verse 4:3 and polygamy
-
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".
-
-
Salaam warner
You said Yataama can include both genders. It should;otherwise that will leave the Quraan without a word for female orphan minors
Why does the quraan need to use the female term of orphan? Is it just because you believe that "yatamaal nisaa'" are female orphans who reached marriage age? In fact, this shows that there is no special rule for female orphans, just as the case for children in general.
Even in sentences specifically for female orphans as 46 yataama (test them till they reach marriage?and release the property) is used
It's your understanding that decides that it is "specifically" for females. Don't male orphans have guardians who manage their finance/property?
Releasing the property mainly to male orphan is covered in 6152 (release when they reach maturity).
Do you find the wordings of tis verse and verse 46 identical or even similar? Each verse discuss a completely different subject. Verse 6152 is part of what God prohibited to us (The Straight Path) not to eat the property of orphans; verse 46 tells us what to do when they reach maturity. So, how can you say that one of them is about males and the other is about female orphans?
-
peace
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.
why was it made lawful for him 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? in what way were they lawful?
because i have in another translation that it means he can marry them and i find it a little strange since they are his cousins. -
-
Peace Samia
Samia....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?
It is NOT ok not to give women who are not orphans what is prescribed to them. The orphans are distinguished since they are in a much more vulnerable position than a normal woman. Here I see the Quraan trying to protect their rights and treat them as special thereby giving them priority.
When we take this in the context of this chapter, it starts with duties towards WOMEN, first to the
Mothers
Orphans (emphasis on female keeping in line with the subject of this part of the chapter)
Wives
Children
With orphans and children both male and female are addressed.
The verses protects the rights of the orphan emphasizing the importance it gives them over other women and naturally that does not mean other women can be treated badly. But the problem with female orphans is the guardian has more undue advantage over her than towards a male orphan, so as to marry her while keeping her property and maybe not pay the dower as well.
-
Peace Samia
Samia Why does the quraan need to use the female term of orphan? Is it just because you believe that "yatamaal nisaa'" are female orphans who reached marriage age? In fact, this shows that there is no special rule for female orphans, just as the case for children in general.
The Quraan need to use the female term of the orphan because the issues related to the orphan with regard to her marriage and her property under the guardianship becomes important when she reaches marriageable age and due to this female orphan has to be distinguished from the male. The guardian is subjected to these rules.
Samia It's your understanding that decides that it is "specifically" for females. Don't male orphans have guardians who manage their finance/property?
Samia Do you find the wordings of tis verse and verse 46 identical or even similar? Each verse discuss a completely different subject. Verse 6152 is part of what God prohibited to us (The Straight Path) not to eat the property of orphans; verse 46 tells us what to do when they reach maturity. So, how can you say that one of them is about males and the other is about female orphans?
6152 I agree with you. 46 the emphasis is on the female orphan although it should/can/may include both.
-
Salam bro Hasan,
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?
Salam bro tanveer.
In your March 22 post you wrote "mathna wa thulatha wa ruba3a" means "two at a time, and three at a time, and four at a time". So I thought that you knew that four at a time means four at one and the same time. And this is what yaseen, in his article, says that these Arabic numbers mean
"Mathna wa thulatha wa rubaa" (also used in 351) means by two, by three and by four. In other words in groups of two, three or four, this meaning therefore has been ignored because it does not fit easily with what traditional interpretations want to find. It is sure this does not mean two three and four because two, three and four in Arabic are ithnaan, thalatha and arbaa? and not mathna, thulatha and rubaa. One must accept that nobody marries two three or four wives at the same time! But that?s exactly what it means if we take ?ankuhu? as Marry instead of Marry off.
Sorry I thought you knew.
If you don't mind, I would like to take one point up at a time, like in this post. In my next post for example I will try to tell you what marry off means to me.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Peace Tanveer
We know the Quraan was revealed in parts and over a number of years. It may be that two successive verses can be years apart. They are successive because of the compilation.
If 3350 and 3352 were reveled at once the time gap would have been few seconds. What is the point in allowing the Messenger to marry a broad set of women and immediately banning it within a few seconds. So naturally it is understood there is substantial time between the revelation of these 2 verses.
Replace is take away/remove/discard something which is already there and place another in its place (substitute). If you do not remove you can not replace. When you replace the car battery or wheel you do not have the earlier one fixed there. But if you take an additional one removal is not necessary. So taking additional is not replacing.The verses do not talk about taking additional they talk about replacing.
The word is used in 3352, 420 and 665 meaning exchanging/replacing wife/wives to take another. The same word is used in other places in the Quraan with the meaning replace or exchange.
In 33.52 the prophet is commanded by God not to take any more women and also not to replace the existing ones. This part of the verse has been misunderstood by many. Let me try to explain this with an example. Lets say the IRS (Inland Revenue) informs the people they can not own any more houses from today. A person owning 4 houses when this law is announced can sell any of the houses and take other houses instead of the ones sold as long as the number of houses do not exceed the upper limit of 4. But if the IRS says you can not own any more houses and also you can not replace your existing houses, then you are fixed with the 4 houses you owned when the law was announced. (Here the figure 4 is just an example the same will apply even for 1)
The analogy is similar to what is said to the Messenger in 3352 with regard to future marriage. He can not take any more women from now neither can he change/replace the existing wives even though he might be attracted to beauty/good of any other woman/women. So the number of wives at the time and the persons become fixed. No additions, No removals, No replacements.
In 3352 God is setting the limit for the Prophet since 3350 he was allowed to marry many categories including any believing woman who offers herself to the prophet . So with this verse he is asked to stop marrying more women or to replace the existing ones.
I need to explain another popular misunderstanding on 420. This verse says you can not take away any dower given, be it very large. Also there are other verses which say you can take away or accept part of the dower given to the wife you are divorcing. That creates a contradiction. But the fact is 420 is instructing with regard to a man divorcing his wife for the sole purpose of replacing with another wife and in that case he can not take away any of the dower he has given although it must be immense.
The above posts show there is an upper limit for the believers with regard to the number of wives at any given time. That we can discuss later once you are ready to accept what ?masna_ wa sula_sa wa ruba_? and ?fawa_hidatan? (43) really means.
Peace.
-
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".
Yes. INKIHOO means marry in 43, and ANKIHOO means marry off in 2432. However the question is not what they mean but why the NKH in 43 was made to read inkihoo although the NKH in 2432 was made to read ankehoo.
Please show the verse in al-qur'aan that mentions requirement of a "registrar" for "nikah".
2282 orders even a monetary contract to be registered because money changes hands, and money is important. But isn?t human life important? Is the wedding contract called nikah concerning a human couple too trival to be registered although it changes their lives?
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.
In order for the nikah of a human couple to be legal you have to get an authority to announce the couple legally married and to note their new status in writing or, if you insist marriage is not worth registering, to verbally note their new status. That is what registrar means here.
That authority may be the parents who marry off (wa ankehoo in 2432) their daughter to a man. And if you claim that their approval is sufficient for the nikah to be legally valid, then the parents are the registrar. God addresses the parents in 2432 and orders them to marry off their unmarried ones (ayaama minkum).
Now please do a comparative reading of 2432 and 629 again.
Hasten to the remembrance of God (629)
Marry off your single ones (2432)In 629 God adresses mosque-goers.
In 2432 He adreesses parents.In 629 mosque-goers are ordered to remember God.
In 2432 parents are ordered to marry off their single ones.God forbids the believers to remember al-Lat
because it is a wrong done to God. God does not share His sovereignty (1826).God forbids parents to marry off their married ones.
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)If 2432 were not a prohibition of polygyny, neither would 629 be a prohibition of idolworship.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Dear hasan
I have failed to find any similarity between 62-9 and 24-32 , and also cant understand the way you have drawn parallel between the two verses
Moreover there is no married women in 4-23 and no prohibition as well , please do not rely on translators and recheck the Arabic, also read the next verse 4-24 in Arabic.
For detailed study of this issue please go through the thread
"Mohsinnat a new understanding"
peacesiki
-
there is no married women in 4-23 and no prohibition as well (siki)
In my post on March 20 I referred to the expression (hurrimat alaikum) an tajma3uu bainal ukhtain in 423, which means (you are forbbidden) to have two sisters as wives at one and the same time.
Please note that this does not mean you are forbidden to marry sisters. No. You can marry biological sisters each one at a time; for instance you can marry your wife?s sister after your wife dies or after you divorce her.
What you are forbidden to do here is to have two sisters as co-wives, because it is polygamy. Stress here is not on sisters but co-wives, which is polygamy. God forbids polygamy because it is a wrong done to sisters in particular and women in general because sisters are women.
To sum it up, polygamy is a wrong done to women. And God does not do the least wrong unto humans but it is humans who wrong themselves (1044)
For detailed study of this issue please go through the thread
"Mohsinnat a new understanding"I did. And I came to the conclusion that the word mohsinat in 423 and 424 means protected independent women such as widows. But this is only a side issue here.
I have failed to find any similarity between 62-9 and 24-32 , and also cant understand the way you have drawn parallel between the two verses
Sorry but I can?t help any more. Please read my post more carefully.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
the word mohsinat in 423 and 424
I meant an-Nisa 24 and 25. Muhammad Asad's translation
"(And forbidden to you are) all married women..." (424)
"And as for those of you, owing to circumstances, are not in a position to marry free believing women..." (425)So according to verse 24 mohsinat are married women, whom according to verse 25 you are allowed to marry?
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
the word mohsinat in 423 and 424
I meant an-Nisa 24 and 25. Muhammad Asad's translation
"(And forbidden to you are) all married women..." (424)
"And as for those of you, owing to circumstances, are not in a position to marry free believing women..." (425)So according to verse 24 mohsinat are married women, whom according to verse 25 you are allowed to marry?
Peace,
Hasan AkcayDear hasan
My apologies , when i wrote 4-23 and 4-24 , i actually meant 4-24 and 4-25
what/ where is the word for prohibited in 4-24? Mohd Asad has added forbidden in brackets from his own side. I had asked you not to take translations but recheck the Arabic.
There is a single word ,Mohsinnat used in both the verses 4-24 and 4-25, how could translators and you take this word in one verse as married and right in the next you are translating Mohsinnat as free(unmarried) believing women? and then again , you are marrying these married women,considering them to be widows? but widows are widows , not married.
I suggest, you spend a little time, and do a detailed study of the threads,( mohsinnat, polygamy, and ma malakat emnakum) and then come back and discuss if required.
peace
siki
-
what/ where is the word for prohibited in 4-24?
There is no such word in 424.Mohd Asad has added forbidden in brackets from his own side.
You are definitely right.I had asked you not to take translations but recheck the Arabic
And I told you I did.There is a single word, Mohsinnat used in both the verses 4-24 and 4-25,
how could translators and you take this word in one verse as married?
Please count me out. I told you that the word mohsanat in 424 and 425 means PROTECTED INDEPENDENT WOMEN SUCH AS WIDOWS. But this is only a side issue here.you are marrying these married women,considering them to be widows? but widows are widows , not married.
I did NOT say marrying. The verb is missing from 424. I said this is only a side issue here and this way asked you to let me say what the implied verb is afterwards.I suggest, you spend a little time, and do a detailed study of the threads
And may I suggest thisRead my posts carefully or do not read them at all.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Peace Siki
It was a manner of speech , I do not know the exact meaning. What I meant was if we know what Nihlatan means it will possibly be a step closer to understand Sadaqat e henna. Samia has not replied on these word meanings.
What I was trying to explain from the earlier post was the ?orphans? mentioned in 43 are ?female orphans?. Since 43 was difficult to understand it looks like 4127 was later revealed explaining it is "female orphans/yataaman nisa" which is referred to in 43. When a minor orphan girl attains age of marriage she is being called a female orphan since the Quraan wants to distinguish her from other women keeping in line with the importance Quraan places on orphans and also since the position of the female orphan is more vulnerable than a male orphan.
Two together, three together, four together should mean someone can be married to two women at one time, three women at one time or four women at one time and the theory on group weddings to save cost is absurd. Why not 5 or 50 together if we are talking about economies of scale and are they saying 4 is the point of diminishing returns. Anyway there is no wedding ceremony mentioned in the Quraan and it is such a trivial thing even to be involved in a verses of this legal significance.
-
Dear warner
I agree with you , yatamma -un -nisa probably are orphaned girls, 127 is cautioning that you should not marry these girls to eat up their properties or, so that you can marry them free(without ujoor) .
4-3 is most definitely marry , not marry off, because of the financial hardship argument and further elaboration of being content with MMA. Marry off argument does not stand a chance , because any such thing just can not make sense with "remaining satisfied with MMA".
Yatamma covers both the genders, and then God is further clarifying , "out of these yatamma , one may marry the women, four together",,,,,etc but if you don't want to be burdened, then only one, or remain satisfied with MMA only.
Sadaqat e hinna is definitely neither dower(ojoor) nor their property or inheritance ( Amwalukm) , it could be a free dower or gift from the guardian or???? any suggestions?
peace
siki -
Salam bro Hasan,
One must accept that nobody marries two three or four wives at the same time! But that?s exactly what it means if we take ?ankuhu? as Marry instead of Marry off.
-
Marrying two, three, or four wives at the same time can be done. Just because it is not generally done does not mean it cannot be done.
-
Even if you marry off two, three, or four women at the same time, it can still mean marrying them off to ONE MAN at the same time ! So this point cannot be taken as an argument that "inkihoo" in 43 means "marry off".
That authority may be the parents who marry off (wa ankehoo in 2432) their daughter to a man. And if you claim that their approval is sufficient for the nikah to be legally valid, then the parents are the registrar. God addresses the parents in 2432 and orders them to marry off their unmarried ones (ayaama minkum).
Thank you for finally accepting that the adressees of 2432 are the believing parents/guardians, if "ankihoo" here is translated as "marry off".
The words "marry off" imply that the "unmarried ones" being mentioned are PARENT/GUARDIAN DEPENDENTS and thus even if 2432 is a commandment and not general advice, it is applicable only to the PARENT/GUARDIAN DEPENDENT SINGLES, and not applicable to INDEPENDENT SINGLES. One can marry independent singles, but one cannot marry off independent singles.
Thus, according to your reasoning, polygyny will not be permitted to parent/guardian dependent singles only, but will be allowed to independent singles.
In my post on March 20 I referred to the expression (hurrimat alaikum) an tajma3uu bainal ukhtain in 423, which means (you are forbbidden) to have two sisters as wives at one and the same time.
Please note that this does not mean you are forbidden to marry sisters. No. You can marry biological sisters each one at a time; for instance you can marry your wife?s sister after your wife dies or after you divorce her.
What you are forbidden to do here is to have two sisters as co-wives, because it is polygamy. Stress here is not on sisters but co-wives, which is polygamy. God forbids polygamy because it is a wrong done to sisters in particular and women in general because sisters are women.
Please do not invent words which are not there. 423 talks about two "sisters (biological)", and not two "co-wives" or two "women", otherwise you are changing the word of The God. The word "akht" does not mean "co-wives" or "women".
-
-
Peace bro Warner,
We know the Quraan was revealed in parts and over a number of years. It may be that two successive verses can be years apart. They are successive because of the compilation.
Your words in red clearly show that you are CONJECTURING. Please give concrete/solid/100 % proof that 3350 and 3352 were years apart.
If 3350 and 3352 were reveled at once the time gap would have been few seconds. What is the point in allowing the Messenger to marry a broad set of women and immediately banning it within a few seconds. So naturally it is understood there is substantial time between the revelation of these 2 verses.
The part in red of your quote is a CONJECTURE as I already mentioned above. You are CONJECTURING and then twisting "min ba3d" to mean "beyond this time", based on your CONJECTURE.
That is why I had said in an earlier post that "min ba3d" in 3352 does not mean "beyond this time" (there is no word for "time" in that verse), but according to the context of 3350-52, means beyond the categories of women mentioned in 3350, i.e. no women were permitted to the Prophet beyond the lawful categories of women mentioned in 3350.
Replace is take away/remove/discard something which is already there and place another in its place (substitute). If you do not remove you can not replace. When you replace the car battery or wheel you do not have the earlier one fixed there. But if you take an additional one removal is not necessary. So taking additional is not replacing.The verses do not talk about taking additional they talk about replacing.
The word is used in 3352, 420 and 665 meaning exchanging/replacing wife/wives to take another. The same word is used in other places in the Quraan with the meaning replace or exchange.
In 33.52 the prophet is commanded by God not to take any more women and also not to replace the existing ones. This part of the verse has been misunderstood by many. Let me try to explain this with an example. Lets say the IRS (Inland Revenue) informs the people they can not own any more houses from today. A person owning 4 houses when this law is announced can sell any of the houses and take other houses instead of the ones sold as long as the number of houses do not exceed the upper limit of 4. But if the IRS says you can not own any more houses and also you can not replace your existing houses, then you are fixed with the 4 houses you owned when the law was announced. (Here the figure 4 is just an example the same will apply even for 1)
The analogy is similar to what is said to the Messenger in 3352 with regard to future marriage. He can not take any more women from now neither can he change/replace the existing wives even though he might be attracted to beauty/good of any other woman/women. So the number of wives at the time and the persons become fixed. No additions, No removals, No replacements.
In 3352 God is setting the limit for the Prophet since 3350 he was allowed to marry many categories including any believing woman who offers herself to the prophet . So with this verse he is asked to stop marrying more women or to replace the existing ones.
3352 No women are lawful to you beyond this, nor that you change them for other wives, even though you may be attracted by their beauty, EXCEPT ma malakat yameenuka. And God is watchful over all things.
The first part of 3352 (blue) prohibited any women beyond the categories of women mentioned in 3350, and the second part (green) prohibited him from exchanging/replacing one wife with another WITH AN EXCEPTION (red), thus this prohibition of replacement was not an absolute prohibition. Looks like you overlooked the EXCEPTION in that verse just like brook did. Thus even after 3352, the Prophet was allowed to replace one wife with another provided the replacement was from "ma malakat yameenuka".
The above posts show there is an upper limit for the believers with regard to the number of wives at any given time.
There is no upper limit because the prohibition of replacement was not absolute, in view of the exception of "ma malakat yameenuka" in 3352 as I have already mentioned above.