The Second Wife

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

As-Salaamu Alaikum Waramatullah Wabrakatuh

<«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»>
THE SECOND WIFE
by Shariffa Carlo Al Andalusia
<«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»><«»>

I heard a commentary the other day which hit home like little else has in
a long time. A news commentator had just finished interviewing some local
youngsters on the impact that the Clinton/Lewinsky affair had upon them.
Most of the young people said the same. “It is personal.” “Let him be.”
“No one is perfect.” and so forth… The commentator, when summing up his
report said, “The President is supposed to represent the morals and values
of the society that he represents.” He paused and then said, “Maybe that
is the problem.”

That pretty much summed it up. Clinton represents the morals and values of
America. He is the poster-child for the greedy, over-indulgent American
who is concerned with nothing more than self gratification. So why do so
many Muslims idealize this society? Why are so many of us so enamoured
with the values of these people that we either appologize for or even deny
basic tenents of our belief?

One such tenent is polygyny. Polygyny is the practice of marrying more
than one wife. Unfortunately, often the term polygamy - the practice of
marrying more than one spouse is used to describe the practice in Islam.
This is incorrect. Islam allows more than one wife, up to four.

I have found that Muslims have fallen prey to the Western ideal of one
woman for one man, which is laughable when you look to the reality of
their relationships. The majority of men admit to committing adultery and
a growing number of women do the same. The system in the West has been
described by some as serial monogomy because of the insane divorce rate,
but is in reality little more than a charade for an open unchecked worship
of human desire.

Unfortunately, I have heard Muslim women say, I would rather that my
husband commit adultery than that he bring a second wife. What a low state
we have reached that such a comment could ever come from a Muslim. May
Allah (SWT) Guide us, Ameen!

I have even heard Muslims actually ask, “Why is it allowed for men but not
for women to have more than one spouse at a time?” Our level of faith in
the Wisdom of Allah has fallen to such an all-time low, that we no longer
think that it is wrong or even disliked to question the judgement of
Allah.

Too many of us follow the West into the lizard hole, and we don’t even
bother to take a light with us to see if it is safe. We no longer care. We
assume that they know what they are doing and we jump in with no fear. I
wish such Muslims would have the same amount of faith in Allah (SWT) that
they have in the West.

We have to start dealing with Islamic issues with the eyes and ears and
minds of Muslims, not with the tongues of the Kafirs, Insha-Allah. Look to
this society. Any sane, rational human being can see the destruction they
have brought upon themselves with their modern concepts of love, justice,
equality and human rights. The only true definitions of these concepts are
those revealed by Allah (SWT) and taught and practiced by His beloved
Messenger. America has shown itself to be devoid of values, time and time
again, but too many Muslims blindly ignore the results of these actions
and continue to follow them, footstep by footstep.

Allah (SWT) has made it so easy for us. He has given us all that we need
to deal with any issue that may present itself. He has paved an even,
straight path for us, so why do so many of us consistantly veer to roads
that are clearly wraught with danger and isapointment? Allah (SWT) has
blessed us with guidance. He has blessed us with knowledge. He has blessed
us with Islam. So, which of the blessings of our Lord will we ignore?

Allah (SWT) says,

“… Marry of the women that please you; two, three or four, but if you
fear you will not be able to deal justly, then only one…”(An-Nisa 4:3)

I have looked to this statement many times. Some people point out to me
the part that speaks of dealing justly, and they match it with, “And you
have it not in your power to do justice between wives, even though you may
wish (it), but be not disinclined (from one) with total disinclination, so
that you leave her as it were in suspense; and if you effect a
reconciliation and guard (against evil), then surely Allah is Forgiving,
Merciful.” (An-Nisa 4:129).

Here, they say, it is impossible for a person to be fair, therefore it is
not allowed to marry more than one. This does not match what is written.
The verse says to not desert them. How can this be a command to not marry
more than one? Also, I find this theory hard to accept since I know that
the prophet, the companions, the second generation, the third generation
and so forth were all practicers of polygyny. If it were wrong, or even
makru - as some state - then we would not find the majority among our best
generations practicing it.

Then, we have others who claim that Polygyny is only in cases where war
has taken the majority of the men, or in special circumstances - like when
the woman can not bear children or when the woman is sick.

However, once again, I do not find this the case when I look to the
history of Islam. It was not less practiced by the wise knowledgable ones
in Islamic history in times of peace, nor was it ever restricted to
certain conditions. Actually, we don’t begin to see any problems with
polygyny as a practice until the West began to exert influence over the
Muslims.

Even as recently as the first World War, we see the bedouin Arabs proud of
the fact that they have this practice as a part of their religion. What
few problems we have are seen in the apologists who were trying to please
the West by softening the image of Islam. These people even apologized for
the practice of divorce which Islam allowed for centuries, while
Christianity forbid it. Now, I wish I could see the faces of these same
apologists if they could see the divorce rate of the West. Would they stop
apologizing for it now that the West has not only accepted the practice,
but embraced it wholeheartedly?

At any rate, when I look to this verse, I clearly see the if - then
statement. As a computer lover, this immediately strikes me. If - then.
This is a simple logic problem. Do A. If A is not possible, then do B
giving precedence to A and using B as an exception to the rule. Therefore,
when we apply it, we see that the man is commanded to marry two or three
or four, but IF he can not be just, then he marries only one. The one,
therefore becomes the exception to the rule.

Now, if this is true, then why is it that today, not only is polygyny not
the rule, it is the exception, and those who practice it are often
criticized? Can it be that we have so many men who consider themselves
unjust? I doubt it. I believe it lies in the attitudes of our women, may
Allah guide us. We have been brainwashed by the Western ideal of one
man-one wife. We need to listen to our scholars, Insha-Allah. So many of
them have warned us to look to ourselves because this issue may be the one
which makes us Kafir. May Allah (SWT) prevent this from happening. Ameen!

Whenever I discuss this subject with women, the first thing I normally
hear, a statement which makes me cringe, is, “But it’s not fair…” Allah
(SWT) forgive the one who makes such a statement, for it is an utterance
of shirk. Ameen!

The One who made polygyny not only halal but also recommended was Allah
(SWT), Himself. Therefore, whatever He, in his Great Fairness and Wisdom,
has allowed and encouraged is fair by definition.

And to say it is unfair is to say that He (SWT) is unfair. May Allah (SWT)
guard our tongues from such blasphemy. Ameen!

Muslim women have to take their minds out of the gutters of the West, and
bring them up to the wisdom and purity of Islam’s high ground. Polygyny is
not an insult to women; it is a sign of respect. How many women would
remain husbandless if it were haram?

Sisters, I beg you. Look to your sisters in the Muslim countries. The
number of single women has climbed so high that special laws are being
created to try to fix the situation (While I know that many of these laws
are misguided and based on fear of cultural intermixing, the fact the
problem has reached epidemic proportions is undeniable even to them). In
some countries, your sisters are having to resort to such misguided
practices as temporary marriage, because polygyny is so looked down upon.
May Allah (SWT) forgive us for making this so.

Even, when a sister does choose to go into polygyny, her fellow sisters
look to her as a traitor, and often treat her worse than an adultress.
They akin it to stealing someone’s husband. Many of our sisters are
ostracized and even humiliated, or worse cursed for practicing an act that
our Loving Lord recommended to us. May Allah (SWT) guide us. Ameen!
Wallahi, it pains me to see the treatment given to second, third and
fourth wives. Sisters, we are so caught up in this idea that we possess
our men, that even the second or third wife feels she has a right to
prevent the inclusion of another into the relationship that benefitted
her.

Where are our minds? Where is our faith in Allah’s (SWT)Wisdom? Where is
our submission to the Will of Allah (SWT)? Where is our love for each
other? Where is the wanting for our sisters what we want for ourselves,
namely family, love and happiness? Astagh Ferrullah!!!

We were not placed on this earth to do anything but worship Allah (SWT),
and we have to this as He commanded, not as our desires and jealousies
guide us. We are allowed to be jealous. Aisha (RA) our Mother was the MOST
jealous of any woman, but she did not allow her jealousy to destroy her
deen, Alhamdulillah.

I challenge anyone to show me an example where one of the wives of
Muhammad (SAW), or one of the female companions, or even one of the second
or third generation ever condemned a woman for becoming a second, third or
fourth wife. It was accepted as a part of their deen. Sure, women tried to
keep their husbands from taking the second, third or fourth wife. Sure
they were jealous of each other, but in the end they submitted to their
Creator, Allah (SWT).

Sure, they even tried (until the Prophet (SAW) forbid it) to ask for the
divorce of the other. But once they knew their limits, they submitted to
the Will of Allah (SWT). So why is it so hard for us? Why can we not
follow these great examples instead of the examples of the Western woman
who has no respect for herself, much less her peers?

Sisters, I am not asking you to go and ask your husbands to take another
wife, but I am asking you to accept this as a natural, acceptable, even
preferable practice of Islam, Insha-Allah. If you are stronger in your
faith, I see only blessings in asking your husband to help out a sister in
need by marrying her, Insha-Allah. Imagine yourself a single mother, an
unmarried woman past her prime, or a widow, alone without support,
Subhana-Allah!

Sisters, these are your sisters, and Allah (SWT) forbid, it could be you
one day. Have mercy on these women. Perhaps if they marry your husband or
your friend’s husband, do not condemn them, curse them, expel them,
boycott them or harass them. They have done the best, Masha-Allah. They
have married rather than commit haram, Masha-Allah. They have followed the
command of Allah (SWT) by completing half their religion (marriage). The
one who objects to it, even silently in her heart, has to re-examine her
faith in Allah (SWT). She has to accept this as Allah’s (SWT) religion and
as the superior way, because and – only because – Allah (SWT) said that
it is so.

May Allah (SWT) guide us all to accept His decree. May Allah (SWT) make us
all strong in following, practicing and accepting this great deen in its
entirety, and may Allah (SWT) give us the strength faith and support to
fight our desires. Ameen!!!

-----------------------------------------------------------¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥
¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥*¥
THE VOICE OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY ONLINE
QUR’AN & SUNNAH NET GROUP
P.O. Box 5764 , San Jose, CA USA 95150
Tel: 408 267 3172 ••• Fax: 408 448 3652
Email: [email protected]
Url: http://www.qsnetgroup.org

2

Would you like your wife bringing home three more men as husbands tonite? or would you wish she had committed adultery instead? just curious.

Monogamy isn't any bullshit western idea. If a man can't be disciplined enough to be satisfied with one wife, he's not going to stop at marrying four.

3

Thanks Mohammad Ali for all the info, was a lenghty one, but i did try to go through all ... I liked the computer logic if .. then.. else, but the problem is most females (if not all) does not understand computers/logic. They have a different operating system to operate on. There very own. anyways thanks for sharing :)

4

Alternative view, stating the full Quranic ayat and in view of the logic contained in the Quran also.

By K.Ahmed:

The Quranic laws are not meant for just one individual but they are intended to provide betterment to the whole society at large.

In a community there might emanate a situation when the relaxation of the rule of one-man, one woman as a married couple becomes a necessity in the overall interest of the society. For example, pro longed war or some natural calamity may reduce considerably the number of young men in the society thereby leaving a large number of widowed women, generally with children and un-married girls un provided for. These women and children must be protected and looked after in the fulfillment of their needs without the expense of lowering their dignity and honor. Establishing orphanages, old homes or even making these destitutes otherwise economically independent is no remedy to such a situation. The problems like these are much deeper in nature and call for the support and assistance of the whole society. In view of this the Qur'an has relaxed the condition of monogamy, but it should be noted that it is for such instances only.

Polygamy, is not for satisfaction of lust or ego boosting of man but it is linked with a special situation of society and that being to provide assistance to the widowed and destitute women. The following verse informs us this situation and the conditional rule linked to polygamy:

"If you fear that it will not be possible to find an equitable solution of the problems of 'Yatama' (widows and orphans in society) otherwise, then marry women of your choice among them, by twos, threes or fours (as the situation demands), but if you fear that you will not do justice, then marry only one.."(4:3)

The above verse needs attention. It says two things.

(1) Marrying more than one wife is conditional if it is feared that (which in Arabic means widowed and orphaned people in society, i.e. those left in isolation.) are not being provided for equitably in society.

(2) If one feels that he cannot do justice between his wives then he has to marry only one wife. Hence polygamy is in direct relation to justice and fair treatment of wives, otherwise the man is called to marry only one woman.

It should be clear that polygamy is not an obligation, but it is a marriage under special conditions and if a man is not able to do justice then he has to marry only one woman. People may argue that nowadays there may rarely be any woman who might be willing to have another woman brought as a rival into her home. This argument may seem valid in the present pattern of life where personal interests come first, but it loses ground when a person has his ideal of life revolutionized by the Quran and which makes his or her mental outlook of life to such a way that his or her thinking becomes like that as described in the following verse:

 <wa yusiru_na ala_ anfusihim wa lau ka_na bihim khasa_sah>

"The Believers prefer others over themselves though they might have to undergo hardships."(59:9)

In communities marred by conflict and calamities, polygamy would be a way out to give the helpless women protection and assistance in a dignified manner. In a society where the number of men are reduced due to some reason, and there is a surplus of
women of marriageable age, then would it not be gesture of mercy on that woman who has no where to go, if any man were to provide her shelter in his home and his first wife were to accommodate her new unfortunate sister?

5

I would like to ask a few questions from the author of this essay (Ms. Andalusia) and make some comments. First questions:

  1. Are you yourself or a close relative (e.g., your daughter, mother) someone’s 2nd, 3rd or 4th wife? Does/did your father have more than one wife? Just to establish that you practice what you preach.

  2. Given an opportunity, would you consider moving to Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia? There are a lot of men who are looking for additional wives. I gather you live in California.

  3. Why stop at 4? Why is 4 such a magic number? Please give us some explanation other than “God says so”.

  4. Can the man have sex with one of his wives in the presence of his other wives? Or a group sex kinda scenario. Any Hadiths or any Surahs in Quran dealing with that situation?

Now some comments:

Your arguments in favor of polygamy lack any rational reasoning, and your way of dealing with your emotions is to blame the West. Why drag American presidency into explaining what is wrong (to you that might be right) with your own beliefs and insecurity about your religion. FYI, Americans do not look to their elected leadership for family values and morals. They look to their Rabbis, Molwees, Pundits, and Priests for that. To Presidents, they look for economic wellbeing, education, healthcare, and other public concerns, not morals. Americans care less if their political leaders are less than perfect in their personal affairs. Sometimes personal issues are used to settle political scores, as was the case in Lewinsky affair.

If your own religion cannot provide answers or solutions to today’s problems, don’t blame West for that. It is easy to find scapegoats and much too hard for accepting that the entire foundation of your religion is weak and based upon imaginary belief in divine revelations. The inequality of sexes in Islam is a proof that the idea of “polygamy” is a creation of some sexually frustrated man seeking multiple partners to get sexual pleasure while making it look like a permissible and a legal practice from religious point of view. By the way, polygamy existed in pre-Islamic days among pagans, and is still practiced in some non-Muslim parts of the world. In the Mormon religion, it is no longer allowed. It was allowed until not too long ago. So it is not purely an Islamic concept. Female members of a tribe of Southern India (Nayirs) practiced polygamy. That is the only example of a matriarchal system where women dictated the rules (and enjoyed multiple sexual partners). So there are all kinds of examples of polygamy. You make it sound that Islam somehow introduced this concept.

Your contention that extramarital affairs are a phenomenon of Western societies, just shows your level of intelligence for stating your argument. In fact, nothing is more disgraceful or as shameful sight as the place of women in today’s Muslim societies. As human beings, we all should question our conscious for such a terrible state of Muslim women in today’s age. Why not go and educate poor Afghan girls rather than encouraging your ‘sisters’ to get married to married men. You have your priorities totally reversed. If Muslim women are educated in a freer and less controlling environment, they will not marry a Muslim man, let alone marry a married Muslim man. If given a choice, a Muslim woman (or any woman for that matter) will marry someone who treats her as his equal, not something like a pair of shoes, worn a few times, time for a new pair. Your arguments also make Muslim men look like sexual maniacs, there might be some truth to that.

I would just ask one final question:

Is there anything right with the West? Why is it that most of the scholars (so called) like yourself want to live in the west to enjoy the freedoms of the West (Imagine a Westerner expressing similar views “opposing in a way - saying the Islam is a religion of fanatics”. Just imagine what would happen to him if he lived in an Islamic country. Before taking your frustrations out on the West, head East and live the reality!

6

NYAhmedi,

you mention Nayirs (Nairs or Nayars) to be a polygamist society. I am half Nair. Firstly, Nair isn't a tribe, it is a caste. It used to be a matriarchial society among my ancestors, but never heard of polyandry. In fact, never heard of any history of polygamy in south india that superceded the arrival of Arab spice traders. Maybe I'm wrong, do you remember where you found the info?

7

Deer Queer, In my social anthropology books. I will give you the references soon.

8

Reminds me of an old story pardon me if u heard before.

A French guy and Englishman were arguing if wife is better or mistress. Englishman said wife is better since it makes him feel secure. Frenchman claimed that divorses and kids are expensive and mistresses are so much fun.

To get the logical answer, both go to a mathematician and ask "Should one have wife or mistress?"

Mathematician pauses a bit and answers "You should have both, wife as well as mistress."

The guys ask "Why?"

Mathematician says "you see... then wife will think that u r with the mistress, mistress will think that u r with wife and u can do some mathematics"

9

Social anthropology? Man! NYAhmedi, you've been reading it for fun or as a part of some degree program?

I'm damn curious to know what my ancestors were like! Please do give me the references, or better still, you could mail me the a small summary of what you found. I'd really appreciate it. :)

ZZ,

Hilarious.

10

'

[This message has been edited by Rubiya Nur (edited August 02, 2000).]

11

Nowhere does it say that men can have a second third fourth wife anytime the want, the only time they can have more than one wife is if the first agrees too it. Personally i would never let my husband get another wife. I liked queers statement that would u like your wife to get three more husbands if she could? and u can't blame everything on the west that's stupid, there is a bunch of dumb stuff happening in Pakistan too.

Do not let appearances decieve you- always 714

12

Let's just say if i were a widow (God forbid) I would never marry a married man. i don't wanna make life hell for some other woman.

13

Dear Queer,

It was long ago that I took courses in social and physical anthropology, but I still go back to my text books once in a while. “The ‘taravad’ of the Nayar of Malabar is a matrilineal and matrilocal lineage, the owner of the land, and the repository of rights over things and people. But to put this formula into effect a marriage must after 3 days be followed by a divorce. Henceforth a woman has only lovers.” I am relying on my memory to quote this from Radcliffe-Brown, but I can have exact title and dates available with a little research. To me that is a different type of polygamy but polygamy nonetheless. The physical aspects of marital relationship were meaningless and it was just a matter of convenience and practicality.

One more source is [the Elementary Structures of Kinship; Claude Levi-Strauss]. This book is the basic required text on kinship theory. He devotes 4 full chapters to India and draws parallels to Indo-China and Siberia. It is fascinating. I am totally mesmerized by the Indian systems of tribes, clans and casts.

Other interesting reads are ‘Emeneau’ whose opinion is that South India is characterized by the exogamous patrilineal clan, with prohibitions in the matrilineal line, which vary according to the community. Then there are cross-cousin marriages of Nayar. The interesting thing is that both modes existed side by side in South India, as well as in Asam. The different modes were present in Northern and Central India and examples are (Bhil, Martha, and Kunbi). These prohibited marriages in the mother’s clan.

Some other sources are (Banerjee, and Raghunandana). I will give you references if you want some ‘heavy-duty’ reading. Raghunandana defends the theory according to which marriage is possible if the girl is three ‘gutra’ removed although within the fifth to the seventh ‘sapinda’ degrees. Making it more exciting to study the Indian societies. So complex, so intriguing, so sophisticated, and so intoxicating. I get a ‘high’ reading material on India. Modern India is of very little interest to me. It doesn’t tickle my fancy as much as ancient India. Sadly, I have never been to India. One day (Insha-Allah!!)

One last thing, from protohistoric times India has had the belief that bones come from the father and the flesh from the mother’s side, and provides in fact the oldest expression of it (dadabhai, and okomama). This idea is found in the ‘Mahabharata’. Another on my ‘must read list’ after I retire (in about 30 years).

Some good Sources: Levi-Strauss, Margaret Mead, Karandikar, Raghunandana, Radcliffe-Brown, Banerjee, Hodson, Sen Gupta, Hira Lal, - just a few from a lengthy list of pioneers in Indo-Asiatic society.

But start with Levi-Strauss [the Elementary Structure of Kinship]. You can find that in any decent library in India or a good book store. If not, let me know, we will figure something out! Good luck.

Dear Rubiya Nur

What can I say? It pains to read such views. In fact these scholars are doing more harm to Islam than any other source.

14

NYAhmedi,

Really interesting! Nayars are mostly from Malabar, and their family/ancestral home is called "tharavaad". I havn't visited mine from a long time, it is in a village in Malabar, the place is muslim dominated, but people coexist in peace. I should ask my grandmother about this polygamy stuff next time i go home. Inter cousin marriages were common among Nayars, but not anymore. I think this custom existed among many Indian societies. Thanks for your effort. I'll lookout for the authors you mentioned. Ancient India indeed is interesting material. You should visit India only if you really want a taste of it. :)It can be real rough for a person used to life in the west. North India shouldn't look very different from Pakistan to you.

15

In Islam polygamy is neither encouraged or required, it is ** permitted ** . What Islam did is ** regulate and restrict ** it. Hammudah Abd al Ati, (The Family Structure in Islam, American Trust Publications, Maryland, 1977, page 119) writes, "the status of polygamy in Islam is no more and no less than that of a permissible act. And, like any other act lawful in principle, it becomes forbidden if it involves unlawful things or leads to unlawful consequences such as injustice."

All parties have options. A husband can remain monogamous if he wishes and a wife can set conditions to require a monogamous marriage, which is binding on the husband. The wife can seek divorce if the husband attempts to enter into another marriage.

There are two verses in the Qur'an dealing with polygamy (to the best of my knowledge):

"And if you fear that you will not act justly towards the orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two, three, four; but * if you fear that you will not be equitable, then only one * , or what your right hands own; so it is likelier that you will not be partial (or become destitute)." (4:3)

" * You will not be able to be equitable between your wives, even so you be eager. * Yet, do not be altogether partial so that you leave her (i.e., the wife discriminated against) as it were suspended. If you set things right, and are God-minded (or God fearing), God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate." (4:129)

The second verse severely restricts the practice of polygamy. It is extremely difficult to be equitable to your wives (as even the Qur'an mentions: "You will not be able to be equitable between your wives, even so you be eager"). Therefore it is in the interest of most Muslims to remain monogamous (and most do). Polygamy is an exception. The above verse (4:3) was revealed after the Battle of Uhud (where many were martyred). This indicates (to most scholars) that:

"...the intent of its [polygamy] continued permissibility, at least in part, was to deal with individual and collective contingencies that may arise from time to time (e. g., imbalances between the number of males and females, created by war). This provides a moral, practical and humane solution to the problems of widows and orphans, who would otherwise surely be more vulnerable in the absence of a husband and father figure in terms of economics, companionship, proper child rearing and other needs." (Jamal Badawi)

Where it is practiced today, polygamy is more than often abused. Its difficult to find a case where polygamy is practiced correctly according to Islamic precepts today. Camille has also posted an excellent article on polygamy, worth reading.

I didn't even read the original article to be honest. But I did read NY Ahmadi's post, which I found a bit offensive (surprise, surprise):

NY Ahmadi wrote, "2. Given an opportunity, would you consider moving to Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia? There are a lot of men who are looking for additional wives. I gather you live in California."

What kind of stereotype is that? Afghan men are looking for additional wives? Your offended cause the original poster mentions infidelity in the west (using the legitimate example of President Clinton) and you counter with a blatant stereotype regarding men in Saudi and Afghanistan. Give me a break.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "3. Why stop at 4? Why is 4 such a magic number? Please give us some explanation other than "God says so"."

Islam restricted polygamous relationships to 4. It did not encourage polygamy, but merely restricted it. Why 4? Well, sorry to tell you this - but "God said so". That is good enough for Muslims. 4 by the way was a severe restriction for Arabs who were accustomed to having many wives.

NY Ahmadi wrote, "4. Can the man have sex with one of his wives in the presence of his other wives? Or a group sex kinda scenario. Any Hadiths or any Surahs in Quran dealing with that situation?"

No. Polygamy was practiced prior to Prophet Muhammad receiving the message. Its function was not sexual.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "It is easy to find scapegoats and much too hard for accepting that the entire foundation of your religion is weak and based upon imaginary belief in divine revelations."

You seem upset. Is this the best you could come up. Insulting a great religion. I can't say I'm surprised.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "The inequality of sexes in Islam is a proof that the idea of "polygamy" is a creation of some sexually frustrated man seeking multiple partners to get sexual pleasure while making it look like a permissible and a legal practice from religious point of view."

Now your insulting Prophet Muhammad. God forbid anyone insult Bill Clinton (who is obviously a 'sexually frustrated man'). If Muhammad wanted the ultimate in 'sexual pleasure' (Astaghfirullah) he would not have remained monogamous for the majority of his life.

NY Ahmadi wrote, "By the way, polygamy existed in pre-Islamic days among pagans, and is still practiced in some non-Muslim parts of the world."

Really, cause I thought you just said it was the "creation of some sexually frustrated man seeking multiple partners to get sexual pleasure..." Guess you lied.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "As human beings, we all should question our conscious for such a terrible state of Muslim women in today's age. Why not go and educate poor Afghan girls rather than encouraging your 'sisters' to get married to married men."

What does this mean? Islam has little to do with the terrible state of Muslim women today. As far as Afghan girls are concerned, the Soviet-US war has more to do with the conditions they are in today, than any other factor. You wanna talk Afghanistan and Afghan women - I'd be happy to anytime (in an appropriate post).

NY Ahmadi wrote: "You have your priorities totally reversed. If Muslim women are educated in a freer and less controlling environment, they will not marry a Muslim man, let alone marry a married Muslim man. If given a choice, a Muslim woman (or any woman for that matter) will marry someone who treats her as his equal..."

Oh, a man like Bill Clinton? Have you ever talked to a Muslim woman? Like really talked to a practicing Muslim woman? I don't think you have. Cause no practicing Muslim would marry anyone other than a Muslim. Muslim women will tell you that Islam gives them 'equality'. I'm beginning to think you may have had a bit to drink before righting this unintelligent response.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "Is there anything right with the West?"

Yeah sure - lots is right. Lots is wrong too. The same can be said about anyplace in the world.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "Why is it that most of the scholars (so called) like yourself want to live in the west to enjoy the freedoms of the West (Imagine a Westerner expressing similar views "opposing in a way - saying the Islam is a religion of fanatics". Just imagine what would happen to him if he lived in an Islamic country. Before taking your frustrations out on the West, head East and live the reality!"

In Canada we have 'hate' laws to protect minorities and other groups, in the US you don't - they call that 'freedom of speech' - perhaps a better phrase would be 'freedom to spread hate'. Thats why you have crazed maniacs killing Jewish children in day-cares - cause someone gave KKK the power to pollute the minds of young white Americans.

The governments of most countries inhabited by Muslims are not democratic, and not supported by the people. If governments take actions to suppress freedom of speech, they do so to protect their own interests, not the interests of Islam. In fact their often silencing Muslims who are stanch supporters of religious reform.

A westerner insulting Islam in a Muslim country is as ignorant as a white man insulting blacks in Harlem. The consequences of such actions have little to do with religion. Some things are sacred and should be respected. I just visited Thailand - there two things are sacred Buddha and their King Rama - I didn't disrespect either (not only cause I'm a nice guy, but also because I understand the concept of sanctity). I suggest you apply these same concepts in your writing and your life and respect Islam, its teachings and its Prophets. It is after all, one of the worlds great religions. You can disagree without offending others.

Achtung

A woman needs a man, like a fish needs a bicycle.

16

Achtung: I won't take the words restrict and regulate in the same context as permit.

Permitting polygamy is a lot different than restricting or regulating number of marriages. It might be the case 1400 years ago, but any justification which was valid then may not hold the same weight now. In modern times, we don't start off by marraying many wives to positively justify regulate and restrict as an argument.

Now, coming back to permitted, permitting four wives ramifies enough of a great deal in making it a practice or practiceable as well as a complete and sheer imbalance of men and women's rights in a society that any such society or religion cannot claim to bestow women the rights they deserve as equal human beings.

Even if polygamy is not practiced as much as it used to be, permission of it itself put women at a lower spot next to men in the society.

As far as "God says so" argument is concerned, I think NYAhmadi was out of line here. It does not matter whether the number was 4 or 5. It's a matter of belief. But the objective matter here is the permission of more than one wive and he should stick to that argument. I agree with Achtung that

[quote]
You can disagree without offending others
[/quote]

17

Dear Achtung,

  1. Welcome back!

  2. You write:

“I didn't even read the original article to be honest. But I did read NY Ahmadi's post, which I found a bit offensive (surprise, surprise): “

I am honored.

You as usual have a habit of quoting out of context. I don’t have time nor desire to point out your inconsistencies. Why not tell us what you think of the idea of inequality of sexes in Islam? To you it might make sense for men to practice polygamy but not allowed for women “because God says so”, to a lot of people in this world, it does not. If you think women are given equal status in Islam, you are living a dream.

“If Muhammad wanted the ultimate in 'sexual pleasure' (Astaghfirullah) he would not have remained monogamous for the majority of his life”. So has Bill Clinton.

“NY Ahmadi wrote, "By the way, polygamy existed in pre-Islamic days among pagans, and is still practiced in some non-Muslim parts of the world." Really, cause I thought you just said it was the "creation of some sexually frustrated man seeking multiple partners to get sexual pleasure..." Guess you lied. “

No I didn’t lie, in that instance I meant that someone tried to make it sound legitimate as allowed by religion. Next time quote the whole sentence. You are bright enough.

“Have you ever talked to a Muslim woman? Like really talked to a practicing Muslim woman? “

No. Nor do I wish to. Someone who believes that being half as good as a male is acceptable needs to have her head examined. Now tell me, have you ever talked to any woman other than a muslim woman? Have you seen any? Like really seen any?

“That’s why you have crazed maniacs killing Jewish children in day-cares - cause someone gave KKK the power to pollute the minds of young white Americans.”

These hate groups are as much a result of American laws and freedom of speech, as the state of Muslim societies (particularly women) because of Islam.

“You can disagree without offending others.” You also write, “I'm beginning to think you may have had a bit to drink before righting this unintelligent response.”

I am least bit offended by your response. It comes out of ignorance and narrow-mindedness. You don’t have courage to admit that your religion has made laws to make women less worthy as compared to men.

A piece of advice - next time read the original posting before reading responses. It might give you a reference point.

“A woman needs a man, like a fish needs a bicycle.”

A nickle is not worth a dime anymore! "Yogi Berra"

Welcome back!!!

18

Basically there are a few points to remember when discussing polygamy in Islam:

  1. It is not the rule, but an exception. It is ** permitted ** under certain circumstances, one of those being a criteria of equity (as per 4:3). The Qur'an itself states that this criteria will be difficult to meet ( * "You will not be able to be equitable between your wives, even so you be eager." * 4:129).

  2. The verse in the Qur'an dealing with polygamy directly (4:3) was revealed after the Battle of Uhud. Indicating (as Camille has also pointed out) that its permissibility was subject to conditions of war and in particular in dealing with widows and orphans. It is the exception, in such cases - not the norm.

  3. Islam ** restricted ** polygamy by placing caveats on its use (like the one above). It also restricted the number of wives to 4.

  4. Islam ** regulated ** polygamy by requiring the consent of the first wife before engagement in a second marriage. It also allowed for divorce for women who felt they were treated unjust during such an arrangement. All parties have options in an Islamic marriage - if a woman wishes she does not have to remain or take part in a polygamous relationship.

  5. The reason women are not permitted to have 4 husbands (other than the pre-modern reason of lineal confusion) lies in the reasoning behind the permitting polygamous relationships: Women did not actively fight in war, nor were they the 'breadwinners' in Islamic societies. Therefore, after wars, they often find themselves destitute.

Today times have changed - if a women can satisfy her needs on her own (which many Muslim women can) - there is no need to engage in a polygamous relationship after widowhood. Nor is it in a Muslim males interest - the sin he may receive for being inequitable between his wives, far outweighs any reward.

Roman wrote: "Even if polygamy is not practiced as much as it used to be, permission of it itself put women at a lower spot next to men in the society."

It did only because it is misunderstood and abused. Polygamy is an exception in Islam, today it is difficult to find the circumstances where such an exception can be put in practice.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "If you think women are given equal status in Islam, you are living a dream."

Islam deals more with 'equity' than 'equality'. Equality based on your definition of the word is obviously different from the definition you would get from a practicing Muslim.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "...someone tried to make it sound legitimate as allowed by religion."

It was legitimate in pre-Islamic times - in fact it was perfectly legit to have hundreds of wives. Islam restricted it and regulated it - making it an exception rather than a norm.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "Someone who believes that being half as good as a male is acceptable needs to have her head examined."

An unnecessary insult to all Muslim women in the world.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "Now tell me, have you ever talked to any woman other than a Muslim woman? Have you seen any? Like really seen any?"

I'm not as narrow-minded as you may think I am.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "These hate groups are as much a result of American laws and freedom of speech, as the state of Muslim societies (particularly women) because of Islam."

I agree. It all comes down to abusing rules which were made for the betterment of society - both in America and Islam.

NY Ahmadi wrote: "You don't have courage to admit that your religion has made laws to make women less worthy as compared to men."

Trust me, you don't know as much as you may think about Islamic law. Every law in Islam has a justification. One of the most attractive things about Islam is actually justice.

Achtung

19

Achtung:

[quote]
It did only because it is misunderstood and abused. Polygamy is an exception in Islam, today it is difficult to find the circumstances where such an exception can be put in practice.
[/quote]

So why allow something of such a great proportion in a religion, at a colllective level, which can easily be "misunderstood and abused" and as a result would have drastic ramfication on women's rights in the society?

Permitting four marriages, no matter what the circmstansive restrictions are, is a collective law upon the whole society. It's not an individualistic act which can be ignored so easily if an individual deviates from the its exact code of conduct. Even if it is not as much practiced, being part of a religious belief system itself puts women in a disadvantageous position.

As far as you example of war is concerned, like I said before, a justification valid 1400 years ago cannot have same weight of validity in this case today.

It seems to me that those circumstances (the post war ones) created a need to make this exception, and I am not arguing its need at that time at all. But that particular circmstance are no longer around, so why we still have this exception as part of religious belief and practice?

20

Interesting topic and a very intellectual, interesting debate! I am glad that most users (men and women) here used rational and common sense to emphasize on fairness and gender equality.

I hope to see more such discussions on this forum.