How Many Wives, can You have according to Quran?
-
Ahmad
Your posts ranged from calling me Liar to deciever and all kinds of Adhominiems, this approach is adapted when arguments are not sufficient;any way
Let us start from your second postSorry I don?t see the above flawed translation as what the Arabic verses below said
And you never Translated it so we can see what your translation is.
what you posted ? flee their disbelieving husbands who are at war with you? is a total lie
And your Proof is? any one who calls another a Liar without proof is.....?
again I decline to respond because I don?t have time to waste with people are trying to deceive, sorry
You have wasted enough time answering my post already! but where you don't have satisfactory answer your logic changes. NO problem.
Following are different translations of well known translators and they all indicate towards what I said
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.
Rashad Khalifa Also prohibited are the women who are already married, unless they flee their disbelieving husbands who are at war with you.And even an average Muslim knows that what is which the right hand possess. When there is a War and a women is got as slave who is married, No one goes to get Divorce from her husband she is just married or used by the one who captures.
I will not shout like you that It is wastage of time arguing, but rather will wait for a clear and comprehensive answer from you.
Now offcourse if you want to discuss it in Arabic and end up with Muta being legal well go on.look bro, I'm sorry I just get mad when I see people posting wrong translation to serve their argument
I will read your comment and respond later to it
sorry again
peace
-
A muslim may marry 3 additional women(must be widows) at a time, ONLY when the following are obeyed.
- when the widows with orphans is incapable of providing , and taking care(of herself and her children) on her own. and is in desperate need of safety and security, and when marriage is the ONLY final resort, with which the man(who wishes to help) can provide for, protect and help them.
*And he is permitted to go ahead, under the above conditions, ONLY if he is capable of being just and impartial among all his wives and capable of providing for all his wives and children, financially and emotionally adequately, in a just and impartial manner.
*The above does not mean women(widows) are incapable of providing for themselves and being secure on their own. They are very much capable of that.
But if a woman is not able to, and needs/requires help and wishes a man to help her and if a man(who wishes to help) cant provide the help required adequately, without marriage, ONLY then, can he marry the woman in question.
*And the man can marry ONLY after obtaining consensus from his exsisting wife.So, in the above, there are too many clauses and conditions, which pretty much rule out 'permisibility of polygamy' in today's world.
- when the widows with orphans is incapable of providing , and taking care(of herself and her children) on her own. and is in desperate need of safety and security, and when marriage is the ONLY final resort, with which the man(who wishes to help) can provide for, protect and help them.
-
well, Jaxal, Man marrying 3 additional women is implicated ONLY BECOZ those days, men were the bread-earners. Majority of the women were dependent on the man financially, since they did not work, coz they didnt know to or werent allowed to etc and a man had more say in the affairs of the world etc. So, it was only natural for a widow(there were loads of them after the battle of uhud and very very few men left) with children to find herself absolutely desperate and in need of help.
If Women were bread earners and were considered/treated equally then, propably this polygamy option would not have even come up.
polygamy was ONLY permitted for the sake of helping desperate widows with children(who cant help themself). How would polyandry help?
And the marriage is not to satisfy one's lust but its permissible only IF its the only possible way of helping the widow in question adequately.Like I said, there are too many clauses and conditions, which rules out 'permisibility of polygamy' in today's world.
-
Peace,
I read the instruction as 4 wives being allowed on condition that 3 are mothers of orphans who are being taken in under the mans care.
I am aware that 44 has been argued to mean mothers of orphans, while others have argued that it means to 'marry off' the orphan females (which I do not subscibe to as a limit is not required in this case)...
Peace Layth I personally subscribe to that verse meaning to marry off the orphan females. However, the part which you placed in brackets, I understand where you are coming from, but perhaps the verse was 'metaphorical' and means that you can marry off many orhpans at the same time.
If I remember correctly, the verse literally meant something like the following
'If you have orphans that you can't deal with, then OF THOSE that are suitable, marry them off in twos threes and fours'.
The Sunnis 'forgot' to translate the word that meant 'of those', so they twisted it to suit their own perversions.
Having said that, I am not aware of any explicit verse stating the marriage 'ratio'.
However, if one man = one woman I don't see how either can be married to more than one.
Roshan
-
Hi Jaxal,
Well, Since conditions today are different, most of the clauses and conditions wont be met
such as-In Today'S world
*Women can be financially independent
*Women can be socially independent
*Woman is considered in equality and hence wont be deprived.
*There are organisations and other sources to help desperate women
*Women do not outnumber men and hence widows can very well marry single men if they so wish.
*And in today's society (laws), marriage cant be the only resort to help a desperate women adequately. They can be absolutely helped with out having to marry.
*And moreover, Man cant be just and impartial to 2 or more wives. And no woman would wish to share her husband.So, considering all of the above, most of the clauses dont get met, and hence Polygamy wont be permissible in today's world.
-
SaLaM PM
Ok so we agree with each other then that in today's world, there is no reason to commit polygomy , something which wasnt allowed in the first place.
Now, you said
well, Jaxal, Man marrying 3 additional women is implicated ONLY BECOZ those days, men were the bread-earners. Majority of the women were dependent on the man financially, since they did not work,
In today's world, dont you see men with kids and not being able to cope with the ability to bring those kids up on their own. In this case, isnt it permissible for a woman to do the good deed now and marry 4 guys like that to support them, or help them?
-
SaLaM PM
Ok so we agree with each other then that in today's world, there is no reason to commit polygomy , something which wasnt allowed in the first place.
Now, you said
well, Jaxal, Man marrying 3 additional women is implicated ONLY BECOZ those days, men were the bread-earners. Majority of the women were dependent on the man financially, since they did not work,
In today's world, dont you see men with kids and not being able to cope with the ability to bring those kids up on their own. In this case, isnt it permissible for a woman to do the good deed now and marry 4 guys like that to support them, or help them?
Jaxal,
cant that guy who wishes for a wife to support him, in his family life, marry a single woman(never married, divorcee, widow)? why does he have to marry a married woman?And when its come to polygamy it is not just about fulfilling financial needs. there are other factors as well. those days, women were not considered equal or infact significant, without a man on her side. they would be socially, econimically deprived in the society etc.
Untill recent years( a few decades), even in India, a child wont be admitted in school, without the dad's presence during admission etc. so, sometimes, in a biased society, such stuff becomes important
PS I agree Polygamy is one other issue thats been abused by the so called muslims, just like most other rulings. People fail to see 'why' something has been said.
check this out
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4440 -
IF U wanna say why not polyandry
polyandry will make sense only if all of the following were true at a given time
*Men are considered inferior to woman in a society and a woman's word counts more than a man's.
*Women are the majority bread earners and men arent allowed to.
*Man has no say in any affairs.
*Women are more physically stronger than Men
*Men are dependent financially and socially on woman, and have no means to carry on their own.
*Men outnumber women in a large proportion.(41 or more)
*the widow man can not absolutely provide for himself or for his children, without a woman's help.
*there are no organisations and other sources to help the desperate man.Since we know, all of the above cant be true, Polyandry wont make sense.
The idea is not to disintegrate the family system(one husband-one wife-their children) -
SaLaM PM
cant that guy who wishes for a wife to support him, in his family life, marry a single woman(never married, divorcee, widow)? why does he have to marry a married woman?
Cant the woman marry a man who is not already married? Why the double standard? If a man is good enough to marry more than 1 woman, why isnt a woman good enough to marry more than 1 man? Unless ofcourse it is YOU who see them as unequal.
those days, women were not considered equal or infact significant,
Yea well those days are gone. So this argument is invalid
-
cant that guy who wishes for a wife to support him, in his family life, marry a single woman(never married, divorcee, widow)? why does he have to marry a married woman?
Cant the woman marry a man who is not already married? Why the double standard? If a man is good enough to marry more than 1 woman, why isnt a woman good enough to marry more than 1 man? Unless ofcourse it is YOU who see them as unequal.
Jaxal, its not about man being good enough to marry more than one etc. No one said that. Men were clearly very less in number when compared to women, as most of them had died during the war. So, there were more women(many widows) and very few men. And with a biased, unsafe society, it would be understandable that the woman(widows) were desperate for help in the ?men dominated society? That?s why men were allowed to marry those women.
Men, in general are not permitted to marry widows or non-widows, more than one, when the various clauses/conditions aren?t met.
That?s why I said, Polygamy wont be permissible in today's world, since those conditions wont be met. -
IF U wanna say why not polyandry
polyandry will make sense only if all of the following were true at a given time
*Men are considered inferior to woman in a society and a woman's word counts more than a man's.
*Women are the majority bread earners and men arent allowed to.
*Man has no say in any affairs.
*Women are more physically stronger than Men
*Men are dependent financially and socially on woman, and have no means to carry on their own.
*Men outnumber women in a large proportion.(41 or more)
*the widow man can not absolutely provide for himself or for his children, without a woman's help.
*there are no organisations and other sources to help the desperate man.Since we know, all of the above cant be true, Polyandry wont make sense.
The idea is not to disintegrate the family system(one husband-one wife-their children) -
well, Jaxal, all of those together cant be true ever, can it?
For one, men are physically stronger than women. Now, dont say there are a few strong women. Its a fact that man is stronger. )