marriage and polygamy

[August]

I have a question based on a speaker that came to the University of Idaho. I had been under the impression, based on what I've heard here and elsewhere, that it is accepted in Islam for men who can support multiple wives to marry up to 4 women at once. But the speaker, a muslim, in addressing women's equality in Islam, said this (quoted from the Argonaut) :

"The reason why the prophet was able to habe several wives was that God gave him the ability to treat all his wives with justice and equality and not to favor one more than the other.
The Justice equity was necessary for setting an example. But now men can't take several wives because God didn't give them the same justice equity that he gave the prophet because they are followers of the prophet, not example setters." The speaker went on to say that muslim men are in violation of Islamic principles if they take more than 1 wife.

Is that accurate? I had thought that it was not. I'm not trying to start a flame war over polygamy, just to understand what most Muslims believe.thanks.

[Umar001]

I have a question based on a speaker that came to the University of Idaho. I had been under the impression, based on what I've heard here and elsewhere, that it is accepted in Islam for men who can support multiple wives to marry up to 4 women at once. But the speaker, a muslim, in addressing women's equality in Islam, said this (quoted from the Argonaut) :

"The reason why the prophet was able to habe several wives was that God gave him the ability to treat all his wives with justice and equality and not to favor one more than the other.
The Justice equity was necessary for setting an example. But now men can't take several wives because God didn't give them the same justice equity that he gave the prophet because they are followers of the prophet, not example setters." The speaker went on to say that muslim men are in violation of Islamic principles if they take more than 1 wife.

Is that accurate? I had thought that it was not. I'm not trying to start a flame war over polygamy, just to understand what most Muslims believe.thanks.

Let me quote this from Ibn Uthaymeen's book on marriage,

In the time of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) a man called Ghaylaan ath-Thaqafee35 (radiyallaahu 'anhu) accepted Islaam and had with him ten wives. So the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) ordered him to choose from them four and separate (divorce) the rest. Qays Ibnul-Haarith (radiyallaahu 'anhu) said: "I embraced Islaam whilst having with me eight wives, so I went to the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and mentioned to him [my case] he said: "Keep four of them."36

36 Collected by Imaam Aboo Daawood in the Book of Divorce #2241

(A Concise Manual of Marriage)

That is what this scholar writes, the individual you hear speak needs to provide evidence for why he believes that, what one should realise is that there are conditions to marrying more than one wife, and the meaning of this conditions should be understood in context of Islamic sources, not our own understanding.

There needs to be justice, if a person can't have justice between his wives then he cannot marry, but what type of justice? A verse does state that we cannot do justice, but again what type of Justice? We as humans cannot do justice with regards to our feelings, but the justice spoken of in the conditions is justice of that which we do have control over, i.e. money, housing etc.

Allah knows best

[Danah]

There needs to be justice, if a person can't have justice between his wives then he cannot marry, but what type of justice? A verse does state that we cannot do justice, but again what type of Justice? We as humans cannot do justice with regards to our feelings, but the justice spoken of in the conditions is justice of that which we do have control over, i.e. money, housing etc.

so true, may allah reward you brother. the feeling is something that human cant control, but he has to watch himself in what he can control in the treatment to his wives

there is a reason for why polygamy in islam. for example if the husband wanna have children and the wife cant have, then he can marry another woman to have children it is better than doing the forbidden with another woman.

[Umar001]

there is a reason for why polygamy in islam. for example if the husband wanna have children and the wife cant have, then he can marry another woman to have children it is better than doing the forbidden with another woman.

Ameen.

And yes sister mashaAlalh, there are many times where polygamy can work, and we can see the wisdom behind it. Though even if it seemed like there was no wisdom we should still believe it because Almighty God and His Messenger told us.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Lawerence]

what one should realise is that there are conditions to marrying more than one wife, and the meaning of this conditions should be understood in context of Islamic sources, not our own understanding.

There needs to be justice, if a person can't have justice between his wives then he cannot marry...

there is a reason for why polygamy in islam. for example if the husband wanna have children and the wife cant have, then he can marry another woman to have children it is better than doing the forbidden with another woman.

The two quotations above give justifications for polygamy. The first one states if a man can be just to more than one wife than he can have more than one wife. The second one states if the husband wants more children and the wife can not bear children than the husband may get another wife.

The Quran, as far as I know, does not offer those reasons for polygamy. The passage I know relating to this issue is Surah 4:3 "And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans marry of the women who seem good to you, two, or three, or four..."

The above passage, through the use of an "if" clause is making the caretaking of orphans the condition upon which polygamy is allowed. I would be interested to know what some others think about the above scripture clearly giving only one condition for polygamy. Are there other passages in the Quran which make justice and the desire for more children a valid condition for polygamy?

[pantaleon-araw]

Religion is not marrying a number of wives but a way of pleasing your Creator.

[_ALI_]

Salam
As far as I know, Quran does not give any justification for polygamy. Why should God justify His orders? however, Muslims have given justification for the sake of non-Muslims who object to polygamy. Dr. Zakir Naik has given the following answer

Most Common Questions asked by Non-Muslims

POLYGAMY

Question:

Why is a man allowed to have more than one wife in Islam? i.e. why is polygamy allowed in Islam?

Answer:

Definition of Polygamy

1. Polygamy means a system of marriage whereby one person has more than one spouse. Polygamy can be of two types. One is polygyny where a man marries more than one woman, and the other is polyandry, where a woman marries more than one man. In Islam, limited polygyny is permitted; whereas polyandry is completely prohibited.

Now coming to the original question, why is a man allowed to have more than one wife?


2. 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 Ramayan, the Mahabharat, 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.

Many Hindu religious personalities, according to their scriptures, had multiple wives. King Dashrat, the father of Rama, had more than one wife. Krishna had several wives.

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.

Polygyny is permitted in Judaism. According to Talmudic law, Abraham had three wives, and Solomon had hundreds of wives. The practice of polygyny continued till Rabbi Gershom ben Yehudah (95% C.E to 1030 C.E) issued an edict against it. The Jewish Sephardic communities living in Muslim countries continued the practice till as late as 1950, until an Act of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel extended the ban on marrying more than one wife.


3. Hindus are more polygynous than Muslims


The report of the ‘Committee of The Status of Woman in Islam’, published in 1975 mentions on page numbers 66 and 67 that the percentage of polygamous marriages between the years 1951 and 1961 was 5.06% among the Hindus and only 4.31% among the Muslims. According to Indian law only Muslim men are permitted to have more than one wife. It is illegal for any non-Muslim in India to have more than one wife. Despite it being illegal, Hindus have more multiple wives as compared to Muslims. Earlier, there was no restriction even on Hindu men with respect to the number of wives allowed. It was only in 1954, when the Hindu Marriage Act was passed that it became illegal for a Hindu to have more than one wife. At present it is the Indian Law that restricts a Hindu man from having more than one wife and not the Hindu scriptures.

Let us now analyse why Islam allows a man to have more than one wife.


4. Qur’an permits limited polygyny


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 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."

[Al-Qur’an 4:3]

Before the Qur’an was revealed, there was no upper limit for polygyny and many men had scores of wives, some even hundreds. Islam put an upper limit of four wives. Islam gives a man permission to marry two, three or four women, only on the condition that he deals justly with them.

In the same chapter i.e. Surah 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.

Broadly, Islam has five categories of Do’s and Don’ts:

‘Fard’ i.e. compulsory or obligatory

‘Mustahab’ i.e. recommended or encouraged

‘Mubah’ i.e. permissible or allowed

‘Makruh’ i.e. not recommended or discouraged

‘Haraam’ i.e. prohibited or forbidden

Polygyny falls in the middle category of things that are permissible. It cannot be said that a Muslim who has two, three or four wives is a better Muslim as compared to a Muslim who has only one wife.


5. Average life span of females is more than that of males


By nature males and females are born in approximately the same ratio. A female child has more immunity than a male child. A female child can fight the germs and diseases better than the male child. For this reason, during the pediatric age itself there are more deaths among males as compared to the females.

During wars, there are more men killed as compared to women. More men die due to accidents and diseases than women. The average life span of females is more than that of males, and at any given time one finds more widows in the world than widowers.


6. India has more male population than female due to female foeticide and infanticide


India is one of the few countries, along with the other neighbouring countries, in which the female population is less than the male population. The reason lies in the high rate of female infanticide in India, and the fact that more than one million female foetuses are aborted every year in this country, after they are identified as females. If this evil practice is stopped, then India too will have more females as compared to males.

7. World female population is more than male population


In the USA, women outnumber men by 7.8 million. New York alone has one million more females as compared to the number of males, and of the male population of New York one-third are gays i.e sodomites. The U.S.A as a whole has more than twenty-five million gays. This means that these people do not wish to marry women. Great Britain has four million more females as compared to males. Germany has five million more females as compared to males. Russia has nine million more females than males. God alone knows how many million more females there are in the whole world as compared to males.

8. Restricting each and every man to have only one wife is not practical


Even if every man got married to one woman, there would still be more than thirty million females in U.S.A who would not be able to get husbands (considering that America has twenty five million gays). There would be more than four million females in Great Britain, 5 million females in Germany and nine million females in Russia alone who would not be able to find a husband.

Suppose my sister happens to be one of the unmarried women living in USA, or suppose your sister happens to be one of the unmarried women in USA. The only two options remaining for her are that she either marries a man who already has a wife or becomes public property. There is no other option. All those who are modest will opt for the first.

In Western society, it is common for a man to have mistresses and/or multiple extra-marital affairs, in which case, the woman leads a disgraceful, unprotected life. The same society, however, cannot accept a man having more than one wife, in which women retain their honourable, dignified position in society and lead a protected life

SOURCE:http://www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm

[Qingu]

That's the problem with religion though. It's a snapshot from an ancient culture that becomes locked into place instead of evolving with the rest of the world.

Muhammad had twelve wives, the youngest of which was nine years old. Since Islam says Muhammad was the greatest dude ever, I don't think you're going to find many Muslims who oppose doing what Muhammad did. However, I have seen some Muslims claim (without evidence) that puberty happened sooner back in the 7th century than it does today, so therefore marrying someone as young as Aisha today would be wrong.

I expect we'll see more claims like this from Muslims as Islamic culture continues to evolve. Christians used to think polygamy and marrying young girls was okay—because after all, King David had lots of wives and plenty of them were young. But Christian culture has evolved, and their interpretations of their holy text and heroic figures have evolved to suit.

[alcurad]

Christians used to think polygamy... was okay

you find it to be unnatural? wrong?
in terms of sexual relationships as long as consent is given, people living in say the US or Europe can do not what exactly?

[Qingu]

you find it to be unnatural? wrong?
in terms of sexual relationships as long as consent is given, people living in say the US or Europe can do not what exactly?

Actually, I have little problem with polygamy in theory. I think consenting adults should be able to form whatever romantic relationships they choose with each other.

My problem is that, in practice, polygamy is usually oppressive towards females. Historically, polygamy was practiced in male-dominated societies (like 7th century Arabia and 12th-century B.C. Palestine) where women could be bought for a brideprice and were basically considered a man's property. Much of Mormon and Islamic polygamy, as they are practiced today, seem very much like an outgrowth of these oppressive cultures, and I do have a big problem with that.

But I don't have any problem with the "hippie-style" polygamy where men and women form whatever networks of relationships they like. I can't imagine I'd ever do it myself, though.

[Whatsthepoint]

Actually, I have little problem with polygamy in theory. I think consenting adults should be able to form whatever romantic relationships they choose with each other.

My problem is that, in practice, polygamy is usually oppressive towards females. Historically, polygamy was practiced in male-dominated societies (like 7th century Arabia and 12th-century B.C. Palestine) where women could be bought for a brideprice and were basically considered a man's property. Much of Mormon and Islamic polygamy, as they are practiced today, seem very much like an outgrowth of these oppressive cultures, and I do have a big problem with that.

But I don't have any problem with the "hippie-style" polygamy where men and women form whatever networks of relationships they like. I can't imagine I'd ever do it myself, though.

Polyamory?

[aamirsaab]

...
My problem is that, in practice, polygamy is usually oppressive towards females. Historically, polygamy was practiced in male-dominated societies (like 7th century Arabia and 12th-century B.C. Palestine) where women could be bought for a brideprice and were basically considered a man's property. Much of Mormon and Islamic polygamy, as they are practiced today, seem very much like an outgrowth of these oppressive cultures, and I do have a big problem with that....

Here is what the Quran says on the matter of polygamy

Quran 4:3
"And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course. "

[Qingu]

Here is what the Quran says on the matter of polygamy

Quran 4:3
"And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course. "

Problem is, I don't see any allowance for women to marry two or three or four guys. :)

And polyamory is probably the more correct term for what I'm talking about, yes.

[alcurad]

in practice, polygamy is usually oppressive towards females. Historically, polygamy was practiced in male-dominated societies... where women could be bought...polygamy...seem very much like an outgrowth of these oppressive cultures, and I do have a big problem with that.

But I don't have any problem with the "hippie-style" polygamy

women mostly don't get bought these days though, and polygamy seems to be an outgrowth of oppressiveness so you disagree with it?

all societies are male dominated, and our modern economy is an outgrowth of thousands of years of slavery.

[alcurad]

Problem is, I don't see any allowance for women to marry two or three or four guys.

not very conductive to creating societies that are capable of surviving for long, and less babies of course.
was that a serious question..

[Qingu]

women mostly don't get bought these days though, and polygamy seems to be an outgrowth of oppressiveness so you disagree with it?

Many women are indeed bought these days. Brideprices still exist in many cultures, where a woman's parents decide who she will marry more than she does.

all societies are male dominated,

Increasingly less so, especially in the West.

and our modern economy is an outgrowth of thousands of years of slavery.

I disagree. I think it's an outgrowth of industrialism, which effectively out-competed slavery during the 18th and 19th centuries. Incidentally, industrialism was a liberating force for women, because they could actually find work and make money in mechanized factories.

I think much of "male oppression" has been tied into the fact that men have historically been the bread-winners. When women achieved economic independence, this started the road to equality more than anything. I think this is why there is such a high correlation between feminine equality and economic development in the world. Though places like Saudi Arabia and Iran are obvious exceptions.

[Qingu]

not very conductive to creating societies that are capable of surviving for long, and less babies of course.
was that a serious question..

Earth has 6.5 billion people and growing. I don't really think "making enough babies" is a problem anymore. In fact, the problem is that people are having too many babies and we're going to have trouble feeding them all.

The most economically advanced societies today have the lowest birth rates.

[Muezzin]

Problem is, I don't see any allowance for women to marry two or three or four guys. :)

The elephant in the room is that in order for even a man to have multiple spouses according to Islam, he must treat them all equally.

Once men think with their brains rather than their loins, they see that keeping more than one woman* happy at any given time is probably not worth the trouble. :)

*i.e. over the age of consent, which for argument's sake is 16.

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Note: Islam restricted polygamy to four whereas people before Islam had countless amounts of wives. Furthermore it gave women rights which Europe has given lately to its women (due to the Suffragettes' in the early 20th century.)


If Islam never gave the man a right to marry four women, due to the higher population of women in the world - many would be without husbands. Since the husband has many duties towards his wife in Islam, then he would have to deal with them justly if he were to perform polygamy [multiple marriages.] Just a few examples are mentioned below;

A Muslim woman has a right to her own property (her husband has to earn for her as a duty even if she's richer than him). This still isn't the case in Europe today. Just over a century ago in Europe, a woman had to give all her property to her husband, he owned it - once she was married to him. In Islam, the woman's property is independent and she can spend it how she wishes.

She has a right to keep her own surname (something which has only lately been introduced in Europe.) In the past she had to keep her husbands surname, as if she was his property.

In Islam, a woman has certain rights which still aren't given to women in different parts of the world. A simple one being the sexual rights. If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that. This will be something laughed at in Europe and not taken seriously. Whereas these issues are taken seriously in Islam since that is a big part of marriage.

Islam gives a severe punishment to the adulterer, especially if the adulterer is a married person. So the Muslim male will fear a heavy punishment if he commits adultery whereas a woman in Europe whose husband cheats on her can't do anything at all. She can't get justice and he laughs, enjoying himself while she stays at home [maybe even working overtime], so she can support his child. Is that human rights?

So if Islam is so backward, then Europe, supposedly the most 'advanced' of civilizations who we should all take is role models as even more backward. Maybe these people can correct themselves first and then tell us what is right and wrong?

[Qingu]

The elephant in the room is that in order for even a man to have multiple spouses according to Islam, he must treat them all equally.

Once men think with their brains rather than their loins, they see that keeping more than one woman* happy at any given time is probably not worth the trouble. :)

*i.e. over the age of consent, which for argument's sake is 16.

I think you missed my point. If it's okay for a guy to have multiple wives (assuming he treats them all nice), why is it wrong for a woman to have multiple husbands?

Your statement itself presupposes that the women are the ones who have to be treated a certain way, by a man—in other words, that they are "objects," not "actors." I realize this is straight out of your religion, but I hope you can see how this kind of worldview troubles a secularist feminist like myself.

In any case, I'm worried we're getting off the topic of child marriages.

[- Qatada -]

If a woman who has many husbands has a child, how does she know who the father is? Since Islam is for all times and all societies, then some science of today [i.e. DNA testing] in some parts of the world won't fulfill that condition for all times.

Since its the mans responsibility to bring up his children and provide for them, how will he know who his child is?


Besides, like mentioned before - there are more women in the world than men, so it is natural that more women would be married to one male than alot of males having to get married to one woman.

[Qingu]

A Muslim woman has a right to her own property (her husband has to earn for her as a duty even if she's richer than him). This still isn't the case in Europe today. Just over a century ago in Europe, a woman had to give all her property to her husband, he owned it - once she was married to him. In Islam, the woman's property is independent and she can spend it how she wishes.

Not the case in Europe today? But you're talking about a century ago.

Women can obviously have their own property in Europe today.

She has a right to keep her own surname (something which has only lately been introduced in Europe.) In the past she had to keep her husbands surname, as if she was his property.

Again, not the case in Europe today

In Islam, a woman has certain rights which still aren't given to women in different parts of the world. A simple one being the sexual rights. If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that. This will be something laughed at in Europe and not taken seriously. Whereas these issues are taken seriously in Islam since that is a big part of marriage.

Really? Can you explain this to me? Are you saying that Muslim wives have the right to refuse husbands sex? I'd like to see some jurisprudence on this subject.

Islam gives a severe punishment to the adulterer, especially if the adulterer is a married person. So the Muslim male will fear a heavy punishment if he commits adultery whereas a woman in Europe whose husband cheats on her can't do anything at all. She can't get justice and he laughs, enjoying himself while she stays at home [maybe even working overtime], so she can support his child. Is that human rights?

Western women might not see "justice" for adultery as killing them. Western women can also simply leave their adultering husbands if they choose to.

Also, isn't it permissible for Muslim men to have sex with slave-girls and concubines? In the West, this would be considered adultery, but it is explicitly allowed in the Quran and the hadith, right?

And finally, a man can have sex with multiple women in Islam—his wives and his concubines—but a woman can only have sex with one man.

So if Islam is so backward, then Europe, supposedly the most 'advanced' of civilizations who we should all take is role models as even more backward. Maybe these people can correct themselves first and then tell us what is right and wrong?

Europe was certainly more backwards than Islam for much of Christianity's history. However, I fail to see what anything you said has to do with modern Europe.

And frankly, I think this whole "Islam was more advanced than Europe 500 years ago" argument is just silly. Who cares? We Westerners don't live in the past; we're ashamed of it.

[Qingu]

If a woman who has many husbands has a child, how does she know who the father is? Since Islam is for all times and all societies, then some science of today [i.e. DNA testing] in some parts of the world won't fulfill that condition for all times.

I guess I don't see why this is so important. Adopted children can be raised without knowing who their parents are. Gay couples can raise healthy and well-adjusted children. Why would this be any more of an issue for polyandrous couples?

I mean, I realize that you religious people might have a problem with such arrangements, but it seems like you're arguing that the people themselves would have a problem. I don't see why that would be the case.

Since its the mans responsibility to bring up his children and provide for them, how will he know who his child is?

Why is it solely a man's responsibility to bring up his children? Islam teaches this, but many people don't believe in Islam, and many single mothers and lesbian couples raise perfectly healthy kids.

I also reject the notion that all romantic relationships exist for the purpose of producing children. We have birth control now.

Besides, like mentioned before - there are more women in the world than men, so it is natural that more women would be married to one male than alot of males having to get married to one woman.

There are barely any more women than men in the world. Certainly not enough to justify male-only polygamy.

[Whatsthepoint]

If a woman who has many husbands has a child, how does she know who the father is? Since Islam is for all times and all societies, then some science of today [i.e. DNA testing] in some parts of the world won't fulfill that condition for all times.

Since its the mans responsibility to bring up his children and provide for them, how will he know who his child is?


Besides, like mentioned before - there are more women in the world than men, so it is natural that more women would be married to one male than alot of males having to get married to one woman.

There are several countries in the world where there are more males than females, China for instance has a surplus of several million men and the capacity to conduct DNA testings.

[- Qatada -]

Not the case in Europe today? But you're talking about a century ago.

Women can obviously have their own property in Europe today.

Read my post;

it gave women rights which Europe has given lately to its women (due to the Suffragettes' in the early 20th century.)

Again, not the case in Europe today

it gave women rights which Europe has given lately to its women (due to the Suffragettes' in the early 20th century.)

Really? Can you explain this to me? Are you saying that Muslim wives have the right to refuse husbands sex? I'd like to see some jurisprudence on this subject.

First of all, don't avoid the point;

In Islam, a woman has certain rights which still aren't given to women in different parts of the world. A simple one being the sexual rights. If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that. This will be something laughed at in Europe and not taken seriously. Whereas these issues are taken seriously in Islam since that is a big part of marriage.

Meaning they have the right to sex from their husband and can seek recompense for it if they're not given it.

Tell me any legislation in the world right now apart from Islam which gives a woman this right? If it does, it would be good news.

Western women might not see "justice" for adultery as killing them.

That's because this concept might be psychologically drilled into their mind. i.e. that its the norms for someone to be a 'playa' so you just gota get used to it. Islam isn't like that, its more professional.

Western women can also simply leave their adultering husbands if they choose to.

If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that.

Why should she leave him? What if she loves him? She should have the right to stay with him and get her rights at the same time. Not for him to just run away and leave it all.

Also, isn't it permissible for Muslim men to have sex with slave-girls and concubines? In the West, this would be considered adultery, but it is explicitly allowed in the Quran and the hadith, right?

And finally, a man can have sex with multiple women in Islam—his wives and his concubines—but a woman can only have sex with one man. [/quote]


Is it for a wisdom? Let's see;

Islam actually gets rid of slavery around the globe in an amazing manner that the woman is free, and her child is free - when he dies. Causing more people to be set free instead of tied to slavery even after their owner dies [try reading about how the Abbasid kings were arab, greek, africans, turks, and all sorts of races!] This is why you'll see in our islamic history that slavery decreased at a drastic level because the woman had a child, so when the male owner died - her and her child were free people.

You may say 'why didnt they reject the concept of slavery altogether when islam came?' Its not that simple because most of the time, these people were slaves only because they fought Muslims and they would have done the exact same to them if the Muslims were caught! This concept was so common in the world at that time - the same way its so uncommon in the world at todays time (- its Islam that actually removed the concept so much that we find it strange today.)

So something practical had to be done about it to slowly set people free. If Muslims said, you can go back home now after fighting us - then wouldn't the Muslims always be at the disadvantage? So by making them slaves - but respecting them, giving them similar rights - Islam changed the concept of slavery altogether in the world (but again this changed when queen Victoria came to Africa.)



What did Allah's Messenger say about slaves? [translation of meaning];

" Those slaves are your brothers, only God gave you an upper hand over them. So let that who has his brother (i.e. slave) under him give him the same food he himself eats, and the same clothing as he himself wears. The master may not give his brother a task that is beyond his ability. If he does give him such task, let him lend him a hand."

Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Marriage is encouraged more in islam though.


Sahih Al Bukhari Volume 1, Book 3 [book of knowledge], Number 97:
Narrated Abu Burda's father:

Allah's Apostle said "Three persons will have a double reward:

1. A Person from the people of the scriptures who believed in his prophet (Jesus or Moses) and then believed in the Prophet Muhammad (i .e. has embraced Islam).
2. A slave who discharges his duties to Allah and his master.
3. A master of a woman-slave who teaches her good manners and educates her in the best possible way (the religion) and manumits her and then marries her."

http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...ml#post1073548



So maybe now you can tell me, what benefitted humanity more - adultery and fornication, or getting rid of slavery at a mass level to the extent that we hardly have slavery at all in the world right now?

Europe was certainly more backwards than Islam for much of Christianity's history. However, I fail to see what anything you said has to do with modern Europe.

And frankly, I think this whole "Islam was more advanced than Europe 500 years ago" argument is just silly. Who cares? We Westerners don't live in the past; we're ashamed of it.

I don't care, Islam is still more advanced in its morals and standards than Europe today. So we take pride in that, and we have more of a right to take pride in Islam since it still raises the standards for goodness against falsehood.

I say this with full confidence because a great deal of societies problems are at a high level within Europe today, alot of it is due to issues such as adultery, children without fathers and much much more. This isn't helping society, but breaking it down into crumbled pieces. Whereas Islam did the exact opposite and brought advances in ALL matters of life.




Peace.

[Whatsthepoint]

So maybe now you can tell me, what benefitted humanity more - adultery and fornication, or getting rid of slavery at a mass level to the extent that we hardly have slavery at all in the world right now?

I'm sorry, are you suggesting it was Islam that brought end to slavery??

[- Qatada -]

I guess I don't see why this is so important. Adopted children can be raised without knowing who their parents are. Gay couples can raise healthy and well-adjusted children. Why would this be any more of an issue for polyandrous couples?

I mean, I realize that you religious people might have a problem with such arrangements, but it seems like you're arguing that the people themselves would have a problem. I don't see why that would be the case.

Some people argue that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children, this isn't fair and it is immoral. The main reason is because it causes Psychological issues for the child - a person without a father is more likely to have psychological difficulties, aswell as a person lacking a mother. This is why homosexuals adopting children will not ease the child's situation. Rather, a child requires a mother and a father to have a good balance, the caring treatment of a mother, and a role model figure as a father. If this is lacking - the child may have psychological difficulties

Drug And Alcohol Abuse: The absence of the father from the home affects significantly the behavior of adolescents and results in greater use of alcohol and marijuana.

Source: Deane Scott Berman, "Risk Factors Leading to Adolescent Substance Abuse," Adolescence 30 (1995): 201-206



Fatherless children are five times more likely to live in poverty, compared to children living with both parents.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.



Fatherless children are at dramatically greater risk of suicide.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.



In 1988, a study of preschool children admitted to New Orleans hospitals as psychiatric patients over a 34-month period found that nearly 80 percent came from fatherless homes.

Source: Jack Block, et al. "Parental Functioning and the Home Environment in Families of Divorce," Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27 (1988)



Kids who live with both biological parents at age 14 are significantly more likely to graduate from high school than those kids who live with a single parent, a parent and step-parent, or neither parent.

Source: G.D. Sandefur (et al.), "The Effects of Parental Marital Status..." Social Forces, September 1992.


43 percent of prison inmates grew up in a single-parent household -

39 percent with their mothers, 4 percent with their fathers - and an additional 14 percent lived in households without either biological parent. Another 14 percent had spent at last part of their childhood in a foster home, agency or other juvenile institution.

Source: US Bureau of Justice Statistics, Survey of State Prison Inmates. 1991


Much more continued here:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...ly%2FFYELayout

http://www.manslife.com/family/fatherfacts/

If one was to respond that it is better for a child to be adopted by a homosexual couple instead of remaining in an orphanage, then the response to this is that another harm should not be caused because of a previous harm.

Rather, it should be encouraged for a couple (husband and wife) to foster children whose parents may be unknown. However, it should not be done through a harmful method.


Children need a caring mother figure, and a role model father to look upto. That's the perfect healthy design and balance which Allah has made us in. It should remain that way to help society as a whole become a better place.

Why is it solely a man's responsibility to bring up his children? Islam teaches this, but many people don't believe in Islam, and many single mothers and lesbian couples raise perfectly healthy kids.

Islam was for humanity, humanity benefited from Islam.

I also reject the notion that all romantic relationships exist for the purpose of producing children. We have birth control now.

Children can be a product of marriage. So Islam provides answers for this situation.

[Whatsthepoint]

Men and women have been created different. I believe men crave sex more than women do, thus perhaps that is one reason that there is an allowance for men to have multiple wives, but not the other way round.
I can't help but chuckle at gay couples being able to raise perfectly well-adjusted children. :D Suree, no kids will eveeerrrr pick on a guy who has gay parents, thus ensuring a healthy and happy upbringing. Aww, bless. :p

That certainly isn't true for all women and men.
Well, many children get picked on, immigrant children for instance, should they be prohibited from raising children?

[Whatsthepoint]

I believe that it is true for the majority. "Men think about sex every 6 seconds". You must have heard such a saying, right?

Besides, just look around, you don't see much porno aimed at women do you? It's mainly a man thing. Obviously it's a reflection of the amount lust men have for sex, compared to women.

Yes the majority, but does that mean the minority should be left behind?

[Muezzin]

I think you missed my point. If it's okay for a guy to have multiple wives (assuming he treats them all nice), why is it wrong for a woman to have multiple husbands?

I wasn't clear.

In my opinion, it is irrelevant whether or not a man can have multiple wives, or a woman can have multiple husbands. What is relevant is that additional spouses have to be treated equally, which is a pain in the backside whether you're male or female.

The Prophet (SAW) was able to have multiple wives because he was an excellent person able to balance different needs and wants.

Most modern males (or females for that matter) are not that responsible.

So although Islam allows polygamy for males, I personally do not necessarily vouch for it. I would feel the same way if it extended that allowance to women.

Your statement itself presupposes that the women are the ones who have to be treated a certain way, by a man—in other words, that they are "objects," not "actors."

Person A's obligation to treat Person B a certain way does not make Person B an object devoid of all proactive or reciprocal action.

Marriage is give and take - it's hard enough to give the requisite amount with one partner, let alone multiple ones, unless you happen to be absolutely amazing.

I realize this is straight out of your religion, but I hope you can see how this kind of worldview troubles a secularist feminist like myself.

I think you'll find my particular worldview is similar to yours regarding this subject.

In any case, I'm worried we're getting off the topic of child marriages.

Yes.

...so I moved the posts here instead. :)

[- Qatada -]

During wars, many men die in comparison to women. Usually women survive and if there are many male losses, they will have to get married to fulfill human needs. Since there are more women, polygamy takes place. Its also well known that women have longer life spans.

[Zahida]

:sl::peace: I respect you from the bottom of the heart right to the top. Why can't more men be like you?????????

May Allah guide you and Bless you with His Rehmat Ameen.:w::D

I wasn't clear.

In my opinion, it is irrelevant whether or not a man can have multiple wives, or a woman can have multiple husbands. What is relevant is that additional spouses have to be treated equally, which is a pain in the backside whether you're male or female.

The Prophet (SAW) was able to have multiple wives because he was an excellent person able to balance different needs and wants.

Most modern males (or females for that matter) are not that responsible.

So although Islam allows polygamy for males, I personally do not necessarily vouch for it. I would feel the same way if it extended that allowance to women.


Person A's obligation to treat Person B a certain way does not make Person B an object devoid of all proactive or reciprocal action.

Marriage is give and take - it's hard enough to give the requisite amount with one partner, let alone multiple ones, unless you happen to be absolutely amazing.


I think you'll find my particular worldview is similar to yours regarding this subject.


Yes.

...so I moved the posts here instead. :)

[Whatsthepoint]

WTP, Islam tells us women aren't allowed to have multiple husbands, so yes, the minority that do have a lot of lust should be left behind.

I believe that Allah creates men with more lust than women. It is in their nature. Any discrepancies can be accounted for by the kind of upbringing an individual has, IMO.

Besides, if men and women both were allowed to have multiple partners, you could end up with a scenario where a guy is married to four women and each wife in turn is married to three other men. Imagine if you will that each husband of each of the wives also has another three wives. Imagine if it continued further? :D That would be quite the ludicrous state of affairs... therefore it makes sense to restrict it to only one party being allowed to have multiple partners. Since men have more lust, they're the winners. :)

It makes sense to ban it outright.

[Zamtsa]

[B]The story of Polygyny in Islam which is to do Polygyny marriage to 2 till 4 women. This is more like a story of Sulaiman 'alaihi Salaam who were married with 100 women. Not story of Ching emperor who had Jima' with 300 women. Or Mao Tse Tung who had Jima' with many women as many as he did(more than 11 women).
Or story of Napoleon who Jima' with many women. Or Hitler who was a Psycho in his Jima' habit. Or the Homosexual from many Priests or Monks.

This one is a real love, for people who have something.

So before people even talking about Polygyny, they should cursed "Rapes," why don't the Government do Rajam to rapists? "Homosexuals," why don't the Government kill them? "Fornication (Zina)" which cause AIDS, why don't the Government lashes 100 times to someone who do that? And Rajam the Zina Mushan doers?

Why don't people marry children who lost their Virginity with whom they lost their Virginity from? These are all bunch of Hypocrites, who like to critise Polygyny marriage or Prophet's Polygyny.

2nd, Why don't people start to curse Polygyny Zina and Poliandri Zina before marriage or out of marriage? They are all bunch of Hypocrites. Islam does not move an inch by people who curse Islam, because Muhammad Shalallahu 'alaihi wa Sallam and 'Aisyah Radhiyallahu 'anhu had REAL LOVE.

3rd, If people really think that Muhammad Shalallahu 'alaihi wa Sallam was a child molester or Pedofile, then why the Christian spare people like O'Grady the Priest? While he was a rapist of more than 2 Children? Please tell them to explain as well.

4rd, Muhammad Shalallahu 'alaihi wa Sallam declared that the punishment for everybody who become a sodomiters or Sodomite rapist, that the Sodomite must be killed and so the one being sodomite.
Why don't people want to apply this law now?


So it's not the question of whether Muhammad Shalallahu 'alaihi wa Sallam was a Playboy or a man with Psychic disease, but the question whether people will punish children molesters, Pedophiles and Fornicators as RASULULLAH Shalallahu 'alaihi wa Sallam had declared or not.


Assalamu manit taba'al huda (May peace be upon people who follow the guidance)[SIZE][B]

[Zamtsa]

Many people are satisfied with doing Poligamy before marriage. They lost it to their girlfriends, not to their wifes. So many people are becoming "Divorce agents," but they resist Poliginy. So too with people who might be able to do Islamic Poligiy but their knowledge do reach the perfectness of it. Poliandri will cause sickness, but not with Poliginy.
Poligamy did not come from Islam, Poliginy did.
Rasulullah said that in Poliginy are forbidden to marry two sisters at once and also forbidden to marry her auntie.

1. Not the idea of choosing 1 after feeling the best of all women over 1 shot.
2. Not the idea of “not marrying with woman,” because of becoming a celebrity, but instead to “marry the fans,” so that you could make many women happy.
3. Makes man more mature in Din, and enhancing the ability to lead people.
4. After the husband feel the pleasure created from Poliginy, he will create better leadership in his life and this make his life better.
5. Man learn by leading the women where man will use his intellect and justice in his Poliginy marriage.
6. Poliginy marriage praises Allahu Ta’ala and Islam
7. In Islam there is this idea that man must marry minimum 2 wifes. That man is for 2 women to 4. And firstly that must be marry is an orphan:

QS.An Nisa (4):3. If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans 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 or (a captive) that your right
hands possess. That will be more suitable to prevent you from doing injustice.
8. Verse in Al Qur’an about Poliginy:

An Nisa(4):129 Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women even if it is your ardent desire: but turn not away (from a woman) altogether so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding and practice self-restraint Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.
9. When a man marry women he will find that in women, the characteristics that will lessen his arrogance as a man, because he needs them as in this verse:
QS.Ar Rum(30):21 And among His Signs is this that He created for you mates from among yourselves that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts); verily in that are Signs for those who reflect.
10. Because 1 man needs 2 women till 4 and becoming loyal to them, while women only need 1 man and becoming loyal to him.
11. The idea of splitting love doesn’t exist in Islam, because Islam does not allow twosome, threesome or foursome.
12. Islam really teach husband to do Jima’ only when his wife is pure, not when she is on Haid and Nifas. And allows the husband to do that by every ways, as long as it is still on the hole for child birth.
13. The solution for men who have a special liking to women. Rasulullah said “Women are married because of 4,… marry those because of her religion.”
Choose women as your wifes, those who have good Akhlaq and sound Aqidah.

[Woodrow]

Just my opinion. I see the rules that govern polygamy for men, essentially prevent nearly all men from having more than one wife. I see the mention of it being directed towards men is because it was men who were engaging in polygamy and the wording is in such a manner, it gives a logical basis as to why men should not engage in polygamy, except in special cases where it is needed to protect women. Just my opinion. astagfirullah

[Zamtsa]

Just my opinion. I see the rules that govern polygamy for men, essentially prevent nearly all men from having more than one wife. I see the mention of it being directed towards men is because it was men who were engaging in polygamy and the wording is in such a manner, it gives a logical basis as to why men should not engage in polygamy, except in special cases where it is needed to protect women. Just my opinion. astagfirullah

Bismillahi I write

The word "Polygamy" is not an Islamic marriage. Polygyny is. Polygamy consists of Polyandry and Polygyny. Polyandry establishes by woman who has more than 1 man as their Jima' partners.

The fact is that Kafir dislike Islam because they could not beat Islam which allowed Polygyny, but only restrict it to 4 women. And Islam has rule over man and woman over Jilbab, covering aurah, lowering the gaze, and Hudud for the transgressors.

So you're all 1 line (retort), by using the word "Polygamy," keep that in mind.

Polygyny, Polygyny, Polygyny" not "Polygamy, Polygamy, Polygamy" because that means "Polyandry-Polygyny, Polyandry-Polygyny, Polyandry-Polygyny."

Ye got that?


Assalamu'alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh.

[KelleyD]

During wars, many men die in comparison to women. Usually women survive and if there are many male losses, they will have to get married to fulfill human needs. Since there are more women, polygamy takes place. Its also well known that women have longer life spans.

and

In my opinion, it is irrelevant whether or not a man can have multiple wives, or a woman can have multiple husbands. What is relevant is that additional spouses have to be treated equally, which is a pain in the backside whether you're male or female.

.....are, so far, the best arguments in support of plural marriage that I've read in this thread. Back around 1860 or so, the Mormons also adopted the plural marriage view for the same reasons. The were persecuted and driven from state to state by angry mobs. Many of the men perished in those wars and, thus, polgamy was necessary.

Today, in the Middle East, you still have much the same situation where the wars are raging and leaving women and children to fend for themselves. Marrying a Sister (with or without children) who has been widowed by the war is about as close to an act of humanity and charity as there can be. Granted, there are many different reasons why one would wish to marry, but this one holds as much weight as the rest.

As to the second comment, I know of an older man in Saudi who has four wives. I've become friends with two of his wives and chat on line with the third one (the fourth one travels alot) and they are in total support of plural marriage. Two live in the same household with him and two live in different housing. They enjoy the "break" that they get when he is with the other. He is able to care for all of them both financially, physically, and emotionally. He is a devout Muslim and as far as I can see, and from what they tell me, treats all his wives fairly. The wives all love him, calling him kind and genourous. They certainly don't have any complaints.

I think when people who live outside of polgamy view it from a distance, they make judgments on a situation that they have no life experience of. You can sit and analyze the pros and cons academically for eternity but until you live the life yourself or interact with those who do, you will always have a somewhat skewed perception.

Just my two pence..............

[doorster]

World female population is more than male population

not according to CIA Book of facts (unless I am misreading, it is 1.02 male(s) per female except the aged 65 years and over where it is: 0.78 male(s) per 1 female

ratio: at birth: 1.07 male(s)/female
under 15 years: 1.06 male(s)/female
15-64 years: 1.02 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.78 male(s)/female

total population: 1.01 male(s)/female (2008 est.)

Just my opinion. I see the rules that govern polygamy for men, essentially prevent nearly all men from having more than one wife. I see the mention of it being directed towards men is because it was men who were engaging in polygamy and the wording is in such a manner, it gives a logical basis as to why men should not engage in polygamy, except in special cases where it is needed to protect women. Just my opinion. astagfirullah

a very valid opinion (and not just yours either)!

[Hamayun]

The Quran, as far as I know, does not offer those reasons for polygamy. The passage I know relating to this issue is Surah 4:3 "And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans marry of the women who seem good to you, two, or three, or four..."

The least you could do is post the whole verse! :enough!:

And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.