A refutation to Bro Yaseen - Polygamy is allowed in 4 23

unknownuser

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

brook

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

unknownuser

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

Samia

Salaam all

May I ask who of the men are forbidden for women to marry? (as per the qur'aan)

unknownuser

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

Samia

Salaam Tanveer

Why did you stop short of verse 424?

unknownuser

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;

Elke

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

Samia

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"?

unknownuser

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.

unknownuser

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".

Samia

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.

brook

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'e

except those whom your oaths possess
illa ma malakat ayman ukum

Muhsanat 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

unknownuser

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

unknownuser

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

Samia

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?

unknownuser

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

brook

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 mature women who you made 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 am trying to understand your concept of muhsanat and ma malakat ayman ukum in 424.

According to 424 it is forbidden to marry the "muhsanat" from the women except those who you have made an oath of engagement with.

So "muhsanat" in 424 are the muhsanat from the women.

(1)Which women?
(2)the muhsanat from the women brings to mind the muhsanat from the men... Muhsanat are women but a subset of the men? I am sorry but it doesn't make sense to me. Are muhsanat women or men?

And "ma malakt ayman ukum" are the muhsanat from the women with whom you made an oath of engagement with. I understand that.

Or you probably mean self-protected women by musanat in 424. So Wa'l muhsanatu min an-nisaae illa ma malakat ayman ukum means (You are forbidden to marry) self-protected women except the women whom you made an oath with. But in this case this question poses itself

(3)Why should you be forbbiden to marry self-protected women; that is, muhsanatu min an-nesaae?

On the other hand these impossibilities disappear if you choose the other verb; that is, propose directly to

O men!
(Propose directly to) the self-protected women except those whom you promised to protect.

The you here stands for you muslims; that is, you + others (from among you).

I understand that you object to verb propose directly to because verb marry in 423 should cover 424 too due to the fact that there is wa in the beginning of 424. However, this rule dose not impose itself on 425.

Note that there is no verb in the beginning of 425, which also is the case in the beginning of 424. So we freely choose let (them) marry or marry (them) off instead of marry.

And there is wa in the beginning of 425 too, but it does not necessisate verb marry over there. The verb in 425 is let them marry or marry (them) off.

And as for those of you who are not in a position to marry self-protected believing women, let them marry from among the young believing ones whom you promised to protect.

Wa min lam yastate' minkum tawlan an-yankeha'l muhsanate'l mumenate, fa man ma malakat ayman ukum min fatayat ekumu'l mumenat

Peace,
Hasan Akcay

unknownuser

Peace Hasan,

So "muhsanat" in 424 are the muhsanat from the women.

(1)Which women?

The answer is in 55

55 Today, the good things have been made lawful to you, and the food of those who have been given the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them; and the muhsanat from the believing women, and the muhsanat from the people of the scripture before you, if you have given them their dowries, protected by commitment and not seeking to take lovers. And whoever rejects belief, then his work has fallen, and in the Hereafter he is of the losers.

So the women are the believing women and the women from the people of the scripture.

(2)the muhsanat from the women brings to mind the muhsanat from the men... Muhsanat are women but a subset of the men? I am sorry but it doesn't make sense to me. Are muhsanat women or men?

I never said that muhsanat can be from men. Muhsanat is female. It would be "muhsaneen" from the men. 424 refers to muhsanat from the women and not muhsaneen.

It is sister Samia who keeps insisting that "muhsanat" in 424 is indirectly referring to "muhsaneen" also, not me. I have been trying to show her that 424 is referring just to the muhsanat from the women and not the muhsaneen from the men. Maybe you can bring this up with sister Samia ?

Let me quote from her post

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?

to which I responded

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.

Please read all her recent posts and my replies to her to have a better understanding of her and mine positions.

Sister Samia is also of the opinion that no polygamy is permitted by al-qur'aan EXCEPT what is allowed in 43 to which I responded that I do not find the word "except" pertaining to the situation in 43 either in 424 or before 43. Also I do not find any command in al-qur'aan stating that "do not marry more than one woman except what is being recited in al-qur'aan". The only prohibitions regarding polygamy that I find in al-qur'aan are in 423 where we are prohibited to marry two sisters at the same time (which is not a prohibition of polygamy as a whole but only a prohibition of sister-gamy), and in 424 where we are prohibited to marry "married women" thus prohibiting polyANDRY (muhsanat includes married women), and in 2432 where indirectly polygyny by DEPENDENT males is not allowed.

Sister Samia insists that "muhsanat" in 424 also indirectly refers to "muhsaneen" which includes married men, thus prohibiting both polyandry and polygyny. However she contradicts herself by saying that 43 allows polygamy with certain women. Thus her understanding creates a contradiction in Allah's revelations.

My position is that 424 refers only to "muhsanat" (females) and not to "muhsaneen" (males), thus prohibiting only polyandry. At the same time, in my understanding, 43 is not talking about polygamy with certain women, but talks about "marrying off" those women to other men, one woman to one man, in groups, like a group wedding.

Following is the translation of 43 that I think is the correct one

43 And if you fear you can't do justice to the orphans, then marry off the mothers of the orphans who have agreed with you two's, three's and four's. But if you fear that you will be unfair then by one or what your oath/right hand possessed as this is better than getting into hardship.

My evidences for this understanding are in my previous posts on this thread, one of those posts is at the following link

http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=5843.msg90163#msg90163

Following link is the reply of brother Ayman to this

http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=5843.msg91024#msg91024

Brother Ayman, and a large number of other members of this forum understand that 43 asks us to "marry" the yatama al-nisa, but I understand that 43 asks us to "marry off" the yatama al-nisa.

I used to have the understanding that al-qur'aan does not permit any form of polygamy, but after reviewing the pertinent verses in al-qur'aan and after a lot of discussions, I now have the understanding that only three forms of polygamy are forbidden in al-qur'aan, namely "sister-gamy" per 423, polyandry per 424, and polygyny of dependent males per 2432, and that polygyny by self-protected men is permitted because it is not forbidden. At the same time I understand that 43 does not talk about polygamy but is about "marrying off" the yatama al-nisa.

Or you probably mean self-protected women by musanat in 424. So Wa'l muhsanatu min an-nisaae illa ma malakat ayman ukum means (You are forbidden to marry) self-protected women except the women whom you made an oath with. But in this case this question poses itself

(3)Why should you be forbbiden to marry self-protected women; that is, muhsanatu min an-nesaae?

You are not forbidden to marry ALL the self-protected women (muhsanat) per 424. You are allowed to marry those muhsanat with whom you have an oath of engagement.