POLYGAMY NOT THERE IN QURAN?
-
Again, what does adopted sons have to do with forbidding polygyny? (ImamQuranonly)
One could justify adoption for the same reason Tanveer justifies polygyny (1)Muhammad had married the second and the third and the fourth... wives of his, as a result of which he was involved in polygny; so polygyny is allowed in Islam. (2)Muhammad had adopted a son (337) who was called by Muhammad?s name as was customary when he lived (334-5 and 37), as a result of which he was involved in adoption; so giving your name to your adopted son is allowed in Islam.
That is why I said If there is permission in Islam for adopting children and giving them your name, there can be permission in Islam for polygyny.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Again, what does adopted sons have to do with forbidding polygyny? (ImamQuranonly)
One could justify adoption for the same reason Tanveer justifies polygyny (1)Muhammad had married the second and the third and the fourth... wives of his, as a result of which he was involved in polygny; so polygyny is allowed in Islam. (2)Muhammad had adopted a son (337) who was called by Muhammad?s name as was customary when he lived (334-5 and 37), as a result of which he was involved in adoption; so giving your name to your adopted son is allowed in Islam.
That is why I said If there is permission in Islam for adopting children and giving them your name, there can be permission in Islam for polygyny.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayQuite plainly, Al Quran doesn't name Zaid the "Son of Muhammad", regardless of what you think the customs were back then. Did you even read the ayaat that I posted that you keep quoting? Your logic is flawed as usual. Read those ayaat again slowly.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
ImanQuranonly, please! There is no need for such bickering here. I read the verses, translated them, commented on them; and my work is included now in the E-Books section of a site.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayWhat does your work being included in the E-Books section of a site have to do with this thread? It just proves that anyone can make a book these days with technology. Cause you can't even understand the simple concept that Zaid is NOT called the "Son of Muhummad" in Al Quran.
Is there a money back policy for innocent people that buy your books and then become knowledgable?
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
I am referring to a fact here, a rule that Muhammad too was bound by earlier involvement in a thing until it was forbidden such as polygyny does not justify it.
Another example is Muhammad's fear of the people around him more than his fear of God at certain times wa tahshaa'n naas; wallahu ahaqqu an tahshaah (3337). Is it allowed for the followers of Muhammad to fear the people around them more than they fear God?
I don't like the way you mention money making through my E-Book. If you go on forcing me to be involved in this kind of bickering I will have to simply ignore your posts.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Peace Hasan Akcay,
I am referring to a fact here, a rule that Muhammad too was bound by earlier involvement in a thing until it was forbidden such as polygyny does not justify it.
The fact that any people who engaged in any activity until it was given as haraam by Allah, did so, does not have anything to do with polygyny.
THE FACT IS THAT YOU CAN'T PROVE WHEN MUHAMMAD MARRIED ANY OF HIS WIVES; WHETHER IT WAS BEFORE OR AFTER QURANIC REVELATION.
THE FACT IS THAT AL QURAN DOESN'T FORBID POLYGYNY ANYWHERE EXCEPT BETWEEN TWO SISTERS AT THE SAME TIME, OR BEING MARRIED TO THOSE FORBIDDEN ALL TOGETHER.
THE FACT IS THAT YOU FALSLY THROUGH MISLEADING STATEMENTS REPRESENTED THAT AL QURAN CALLED ZAID THE SON OF MUHAMMAD TO TRY AND SUPPORT ANOTHER OF YOUR FALSE PREMISES WITH BAD LOGIC.
Another example is Muhammad's fear of the people around him more than his fear of God at certain times wa tahshaa'n naas; wallahu ahaqqu an tahshaah (3337). Is it allowed for the followers of Muhammad to fear the people around them more than they fear God?
Do you think people that try to follow the guidance given by Allah in Al Quran never fear people around them more than they fear Allah? If you do, you are disillusioned and unrealistic. It happens, but the guidance is there to remind you not to do it to get you back on the right track. The human being is forgetful and that is why the guidance in contained in a Book that you can read over and over again to remind you. Did you miss that lesson from Al Quran?
I don't like the way you mention money making through my E-Book. If you go on forcing me to be involved in this kind of bickering I will have to simply ignore your posts.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayIf you are making money promoting your Hislam with the knowledge that you have, then you may not have enough fear of Allah as you are supposed to if you claim to be a believer. You barely know what you are talking about, have read a lot of what others have written, and then go about writing books as if you have studied Al Quran in great detail and have been guided to the truth enough to promote your books online in the E-Book section of a website. What will you do when your knowledge grows, (if it does), and you realize that what you sold to people in those E-Books are lies and distortions of the truth that Allah has revealed in Al Quran? Will you refund their money then? Or just continue to eat the fire into your belly?
IMHO, you don't know enough to write books and be selling them to people; if that is what you are doing. If you want to write your opinions and tell people that for free, fine. But if you are charging people for you lack of knowledge and misguiding them by doing so, may Allah have mercy on you.
Feel free to ignore me and my posts if it gives you peace. But don't expect me to ignore you on here when you promote incorrectness about Al Quran, especially without proof or with falsehood and/or poor/bad logic.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
Salam eleikum All
First of all i will remined that inspite of to look to the question of woman globaly ,the modern onrientalists stay regurgitating the same points of view of their preceeders in the middel era ,Polygamy ,hijab ,men dominance.
I want to mention her some numbers to those who killed us by their noisy shouding about Polygamy among muslims
The annual number of trafficated humans in USA ( most of them are kidnapped women ,girls ) are about 800 000.
The global annual number is more dramatic about 10 - 15 milions of humans trafficating annualy most of them women , girls( see the UN resources ) ,and the main marked to those is EU ,USA and some of their allians in the oil states in the Golf .Then come and tell me about the rights of muslim women ...........
Yes the polygamy is mentioned in Quran but is it obligatory ,or its an alternative ( solution ) which can resolve sosial problem which is more dangerous and injirious than polygamy it self ( her f.eks the lack of life resources ) .
By another side i want to ask is Islam the only religion which permit this ,of course not .
Iam in Work now so inshalla i will provide you with the suitable translation and occasions of the aya of what you call it polygamy in the next future -
Salam eleikum All
First of all i will remined that inspite of to look to the question of woman globaly ,the modern onrientalists stay regurgitating the same points of view of their preceeders in the middel era ,Polygamy ,hijab ,men dominance.
I want to mention her some numbers to those who killed us by their noisy shouding about Polygamy among muslims
The annual number of trafficated humans in USA ( most of them are kidnapped women ,girls ) are about 800 000.
The global annual number is more dramatic about 10 - 15 milions of humans trafficating annualy most of them women , girls( see the UN resources ) ,and the main marked to those is EU ,USA and some of their allians in the oil states in the Golf .Then come and tell me about the rights of muslim women ...........
Yes the polygamy is mentioned in Quran but is it obligatory ,or its an alternative ( solution ) which can resolve sosial problem which is more dangerous and injirious than polygamy it self ( her f.eks the lack of life resources ) .
By another side i want to ask is Islam the only religion which permit this ,of course not .
Iam in Work now so inshalla i will provide you with the suitable translation and occasions of the aya of what you call it polygamy in the next futureWa aleikum Salam
Well said brother,
In this monogamous society where women are so independent, still global studies have shown that more married men than women have affairs and, I can recall I wives saying ?What he does behind my back is OK? as long as I don?t know about it, such hypocrisy.
The global annual number is more dramatic about 10 - 15 milions of humans trafficating annualy most of them women , girls( see the UN resources ) ,and the main marked to those is EU ,USA and some of their allians in the oil states in the Golf
I am a woman but lucky one and so are those vulnerable Kosovan women who have been tricked into human trafficking. I see them forced into prostitution or begging on the streets of London and that?s when I think ?If only these Muslims knew why polygamy was allowed, no man would joke about it or view it as a privilege to take another wife, but rather would realise that it is in fact a duty to shelter the vulnerable in society.
Through the ages very few have understood the reasons behind polygyny and only a true believer would have the depth in their hearts to see is as a solution to a social evil.is Islam the only religion which permit this ,of course not
Jews have a very tough law where a man can leave his wife yet refuse to divorce her. Should he remarry his deserted wife is still not allowed in religion to marry another man. If she does anyway her children are considered illegitimate.
A Jewish man can go on like this until he has taken three wives. In other words a Jewish man can shackle his wife by not allowing her a divorce, himself free to take one after the other. At least Quran has given a women right to divorce if she prefers not to live in a polygynous marriage.
May we become a tolerant society in true sense.
Best regard -
THE FACT IS THAT YOU CAN'T PROVE WHEN MUHAMMAD MARRIED ANY OF HIS WIVES; WHETHER IT WAS BEFORE OR AFTER QURANIC REVELATION. (ImanQuranonly)
Please do not shout. Al-Ahzaab 50, 51 and 52 proves it
O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives?
Yaa ayyuh an nabeyyu! Innaa ahlalna laka azwaaj aka (50)Put off whichever of them thou pleasest
Torjee man tashaa3o minhonnah (51)No women shall henceforth be lawful to thee
Laa yohello laka?n nisaao min ba3do (52)(1)Muhammad had married ALL his wives when God revealed 3352. Just imagine what would happen to him if still married after this verse and thus rebelled against his Sustainer
Say "I only follow what is revealed to me. Behold, I would dread were I to rebel (asaito) against my Sustainer, the suffering on that awesome Day!" (1015)
(2)In 3352 God does not condemn Muhammad for having married his wives before but forbids him to marry from now on ?min ba3du.
The fact that any people who engaged in any activity until it was given as haraam by Allah, did so, does not have anything to do with polygyny.
It definitely does. MIN BA3DO in 3352 means that Muhammad?s earlier action in this regard does not count. What counts is the fact that he never took wife upon wife again after he had been forbidden to marry any more. That means a clearcut abolition of polygyny because you can not have polygyny unless you take wife upon wife.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
THE FACT IS THAT AL QURAN DOESN'T FORBID POLYGYNY ANYWHERE EXCEPT BETWEEN TWO SISTERS AT THE SAME TIME?
God allows no exceptions. He does not say "You are forbbidden to marry two sisters except two other women such as two mothers of orphans at the same time.
In 2432, God says "Marry the single from among you." This divine command in 2432 is structurally the same as His commad in 629.
Fas3aw el? zikrillah (629)
Wa ankehu?l ayaama minkum (2432)Hasten to the remembrance of God (629).
Marry the single from among you (2432)God forbids us to hasten to the remembrance of, say, al-Lat on the Day of Cogregation. So does He forbid us to marry the married, esspecially when we take into account the fact that polygyny is such an terrible wrong unto women that it has to be forbidden (423)
You are forbidden to marry two sisters together.
Hurrimat alaikum? an tajma3uu baina?l uhtain.God forbids registrars to marry off the married, without exceptions. He forbids men to marry a woman upon her sister, without exceptions such as one mother of orphans upon another.
God forbids polygyny without exceptions.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
It is God's truth that some people have distorted God's message in 43. Here is the proof
In 410 God warns all momeneen and momenaat against sinfully devouring the possessions of orphans. He threatens them "Those who sinfully devour the possessions of orphan but fill their bellies with fire for, (in the life top come) they will have to endure a blazing flame!"
In 42 He addresses all momeneen and momenaat and warns them again against consuming the possessions of the orphans together with their own possessions, and threatens all momeneen and momenaat once more it is the biggest crime -hooban kabeera, for which you will duely pay in the life to come.
In 43 He surely goes on addressing the same people, momeneen and momenaat and reminds them of the big crime which they should fear to commit "If you fear to be unjust with the orphans, NKH the women..."
If NKH means marry, God is saying "O momeneen and momenaat! Marry the women!" Is this possible? Does God want the momenaat to marry women? Ask yourselves over again
Does God want women to marry women in 43?
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
"Sadaqats" are certainly "chairties" , its combination with Nihalatan solidfies the meaning as something to be given away without expecting a benifit in return, but the problem comes up when the sentence culminates with , "If they forfeit something willingly" brickwall This is a real problem .
we may have to adop a voodoo non conformal but creative and logical approach to solve the above. hmm So let us do some out of the Box thinking. group
siki
I think the problem arises when we think that the addressee in "aatuul nisaa"" are the same ones who are paying the sadaqaat. They are not. It means The sadaqaat already paid by others to the nisaa' "the poor, the needy, and those who are employed to deal with the sadaqaat" should be handed to them in full and willingly, unless they want to forfeit part of it for the community.
-
The term employed in the Qur'an for the "dowry" the bridegroom pays the bride is 'ujoor. Sadaqaat is employed in other ayas not meaning 'ujoor but what Samia has just said, if I a don't remember wrong. Is there a reason to change nomenclature in 4.3 and call it something else when in fact it taking it with its usual meaning doesn't present any problem?
-
Salaams,
THE FACT IS THAT YOU CAN'T PROVE WHEN MUHAMMAD MARRIED ANY OF HIS WIVES; WHETHER IT WAS BEFORE OR AFTER QURANIC REVELATION. (ImanQuranonly)
Please do not shout.
I didn't shout. I wrote in CAPITAL LETTERS to EMPHASIS a point. Shouting involves vocal chords which you have not heard me use. Please try to be more accurate.
Al-Ahzaab 50, 51 and 52 proves it
O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives?
Yaa ayyuh an nabeyyu! Innaa ahlalna laka azwaaj aka (50)Put off whichever of them thou pleasest
Torjee man tashaa3o minhonnah (51)No women shall henceforth be lawful to thee
Laa yohello laka?n nisaao min ba3do (52)(1)Muhammad had married ALL his wives when God revealed 3352. Just imagine what would happen to him if still married after this verse and thus rebelled against his Sustainer
Just imagine what would happen if you posted the ENTIRE ayat instead of just the portion you want to present
Transliteration La yahillu laka alnnisao min baAAdu wala an tabaddala bihinna min azwajin walaw aAAjabaka husnuhunna illa ma malakat yameenuka wakana Allahu AAala kulli shay-in raqeeban
Literal The women are not permitted/allowed to you from after, and nor that you exchange/replace with them (F) from wives , and even if their goodness/beauty pleased/marveled you, except what your right (hand) owned/possessed, and God was/is on every thing observing/watching .And can you tell me in your infinite wisdom which ayaat was revealed first 3352 or 43? (please prove your conclusion from Al Quran)
Say "I only follow what is revealed to me. Behold, I would dread were I to rebel (asaito) against my Sustainer, the suffering on that awesome Day!" (1015)
I think it is safe to say here that Muhammad followed ALL of what was revealed to him, not just portions of the ayaat as you quote them.
(2)In 3352 God does not condemn Muhammad for having married his wives before but forbids him to marry from now on ?min ba3du.
Why would Allah condemn him for what He has already made halaal(43 for example)? Did you erroronesously or intentionally forget that Allah also said "except what your right (hand) owned/possessed,"?
The fact that any people who engaged in any activity until it was given as haraam by Allah, did so, does not have anything to do with polygyny.
It definitely does. MIN BA3DO in 3352 means that Muhammad?s earlier action in this regard does not count. What counts is the fact that he never took wife upon wife again after he had been forbidden to marry any more. That means a clearcut abolition of polygyny because you can not have polygyny unless you take wife upon wife.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayThis command is also ONLY for the Prophet. Not all the believers. It also doesn't stop the Prophet from more MMA. It also forbids the Prophet from divorce and then marrying another wife. So do you think divorce is also prohibited now in Al Quran? that believers can't divorce their wives and then marry another as said in the ayat mentioned?
A clearcut abolition of polygyny would have to say "get rid of all of your wives and MMA except ONE". It doesn't exist in Al Quran. What was given here is a protection for those wives of his that were called by Allah "mothers of the believers". Their status is solidified by Allah and they can not be exchanged and that title given to other women just by marrying the Prophet.
Allah no more forbid polygyny for the Prophet or the believers at large in this ayat, than He did forbid divorce and remarriage for all believers.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
THE FACT IS THAT AL QURAN DOESN'T FORBID POLYGYNY ANYWHERE EXCEPT BETWEEN TWO SISTERS AT THE SAME TIME?
God allows no exceptions. He does not say "You are forbbidden to marry two sisters except two other women such as two mothers of orphans at the same time.
That is such backwards logic that I am not sure where to even begin to address it.
Maybe this will help you to understand; 423 starts a list of whom is prohibited for marriage. It continues in 424 which also includes what is in BOLD below
424
Transliteration Waalmuhsanatu mina alnnisa-i illa ma malakat aymanukum kitaba Allahi AAalaykum waohilla lakum ma waraa thalikum an tabtaghoo bi-amwalikum muhsineena ghayra musafiheena fama istamtaAAtum bihi minhunna faatoohunna ojoorahunna fareedatan wala junaha AAalaykum feema taradaytum bihi min baAAdi alfareedati inna Allaha kana AAaleeman hakeeman
Literal And the married from the women except what your rights owned/possessed (from spoils of war) God's decree/judgment on you, and became/is permitted/allowed for you, what (is) behind that, that you ask/desire with your (P) wealths , marrying not fornicating/adulterating, so what you enjoyed with it, from them (F), so give them (F) their (F) rewards/fees (dowries) a religious duty/command/stipulation ,and no offense/guilt on you in what you (P) mutually agreed with it, from after the religious duty/command/stipulation , that God was/is knowledgeable, wise/judicious.Get it? All others that you seek for marriage are permitted! Do you have any clue now as to why "waan tajmaAAoo bayna al-okhtayni illa ma qad salafa" (and that you combine between the two sisters, except what had preceded) was given?
In 2432, God says "Marry the single from among you." This divine command in 2432 is structurally the same as His commad in 629.
Fas3aw el? zikrillah (629)
Wa ankehu?l ayaama minkum (2432)Hasten to the remembrance of God (629).
Marry the single from among you (2432)I can find way too many "portions" of ayaat in Al Quran that appear to be structurally the same. But since you say these two are, why don't you break them down grammactically and tell us why the grammatical similarity of these "portions" of the two ayaat, support or don't support the permission of polygyny. yeah
God forbids us to hasten to the remembrance of, say, al-Lat on the Day of Cogregation. So does He forbid us to marry the married, esspecially when we take into account the fact that polygyny is such an terrible wrong unto women that it has to be forbidden (423)
There is actually a provision where the married can be married, didn't you notice that above in 424 at the beginning? Where is the exception that al-Lat can be remembered?
Are you really a woman in disguise posing as a man? How many married polygynous woman have you interviewed personally to determine that it is such a terrible wrong done to them? It has to be forbidden according to your irrational emotional nature only, and those like you too of course....is that what you are saying? Where is your Quranic proof of it being a terrible wrong? Please don't try to quote the ayaat that you have presented either incomplete or out of context as your proof.
You are forbidden to marry two sisters together.
Hurrimat alaikum? an tajma3uu baina?l uhtain.God forbids registrars to marry off the married, without exceptions. He forbids men to marry a woman upon her sister, without exceptions such as one mother of orphans upon another.
You and your registrars. Funny. Wouldn't marry off imply that the registrars get to make the choice of who to marry to whom and when? Sounds like you have lived in this type of society and continue to enjoy forced marriages.
What the heck does "He forbids men to marry a woman upon her sister mean? How can a man marry a woman UPON her sister? o Can you say that again in plain english please. (please don't use the weak argument that all women are sisters; cause in that case, all men are brothers and all humans are family and incest is forbidden in the same ayat that you are quoting. So your argument would be destroyed since no one could marry anyone then.)
Do I still need to point you to the married in 424 that can be married? And is it marry or marry off? You seem to choose either one depending on what suits your needs. Or are any people told to "marry" at all in Al Quran. Or are only the registrars told to "marry off" everyone? (according to their desires Im sure according to you)
God forbids polygyny without exceptions.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayHasan Akcay is trying to ATTRIBUTE to Allah the forbidding of polygyny without exceptions!
Haven't you read the ayat that asks who will forbid what Allah has made halaal? &
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
It is God's truth that some people have distorted God's message in 43. Here is the proof
In 410 God warns all momeneen and momenaat against sinfully devouring the possessions of orphans. He threatens them "Those who sinfully devour the possessions of orphan but fill their bellies with fire for, (in the life top come) they will have to endure a blazing flame!"
In 42 He addresses all momeneen and momenaat and warns them again against consuming the possessions of the orphans together with their own possessions, and threatens all momeneen and momenaat once more it is the biggest crime -hooban kabeera, for which you will duely pay in the life to come.
In 43 He surely goes on addressing the same people, momeneen and momenaat and reminds them of the big crime which they should fear to commit "If you fear to be unjust with the orphans, NKH the women..."
If NKH means marry, God is saying "O momeneen and momenaat! Marry the women!" Is this possible? Does God want the momenaat to marry women? Ask yourselves over again
Does God want women to marry women in 43?
Peace,
Hasan AkcayWhat kind of question is that?
First, please post ayat 410 and show where, as you said "In 410 God warns all momeneen and momenaat"
Second, post ayat 42 and show where, as you said "In 42 He addresses all momeneen and momenaat"
Third, your point is invalidated because you don't understand that even if what you said existed did in fact exist, the plural masculine form "can include the feminine" as well, but doesn't HAVE TO. The context is what determines whether or not it does. Since women obviously can't marry women, 43 has to be addressing MEN only.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
Peace All,
I have a question about a verse, which I thought was relevant to the discussion at hand, but might not be. Kindly let me know your thoughts about it.
2432 - "Marry those among you who are single, or the virtuous ones among yourselves, male or female if they are in poverty, Allah will give them means out of His grace for Allah encompasseth all, and he knoweth all things." (Yusuf Ali)
Now my question is, who do you think that this verse is applicable to?
(1) Men,
(2) Women, or
(3) Both men and women.Without any preconceptions, I think that it is applicable to both. I would love to hear your thoughts about it.
-
Peace All,
I have a question about a verse, which I thought was relevant to the discussion at hand, but might not be. Kindly let me know your thoughts about it.
2432 - "Marry those among you who are single, or the virtuous ones among yourselves, male or female if they are in poverty, Allah will give them means out of His grace for Allah encompasseth all, and he knoweth all things." (Yusuf Ali)
Now my question is, who do you think that this verse is applicable to?
(1) Men,
(2) Women, or
(3) Both men and women.Without any preconceptions, I think that it is applicable to both. I would love to hear your thoughts about it.
I agree. However, I would like the translation to be more precise. The Arabic words corresponding to the virtuous ones, male or female is wa's saaleheena min ebaad ekum wa emaa ekum. EBAAD male slaves, EMAA female slaves
Wa ankehuu'l ayaama minkum
Marry off the single from among youWa's saaleheena min ebaad ekum wa emaa ekum
and virtuous male and female slaves of yoursPeace,
Hasan Akcay