verse 4:3 and polygamy
-
Peace bro warner,
Also in which verse does Nikah implies sex?
You might want to ask bro brook ! I was just responding to his understanding.
-
My Dear Brother Tanveer
There is an un-written rule here we do not accept anyone?s opinions without verifying, including Mr. Asads. You were one of the biggest proponents of this.
Also when you define marriage can you try to look beyond the wedding day and the ceremony or the day the two people will sign in front of the registrar with witnesses.
You know none of this is mentioned in the Quraan.Marriage is a process and a relationship and can not be tied to a day. Some people are married for 50 years. Every day of those years over 18000 days they are married; every hour, minute and second. So why do we cloud our minds with only the day they enter in to this relationship when we translate nikah as marriage or marry?
Although sex is a major part of marriage/nikah that does not mean Nikah is ?sex? even though in Islam there is no sex without marriage (Except with Ma Malakt Aymanakum, currently let?s not go there)
In the verses Brook quoted Nikah does not mean sex either.
243 says after the punishment the person who committed zina can get married to another person who committed zina (and probably received punishment as well). The marriage between a believer and the spouse, who was convicted of zina, will be cancelled since a believer can not stay in a relationship with a zani.
And as for,
2460, Which comes first ?No hope of marriage? or ?No hope of Sex??
Have you met any lady who has no hope/beyond the prospect of marriage but has hope of /within the prospect of sex? Me neither, but anyway it was just an analogy.
-
Peace warner,
Did I ever say that I accepted brook's opinion ? You keep directing your comments to me when you should direct them to brook. He is the one who claims "nikah" can mean sexual intercourse, not me.
Although sex is a major part of marriage/nikah that does not mean Nikah is ?sex? even though in Islam there is no sex without marriage (Except with Ma Malakt Aymanakum, currently let?s not go there)
Nowhere is sexual intercourse allowed without marriage, even with "ma malakat aymanukum" per 424-25. There is no mention of sexual intercourse in 7029-30 and 235-6.
-
Tanveer Even if "nikah" implies "sexual intercourse" in some verses, "sexual intercourse" is not lawful without marriage according to al-qur'aan, thus "nikah" in those verses indirectly also implies marriage; this is undisputable.
Peace Tanveer
In reply to brook in your above post you are saying nikah in those verses indirectly also implies marriage; if Nikah indirectly implies marriage what does it directly imply?
It was not my mistake; you were accepting nikah implies sexual intercourse in the above post
-
Peace warner,
I was trying to use his reasoning against him to show that nikah does not imply only sexual intercourse. Looks like you have completely ignored the "even if" at the beginning of my statement which makes the premise following those words hypothetical. I just do not understand what you are trying to achieve by these kind of posts. It looks like you do not wish to accept that in my understanding nikah always means marriage, even though I have explicitly stated that in my earlier posts in reply to TBA. I do not wish to indulge any further in this issue. Thanks.
-
2-236 There is no sin upon you if you divorce the women before having sexual intercourse with them, or before committing to what was agreed for them. Let them have recompense, the rich according to his means, and the poor according to his means. Recompense which is in goodness, a responsibility for those in kindness
? ? ???
peace
siki
-
Peace Tanveer
Sorry Tanveer I did not mean to offend you and I do not want any animosity among us in the quest for truth. But I said lets not go there because we have just concluded another heavy round on MMA with many of the heavyweights involved and with no final determination. I will try not getting in to that again unless I have some thing new to offer.
According to your analysis what is ?guarding private parts?
-
-
Peace be with you
Thanks for your comments related to ?masna_ wa sula_sa wa ruba_? in 43 and ?masna_ wa fura_da_? in 3464 which I explained above.
Since I haven?t got any refutations on this; ?masna? meaning two together, ?sula_sa? meaning three together, ?ruba? meaning four together seems to be correct in the light of the verses compared.....Has anyone seen Samia recently ?
But still there is a problem with the connecting wa/and between ?masna_ , sula_sa , ruba (43) and between masna_ , fura_da_(3446). You can see in 43 I have omitted AND between the words and in 3446 used OR instead of AND which is not correct. How will the use of ?wa/and? change the meaning or the construction of the verse and also the connection with the rest of the sentence.
An interesting point with 3446 the first part of the verse says ?Warn you with ONE THING? so the proper translation should bring out ONE THING and not TWO THINGS in the second part of the verse otherwise it will create a contradiction between the second part of the verse with the first part.
I request Aymans kind attention on this.
-
Salaam warner
There is no mother of orphans in 4127 but as you explained ?orphans of women?. When orphan girls reach marriageable age I think we can call them ?orphans of women?.
I do not understand what you mean by "there is no mother of orphans". Is it because the word "mother" does not appear? Would you have been satisfied if it were "yatamaal ummahaat"? Well, this expression exists, but it means (an orphan who lost his mother"! Definitely that's not what we want.
And when an orphan girl reaches marriagebeable age, we do not call them "orphans".
-
Salaam Samia
Thanks for coming back.
Been making lot of effort with my pre school Arabic knowledge. Will you please read the posts and give your assessment on them.
What will be the correct term for ?mother of Orphans?
I think from the following 3 verses (I only quote the relevant part) we can deduce a person can be called orphan until attaining the age of marriage and more precisely as ?orphans of women? as used in 4127. I agree with you on the fact, that we can not call someone an ?orphan? after the marriage.
4 6
Yusuf Ali Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them release their property to them ??4 127
Yusuf Ali ??concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed and yet whom ye desire to marry???6 152
Yusuf Ali And come not nigh to the orphan's property except to improve it until he attain the age of full strength??.Peace
-
"mathna wa thulatha wa ruba3a" means "two at a time, and three at a time, and four at a time" (tanveer)
This also proves that polygamy is practically forbidden in God?s religion because no man is ever sexually fit to sleep with two or three or more brides at a time, whom he marries at a time.
So in 43 God can not be telling the man to marry but marry off the women two or three or four at a time if he finds his means financially fit, which is quite likely.
For argument sake lets take a hypothetical example in which one person has 10 wives and he wants to marry one more,
Fine.
then he can either divorce one and marry another in her place (replacement),
In the prophet?s time that must have been out of the question because the prophet himself was forbidden to marry another woman in place of any one of his wives (3352).
If the prophet had allowed his polygamous contemporaries to divorce one wife to marry another in her place, which God had forbidden His prophet to do and which the prophet strictly obeyed, Islam would have lost its credibility and would have failed.
Islam succeeded in the prophet?s lifetime, which is proof enough that the prophet and his followers were unified; and that the prophet did not go one way and his followers another.
or he can marry another without divorcing any which will make 11 wives.
No way again due to the same reasons I tried to explain above.
It does not mean that he cannot marry any more after the revelation of this verse, otherwise what is the use of giving him general categories of women that are lawful to him in 3350?
The four categories of women cited in 3350 as lawful to the prophet were his wives already, as is made clear in the very beginning of the verse "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives (aswaajakah)."
The verse is a statement of the fact that the prophet was polygamous, and his wives were all lawful to him because he had married them before the revelation of 3352, which said "No other women shall be lawful to thee min ba3d..."
"Min ba3d" in 3352 is not referring to after this time but beyond the mentioned categories of women.
Beyond the mentioned categories of women is the same as after this time because no women beyond the mentioned categories, that is his present wives, shall the prophet marry after this time. It never gave the prophet permission to marry other women than his present wives in the future; it meant that his present wives were lawful to him although polygamy was forbidden after this time.
I will try to continue, God willing.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Peace Samia
What is the word for ?Widow? and is there a term/word for ?widow with child/children??
Since we are stuck with the definition of ?orphan of women/yata_man nisa? I will try an example of sorts.
-
A small girl who lost both her parents being raised by a guardian. Now the orphan turns 18 and therefore attains marriageable age.
-
A 40 year old woman who has one child and the woman lost her husband recently.
Who is better fit to be orphans of women?
Also I realized halfway this is one issue we will not agree since I believe that orphan is a person who has lost both his/her parents whereas your position is it can be even one parent.
-
-
What is the word for ?Widow? and is there a term/word for ?widow with child/children??
I know the word "armala", but it is not used in the quraan.
The only verse where we find the expression of "yataamaal nisaa'" is verse 4127. If we take it as female orphans, does this mean it is OK to not give women who are not orphans what is prescribed to them? Or that a guardian refuses to give a male orphan his dues because he will marry him his daughter, for example?
Not to mention the linguistic problem. We say jameelaat (f.p) alnisaa'a beautiful omen (roughly); but it is wrong to say jmeeluun (m.p)alnisaa'. The latter is analogical to yataama (m.p) alnisaa'
-
Peace Samia
You said Yataama can include both genders. It should;otherwise that will leave the Quraan without a word for female orphan minors because the term ?yata_man nisa_" meaning female orphans who has reached the age of marriage (adult) exist. Even in sentences specifically for female orphans as 46 yataama (test them till they reach marriage?and release the property) is used .Releasing the property mainly to male orphan is covered in 6152 (release when they reach maturity).
Also the separate words you posted for orphans, female minor and male minor, can they be post quranic?
Is the word yatamaa similar to wolad/child where male and female children are both covered? But wolad when grows up will become either rijaal or nisa. It maybe not necessary to distinguish male and female with wolad since the issues will be same for both genders. But for minor female orphans when they reach adulthood still their rights and legal issues concerning marriage, guardianship and their property has to be resolved therefore it may be necessary to separately identify them as female orphans as distinguished from male orphans.
Sometimes as in 43 the verse context should identify whether the yatamaa mentioned is male or female. But since the verse is difficult to understand I believe4127 has been revealed to clarify the misunderstanding set by 43.
We can not ignore the connection announced by 4127 to previous verses concerning women in general and orphans and children in particular.
Also we know some parts of the quraan explain the other parts, this is very important when a verse can not properly understood.I will try to give my version on how 4127 and 43 should be merged i.e. how 4127 will explain the misunderstood verse 43 when both verses are taken together.
?.concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed and yet whom ye desire to marry; that ye stand firm for justice to orphans, If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans marry women of your choice two together or three together or four together ; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal fairly (with them) then only one?.
(part of verse 4127 and part of verse 43 together) -
2432 is a general advice to marry off the single and the male and female servants, and not a prohibition of polygyny. (tanveer)
2432 is the same as 629 in terms of wording. So if 2432 were not a prohibition of polygyny, neither would 629 be a prohibition of idolworship
Hasten to the remembrance of God (629)
Marry off the single (2432)In 629 God adresses the mosque-goer.
In 2432 He adreesses the registrar.In 629 the mosque-goer is ordered to remember God.
2432 the registrar is ordered to marry off the single.God forbids the mosque-goer to remember al-Lat
because it is a wrong done to God. God does not share His sovereignty (1826).God forbids the registrar to marry off the married
because it is a wrong done to women (423). God doesnot do the least wrong unto humans but it is humans who wrong themselves (1044)I will try to continue, God willing.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Salam bro Hasan,
This also proves that polygamy is practically forbidden in God?s religion because no man is ever sexually fit to sleep with two or three or more brides at a time, whom he marries at a time.
Firstly, the portion in red of your quote is pure conjecture and it is not scientifically correct to say that NO man is capable of that. My friend's brother and numerous other people that I know have done it and even ONE example is sufficient to destroy your conjecture.
Secondly, where does it say in al-qur'aan that one has to perform sex with all of one's wives every day ? Even the Prophet was told the following
3351 You may postpone whom you will of them, and you may receive whom you will. And whomsoever you seek of those whom you have set aside then there is no sin upon you. Such is best that they may be comforted and not grieve, and may all be pleased with what you give them. God knows what is in your hearts. God is Knowledgeable, Compassionate.
So in 43 God can not be telling the man to marry but marry off the women two or three or four at a time if he finds his means financially fit, which is quite likely.
Firstly, "marry off" is always used in al-qur'aan for men and not for women. For example
2221 And do not marry (TANKIHOO) the females who set up partners until they believe. For a believing servant is better than one who sets up partners even if she attracts you. And do not marry off (TUNKIHOO) the males who set up partners until they believe. For a believing servant is better than one who sets up partners even if he attracts you. Those invite to the Fire, while God is inviting to Paradise and forgiveness by His leave. He clarifies His revelations for the people that they may remember.
TANKIHOO = marry (used before female)
TUNKIHOO = marry off (used before male)
INKIHOO can mean both "marry" and "marry off", and the context in 43 is clearly women so it can only mean "marry" there and not "marry off".
Secondly, sexual fitness has nothing to do with 43, as you yourself pointed out that the criteria is financial fitness, not sexual fitness.
In the prophet?s time that must have been out of the question because the prophet himself was forbidden to marry another woman in place of any one of his wives (3352).
Firstly, what about the following verse then, where divorce and substitution of the Prophet's wife is possible
665 It may be that he would divorce you, then his Lord will substitute other wives in your place who are better than you; submitting, believing, dutiful, repentant, worshipping, devout, mature and youthful.
Secondly, did you forget to see the word "except" in 3352, which gives exception to the general rule and thus allows the Prophet to replace one wife with another in that exceptional situation ?
3352 No women are lawful to you beyond this, nor that you exchange/replace with them from wives, even though you may be attracted by their beauty, EXCEPT ma malakat yameenuka. And God is watchful over all things.
If the prophet had allowed his polygamous contemporaries to divorce one wife to marry another in her place, which God had forbidden His prophet to do and which the prophet strictly obeyed, Islam would have lost its credibility and would have failed.
The prohibition was not absolute. Please see above for exception to that rule. The rule does not say that the Prophet was forbidden from marrying another wife, but says that he cannot replace one wife with another, with an exception even to that rule. The prohibition is of replacement (with an exception), not of polygyny. Where do you get prohibition of polygyny from that ?
The four categories of women cited in 3350 as lawful to the prophet were his wives already, as is made clear in the very beginning of the verse "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives (aswaajakah)."
Not all four categories were his wives already. Do you mean to say that ALL of his uncle's and aunt's daughters were already his wives ? Also, the woman who decreed herself to the Prophet could not already have been his wife because the next part of the verse says that the Prophet may MARRY HER if he wishes.
The categories can be broken down to as follows
3350 O prophet, We have made lawful for you
-
the wives to whom you have already given their dowries, (this is the only "wives" category, not the rest)
-
and those who are committed to you by oath, as granted to you by God,
-
and the daughters of your father's brothers, and the daughters of your father's sisters, and the daughters of your mother's brothers, and the daughters of your mother's sisters, of whom they have emigrated with you.
-
Also, the believing woman who had decreed herself to the prophet, the prophet may marry her if he wishes, as a privilege given only to you and not to the believers.
Only the first category refers to "wives", and refers only to those wives whom he had already given their dowries.
The verse is a statement of the fact that the prophet was polygamous, and his wives were all lawful to him because he had married them before the revelation of 3352
WRONG !! Not ALL his wives were lawful to him. Only those were lawful to whom he had already paid their dowries. Please re-read 3350 carefully !
Beyond the mentioned categories of women is the same as after this time because no women beyond the mentioned categories, that is his present wives, shall the prophet marry after this time. It never gave the prophet permission to marry other women than his present wives in the future; it meant that his present wives were lawful to him although polygamy was forbidden after this time.
The red portions of your quote are partially correct based on a FALSE INTERPRETATION of 3350 and 3352 where you conveniently forgot the word "illa"/except.
The mentioned categories were not all his present wives, but included 3 other categories of women other than his wives, and even the category of wives included only those whom he had paid the dowries to, and not ALL wives. Please be careful with what the verses actually say !
In 629 God adresses the mosque-goer.
In 2432 He adreesses the registrar.In 629 the mosque-goer is ordered to remember God.
2432 the registrar is ordered to marry off the single.WRONG AGAIN in the red portions !
There is no "registrar" being addressed in 2432. According to the context of 2430-32, it is "the believers" that are being addressed in general.
Please show the verse in al-qur'aan that mentions requirement of a "registrar" for "nikah".
-