Polygamy - Time to settle the issue
-
lol, thanks, now all I need are contributors....
Salaam
Qur;an is not restricted by dictionaries, one has to understand the concept and ""Yatama" as I understand are vulnerable person who need support, financially or othewise and in case of underage vurnable/yatame who have no one to care for them you give them their weatlh as they reach age where they are able to look after their affairs.
Simpls -
Peace )
Okay, so you are you saying is that the Quran isn't only referring to "mothers of orphaned children"? You mean to say that the Quran may also be referring to unmarried women, for any reason at all?
I don't understand this because the verses seem to revolve primarily around the welfare of the orphans. Can you break it down a little further for me?
-
Peace )
Okay, so you are you saying is that the Quran isn't only referring to "mothers of orphaned children"? You mean to say that the Quran may also be referring to unmarried women, for any reason at all?
I don't understand this because the verses seem to revolve primarily around the welfare of the orphans. Can you break it down a little further for me?
I am always reluctant to impose m;y understanding on others as I feel we all have to study the Qur'an to understand it but no I do not beleive that the Ayat, where polygamy is discussed refers to mothers of orphans. To my understanding it's about those vULnerable women who have no where to go and need care. If one can not give them the care expected from a God fearing person then marry them so they can enjoy a wife's status.
A single woman can be as vulnerable as a widowed or divorced one in a society where women have no rights. The ayat are not asking to take them as mamalkat aymanhu, marriage in mentioned here, for whic concent is a requirement where a woman is of age when she can understand importance of her finance /Mahr as we clearly understand that unage yatama have to wait till they reach age of understanding/concent 46
Salaam -
Peace IMHO,
Do you think that men are allowed to help the vulnerable women through the act of marriage, without first seeking the permission or consent of his initial wife(s). I believe this to be a decision that a family should together, no? What is the initial wife (s) is/are not happy with the prospect of having a co-wife, splitting up the inheritance further, or being in a relationship where sex is not monogamous?
-
Ok, lemme make myself a bit more clearer. Yatim in general refers to someone who is vulnerable, its more like a characteristic. When it has an 'Al' or tanween at the end, it becomes a definite and indefinite noun respectively. Except for the first half of , everywhere in the Quran it has been used (Except for one more instance where it comes as 'Yatemain', but there it IS to be used as a general word and is in a dual form so I think there it can't be with an Al in the first place), it comes with an 'Al', in other words, the Quran uses it as a definite noun. Just like it uses the term 'An Nisa' or 'The women', or 'Al Mushrikin', as in 'The polytheists', it uses the term 'Al Yatama' as in, 'The vulnerable/isolated/jaded'. According to context, at all those instances, it only makes sense if the meaning is taken as 'The fatherless children', or 'The orphans'. However, in 's first half, it doesn't use 'Yatama' as a noun, but a descriptive word, like, it describes what follows it, and what follows it is 'An Nisa', this, has been used as a definite noun, as it has 'Al' in the beginning. Like in a phrase has been used 'Azab Al Khizy', where 'Al Khizy' means 'The disgrace' or the concept of disgrace, while 'Azab' means 'Punishment', which means 'Punishment of the disgrace', in other words, 'The disgrace' in the form of torture. Similarly. here it means 'Isolated/Vulnerable of the women', or in other words, women who are vulnerable/jaded, or at least that's what I think Abdul Mannan Omar is trying to say. If it was 'Al Yatama An Nisa', then I'm sure neither he, nor I would have thought about interpreting it this way, since then Yatama would itself be a noun, rendering this interpretation illogical. I've also taken a look at what Mazhar has done at Haqeeqat.org.pk, and even he has translated it as 'Orphan lonely women', which seems like he is also agreeing that 'Orphan lonely' is an adjective that describes a type of women (Though I'd like it if he'd pay us a visit and clear up what he thinks). But this is just an opinion, and I am ready to change it. Another reason why I am inclined to this interpretation, is that this verse suggests that these topics have been discussed in the Quran previously; Yatama An Nisa, oppressed children, and being fair with orphans. If you think about it, oppressed children have been discussed in , being fair with orphans has been discussed in , and isolated women (Divorcees and widows etc.) have been discussed in between verses 200 and 250 of Ch. 2. Furthermore, it says that people weren't willing to give them what was decreed to them, and we can see that in Allah says that if we desire to marry a widow, we have to wait till their 'Prescribed' (Kitab) term is fulfilled, and as per , a year's maintenance of a widow is to be made by the husband before he dies, obviously after he does die, then it is up to the court etc. to do it, if someone would want to marry a widow, he obviously wouldn't want that to happen and keep her in his own home, however, unless she herself doesn't approve the marriage, she is to be given a year's maintenance. Get my point?
-
Read my previous reply, reply #9 on the previous page first and then read this
As for 'Mothers of orphans', I myself too don't believe that it exists. In , there is NO indication whatsoever that 'The women' are 'Mothers of orphans', and EVEN if we in taken 'Yatama an Nisa' to mean as 'Orphans of the women', as in, the fatherless children of the women, it is not necessary that that verse is linked to in anyway.
-
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. (
-
Peace IMHO,
Do you think that men are allowed to help the vulnerable women through the act of marriage, without first seeking the permission or consent of his initial wife(s). I believe this to be a decision that a family should together, no? What is the initial wife (s) is/are not happy with the prospect of having a co-wife, splitting up the inheritance further, or being in a relationship where sex is not monogamous?
Salaam
As we can read in the Qur'an there is no requirement to seek permission from initial wife, you talk about family above I think these verses are directed towards those who see the whole communty as their family and they must take care of Yateem as Qur'an emphesises rights of Yateem upon us. In those situations the first wife too would reccognise those right if she too see the whole Ummah as her family.
As I understand these ayat are not for familes like your and mine who have husband and wife a house and a car and they live like one unit and the rest are outsiders.
hmm -
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?
-
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