By Dr. Lutf ur Rehman, Nashville, TN, USA
Almost thirty years ago, I was a young man who had recently arrived in Ireland from Pakistan. Ireland was a deeply religious country, mostly Catholic. Back then it was not a politically active country on the international stage. The wars in the Middle East had just started. America had attacked Iraq. Islam was coming into focus for the Westerners.
The Irish are very friendly and happy people. Working in the hospital, the most common question I faced was “Can you marry four women?” I was young and naive with little knowledge of my own religion. According to my limited understanding the answer to this question was an emphatic yes. When I asked the “religious scholars,” they also defended polygamy vigorously. Of course some of them who could perceive the irony hidden in this question tried to recount the benefits and virtues of polygamy. None was willing to place any limitations on it. What if the woman was chronically sick? What if she was unable to bear children? What if there were more women in the society than men such as in times of war? I also memorized these benefits and defended polygamy without any restrictions. But deep down my soul could not accept these explanations. If a wife is chronically sick, should the husband abandon her and go enjoy with a new wife? If she could not bear children for him, instead of getting treatment should he marry another woman? What about adoption? I was not content with these explanations. “Religious scholars” could not answer such questions intelligently. They just parroted what they had learned in the “madrassa.” There was no intellectual depth in their explanations. There was not even recognition from them that polygamy was a disaster for the first wife.
I understood then that religion cannot be learned from these “religious scholars.” At the same time I could not accept that the religion of Islam has no good explanation for polygamy or that it sought oppression of women.
Now many years later with much study and discussion with “non-religious” but sharp and smart Muslims, I have a much better understanding of this issue as well as many others facing the religion of Islam today.
In the present day, Islam is under attack at two fronts. One is the issue of Violent Jihad. I don’t mean the fight in the Middle East as that is mostly a geo-political issue and has nothing to do with Islam. I mean the extreme intolerance of different views among the Muslims. Muslims are killing other Muslims just for a difference in the interpretation of religion. Their sensitivities are extreme. They are easily provoked by inconsequential issues. They are quick in declaring other Muslims as infidels and an enemy of Islam and are willing to kill unarmed civilians, women and children. They have created many idols such as their religious leaders and many revered figures from the past. Any perceived insult of these idols can result in a violent attack on the perpetrator. This extreme ideology is being promoted by the leaders of the religion for their personal benefits.
The other front is the teachings of the religion of Islam most commonly the women issues, family law and criminal law. Polygamy is one such issue.
Polygamy is when a man has more than one wife at the same time.
No woman could agree with polygamy. No wife would like to share her husband with another woman. Yet when it happens, against the wishes of the first wife, many of them would accept this less than perfect arrangement and prefer this over getting a divorce. The reasons of this acceptance could be many but following few are the most common.
1. Financial dependence of woman on her husband, due to lack of education, vocational skills and permission or opportunity to work.
2. Societal and family pressure to maintain the marriage no matter what.
3. Religious indoctrination and flawed explanation of the scriptures.
But as God predicted in the Holy Quran, women issues are gaining more importance. Many religions and countries are addressing them. In most Western countries polygamy is against the law. Almost all major religions have renounced polygamy despite no prohibition in their scriptures. Islam is the only religion which allows and in some instances promotes polygamy. This statement may be shocking to some Muslims, but is a fact. What Islam says about polygamy is very different from what the Muslims believe it to be.
There is permission in the Holy Quran for polygamy, but with restrictions and limitations.
The verse of the Holy Quran which grants permission for polygamy is in the context of the orphans. This is the translation of it:
And give to the orphans their wealth. And do not take filth in exchange of what is pure. And do not embezzle their wealth by mixing it with yours. This is indeed a great sin.
And if you fear that you will not be just in the matter of the orphans then marry the women which you like, two three or four. But if you fear that you will not be equitable between them, then marry only one, or those whom your right hands possess. This is the least you could do to avoid injustice. (Ch. 4, Verse 3 & 4)
It is clear from this verse that the permission of polygamy is in the context of orphans. This is not a general permission. It means that if you were the guardian of orphan girls you may wish to marry one of them. Since they are orphans and you are the guardian, you may be unjust to them by not giving them their bridal gift (mehr). In that case you should marry other women who have societal support and you will have to deal with them justly. Even in this context the permission is restricted and comes with instructions. Marry only four at the most. It should be proper marriage with all the legal rights of marriage. There should be equity between the wives. Do not bend on the side of one and leave the others hanging. (Ch. 4, Verse 130) And most of all the purpose of this permission is so the man does not commit sin. There are women under his supervision and the situation is ripe for sin.
A widespread interpretation of this verse, attributed to the Prophet’s wife Ayesha is that it concerns orphan girls who were vulnerable to abuse by their male guardians. Since an orphan girl’s guardian was often also her wakil (advocate) – the male guardian was legally able to give her in marriage – he might seek to marry her to himself or others without her consent, seek to marry her himself for a discounted bridal gift (mehr), or refuse to marry her to anyone in order to keep her wealth for himself while mistreating her. The verse instructs men who might be tempted toward these abusive practices to marry women not in their custody and thus not vulnerable to these abuses. (Jami al biyan an ta wilay al Quran by Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari, Tafsir al Quran al-Azim by Imad al DinAbul Fida Ismail ibn Umar ibn Kathir)
This is the only verse of the Holy Quran which permits polygamy. There is no other place in the entire book where polygamy is permitted. As with all permissions there has to be conditions and restrictions. Just as an example, when the speed limit is 40 miles an hour and the sign is posted on the road, it does not mean that everyone has to drive at this speed. The circumstances of the traffic will determine the speed and we can still be stopped by the police and charged with reckless driving even when we are driving under the speed limit. So the context and circumstances are important when a permission is being used. We also see that this disclaimer is not posted with every road sign. But somewhere in the law it is mentioned and people know it. Even when they claim ignorance this is not a legal defense. Same is true of all permission in the religion. They are only permissions and can be used only when the right circumstances exist. Otherwise they will be considered illegal and their use can bring investigation and punishment. This is also an accepted principal of Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqah). Wudu is necessary only when it is time for prayers. Otherwise it is not required.
Talking about polygamy the Promised Messiah (as) said:
About polygamy it is clear words of two, three or four in the Holy Quran. But in the same verse equity is also mandated. If equity is not possible or love goes only in one direction, or the resources are limited or he is impotent then one should not marry more than one wife. In my view it is best that one should not do this, because God says in the Holy Quran, “He does not like those who cross the limits” (Ch. 2: Verse 191). (Malfuzat Vol 1, page 154)
At another place he says:
The Law of God should never be used against its intent. Nor should it be made an excuse for the carnal desires. This would be a sin. God says this again and again that you should not be overcome with canal desires. In every matter righteousness should be your goal. If polygamy is practiced for carnal desires by making sharia an excuse, the only result would be that the other nations will raise objections that Muslims have nothing else to do except polygamy. Fornication is not the only sin. Getting overwhelmed with carnal desires is sin. Influence of this world should be minimal in one’s life, so you can be a reflection of the verse, “Laugh less and weep more” (Ch. 9, Verse 82) One who has too much indulgence in this world and he is busy in his wives day and night, when would he be weeping? Most people are such that they follow one view and do everything for it but fall away from the real purpose of God. Even when God has granted permission for certain things it does not mean that the entire life is spent doing them. God says in praise of his servants that they spend all night prostrating and standing before Him. (Ch. 25, Verse 65) Now look at the person who is busy in his wives day and night. He is only creating associates with God. (Malfuzat Vol. 4 page 50-51)
In the context of polygamy this is clearly illustrated by the writings of the first Ahmadi preacher in the USA, Hadhrat Mufti Muhammad Sadiq. He writes in “Muslim Sunrise” in July of 1921:
I have not come here to teach plurality of wives. If a Muslim will ever preach or practice polygamy in America he will be committing a sin against his religion. This was my reply to the immigration officer’s first question put to me when I reached the American shore. In the religion of Islam there are some commandments and some permissions. I must always follow the commandments, but the permissions can be avoided. For example, Islam commands that we must worship One God and permits that I may eat beef. No government can make me worship more than One God. But if I go to a country where the government does not allow cow-killing and beef-eating (as in some parts of India), there, I as a Muslim will never eat beef. ….. For another example, Islam commands that I must obey the Law of the government under which I live. And polygamy, even if allowed with all its limitations and conditions, falls under the category of permissions and not commandments. And that permission is taken away under the commandment that I must obey the law of the ruling government of the country. If a Muhammadan in Europe or America marries more than one wife he violates not only the law of his country, but also a great commandment of his Faith. Thus the religion of Islam PROHIBITS polygamy for the Muhammadans in Europe and America. No Muslim can ever think of plurality of wives here. His religion does not allow it. (Muslim Sunrise, July 1921)
Permissions of the Holy Quran apply only when a need or circumstances exist. Use of these permissions without need or justification is a sin. One example is Jihad (War to protect the core religious rights. It does not include political wars). The concept of Jihad is so important in Islam that “Qital” is mentioned in the Holy Quran more often than “Salat!” But in the current day nearly every Muslim would agree that “Qital” (violent jihad) is not applicable. (because everyone is free to practice their religion) If circumstances changed surely it will come into action again, but not under the current circumstances. We are also aware that the permission of jihad has many limitations and rules that come with it. (Migration before jihad. God’s land is vast) Even when jihad becomes necessary, there are rules and regulations. In exactly the same way in the present day, the need for polygamy does not exist. Orphans are not under the control of individuals. There are governmental institutions taking care of them. Moreover regulations and rules must be followed to make sure that women are not being abused. These could include an assessment of mental status of a man to determine if he needs psychological counselling or to identify physical defects such as impotence, etc. Medical assessment of infertility should also be performed in relevant cases. Stigma against adoption should be addressed by campaigns of public education during Friday sermons. The financial ability of the man should also be evaluated. After all if a permission is granted to proceed with polygamy, the relationship should be constantly monitored to make sure that the man is following the intent and word of the Holy Quran perfectly.
It is clear that the religion of Islam has been used extensively to usurp the rights of women over the centuries. The dire situation of women in Muslim countries is a testament to this tragedy. Women are forced to follow the desires of men on the pretext of their religion. It is time according to the prophecy of the Holy Quran to address this injustice and set it right.
Great article. Clearly lays out the role of polygamy in Islam and the misperceptions around the issue
Well, I beg to differ (slightly). The writer is not taking into consideration the facts of life also in Western Countries. The majority of people now live together without a formal marriage. Consequently when a ‘polygamist’ is living with more than one lady without formal marriage he is not breaking any laws. Yes, in order to treat all ladies equally he will have to make arrangements, such as a will so that all ladies inherit equally. (or balance the ‘governmental pension schemez with a private one). In the non-Muslim society of the West both ‘serial polygamy’ (one after the other) as well as ‘concurrent polygamy’ does exist. The difference is that the ‘Westerners’ to a large extend hide it while Muslims should be honest and treat all wives equally.
Wow, what a good read. It’s very clear and concise. Very well written and referenced . And I must say bring a woman after reading this I feel much satisfaction.
A Muslim practicing polygamy in the West would only be breaking the law if he ‘marries’ her ‘legally’, which means he would have to lie and state that he is single. Lies are of course not permitted in Islam.
Just to clarify: a Muslim practising polygamy in the West would have a ‘Nikah’ (Islamic marriage, public announcement, nothing secret) but not a registered marriage in the Western Civil Registry.
A great article…very precise and understandable.
Thanks to the writer.
I think that in other places Promised Messiah has also clearly said that in conditions permitting such a situation, where there is a likelihood of breaking the demands of Taqwa, societal pressures must be resisted which do not favor polygyny- but incline men to seek relationships which are inimical to Taqwa. This is what is happening now in the West – where responsibility is abandoned due to legal restrictions. In some circumstances this is prescribed as an unpleasant medicine to curb wayward tendencies and bring responsibility to actions. Promised Messiah also said that an arrangement between three mature individuals i.e. the first wife, husband and the new wife, is a matter of adult consent and no other individual has the right to interfere. Of course this is in the bounds of moral law, virtue and sin. Legality can always be tackled one way or the other. The second Khalifa was quite clear that the conditions demanding polygyny go beyond the specific situations mentioned in the Holy Quran. This is because, human condition is varied and the Quran being a universal and final message must cater to needs of all times and all places and must also covers exceptions not just the rules.
Thanks Dr. Sahib. It is an important addition.
For anyone needing a reference for Khalifa Sani’s (RA) views on this please see Volume titled Khutbate Som – mainly on the Nikah Ceremonies performed by him.
Correct word is Polygyny and not Polygamy. Polygamy covers both Polygyny and Polyandry. Polyandry is not permitted in Islam under any circumstances.
Wow that’s enlightening, it’s something I was unaware of. But I’m grateful that you have advised me. I’ll be sure to read the book of khalifa Sani (ra) as per your suggestion.
I agree very enlightening. I’ll also take my time into reading the book khalifa Sani (ra). Hopefully this opens the mind of others
I hope the discussion can mostly focus on the holy Quran as that gives us ever lasting principles that are not constrained by the limitations of age and environment. For example, seventh century Arabia is clearly different from the 17th or 18th century India when the Mughals ruled or the Ottoman Empire in Turkey when there were multiple wives and concubines and now the 21st century USA and the other Western countries. It is very apparent that we should always read the holy Quran in the context of the time.
Suggested Reading
Reading the Quran and the Bible Literally Means Demons and Jinns Will Rule Humans
Explaining Misinterpretations of the Holy Text to a Christian Audience
God Is Living, So Why Does Religion Treat God As Dead?
Sources or Criteria for Interpretation of the Holy Quran
Sir Zafrullah Khan Introducing the Holy Quran to the World
The British law does not recognize a second wife as a legal wife where as Islam does. If the British law can accommodate common law arrangements between long term partners and same sex marriages then why can it not also accommodate a second wife of a Muslim male as his legal wife? How does making this provision for Muslims affect non Muslims in any way?
Muslim immigration to Britain is a relatively recent phenomenon from 1945 onwards. I can see from various discussions on this thread that there is an unease about allowing separate laws for the Muslim community in accordance with Islam.
What about Roman Catholicism which was if I am not wrong the religion in Britain until the separation and formation of the Church of England by Henry the eighth? Do the British Roman Catholics follow the laws of the country or are they allowed some contracts and laws in accordance with their faith?
The British identity is not based on religion and therefore its easy for them to accommodate different religions. Islam came under severe criticism after 9/11 and a deplorable act by a bunch of terrorists led to this unfounded fear and distrust of all Muslims in all the Western countries which is unfortunate to say the least. What about the Jews? Are they allowed separate contracts/laws in accordance with their religion?
IA
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk
Polygamy is the ancient Islamic law, the time of slavery.
Those Muslim who practice polygamy will destroy happiness of his children and wife. He is a children destroyer. No children like their father have another wife.
Hopefully Ahmadiyyah do not urge male to do polygamy.
Polygamy is not relevant anymore, 21st century.
As expected men are unwilling to concede any ground on the subject of polygamy whereas women like the new thinking. The fact is that one can find excuse for his bad behavior in the Holy Quran or the writings of the Promised Messiah or the Khulafa. The history of Islam is filled with such examples. (Jihad, Concubines, Muta, Blasphemy, Apostasy, Death of Jesus, Khatum un Nabiyeen etc) According to the Holy Quran the women’s rights were going to become important in the latter days. We also believe that the Sun was going to rise from the West in the latter days, meaning the wisdom and progress would come from the Western Nations. I think there is no harm in learning from them. The great poet Iqbal said it, “Fear of modernity and insistence on the tradition — This is the difficult step in the journey of nations”.
Ahmadiyyah Muslims and others sect of Islam are so happy and enjoy living in the West countries than their own country.
God bless America and its people, Human Right is the main key for peace, harmony, dignity, prosperity and happines.
Orphans must be respected by their temporary caretaker or guardian. No sexual advantage should be taken from orphans. To marry an orphan from a superior position of guardian,is a sexual misconduct. It is taking sexual advantage from a superior position.It is breech of trust .
To marry another women for sexual needs is injustice and insult to first wife.
Today we know that a man is incapable to take care of sexual needs of a women continuously because of a refractory period between erections.To marry another women for children is injustice and insult to first wife.Today we know that there are 50% chance of male infertility and female infertility is a treatable condition.To marry another women during sickness is not only injustice and insult to first wife but it is a sub-human primitive behavior.
The first Ahmadi mubaligh of USA, Mufti Sb said rightfully over 100 years ago, If a Muslim will ever preach or practice polygamy in America he will be committing a sin against his religion—-Islam commands that I must obey the Law of the government under which I live. And polygamy, even if allowed with all its limitations and conditions, falls under the category of permissions and not commandments. And that permission is taken away under the commandment that I must obey the law of the ruling government of the country. If a Muhammadan in Europe or America marries more than one wife he violates not only the law of his country, but also a great commandment of his Faith. Thus the religion of Islam PROHIBITS polygamy for the Muhammadans in Europe and America. No Muslim can ever think of plurality of wives here. His religion does not allow it. (Muslim Sunrise, July 1921) .
well, you have your opinion and I have my opinion. Again: yes, to ‘marry in a court of law’ in America is not possible, but now-a-days is it not that more than 50% of living-together-couples are not married in a court of law? Consequently the 1921 argument is not valid today.
Mohtram, nobody should force their morality on others. If some one of legal age has sex with mutual consent in USA, he or she does not break the law of the land. Still 50 % use their choice of marriage to live together. In other words we can say at least 50 % do not chose sinful way of living voluntarily .
Morality should be taught to children by their parents according to their own preference.
Morality should not be legislated.Healthy sexual living should be taught in schools to avoid social and health consequences due to sexual contacts.
There is no commandment in Quran that forces a man to live as a polygamous today.
Polygamy is exploitation of opposite sex by Power, money, beauty or peer pressure.
If a Muslim in Europe or America marries more than one wife he violates not only the law of his country, but also a great commandment of his Faith.( Mufti Ahmed Sadiq Sb;Muslim Sunrise, July 1921)
Mohtram, 50% live together without marriage is a lame excuse for polygamy.1921 arguments of first Ahmadi Muslim mubalagh and Sahabi of Hazrat Mirza Sb, was the most important argument then and is valid now. Polygamy does not reduce extramarital, intramarital or premarital sexual misconduct.
Well written article. Hopefully it open the minds of others if they want to understand the real teachings of Islam.
This verses were revealed after Uhud war. Out 754 men (700 infantry; 50 archers, 4 cavalry), 70-75 Muslims died. So, at least 70-75 women became widows and of their children became orphans. More likely, lot more than 75 women must have become widows due to the practice of polygamy at that time. These widows and their children were left with no source of livelihood because men were bread winners at that time . The verse 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; 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.”) was revealed and it recommended Muslims marrying and supporting the widows of Uhud war. It is nothing to do with marriages with orphans but with widows and supporting them and their children.
So, polygamy is time-bound permission after Uhud war, and not sanctioned for all the time.
So here is what Sir Zafarullah writes in his book “Woman in Islam”. Very well stated and could not be said better.
I will look for original source by Promised Messiah also. One has to be careful when on criticizes an institution practiced by majority of Prophets and Khalifa Sani (RA). In all cases, necessities of Taqwa are most important to keep in mind. I believe man are also monogamous by nature and barring of course the exploitation of religious injunctions (which can happen in all cases), polygyny is a call to sacrifice for a higher purpose and very few men can really do justice.
Excerpt from the book is as follows:
“Some modern Muslim writers, in their anxiety and eagerness to curry favour with the West, have sought to argue that as polygamy was permitted on condition of equal treatment of wives (4:4) and equality was declared impossible of achievement (4:130), it follows that the permission was in effect revoked. This line of exegesis is entirely mistaken and is utterly untenable. The text of 4:130 itself clearly contemplates continuation of a system of plurality of wives. Besides, 4:130 was not interpreted by the Holy Prophet (peace be on him) or his companions as revoking the permission granted by 4:4; nor was such interpretation ever commended by Muslim Jurists through the centuries.
The truth is that polygamy as defined and restricted by Islam is a device designed by the highest wisdom for the fostering of high moral values and the safeguarding of chastity both of males and females. It may be described as a beneficent moral and cultural safety valve. For lack of such a safety valve, societies that have sought to enforce a rigid system of monogamy have been ripped apart by promiscuity, homosexuality, lesbianism and bestiality. Unrestricted sexual indulgence has become the norm between them, and does not even attract moral disapprobation.
The moral line is to be drawn not between monogamy and polygamy, but between regulation and license. In the absence of moral restraint, both monogamy and polygamy may be abused. It is the
character of the relationship that exalts or debases it. As already mentioned, the ultimate purpose of marriage in Islam is winning the pleasure of Allah. Then Islam inculcates the beneficent development
of all faculties and capacities through wise regulation and exercise, and disapproves of and condemns their suppression or stultification. In the early years of Islam, responding to the divine call, particularly in the case of a male, spelt the forfeiture of life. Many paid the forfeit in Mecca; many more had to pay it in Medina and other places on the field of battle. Though women were not altogether exempt, yet comparatively few of them were called upon to make the extreme sacrifice. In consequence the number of women among the Muslims rapidly increased in proportion to men. Widows and orphans, male and female, had to be provided for. The safeguarding of moral and spiritual values, in these conditions, made polygamy an obligation, a sacrifice and certainly not an indulgence.
There were other considerations of a personal, social, politico-religious character, which called for polygamy. In modern times conditions have changed and monogamy, outside Africa, is becoming
more and more the rule; but everywhere in individual cases moral considerations still call for a plurality of wives. Islam makes provision for such cases. Among Muslims no stigma attaches to polygamy; it is as honourable as monogamy, and involves no discrimination between the wives or their children”
Mohtram Dr Alim Sb,
1- Please respond to the first Ahmadi Muslim American Mubaligh, Hazrat Mufti Sb’s argument:
If a Muslim in Europe or America marries more than one wife he violates not only the law of his country, but also a great commandment of his Faith.( Mufti Sadiq Sb;Muslim Sunrise, July 1921)
2- Is polygamy mandated by Quran for Muslims living in the west today? My answer is no.if your answer is yes, please give me references.
3-Are you polygamist? If so how many wives do you have. In case of four wives please enlighten us with your reasons for each additional marriage.
4- May we hear reasons from wife #2,3 and 4?
5-If you have daughters are they in polygamous relationship?
6- If not will they be looking forward to polygamous marriages for themselves ?
7- I have no right to look down upon you if you are a polygamist.It is between you and God.
Rich widows can always find young single handsome man. We have example of Hazrat Khadeja.
Filthy rich guys always find two, three or four girls in their harem..
There are no girls in war spoils these days. They are protected by Geneva convention unless some sexual predator catches them.I have talked about sickness and infertility before. .
These are lame excuses.
Your direct personal experience may educate people who look polygamy as a sexual exploitation.
Those who wish to learn the opinion of current Khalifa of Islam should refer to this Friday Sermon delivered in March this year. Read from Slide 15 onwards. This should close the debate as he is the final authority at least for Ahmadiyya Muslims.
The Issues The Solutions Prayers True purpose Polygamy Funerals: https://www.alislam.org/archives/sermons/…/FSP20170303-EN.ppt
Mohtram Dr Alim Sb, I have seen it, please do not try to hide under the coat tail of Hazrat Khalifatul Maseh (aba).
There is no debate. It is simply unlawful and crime in the west.
If you still think, it is a debate then just talk to your wife/ wives, sisters and daughters. They will end this debate for you.
InshaAllah.
Janab Chaudry Sahib: Peace be upon you. I think we are having a civilized debate about this and I find your tone aggressive, personal and insecure. I am not interested in personalizing this nor do I think its helpful. I am not hiding anything or hiding behind anyone. I think Huzoor’s khutba amply explains it and I follow him and this is enough for me. I consider Islam a universal religion in time and space and speak from that point of view. As far as individual circumstances are and whether you live in Europe, North America or South Asia, you must obey the law of the land and if that stands in your way of achieving Taqwa, A quote from Mufti Sadiq sahib from 1921 suitable for USA is not universal teaching while the Khutba from our current Imam is and that is what i am trying to convey. you can always migrate if your intention is to please Allah. Always the principle remains the achievement of Allah’s pleasure and that is between Allah and yourself. I hope you understand what I am saying and I pray that Allah keeps both of us safe, happy and healthy in where we are and whatever we do with full obedience to Khilafat. Wassalam
Polygamy is the ancient Islamic law, the time of slavery.
Those Muslim who practice polygamy will destroy happiness of his children and wife. He is a children destroyer. No children like their father have another wife.
Hopefully Ahmadiyyah do not urge male to do polygamy.
Polygamy is not relevant anymore, 21st century.
Reply
“if you fear that you will not be just, then marry only one. Quran 4:4
Quran is the only holy scripture that says marry only one. Quran mandates condition of 100% justice. Quran does not mandate polygamy. It is painful for a women even to imagine it.
In USA, Hazrat Khalifatul Maseh V ) has issued 11 point directive “true Islam”. Point #3 is “Equality and Empowerment of women”. Now women is Empowered to demand equality and is empowered to say no to polygamy. Hazrat Mufti Sb was divinely guided . He said it 100 years ago.
I am sorry if you felt irritated and defensive. I really did not mean it.
Love for all. Peace be upon you.
@ Dr. Alim — Please read the article carefully. At no place polygamy has been condemned or a demand made to abrogate it. Your reaction though is as if polygamy has been condemned. This is exactly the knee jerk reaction of the Muslims, including Ahmadis that has put Islam at a disadvantage. In the long reference from Sir Zafrullah that you have quoted, I will just quote one line.
“The moral line is to be drawn not between monogamy and polygamy, but between regulation and license. ”
The article is an attempt to underline reasonable regulation for polygamy. I hope you will agree.
I agree with Dr. Chaudhry that we should argue from the Holy Quran and not from the understanding of someone else. Sir Zafrullah was a polygamist himself. So his views are biased and not admissible.
The article quotes the Promised Messiah and derives the proposed regulation from his writings. I hope this will obviate the need to quote any khalifah.
I also hope that you will agree that the law of the land takes precedence over any religious permissions. Therefore polygamy is against the religion of Islam in the Western countries. This principal has been mentioned by the Promised Messiah himself.
I hope you will cool down and reconsider your views.
Dear Dr. Lutf-ur- Rahman. Peace by upon you. On another note, i wanted to make an acquaintance again with you. Dr. Zia Shah knows this. I am class fellow of your youngest brother Ijaz from CCH 1977 Entry, Liaquat Wing. Happy to see you in action. I am intrigued by your comment on Sir Zafarullah being a polygamist. Do you have a reference or personal information? I have read him extensively and about him but have not come across that. Sincere apologies to both you and Dr. Chaudry sahib if any offense caused. I am always open to reconsider my views on merit. May Allah keep us all safe and healthy.
Dr Abdul Alim: == we are and whatever we do with full obedience to Khilafat. ===
Allah warn you Dr Abdul Alim : It seems to me that you believe in Khilafat 100 percent??? Woow. Only God is Holy
No people always true, human can make mistake easilly.
As long as a man, do not trust a man blindly.
There is no one in this earth who does what is right all the time and never makes a mistake.Ecc.7:20.
It is better to trust in God’s laws , than depend on man.
It is better to trust in God’s laws ,than depend on human leaders.Psalm 118:8
There are a lot of topics under discussion. Let us focus on merits and harms of polygamy here. If we are debating with non-Muslims an argument from authority like what the prophet said or did does not help. Let us have a broader discussion based on reason, logic and human observations.
I understand that polygamy violates the happiness and the basic human rights of the first wife. My question would be can it help millions of children being raised by single mothers without a father figure in their lives?
good point, rational one. Some ladies will divorce a husband if he marries more than one and some men will divorce a lady if she does not allow it. Duvorces should be minimized. Ofcourse faithful wives and faithful husbands are better. But Islam caters for all human situations.
Alhamdilullah. We can quote the Holy Quran if we want to read ‘marry only one’ and we can quote the Holy Quran if we want to read ‘marry two, three or four’. … and Allah will be the judge of us all.
The only two cases of men marrying a second wife here in the UK that I know both ended in disaster for the first wives involved, as well as in one case the children, who no longer have contact with their father. Such arrangements are certainly not to be recommended whatever the belief. Also not allowed by law in the West. Those who choose to live in the West need to live by its laws.
First of all, of course, polygamy is not ‘mandatory’. Where would all the ladies come from? It has always been a permission as an exception and not as a rule. – Regarding polygamy being ‘against the law’. It seems I am bad in explaining. Polygamy is against the country’s civil law in Ghana also for instance. One Christian contractor used to come to my office. He always quoted the bible and gave me Christian Missionary leaflets. Once I asked him how many children he had and he answered 16. I remarked that it was a bit much for one wife. His reply was that he has three. I exclaimed how that was possible for such a good Christian as himself. His answer: ‘I married one in the Church, but I am African, therefore I married another two according to our traditional law’. Same thing in the West. Only one wife can be married according to civil law, but as ‘partners’ what is the limit?
According to my knowledge when Sir Mohammad Zafrullah Khan married the Palestinian lady he was divorced from his (first) wife. Yes, correct me if I am wrong.
Why should we not quote the Khalifas of Ahmadiyyat in relation to this subject? There was no war when Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih Sani (ra) married four wives at a time. Later Khalifas have given permission to selected individuals. Just as it should be: they did not recommend it to one and all, but did not prohibit to one and all either. Is there a need for further details?
I believe in a much wider and global discussion. The issue is not just of monogamy or polygamy but of human rights and women rights and secularism.
Human rights and women empowerment is a construct of the Western world and I love both ideas. It is based on individualism. The Muslims in the West are surviving right wing politics of Islamophobia only because of these constructs.
Polygamy does not cater very well to the individualism of each wife and her human rights.
The Muslims of different sects have never sat together and agreed on any thing, not even one, like timing of breaking fast or when to start the month of Ramadan, and certainly not on the 30 Articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and they never will. The semblance of peace that we have among the Muslims has been given to us by the West. We have the history of individual countries before us. Pakistan in 70 years has not simply understood that anyone who calls himself or herself a Muslim is one and that state should not get into the faith and I don’t think they are becoming any wiser over the years.
The West has emphasized and developed human rights only in a secular construct, when religion was not allowed to push its agenda.
I don’t see how the Muslims can have their cake and eat it too.
We have to honor the human rights and women rights agenda as a secular construct, which borrowed some ideas from religion, give the credit where it is due and proceed with building our house on the foundation of human and women rights. I don’t see any other way or we will be spending coming centuries in inter-sectarian debates, killings and wars.
Once again I want to point out that the article does not advocate against polygamy. It talks about regulations. So all those who are trying to defend polygamy should say something about regulation. They are wasting their time and deflecting the issue.
Right. The article does not but some commentators do / did. And – regarding regulations – yes, it has to be stressed that one the one hand those practicing it must try their utmost to treat all wives equally. On the other hand it would help if the states would recognize all unions as equal, giving equal rights to all partners. (until that is done the husbands need to try and compensate the unequal parts of the laws. For instance if a government pension goes to wife Nr.1 than the husband has to arrange an equal private pension for wife Nr. 2 (and 3 …and 4…)
No woman in her right mind would like sharing her husband. No man in his right mind would do it knowingly unless the alternatives were detrimental to his relationship with God i.e. God fearing man and not those who are lustful and use it to justify their selfish desires. Promised Messiah has touched upon this and stated that in cases where women know that the reason the husband is doing it for the sake of righteousness, they become partners and supporters. In his own case, he mentions that his wife, the Mother of believers, would weep in prayers for his second marriage to happen as it was the fulfillment of a prophecy from God.
The issue of consenting adults has not been fully elaborated. The Promised Messiah also takes this line of argument and Western liberal tradition which emphasized individual and human rights, cannot over ride it either. Its nobody’s business if three consenting adults want that sort of an arrangement and accept implications of division of labor and of resources and attention. If we talk about equality then some would say that this should also apply to polyandry and I say yes but again that is between three adults and what sort of spiritual or moral justification they use to practice it. Its not my business to tell them anything. Those who want to say this oppresses women are guilty of challenging women’s wisdom just as many are when it comes to women choosing to wear hijab saying that this is forced on them no matter what those women say.
Once the issue of righteousness of intentions is taken care off (and this is the biggest element and the most difficult) and personally satisfactory arrangements (justice requires equity and not complete equality) have been made and well understood by each individual the question of regulation comes in. Just as people are smart at avoiding taxes or finding legal loopholes to do it, although obviously not advisable, people can and do find ways to make arrangements that do not violate the law of the land. Law belongs to the domain of social order as long as social order is not under threat the law does not come into play. The law has no jurisdiction of what people do inside their homes or specific arrangements they make to fulfill their spiritual needs. Its not difficult to find examples of this in the US. Law is adhered to and respected and yet imperfect in fully satisfying human nature and its needs.
Morality and fear of God are critical to what happens inside homes. The decisions made by a spiritually inclined family as a part of a spiritual community led by a righteous leader, are always respectful of the law, yet the consideration of spiritual welfare remain paramount and must remain so. Ultimately a moral arrangement facilitates the social order which is the original intent of the law. Given the global financial and economic system and the rapidly rising inequality, the fact is that a large number of man are unable to reasonably support a family. A relative and expanding lack of or death of manhood is the crisis with conditions almost akin to a war where many man die.
We know that there is already a serious crisis in most communities where women and girls are unable to find good partners. So either they need to lower their expectations – which is rare nowadays – or compete for the attention of men, without consideration of whether they are already married or not. And that is what is really happening in most countries nowadays. What is the practical answer to this question is what I leave the readers with and especially women – but obviously not those who have decided remain single and lonely and have learned to like it.
In all cases, polygyny is a marginal and exceptional situation and a very difficult and dangerous venture for all involved, If done for the sake of righteousness with all its implications, its not for the faint of the heart- don’t try it at home.
Mohtram Dr Zia Shah Sb
You have given an excellent secular view and I agree with your way to chill fuming temper.
“The issue is not just of monogamy or polygamy but of human rights and women rights and secularism.
Human rights and women empowerment is a construct of the Western. It is based on individualism.
We have to honor the human rights and women rights agenda as a secular construct”
But being a Muslim, I would say it as following:,
“The issue is not just of monogamy or polygamy but of human rights, women rights and women empowerment in Islam, as directed by Hazrat Khalifatul Maseh V in this time and space.
Human rights, women rights and women empowerment is an Islamic way of thinking, as directed by Hazrat Khalifatul Maseh V in this time and space.
We must honor human rights and women rights. It is a Muslim agenda as directed by Hazrat Khalifatul Maseh V, in this time and space.
Polygamy is against the religion of Islam in the Western countries. This principal has been mentioned by the Promised Messiah himself and Prophet Muhammad(saw)_”Obey the Law of the Land”.
Polygamy is sin and crime, as our first Ahmadi Mubalagh Mufti Sb answered to immigration officer 100 years ago. “I have not come here to teach plurality of wives. If a Muslim will ever preach or practice polygamy in America he will be committing a sin against his religion —If a Muslim in Europe or America marries more than one wife, he violates not only the law of his country, but also a great commandment of his Faith.
Love and peace to all.
It seems that Dr. Chaudhry is blind to any arguments. ‘Living together however you want to’ is now-a-days no crime in Europe or America. (it would only be a crime, if you register a second marriage hiding the fact that you already have one). But Dr. Chaudhry does not want to understand this legality. Violates a commandment of his faith? Please read Dr. Alim’s explanations.
Thanks to the writer, to shows us right path.
I would agree with your views, Zia H Shah.
Interesting read from the Economist: link below
It may be true that the abolition of polygamy was a necessary step toward liberal egalitarian societies. But it simply doesn’t follow that legalising polygamy now, among liberal egalitarian Americans, threatens to turn back the clock. It may be that smoking bans in bars and restaurants have been absolutely vital to reducing tobacco addiction and smoking deaths. But if those bans are rescinded 100 years from now, how much demand will there be for smoking in bars and restaurants? And how much of a public-health problem would there be if a few people legally smoked in a hazy pub somewhere?
That said, let’s suppose, as seems plausible, that the plural marriages that would come about in a more fully libertarian future end up reinforcing inegalitarian gender norms. Well, if that’s a reason to disallow them, it’s also a reason to disallow many inegalitarian monogamous marriages. In a lucid and illuminating post, Chris Freiman, a philosophy professor at William and Mary, offers a useful thought experiment:
[I]magine that a new club pops up: the Society for Traditional Gender Hierarchies (STGH). Thousands of men and women nationwide sign up and pledge their commitment to the notion that a wife must always be the primary caregiver and a husband must always be the primary breadwinner. Needless to say, this is a bad club. You shouldn’t join and, indeed, you should morally oppose the principles of the club. However, even if marriages between STGH members are very likely to reinforce inegalitarian gender norms, they would still receive legal recognition.
Of course, many actual American marriages are, in effect, STGH marriages. But we don’t prohibit marriages between those who have adopted traditional gender roles. “Part of liberalism is tolerating illiberality,” Mr Freiman rightly says. In the absence of credible evidence that plural marriage in America today would be any more inegalitarian or socially harmful than the old-fashioned patriarchal monogamous marriages that millions of Americans already have, it’s hard to justify, at least on liberal grounds, our legal prohibition against more than two consenting adults freely entering into a marital arrangement. As I’ve argued before, many of the unseemly and unhealthy aspects of existing American polygamous “marriages” are a side-effect of our having made them illegal, and a target for disgust and contempt, much as homosexuality was within living memory.
Perhaps there are other, excellent arguments against legalising plural marriage. But for now, not even extremely sophisticated liberals are making them. Messrs Rauch and Macedo’s claims about the harms that would ensue from legalising plural marriage have the same speculative character as some conservative arguments against legal gay marriage. This ought to pique some concern.
Fredrik deBoer, writing in Politico, speculates that liberal opponents of plural marriage remain “trapped … in prior opposition that they voiced from a standpoint of political pragmatism in order to advance the cause of gay marriage”. This is probably right. Now that gay marriage is finally legal from sea to shining sea, it’s time for liberals to refine their arguments against polygamy. We need better, more rationally compelling arguments if we wish to be fair in shutting against would-be polygamists the libertarian door that we’ve just blasted open.
https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/07/marriage-and-polygamy
Polygamy is against the religion of Islam in the Western countries. This principal has been mentioned by the Promised Messiah himself.
Today,Human rights and women empowerment is given bu Khalifatul Maseh V by issuing 11 point for Ahmadies of USA. Please don’t call Khalifatul Maseh V ‘s directive as non Islamic, western reactionary egalitarian work.We must honor the human rights and women rights and women empowerment granted by Islam.
I personally know two case of polygamy in UK and one case in USA. All ended up in disaster. Children and wives don’t talk to each other. Their lives are miserable. At present they are in courts .
Polygamy is not one of the 30 Articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it never will be.
We got to uphold and honor human rights, women rights and women empowerment given by Islam.
Please wake up in 21st century. Prophet Muhammad (saw) in an example for us. He practiced it in Madenah.
No woman in her right mind would like sharing her husband.
Mohtram, you are right, these marriages were specifically and only for Prophet Muhammad (saw) . This exception is mentioned in Quran. You are right again since this is a specific excretion in Quran for Prophet Muhammad (saw), no Muslims should advocate or follow this, period.
Human Rights give the rights to humans to choose. Even those women who might not be in her right minds at the moment.
Mohtram , Ahmadi Muslims, simply do not make fun of any mind.
“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) covers this subject in detail. It is a disgrace to look down upon any human being.
We don’t have right to judge people. Our society has left this decision for courts to decide in this world. God is the final Judge in hereafter.
“11 points of true Islam is the directive of Hazrat Khalifatul Maseh V (aba) to avoid misconceptions
and to educate about Islam.The 7th bullet point talks specifically about “Universal deceleration of Human rights”.
The “Universal deceleration of Human rights” protect even those women who might not be in their right minds”. We simply do not make fun of any mind.
Love and peace for all.
Mr. Tschannen and Dr. Alim refuse to accept any restriction on polygamy. Mr. Tschannen has even advocated polygamy when the law of the land prohibits it. (Advocates committing a crime). According to the religion of Islam and God’s Word, the Holy Quran, polygamy is illegal in those countries where the law of the land prohibits it. The physical, mental and financial evaluation of the man is necessary.
No matter how much support you try to find from the writings of the Promised Messiah, his one sentence should give you his opinion, “In my view it is best that one should not do this”.
I also have a question for both of these learned men.
There is no place in the Holy Quran where slavery has been prohibited. In fact Holy Prophet had a slave. Quran gives instructions about good treatment of slaves. There are many ahadith teaching good treatment of slaves. Do you think slavery is a good idea? Times change, and human thought evolves. Quran can keep up with all this. It is not a rigid book. So you should understand that the unrestricted polygamy that existed in the past is not an argument for continuing this injustice.
Dr. Chaudhry sahib, you are on the right path.
Mohtram CS Sahib, your answer was breath of fresh air, in this this time and space.
I feel like repeating some of your lines.
The physical, mental and financial evaluation of these man is necessary.
No matter how much support you try to find from the writings of the Promised Messiah, his one sentence should give you his opinion, “In my view it is best that one should not do this”.
There is no place in the Holy Quran where slavery has been prohibited. In fact Holy Prophet had a slave. There are many ahadith teaching good treatment of slaves. Do you think slavery is a good idea?
Times change, and human thought evolves. Quran can keep up with all this. It is not a rigid book.
لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ Everybody is entitled to their opinions.
Jazakallah. I find this debate very illuminating and interesting. The Holy Quran does not prohibit polygyny, American law does. Laws are made by humans and subject to change. Its just a matter of someone going to US Supreme Court and open the box for challenging it. The Economist piece that I have included in my last comment should suffice even from the Western perspective and human rights perspective, a case of three consenting adults cannot be challenged as long as it does not impinge on the social order or violate legal prohibitions. Community sanctioned marriages and extramarital affairs are a constant feature of American society but do not violate any laws. its not difficult to find them if you just do a quick search on the internet. I have never said that I promote unrestricted polygyny. No in fact Islam is the first religion to restrict and regulate polygyny and I entirely agree with that. What i state is that human ingenuity will find ways to bypass laws and it does and we all know that is a reality. If that is a reality its important to regulate it and since Religion is about regulating personal space, Islam has provisions to regulate it. Yes in countries where polygyny is legal, state has the authority to make laws to check upon the mental soundness, financial and physical ability of a man who wishes to take this step.
No I do not advocate violating US Law. Ahmadies every where respect the laws of the country they live in and that is also a principle based on Sharia. North American population and Europe – if prohibition laws exist everywhere that is, constitute 17% of the world population. We are talking about the whole world and not just North America. A universal religion caters for all needs of all humans for all times.
Almost 49 Million people in the world are enslaved. No one agrees with keeping slaves in this modern day and age but they exist. It is terribly wrong to say that the Holy Prophet had a slave. The Prophet actually did not have any slaves. He freed all the slaves bequeathed to him by Hazrat Khadija (ra) at the time of his marriage with her. Only Zaid (RA) was left. He had adopted him once he chose to live him despite his offer to free him and go with his relatives. Yes, the Quranic verses on slavery are as applicable today as they were 1400 years back. Islam practiced gradual emancipation of slaves because suddenly freeing them would have been harmful for their well being but it does not condone it. The charter of Human Rights given by the Prophet is unequivocal in equality of all human beings. He said those things a thousand years before John Lockey stumbled upon them in 1632.
We can all quote different passages from the Promised Messiah to support our arguments. The fact is that he was, and in his liking, all Khulafa are spiritual doctors and prescribe individual solutions to their followers based on their temperament and particular context so it is difficult to resolve this in a general context with a broad recommendation. Polygyny is among a range of solutions for spiritual ills that some people may suffer from and was prescribed in specific situations.
The point here is that Humanity will always be challenged with difficult questions in time and space as long as we live. Human made laws are imperfect and subject to revisions. The Quran provides solutions and remedies for all possible ills and problems that humans can face being the final and universal message. Please take a look at the sermon of Hazrat Khalifatul Masih V that I linked in my earlier comments. He is clear and speaks of the global situation. North American context is one small part of that global situation.
Jazakallah to everyone to have this enlightened debate. Wassalam
excellent explanation. Thanks Dr. Sahib
Excellent discussion. Two comments above gave me an epiphany. One commentator said and I am paraphrasing that the Quran can be quoted for monogamy or polygamy depending on your bias and the other commentator said the same about the writings of Promised Messiah.
To me it seems that this is evidence for religion to be in the personal and private sphere only and once we bring it to public sphere, it only leads to senseless debates and hurt feelings and at the end of the day you achieve nothing as you still need to deal with persons of other faiths.
So, all the more reasons to always keep a secular perspective in public life, make decisions through the civic process and move on rather than being stuck in the same debate for decades and centuries.
Oh, I see power play.
Love and peace for all
This is a fantastic article! It brought me lots of joy while reading it.
What a great message. It made me really happy reading it. This really shows peace for all.
This item has come up again. Interesting though the debate about polygamy is, there is only one simple answer: to abide by the laws of the country you live in. In the non-Muslim world polygamy is not permitted, as is the case here in the UK. The law recognises only civil ceremonies, which are registered, and which may also be held in a church or other religious establishment which has authority to conduct such ceremonies. Or one may have a separate religious blessing/ ceremony after a civil ceremony, but religion is a private matter. Any other relationships are not recognised by law. Anyone who does not care to live by the laws of the country should consider if they are in the right country. No lengthy debates about that are needed.
Of course you are right as far as registered ‘unions’ are concerned. There is however absolutely nothing in the law that states that consulting adults cannot live together however they like, including polygamous unions blessed ‘only’ by a verbal Nikah not recognized by the state.
about my marriages: see: https://themuslimtimes.info/2017/08/21/glimpses-into-the-life-of-a-global-nomad-part-seven/
Why then not just comply and get a legal marriage, along with a religious ceremony? We have a friend whose marriage has broken down, and there has been no agreeable outcome from the Sharia ‘court’. The husband has sold the marriage house and left the wife and 2 children destitute, not paying anything even for his children, they are living on social service support in accommodation provided by the local authorities. We have directed them to civil law for assistance, which may prove somewhat difficult since they were not married by civil law, but I hope there will be a good outcome. It would have been so much simpler had they been married in accordance with the laws of the land. But yes, only one wife would have been permissible. And I hope that will never change.
Rafiq A Tschannen – I’ve just read your chapter about your second, polygamous, marriage. Don’t expect me to be kind and understanding. I could not see any justification for taking another wife, and causing obvious hurt to your first wife and probably your children too. Was she even consulted, which I understand is a normal requirement? And did she agree? It does not sound like it. I cannot accept your religious rationale. I know of many men who have had sick wives, could not have children, and/or whose wives had died, and who did not find it necessary to abandon their wives or take another. That is what is called strength of character and heart. Although I also know of some who did, which I cannot praise, since both first wives suffered tremendously. Again, I would say that you live by the laws of the country, it may not be perfect, but each one has a responsibility to ensure that they make a contribution towards a fair and just society. And I’ll add Amen here!
I am not disputing that a proper faithful husband is better than a polygamous one, even one who tries hard to be equal. Why I pointed it out to you to read my chapter was actually to show that our beloved Khalifas may positively advice us, as an exception and not as a rule, a polygamous marriage even for citizens of Western countries.
With respect, Khalifas are spiritual leaders and are not above the law in Western countries, and therefore their advice has no legal base. Does it not state in the Quran that one should abide by the law of the land of residence? And you have not given any acceptable reason, or any reason at all, why you needed to take another wife, when it seems that you had a good relationship with the wife you already had. You did not know the other woman, neither was this a case of love. Just wanting a younger woman to satisfy the ego or desire is only a short step removed from the pedophilia we are hearing so much about, especially in the Middle East, which is rife with older men organising for young girls to be delivered to them for marriage. And of course, it’s all considered legal under their version of Sharia law, or whichever primitive interpretation they use to satisfy them. Although, again, the Quran states certain circumstances only for taking additional wives, such as orphans, widows, and similar situation, in other words it looks at protecting the needy rather than self-serving sexual needs. Even the Prophet Mohammed was married to only one woman for many years until her death, and as I understand it, later married a number of woman mainly to consolidate tribes, and there are various theories as to why he took a young child to be his wife, although it was a common practice in those days, even in the non-Muslim world. But the world has moved on from those times. We are learning and progressing, but because life is not perfect we also continue to make mistakes. We recognise men’s weaknesses, but that does not give them licence to act like wild animals, we have choices! And that is why laws are essential! Apologies for going on about this matter, but as you can see I feel very strongly about this and other injustices.
oho … wild animals ? ok, let me take that as a compliment.
Hardly a compliment! Humans are supposed to be intelligent beings with consciences.
And just a further thought. You are very lucky indeed that you did not have me as your mother-in-law!
Respectfully its not nice to be condescending even if one has differences. We must always be respectful as all of us have to make choices that show our human limitations. No one is competing to show superiority in moral values. Religion is about personal, private and about humility and fear of Allah. We live and make choices. Allah throws circumstances at some of us and one has to decide keeping in view the highest moral standards one can hold without fear of people. Ultimately we are accountable to Allah.
The debate is important and we should remain loyal to subject at hand and not target people. Please read carefully my comments which I repost below.
Also good to see this clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-Pm5092a0c&t=42s and understand what is happening in the USA even with the laws in place.
No one has responded to my point on the issue of three consenting adults because that is fully compliant with human rights?
What do people say about US legalizing gay and lesbian marriages. Does the Islam of Ahmadiyya in USA also comply with that law?
If people have not watched Huzoor’s latest Q&A session with AMWSA in Germany, he answers the question on Polgyny. Good to watch that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovIN44LEDbI
May Allah guide us all.
Repost:
Jazakallah. I find this debate very illuminating and interesting. The Holy Quran does not prohibit polygyny, American law does. Laws are made by humans and subject to change. Its just a matter of someone going to US Supreme Court and open the box for challenging it. The Economist piece that I have included in my last comment should suffice even from the Western perspective and human rights perspective, a case of three consenting adults cannot be challenged as long as it does not impinge on the social order or violate legal prohibitions. Community sanctioned marriages and extramarital affairs are a constant feature of American society but do not violate any laws. its not difficult to find them if you just do a quick search on the internet. I have never said that I promote unrestricted polygyny. No in fact Islam is the first religion to restrict and regulate polygyny and I entirely agree with that. What i state is that human ingenuity will find ways to bypass laws and it does and we all know that is a reality. If that is a reality its important to regulate it and since Religion is about regulating personal space, Islam has provisions to regulate it. Yes in countries where polygyny is legal, state has the authority to make laws to check upon the mental soundness, financial and physical ability of a man who wishes to take this step.
No I do not advocate violating US Law. Ahmadies every where respect the laws of the country they live in and that is also a principle based on Sharia. North American population and Europe – if prohibition laws exist everywhere that is, constitute 17% of the world population. We are talking about the whole world and not just North America. A universal religion caters for all needs of all humans for all times.
We can all quote different passages from the Promised Messiah to support our arguments. The fact is that he was, and in his liking, all Khulafa are spiritual doctors and prescribe individual solutions to their followers based on their temperament and particular context so it is difficult to resolve this in a general context with a broad recommendation. Polygyny is among a range of solutions for spiritual ills that some people may suffer from and was prescribed in specific situations.
The point here is that Humanity will always be challenged with difficult questions in time and space as long as we live. Human made laws are imperfect and subject to revisions. The Quran provides solutions and remedies for all possible ills and problems that humans can face being the final and universal message. Please take a look at the sermon of Hazrat Khalifatul Masih V that I linked in my earlier comments. He is clear and speaks of the global situation. North American context is one small part of that global situation.
Jazakallah to everyone to have this enlightened debate. Wassalam
ah yes, my mother-in-law was a real lady! May Allah bless her soul.
Dr Alim. This is not about being condescending, rather about standing up for human rights, in this case the rights of women, who have been abused throughout the ages, especially in the various patriarchal societies, and which in this case includes the practice of polygamy by Muslims, which was a well established custom long before Islam came into existence. Fortunately most educated Muslim men are now monogamous, although there are groups here in the UK who believe that they are still living in Afghanistan or Bangladesh, and other isolated cases.
But of course polygamy is not exclusive to Islam, there are Mormon groups in the USA who also practise it (although illegal), and possibly some ultra-orthodox Jews, among others; and President Zumo of South Africa makes a point of taking his various wives on trips/tours; it’s a tradition of status among certain Africans, who count women among their property, as do other unenlightened societies.
Women in the West have been fighting for their rights for some time, and are making slow progress. Much has already been achieved, but we have a long way to go. The patriarchal mindset still dominates. But polygamy has no place in the modern world, along with some other alien practices. Matters such as same-sex relationships and other complex gender conditions should be treated as separate subjects. Hopefully, one day, justice will prevail.
Rafiq A Tschannen – I can assure you that I am a real lady too!
probably, as long as no son-in-law of yours tries to marry a second wife.
Ranate Chaudhry, You are 1000% right.polygamy has no place in the modern world.Matters such as same-sex relationships and other complex gender conditions should be treated as separate subjects.
I am 100% sure Khalifatul Maseh will never tell us to break law of the land . In other words Khalifa will not tell us to break the law – go do second third and fourth marriage. These guys will not stop invoking khalifa, Hadith or Quran out of order. They should stop invoking this out of time and space.
They forget that Quran is the only scripture that say “It is best for you to marry one”. Who can tell them that Quran never mndbated a Muslim to marry more than once.
It is shameful that a lady who disagree with them can not be a real lady for these guys..
They do not accept that a woman is empowered to say no. They refuse to acknowledge empowerment of women.
I read his episode of hormones. Like an animal he could not control it.This hypersexual sick polygamist disgraced his first wife.Who neither permitted him nor accepted his second wife. Khalifa told him it would hurt his first wife ” you will no doubt cause hurt to your first wife by your second marriage”.
He made everybody’s life complicated “And now life became complicated – Well, ok, yes, it is entirely my fault. I created the complication myself”.He picked up the sweetest for his sexual gratification because be could not control his male hormones.Both wives were jealous, did not accept each other, did not like to live together. He pited one against the other.His house was an example of hell.
Now this hypersexual sick man is preaching polygamy. God please save our ladies from these predators. Prophet Muhammad had much more hormones, but he married only one wife during this hormonal phase.
I must say that a normal faithful man has no reason to marry a second women whatsoever. They can confirm this from their daughters.I am 100% sure none of these guys will ever give their daughter as second, third and fourth wife to a hypersexual sick man.
Infertility and sickness are not excuse for second marriage. Rather these are reason to support first wife in these special circumstances
Hypersexuality is a sickness. These guys should be in a hospital or in a jail. We are blessed that law of our land has saved our mothers , sisters and daughters from these sexual predators.
This forum is run and edited by male chauvinists. Soon they will erase your genuine comments as they have erased mine. Most Likely my comments will not stay here for long time.
Khalid is putting words in my mouth. I did not say that anyone is not a lady. I also did not say that ‘life became hell’, just a bit expensive, with two households. You (two) or the ones who are ‘name calling’. Do so if you like. Abuse all those who practise it, both men and the ladies who have agreed to it, if you like, even though many Holy Men in the farer past and the not so far past have practiced it too. – And please stop the nonsense of ‘not permitted in our country’ and ‘against the law’. I thought I had explained that. It is against the law to register two marriages, not to live together in a religious union.
Very regrettable to see Ahmadi men abusing others from their own community. I cannot even imagine what will they do to others outside the community in case of difference of opinion. This is completely against our teachings. Differences should be expressed respectfully and with humility. Usually in an argument the one who becomes aggressive or abusive is the one who has lost the argument. Rafiq Sahib is a very honored and respectable member of our movement who had the courage to defy so many things to become an Ahmadi Muslim.
I don’t understand why the legalization of same sex marriage is a different issue than polygyny. It is about union of individuals and about same human rights that our learned readers do not get tired of quoting. So why apply two different standards when it comes the argument?
There is no need to get emotional. I respect and fully understand Ms. Renata Chaudry’s arguments and actually support them. What i do not support is the application of American laws as universal teachings, which they are not.
I still have not seen answer to my questions on three consenting adults and what our learned readers would like to say about Islam Ahmadiyya teachings on same sex marriage. Please give us your opinion and how do you reconcile the position of our teachings with that American law?
May Allah enable all of us to be patient, to tolerate difference of opinions and enrich our views with force of argument instead of abuse.
Peace be to all.
quote: I still have not seen answer to my questions on three consenting adults and what our learned readers would like to say about Islam Ahmadiyya teachings on same sex marriage. Please give us your opinion and how do you reconcile the position of our teachings with that American law? unquote.
My personal view (as I am not a Mufti): same sex marriage: has absolutely nothing to do with Islam or Ahmadiyya interpretation of it also. That does not mean that some readers now have to put words in my mouth saying that I am ‘anti gays’ etc. I know we have gays in our Mosques, but they do not put a label in front of their forehand saying ‘we are gay’. – Three consenting adults: well, I suppose I stated my views on that already. Others please (politely if you can):
Dr. Sahib: From videos we see about polygamous Mormon families it would appear that Mormon ‘sister wives’ are better at living together than ‘Muslim sister wives’. Why do you think that is? Is it an American female thing or a religious thing? (As for fundamental Mormons polygamy is a religious thing and for Muslims it is just ‘permitted as an exception to the rule’?)
Dear Khalid P Chaudhry – We are kindred spirits, and I know that there are others who feel like us too. It’s been a pleasure to communicate with you. Thank you. You can find me on Facebook if you like.
Rafiq A Tschannen – It is because I am a lady that I would not tolerate my son-in-law taking a second wife. If he decided that his relationship with my daughter had broken down for whatever reason and they could no longer live together, then it would be appropriate for them to get a divorce. He would then be free to take another wife. It’s as simple as that!
Well said.
No woman of sane would accept humiliating polygamous relationship.
Khalid: It is not nice of you to call my wife (wives) insane. You do not have to agree, but if they do that is none of your problem.
Just for you and Lady Renate: http://pathway2jannah.blogspot.co.id/2015/02/polygamy-survival-guide-co-wifes.html
you do not need to agree, but try to stop your ‘name-calling’ …
and you would decide? not your daughter?
Mohtram Rafiq Sb,
1- Three consenting adults:
American law does not force or recommend you to do it.
If you believe your religion does not allow it and you want to follow your religion, you will have no problem here.
If you believe your religion does not allow it but you like it, still you will not have any problem as long as you do not create public nuisance openly.
The important issue is that I can not enforce my morality upon others and others can not enforce their morality on me. This is the beauty here.لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ Everybody have their choices.So in America you should feel relaxed to practice your religion peacefully. Specially, we obey the law of the land. We are not judge upon others. We leave moral Judgement for God.
2- Same sex marriage:
American law does not force or recommend you to do it.
If you believe your religion does not allow it and you want to follow your religion, you will have no problem here.
If you believe your religion does not allow it but you like it, still you will not have any problem as long as you do not create public nuisance openly.
The important issue is that I can not enforce my morality upon others and others can not enforce their morality on me. This is the beauty here.لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ Everybody have their choices.So in America you should feel relaxed to practice your religion peacefully.Specially, we obey the law of the land.We are not judge upon others. We leave moral Judgement for God.
All of these people have right to say who they are freely. It is not a good idea to lock them in closet.
Yes they are allowed to express who they are as we are allowed to express who we are. This is the beauty of freedom of thought and expression.Freedom of religion.
I don’t know when curfew will start.I am concerned because some people have agenda to enforce Sharia Law upon others to follow. Alas they knew that there is no existence of Sharia law in Quran,what so ever.
sorry, if i hurt your feelings. I read your article and said what was in that article about wives behaviour towards each other and their opinions etc. I know facts are not that pleasant.