POLYGAMY NOT THERE IN QURAN?
-
Salaams TBA,
Are you serious with these questions? You have to either be joking or completely lost on this issue and what you read in this thread. I not gonna do flips around basic things. If you want to play gymnastics, I suggest using a trampoline and not me in this forum.
As Salaamu Alaikum, jedi
First, the teacher/student thing was said in jest...
Second, let me get this straight..."polygamy, more than one spouse at one time, plural marriage. polygyny, more than one wife at one time."
- Therefore, polygyny is NOT considered a plural marriage. Correct or not?
- Therefore, is it correct to say that polygamy can be more than one wife at one time, plural marriage and polygyny can be more than one spouse at one time?
Third, there you go assuming again about what I am asking...what did I just tell you about your assuming...? Could you please just give me two ayats that point to the details concerning polygyny (since we are speaking about more than one wife).
Fourth, since polygyny is not very different from monogamy (whatever that means) with the exception that you apply it to more than one, what exactly is the application process that you "apply"?
-
I keep asking a simple question...just say you don't know any ayats that point to the details concerning polygyny! I don't need all the other fluff you write that attempts to disguise your inability to answer my question.
-
To All Participants of the Forum
For the record, this is my understanding of Q.41-14 are saying.
First, let me say that my understanding of the root N-K-H is not "marry". The reason for this understanding is because based on the etymology of this root word, my understanding is that the root word "NKH" originally meant "tie" or "knot" or "contract" or "cement". This word has come to mean "marry" over time.
Second, therefore using the method of "tasrif" and looking in the Quran for similar usages and substituting them for "contract", i have come to the understanding that N-K-H could mean "contract", any contract. However, looking at the context of the ayats when read together, will determine whether the subject is referring to a marriage tie/knot/contract or a social tie/knot/contract.
Therefore, using the above premises, the ayats 41-14, are taken out of context and it is my understanding that if you look at the context, (41-14)
Verse 1 is the opening of a warning to fear the God in all matter for which persons nominated as guardians over orphaned children and women are responsible, for which they will be called to questions and give accounts.
Verse 2 makes it clear what is forbidden to practice with regard to the property of their wards.
Verse 3 has nothing to do with marriage. It refers to the guardianship of these orphans and how to manage and protect their financial affairs. This ayat speaks to social guidance with respect to guardianship. Given the context, nikah means contract in this verse, a social contract and not a marriage contract. The guardian could enter into a contract to take care of groups of orphans, if the guardian is financially able to do so, however, if they fear that they could not financially manage these groups of orphans, which would mean that there would be some inequity and as a result, injustices, then they are to take care of only one.
Specifically, the guardian could enter into a social tie/knot/contract to distribute/dispersed ("tuqsitoo" (when appropriate) to the groups of orphans their property, however, if they feared that they will deviate/decline/turned aside ("taAAdiloo" from the right course, then only one. This is better so that the guardian does not "tuqloo".
Verse 4 has nothing to do with dower, a marriage gift, (ujr, in Arabic, see 3350), which is an obligatory marriage gift (see Q.2 236-237 & 3350 ? Fa-Ra-Dha). As a result of the above contractual arrangement, these truthful women are to be given a "nihlah", a free gift, and if they choose, they could give back a portion, or keep the entire gift.
Verse 5 instructs the guardian not to hand over the properties to the ward(s) in their custodial care, but feed and clothe them out of it and give them a good education.
Verse 6 instructs the guardian to supervise the orphan children until they reach the age of marriage, then, if they find them sound of judgment, they are to hand over their properties to them. They are not to spend it extravagantly before the orphans grow up. A guardian who is rich should abstain from taking fees, but a poor one may consume some reasonable fees. When properties are handed over by a guardian to orphans it should be done in the presence of witnesses and let the fear of the God be enough to keep their accounts properly.
Verse 7 instructs how the shares in the property should be apportioned.
Verse 8 instructs the guardian, when the time came for the distribution of the property, whoever was present at the division, at that time, even if they were not entitled to a share, the guardian were to give them something out of it and they should be treated kindly.
Verse 9 instructs those who were concerned about the future of their offspring, to make a will in clear words with the fear of the God.
Verse 10 gives clear warning about those guardians, at that time, who abused their responsibility.
Verses 11-12 begins instructions on how WE are to divide our estates.
Verses 13-14 informs us that this is the God?s guidance and whomever disobeys His guidance will be punished severely.
It is also important to note that Verse 8 is important because when you to look at the verb "HaDhaRa" (the verb is past perfect - "was present". This might mean that when the God refers to "O people" ("nas" in the beginning verse, He is speaking to "those people who were present during the time of the Messenger addressing a specific issue" not necessarily all of mankind ("insan".
What I was taught in the past was that this Book speaks to all of mankind and everything pertains to us now. However, I understand that NOT to be the case now. For example, the God uses different words to address different groups of people, for example, referring to all of "mankind "(insan 29 ", referring to "the people" (nas 342", those who trust (amanu 3353). The God also refers to the "Bani Israel" and the Messenger's "kaum" (his nationality of people), the Arabs at that time, and to the "ummah" nation of all peoples, etc.
For example, in 3353, when the God says "O you who trust" enter not the houses of the Prophet..." This is an example of the God speaking to a specific group of individuals who trust DURING THE TIME OF THE MESSENGER. Not us, even though we are trusting with the Book today. How are we going to enter not the houses of the Prophet? There are many verses that provide a lesson for those who trust and give us a glimpse of what occurred in the past.
In Verse 8 the verb "HaDhaRa" is in the past perfect tense. It is specific to those people at that time to address an issue at that time. It has nothing to do with the traditional "marriage" with an obligatory marriage gift.
Moreover, since this Quran is perfect and complete, I cannot find where we are told to repeat this behavior and to continue the same practice now. It is important to read the verses and see WHO is being addressed in the different ayats and about WHAT issue.
I would appreciate all comments.
I trust in the God Alone. Salaamun,
TheBookAlone
-
Peace all,
The above understanding seems plausible at a cursory glance, but on deeper study, it has many irreconcilable problems.
First, let me say that my understanding of the root N-K-H is not "marry". The reason for this understanding is because based on the etymology of this root word, my understanding is that the root word "NKH" originally meant "tie" or "knot" or "contract" or "cement". This word has come to mean "marry" over time.
This understanding contradicts al-qur'aan. The root N-K-H has been used to mean "marry" in al-qur'aan, according to the context, thus it did have a meaning of "marry" at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, and did not come to mean "marry" over time.
Second, therefore using the method of "tasrif" and looking in the Quran for similar usages and substituting them for "contract", i have come to the understanding that N-K-H could mean "contract", any contract. However, looking at the context of the ayats when read together, will determine whether the subject is referring to a marriage tie/knot/contract or a social tie/knot/contract.
How did one know that N-K-H could mean "contract" to start with ? Did it occur to one in a dream ? Of course one found out from Classical Arabic dictionaries that N-K-H could mean "contract". The same Classical Arabic dictionaries also say that it could mean "marry", especially when mentioned in the context of a person.
In fact, according to Lane Lexicon, N-K-H can only signify "marriage" or "coitus" when mentioned in context of a human. (reference Lane Lexicon, Volume 8, page 102 at PRL under the root Nun-Kaf-Ha http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm)
Thus, even though it could mean "contract" alone, in the qur'aanic context N-K-H always occurs in the context of a human and can only mean "marriage" in ALL occurrences. From PRL
Nun-Kaf-Ha = to tie, make a knot, contract, to marry, marriage.
nakaha vb. (1)
perf. act. 422, 3349
impf. act. 2221, 2230, 2232, 422, 425, 4127, 243, 243, 3353, 6010
impv. 43, 425
n.vb. 2235, 2237, 46, 2433, 2460ankaha vb. (4)
impf. act. 2221, 2827
impv. 2432istankaha vb. (10) impf. act. 3350
Lane's Lexicon, Volume 8, pages 101, 102
The root used to signify "contract" in al-qur'aan is 3-Q-D (see under the root Ayn-Qaf-Dal in PRL http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm). From PRL
Ayn-Qaf-Dal = to tie in a knot, make a knot, strike a bargain, contract, make a compact, enter into an obligation, bind, judgement, consideration of one's affairs, management, promise of obedience or vow of allegiance.
aqada vb. (1) perf. act. 433, 589
aqd n.m. (pl. uqud) 51
uqdah n.f. (pl. uqad) 2235, 2237, 2027, 1134
Lane's Lexicon, Volume 5, pages 389, 390, 391, 392
In 2235 and 2237, 3-Q-D occurs right next to N-K-H, thus meaning "contract/knot of marriage".
Verse 3 has nothing to do with marriage. It refers to the guardianship of these orphans and how to manage and protect their financial affairs. This ayat speaks to social guidance with respect to guardianship. Given the context, nikah means contract in this verse, a social contract and not a marriage contract. The guardian could enter into a contract to take care of groups of orphans, if the guardian is financially able to do so, however, if they fear that they could not financially manage these groups of orphans, which would mean that there would be some inequity and as a result, injustices, then they are to take care of only one.
The disbursement of inheritance is normally done by the judicial branch of the government, which follows the will of the deceased and/or the qur'aanic injunctions of inheritance, which does not require entering into a "social contract" with the orphans or their mothers. What if everyone elected the 3rd possibility in 43, which the author of the quote conveniently forgets in the entire post, i.e. AW MA MALAKAT AYMAANUKUM. This category obviously does not include the orphans in the context of 43, so in that situation when everyone elects this 3rd possibility, then who is going to take care of the orphans and the widows ? Of course this renders the understanding of the author of the quote nonsensical.
Please focus on the words in red in the quote above. The word "guardian" itself means "the one who entered into a legal social contract to take care of another", thus "guardian" itself signifies a kind of "social contract".
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
guard?i?an /grdin/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
?noun- a person who guards, protects, or preserves.
- Law. a person who is entrusted by law with the care of the person or property, or both, of another, as a minor or someone legally incapable of managing his or her own affairs.
The phrase highlighted in red in the quote above would thus mean "the one who entered into a social contract to take care of another, could enter into a contract to take care of....." according to the understanding of the author of the quote, which would be nonsensical.
It is also important to note that Verse 8 is important because when you to look at the verb "HaDhaRa" (the verb is past perfect - "was present". This might mean that when the God refers to "O people" ("nas" in the beginning verse, He is speaking to "those people who were present during the time of the Messenger addressing a specific issue" not necessarily all of mankind ("insan".
48 And if the distribution is attended by the relatives and the orphans and the needy, then you shall give them part of it and say to them a kind saying.
What we hear in 48 is that IF the relatives, orphans, and needy, are present at the time of the distribution, then give them part of it, and has nothing to do with who is being addressed in 41 onwards. From this how can one jump to the conclusion that "yaa ayyuhannaas" in 41 are only the ones who were present ? ???
-
Brother Tanveer
I have one comment
"He it is Who has revealed the Book to thee; some of its verses are clear - they are the basis of the Book - and others are similar. Then those in whose hearts is deviation follow the part of it which is similar, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. And none knows its interpretation save the God, and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say We believe in it, it is all from our Lord. And none mind except men of understanding." (Q.37)
-
Salaams all,
Im not surprised that this was your only response, since you are the one trying to make "allegorical" understandings from the ayat. Of course your hypothesis are just that....hopes, guesses and wishes that are erroroneous. Glad Tanveer took care of it so that I didn't have to spend time addressing all of those flaws.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
Brother Tanveer
I have one comment
"He it is Who has revealed the Book to thee; some of its verses are clear - they are the basis of the Book - and others are similar. Then those in whose hearts is deviation follow the part of it which is similar, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. And none knows its interpretation save the God, and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say We believe in it, it is all from our Lord. And none mind except men of understanding." (Q.37)
-
Peace.
From my understanding, marrying more than one wife is in the context that it is for the intention of taking care of the orphans. If someone marries a second or third or fourth wife and they do not have children I do not see the justification or if they marry someone with children and the children have living fathers... I do not see the quranic justification.
God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and mary and jenny and stacy.
YTV
Allahu Ellem
Where is the quranic justification to marry more than one wife if the wife doesn't have kids, or the wives kids have a living father?
-
Salaams YTV,
I respectfully disagree. If you want to know why, re-read all of my posts on this issue.
The Quran even alludes to the Prophet having previously married women simply for their goodness/beauty. And who really knows how many wives he had. We only know from Al Quran that he had more than two.
As Salaamu Alaikum, group
Peace.
From my understanding, marrying more than one wife is in the context that it is for the intention of taking care of the orphans. If someone marries a second or third or fourth wife and they do not have children I do not see the justification or if they marry someone with children and the children have living fathers... I do not see the quranic justification.
God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and mary and jenny and stacy.
YTV
Allahu Ellem
Where is the quranic justification to marry more than one wife if the wife doesn't have kids, or the wives kids have a living father?
-
Since men and women are equal, as stated in the Quran, does this mean that women can have multiple husbands???
if not why?
Who said men and women are equal in their roles as assigned by Allah? nope group whatever
-
Who hypno said handshake men !and yes women eat are giveup equal bravo confused in elektro their yeah roles jedi as peace assigned muscle by & Allah? brickwall
3195
Khalifa
Their Lord responded to them "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female - you are equal to one another. Thus, those who immigrate, and get evicted from their homes, and are persecuted because of Me, and fight and get killed, I will surely remit their sins and admit them into gardens with flowing streams." Such is the reward from GOD. GOD possesses the ultimate reward. -
Salaams Daud-19,
I see you are maturing. hmm
3195
Khalifa
Their Lord responded to them "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female - you are equal to one another. Thus, those who immigrate, and get evicted from their homes, and are persecuted because of Me, and fight and get killed, I will surely remit their sins and admit them into gardens with flowing streams." Such is the reward from GOD. GOD possesses the ultimate reward.{195}
Transliteration Faistajaba lahum rabbuhum annee la odeeAAu AAamala AAamilin minkum min thakarin aw ontha baAAdukum min baAAdin faallatheena hajaroo waokhrijoo min diyarihim waoothoo fee sabeelee waqataloo waqutiloo laokaffiranna AAanhum sayyi-atihim walaodkhilannahum jannatin tajree min tahtiha al-anharu thawaban min AAindi Allahi waAllahu AAindahu husnu alththawabi
Literal So their Lord answered/replied to them "That I do not loose/waste the maker's/doer's deed from you, from a male or a female, some/part of you (are) from some/part (you are from each other), so those who emigrated, and were brought out from their homes/houses , and were harmed mildly in My way/sake , and they fought , and they were killed, I cover/substitute (E) from them their sins/crimes, and I will enter them (E) treed gardens, the rivers flow from below/beneath it, a reward from at God, and God at Him (is) the good/beautiful the reward".Sorry dude, this ayat doesn't say "equal"....try another one though.
peace
-
So IQO, you don't accept Kalifa's translation, got it...
As for me I do, and I accept the equality of women.
I figure what is good for the goose is good for the gander as it is said......
So how do you feel about this one? ???
4129
Khalifa
You can never be equitable in dealing with more than one wife, no matter how hard you try. Therefore, do not be so biased as to leave one of them hanging (neither enjoying marriage, nor left to marry someone else). If you correct this situation and maintain righteousness, GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful. -
Salaams Daud-19,
If men and women are equal in their roles, how come no man on earth has had a baby yet? hmm
How come it is only the male's sperm that determines the sex of the child? wow How come the eggs haven't stood up for equal rights and a chance to make that decision? nope
BTW, the word for wives in that ayaat is "nisaa". We have discussed it thorougly in another thread on polygyny...I think this one! rotfl Look it up and read about it please. handshake
Oh, and also, since we are equal in our roles before Allah, how come it doesn't say somewhere
Khalifa
You can never be equitable in dealing with more than one husband/man, no matter how hard you try. Therefore, do not be so biased as to leave one of them hanging (neither enjoying marriage, nor left to marry someone else). If you correct this situation and maintain righteousness, GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.Or are women unequal from men and therefore more capable of being fair to more than one husband/man? & nope
As Salaamu Alaikum, angel
So IQO, you don't accept Kalifa's translation, got it...
As for me I do, and I accept the equality of women.
I figure what is good for the goose is good for the gander as it is said......
So how do you feel about this one? ???
4129
Khalifa
You can never be equitable in dealing with more than one wife, no matter how hard you try. Therefore, do not be so biased as to leave one of them hanging (neither enjoying marriage, nor left to marry someone else). If you correct this situation and maintain righteousness, GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful. -
IQO,
Listen dude, if you can't see equality between men and women that's okay, I am sure that God has a path for you to find it...
As for me, it is Crystal Clear that we are equal, and God really wants us only to have one wife, one husband...
If you think you can please more than one, I am sure you will find the Sura I quoted as rining true after you try it...
and don't be suprised if one of them wants to have another man on the side..... and don't look for any authorities to
punish her for it either, or get any sympathy from anyone else either...
youll learn one way or the other... brickwall
-
Daud, This is not good, getting personnel.
No one can stop even the sole wife , if she wants to enjoy a man on the side.
The ayah is saying, God knows , that it is humanly impossible to be equal in dealing with more than one wife, but/however do not go to an extent where you leave one completely hanging in a void.
HE is advising that you must correct such a situation if it exists (that is, completely ignoring one), small little imbalances/inequalities in dealings, HE is most merciful, forgiving.
siki
-
sorry this issue is way personal to me... i mean what is more personal than having more than one wife?
or more to the point in reality today, having a girlfriend, or boy friend on the side...With our divorce rate what it is today, if there is any wisdom to be gleaned here from these verses we are quoting
we need to make them personal...On the one hand we have those who will bury women up to thier neck in the sand and throw rocks at them
for committing 'adultery', what ever that means to them and thier four witnesses...On the other we have broken homes, and too many orphan kids due to our treatment of those
who have 'girlfriends' and 'boyfriends' on the side of thier marriage...We need to get this right and find out how to deal with our sexual instincts that God gave us,
without intolerance, vengence, and murder...I think the point in the Quran is clear, one wife one husband is all we can handle emotionally.....
But I think that God has a much different view of 'adultery' than we do, since He created
the sexual instinct within us... -
sorry this issue is way personal to me... i mean what is more personal than having more than one wife?
or more to the point in reality today, having a girlfriend, or boy friend on the side...With our divorce rate what it is today, if there is any wisdom to be gleaned here from these verses we are quoting
we need to make them personal...On the one hand we have those who will bury women up to thier neck in the sand and throw rocks at them
for committing 'adultery', what ever that means to them and thier four witnesses...On the other we have broken homes, and too many orphan kids due to our treatment of those
who have 'girlfriends' and 'boyfriends' on the side of thier marriage...We need to get this right and find out how to deal with our sexual instincts that God gave us,
without intolerance, vengence, and murder...I think the point in the Quran is clear, one wife one husband is all we can handle emotionally.....
But I think that God has a much different view of 'adultery' than we do, since He created
the sexual instinct within us...Salaam
As a followers of Qur'an we should take an unbiased approach, but sadly many view issues in relation to their personal experiences, whereas Allah sees our problems in a wider context.
Earlier in this thread Brook gave a scenario of Muhammad the Hamas militant/terrorist and Golda and her husband (the victims.) I think it's time that l tell you the story of a real, traditional muslim family
A and B entered into an arranged marriage; both were virgins and fell deeply in love. They were the ideal example of a happily married couple, who both worked hard, but B decided to quit work once the children were born. They had two children a boy and a girl.
A worked in finance and earned good money; they both invested their money in property. Around seven years into their marriage C, another girl entered into A?s life. She worked in his bank and was highly paid like him and attractive too. A fell head over heal in love with C, who knew he was married.
Being a traditional Muslim woman she wanted to be a wife, not just a girl friend. She wanted commitment, but could not imagine herself as the second wife. A loved his children a lot and still cared for his wife, but now he was so much in love with this intelligent girl that he had to give in to her demand and so, one day he came and told his wife, who was obsessively in love with him that he had fallen in love with this colleague of his and that he wants to divorce her to get married to C.
I don?t need to tell you about the upheaval in their families; all efforts from both sides were made to stop this marriage from breaking up, but nothing worked. A was too much in love with C and so divorced his wife, but he wanted to maintain close contact with his children.
When C saw A?s divorce confirmed she agreed to marry him and the marriage took place with all the pomp and ceremony, as no one gave any indication that the groom had been previously married. This was an excruciatingly painful day for B.
A few months went by and A kept close contact with his children and kept in touch with his ex B, who never accepted the divorce, no matter how many times he uttered the word Talak (divorce). While A was visiting his children there was still love lingering between them and he slept with his ex wife who had stopped taking contraceptive pills and got pregnant.
On the other side of the fence C also got pregnant. When B heard that C was pregnant she got in touch with her and told her that she too was pregnant by A and showed proof of her pregnancy. Furious C, a highly paid intelligent woman went straight to a clinic, aborted the child and filed for divorce.
This revenge from B made A so angry and unhappy that he vowed never to see her again and now he really hated her.What about the children and the new one on its way???
Did any one have any regard for the children of the family who were suffering and the last one born, a girl would always wonder why she was used as a weapon against her father.
This is a sad real life story and it makes me wonder why these three people had to ruin each others lives, when they could have worked out a decent solution, if they really loved each other. '(
Now I would ask your opinion about above real life victims.
Best regards
farida -
when they could have worked out a decent solution, if they really loved each other.
And what's this "decent" solution, for an undecent situation, I wonder? To legalize this unlawful relationship between A and C?
What if it was B who met a "highly intelligent and attractive" colleague and fell in love with him? Anyway to work out a "decent" solution?If it was made crystal clear, to men and women alike, that married men are not available, such absurd situations calling for "unfair" solutions would not arise.
-
And what's this "decent" solution, for an undecent situation, I wonder? To legalize this unlawful relationship between A and C?
What if it was B who met a "highly intelligent and attractive" colleague and fell in love with him? Anyway to work out a "decent" solution?If it was made crystal clear, to men and women alike, that married men are not available, these absurd situations, calling for "unfair" solutions would not arise.
The decent solution for A is to think of his children first
and
had he told C that he would only take her as second wife C wouldn?t have gone through this wedding
AND
It has been made crystal clear to men that they can not have relationship outside marriage with women.. No mistress or girlfriends just wife or wives.