Why are men allowed four wives in Islam?

[Saeed Khalid]

The Qur’an is the only religious scripture in the world that says, “marry only one”
The Qur’an is the only religious book, on the face of this earth, that contains the phrase ‘marry only one’. There is no other religious book that instructs men to have only one wife. In none of the other religious scriptures, whether it be the Vedas, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, the Geeta, the Talmud or the Bible does one find a restriction on the number of wives. According to these scriptures one can marry as many as one wishes. It was only later, that the Hindu priests and the Christian Church restricted the number of wives to one. In earlier times, Christian men were permitted as many wives as they wished, since the Bible puts no restriction on the number of wives. It was only a few centuries ago that the Church restricted the number of wives to one.
As I mentioned earlier, Qur’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth that says ‘marry only one’. The context of this phrase is the following verse from Surah An Nisa’ of the Glorious Qur’an:

“Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one.”

In the same chapter i.e. Surah An Nisa’ Verse 129 says:

“Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women....”

[Al Qur’an 4:129]

Therefore polygyny is not a rule but an exception. Many people are under the misconception that it is compulsory for a Muslim man to have more than one wife.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Mamoon]

I get it now.

the respect and value of a woman is to be one of the four wives of a man and be a Lust Fulfilling Object (LFO) for which he can marry you, raise a family and then once he's bored of you, can marry another LFO.

But hey, why complain? he will treat you and all other LFOs impartially.

Hats off to such a pious Muslim and the version of religion he believes in.

 

[shaykh]

Silly presumptions?

An ex-non-muslim ex-muslim (or is it the other way around ) trying to justify his decision to leave on the pretext that he found certain aspects of his former (newfound) religion to be 'distasteful', 'disturbing' and 'irrational', and then goes around maligning that religion, spreading Islamophobia whilst claiming to be an expert on the subject. When did you join the BNP?

It reminds one of footballers.

Happy and ecstatic at joinging a new club. To show his fellow footballers and the clubs fans of his loyalty and committment, delves into learning about the history and past achievements of the club, including it's styles of play, coaching structures and the like. After a while, becomes dissatisfied with life at the club and decides to move on, and joins another club. In order to justify his move and ingratiate himself with his new colleagues and the fans of his new club, starts dissing his previous club, it's coach, it's training methods et al whilst claiming to be an expert due to his previous stint there.

As stated...its not a hard concept but you're too dim to understand...

You can believe something and then eventually disagree with it...it happens...you seem to take my decisions as confusion but frankly you're the one who is confused...

You're the one who states that they are a Muslim but spouts their own opinions masquerading as Islam...

You keep speaking about maligning yet you keep avoiding the question...what exactly have I misrepresented?...I keep asking you to refute the scripture and you stick to ad hominem attacks...

You have nothing to contribute...lets say for a minute that I am what you think I am then what difference does it make?...refute the points raised...

Your version of Islam is the following:

I don't like it...so its not from Islam...
Shaykh says something I don't like about my views...I'll accuse him of maligning Islam...

I'll say it again...you and Mamoon along with that Khan Ji guy that used to be on here simply present your own opinions...you don't present Islamic opinions...and you misrepresent Islamic rules...

Now in my case I express my own opinions on Islamic rules...you deny the rules exist...

I suppose Marx was a capitalist too...

 

[Yossarian]

^^^^ My previous post was spot on.

An ex-non-muslim ex-muslim (or is it the other way around ) trying to justify his decision to leave on the pretext that he found certain aspects of his former (newfound) religion to be 'distasteful', 'disturbing' and 'irrational', and then goes around maligning that religion, spreading Islamophobia whilst claiming to be an expert on the subject. When did you join the BNP?

It reminds one of footballers.

Happy and ecstatic at joinging a new club. To show his fellow footballers and the clubs fans of his loyalty and committment, delves into learning about the history and past achievements of the club, including it's styles of play, coaching structures and the like. After a while, becomes dissatisfied with life at the club and decides to move on, and joins another club. In order to justify his move and ingratiate himself with his new colleagues and the fans of his new club, starts dissing his previous club, it's coach, it's training methods et al whilst claiming to be an expert due to his previous stint there.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I get it now.

the respect and value of a woman is to be one of the four wives of a man and be a Lust Fulfilling Object (LFO) for which he can marry you, raise a family and then once he's bored of you, can marry another LFO.

But hey, why complain? he will treat you and all other LFOs impartially.

Hats off to such a pious Muslim and the version of religion he believes in.

You are an idiot.

 

[shaykh]

^^^^ My previous post was spot on.

Lets cut the story short...


AR Fan, DV and KB24 have discussed Islam and used scripture...they have understood Islamic rules in the same way as I have...our debate between each other has been over the wisdom of such rulings...something which in its essence is an irrelevancy if you are a Muslim because you accept whatever Islam says because you believe in Allah's wisdom over yours...

This is why I can have a respectful conversation with them because we are discussing the same concepts...

You and Mamoon have NOT discussed Islam nor have you discussed scripture...so frankly I have no idea what exactly you believe you have contributed to this topic...'I think' is not an Islamic concept...

You are discussing your own opinions and if I have maligned anything it is your pathetic opinions which you present as Islam...

 

[Pakz]

Lets cut the story short...


AR Fan, DV and KB24 have discussed Islam and used scripture...they have understood Islamic rules in the same way as I have...our debate between each other has been over the wisdom of such rulings...something which in its essence is an irrelevancy if you are a Muslim because you accept whatever Islam says because you believe in Allah's wisdom over yours...

By islamic sources or scriptures do you include secondary sources as well, when you talking about it as a set of rules? I.e, Rejection of hadith, but not taken a figurative meaning from the primary source/text?

 

[Mamoon]

As stated...its not a hard concept but you're too dim to understand...

You can believe something and then eventually disagree with it...it happens...you seem to take my decisions as confusion but frankly you're the one who is confused...

You're the one who states that they are a Muslim but spouts their own opinions masquerading as Islam...

You keep speaking about maligning yet you keep avoiding the question...what exactly have I misrepresented?...I keep asking you to refute the scripture and you stick to ad hominem attacks...

You have nothing to contribute...lets say for a minute that I am what you think I am then what difference does it make?...refute the points raised...

Your version of Islam is the following:

I don't like it...so its not from Islam...
Shaykh says something I don't like about my views...I'll accuse him of maligning Islam...

I'll say it again...you and Mamoon along with that Khan Ji guy that used to be on here simply present your own opinions...you don't present Islamic opinions...and you misrepresent Islamic rules...

Now in my case I express my own opinions on Islamic rules...you deny the rules exist...

I suppose Marx was a capitalist too...

Problem is, you fail to realize that Quran is a guidance book and so are the hadiths.

Its not possible to replicate a 1400 year old society in today's world, otherwide, we should all be riding camels since that counts as a sunnah as well.

We have a free will, and its our duty to interpret the Quran. You don't need to be a scholar or a have a degree for that. This isn't a license.

Even religious scholars/Molvis have their own agenda.

They will loathe Non Muslims and spread their voice using Made in Japan speakers.

They'll read the Quran wearing glasses which will have a made in America frame.

They will talk on how a non Muslim will go to hell on a cellphone that is a non muslims invention.

They will go to Hajj on aircraft which is an American invention, courtesy of the Wright brothers.

Best of all, they will speak on how pictures are not allowed in Islam but will pray 5 times a day in a mosque with wallet in pocket and that wallet containing notes with pictures of Quaid e azam.

There are tableeghi people in my neighborhood and they are particulary proud over the fact that they have done Hajj and Umrah collectively more than 50 times but, there are servants in their household, who haven't done it once. Instead of hitting a half century which neither Allah nor Muhammad PBUH wanted you to score, you could have helped the poor people fulfill their wish of doing one as well.

There is no productive and practical contribution that a religious scholar or Molvi makes to the society, rather than self contradict himself and bend Islam to fulfill his needs.

If you go in accordance to the Molvi's of today, you will be of no use to the world but who cares, the world is irrelevant and the only thing that is important is a certain fairyland which no one has seen.

If the world isn't important, die now. Don't be a waste of space.

So please, don't talk about custom interpretations of Islam. Everyone is the guilty party in here.

 

[Mamoon]

You are an idiot.

An idiot is better than a man who leaves his family in tatters just to fulfill his sexual desires.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

An idiot is better than a man who leaves his family in tatters just to fulfill his sexual desires.

You keep making this point over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Its a redundant point. The male still has to fulfil his duties to his first wife and kids according to the law of polygamy.

I think due to some personal circumstances you are too emotionally invested in maritial discussions to put forward an opinion devoid of emotion. Marriage in itself is a fulfilment of lust. Lust is natural not a naughty word that you seem to think it is.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Problem is, you fail to realize that Quran is a guidance book and so are the hadiths.

Its not possible to replicate a 1400 year old society in today's world, otherwide, we should all be riding camels since that counts as a sunnah as well.

We have a free will, and its our duty to interpret the Quran. You don't need to be a scholar or a have a degree for that. This isn't a license.

Even religious scholars/Molvis have their own agenda.

They will loathe Non Muslims and spread their voice using Made in Japan speakers.

They'll read the Quran wearing glasses which will have a made in America frame.

They will talk on how a non Muslim will go to hell on a cellphone that is a non muslims invention.

They will go to Hajj on aircraft which is an American invention, courtesy of the Wright brothers.

Best of all, they will speak on how pictures are not allowed in Islam but will pray 5 times a day in a mosque with wallet in pocket and that wallet containing notes with pictures of Quaid e azam.

There are tableeghi people in my neighborhood and they are particulary proud over the fact that they have done Hajj and Umrah collectively more than 50 times but, there are servants in their household, who haven't done it once. Instead of hitting a half century which neither Allah nor Muhammad PBUH wanted you to score, you could have helped the poor people fulfill their wish of doing one as well.

There is no productive and practical contribution that a religious scholar or Molvi makes to the society, rather than self contradict himself and bend Islam to fulfill his needs.

If you go in accordance to the Molvi's of today, you will be of no use to the world but who cares, the world is irrelevant and the only thing that is important is a certain fairyland which no one has seen.

If the world isn't important, die now. Don't be a waste of space.

So please, don't talk about custom interpretations of Islam. Everyone is the guilty party in here.

good post ( for a change )

 

[shakil]

^ Leave those poor souls alone Shaykh. Leaving your birth religion and years of indoctrination is hard, very very hard. It was hard enough for me at least, so I don't blame the others

 

[Yossarian]

lets cut the story short...


Ar fan, dv and kb24 have discussed islam and used scripture...they have understood islamic rules in the same way as i have...our debate between each other has been over the wisdom of such rulings...something which in its essence is an irrelevancy if you are a muslim because you accept whatever islam says because you believe in allah's wisdom over yours...

This is why i can have a respectful conversation with them because we are discussing the same concepts...

You and mamoon have not discussed islam nor have you discussed scripture...so frankly i have no idea what exactly you believe you have contributed to this topic...'i think' is not an islamic concept...

You are discussing your own opinions and if i have maligned anything it is your pathetic opinions which you present as islam...

..........

 

[Pakz]

good post

Could I ask what religion you follow? Just a question...

^ Leave those poor souls alone Shaykh. Leaving your birth religion and years of indoctrination is hard, very very hard. It was hard enough for me at least, so I don't blame the others

In what sense is it hard, could I ask? Yet again just wanted to know.

 

[Mamoon]

I'd rather be a thumpin' idiot than a gorilla of a man, who even after marrying and having kids, hasn't had his sexual desire meter filled enough not to tempt him to marry another woman to fulfill his sexual desire.

I don't buy this "you can marry multiple times for lust/sexual desire" nonsense.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Could I ask what religion you follow? Just a question...

l

Truthfully I don't really follow a religion, although I don't reject any either. I still consider myself a Muslim although a very casual one. I find the harsh aspects of Islam quite repellent in a lot of ways, but I also really appreciate having been brought up in a Muslim household. The Islamic family system provides a lot of structure I want my kids to have that as well.

 

[Mamoon]

You keep making this point over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Its a redundant point. The male still has to fulfil his duties to his first wife and kids according to the law of polygamy.

I think due to some personal circumstances you are too emotionally invested in maritial discussions to put forward an opinion devoid of emotion. Marriage in itself is a fulfilment of lust. Lust is natural not a naughty word that you seem to think it is.

Animals have a desire for copulation by nature, but only humans marry.

Because, marriage is not a fulfillment of lust.

Its a mutual contract between two people of trust and respect which also serves to fulfill sexual requirements.

There is more responsibilites to marriage than just mating.

Marrying another woman to fulfill your sexual needs is indirectly telling your wife in her face that she is not good enough to fulfill your sexual desires. In short, she's incapable.

This itself throws the respect and honor out of the window.

And what is the solution if a woman's lust and desire can't be fulfilled by one man?

Why can't she marry multiple men and swap beds every night to avoid the same boredom men suffer from?

Sorry I forgot, because its haram.

Logic and the mullah version of Islam don't go hand in hand.

 

[Mamoon]

Performing more than one Hajj should be banned.

Its not a wordly thing, its a religious ritual. Some people cannot afford to do even one, while others can afford to do so multiple times.

Any mode of worship that requires financial power to perform is no worship.

 

[shaykh]

Problem is, you fail to realize that Quran is a guidance book and so are the hadiths.

Its not possible to replicate a 1400 year old society in today's world, otherwide, we should all be riding camels since that counts as a sunnah as well.

We have a free will, and its our duty to interpret the Quran. You don't need to be a scholar or a have a degree for that. This isn't a license.

Even religious scholars/Molvis have their own agenda.

They will loathe Non Muslims and spread their voice using Made in Japan speakers.

They'll read the Quran wearing glasses which will have a made in America frame.

They will talk on how a non Muslim will go to hell on a cellphone that is a non muslims invention.

They will go to Hajj on aircraft which is an American invention, courtesy of the Wright brothers.

Best of all, they will speak on how pictures are not allowed in Islam but will pray 5 times a day in a mosque with wallet in pocket and that wallet containing notes with pictures of Quaid e azam.

There are tableeghi people in my neighborhood and they are particulary proud over the fact that they have done Hajj and Umrah collectively more than 50 times but, there are servants in their household, who haven't done it once. Instead of hitting a half century which neither Allah nor Muhammad PBUH wanted you to score, you could have helped the poor people fulfill their wish of doing one as well.

There is no productive and practical contribution that a religious scholar or Molvi makes to the society, rather than self contradict himself and bend Islam to fulfill his needs.

If you go in accordance to the Molvi's of today, you will be of no use to the world but who cares, the world is irrelevant and the only thing that is important is a certain fairyland which no one has seen.

If the world isn't important, die now. Don't be a waste of space.

So please, don't talk about custom interpretations of Islam. Everyone is the guilty party in here.

As opposed to yourself who interprets Islam based on his emotions...

Islam isn't a book of guidance...the rules are supposed to be followed...the Prophet implemented rules...he didn't offer choices...the Quran is full of verses which speak about ruling by what Allah has revealed...obligations and prohibitions and permissions...something you seem to be blind to...

And since you feel Islam is nothing but guidance then I suppose you see Salat as a suggestion...or the payment of zakat as a suggestion...

Islam is not a DIY thing...if everyone treated it as that then everyone would have their own version of Islam...

Yours is based primarily on your emotions and not on scripture...

And just to add you clearly miss the point of Islam being applicable to all times...go read up on ijtihad and then you will realise that your views have absolutely nothing to do with Islam...

 

[shaykh]

^ Leave those poor souls alone Shaykh. Leaving your birth religion and years of indoctrination is hard, very very hard. It was hard enough for me at least, so I don't blame the others

Thing is I have not attacked the actual guys have presented Islam on here...

I may not agree with them but I can respect their position cos we are discussing the same thing...

They believe in their creed and thus believe what emanates from it to be correct...I can respect that...

Its the likes of Javelin and Mamoon who misrepresent Islam that I find ludicrous cos they aren't even discussing Islam yet feel they have something to contribute to a discussion on it...

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Animals have a desire for copulation by nature, but only humans marry.

Because, marriage is not a fulfillment of lust.

Its a mutual contract between two people of trust and respect which also serves to fulfill sexual requirements.

There is more responsibilites to marriage than just mating.

Marrying another woman to fulfill your sexual needs is indirectly telling your wife in her face that she is not good enough to fulfill your sexual desires. In short, she's incapable.

This itself throws the respect and honor out of the window.

And what is the solution if a woman's lust and desire can't be fulfilled by one man?

Why can't she marry multiple men and swap beds every night to avoid the same boredom men suffer from?

Sorry I forgot, because its haram.

Logic and the mullah version of Islam don't go hand in hand.

So everything that existed until your birth is Mullah version of Islam. You were created to free us from these shackles. Thanks my friend.

I asked you a question previously, that why is polygamy restricted to 4 if its a charitable deed. You had no reply, your logic failed you. Your answer is essentially because thats what Allah said.

The same applies for female polygamy. Allah has forbidden it so we accept it. Its probably a lot easier to be a satellite father moving between households than a satellite mother too.

Anything you disbelieve in becomes 'Mullah Version'. Its quite pathetic. Either man up and have a discussion based on scriptures, discuss the hadith, interpret them, give us examples from Islamic history and intepret the countless marriages that the Prophet(saw) oversaw that were polygamy for lust and we will consider your point.

While 'I think' might be very good for you and your loved ones, most people don't care unless you can back it up with evidence of some sort.

 

[ElRaja]

Its probably a lot easier to be a satellite father moving between households than a satellite mother too.

no need to be a satellite mother, one of my mates gran had 8 sons all by different men, she kept em all in her house, lol. real yardy

 

[shaykh]

Animals have a desire for copulation by nature, but only humans marry.

Because, marriage is not a fulfillment of lust.

Its a mutual contract between two people of trust and respect which also serves to fulfill sexual requirements.

There is more responsibilites to marriage than just mating.

Marrying another woman to fulfill your sexual needs is indirectly telling your wife in her face that she is not good enough to fulfill your sexual desires. In short, she's incapable.

This itself throws the respect and honor out of the window.

And what is the solution if a woman's lust and desire can't be fulfilled by one man?

Why can't she marry multiple men and swap beds every night to avoid the same boredom men suffer from?

Sorry I forgot, because its haram.

Logic and the mullah version of Islam don't go hand in hand.

Mamoon...

Other than your own thought process what have you got scripture wise to refute anything about polygamy...

FACT - Allah allows polygamy...
FACT - Allah doesn't stipulate reasons for why to get married...you CAN marry your first wife out of lust if you so want to...so can she....
FACT - If Allah permits it then that's it really...you logic based arguments aren't relevant...

Rules don't determine belief...Belief determines you acceptance of rules...

If you want to be taken seriously then present scripture to prove your point...your own emotions have no role in this discussion...

 

[Ims1]

Animals have a desire for copulation by nature, but only humans marry.

Because, marriage is not a fulfillment of lust.

Its a mutual contract between two people of trust and respect which also serves to fulfill sexual requirements.

There is more responsibilites to marriage than just mating.

Marrying another woman to fulfill your sexual needs is indirectly telling your wife in her face that she is not good enough to fulfill your sexual desires. In short, she's incapable.

This itself throws the respect and honor out of the window.

And what is the solution if a woman's lust and desire can't be fulfilled by one man?

Why can't she marry multiple men and swap beds every night to avoid the same boredom men suffer from?

Sorry I forgot, because its haram.

Logic and the mullah version of Islam don't go hand in hand.

You nailed it Mamoo

 

[Mamoon]

Venom, The "Allah says so" creates a contradiction when you look at it from the sexual desire angle.

Both genders have it, why it is allowed for one only?

Polygamy for protection doesn't create this contradiction, because a woman can't give protection and security to a man.

Regarding why only 4? when a lot of men maybe able to sustain 5/6 women, I accept that no one has an answer, its like I asking why there are only 3 faraz rakaat in Maghrib prayer.

My question regarding the limit on number of wives from a lust POV was a wrong one because the number is irrelevant. Whether its three, five, twenty etc doesn't matter.

The only thing that is in question is the logic and reasoning behind the concept of polygamy.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Venom, The "Allah says so" creates a contradiction when you look at it from the sexual desire angle.

Both genders have it, why it is allowed for one only?

Polygamy for protection doesn't create this contradiction, because a woman can't give protection and security to a man.

Regarding why only 4? when a lot of men maybe able to sustain 5/6 women, I accept that no one has an answer, its like I asking why there are only 3 faraz rakaat in Maghrib prayer.

My question regarding the limit on number of wives from a lust POV was a wrong one because the number is irrelevant. Whether its three, five, twenty etc doesn't matter.

The only thing that is in question is the logic and reasoning behind the concept of polygamy.

Says who?

 

[Mamoon]

I never claimed that I am here to save everyone or my say is final, I am only presenting my opinion and debating on why I disagree with yours.

I believe adding "IMO" before every post is not necessary to make it my opinion only.

 

[Haroon786]

Epic discussion is going on, just have to sit tight and watch.

 

[Mamoon]

Says who?

I do.

In our society, the man is the sustainer and the cheif provider which automatically makes him responsible for the safety of the family.

In families where the women works, she is the one to provide the financial security. But, it doesn't end there.

By default, the male specie is the dominant one. A male Lion is leader of the pack, not a female one.

Swapping the roles of men and women is not natural.

 

[Mamoon]

Mamoon...

Other than your own thought process what have you got scripture wise to refute anything about polygamy...

FACT - Allah allows polygamy...
FACT - Allah doesn't stipulate reasons for why to get married...you CAN marry your first wife out of lust if you so want to...so can she....
FACT - If Allah permits it then that's it really...you logic based arguments aren't relevant...

Rules don't determine belief...Belief determines you acceptance of rules...

If you want to be taken seriously then present scripture to prove your point...your own emotions have no role in this discussion...

Religion does not teach you morals. If you think its the source to differentiate between good and bad, moral and immoral, you are grossly mistaken.

A lot of athiest people do charity, they don't hurt feelings of others and don't commit crimes. Who taught them that? Clearly, not religion.

The purpose of the above paraghraph was to emphasize on the point that marrying again for no reason other than lust is an immoral, selfish behavior.

You think a woman will not be hurt to see her husband marry again to fulfill his sexual needs?

What will she think of herself?

How is this justified, ethically and morally.

The reason why I don't believe in this theory is because there is too much emphasis in Islam on not to hurt the feelings of others.

 

[Haroon786]

Personally, think that Mamoon in the context of what he's suggesting (hurting the previous wife's sentiments) is correct about the potential immorality about polygamy, however I'm also sure that it in Islamic law, you can have 4 wives at a time, but in a certain situation, when you are morally obliged to attend to each of them in a just and impartial manner, the wives will also have to be satisfied with the extra relationships, otherwise IMO this peripheral manner of conducting Islam is wrong and just contrary to the spirit of our religion.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I do.

In our society, the man is the sustainer and the cheif provider which automatically makes him responsible for the safety of the family.

In families where the women works, she is the one to provide the financial security. But, it doesn't end there.

By default, the male specie is the dominant one. A male Lion is leader of the pack, not a female one.

Swapping the roles of men and women is not natural.

This exact same argument is used by many pro-polygamy people.

 

[Ummer Khan]

Problem is, you fail to realize that Quran is a guidance book and so are the hadiths.

Its not possible to replicate a 1400 year old society in today's world, otherwide, we should all be riding camels since that counts as a sunnah as well.

We have a free will, and its our duty to interpret the Quran. You don't need to be a scholar or a have a degree for that. This isn't a license.

Even religious scholars/Molvis have their own agenda.

They will loathe Non Muslims and spread their voice using Made in Japan speakers.

They'll read the Quran wearing glasses which will have a made in America frame.

They will talk on how a non Muslim will go to hell on a cellphone that is a non muslims invention.

They will go to Hajj on aircraft which is an American invention, courtesy of the Wright brothers.

Best of all, they will speak on how pictures are not allowed in Islam but will pray 5 times a day in a mosque with wallet in pocket and that wallet containing notes with pictures of Quaid e azam.

There are tableeghi people in my neighborhood and they are particulary proud over the fact that they have done Hajj and Umrah collectively more than 50 times but, there are servants in their household, who haven't done it once. Instead of hitting a half century which neither Allah nor Muhammad PBUH wanted you to score, you could have helped the poor people fulfill their wish of doing one as well.

There is no productive and practical contribution that a religious scholar or Molvi makes to the society, rather than self contradict himself and bend Islam to fulfill his needs.


If the world isn't important, die now. Don't be a waste of space.

So please, don't talk about custom interpretations of Islam. Everyone is the guilty party in here.

Yes of course it is but it has to be followed in letter and spirit.

U seem to be confused brother. Nowhere is it mentioned in Quran that u have to be a good scholar, moulvi or mufti.; it simply demands us to be a good muslim.

A person can pass great islamic judgments(mufti) but he may be a BAD muslim, likewise somebody can have wealth of knowledge about islamic affairs(aalim) but there is still a possibility that he can be still categorized as bad muslim.


Yes therein lies the problem, most of the religious scholars we see around us these days are literates in islamic studies but are not necessarily educated and lack wisdom.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Personally, think that Mamoon in the context of what he's suggesting (hurting the previous wife's sentiments) is correct about the potential immorality about polygamy, however I'm also sure that it is Islamic law that you can have 4 wives at a time, but in a certain situation, when you are morally obliged to attend to each of them in a just and impartial manner, moreover the wives will also have to be satisfied with the extra relationships, otherwise IMO this peripheral manner of conducting Islam is wrong and just contrary to the spirit of our religion.

If a woman feels strongly anti polygamy then she should refuse to enter such a union.

Its quite simple.

 

[Haroon786]

If a woman feels strongly anti polygamy then she should refuse to enter such a union.

Its quite simple.

Agreed.

Than what exactly was the debate about ?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Agreed.

Than what exactly was the debate about ?

About the reasons regarding its permissibility.

Was quite interesting!

 

[Haroon786]

About the reasons regarding its permissibility.

Was quite interesting!

IMO, it is quite basic.

If the females involved in the contract are happy with the deal, than it's fine; if the converse is true, than it's not.

Don't really see anymore to it.

 

[Ummer Khan]

also if all islamic rules etc are applicable in this age as well, will you all allow a muslim man to marry a minor aging under 10?

The Suitable Age For Marriage
Question:

What is the suitable age for marriage for men and women, because some young women do not accept marriage from those who are older than them? Likewise, some men do not marry women who are older than them. We request a response and may Allaah reward you with goodness.
Answer:

I advise young women not to refuse marriage from a man due to his age, such as being ten, twenty or thirty years older than her. This is not a reason, because the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi was salam, married 'A'ishah, may Allaah be pleased with her, when he was fifty-three years old and she was a girl of nine years old. So being older does not harm. There is no sin in the woman being older, nor any sin in the man being older, because the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi was salam, married Khadijah, may Allaah be pleased with her, when she was forty years old and he was twenty-five years old, before the Revelation came to him, sallallaahu alayhi was salam; that is, she, may Allaah be pleased with her, was fifteen years older than him. Then he married 'A'ishah, may Allaah be pleased with her, when she was small - six or seven years old and he was fifty-three years old.
Many of those who speak on the radio or television deter people from marriage between men and women of differing ages - this is all wrong & saying such things is not permissable for them. It is obligatory for a woman to look at the (prospective) husband, and if he is righteous and suitable, she should agree, even if he is older than her. Similarly, a man should devote himself to finding a righteous, religious woman, even if she is older than him, if she is still young and still fertile. In short, the age should not be an excuse and it should not be considered something shameful, as long as the man is righteous and the woman is righteous. May Allaah reform the situation of us all.

Shaykh `Abdul-`Azeez Bin Baz
Fatawa Islamiyah, volume 5, The Book of Marriage, page 169-170

 

[Mamoon]

Since Quran is a rule book and not guidance book,

what will you do in this situation?

Suppose your neighbor is a Hindu, and you have the option to sacrifice a cow or a goat, what will you?

Your sacrifice will be acceptable both ways, but sacrificing a cow will hurt the feelings of your Hindu neighbor because having a cow slaughtered in front of his eyes will hurt his sentiments.

Quran and scriptures doesn't stop you from sacrificing a cow infront of a Hindu, but will you be justified in doing so?

What does your morals say?

What will the rights of neighbors in Islam say about this?

If you believe than polygamy in Islam is allowed on the ground of lusting/sexual desires, your contradicting what Islam teaches you about morals.

Unless you find the interpretation of morals subjective to satisfy your agenda.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

You are the one bringing in subjective morals. Your own views on sex/lust etc and applying them across the board.

The Quran doesn't mention what animals to sacrifice. It does mention marrying four women ( with no conditions apart from equal treatment).

 

[shaykh]

Religion does not teach you morals. If you think its the source to differentiate between good and bad, moral and immoral, you are grossly mistaken.

A lot of athiest people do charity, they don't hurt feelings of others and don't commit crimes. Who taught them that? Clearly, not religion.

The purpose of the above paraghraph was to emphasize on the point that marrying again for no reason other than lust is an immoral, selfish behavior.

You think a woman will not be hurt to see her husband marry again to fulfill his sexual needs?

What will she think of herself?

How is this justified, ethically and morally.

The reason why I don't believe in this theory is because there is too much emphasis in Islam on not to hurt the feelings of others.

Good actions are defined by Allah and so are bad actions...can you tell me what is inherently immoral about eating swine or reptiles?...nothing objectively but as a Muslim you don't do it because Allah has set the parameters for what is acceptable...

In the same vein Allah has set parameters regarding polygamy...it is acceptable to marry upto four women and a reason is not required...show me in the scripture where it states you must marry your wife for this and this reason...you won't find it...

And yes I don't believe but I also know my actions aren't recognised by Islam cos I don't do them to please Allah...for a Muslim only the actions he does to please Allah are recognised...moral acts themselves do not become moral themselves in the eyes of creed...

And I also have rational disagreements with the idea of polygamy as I have raised here...but the difference with your perspective is you are reforming Islam to suit your own ideas...the 'Islam wouldn't say that' argument as opposed to looking at what Islam actually says...

Ethics and morals are defined by Islam if you are a Muslim...so look at the scripture to determine what is ethical and moral...and polygamy is fine...

If you're a Muslim and you are convinced that Islam is the word of God then you should be happy to accept that which is within it...not reform it to fit in with what makes you feel comfortable...

You don't believe it cos you don't like it...when really your belief should hinge on whether the scripture says it or not...

 

[Pakz]

Epic discussion is going on, just have to sit tight and watch.

Yes. Seems like a good discussion, although I don't really disagree with either view. From different perspectives the reasons are valid (well most parts).

What's your take?

Since Quran is a rule book and not guidance book,

If it's guidance, then should it not be followed objectively. However not about ruling and disagreements, but rather reason through understanding and applying.

Although leads to another topic linked to it. Might open a thread one day

 

[Yossarian]

If a woman feels strongly anti polygamy then she should refuse to enter such a union.

Its quite simple.

But the arguement that Mamoon is making revolves around the feelings of the 1st wife when the husband brings in a 2nd.. 3rd...4th ...wife.

At the time of marriage, the 1st wife did'nt know that the man she was marrying would later on bring one or more women to share his bed, whereas the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th wives were entering the relationship with the full knowledge that he already had a wife/wives.

 

[Yossarian]

If it's guidance, then should it not be followed objectively. However not about ruling and disagreements, but rather reason through understanding and applying.

Correct. Which leads back to the point about context and prevailing circumstances.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

But the arguement that Mamoon is making revolves around the feelings of the 1st wife when the husband brings in a 2nd.. 3rd...4th ...wife.

At the time of marriage, the 1st wife did'nt know that the man she was marrying would later on bring one or more women to share his bed, whereas the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th wives were entering the relationship with the full knowledge that he already had a wife/wives.

She can specify it in her original marriage contract.

 

[Haroon786]

Yes. Seems like a good discussion, although I don't really disagree with either view. From different perspectives the reasons are valid (well most parts).

What's your take?

I think that all 4 participants must be openly satisfied with the stipulations of the man sharing relationships with each one of them, however if this isn't met, than the relationship is null and void.

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

Of course it was neccessary, and what about the women whose husbands died?

Polygamy was already a common practise so the ayah being revealed would be redundant because the practise already existed in the society. So your claim once again is a nonsensical one.

Let me rephrase, if you don't know the purpose of polygamy in Islam, you simply haven't thought deeply enough.

My view on polygamy is that Allah has allowed it knowing the nature of man and because it has benefits - some we can gauge and some we can't.

Why do you think the Prophet PBUH married multiple times? to provide shelter, protect women from misuse or for lust?

I'm not going to pretend that I can read Prophet saw's intentions or anyone else's for that matter. I can only drive wisdoms from his decisions.

Why do you think men are allowed to marry more than once? If you think for lust, well that is exactly interpreting Islam to cater your personal needs, no offense.

I'm interpreting Islam the way it was practised by those it was revealed upon. A man's nature doesn't changes, doesn't matter what century he is living in.

Polygamy is applicable in circumstances where you have to provide shelter to another woman, if there is divorced lady or a widow who wants to marry again and there aren't any bachelor men interested, you can marry her.

And that's your opinion because you probably think that men with perfect wives do not cheat, they do, and in my view they should man-up, marry that woman and not use her in private in turn live a life of sin as well as dishonor her in society.

Allowance of polygamy does not mean that you can simply jump from women to women, for fun.

No one's said that it is.

Quran doesn't set the rules for polygamy but its a GUIDANCE book.

A guidance book gives you a point and its your job to interpret.

Yes, a guidance that was interpreted by the Prophet saw himself, his companions, their followers, and their inheritors i.e. the Scholars - none of whom interpret it like you do.

if Quran tells you to be considerate towards your parents, its your job to determine what considerate means.

To determine that, you ought to follow the sunnah.

And the Sunnah doesn't tell me that Prophet saw's forbid a man to marry because he was attracted to a woman.

Now tell me, how many women did the Prophet PBUH marry to for lust? if none, on what basis are you claiming that its okay to marry another woman to fulfill lust?

Even if he saw did not marry for lust, did he ever forbid anyone from doing so? Were his companions all being philanthropic by marrying multiple women?

 

[Ummer Khan]

Since Quran is a rule book and not guidance book,

what will you do in this situation?

Suppose your neighbor is a Hindu, and you have the option to sacrifice a cow or a goat, what will you?

Your sacrifice will be acceptable both ways, but sacrificing a cow will hurt the feelings of your Hindu neighbor because having a cow slaughtered in front of his eyes will hurt his sentiments.

Quran and scriptures doesn't stop you from sacrificing a cow infront of a Hindu, but will you be justified in doing so?

What does your morals say?

What will the rights of neighbors in Islam say about this?



If you believe than polygamy in Islam is allowed on the ground of lusting/sexual desires, your contradicting what Islam teaches you about morals.

Unless you find the interpretation of morals subjective to satisfy your agenda.

Whatever i feel like eating that time?

On a serious note, yes the feelings of the neighbours are to be respected as long as it does not make me do some thing that is contradictory to my beliefs and values.

In such situations u have to show the wisdom, but unfortunately its reserves are pretty low at the moment amongst the muslims. For us there is no concept of middle ground.

 

[Yossarian]

She can specify it in her original marriage contract.

Presumably you mean 'marriage contract' in the sence of Hollywood stars and extremely rich folk draw up marriage contracts stipulating conditions x,y and z?

If so, how many women, never mind muslim women, or for that men, amongst the general population draw up marriage contracts and put in conditions, ie other than those which form part and parcel of the marriage contract itself? Or did so 1400 years ago?

Even in the modern world, it would be rare indeed for a muslim woman, or even a man, to insist on drawing up a marriage specifying such conditions.

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

I understand what you are getting at but there is still a different kind of reaction when a guy says to his wife "The widow of my friend needs support and I think I hold the responsibility and so and so." as opposed to "I'm interested in someone else." Do you get what I mean?

I understand this but it will not stop 'some' men from still cheating on their wives. I just think that it is better to be open about it and legalize such relationships rather than be sinful and carry it in secrecy and continuously lie.

Anyways, Islam has only allowed multiple marriages, it doesn't really encourage them. Muslim women get so much criticism from religious folk when they say that they will never be a part of such marriage, as if they are rejecting something basic like hijab when they're not. It's not right.

Agree, but it goes both ways. Women also hurl all sorts of insults to men that are in multiple relationships as if they are capable of understanding men's struggle whether it be maintaining relationships, avoiding temptations or their general psyche.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Presumably you mean 'marriage contract' in the sence of Hollywood stars and extremely rich folk draw up marriage contracts stipulating conditions x,y and z?

If so, how many women, never mind muslim women, or for that men, amongst the general population draw up marriage contracts and put in conditions, ie other than those which form part and parcel of the marriage contract itself? Or did so 1400 years ago?

Even in the modern world, it would be rare indeed for a muslim woman, or even a man, to insist on drawing up a marriage specifying such conditions.

No thats not what I mean. http://islam.about.com/od/marriage/a/contract.htm

It doesn't matter what the general population do. How many of the 'general population' actually practice polygamy?

If a young woman before entering marriage is quite clear that she doesn't want a polygamous relationship ( as some female posters on this site made quite clear), then there is a way for them to ensure this doesn't occur.

I am only speaking about the law not how widely it is followed. You and Mamoon keep bringing up individual hypothetical cases that you can bring up for any law in the world ( these cases coincidentally keep changing) after every example is shot down.

So basically there are three points.

1. Muslim Men CAN enter polygamous relationships for in the words of Mamoon lust.This is mandated by Quran and Shariah.

2. Islam sets our rules for this marriage ( you cannot abandon your first family).

3. A muslim woman has the legal right to demand at the outset of marriage that her husband marries nobody else.

So which of these statements do you have a problem with?

 

[Radiance Of Australis]

Re: Why in Islam are Men allowed 4 Wives?

engouraging to see the female perspective on this.

you say you´ll never marry, wont your parents disallow this? Wont they go against your decision?

I dont know.
And its not for this reason alone. I just have a lot of personality issues + I always prefer to be alone, spend most of my time alone and I'm also very quiet and introverted.

If she's living in Australia she can marry whoever she likes rather than become one of four wives to a Muslim. I would suggest she break out of her protective parental cocoon and learn to live on her own wits like most other Aussie women.

I live in Canada at the moment BTW
And yeah I agree.

Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk 4

 

[Yossarian]

3. A muslim woman has the legal right to demand at the outset of marriage that her husband marries nobody else.

So which of these statements do you have a problem with?

Some of the arguments in this thread are toing and froing around the issue of whether or not the 1st wife's agreement is required before entering a second marriage.

Any condition that is allowable in Islamic law is allowed to be entered, as long as both parties agree
http://islam.about.com/od/marriage/a/contract.htm

Obviously, if she has'nt drawn drawn up such a contract prior to marriage but she disagree's with him marrying another woman, whether he can or cannot still go ahead is dependent upon which side of the above argument he abides by.

However, if the husband does'nt need the first wife's permission to marry a 2nd wife, and he insists on marrying again, is such a premarital contract still valid/recognised under Islam? (- not arguing, querying).

 

[DeadlyVenom]

There are different opinions about needing the permission of the first wife, if no agreement has been made prior to marriage.

If a pre marital contract has been arranged that stipulates the husband cannot marry again then it is iron clad. He categorically cannot marry again ( of course he can physically marry but it is not recognised under law).

There are a growing number of courses aimed at late teens/early twenties in the UK to educate on marriage and particularly the rights of a woman. This type of stuff gets taught there. Its mainly a female audience and it is important that they are aware of their rights in marriage before entering a union.

The law is clear, if the law isn't understood properly then its an educational issue not an issue with the law itself.

 

[Yossarian]

Polygamy in Islam: The women victims of multiple marriage

When Dr Zabina Shahian married Pervez Choudhry she thought he would be the man with whom she would settle down for the rest of her life and start a family.

But she did not know the former Conservative party leader on Slough Borough Council was still married.

Choudhry, 54, who claimed he did not realise the marriage in Pakistan was legally valid in the UK, was given a community order after admitting bigamy.

A "devastated" Dr Shahian now wants to help other women who are victims of polygamous marriages - a practice a leading family lawyer says is "rife" within the British Muslim community.
Councillor Pervez Choudhry Pervez Choudhry pleaded guilty to bigamy

Dr Shahian believes the episode has meant she has "missed the boat" at starting a family.

The GP, in her 40s from Erdington in Birmingham, spent more than two years and thousands of pounds gathering evidence against Choudhry.

The investigations, which involved a private detective, revealed Choudhry married his first "arranged" wife in 1986, with whom he had three children but never legally divorced.

But Dr Shahian, who did not want her picture published, realises she was lucky, as a career woman, to have been able to afford the detective fees and also to have support from her family to go through with the prosecution.

However she said some members of her local South Asian Muslim community were less understanding.

"When I go down to my parents I get all the neighbours looking at me.

"As a Muslim woman I'm supposed to keep a low profile. I feel like I've committed a crime here although I'm the victim.

"You're supposed to keep your mouth shut and you're supposed to just carry on. It is impregnated into our culture."

Despite this she is determined to help other Muslim women who find themselves the victim of polygamy, women who may not have the same financial security and who may feel cultural pressure not to speak out.

The Choudhry bigamy case was unusual, as more commonly the actions of Muslim men who take more than one wife are not answerable under UK law.
Polygamy 'widespread'

This is because they are able to avoid having their second or third marriages registered in the UK by having a Nikah ceremony instead - an Islamic non-registered marriage contract not recognised under British law.

For a Nikah wedding to be recognised in the UK, the marriage needs to have an accompanying civil ceremony.

Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, director of think tank The Muslim Institute, said men could exploit the "cruel loophole" of the Nikah, allowing them to have more than one wife under Islamic law but not having to register the marriage in the UK, which means the woman would have no spousal rights if the marriage were to fail.
Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui says some Muslim men exploit the "cruel loophole" of the Nikah

"They dump their first wife and simply go to Pakistan, Bangladesh or wherever and marry again," he said.

Leading family solicitor Annemarie Hutchinson, who represents Muslim women, said no official statistics were available but that Dr Shahian joined thousands of Muslim women in the UK who were victims of polygamous marriages.

"There are lots and lots of second marriages and second wives - it's rife."

But in cases where prosecution would be possible, she said there would be no case "unless the first or second wife pushes for it".

"It's bigamy but the police won't prosecute because there would be thousands of cases," she said.

A Muslim Marriage Working Group, set up by the Ministry of Justice, met on Monday for the first time to identify the issues "some Muslim women experience when they do not have a legally registered marriage", according to a spokesman.

But combating a cultural pressure on some Muslim women is difficult, says Dr Siddiqui.

Polygamy "is so widely spread they don't blame men having a second wife or a third or fourth wife," he said.

"They accept this is their lot."

Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain and who is an imam, said in the Koran it stated men were allowed to take more than one wife, but only under strict rules that included obtaining consent from the first wife and treating all wives equally and fairly.

He did not think there were many polygamous marriages in the UK but "condemned" the actions of men who flout the polygamy rules.

He also described as "sad" the "cultural pressures" that prevent women standing up for justice.

"Whatever cultural norms there may be, what Islam does not allow is the mistreatment of women, full stop."

Dr Shahian said: "Islam does not allow deceit and lies, but there are a lot of women who, due to their circumstances and due to their financial problems, accept being the second wife.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-18252958

 

[Yossarian]

Polygamous Marriages under Muslim Family Laws in Pakistan

Polygamous Marriages:MFLO has also introduced some reforms in the law relating to polygamy. Now, a husband must submit an application and pay a prescribed fee to the local union council in order to obtain permission for contracting a polygamous marriage. Thereafter, the chairman of the union council forms an arbitration council with representatives of both husband and wife/wives in order to determine the necessity of the proposed marriage. The application must state whether the husband has obtained consent of the existing wife or wives. Contracting a polygamous marriage without prior consent is subject to penalties of fine and or imprisonment and the husband becomes bound to make immediate payment of dowry to the existing wife or wives. Nonetheless, if the husband has not obtained consent of the existing wife or wives the subsequent marriage still remains valid.
http://pakistanilaws.wordpress.com/...arriages-validity-under-pakistani-muslim-law/

ZAMAN VARDAG Advocates & Consultants

is a Full Service Pakistani Law Firm based in Lahore

So, on the one hand there is a legal requirement to go through an arbitration council to get married to another woman, and getting married without consent of the existing wife is an offence punishable by fines or imprisonment, but the marriage is still valid? Eh...

 

[Ims1]

I know 2 people who have more than a wife . One is 60 years old ,has 2 wives living in separate floors of same house . Other has 3 wives ,he is 38 & all live separately .

Both cases ,some common themes, hubby spends most time with the youngest wife & all wives & their kids despise each other .

 

[KB-24]

Problem is, you fail to realize that Quran is a guidance book and so are the hadiths.

Its not possible to replicate a 1400 year old society in today's world, otherwide, we should all be riding camels since that counts as a sunnah as well.

We have a free will, and its our duty to interpret the Quran. You don't need to be a scholar or a have a degree for that. This isn't a license.

Even religious scholars/Molvis have their own agenda.

They will loathe Non Muslims and spread their voice using Made in Japan speakers.

They'll read the Quran wearing glasses which will have a made in America frame.

They will talk on how a non Muslim will go to hell on a cellphone that is a non muslims invention.

They will go to Hajj on aircraft which is an American invention, courtesy of the Wright brothers.

Best of all, they will speak on how pictures are not allowed in Islam but will pray 5 times a day in a mosque with wallet in pocket and that wallet containing notes with pictures of Quaid e azam.

There are tableeghi people in my neighborhood and they are particulary proud over the fact that they have done Hajj and Umrah collectively more than 50 times but, there are servants in their household, who haven't done it once. Instead of hitting a half century which neither Allah nor Muhammad PBUH wanted you to score, you could have helped the poor people fulfill their wish of doing one as well.

There is no productive and practical contribution that a religious scholar or Molvi makes to the society, rather than self contradict himself and bend Islam to fulfill his needs.

If you go in accordance to the Molvi's of today, you will be of no use to the world but who cares, the world is irrelevant and the only thing that is important is a certain fairyland which no one has seen.

If the world isn't important, die now. Don't be a waste of space.

So please, don't talk about custom interpretations of Islam. Everyone is the guilty party in here.

No, the problem is you fail to realize that the Qur'an is a book of guidance AND rules.

As for the Maulvis/Shuyuks/Muftis/Aalims they express opposition against western tradition & culture which is contradictory to Islam.

Things are common to all human beings and so they are allowed whether they be western or eastern. So for example, using speakers for delivering Khutbahs is not hypocritical.

The problems of mankind remain the same throughout centuries, what changes are the tools/things through which man solves these problems. Therefore, if camels were used for travel back then, today we have cars and airplanes for doing that and this is completely allowed in Islam which is what makes it evergreen and not limited to 7th century Arabia.

As for interpretation, none of us is allowed to do so except for the Prophet SAW who embodied the Qur'an through his practice (Sunnah). That's how Qur'an is meant to be implemented and the best examples after Him SAW, were his Sahaba (RAA). That's what Islam was, is, and will continue to be till the end. The more we try to stray away from that the further trouble we'll run in to. The current situation of the Muslims is a reflection of abandoning Islam as taught by Rasul Allah SAW and practiced by the Sahaba (RAA).

 

[Eagle_Eye]

You are the one bringing in subjective morals. Your own views on sex/lust etc and applying them across the board.
The Quran doesn't mention what animals to sacrifice. It does mention marrying four women ( with no conditions apart from equal treatment).

DV- Can you please quote the exact verses here.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

'Marry woman of your choice in twos' threes' or fours' but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, (with them), then only one'

 

[Eagle_Eye]

'Marry woman of your choice in twos' threes' or fours' but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, (with them), then only one'

Ok thanks. Thats pretty unequivocal.

Would be god to delve into the backdrop.

 

[shaykh]

Ok thanks. Thats pretty unequivocal.

Would be god to delve into the backdrop.

Ibn Kathir's Tafsir:

The Permission to Marry Four Women Print E-mail
Allah's statement,

﴿مَثْنَى وَثُلَـثَ وَرُبَاعَ﴾

(two or three, or four), means, marry as many women as you like, other than the orphan girls, two, three or four. We should mention that Allah's statement in another Ayah,

﴿جَاعِلِ الْمَلَـئِكَةِ رُسُلاً أُوْلِى أَجْنِحَةٍ مَّثْنَى وَثُلَـثَ وَرُبَـعَ﴾

(Who made the angels messengers with wings, - two or three or four) ﴿35:1﴾, does not mean that other angels do not have more than four wings, as there are proofs that some angels do have more wings. Yet, men are prohibited from marrying more than four wives, as the Ayah decrees, since the Ayah specifies what men are allowed of wives, as Ibn `Abbas and the majority of scholars stated. If it were allowed for them to have more than four wives, the Ayah would have mentioned it.

Imam Ahmad recorded that Salim said that his father said that Ghilan bin Salamah Ath-Thaqafi had ten wives when he became Muslim, and the Prophet said to him, "Choose any four of them (and divorce the rest).''

During the reign of `Umar, Ghilan divorced his remaining wives and divided his money between his children. When `Umar heard news of this, he said to Ghilan, "I think that the devil has conveyed to your heart the news of your imminent death, from what the devil hears during his eavesdropping. It may as well be that you will not remain alive but for a little longer. By Allah! You will take back your wives and your money, or I will take possession of this all and will order that your grave be stoned as is the case with the grave of Abu Righal (from Thamud, who was saved from their fate because he was in the Sacred Area. But, when he left it, he was tormented like they were).''

Ash-Shafi`i, At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Bayhaqi collected this Hadith up to the Prophet's statement, "Choose any four of them.'' Only Ahmad collected the full version of this Hadith. Therefore, had it been allowed for men to marry more than four women at the same time, the Prophet would have allowed Ghilan to keep more than four of his wives since they all embraced Islam with him. When the Prophet commanded him to keep just four of them and divorce the rest, this indicated that men are not allowed to keep more than four wives at a time under any circumstances. If this is the case concerning those who already had more than four wives upon embracing Islam, then this ruling applies even more so to marrying more than four.

 

[Yossarian]

 

[Jadz]

I wrote an article about this topic a while ago, so for anyone interested -

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?t=111436&highlight=Permission+marry+upto+wives

 

[shakil]

View attachment 40697

But they are in front of him

 

[Yossarian]

But they are in front of him

Perhaps he wants to make sure they won't change their minds later on the pretext they find his actions 'distasteful'.

 

[FreeBird]

Why in Islam are Men allowed 4 Wives?

Can we reverse the question and ask,

Why non-Islamic religions not allow more one marriage? or do they?

 

[Jadz]

The Suitable Age For Marriage
Question:

What is the suitable age for marriage for men and women, because some young women do not accept marriage from those who are older than them? Likewise, some men do not marry women who are older than them. We request a response and may Allaah reward you with goodness.
Answer:

I advise young women not to refuse marriage from a man due to his age, such as being ten, twenty or thirty years older than her. This is not a reason, because the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi was salam, married 'A'ishah, may Allaah be pleased with her, when he was fifty-three years old and she was a girl of nine years old. So being older does not harm. There is no sin in the woman being older, nor any sin in the man being older, because the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi was salam, married Khadijah, may Allaah be pleased with her, when she was forty years old and he was twenty-five years old, before the Revelation came to him, sallallaahu alayhi was salam; that is, she, may Allaah be pleased with her, was fifteen years older than him. Then he married 'A'ishah, may Allaah be pleased with her, when she was small - six or seven years old and he was fifty-three years old.
Many of those who speak on the radio or television deter people from marriage between men and women of differing ages - this is all wrong & saying such things is not permissable for them. It is obligatory for a woman to look at the (prospective) husband, and if he is righteous and suitable, she should agree, even if he is older than her. Similarly, a man should devote himself to finding a righteous, religious woman, even if she is older than him, if she is still young and still fertile. In short, the age should not be an excuse and it should not be considered something shameful, as long as the man is righteous and the woman is righteous. May Allaah reform the situation of us all.

Shaykh `Abdul-`Azeez Bin Baz
Fatawa Islamiyah, volume 5, The Book of Marriage, page 169-170

The Fatwa, judgement, of our learned Sheikh contains a self-evident contradiction. Namely: '... It is obligatory for a woman to look at the (prospective) husband, and if he is righteous and suitable, she should agree, even if he is older than her...'

1) It is not possible for a girl of 6 or 9 or 12, to "look at" any man as a prospective husband, simply because she is too young, immature, and unworldly, to know what marriage entails.

2) A girl of very young age is under the care and guardianship of her family, parents, or relatives. To decide upon marriage requires independence, knowledge, and choice. In the absence of these, it would fall to the guardians to choose, what they believe, to be a suitable choice. However, the choice would, thus, be theirs, and not hers. Which makes such a marriage null and void. It is not only the male who has the absolute right to choose his own spouse, it is the inalienable right of the female too.

3) Marriage entails responsibility, of a type only an individual with a degree of maturity is able to understand and fulfil. The rights and responsibilities of a Muslim wife, therefore, cannot - reasonably, or in all fairness - be properly comprehended by a child of 6, 9, 12, and so on.

4) There is no proof, forthcoming from the Qur'an, that Aye'shah (rda) was as young as is reported in Ahaadeeth. In fact, there are Verses in the Qur'an which contradict this supposition, or belief. In any case, we cannot employ the age of one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) as a standard, or measure, for all Muslim women. Since they were in a uniquely different position, and were honoured with the position of 'Mothers of the Faithful', as the wives of the Messenger, their role and tasks were not comparable to that of normal wives.

In sum, I entirely agree in that age should not be a barrier to marriage. However, it is a significant factor, if only because it is an indicator as to level of maturity, knowledge, understanding, about the marriage contract, and the rights, responsibilities of both participating parties.

Personally speaking, I am totally against young girls being coerced, bullied, forced, or pressured into marriage. Islam has the over-riding principle and concept of "there shall be no coercion in matters of faith" - Q2:256 - and this extends beyond ritual worship, and includes, embraces, all aspects and facets of a believer's life. Thus, in the absence of choice - or the ability to make a choice - no young girl should be permitted to enter into marriage.

Wa Llahu 'Alam

 

[Jadz]

Can we reverse the question and ask,

Why non-Islamic religions not allow more one marriage? or do they?

Most religions did permit men to take more than one wife - Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism - but in recent times the practice has declined -


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy

 

[LA Guy]

I am not sure if it is my observation or a common practice, what I have a noted that there seems to be a connection between religion and lust and I am not taking about a perticular religion or country.
I started noticing it when I was 12 years old and this middle age man was assinged by my mother to help me recite the Quran, i never liked him he would never look at me always looking down or looking at me from the side of his eyes, the way he looked at other members of my family was disgusting. I caught him more than one time in a very unappropraite way when he was alone in the room waiting for me, make a long story short I went through the whole progarm with him for six months and then my mother wanted to hire him for my younger sister. i talked to my Dad and with lot of protest my mother agreed to find a woman to teach my sister.
After high school I moved to the States first in Illinois and then i moved here to Los Angeles which is where I live with my wife, what I noticed through the years that the more religious you are or pretend to be the more lusty you become. There are countless cases of Hindu holy men and gurus accused of forcing their young deciples in to having relationship with them and quite a few have been caught raping young women and young boys.
Thousands of catholic priests have been caught having forced mostly young boys and in some cases young girls into sex and now the church is involved in paying billions of dollars in demages to these boys and girls and more cases are coming every day.
I bet if anyone look into these men married to multiple women in any country that allow it you will find that these men are very religious, just like the case of Mormons in the States, quite a few of these men with upto six or seven wives are head of their churches and are pastors.
We own a Boutique here in the city and mostly it is my wife's cup of tea, she runs it and takes care of it and I have a different work, we have three employees all from India, one of the employee who is our best producer, very good at what she does, dependable always smiling and a very low maintanance worker, she is a Christan from India and fairly religious, goes to Church every Sunday.
Since our store is open 7 days i worked there every Saturday so my wife can relax and we both are there on Sundays, I was noticing that this man would come every Sunday and talked to this employee for about an hour and he was not her husband becuase I see her husband in the evening when he come to pick her up, so I asked her who he was and she said he was the pastor from their church and he come to see her and pray for her on Sundays, i did not have any problem with that as long as it does not disrupt the business, any way about few months ago she cam to our office wanted to talk to us and she was crying, I got concerned got a her a glass of water and asked her what is the matter and she said Sir i do not want you to talk to someone else about it but I want you to talk to the pastor that come here and tell him not to come here anymore, I said I have have no problem but why don't you tell him yourself and she started crying more so i said ok ok don't worry i will take care of it but what happened? first she didn't want to tell but then she spilled it out.
Apparently a few Sunday's back her husband was noy able to pick her up so this pastor offered to give her a ride home and on the way to her house stoped at a motel and asked her to spend some time with her in the room before droping her home, she said that she could not believe it and freaked out statred screaming and he got scared and said no problem think about it and may be we can do this some other time
I was appalled and angry at the same time and suggested that she should talk to her husband and othere family members and also to the members of the Church and officials but she said no becuase nobody will believe it and they will blame her and she requested me not to talk to her husband, I asked her if she wanted to file a police report and she decline that aswell
The priest showed up like a clock work that evening and I stoped her at the door and he in his usuall way very polite and humble and statred blessing me and the store but this time I stoped him in the middle and asked very nicely not to come there anymore becuase it was a private place of buisness and he was disrupting our employee to do her job and if he wanted to pray for her and give her the blessing he can do it in the church, at this point he realize that i know about the incident and instead of leaving quitely he started to get smart, what do you mean private? this is a public place and that i was discreminating against him and he will lodge a compliant. I was furious but I kept calm and said listen sir I do not care what you do but this is a private place and if you want a public place it is the side walk out side the door and i suggest that you go to your public place right now or I will call the police.
I found out later that she changed her Church and now go to a different place
So I don't know may be it is true or just my imagination but I have seen and read a lot of stories about these so called religious men and thier lust

 

[endymion248]

Animals have a desire for copulation by nature, but only humans marry.

Because, marriage is not a fulfillment of lust.

Many animals can be in monogamous for life. Marriage is a fulfillment of lust in order to perpetuate one's species through the resulting progeniture.

Different animals have different strategies. Some are monogamous, some are polygamous males only (lions), some polygamous female only and some, finally, polyamorous (ourang-outans for example). These strategies are adapted to one's environment and the skills of one's kids. For example, human kids are among the most worthless kids in their early year and can't survive on their own or with one parent only. Humans form couples where the male is the provider. Behaviourist theories postulate that this is the origin of bipedia. Why is it that we don't have polyamoric societies or several males providing for one female, since this would increase chances of children surviving? There are many different hypothesis but, empirically, we see that human children need a bond with a specific couple (see kibutzi societies). The main reason is that, if mates are randomly chosen, and one female can have several mates taking turns and all providing, there is no way of chosing the best genes for the progeniture and the species is no longer adapted to its (changing or not) environment.

This is the reason why, in an environment where ressources are unequally distributed between males, polygamy comes perfectly natural to them while, even in an environment where ressources are equally distributed, there is no reason for having female polygamy.

It is not necessarily applicable to modern society but you can't just go around idealizing your perfect version of marriage by ignoring the origin of human relationships and why we are as we are.

 

[shaykh]

The Fatwa, judgement, of our learned Sheikh contains a self-evident contradiction. Namely: '... It is obligatory for a woman to look at the (prospective) husband, and if he is righteous and suitable, she should agree, even if he is older than her...'

1) It is not possible for a girl of 6 or 9 or 12, to "look at" any man as a prospective husband, simply because she is too young, immature, and unworldly, to know what marriage entails.

2) A girl of very young age is under the care and guardianship of her family, parents, or relatives. To decide upon marriage requires independence, knowledge, and choice. In the absence of these, it would fall to the guardians to choose, what they believe, to be a suitable choice. However, the choice would, thus, be theirs, and not hers. Which makes such a marriage null and void. It is not only the male who has the absolute right to choose his own spouse, it is the inalienable right of the female too.

3) Marriage entails responsibility, of a type only an individual with a degree of maturity is able to understand and fulfil. The rights and responsibilities of a Muslim wife, therefore, cannot - reasonably, or in all fairness - be properly comprehended by a child of 6, 9, 12, and so on.

4) There is no proof, forthcoming from the Qur'an, that Aye'shah (rda) was as young as is reported in Ahaadeeth. In fact, there are Verses in the Qur'an which contradict this supposition, or belief. In any case, we cannot employ the age of one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) as a standard, or measure, for all Muslim women. Since they were in a uniquely different position, and were honoured with the position of 'Mothers of the Faithful', as the wives of the Messenger, their role and tasks were not comparable to that of normal wives.

In sum, I entirely agree in that age should not be a barrier to marriage. However, it is a significant factor, if only because it is an indicator as to level of maturity, knowledge, understanding, about the marriage contract, and the rights, responsibilities of both participating parties.

Personally speaking, I am totally against young girls being coerced, bullied, forced, or pressured into marriage. Islam has the over-riding principle and concept of "there shall be no coercion in matters of faith" - Q2:256 - and this extends beyond ritual worship, and includes, embraces, all aspects and facets of a believer's life. Thus, in the absence of choice - or the ability to make a choice - no young girl should be permitted to enter into marriage.

Wa Llahu 'Alam

With respect its been established plenty on this forum that you reject Sahih hadith...and it seems now you reject Quran too...

You also consistently dispute the legitimacy of scholars when presenting yourself as a scholar at the same time...

On the topic of marrying girls who are prepubescant...the discussion is one where the marriage can only be consumated when a girl has hit puberty...but a marriage prior to that is fine...the respected scholar Ibn Kathir among others are adamant about this fact...and for you here is some Quran:

4. Those in menopause among your women, for them the `Iddah, if you have doubt, is three months; and for those who have no courses. And for those who are pregnant, their `Iddah is until they lay down their burden; and whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make his matter easy for him.) (5. That is the command of Allah, which He has sent down to you; and whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will expiate from him his sins, and will increase his reward. (65:4)

Ibn Kathir's commentary:

Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. ﴿see 2:228﴾ The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation. Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause. This is the meaning of His saying;

﴿وَاللَّـتِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ﴾

(and for those who have no courses...) as for His saying;

﴿إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ﴾

(if you have doubt...) There are two opinions: First, is the saying of a group of the Salaf, like Mujahid, Az-Zuhri and Ibn Zayd. That is, if they see blood and there is doubt if it was menstrual blood or not. The second, is that if you do not know the ruling in this case, then know that their `Iddah is three months. This has been reported from Sa`id bin Jubayr and it is the view preferred by Ibn Jarir. And this is the more obvious meaning. Supporting this view is what is reported from Ubay bin Ka`b that he said, "O Allah's Messenger! Some women were not mentioned in the Qur'an, the young, the old and the pregnant.'' Allah the Exalted and Most Honored sent down this Ayah,

﴿وَاللاَّئِى يَئِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَآئِكُمْ إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللَّـتِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُوْلَـتُ الاٌّحْمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ﴾

(Those in menopause among your women, for them the `Iddah, if you have doubt, is three months; and for those who have no courses. And for those who are pregnant, their `Iddah is until they lay down their burden.) Ibn Abi Hatim recorded a simpler narration than this one from Ubay bin Ka`b who said, "O Allah's Messenger! When the Ayah in Surat Al-Baqarah was revealed prescribing the `Iddah of divorce, some people in Al-Madinah said, `There are still some women whose `Iddah has not been mentioned in the Qur'an. There are the young, the old whose menstruation is discontinued, and the pregnant.' Later on, this Ayah was revealed,

﴿وَاللاَّئِى يَئِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَآئِكُمْ إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللَّـتِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ﴾

(Those in menopause among your women, for them the `Iddah, if you have doubt, is three months; and for those who have no courses.)''

Islam QA answered this question also:

Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:

Marriage to a young girl before she reaches puberty is permissible according to sharee’ah, and it was narrated that there was scholarly consensus on this point.

1 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise”

[al-Talaaq 65:4]

In this verse we see that Allaah states that for those who do not menstruate – because they are young and have not yet reached the age of puberty – the ‘iddah in the case of divorce is three months. This clearly indicates that it is permissible for a young girl who has not started her periods to marry.

Al-Tabari (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The interpretation of the verse “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise”. He said: The same applies to the ‘idaah for girls who do not menstruate because they are too young, if their husbands divorce them after consummating the marriage with them.

Tafseer al-Tabari, 14/142

2 – It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, and consummated the marriage with her when she was nine, and she stayed with him for nine years.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4840; Muslim, 1422.

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said:

The scholars are unanimously agreed that a father may marry off his young daughter without consulting her. The Messenger of Allaah married ‘Aa’ishah bint Abi Bakr when she was young, six or seven years old, when her father married her to him.

Al-Istidhkaar, 16/49-50.

Secondly:

The fact that it is permissible to marry a minor girl does not imply that it is permissible to have intercourse with her, rather the husband should not have intercourse with her until she becomes able for that. Hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) delayed consummating the marriage to ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her).

And Allaah knows best.

As for Aisha you're just rejecting Sahih hadith now...

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:

Narrated Hisham's father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311:

A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

So in conclusion

(1) Ibn Kathir disagrees with you as to Tabari and in fact all classical scholars who believe a girl can marry before she menstruates with the caveat that the marriage can only be consumated when she has hit puberty...

(2) Abu Bakr married off Aisha when she was a child...now are you going to insult the Sahaba now...

(3) Your point may indeed be valid but again Islamic scholars disagree with you and have presented plenty of evidence for their points...one can get married at 6 or 7 as Aisha did and consumate a marriage at 9 when Aisha did once she had hit puberty...

(4) Proof is in the Ayat that permits the marriage of girls who haven't menstruated...would love to see these contradictions you speak of...and you mention hadith...Bukhari, Muslim are known as Sahih...but of course you reject hadith in their totality anyway...

(5) Lol on your point of coercion...are you now going to deny that slaves and concubines existed and were acceptable in Islam...all of these are coercive relationships...keeping a slave girl can hardly be considered a consensual relationship...are you going to deny the 'that which your right possesses' too now?...

In addition check this link for how respected scholar Gibreel Haddad destroys the arguments you most likely lifted...

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=4604&CATE=1

 

[endymion248]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-18252958

That's noise for nothing. Is a man, under UK law, allowed to have a wife and a mistress? If yes, then the government has nothing to do with a man that has one civil marriage and one religious marriage (which is not recognized as marriage under UK law).

 

[Yossarian]

This is the reason why, in an environment where ressources are unequally distributed between males, polygamy comes perfectly natural to them while, even in an environment where ressources are equally distributed, there is no reason for having female polygamy.

You are (almost) correct, but not quite. Even today, there are many communities and tribes, even in India, where polyandry is still practiced, often for economic reasons.

Polyandry is a form of polygamy whereby a woman has several husbands. In Tibet those husbands are often brothers, which is why it is most commonly called "Fraternal Polyandry". Concern over the delicate question of which children are fathered by which brother falls on the wife alone. She may or may not say who the father is because she does not wish to create conflict in the family; she may also be unsure who the biological father is.
wiki

Rationale behind polyandry

Studies have attempted to explain the existence of polyandry in Tibet. One reason put forward in traditional literature is that:

By not allowing land to be split between brothers, Tibetan families retained farms sufficiently large to continue supporting their family. A compelling socio-biological justification for polyandry is that it makes good genetic sense for brothers to raise one another's children since a brother possesses the next closest gene pool to their own. most they call father to eldest brother.

Another reason for polyandry is that the mountainous terrain makes some of the farm land difficult to farm, requiring more physical strength. Women take multiple husbands because they are strong and able to help tend the land.
wiki

 

[Eagle_Eye]

With respect its been established plenty on this forum that you reject Sahih hadith...and it seems now you reject Quran too...

You also consistently dispute the legitimacy of scholars when presenting yourself as a scholar at the same time...

On the topic of marrying girls who are prepubescant...the discussion is one where the marriage can only be consumated when a girl has hit puberty...but a marriage prior to that is fine...the respected scholar Ibn Kathir among others are adamant about this fact...and for you here is some Quran:



Ibn Kathir's commentary:



Islam QA answered this question also:



As for Aisha you're just rejecting Sahih hadith now...

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234



Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:



Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311:



Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917




So in conclusion

(1) Ibn Kathir disagrees with you as to Tabari and in fact all classical scholars who believe a girl can marry before she menstruates with the caveat that the marriage can only be consumated when she has hit puberty...

(2) Abu Bakr married off Aisha when she was a child...now are you going to insult the Sahaba now...

(3) Your point may indeed be valid but again Islamic scholars disagree with you and have presented plenty of evidence for their points...one can get married at 6 or 7 as Aisha did and consumate a marriage at 9 when Aisha did once she had hit puberty...

(4) Proof is in the Ayat that permits the marriage of girls who haven't menstruated...would love to see these contradictions you speak of...and you mention hadith...Bukhari, Muslim are known as Sahih...but of course you reject hadith in their totality anyway...

(5) Lol on your point of coercion...are you now going to deny that slaves and concubines existed and were acceptable in Islam...all of these are coercive relationships...keeping a slave girl can hardly be considered a consensual relationship...are you going to deny the 'that which your right possesses' too now?...

In addition check this link for how respected scholar Gibreel Haddad destroys the arguments you most likely lifted...

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=4604&CATE=1

Ibn khatir and Ibn Taymiyyah are to Wahabis/ Salafis what Marx is to socialism/communism.

Islamic ideology in Saudi Arabia today is that from the school of though of Ibn taymiyyah and khatir.

It puts me right off as soon as mention these two sources.

 

[endymion248]

You are (almost) correct, but not quite. Even today, there are many communities and tribes, even in India, where polyandry is still practiced, often for economic reasons.

This is true because the reasons are that the region can't sustain a high population, each male cannot provide for his own offspring due to scarcity of ressources and, most of all, polyandry is practiced among brothers so that they are genetically similar. Also, there could possibly be uneven birth of boys/girls.

If you take these reasons on their own, it is not sufficient. For example, some primates fight the scarcity by communal lifestyle. Therefor, it's a very exceptional situation thath as led to this.

Anyways, I did say that my explanation is not 100% proven. Fact is that polygamy is much more prevalent than polyandry in the history of hominids and all explanations are empirical from that constatation.

 

[Yossarian]

That's noise for nothing. Is a man, under UK law, allowed to have a wife and a mistress? If yes, then the government has nothing to do with a man that has one civil marriage and one religious marriage (which is not recognized as marriage under UK law).

You need to do some research my friend, it is not 'noise for nothing'.

In the UK, the answer to your question is both a 'yes' and a 'no'. Here is an article from last year which sheds some light on the matter.

Although bigamy is illegal in Britain, men who married more than one woman in countries where the practice was legal and then brought them to the UK have been allowed for years to receive multiple benefits.

Critics claimed the controversial system meant the state is effectively "recognising" polygamous marriages, of which there are thought to be about a thousand in the UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...rs-ban-extra-benefits-for-multiple-wives.html

 

[endymion248]

You need to do some research my friend, it is not 'noise for nothing'.

In the UK, the answer to your question is both a 'yes' and a 'no'. Here is an article from last year which sheds some light on the matter.

That is a different situation where the state recognizes both marriages. In your first article, it was talking about men that do one niqqah (non recognized by the state) and one civil marriage.

 

[shaykh]

Ibn khatir and Ibn Taymiyyah are to Wahabis/ Salafis what Marx is to socialism/communism.

Islamic ideology in Saudi Arabia today is that from the school of though of Ibn taymiyyah and khatir.

It puts me right off as soon as mention these two sources.

Sorry but I disagree...Kathir is well respected across the board...

Ibn Kathir was a Shafii scholar...

And Shaykh Haddad whose link I posted at the bottom is a Shafi scholar opposed to Wahabis...and these are the same arguments he carries...

Who's tafsir do you respect cos you will find it tough to find sources that disagree with what has written above...

The points I presented are pretty much consensus and have been for the past 1400 years in Islam...

I

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Sorry but I disagree...Kathir is well respected across the board...

Ibn Kathir was a Shafii scholar...

And Shaykh Haddad whose link I posted at the bottom is a Shafi scholar opposed to Wahabis...and these are the same arguments he carries...

Who's tafsir do you respect cos you will find it tough to find sources that disagree with what has written above...

The points I presented are pretty much consensus and have been for the past 1400 years in Islam...

I

You do know that Ibn Khatir was taught by Ibn Taymiyah? Both go hand in hand

100+ years ago, Their doctrine was used to butcher people in lands which we now know as Saudi Arabia. The very same ideology that perpetuates the royal rule and hypocriacy wherever you look at it.

You obviously followed salafi/wahabi path from the nature and tone of the arguments you present.

Have you ever thought to yourself out of all the different muslim groups/ideologies, the wahabis have the highest number of polygamist marriages.... Why does lust play such a huge part in their lives?

Tell me the last time you met a muslim, who told you ... Please meet my concubine...X
In my 30+ years of existence, I have not met a single such person.

Hadith was written down by people, why should we not question it?

Why do Shias have different accounts? The mainstream shias lets say and not the extreme fringes.

Which hadiths should we believe?