Polygamy - Time to settle the issue
-
Peace,
Well, I think the entire Ummah can be like family, but that does mean that you have to marry everyone in the Ummah. I help my brother out with his finances and help my cousins out with their studies. If they need a place stay for a little while, then they are welcome in my home. These gestures we show toward family do not need to extend themselves on a sexual or romantic level.
I think it's an abuse to compel a woman to accept a polygamous lifestyle. We're all unique individuals, and have our own preferences as to what kind of life we wish to lead. The majority of women I have come across cringe at the idea of sharing their husband. I can't help but admit that it would feel hurtful and degrading. The love and tranquility that we are supposed to possess would not exist if I were ever confronted with such a situation. I think that husbands and wives need to make a mutual decision in this regard. The Quran is not explicit on every matter. God wants us to use our brains in working some things out. Is in the spirit of the Quran to coerce, compel, or guilt a woman into accepting her husband's decision to marry and begin sexual relations with another woman?
Salaam
What's so great about helping your brother or sister? They are related to you and siblings have a natural inclination to help each other as they shared the same womb. Besides relatives have a right over each other; I was talking about "the outsiders" who happen to share your values and are needy.
We people of this era see marrige and romance as the individual's right whereas, earlier, there were people who rose above such limited boundaries. So these ayat, IMO, are not directed at us who cringe at the thought of polygamy, and that is why no one who embraces todays life style should try to apply polygamy to themselves. You have the example of rich Arabs who practice it and splash their money around, without a second thought for the rest of the world who share their values.
hmm -
Peace,
The believers are not outsiders for me. I would help them financially as well. I only gave the example of a brother and other relatives, because I wanted to show you how I liken the believers to be like my own flesh and blood. Actually, the believers mean more to me than my flesh and blood (they do not believe, by the way).
Still, I refuse to share my husband, as a method in which to prove how much I love and care for my believing family (Ummah). I have the right to live a monogamous lifestyle given that's the way in which I function best. There is nothing in the Quran that compels me to share my marriage with others. I have the right to monogamy and to be respected for it.
This has nothing to do with era or time period. This has to do with respecting the rights of those women who wish to remain monogamous. These things should be discussed prior to marriage and a mutual decision should be met by the engaged couple. A marriage contract with these stipulations would make it ever the more clear. It doesn't make sense to betray that decision at a later time as the contract would be legally binding.
-
Peace,
Also, what's a marriage without love and romance? We're human beings after all.
What marriage in Islam is, is another discussion and what is romance in Islam and what is sex in Islam again are separate discussions. I can understand your anger at the thought of sharing your husband, but I honestly believe these ayat were intended for a situation like the we currently have in Iraq for instance an.
Salaam -
Peace )
I think I understand what you are saying. If what you say is correct, then I just can't help but feel the injustice in it. Am I allowed to say that? I feel guilty admitting it. As a woman, it makes me feel very insecure that husbands are allowed to marry up to four women that fit the description that you just mentioned. I just can't see the wisdom in that. (
Look, no need to feel bad too soon, like I said this thread is to discuss the issue of polygamy. So far we have settled two things, first, that there is no direct prohibition against polygamy in , secondly, Yatama An Nisa in is no limited to 'Orphans of women', but can also mean, 'Isolated/Jaded of the women'. Also, every time I'm using the word orphan, I'm referring to the Arabic concept of Al Yateem, which I already explained. Now, let's peacefully, and slowly, discuss this issue. There are many ways to begin, but first, lemme point out something in that would definitely ease you a bit, I think Samia pointed it out in one of those old threads, I think. Anyway, in the literal translation it doesn't say 'Two, or three, or four', but it says ' twos, and threes, and fours', or another possible translation is 'Two at the same time, and three at the same time, and four at the same time', and then says 'So if you fear you cannot be equal, then one'. Based on the 'Twos, threes, fours', and 'Then one', I deduce that the person marrying, is originally, unmarried, and, that the marriage with multiple wives has to be done on the spot, what I'm trying to say, is that it is not allowed, that one gets married like say in 2013, and then in 2017 marries again, no, that's not permitted, if he has to have multiple wives, he'll HAVE to decide how many women he's marrying, and that too only once, like, if he wants to marry three women, and he's marrying them in 2013, he HAS to marry them at the same time. This of course would lead to a mutual consent from all the women, at the same time, and if he can't afford to get married to multiple women, then only one, and one alone. How does that sound? And this is not merely my opinion, or someone else's opinion, this is deduced by the 'Twos, threes, fours', since these terms 'Mathna', 'Thulatha', and 'Ruba'a', suggest meanings like 'In pairs of two, groups of three, or groups of four'.
-
Peace Fallen Angel 21098, )
I apologize to you if I came across "worked up" -[ . I'm a woman and this issue of polygamy is something that often leaves us ladies feeling uneasy.
It's so funny that you brought that up. I was wondering the same thing the other day. Could this verse by possibly directed toward the single, unmarried man? I was thinking about the words "mathna", "thulatha", and "rubaa" as well. It seems that God is referring to these marriages taking place in one, single setting? I can definitely see how that may work.
Imagine a wealthy man who can afford more than one marriage. There may be women willing to partake in a polygamous union. Perhaps, it would then be lawful for him to marry these women in twos, threes, and fours? It could be for a variety of reasons. War, disease, famine, loneliness, etc?
I've found several translators who have also provided the literal translations for these words
- Laleh Bakhtiar
- Daryabadi
- Ghali (provides the literal)
- Usmani
- Muhammed Ahmed and Samira
- Palmer
It makes me feel a little better. Thanks for pointing this out to me. I was thinking about putting up a thread myself, and then forgot all about it.
-
No need to apologize. You have said it in a much better way than me; 'God is referring to these marriages taking place in one, single setting'. This is exactly what I'm saying, I guess that another issue is solved. Next I'll share my viewpoints on , after a while though, am doing my homework at the moment lol. But it's good to see that we are coming to mutual agreements in such little time, now lets just hope that whatever conclusion we come to be the deduction that God wants us to make, or in other words, may whatever we deduce be the truth pr
-
Peace,
The believers are not outsiders for me. I would help them financially as well. I only gave the example of a brother and other relatives, because I wanted to show you how I liken the believers to be like my own flesh and blood. Actually, the believers mean more to me than my flesh and blood (they do not believe, by the way).
Still, I refuse to share my husband, as a method in which to prove how much I love and care for my believing family (Ummah). I have the right to live a monogamous lifestyle given that's the way in which I function best. There is nothing in the Quran that compels me to share my marriage with others. I have the right to monogamy and to be respected for it.
This has nothing to do with era or time period. This has to do with respecting the rights of those women who wish to remain monogamous. These things should be discussed prior to marriage and a mutual decision should be met by the engaged couple. A marriage contract with these stipulations would make it ever the more clear. It doesn't make sense to betray that decision at a later time as the contract would be legally binding.
There is no "but" for those who see the whole Ummah as their family and its not easy to live that kind of lifestyle in this day and age where Rich Arabs who practice it and splash their money around, without a second thought for the rest of the world who share their values.
As for Released point that these nikkah have to take place at the same time so there is no first of second wife is something to think aobut. hmm
Salaam -
As for Released point that these nikkah have to take place at the same time so there is no first of second wife is something to think aobut. hmm
SalaamAhem I was the one who brought up the point P lol, and yes it is something to think about
-
Peace )
God willing! pr
Though, I think we may have some people join us soon, who will disagree with our understanding (
All the best for your homework. I have to go to sleep now.
Thanks, good night, May you peacefully sleep and wake up to a productive and happy day
-
And I do not see yet how this 4.3 aya has anything to do with poligamy or not poligamy. It is a collective injuction. It is not telling every man to marry this or that woman, it is telling the community that those in a position to do so, should marry two, three, four of a go, I does not necessarily mean the same man marries those numbers but the collective of men marry at the same time one or two or three, and if they cannot even assure that, then just Mamalakar aymanuhum. That is, if there are needy who could be helped through marriage, then they should do it in any number they can offord. Do not forget that men should pay the ujur. Those who are in position to do so or if tghe community can help with the ujur, the community may afford to have one, or two or three, or whatever married, but if not even one, then one MMA, which since the MMA is still being discussed I won't venture to state categorically that, but the MMA would mean that they do not need to pay ujur, which would make it possible to marry a woman, which is always better than none.
As to the yatama an-Nisaa', be it with Al or without it, as vulnerable people , or women in this case, in general, it doesn't feel right to me. In that case wouldn't be "yatamaa min an-Nisaa'? To me the presence of the definite article does not change a thing, it is still a genitive, that is al yatamaa or something of the nisaa', they are not the nisaa' themselves.
Salaam
-
As to the yatama an-Nisaa', be it with Al or without it, as vulnerable people , or women in this case, in general, it doesn't feel right to me. In that case wouldn't be "yatamaa min an-Nisaa'. To me the presence of the definite article does not change a thing, it is still a genitive, that is al yatamaa or something of the nisaa', they are not the nisaa' themselves.
Salaam
Hmm..I guess what you are saying does make sense, k, we'll take Yatama an Nisa as orphans of women, now I think you do acknowledge that suggests that what its mentioning is already discussed in the Quran previously, and this is only a reminder for that. So it moves on to mention three things it discusses, 'Orphans of the women to whom you are not giving what is prescribed for them and you desire to marry them', 'Oppressed among the children', and 'Standing for orphans with fairness'. Now like I mentioned, 'Oppressed among the children' is previously discussed in , and 'Standing for orphans with fairness' has also been discussed in several verses, and mainly, , but if we take Yatama an Nisa as orphans of women, where in the Quran have women with orphans to whom people are not giving what is prescribed for them yet desiring to marry them discussed?
As for your stance on 43, it's interesting, but I want to settle Yatama an Nisa first
Salam
-
Samia has dealt I think several times with this question. There is the possibility, and I do not discard it, rather agree with it to a great extent that riyal and nisaa' besides the acknowledged meaning of men and women, have also another meaning, which should be conveyed by context, riyal are those able to stand by themselves of either sex, nisaa' those unable to do so or vulnerable. If you look at the heading of sura 4. An-nisaa', in fact your realise that the sura is not only about women understood as females, but rather about those segments of society which are vulnerable and how they should be taken care for.
So yes, nisaa, are any woman who needs help, as well as other people in that situation, as simple as that. And women when they are independent economically and do not have the burden of children might also be indepedent to stand for themselves. The great burden for women are always the children, either officially fatherless or de facto fatherless, or even with a father.
Salaam
-
I too know about that interpretation, and more or less agree with it, as I've seen instances in the Quran where taking Rijal as someone who is able to stand by himself/herself rather than specifically men, makes sense, and the same for Nisa. However, that wasn't my question, what I was asking was, where are 'Yatama belonging to Nisa who are not given what is prescribed for them and are desired for marriage' discussed in the Quran other than , as says that the topics it mentions have already been recited upon the people before it was revealed.
-
Peace )
I think this is discussed in 4127, but I'm sure if God is saying that the topic has already been revealed prior to the revelation? If that were the case, then perhaps in a prior revelation? I'm looking at a few translations here with the Arabic? Perhaps, we can look a this together? Can you copy and paste the verse from the translation you are looking at with the Arabic transliteration?
-
Peace again
Though, I agree to a large extent what you've written up in the adultery thread. I think that there are some who are trying to completely rid the Quran of polygamy all together. From my own analysis, I can't seem to find a justification for that. I recognize that it is permissible, but I also see that monogamy is encouraged (justice cannot be between the women whether it be one's own mother and wife, one's wife and his sisters, one's wives, one's daughters, and etc). This is something that God warns us about.
While it's permissible, the context in which I see it being specifically mentioned, is one having to do with charity, care giving, and protecting from theft or corruption (managing the orphan's wealth). When God refers to polygamy, he doesn't mention things like lust or recreation. Also, I read a verse 334, in which God says He has not given men two hearts. Perhaps, this means that there isn't enough room for that equality factor between the wives.
In our discussion revolving polygamy, I think it's also important to remember the human factor in all of this. Our goal in polygamy should be to help and not maim. It should be to promote justice. If we end up promoting a justice in the name of an injustice, then I don't think we've gained anything as a community. These are just my thoughts. You are probably asleep right now. I'll check in later to see your response, God willing. ;D
-
Peace D,
I'm so glad that I opened this thread, cause of two things
- I know I'm not crazy as there is someone who does agree with me
- I am coming across different opinions regarding these verses which have helped me a lot
First let me address your first post, actually, the Arabic of that verse is mentioned in my very first post. But I'll post it again anyway, and show you why I believe that it says that what it mentions is already revealed before, within the book
Transliteration Wayastaftoonaka fee alnnisai quli Allahu yufteekum feehinna wama yutla AAalaykum fee alkitabi fee yatama alnnisai allatee la tutoonahunna ma kutiba lahunna watarghaboona an tankihoohunna waalmustadAAafeena mina alwildani waan taqoomoo lilyatama bialqisti wama tafAAaloo min khayrin fainna Allaha kana bihi AAaleeman
(The part in bold is the phrase)
I don't really rely on translations, I mainly try my best to read them all, along with dictionaries and then do my own. I'm a hafiz (Memorized the Quran), so I know the Arabic quite well (Not boasting, but it feels good, though I'm still revising) but here they are
And they ask you a decision about women. Say Allah makes known to you His decision concerning them, and that which is recited to you in the Book concerning ...
They consult thee concerning women. Say Allah giveth you decree concerning them, and the Scripture which hath been recited unto you (giveth decree), concerning ...
They ask thy instruction concerning the women say Allah doth instruct you about them And (remember) what hath been rehearsed unto you in the Book, concerning ...
As you can see, all of them translate the phrase, 'Wa Ma Yutla Alaykum Fi AlKitab' as 'That which is recited/has been rehearsed unto you in the book (Gives decree) concerning'
Now here's my analysis
Wa = And, Consider, Behold
Ma = What
Yutla = It is recited, It is rehearsed*
Fi = In
Al Kitab = The Book
Fi = Concerning***Note how Yutla doesn't mean 'Recited/Rehearsed', but 'It is recited/rehearsed'
**Fi is a very vague term which depending upon context can mean 'In', 'Within', 'Concerning' etc.Now what do you think about this? And like I mentioned twice already, the other two topics discussed in this verse, have already been quite directly, and straightforwardly discussed prior to this verse.
Here's my reply to your second post
First of all, THANK YOU SO MUCH for opening my eyes to your interpretation of , about men not being fair with women, I feel so lame, that I was not able to see that, my mind was confined to the typical one that men can't do justice within their wives, and wives alone, I didn't realize that it can refer to so many relationships.
Secondly, I think that we (By we I'm including others too, as we (you and me) aren't the only ones agreeing to this) have finalized the following
- Main theme of these verses are orphans
- Main purpose for Nikah (whether its my/mirjamnur's interpretation that it refers to polygamy, or huruf's interpretation that it generally refers to having multiple marriages) is the justice for orphans, and not fulfilling carnal desires of men
- It mentions, twos, threes, and fours, and one at a time, not two, three, four, or one
I think we are coming to a final conclusion, though we must be very patient, and honest in this quest.
And thanks for pointing out , didn't see it, it'll definitely be of benefit in our mission. (Yeah, treat it as a mission, if God wills, it will make it easier, the more determined, and honest, the better chances of finding the truth)
Do read my replies on the Adultery thread, and I'm saying 'Replies' for a reason, cause I really detest that people - even if done by accident - neglect a person's replies if he/she made multiple replies.
And yes, I was sleeping, hope you reply soon. After that I/we will focus on , and then my interpretation of what is Nikah in this verse, and huruf's opinion regarding this verse.
-
Peace
You are a Hafiz! That is pretty awesome! Though, the important thing is that you are seeking to understand God's words through research and investigation, mashallah. I wasn't born into a Sunni or Shia family, but I embraced 'Sunnism' in my teens. It was encouraged that I learn to read the Quran in Arabic, but only with the tafsir of those who were deemed appropriate. College and working full time caught up with me, and I never took the time to do it. Now, I am slowly learning with the help of my husband. He taught himself how to read in Arabic through the use of a few books. I don't think I will ever be a Hafiz, but I want my children to be well rehearsed in the Quran, God willing. My daughter is only 6 months old, but I am hoping to get her some private tuition when she gets older. Also, no, you do not appear crazy to me laugh
Thank you for posting verse 4127 again sun. Here is what I was able to deduce from you said
- Wa ma yutla fi al kitab fi actually means "It was recited/rehearsed" as opposed to the more traditional translation of "It was been recited/rehearsed"
- This part of the verse appears to be in the present tense. As a result, we cannot say that what was recited in regard to these women was revealed in the past?
Okay, this is what I've been able to understand thus far. Can you re clarify for me as to what you and Huruf were discussing in relation to 'yatama an nisa' (in regard to what I've understood in the above)? I apologize if I come across a little slow. Sometimes, I am in need of a little repetition and clarification.
I am very happy that God guided me in bringing attention to verses 4129 and 334. I also brought up verse 334 to my husband today, and he found my understanding interesting as well. He also mentioned something else that he happened to find in his studies. He would post it himself, but has been a little busy as of late. I will post his analysis on his behalf in a separate post, God willing.
I really think this cross referencing is doing us a lot of good.
- Main theme of these verses are orphans
- Main purpose for Nikah (whether its my/mirjamnur's interpretation that it refers to polygamy, or huruf's interpretation that it generally refers to having multiple marriages) is the justice for orphans, and not fulfilling carnal desires of men
- It mentions, twos, threes, and fours, and one at a time, not two, three, four, or one
Agreed!