In my case, some ayats from quran were read. Consent was asked from me first in presence of my dad and mum and few uncles and aunts. Then he was asked in a separate room. Witnesses signed and mashallah it was done.
How is any other nikah different? Please do share.
I have an ahmadi friend and her nikah was quite different from the sunni way you've described above. They have to register their nikah with their jama't khaana and get the seal from the ameer a couple months before the wedding so in case there are any errors they can be corrected in time. On the wedding day, they had segregation in the hall. The maulvi sahib didn't come into the girl's side at all. He was speaking into a mic and asked the groom for his consent. He then asked the girl's father (her guardian) to give consent on her behalf. And that was that.
I found it strange that the jamaat they follow was in the UK so the bride and groom mailed the signed papers and got confirmation some time later that their nikah is now valid. I am not sure if this is the custom in all ahmadi families, but in my friend's case, this is how it was done.
Nikah is done the same way in presence of wali and witness. The one who's there to perform nikah recites qalma to bride and groom ( not necessarily they recite themselves but he) just so they are on emaan, as religious scholars say wird of qalima is good thing because who knows our what act takes us away from islam and the God.
Qalma which I have heard from my shia friends is a bit different in the end, as they verify hazrat ali as wali Ullah.
With apologies , as I may be wrong.
^ interesting .. Thinking of other sects I wonder if there are big differences in marriage ceremony with Sufi, Ismaili or Salafi sects when it comes to marriage.
I once attended an ismaili wedding not in Pakistan though. It was like recitation which they called nikah followed by translation, acceptance from both the bride and the groom, and the signing of the paper*After the ceremony, the family tied the ends of a shawl on the bride and groom in a sacred knot symbolizing everlasting togetherness which they opened after a rasm which I have forgotten the name.
Qalma which I have heard from my shia friends is a bit different in the end, as they verify hazrat ali as wali Ullah.
With apologies , as I may be wrong.
well you are wrong. I am forced to state thatso that your misinformation doesn't lead others astray
I other than sitting together which varies from home to home it is the same then. Pretty hard to differentiate between one or the other then through a mere ceremony as far as shia sunni nikah is concerned?
When I looked this up yesterday there was a difference in the number of witnesses needed for each.. but it would be easy enough to deal with that by just going with the stricter view so it's covered..
Nothing major to worry about imo.. some people seem to want to create problems out of nothing..
As if us Muslims need even more division and drama..
So during some of the Shia-Sunni marriages in my family the discussions have come up since one side required two Maulanas (one for both bride and grooms side) and the other only needed one to read the Nikah. In the end there has always been two and both families had the freedom to chose who they wanted as their representative. There were never issues about what was being read though. So I think a Nikah is a Nikah but families just have to hash out details about who they want it to be read by and such. My family in particular is quite specific about that so other than that, the rest has been the same. Guy and girl are always in separate rooms, and it's usually intimate for us. We have never done a Nikah on a stage in front of all the guests, it's always a more smaller thing for us, that's the only thing I know got discussed from my family's end.
Qalma which I have heard from my shia friends is a bit different in the end, as they verify hazrat ali as wali Ullah.
With apologies , as I may be wrong.
well you are wrong. I am forced to state thatso that your misinformation doesn't lead others astray
[/QUOTE]
She is not wrong but the kalma is incomplete though. Complete is this:
La Ila Haa Illallahu Muhammdur Rasoolullahi Aliyun Waliyullahi Wasiyyu Rasulillahi Wa Khalifatuhu Bila Fasl
Agree with both of you…it all boils down to family preference. In my family, the nikkah is always on the stage, with the bride and groom seated side by side with their respective parents and the witnesses, because ghar ke elders believe that that the essence of the nikkah is to make the union known publicly. Another thing that is totally taboo in my family is a nikkah without immediate ruhksati. Their has only been one time in my family where due to immigration filing the nikkah was done first and ruhksati followed a year and half later (my choti khala in the late 80’s..she was in US, her husband in Muscat). My nana was vehemently against prolonged nikkahs so we don’t even consider this scenario unless it’s the last resort or has a very specific reason as to why the ruhksati can’t take place on the same day.