POLYGAMY NOT THERE IN QURAN?
-
As Salaamu Alaikum all,
It's really amazing how everyone has a different view of whether polygyny is forbidden, permissible, encouraged, etc.; and under what circumstances, etc. The arguments of "proof" are all over the place. Ayaat taken out of context, quotes taken out of context, trying to make arabic words have new meanings, and the list goes on and on. It's obvious that most want everyone else to believe as they do, instead of everyone trying to reach a better understanding of what Allah has revealed as guidance.
Just wanted to say that! jedi
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
Further to your analysis, what I see is that we have two extremes dominated by men one extreme is polygamy is allowed, no conitions; and other is polygamy not allowed at all under any circumstances. Those on either extreme are not willing to move one inch. The group of gals are iin the middle for restricted polygamy and are the ones discussing with the "extremists".
-
Salaam Samia,
Firstly, It is not an excuse but a solution based on one of the already known methods.
Secondly, your analogy is completely off. You are comparing one thing with the same exact thing. A better analogy (nonetheless still a poor one) would be if you travel to your work every morning sometime on foot, sometime on bicycle, sometime on bus and sometime on tube, then it would not be meaningless if I say to you if you fear to be late, travel by the tube ! but if you fear that the tube is too expensive then by foot or by bicycle !!
Salaam Tanweer
Your analogy sounds better If I put the parts of the verse in place of analogiesif you fear to be late= if you fear to be unfair to orphans
travel by tube = marry who accepts of women twos, three and fours
but if you fear the tube is expensive =if you fear to be unjust
then by oot or by bicycle then oneSo far so good, until we come to how you usually travel
you travel to your work every morning sometime on foot, sometime on bicycle, sometime on bus and sometime on tube
If you do travel by tube usually, why would I, again, recommend the tube? You seem to know better than me. You are the one who goes to work and make transport choices already. I am not giving you additional information. That's my point. If you are already allowed polygamy, what's the point of giving you if's and but's, unless this if is a condition without which you cannot travel by tube? -
The so called western/Christian men were very wise , they understood the problem and correctly opted out of it , they now Have a lot of fun, but marriage is prohibited, where as, GOD FEARING MEN? who desire to stay within the limits of Allah, are labeled as beasts/ Pariahs by these societies and the ones influenced by it.
And the Irony is , that in most cases a wife , as a last resort , accepts a mistress, or closes her eyes on her husband's sleeping around with other women, but creates hell, and would never accept another woman becoming his legally wedded wife.
Peace siki, even though i agree with what you say above, i would like to add that hypocrisy as such is HUMAN, not only western
lk -
Peace all --
I view polygamy similar as it?s OK to marry your cousin; it?s not forbidden although you don?t have to.
No charities organizations then; left alone without a provider they?ll starve or be forced to do whatever to survive. Imagine all the widows and orphans from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and having responsibility and being encouraged to marry and equally care for two and three and four wives and their kids.
Not about sex; really more of a burden and duty on the man to care for fellow believers and NOT all women are great lookers.
Obviously, people will read/interpret verses and abuse them to fit their desires.
Salaam Nun
Did the qur'aan advise us to marry the poor or to donate to them? Why can't someone care for somebody without marrying them? How about women? Do they have to marry everyone they support? Why should men?
-
Salaam siki,
I agree almost 100% percent with what you say. It is a burden, obviously. Marriage in itself is a burden to any person. If you add more than one than one consort, it is an added AND most likely COMPOUNDED burden. I am witness of the ease with which many "oriental" males on arriving in the west quickly discover the enormous "advantages" of free sex without attachments.
Whee you say "The women think it to be a privilege ", of course not all women, but many women. Hoever some men do consider it as a privilege or some kind of acknowledgement of a superior status. However superiority only there will be in as far as the man does it out of a sense of responsibility and submission to God and service to his society. Nobody no honest people will grudge such person acknowledgement and respect. It is evident that for all people involved in such a configuration it is demanding, particularly for the man as you have approrpiately described. Poligamy, though, like everything else under the sun can be abused and has been abused, diverted and perverted, not just in the Muslim world of course.
Poligamy, precisely because it may place a disproportionate burden on some people, should not be a single remedy or a magic remedy. The Qur'an places consistently and unrelentingly the greates weight on equity and justice and on not burdening anybody beyond his or her capacity. In this sense, more important that the system it is always the will and the determination of the believers in assuming their share and no less according to their capacity. To judge from the Qur'an, that seemed to be the case of the earlier believers. Not all men or not many, can handle more than one wife, not all women can assume a spinters life without motherhood, and if they can't telling ourselves that they should solves nothing, and we cannot ban anybody for their limited ability, but rather help where we can, and not accept double morals or hypocrisy.
Exactly my thoughts, which i wanted to convey for a long time , but couldn't. To add
The women think it to be a privilege , where as it is a great burden and responsibility. Marrying one, two , three or four , after a while the attraction wears out. For men, excitement and fun is newness, conqurence and seduction, marrying , one or multiple, there is hardly any Fun in his sex life, but in the bargain, It is one hell of a Mess that he gets into.
Handling/supporting multiple families is a nightmare, most of the time these women, or/and their kids, would be at war with each other, making his life miserable, It is really a very big disadvantage to have more than one wife.
Come on Gals, try and visualize, it is a great advantage to women Folk. You don't have to agree to such an arrangement , if you don't feel like, but if there is no option , and the difference is between not having a marriage/family at all , I think it is well worth it.
The choice is totally yours, even the wife number one has a choice to leave if such a situation exists, and/or if she has better options.
The so called western/Christian men were very wise , they understood the problem and correctly opted out of it , they now Have a lot of fun, but marriage is prohibited, where as, GOD FEARING MEN? who desire to stay within the limits of Allah, are labeled as beasts/ Pariahs by these societies and the ones influenced by it.
And the Irony is , that in most cases a wife , as a last resort , accepts a mistress, or closes her eyes on her husband's sleeping around with other women, but creates hell, and would never accept another woman becoming his legally wedded wife.
peace
siki
-
Peace siki, even though i agree with what you say above, i would like to add that hypocrisy as such is HUMAN, not only western
lkSalaam Elke,
You are right hypocrisy is not only a western archetype, in fact you will come across huge numbers of people in the east, who have taken this world as their God. (rejecters) Hypocrisy is so entrenched in their everyday life that they don?t even know the difference.
968 God has promised the hypocrite men and women and the rejecters a Fire in Hell, in it they will abide; it will be enough for them. And God has cursed them and they will have a lasting retribution.
The message above is directed to all humans, belonging to east or west
May God save all of us from being a hypocrite.
Best regards
farida -
Salaam Nun
Did the qur'aan advise us to marry the poor or to donate to them? Why can't someone care for somebody without marrying them? How about women? Do they have to marry everyone they support? Why should men?
Salaam Samia,
Qur?an advises to help the poor and marry whom we please and yes one can care for somebody without marrying them.
The men don?t have to marry and neither do the women have to.
Some women may want to share a man rather than live man-less, while others not.
It?s really simple; as an example?Given there is only myself and a few women believers are left; let?s pick
Samia, Elke, Lil Ol Lady and her friend Hanifa D
Now, I can offer assistant/marriage to two, three, four, one or none;
likewise, each can offer assistance/marriage to me and we live happily.Btw, I?d be OK with every other Friday off, a modest mansion, Lexus, and a few $ grand/day spending allowance if you? all will have me? ;D
-
Assalamo Alaikum,
Except for the first page I have not gone through remaining 15 pages, therefore, excuse me if it is a repetition.
The corrected translation of the verses are as follows- O people, observe your Lord who created a person. And another he created of his spouse and He expands from both, more males and females. And observe the God who you constantly request to for the family. Indeed, the God, He cares for you.
- And hand over the orphans their inheritance, and you shall not exchange the bad for the good, and you shall not deposit their assets into your assets, for indeed that will be a great injustice.
- And if you fear that you are unable to mete out justness amongst the orphans, therefore mary them off from you. Of the females pairing in two, and in three, and in four. Hence if you fear about fairness, thus once and for all, your decision. That is to ensure you avoiding any misappropriation.
Translation of 401 is not of the words of Quran.
This is the situation, cause, problem
And the solution is this, effect, action desirable to be taken to meet the situation, problem, apprehension, possibility, eventualityAs a solution, sequel,make/arrange marriage {here it is not that "marry"}
which is {one thing/decision/solution} desirable for you people {society}. Particle "Fa" and word "taba lakum" needs to be taken into consideration.
Marriages of widow will reduce the possibility of abuse of the rights of orphans in the society because it will create a relationship of "arhaam" through the mother of the orphans. -
As Salaamu Alaika Mazhar,
It might be wise for you to read all the other posts, because your post can not even be addressed. It would be like starting over and forgetting the first 15 pages. Not to mention that your translations is Wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off base in taking privilege to define words incorrectly and ignore meanings or importance of other words. Good luck to you and your understanding.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
Assalamo Alaikum,
Except for the first page I have not gone through remaining 15 pages, therefore, excuse me if it is a repetition.
The corrected translation of the verses are as followsTranslation of 401 is not of the words of Quran.
This is the situation, cause, problem
And the solution is this, effect, action desirable to be taken to meet the situation, problem, apprehension, possibility, eventualityAs a solution, sequel,make/arrange marriage {here it is not that "marry"}
which is {one thing/decision/solution} desirable for you people {society}. Particle "Fa" and word "taba lakum" needs to be taken into consideration.
Marriages of widow will reduce the possibility of abuse of the rights of orphans in the society because it will create a relationship of "arhaam" through the mother of the orphans. -
Peace IQO,
Perhaps you want to tell us why his translation is way off etc...
Salaams House M.D.,
Perhap I don't care to bother with such a lengthy explanation that has been covered too many times already in this thread and others. yes
I think it is self evident for those who have read the threads.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
Verb NKH has two forms. Their imperatives are ?nkihu which means marry (to other men) like in An-Noor 32 and inkihu which means marry like in An-Nisaa 3.
An-Noor 32
Wa ?nkihu?l ayaama
And marry the unmarried (to other men)An-Nisaa 3
Fainkihu ma taaba lakum mine?n nisaa
Then marry the women who allow youThe conjunction wa is sometimes written as fa by mistake, like in Ash-Shams 15.
Wa la yahaafu ?And they had no fear (Warsh)
Fa la yahaafu ? Then they had no fear (Hafs)In 43 too the same spelling mistake seems to have been made. If it had been written correctly, it would be Wa NKH ma taaba lakum mine?n nisaa just like in An-Norr 32, and the divine command would be as follows
Wa ?nkihu ma taaba lakum mine?n nisaa
And marry the women who allow you (to other men)There is NO POLYGYNY in the Quran
My arguments in this post are based on the article Is There "Polygamy" in the Quran? by yaseen http//www.geocities.com/yaseen_q/polygamy.html?20072
He says his criteria are
-linguistic (rules in the related verses)
-usage of specific words (consistency throughout the Quran)
-logic and common sense,
-topics covered,
-audience addressed.An explanation
The difference between the two verbs "unkaha" and "nakaha" is the hamza (the glottal stop) in the beginning. When they are in the imperative, they have the same form (unkih/unkihuu), both beginning with the glottal stop. The difference between the two glottal stops is that one is original (imperative of unkaha) and the other is not (imperative of nakaha). When not preceded by any word, i.e when both verbs are in the beginning of a senence, there's no difference between them. Only when they are preceded by a word or a preposition such as wa or fa, will they have different pronunciation and writing
(imperative of the verb nakaha and is pronounced fankihuu)
(imperative of the verb unkaha and is pronounced fa unkihuu)According to this explanation, when the imperative NKH is preceded by fa like the fankihu in 43, it only means marry. However, according to yaseen it could mean either marry or marry off; in which case the context will determine the intended meaning.
I would rather give the benefit of doubt to yaseen's explanation because it saves the verse from a lot of contradictions which the other one causes.
The context undoubtedly plays a big role in the interpretation of 43 so that it invalidates the choice of marry because if this meaning is imposed on the message, the verse gets loaded with contradictions despite the fact that there can be no contradictions in God?s revelation (482).
Take the fear mentioned in the beginning of the verse. Let?s assume that it stands for the worries of the believers that they will probably consume the possessions of the orphans and this way they will commit the hooban kabeera mentioned in 42.
If the NKH means marry, they will marry the mothers of the orphans. Will their fear disappear then? Never. Because they will still have the possessions under their care, which they will consume as before and this way they will go on committing the big crime. That is a contradiction.
Another contradiction concerns mathna wa thulatha wa rubaa. These numbers can not be used in counting the women mentioned in the verse although the classical commentators pretend that they do.
These numbers are used in sharing the women. Al-Faatir 1 is proof enough, where God says
All praise is due to God, Originator of the heavens and the earth, who makes the angels messengers with two wings or three wings or four wings (ajnehatin mathna wa thulathaa wa rubaa ) .
God did not give an angel one wing first, another wing some time later, and a third one still some more time later. He gave each angel its fixed number of wings at one and the same time.
So when a man is told to NKH the women thulatha, he is required to NKH all of the three women at one and the same time.
If NKH means marry the women (to other men), the command does make sense because anybody with enough financial means can marry three or more women each to a man at one and the same time.
But if it means marry them (yourself), does it make sense? Can one man marry three women at one and the same time?
Objection One man can simultaneously get married to three women. Why can't he?
If he never sleeps with them, yes. But in that case the three women will not be his wives; they will only be some refugees in his house, which is an orphanage rather than a home of a family made up of a husband and wife. Neither is it polygyny because polygyny never exists without a husband and wives.
On the other hand, if the three women are his actual wives, the man?s marrying and sleeping with them at one and the same time is immoral.
And illegal because in 3352 God prohibits marriage upon marriage, (which I will explain). Therefore in God?s religion no man can indulge in polygyny by taking wife upon wife even if the co-wives are mothers of orphans.
A believing man can have only one wife; otherwise he defies God?s command in 3352, commits the big crime, and indulges in immoral sex.
That is why it is so crucial to understand 43 correctly. I will continue to sum up my views, God willing.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
There is NO POLYGYNY in the Quran
My arguments in this post are based on the article Is There "Polygamy" in the Quran? by yaseen http//www.geocities.com/yaseen_q/polygamy.html?20072
He says his criteria are
-linguistic (rules in the related verses)
-usage of specific words (consistency throughout the Quran)
-logic and common sense,
-topics covered,
-audience addressed.Peace,
Hasan AkcaySalaam Hasan Akcay,
I have read the above link and I noticed that in conclusion Yassen writes We can?t talk about polygamy in the Quran anymore in an apologetic way because it is not there.
My openion is that rather than trying to understand the wisdom behind Allah's commandements, many feel guilty about certain subjects, which are exploited by non beleivers and so, writhing in all sorts of twists and turns, try to wring out a "version", that appeals to the world.
Best regards
farida -
Salaam Hasan Akcay,
I have read the above link and I noticed that in conclusion Yassen writes We can?t talk about polygamy in the Quran anymore in an apologetic way because it is not there.
My openion is that rather than trying to understand the wisdom behind Allah's commandements, many feel guilty about certain subjects, which are exploited by non beleivers and so, writhing in all sorts of twists and turns, try to wring out a "version", that appeals to the world.
Best regards
faridaSalaam farida. In some instances a mere apology is not enough. For instance, Muslims acting in accordance with the following translations of 424 become criminals and deserve the punsihments international courts of justice sentence them to
Let?s assume that Muhammad the Hamas militant agrees with these translations.
He is in Jarusalem, where Muslims and Jews are engaged in street fights. Muhammad takes Golda and her husband captive and marries his captive in accordance with these translations, which make God say that a Muslim is allowed to marry his captive even if she is married.
Golda?s family appeal to the international court of justice. What happens?
004.024
YUSUFALI Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.PICKTHAL And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.
SHAKIR And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.
-
I have to agree here, absolutely no place for any interpretation where there is no mutual consent. One word for that - rape.
-
I have just read the link to Yaseen. In the way of condoning or not condoning poligamy, I have to say that we have talked so much about all this and about this and that other aya, that one is already numbed, so that in fact what has most impressed me in that article is an oblique indication the one about inheritance, where no mention is made if there is more than one survivor wife. If poligamy is foreseen, it seems not to have been foreseen in dealing with this aspect. I find this fact as being quite significant. But I look forward to comments.
Another thing about Yaseen article is about 4.127. Counter to what he says, grmatically, of course, yataamaa an nisaa', as Samia pointed out, cannot be women orphans, but orphans of the nisaa'. What I wonder is whether this nisaa' is talking not about sex but about condition that is, the vulnerable and not necessarily the women, and again also in 4.3.
My humble opinion is that we shouldn't get fixed on fixed and perpetually upholdable situations, but look at what there really is and think consistently in a quranic spirit. We are not bound to reproduce anything, but to reflect and struggle to create whatever our lights and the Light with the Qur'an guidance we may divise as most appropriate and beneficial conditions right where we are, which may pose quite different challenges from those met previosuly and which, at any rate, since we didn't live at any other time, for us are new, and where we live is what we may know best and where we can act.
In another thread, OPF, spoke of poliandry, I put forward the case of the male excess due to selective abortions. That is real and a real problem. I am most certainly no propounding poliandry, but just to indicate that we don't have to be so uptight as to what goes on and what can be done to improve societies. I will open a thread.
Salaam
-
Salaam farida. In some instances a mere apology is not enough. For instance, Muslims acting in accordance with the following translations of 424 become criminals and deserve the punsihments international courts of justice sentence them to
Let?s assume that Muhammad the Hamas militant agrees with these translations.
He is in Jarusalem, where Muslims and Jews are engaged in street fights. Muhammad takes Golda and her husband captive and marries his captive in accordance with these translations, which make God say that a Muslim is allowed to marry his captive even if she is married.
Golda?s family appeal to the international court of justice. What happens?
Salaam brook,
If I was representing Golda's family I would first ask if Golda consented to that marriage and was not willing to go back to her husband. According to the Qur'an you clearly can not inherit women against their will.
IMHO we are not to limit our arguments to one verse; we need to base our decisions on the body of Ayat concerning the rights of mankind.
Those who think that men have some sort of superior status because they are allowed to take more wives should carefully consider the burden associated with taking responsibility of a wife/wives. In the Quran men are given greater responsibility rather than greater position.
3372 We have offered the trust to the heavens and the Earth, and the mountains, but they refused to bear it, and were fearful of it. But the human being accepted it; he was transgressing, ignorant.
Best regards
farida -
I have been following this very long thread and I would like to pose the following question to anyone that would like to answer it
Since The Reading is clear, complete and fully explained, can you point me to the ayats that outline the details for polygamy? If polygamy is sanctioned by The God, then all the details MUST be in His Book. We should not have to speculate or conjecture.
-
I have been following this very long thread and I would like to pose the following question to anyone that would like to answer it
Since The Reading is clear, complete and fully explained, can you point me to the ayats that outline the details for polygamy? If polygamy is sanctioned by The God, then all the details MUST be in His Book. We should not have to speculate or conjecture.
I was going to leave this thread alone...but posts like this encourage me to answer. O0
Since the Reading is clear, complete and fully explained, can you point me to the ayats that outline the details for forbidding polygyny? (Im assuming that is what you meant unless you want polandry included also?) Also, can you show me the ayaat that detail how we are supposed to eat also? And don't forget how we are to walk in the house...I mean which foot first? etc. etc. etc. brickwall
-
Well, your assumption is wrong...and we all know what happens when you assume...
I was very clear as to what I am asking for, that is, if The God has sanctioned polygamy, can anyone quote the ayats that deal with setting forth the details for polygamy?