generally considered by the wider Community as a committed couple then they are usually not expected to marry.

You couldn't be more wrong!

I quote an official Baha'i source:

"1270. Regarding Couples Living Together Without Being Married

"When considering cases of couples who are living together without being married it is important to distinguish those who started this association after becoming Bahá'ís from those who were in this condition already at the time of accepting the Faith. The House of Justice is sure that your Assembly is aware that it is not permissible for Bahá'ís to enter into such an immoral relationship and that any believers who do so must be counselled by the Assembly and warned to correct their conduct, either by separating or by having a Bahá'í marriage ceremony in accordance with the provisions of Bahá'í law. If, after repeated warnings, the believers concerned do not conform to Bahá'í law, the Assembly has no choice but to deprive them of their voting rights.

"The situation of those who were living in such a relationship when they accepted the Faith is less clear-cut, and the House of Justice has instructed us to send your Assembly the following summary of the applicable principles which was prepared in response to a similar question by another National Spiritual Assembly.

"1. In general, marriages entered into by parties prior to their enrolment in the Faith are recognized as valid under Bahá'í law, and in such cases an additional Bahá'í marriage ceremony is not permitted. This applies whether the marriage was established under civil or religious law or under tribal custom.

"2. A couple living together merely as man and mistress when either or both
become Bahá'í are not married in the eyes of Bahá'í law, and must either have a Bahá'í marriage in accordance with the provisions of Bahá'í law, or cease living together. In other words, the Assembly must deal with the situation as it would in any other case of immoral behaviour, explaining the requirements of the law, giving repeated warnings, and ultimately, if the offender does not comply, he must forfeit his voting rights."

--Lights of Guidance, pp. 380-381

Peace,

Bruce

Rani

Gee Bruce, sometimes your messages come across as though you are angry. Regular use of whole words in capitals can make it appear that way, but in this case it was just your vehement assertion of how wrong you claim I am. -with exclamation mark.


But why exclude point no.3 from the very extract you posted?

3. Because of unusual conditions in certain countries and certain cases it sometimes happens that a person will become a Bahá'í when he or she is living in a situation which does not clearly fit within either of the above definitions. Such a case occurs, for example, where a couple have established firm ties of union and are living together in such a way that they appear to be married and are accepted as such by those around them; the union has stood the test of time and there may even be children, and yet, in fact, the couple are not actually married in any of the ways defined above. The principle followed here is that we do not pry into people's lives and insist on their undoing those ties they have established before becoming believers, but the union is accepted as a marriage in the eyes of Bahá'í Law. The Guardian upheld this principle in situations which arise in some catholic countries where, because of the relationship between church and state divorce is impossible, and none or both of the parties may still be legally married to someone else. Where it is possible for such a couple to regularize their position in civil law by having a civil marriage ceremony, they may certainly do so, but it is neither necessary nor permissible for them to have a Bahá'í marriage ceremony, since, in the eyes of Bahá'í Law, they are already united in marriage."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Panama, September 7, 1981)

(Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 379)

I don't know of any other way to read this except that there are cases where couples whose union has 'stood the test of time', who may or may not have children, and who never actually had a marriage ceremony can still be accepted as a couple who are as good as married by the Faith.

I agree that points 2 (from your post) and 3. above could appear contradictory but I don't think they are.
In point 2. they refer to when a couple are living as 'man and mistress'. There is a difference between a couple who are still trying things out and just living together because it's fun, and those who, before becoming baha'is had a long-standing committed union which was recognised as such by their wider social circles.

I and others have been surprised when I read the above quote, but again, I don't know of any other way you can read it.


Also:
1272. Faith accepts in Certain Cases Unions which Are 'Immoral But Accepted' by Society in Which the People Live

"As you see, the Bahá'í Faith accepts as man and wife couples who prior to becoming Bahá'ís, have had a valid marriage ceremony, whether this be civil, religious or by tribal custom, even if this has resulted in a polygamous union. Furthermore, the Faith accepts in certain cases unions which are immoral but accepted by the society in which the people live. In all these cases, because the union is accepted by the Faith, there is no question of a couple's having a Bahá'í wedding ceremony subsequently because, as the Guardian says, 'Bahá'í marriage is something you perform when you are going to be united for the first time, not long after the union takes place'. If, however, such a couple would like to have a meeting of their friends at which Bahá'í prayers and readings are said on behalf of their marriage now that they are Bahá'ís, there is no objection to their doing so, although it must be understood that this does not constitute a Bahá'í marriage ceremony.

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Peru, June 23, 1969)

(Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 380)

BruceDLimber

Only applicable, of course, if you ignore the fact that the passage you asked about refers specifically to "unusual conditions in certain countries" and is thus not generally relevant.

Bruce

tonyfish58

Rani - Yes a difficult topic that is for sure.

The Faith calls for a level of Morality that will assist mankind in to the future.

The issue is that we are living in a time when Morality is at its lowest and we each have to choose the path. These laws may seem harsh in this environment, this extract from Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh CLV is what we must consider!

"Think not that We have revealed unto you a mere code of laws. Nay, rather, We have unsealed the choice Wine with the fingers of might and power. To this beareth witness that which the Pen of Revelation hath revealed. Meditate upon this, O men of insight!…
Whenever My laws appear like the sun in the heaven of Mine utterance, they must be faithfully obeyed by all, though My decree be such as to cause the heaven of every religion to be cleft asunder. He doth what He pleaseth. He chooseth; and none may question His choice. Whatsoever He, the Well-Beloved, ordaineth, the same is, verily, beloved. To this He Who is the Lord of all creation beareth Me witness. Whoso hath inhaled the sweet fragrance of the All-Merciful, and recognized the Source of this utterance, will welcome with his own eyes the shafts of the enemy, that he may establish the truth of the laws of God amongst men. Well is it with him that hath turned thereunto, and apprehended the meaning of His decisive decree".

I can say from experience that there is manifold wisdom in those words.

If it is within anyones capacity to live by Bahai Law without question, then they will find the right path. If we do/can not, then we will be continually faced with more Tests to overcome as to perfect our souls.

The writings give us a path that we must take tocement a lasting relationship, if we work outside that Path which is pure wisdom itself, then we open ourselves up to manifold tests.

We have been given the choice this is from the Hidden Words # 82

The mystic and wondrous Bride, hidden ere this beneath the veiling of utterance, hath now, by the grace of God and His divine favor, been made manifest even as the resplendent light shed by the beauty of the Beloved. I bear witness, O friends! that the favor is complete, the argument fulfilled, the proof manifest and the evidence established. Let it now be seen what your endeavors in the path of detachment will reveal. In this wise hath the divine favor been fully vouchsafed unto you and unto them that are in heaven and on earth. All praise to God, the Lord of all Worlds.

Best of luck with it all

Regards Tony

Coloc

Hi guys,

I've been reading this and other forums on the issue of couples co-habiting outside marriage. I have been a Baha'i for about 4 years, and last year, a good friend of mine grew closer to the Faith and also declared. Following that, we were both, at separate times and through separate processes, admitted to a university in the same country (2 different campuses), which was also exciting because we were already such good friends. Looking at housing options, we realized much of what was available around each of our campuses was rather expensive, but there were cheaper options if we found a 2 person apartment between our schools. So quite happily, we moved in together (separate rooms and bathrooms). We are not in any way in a relationship outside of our good friendship, we never have been, and we each have separate romantic interests. This seemed like a a blessing to have things work out better financially, in a new and unfamiliar place, and with someone we each trusted. In fact, we were excited about hosting activities at our place and continuing to learn and grow etc. But another Baha'i friend has expressed concern about us living together, which has troubled me greatly, i won't lie. Though i have not seen any guidance on people of different genders who are NOT a couple living together being forbidden or discouraged, i certainly would not want to give off the semblance of impropriety. I should probably go to our new LSA with this, but I want to know what a few others think first. Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this.

Rani

Hi Tony,

I'm not sure if I've been understood.

It's not that I think that the laws are harsh, No. What upsets me is that some baha'is seem to think that sleeping together -having sex- before marriage is okay as long as it's with the same (one) person.

Growing up having started going to church when I was about 9 or 10, I was never given the impression that that was okay. And as we read the Baha'i goal and standard is to be chaste/pure before marriage and faithful afterwards.

Now I think it might have been easier for me if I had thought it was acceptable, because it seems to work out fine for the people who do that and don't feel guilty about it. (
But somehow I'm the kind of person who feels guilty for anything and who might be more likely to leave a r'ship if I felt 'tarnished' or impure from guilt.

Sorry, this post is probably unfinished.

arthra

"....some baha'is seem to think that sleeping together -having sex- before marriage is okay..."

If that's an issue in a community maybe some deepenings on the subject would be helpful. Select some appropriate readins on purity and some references cited above..Maybe include some consultation as well.

A start might be the following selections:

A Chaste and Holy Life

Rani

Hi Coloc,

There was a thread recently about this issue, and although you may not find a final answer there it might give you some impressions.

I think this varies a bit depending on the country in which you live, and what is considered as chaste and acceptable by the wider community. That's my impression.

I had a friend in the U.S. who suggested to me that U.S. friends received guidance from their National Assembly to not pry too much into people's situation like that, but that's what he told me, -I haven't seen it in print.

My impression is that generally friends (baha'i friends) in the U.S. will discourage it or think it's not a good idea, but I guess it's up to you and your prayerful understanding and your consultation with the Friends and LSA in your area. (?)


Living alone with someone of the opposite gender?

nicolioso

Am I to understand that Baha'i faith promotes NO condemnation of personal belief or of perceived sin? If so...then what are you even arguing about. If such is true, then the very opinion of this woman in a "trial marriage" as being a negative thing is as against the believe of the Baha'i as the act itself. Do you not say that there is to be unconditional acceptance of the role of the divine in the life of each individual? Would then, this woman's choice be no different than any other questionable act? If her heart is with the Lord, if her mind is likened to that of her partner (married or not, I speak from experience), then does God not still come to their life just as he would to someone who chooses to "sin" differently? Let us only be steadfast in LOVE, and not in the deciding of one's conduct as "wrong" or "right". God is the infinite giver, and whom he chooses to bestow his gifts upon cannot and should not be questioned. I am not familiar with the Baha'i other than a few personal stories which I would gladly share upon request...but it seems to me that there are some who know of the mysteries of the great Ancient of Days, and this topic is...for lack of a better term..."spiritually elementary" if you ask me.