A refutation to Bro Yaseen - Polygamy is allowed in 4 23
-
Peace brother Hasan,
I am a bit confused by your two posts.
This is what you wrote in your first post
I tend to believe that all believing women are mosanat, including the ones whom your oaths possess (ma malakat ayman ukum). So the Progressive Muslims translation of 244 seems to be wrong
"And those who accuse the independent women (mohsanat) and they do not bring forth four witnesses, then you shall lash them eighty lashes and do not ever accept their testimony. Those indeed are the evildoers."
It can be corrected like this
"And those who accuse the believing women (mohsanat) and they do not bring forth four witnesses, then you shall lash them eighty lashes and do not ever accept their testimony. Those indeed are the evildoers."
Here according to you "muhsanat" = ALL believing women and not independent women
In your second post here is what you wrote
No. It is clear that muhsanat here are presented as an alternative to the ones whom your oaths possess, who are dependent on you; therefore muhsanat are independent.
In 424 and 25 muhsanat are independent, so they protect themselves; whereas "ma malakat ayman ukum" are dependent on you, so it is you who protect them.
Here according to you "mohsanat" are only the independent ones and not ALL believing women.
Brother you are contradicting yourself.
Furthermore, you wrote in your second post
And as for those of you who are not in a position to marry (independent) muhsanat, let them marry from among those young (muhsanat) whom your oaths possess.
Here the second underlined word should read "fatayat" and not "muhsanat".
Coming back to your following quote
No. It is clear that muhsanat here are presented as an alternative to the ones whom your oaths possess, who are dependent on you; therefore muhsanat are independent.
"Muhsanat" in 425 are not presented as alternative to just "ma malakat aymanukum" but to "ma malakat aymanukum min fatayatikumu almuminati"
The "ma malakat aymanukum" discussed in 424 are a subset of "muhsanat", so the "ma malakat aymanukum" in 424 are the "muhsanat" "ma malakat aymanukum" and the "ma malakat aymanukum" in 425 are subset of "fatayat", so the "ma malakat aymanukum" in 425 are the "fatayat" "ma malakat aymanukum".
Thus "ma malakat aymanukum" can be from the "muhsanat" or the "fatayat".
After discussion with a learned member of the forum, I have realized that "almuhsanati almuminati" means believing muhsanat, and not muhsanat of/from the muminat. Thus I revise my understanding as follows
Considering the phrases "almuhsanati almuminati" and "fatayatikumu almuminati" in 425, it is clear that both muhsanat and fatayat are subsets of muminat. However by considering 55, it is clear that all muhsanat are not necessarily muminat, and there could be "muhsanat" who are from other than "muminat", for example muhsanat from the people of the book.
55 ......................and the "muhsanat" from the believing women, and the "muhsanat" from the people of the Scripture before you....................
"Fatayat" in 425 are obviously parent-protected or dependent on parents. The "ma malakat aymanukum" in 425, therefore, refers to those parent-protected women with whom one has oath of engagement. The "ma malakat aymanukum" in 424, however, refers to those "muhsanat" with whom one has oath of engagement.
Thus my revised understanding of "muhsanat" is "women self-protected by commitment". Thus "muhsanat" would include the women self-protected by commitment to marriage (married women) or women self-protected by commitment to engagement, and would exclude the widows and the independent women who are neither married nor engaged.
Let us consider 244 now
244 And those who accuse the "muhsanat" and they do not bring forth four witnesses, then you shall lash them eighty lashes and do not ever accept their testimony. Those indeed are the evildoers.
Obviously the "fatayat" is not included in the "muhsanat" in this verse. So let me ask you a question
Is it ok then to slander "fatayat" or parent-protected/parent dependent women ?
Peace
-
Saaimat are women who fast or "observe sawn" commanded by God.
Peace, Myr. I may agree with you.
The translation of saaimat as "self-denying women" belongs to Muhammad Asad, who provides an explanation as follows
The term saa?im, usually rendered as "fasting", has here its primary connotation of "one who abstains (from anything)" or "denies to himself (anything)" cf. 1926, where the noun sawm denotes "abstinence from speech". (The Message of THE QUR?AN)
I am a bit confused by your two posts.
Please excuse me for confusing you. However, I am very sure about my understanding of muhsanat and see that your view is now basically the same as mine. There is no need on my part to make a fuss.
Thank you and peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Salaam all
There have been many posts on this thread since I last visited it. I will briefly question some notions that drew my attention
First there is a notion of makeing subets mu7Sanaat mu'minaat, fatayatukuk almu'minaat, maa malakat aymanukum..etc. It is like saying English man man is a subset of English. I do not see any subsets here. The underlying condition could be "they have to be mu'mins, not just muslims).
Another thing is that all posts discuss (mu7Sanaat and maa malakat aymaanukum) as if it pertains to women only. Remember that men can also be (mu7Saneen & maa malakat aymanuhunna), so any attempt to explain these terms should take "male mu7Sans and maa malakat al-aymaan) into consideration.From Tanveer's
I have arrived at a new understanding that polygyny is allowed by The God by virtue of it not being forbidden in the qur'aan. In 423 The God is acknowledging the presence of polygyny by forbidding polygyny with 2 sisters, but does not forbid polygyny with other women, hence permitting polygyny with women other than sisters.
Polygamy is restricted as per verse 43. There is no contradiction with verse 423. It is simply that if the mother of orphans is your sister-in-law (your wife's sister) you cannot marry her. No more permission for polygamy other than what is already stated in 43.
-
Peace sister Samia,
Thank you for sharing your understanding. The only problem that I see with your understanding at this point is as follows
No more permission for polygamy other than what is already stated in 43.
We have to be careful in attributing something to Allah that which He never said.
Where does it say in the Qur'aan that no more permission for polygamy other than what is already stated in 43 ?
The only way that could have been true is if Allah had said somewhere in the Qur'aan something similar to "it is forbidden for you to marry more than one other than what is being recited in the scripture" or "do not marry more than one other than what is already recited in the scripture".
To my knowledge, nowhere in al-qur'aan does Allah say that.
Peace
-
I understand that there are verses in the Quran which prohibits polygamy.
For example 423 says that you are forbidden... to have two sisters at one and the same time -hurrimat alaikum... antajma'u baina'l uhtain-, which is polygamy.
Let me repeat for emphasis
You are allowed to have sisters as your wife one at a time because it is monogamy, bu you are forbidden to have sisters as your wives at one and the same time because it is polygamy.
And 2432 orders you to marry off the single from among you -Wa ankehu'l ayama minkum. It is definite that the moment you marry off a single person -ayyem- from among you, that person's state changes from single to married; therefore you can not marry him off again.
God orders you to marry off your single relatives only; He does not order you to marry off the ones who are already married.
That is definitely prohibition of polygamy.
Finally, verse 3352 forbids the Prophet from taking wife upon wife, which is in actuality prohibition of polygamy because without taking wife upon wife polygamy is impossible.
Now the question is is it permitted for the Muslims to take wife upon wife in spite of the fact that God prohibited it for the prophet by revealing 3352 and the prohet obeyed it from then on to the end of his life.
True Muslims have to think.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Peace brother Hasan, all,
I understand that there are verses in the Quran which prohibits polygamy.
For example 423 says that you are forbidden... to have two sisters at one and the same time -hurrimat alaikum... antajma'u baina'l uhtain-, which is polygamy.
Let me repeat for emphasis
You are allowed to have sisters as your wife one at a time because it is monogamy, bu you are forbidden to have sisters as your wives at one and the same time because it is polygamy.
There are only two verses that forbid certain types of polygamy in al-qur'aan. In 423 polygyny with 2 sisters is forbidden and in 424 it is forbidden to marry muhsanat which includes married women thus forbidding polyandry. There is no verse that forbids polygyny with non-sisters. In 423 it says " it is forbidden to have 2 sisters together" and not "it is forbidden to have 2 women together". Please do not attribute something to Allah what He never said in al-qur'aan.
And 2432 orders you to marry off the single from among you -Wa ankehu'l ayama minkum. It is definite that the moment you marry off a single person -ayyem- from among you, that person's state changes from single to married; therefore you can not marry him off again.
God orders you to marry off your single relatives only; He does not order you to marry off the ones who are already married.
That is definitely prohibition of polygamy.
Firstly, only those can be "married off" who are still dependent. How can someone "marry off" an independant or self-protected man ? The wording "marry off" implies marrying off DEPENDENT singles. So this does not apply to independent or self-protected men who may be married.
Secondly, if this advice applies to independent or self-protected married men in addition to the dependent single men, thereby not allowing independent or self-protected married men to have more than one wife, then it would contradict with 43 which is usually translated to allow polygyny with mothers of the orphans.
I would understand 2432 as not allowing dependent men to have polygyny, and this would not be applicable to independent/self-protected men who are single or married. Thus this verse does not prohibit polygyny for independent/self-protected married men.
Finally, verse 3352 forbids the Prophet from taking wife upon wife, which is in actuality prohibition of polygamy because without taking wife upon wife polygamy is impossible.
Now the question is is it permitted for the Muslims to take wife upon wife in spite of the fact that God prohibited it for the prophet by revealing 3352 and the prohet obeyed it from then on to the end of his life.
Brother Hasan, you are creating contradiction in al-qur'aan. 3352 is an order ONLY for the Prophet and not applicable to other believers otherwise it would contradict with the permission given to believers in general to exchange wives in 420
420 And if you wish to replace one wife instead of another, and you have given one of them a large amount, then do not take anything from it. Would you take it by falsehood while it is clearly a sin?
This permission was taken away ONLY for the Prophet by 3352.
Peace
-
Peace sister Samia,
Women are forbidden to marry the following men according to al-qur'aan
- Males who set up partners
2221 And do not marry the females who set up partners until they believe. For a believing servant is better than one who sets up partners even if she attracts you. And do not marry the males who set up partners until they believe. For a believing servant is better than one who sets up partners even if he attracts you............
- Males who are disbelievers
6010 O you who believe, if the believing women come emigrating to you, then you shall test them. God is fully aware of their belief. Thus, if you establish that they are believers, then you shall not return them to the disbelievers. They are no longer lawful for them, nor are the disbelievers lawful for them. And return the dowries that were paid..........
- Step-sons
422 And do not marry what your fathers had married from the women, except what has already been done. It is a lewdness, and an abhorrence, and a bad path.
- Sons, father, brothers, brother's sons, sister's sons, father's brothers, mother's brothers, foster sons, brothers from suckling, daughter's husbands, step-fathers if they have consummated marriage with mother, husband's father, sister's husband while he is married to sister
423 Forbidden for you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your fathers' sisters, and your mothers' sisters, and the daughters of your brother, and the daughters of your sister, and your foster mothers who suckled you, and your sisters from suckling, and the mothers of your wives, and your step-daughters residing in your homes from your wives which you have already consummated the marriage with; if you have not consummated the marriage then there is no sin upon you; and the wives of your sons that are from your seed, and that you join between two sisters except what has already been done. God is Forgiving, Merciful.
Peace
-
Peace Samia,
Just an oversight. 424 gives a conditional prohibition. You could have completed the list too, instead of asking.
Women self-protected by commitment (muhsanat), other than the ma malakat aymanukum, are forbidden to marry ALL MEN.
424 And the muhsanat from the women, except ma malakat aymanukum;
-
Peace tanveer
Women self-protected by commitment (muhsanat), other than the ma malakat aymanukum, are forbidden to marry ALL MEN.
What ? Would you elaborate please ? Or if i have to take up the whole thread again coz it's all been said already, just tell me so.
lk
-
Peace sister Samia,
Women are forbidden to marry the following men according to al-qur'aan
- Males who set up partners
2221 And do not marry the females who set up partners until they believe. For a believing servant is better than one who sets up partners even if she attracts you. And do not marry the males who set up partners until they believe. For a believing servant is better than one who sets up partners even if he attracts you............
- Males who are disbelievers
6010 O you who believe, if the believing women come emigrating to you, then you shall test them. God is fully aware of their belief. Thus, if you establish that they are believers, then you shall not return them to the disbelievers. They are no longer lawful for them, nor are the disbelievers lawful for them. And return the dowries that were paid..........
- Step-sons
422 And do not marry what your fathers had married from the women, except what has already been done. It is a lewdness, and an abhorrence, and a bad path.
- Sons, father, brothers, brother's sons, sister's sons, father's brothers, mother's brothers, foster sons, brothers from suckling, daughter's husbands, step-fathers if they have consummated marriage with mother, husband's father, sister's husband while he is married to sister
423 Forbidden for you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your fathers' sisters, and your mothers' sisters, and the daughters of your brother, and the daughters of your sister, and your foster mothers who suckled you, and your sisters from suckling, and the mothers of your wives, and your step-daughters residing in your homes from your wives which you have already consummated the marriage with; if you have not consummated the marriage then there is no sin upon you; and the wives of your sons that are from your seed, and that you join between two sisters except what has already been done. God is Forgiving, Merciful.
Peace
The above quote is not the same pattern as the one below
Women self-protected by commitment (muhsanat), other than the ma malakat aymanukum, are forbidden to marry ALL MEN.
According to the pattern in your first quote, this should be
- Married men (muhsaneen) other than ma malakat aymanuhunna.
You see what I mean? This does not mean that I accept "muhsan" as meaning "married". Is it Ok to marry a married "milkul yameen aka ma malakat aymanuhum"?
-
Peace Elke,
What ? Would you elaborate please ? Or if i have to take up the whole thread again coz it's all been said already, just tell me so.
I have already elaborated in detail in my previous posts; please read them again.
I re-stated what was said in 424 in a different way from the women's perspective. 424 is addressing the men and telling them that "muhsanat" from the women, except ma malakat aymanukum are forbidden for them. I re-stated the same thing from a different persepective by saying that all men are forbidden to the "muhsanat" other than the ma malakat aymanukum from among the muhsanat.
-
Peace Samia,
Is it Ok to marry a married "milkul yameen aka ma malakat aymanuhum"?
The "ma malakat aymanukum" mentioned in 424 are not married. They are those muhsanat who have an oath of engagement with the men. Muhsanat include not only the married women. Muhsanat = married self-protected women + engaged self-protected women. It is forbidden for the men to marry muhsanat from among the women, except the engaged self-protected women.
According to the pattern in your first quote, this should be
- Married men (muhsaneen) other than ma malakat aymanuhunna.
I disagree. That is a logically false inference.
424 is not talking about muhsaneen being forbidden but about muhsanat from among the women being forbidden to ALL MEN. It is ALL MEN versus the "muhsanat" from among the women. Thus I did not change any patterns.
I think Allah knew you were going to try to make a logically false inference like that, that's why He clarified that He is talking only about muhsanat and not the muhsaneen by adding "min alnisa" to the "muhsanat".
-
Salaam Tanveer
Muhsanat = married self-protected women + engaged self-protected women
So they are allowed to marry women engaged to other men? I do not think this is acceptable by God!! If it is about "marrying women who are engaged to you", I think this is too obvious to be mentioned, otherwise, why would one get engaged at all? Or does it mean, once you are engaged to them you MUST marry them? I honestly do not understand this engaged-self -protected- women thing worthy being mentioned as "allowed to you to marry"
I think Allah knew you were going to try to make a logically false inference like that, that's why He clarified that He is talking only about muhsanat and not the muhsaneen by adding "min alnisa" to the "muhsanat".
If you can allow mothers, sisters, daughters..etc to be replaced by fathers, brothers, daughters..why can't you allow nisaa' to be replaced by men? "min alnisaa'" could merely be in opposition to "all females" which would include young girls; so we know it is about adults, "women", not just "females", as the word muhsanat means female "muhsans".
Moreover, "nisaa'" itself is not immune of meaning /including "men". Just ponder on verses 443; 56.
-
Dear tanveer, I had written this post before I saw Samia's reply. Please excuse me for the repetitions.
As I said in my previous post, your concept of "muhsanat" is basically the same as mine, excepting some minor details.
The "ma malakat aymanukum" mentioned in 424 are not married.
I agree.
They are ...muhsanat...
Yes.
who have an oath of engagement with the men.
Which men? If other men than you have an oath of engagement with them, what is your relation to those women? I mean you also have oaths with them (malakat ayman ukum).
You have oaths of what with them?
You are included, are you not, in the men whom God implicitly addresses in the beginning of 424. Please explain what He wants you to do about them
(O men!)
And the self-protected mumenas...
Wa'l muhsanatu min an-nesaa'eexcept those whom your oaths possess
illa ma malakat ayman ukumMuhsanat include not only the married women. Muhsanat = married self-protected women + engaged self-protected women.
Yes, but Jesus Christ's mother also was a protected woman (muhsana), who was neither married nor engaged.
What this means is that there are also other subsets (as you put it) of muhsanat, such as young single daughters of independent families.
Take the Prophet's single daughters. Were they not protected to the extent that if anybody accused them of adultery but failed to produce four witnesses, they would deserve 80 stripes (244)?
It is forbidden for the men to marry muhsanat from among the women, except the engaged self-protected women.
Please explain how the women whom your oaths posses would fit in the verse
And the self-protected mumenas... except those whom your oaths possess
(1)Are the women whom your oaths possess really self-protected? If they are, what becomes of the protection your oaths entitle you to?
(2)There is no verb here. Please explain which one of these two verbs come to your mind to make better sense
And (propose directly to) the self-protected mumenas except the ones whom the oaths somebody from among you possess.
And (marry) the slef-protected mumenas except the ones whom the oaths of somebody from among you possess.
Daer tanveer,
After we settle our differences about the details concerning muhsanat, I will try to reply to the points you made about polygamy, God willing.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Salaamun alaika Samia,
So they are allowed to marry women engaged to other men? I do not think this is acceptable by God!!
Thank you for pointing out the error in my post. What I meant was that it is about "muhsanat" being forbidden to all men except women who are protected by oath of engagement to you. Thus the only way of marrying a "muhsanat" is by first having an oath of engagement with her.
Hence, muhsanat includes women protected by marriage and women protected by oath of engagement to you.
If it is about "marrying women who are engaged to you", I think this is too obvious to be mentioned, otherwise, why would one get engaged at all? Or does it mean, once you are engaged to them you MUST marry them?
As I mentioned above, 424 is telling us that the only way to marry a muhsanat is to have an oath of engagement with her.
If you can allow mothers, sisters, daughters..etc to be replaced by fathers, brothers, daughters..why can't you allow nisaa' to be replaced by men?
This time you are the one overlooking all the "kums" in 423.
Forbidden for you are YOUR mothers means that the men being referenced to by this part of the verse are the sons. If it had said "forbidden for you are the mothers" then the men being referenced to would be all the men, and it would mean that any women with a child is forbidden for marriage. Thus all the female relations mentioned in 423 can be replaced by the male counterparts, because of the "kums".
In 424 there is no "kum" with the muhsanat. It says "forbidden are the muhsanat......." and not "forbidden are your muhsanat........" Thus the men being referenced to are all the men by the first part, and only those men who have an oath of engagement with the women in the second part. Thus "al-muhsanat" in 424 cannot be replaced by their male counterparts.
Another important point
If you falsely infer that "al-muhsanat" in 424 can be replaced by "al-muhsaneen" (including married men), then you would be contradicting yourself when you said in an earlier post "no more permission of polygamy except what is already stated in 43" because according to 43, as soon as a man marries one mother of orphans he will become a "muhsan" and then it will be forbidden for him to marry another mother of orphan while he is still married.
There is no "illa" or "except" before 43 with reference to other parts of the scripture to make it an exception to 424. Also 424 does not say "forbidden are the muhsanat from the women except the ma malakat aymanukum AND what is being recited to you in the scripture".
Moreover, "nisaa'" itself is not immune of meaning /including "men". Just ponder on verses 443; 56.
al-muhsanat in 424 clearly implies that it is the women being mentioned. You will have a point only if it had said "al-muhsaneen min al-nisa" instead of "al-muhsanat min al-nisa".
Peace
-
Salaamun alaika Hasan,
I had written this post before I saw Samia's reply. Please excuse me for the repetitions.
No problem. Excuse me also for the repetitions because some of your points I have already addressed in my reply to sister Samia.
Quote
who have an oath of engagement with the men.Which men? If other men than you have an oath of engagement with them, what is your relation to those women? I mean you also have oaths with them (malakat ayman ukum).
Thank you for pointing out the error. I should have said "who have an oath of engagement with YOU".
You have oaths of what with them?
You have oaths of engagement with them. Thus thay are protected by their commitment to you because of your oath of engagement with them.
You are included, are you not, in the men whom God implicitly addresses in the beginning of 424. Please explain what He wants you to do about them
He wants me not to marry any "muhsanat" without first having an oath of engagement with her.
Yes, but Jesus Christ's mother also was a protected woman (muhsana), who was neither married nor engaged.
What this means is that there are also other subsets (as you put it) of muhsanat, such as young single daughters of independent families.
Please consider 335 in which Mary was dedicated to Allah's service. Thus she was a "muhsanat" because she was self-protected by her commitment to Allah's service. She protected her farj by committing to Allah's service.
So I agree that there are also other subsets of muhsanat but not what you mentioned.
Muhsanat would thus include
Women self-protected by commitment of marriage,
Women self-protected by commitment of engagement,
Women self-protected by commitment to Allah's service."Young single daughters of independent families" would be the "fatayat" and not the muhsanat.
Let me ask you a question that you have not answered as yet
244 And those who accuse the "muhsanat" and they do not bring forth four witnesses, then you shall lash them eighty lashes and do not ever accept their testimony. Those indeed are the evildoers.
Obviously the "fatayat" is not included in the "muhsanat" as per 425. So let me ask you a question
Is it ok then to slander "fatayat" or parent-protected/parent dependent young women ?
Please explain how the women whom your oaths posses would fit in the verse
And the self-protected mumenas... except those whom your oaths possess
(1)Are the women whom your oaths possess really self-protected? If they are, what becomes of the protection your oaths entitle you to?
(2)There is no verb here. Please explain which one of these two verbs come to your mind to make better sense
And (propose directly to) the self-protected mumenas except the ones whom the oaths somebody from among you possess.
And (marry) the slef-protected mumenas except the ones whom the oaths of somebody from among you possess.
By self-protected, I mean they protect themselves by making a commitment. The "ma malakat aymanukum" mentioned in 424 protect themselves by committing themselves to you when you make an oath of engagement with them.
In my understanding the verb that comes to my mind is "marry" because 424 is a continuation of 423 and 422 because of the "wa" at the beginning, and according to context established in 422, Allah is clearly talking about those women who are forbidden to marry in these verses, not those women who are forbidden to propose directly to.
Peace
-
Salaam Tanveer
I really do not like to sound like splitting hairs, but I do not see any meaning of saying "Do not marry married women except your fiancees".
Why is an engagment considered as a comittment that is equal to marriage? And how an engaged woman is self-protected? What do you mean by self-protected? She can always break up her engagment without the need for a judge or arbitraries; yes or no? If yes, where is this protection; if no, what's the proof?If you falsely infer that "al-muhsanat" in 424 can be replaced by "al-muhsaneen" (including married men), then you would be contradicting yourself when you said in an earlier post "no more permission of polygamy except what is already stated in 43" because according to 43, as soon as a man marries one mother of orphans he will become a "muhsan" and then it will be forbidden for him to marry another mother of orphan while he is still married.
There is no "illa" or "except" before 43 with reference to other parts of the scripture to make it an exception to 424. Also 424 does not say "forbidden are the muhsanat from the women except the ma malakat aymanukum AND what is being recited to you in the scripture".
This is a general rule because it applies to both genders. If there is "AND what is being recited to you in the scripture", as you suggest, then it will imply that men, too, have something in the scripture that allows them to marry married women.
Then there is the specific rule in verse 43 to apply to mothers of the orphans only, and it does not apply to women in general, who are addressed in 424.al-muhsanat in 424 clearly implies that it is the women being mentioned. You will have a point only if it had said "al-muhsaneen min al-nisa" instead of "al-muhsanat min al-nisa".
"al-muhsaneen min al nisa" is grammatically and linguistically incorrect. God will not use such an erronous expression. "min al-nisaa'" merely serves as setting an age, so as to exclude young girls.
There is a similar expression in verse 55 "wal muhsanatu min al mu'minaat". Would you say that mu'minaat women cannot marry in ahlul kitaab as per this verse? Would it be that mumineen can marry "married women" of ahlil kitaab and married mu'minaat?
-
Peace Samia,
I really do not like to sound like splitting hairs, but I do not see any meaning of saying "Do not marry married women except your fiancees".
Why is an engagment considered as a comittment that is equal to marriage? And how an engaged woman is self-protected? What do you mean by self-protected? She can always break up her engagment without the need for a judge or arbitraries; yes or no? If yes, where is this protection; if no, what's the proof?It does not mean "do not marry married women except your fiancees". It means "do not marry muhsanat except your fiancees/the ones you have an oath of engagement with". While muhsanat includes the married women, it includes other categories too, "ma malakat aymanukum" being one of them.
I never said that 424 implies that commitment of marriage is equal to the commitment of engagement. They are both forms of commitment.
An engaged mature woman protects herself by committing to an oath of engagement with a man, without needing permission from parents, thus SELF-protected. She can always break up her engagement, but then she will not be protected any more.
Oaths should not be taken lightly and come with responsibilities and rights. When one makes an oath of engagement one is protecting that woman by committing to get married with her and that oath permits him not to guard his farj from his fiancee as per 235/6.
I will quote brother Ayman's explanation
There is no mention of intercourse in 235. What is mentioned is indeed guarding our modesty. What 236 is telling us is that there is no blame on us if we don't guard our modesty with our spouses and those engaged to us. So when a couple is engaged they can kiss and be romantic with each other and the only thing they can't do is intercourse (see 2235). For this, they have to wait until the predetermined time. Now this may go against social norms but we need to be careful in not letting our social norms block us from understanding what is being said.
I think that the meaning is "guarding their private parts". This would include arousing those parts so with this understanding passionate kissing would fall under that. So 235-6 is giving us a license to be intimate (but no intercourse as per 2235) with those we are engaged to (ma malakat aymanukum).
Then there is the specific rule in verse 43 to apply to mothers of the orphans only, and it does not apply to women in general, who are addressed in 424.
Firstly, a specific rule cannot override a general rule in al-qur'aan unless an exception is specified.
Secondly, In the first part of 424 it is muhsanat from women that are addressed and not women in general.
What I was trying to explain to you did not pertain to mothers of orphans but to the men addressed to in 43. Please re-read what I said or better still, I will re-post it here
If you falsely infer that "al-muhsanat" in 424 can be replaced by "al-muhsaneen" (including married men), then you would be contradicting yourself when you said in an earlier post "no more permission of polygamy except what is already stated in 43" because according to 43, as soon as a man marries one mother of orphans he will become a "muhsan" and then it will be forbidden for him to marry another mother of orphan while he is still married.
There is no "illa" or "except" before 43 with reference to other parts of the scripture to make it an exception to 424.
Would it be that mumineen can marry "married women" of ahlil kitaab and married mu'minaat?
Mumineen can marry only "muhsanat" from ahlil kitaab and "muhsanat" from muminat. Muhsanat does not include only married women but includes other categories too, for example the single self-protected women that you have an oath of engagement with. According to 424 it is forbidden to marry the "muhsanat" from the women except those who you have made an oath of engagement with. Thus it follows that the only "muhsanat" from ahlil kitab or muminat that are allowed for marriage are the ones with whom you made an oath of engagement with.
I don't know why you keep translating "muhsanat" as just "married women".
Peace