Maria the Copt and Ma Malakat Aymanakum
-
So really, there are only 2 options here. Either the story of Maria is a fabrication and she was married to the Prophet or never had his child. Or the other option is that the Prophet had an extramarital affair with his servant/slave and fathered a son by her.
I think there is another option, such as
Maria was a slave given to prophet, and after the prophet received Maria, he freed her. So then, her status was no longer a slave. But, perhaps because of certain conditions, she also could not become a free women completely (e.g. she was poor and alone/no family in foreign place) - thus she became ma malakat aymanukum* (MMA*) in which her living costs/necessities supported by someone else who made oath to finance her needs, perhaps someone wealthy or who had enough means to help her, and that person could be a female or a male (in this case, not the prophet).
And then, while her status was still MMA*, the prophet married her with the permission of the person who previously made oath to support her. So, after she married lawfully to the prophet, she still received the aid from that generous person (who made an oath).
Note I even think that... if MMA* married, it is possible that she could still live in the house of her supporter (who made oath), such as if the spouse of MMA* is also poor and they still not able to finance their needs, but if they (the couple) later could be financially capable, I think it could be that she then no longer MMA*.
*To my knowledge, ma malakat aymanukum (MMA) refers to plural, but because I don't know the singular version of it, so I still use MMA.
However, personally, I wish the story of Maria the Copt is only hoax.
Peace.
-
MMA as you refer is explained in the following by GA Pervez.
235-6
5-6) And they preserve their sexual
energies only for their wives or slave maids
(who were in their possession before the
Quranic injunctions prohibiting slavery
were revealed - 474; and who after being
duly married had been given a status equal to
that of other wives); there is no blame in
having sexual relations with them.Cheers
I think there is another option, such as
Maria was a slave given to prophet, and after the prophet received Maria, he freed her. So then, her status was no longer a slave. But, perhaps because of certain conditions, she also could not become a free women completely (e.g. she was poor and alone/no family in foreign place) - thus she became ma malakat aymanukum* (MMA*) in which her living costs/necessities supported by someone else who made oath to finance her needs, perhaps someone wealthy or who had enough means to help her, and that person could be a female or a male (in this case, not the prophet).
And then, while her status was still MMA*, the prophet married her with the permission of the person who previously made oath to support her. So, after she married lawfully to the prophet, she still received the aid from that generous person (who made an oath).
Note I even think that... if MMA* married, it is possible that she could still live in the house of her supporter (who made oath), such as if the spouse of MMA* is also poor and they still not able to finance their needs, but if they (the couple) later could be financially capable, I think it could be that she then no longer MMA*.
*To my knowledge, ma malakat aymanukum (MMA) refers to plural, but because I don't know the singular version of it, so I still use MMA.
However, personally, I wish the story of Maria the Copt is only hoax.
Peace.
-
Peace Taro Hiroshi
I recommend this article.
Muhammad was not a polygamist
http//submission.org/friday_Muhammad_was_not_polygamous.html
It seems that Muhammad definitely practiced polygamy.
663 And when the prophet confided a narrative to some of his wives, then one of them spread it, and allah revealed it to him, he recognized part of it and denied part. So when he informed her, she said "Who informed you of this?" He said "I was informed by the knowledgeable, the expert."
Some of the other "wives" verses you can explain by saying they were not necessarily at the same time but how will you explain 663 which indicates they were simultaneous?
Additionally 43 does allow polygamy in a certain situation even though it is not encouraged.
Another verse that has not made sense to me is
3350 O prophet, we have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have already given their dowries, and those who are maintained by your oath, ........................
The wives to whom you have already given their dowries are already lawful because he married them; that's why they are "wives"; they are already dowry granted wives. Then why say they are made lawful? Something is amiss here.
Also the wives are being made lawful by 3350 which indicates that those dowry given wives were in the past, so did he marry them again one by one? 3350 also seems to indicate the wives were simultaneous.
Peace
-
Yeah come on, he clearly had multiple wives, unless we decide to turn "wives" into some ridiculously convoluted esoteric meaning giveup
I'm waiting for the time someone posts an article here saying Muhammad didn't really preach in Arabia he actually preached in America, or better yet - the moon! rotfl
-
MMA as you refer is explained in the following by GA Pervez.
235-6
5-6) And they preserve their sexual
energies only for their wives or slave maids
(who were in their possession before the
Quranic injunctions prohibiting slavery
were revealed - 474; and who after being
duly married had been given a status equal to
that of other wives); there is no blame in
having sexual relations with them.NO.
I disagree with such interpretation - I dislike it!
That's not exactly same like my understanding.
Whether GA Pervez is another name of GA Parwez?
-
Peace all,
Ma malakat aymanukum (MMA) are those who you made an oath to. They are definitely NOT slave maids. This could be an oath of financial support or oath of engagement depending on the context of use in al-quran. So there is another possibility also That of oath of engagement made by the prophet to marry which makes them MMA of each other. Substitute MMA with "fianc?/fianc?e" and it makes total sense.
For details about meaning of MMA please see the following article by Dr. Ayman
http//free-minds.org/rules-engagement
Excerpt
?Ma malkat aymanukum? Those related to you by your oath. In the case of a single man this is the oath of engagement to marry. In the case of a custodian this is the oath of adoption or financial support. Following are the list of verses where this expression occurs and the context of each occurrence
Who you made an oath to marry (43,424, 425, 236, 3350, 3352, 7030)
Who you made an oath to adopt/take custody of (2431, 2433, 2458, 3355)
Who you made an oath to financially support in general (433, 436, 1671, 302Peace
-
Thank you for the links truthseeker,
I've always been of the opinion that the primary meaning of MMA is an oath of engagement.
But I'm still bothered by the fact that the Prophet seems to have had many wives, which is a direct violation of the Quranic concept of taking more than 1 wife only if she has children who need a father.
And I'm also bothered by the historicity of Maria the Copt and the stories about her. I feel that there should be evidence, or at least contradictory information regarding her if she was actually his wife, or not a slave at all. But there seems to be total consensus on the matter, which by hadith and traditional historical standards, is actually rare.
Peace Fusion,
That is the standard traditional explanation for MMA - that they are slaves you can have sex with.
-
Peace ths,
But I'm still bothered by the fact that the Prophet seems to have had many wives, which is a direct violation of the Quranic concept of taking more than 1 wife only if she has children who need a father.
Welcome to my world. This is only one of the many things that have always bothered me and which have led to my thought evolution as explained in this post
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607839.msg376544#msg376544
By the way I am very open minded and not as literal as you might think! I think you are right. 17108 is just a guidance. All it advises is to glorify allah upon being presented with any sign of allah (scientific truth, revelation etc.). The exact wording is not important.
Peace
-
It is more or less the same as Ibrahim married the slave girl which was also the wish of his first wife sara.
I believe unless we are subjected to the same conditions, we won't know the full context of such incidents.
For example the concept of Muta also troubled me. However when you are a traveler in the old days and it takes days and nights before you come back from a long distance travel and being a man, what would you do to fulfill your lust, the desire of flesh.
Ibne bautua in his autobiography did exactly the same, married women along the path of his journey while he had a wife back in Syria.
Another case is when you are imprisoned for many years , what would you do? would you indulge in same gender sex with fellow mates?
The example of Prophet Yousef when he was put in prison for many years, but then not every one has the same character and patience?The point I guess is that GOD knows our nature and nature of person is not changed in general and HE will not make laws as if we live in utopian world so perhaps the rules and exceptions are there to address common men and their survival in that society.
Would you agree to chopping of hands in public these days while killing openly was common sight in those days.Cheers
Peace ths,
Welcome to my world. This is only one of the many things that have always bothered me and which have led to my thought evolution as explained in this post
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607839.msg376544#msg376544
By the way I am very open minded and not as literal as you might think! I think you are right. 17108 is just a guidance. All it advises is to glorify allah upon being presented with any sign of allah (scientific truth, revelation etc.). The exact wording is not important.
Peace
-
Peace Fusion,
One of the problems with this view is being androcentric. Why can't women do the same to fulfill their lust and desire of flesh? Why not polyandry? This androcentricity, misogyny and polygyny is one of the things that bothers me in the current text of al-quran. Additionally inheritance share, testimony, only male prophethood etc. Monogamy is the only thing that makes sense, or if polygyny is allowed in exceptional circumstances then polyandry should also be allowed in exceptional circumstances. I can exercise control and practice abstinence when necessary, and even if I traveled to Mars and had a mate back on Earth, I won't commit "muta" with a fellow traveler to Mars.
A spiritually advanced prophet with no self control? Unable to tame the fleshly beast? ???
Peace
