Sunday, March 2, 2008

WHY A MAN IS ALLOWED IN ISLAM TO HAVE UPTO 4 WIVES? AND WHY A WOMAN IS NOT ALLOWED IN ISLAM TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE HUSBAND?

WHY AND WHEN DOES ISLAM ALLOW A MAN TO
HAVE UPTO FOUR WIVES?

--LET US SEE THE REASONS WHY LIMITED(TO 4)
POLYGYNY(A MAN HAVING MORE THAN ONE WIFE )
IS ALLOWED IN ISLAM

AND WHY POLYANDRY(A WOMAN HAVING MORE THAN ONE HUSBAND ) IS NOT ALLOWED IN ISLAM….


(Links and articles updated)

INTRODUCTION:
(THESE ARTICLES WERE ORIGINALLY SENT VIA MAIL IN JUNE 2005 TO ONE OF MY FRIENDS WHO HAD ASKED WHY ISLAM ALLOWS MEN TO MARRY UPTO 4 WOMEN.)
I HAVE UPDATED THE ARTICLE; EDITED AND ADDED SOME ARTICLES…
3 OR 4 LINKS ARE BROKEN SINCE PAGES HAVE BEEN MOVED)
LINKS AND WHETHER THEY ARE WORKING OR NOT ARE SPECIFIED AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ARTICLE…)

(THERE ARE MILLIONS OF GB OF INFORMATION AND IT IS HUMANELY IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW OR LEARN EVERYTHING…
THIS IS A SMALL EFFORT TO GIVE A DETAILED ANSWER)

LET US- GOD WILLING- START WITH THE INTRODUCTORY WORDS …,)


1. Polygyny (A MAN MARRYING MORE THAN ONE WIFE) is only permitted in Islam- It is NEITHER COMPULSORY nor RECOMMENDED.

2. Islam has ALLOWED Polygyny only as an EXCEPTION- for HELPING A POOR ORPHAN/WIDOW for example
3. IF Polygyny had been made unlawful, what would be the fate of such women? - SHOULD THEY RESORT TO PROSTITUTION? WHICH IS BETTER?- LIFE OF A prostitute(WITH CHILDREN AS BEGGARS) OR LIVING AS A SECOND WIFE OF A FINANCIALLY CAPABLE MUSLIM WHO FEARING HIS GOD WOULD TREAT HER ON PAR WITH HIS FIRST WIFE?- just think over it.

4. Understand that THE WIFE (or her BROTHER or ANY of her relatives) WILL NOT LIKE THE MARRIAGE OF HER HUSBAND TO ANOTHER WOMAN for the FEAR OF BEING NEGLECTED or BEING DEALT WITH UNJUSTLY.
FROM THE NOBLE QURAN and the SAYINGS of HOLY PROPHET, the following can be inferred;
A.IF A PERSON fears THAT HE SHALL NOT BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH HIS WIVES EQUALLY,THEN HE should desist and marry only one.(For your information, Noble quran is the only religious scripture which says-marry one).

B.IF A PERSON MARRIES MORE THAN ONE WIFE AND TREATS THEM UNJUSTLY, HE WILL BE PUNISHED AS IT IS A SIN.

5. SO, A TRUE MUSLIM
A.WILL NOT MARRY MORE THAN ONE WIFE IF HE FEARS THAT HE WILL NOT DEAL JUSTLY WITH THEM,
B. WILL MARRY MORE THAN ONE ONLY IF HE IS FINANCIALLY CAPABLE AND ONLY FOR DOING A RIGHTEOUS DEED.
C.WILL NOT MARRY MORE THAN ONE JUST FOR CARNAL DESIRES.

6. Polygyny is not allowed for just any man at any time
(See the attachments with this mail).

7. ISLAM PROTECTS THE RIGHT OF WOMEN UNDER ALL SITUATIONS.

8.POLYGYNY DOES NOT SIMPLY MEAN LUST OR EXCESSIVE CARNAL DESIRE.IF FOLLOWED IN TRUE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE, IT IS A GREAT RESPONSIBILITY AND A SACRIFICE INDEED.YOU MIGHT USE THE WORD ATROCIOUS, because YOU think polygyny is done merely out of lust and nothing else!

Read all the articles carefully.
Any doubts or questions- kindly mail me at firdoze1234@gmail.com or
firdoze1234@yahoo.co.in
INSHA ALLAH(GOD WILLING), i will answer..
This entire file can be downloaded as a word file at
http://www.4shared.com/account/file/39596248/5b68f503/POLYGYNY_IN_ISLAM.html



http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/mcqnm1.htm (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

Polygamy:

Question:
Why is a man allowed to have more than one wife in Islam? i.e. why is polygamy allowed in Islam?
Answer:
Definition of Polygamy
1. Polygamy means a system of marriage whereby one person has more than one spouse. Polygamy can be of two types. One is polygyny where a man marries more than one woman, and the other is polyandry, where a woman marries more than one man. In Islam, limited polygyny is permitted; whereas polyandry is completely prohibited.Now coming to the original question, why is a man allowed to have more than one wife?
2. The Qur’an is the only religious scripture in the world that says,"marry only one".
The Qur’an is the only religious book, on the face of this earth, that contains the phrase ‘marry only one’. There is no other religious book that instructs men to have only one wife. In none of the other religious scriptures, whether it be the Vedas, the Ramayan, the Mahabharat, the Geeta, the Talmud or the Bible does one find a restriction on the number of wives. According to these scriptures one can marry as many as one wishes. It was only later, that the Hindu priests and the Christian Church restricted the number of wives to one.
Many Hindu religious personalities, according to their scriptures, had multiple wives. King Dashrat, the father of Rama, had more than one wife. Krishna had several wives.
In earlier times, Christian men were permitted as many wives as they wished, since the Bible puts no restriction on the number of wives. It was only a few centuries ago that the Church restricted the number of wives to one.
Polygyny is permitted in Judaism. According to Talmudic law, Abraham had three wives, and Solomon had hundreds of wives. The practice of polygyny continued till Rabbi Gershom ben Yehudah (95% C.E to 1030 C.E) issued an edict against it. The Jewish Sephardic communities living in Muslim countries continued the practice till as late as 1950, until an Act of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel extended the ban on marrying more than one wife.
3. Hindus are more polygynous than Muslims
The report of the ‘Committee of The Status of Woman in Islam’, published in 1975 mentions on page numbers 66 and 67 that the percentage of polygamous marriages between the years 1951 and 1961 was 5.06% among the Hindus and only 4.31% among the Muslims. According to Indian law only Muslim men are permitted to have more than one wife. It is illegal for any non-Muslim in India to have more than one wife. Despite it being illegal, Hindus have more multiple wives as compared to Muslims. Earlier, there was no restriction even on Hindu men with respect to the number of wives allowed. It was only in 1954, when the Hindu Marriage Act was passed that it became illegal for a Hindu to have more than one wife. At present it is the Indian Law that restricts a Hindu man from having more than one wife and not the Hindu scriptures.
Let us now analyse why Islam allows a man to have more than one wife.
4. Qur’an permits limited polygyny
As I mentioned earlier, Qur’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth that says ‘marry only one’. The context of this phrase is the following verse from Surah Nisa of the Glorious Qur’an:
"Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one."
[Al-Qur’an 4:3]
Before the Qur’an was revealed, there was no upper limit for polygyny and many men had scores of wives, some even hundreds. Islam put an upper limit of four wives. Islam gives a man permission to marry two, three or four women, only on the condition that he deals justly with them.
In the same chapter i.e. Surah Nisa verse 129 says:
"Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women...."
[Al-Qur’an 4:129]
Therefore polygyny is not a rule but an exception. Many people are under the misconception that it is compulsory for a Muslim man to have more than one wife.
Broadly, Islam has five categories of Do’s and Don’ts:
i. ‘Fard’ i.e. compulsory or obligatory
ii. ‘Mustahab’ i.e. recommended or encouraged
iii. ‘Mubah’ i.e. permissible or allowed
iv. ‘Makruh’ i.e. not recommended or discouraged
v. ‘Haraam’ i.e. prohibited or forbidden
Polygyny falls in the middle category of things that are permissible. It cannot be said that a Muslim who has two, three or four wives is a better Muslim as compared to a Muslim who has only one wife.
5. Average life span of females is more than that of males
By nature males and females are born in approximately the same ratio. A female child has more immunity than a male child. A female child can fight the germs and diseases better than the male child. For this reason, during the pediatric age itself there are more deaths among males as compared to the females.
During wars, there are more men killed as compared to women. More men die due to accidents and diseases than women. The average life span of females is more than that of males, and at any given time one finds more widows in the world than widowers.
6. India has more male population than female due to female foeticide and infanticide
India is one of the few countries, along with the other neighbouring countries, in which the female population is less than the male population. The reason lies in the high rate of female infanticide in India, and the fact that more than one million female foetuses are aborted every year in this country, after they are identified as females. If this evil practice is stopped, then India too will have more females as compared to males.
7. World female population is more than male population
In the USA, women outnumber men by 7.8 million. New York alone has one million more females as compared to the number of males, and of the male population of New York one-third are gays i.e sodomites. The U.S.A as a whole has more than twenty-five million gays. This means that these people do not wish to marry women. Great Britain has four million more females as compared to males. Germany has five million more females as compared to males. Russia has nine million more females than males. God alone knows how many million more females there are in the whole world as compared to males.
8. Restricting each and every man to have only one wife is not practical
Even if every man got married to one woman, there would still be more than thirty million females in U.S.A who would not be able to get husbands (considering that America has twenty five million gays). There would be more than four million females in Great Britain, 5 million females in Germany and nine million females in Russia alone who would not be able to find a husband.
Suppose my sister happens to be one of the unmarried women living in USA, or suppose your sister happens to be one of the unmarried women in USA. The only two options remaining for her are that she either marries a man who already has a wife or becomes public property. There is no other option. All those who are modest will opt for the first.
In Western society, it is common for a man to have mistresses and/or multiple extra-marital affairs, in which case, the woman leads a disgraceful, unprotected life. The same society, however, cannot accept a man having more than one wife, in which women retain their honourable, dignified position in society and lead a protected life.
Thus the only two options before a woman who cannot find a husband is to marry a married man or to become public property. Islam prefers giving women the honourable position by permitting the first option and disallowing the second.
There are several other reasons, why Islam has permitted limited polygyny, but it is mainly to protect the modesty of women.

=============================================================================================================


http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/mcqnm2.htm (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

POLYANDRY

Question:
If a man is allowed to have more than one wife, then why does Islam prohibit a woman from having more than one husband?
Answer:
A lot of people, including some Muslims, question the logic of allowing Muslim men to have more than one spouse while denying the same ‘right’ to women.
Let me first state emphatically, that the foundation of an Islamic society is justice and equity. Allah has created men and women as equal, but with different capabilities and different responsibilities. Men and women are different, physiologically and psychologically. Their roles and responsibilities are different. Men and women are equal in Islam, but not identical.
Surah Nisa’ Chapter 4 verses 22 to 24 gives the list of women with who you can not marry and it is further mentions in Surah Nisa’ Chapter 4 verse 24 "Also (prohibited are) women already married"
The following points enumerate the reasons why polyandry is prohibited in Islam:
1. If a man has more than one wife, the parents of the children born of such marriages can easily be identified. The father as well as the mother can easily be identified. In case of a woman marrying more than one husband, only the mother of the children born of such marriages will be identified and not the father. Islam gives tremendous importance to the identification of both parents, mother and father. Psychologists tell us that children who do not know their parents, especially their father undergo severe mental trauma and disturbances. Often they have an unhappy childhood. It is for this reason that the children of prostitutes do not have a healthy childhood. If a child born of such wedlock is admitted in school, and when the mother is asked the name of the father, she would have to give two or more names! I am aware that recent advances in science have made it possible for both the mother and father to be identified with the help of genetic testing. Thus this point which was applicable for the past may not be applicable for the present.
2. Man is more polygamous by nature as compared to a woman.
3. Biologically, it is easier for a man to perform his duties as a husband despite having several wives. A woman, in a similar position, having several husbands, will not find it possible to perform her duties as a wife. A woman undergoes several psychological and behavioral changes due to different phases of the menstrual cycle.
4. A woman who has more than one husband will have several sexual partners at the same time and has a high chance of acquiring venereal or sexually transmitted diseases which can also be transmitted back to her husband even if all of them have no extra-marital sex. This is not the case in a man having more than one wife, and none of them having extra-marital sex.
The above reasons are those that one can easily identify. There are probably many more reasons why Allah, in His Infinite Wisdom, has prohibited polyandry



=============================================================================================================


http://islam.thetruecall.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=290 (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

Polygamy in Islam

People from different religions often point fingers at the permissibility of Polygamy in Islam. This is due to their lack of understanding as far as polygamy in Islam is concerned. In due course of this article which I intend to keep short and sweet, I will explain what polygamy in Islam is.

According to the
Online Merriam Webster Dictionary
Polygamy: marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at the same time.
Polygyny: the state or practice of having more than one wife or female mate at one time
Polyandry: the state or practice of having more than one husband or male mate at one time
Hence it would only be appropriate to mention that polygyny is allowed in Islam and not polygamy as a general term. But in this article I will refer to it as polygamy for the ease of the reader.
It should be pointed out that Islam never introduced Polygamy. It was already prevalent. Probably the only religion that does claim to prohibit it is Christianity but in reality the Bible never prohibited Polygamy. I will discuss the Bible as regards to Polygamy towards the end.
In the Quran, Surah Nisa, verse 3, it is mentioned:
“If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.” [Quran 4:3]
This verse was revealed after the Battle of Uhud in which nearly half the Muslim population was wiped out. Hence Allah (swt) in all His Wisdom told Muslims to:
FIRST opt for adopting an orphan. If injustice was feared, THEN if you can be just, opt for marrying up to four women. If injustice was feared, THEN marry only ONE.
As it is from the above verse it is clear that polygamy was never the first choice. The purpose of this Noble Verse was two folds:
1) To give protection to the orphans 2) To increase the Muslim population primarily by adopting and giving protection to the orphans.
Hence despite the fact that the Muslims had lost a lot of men Allah (swt) still did not want polygamy to take place and the first option that ALLAH gave was for them to adopt. Regarding polygamy, ALLAH strictly said that you have to be just between your wives and even if you FEAR that you cannot be just, you are to marry only ONE.
Being “Just” with your wives is not an option but a compulsion. Hence if a man fears that he might not be able to be just with his wives then he cannot marry more than one woman.
From the verse it is also clear that Polygamy is not something compulsory but only permissible. Everything that is permissible is not compulsory. Also no one can force anyone to marry. In Islam both the parties have equal rights to choose their partners hence a man cannot force a woman to marry him.
There are many cases that occur where a husband divorces his wife for various reasons. These reasons may include anything; individual cases have different reasons. Many a times the wife is physically abused to the extent where she finds no way out other than to opt for divorce. I have personally seen cases where the husband throws the wife along with the children out of the house without any financial support. These are only some of the cases that take place in this world. Those who have undergone it are hurt and totally broken from the inside. It is not easy for such a woman to survive along with her children. Apart from that it is her natural and biological desire to have a family and a husband.
Realizing these factors one must also recognize the fact that not many single men are willing to marry a divorcee. If such a divorcee has children then her case gets more complicated. Why should a woman whose divorce is not her fault, suffer through life without a family and a husband? Islam recognizes the need and carnal desires for people to have a partner. In such cases there is nothing wrong if an already married man wishes to marry such a woman to support her and provide her with a family. This also keeps the society in order and minimizes the chances of corruption.
Comparing Polyandry to Polygyny
Some people including feminists often argue why Polyandry is not permitted. Why can the female not have more than one husband and why is man allowed more than one wife. If polyandry were allowed then greater problems would be faced as compared to monogamy.


Below I will analyze the points discussed above and some more points in light of polyandry.
1) If in a case like loss of male population e.g. that which occurred after the Battle of Uhud, we practice polyandry, then the purpose of repopulation is defeated. I would like the people who advocate for polyandry, use their wisdom and explain how repopulation can be achieved with polyandry.
2) Further it should also be noted that a female is highly likely to develop STD when she has multiple sexual partners e.g. Bacterial Vaginosis
3) Imagine a woman with more than one husband, and all her husbands want to have a child. Who will have it first? Fine they agree on turns. So this year one husband has a child the next it’s the other. Again medically this is unhealthy for the woman. She will be having children every year!! Would she be able to tend to all her husbands and her infants? No way is it practical. Any logical sane mind would accept that it is not possible.
Conclusion:
Islam never started the idea of polygamy and the reason why it left this option permissible is because like the Battle of Uhud, Muslims might face a situation where they would require repopulating and that can be achieved at a much faster rate by practicing polygamy. Apart from that there are other reasons touched upon by this article to show that keeping polygamy as a permissible (not compulsory) option is important for a civilized society to function while minimizing corruption.
Highly Recommended read:
Polygamy in the Bible
- Ebrahim Saifuddin


=========================================================================================================




http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996015724&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE
- (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

Question
I am living in Vienna, Austria and working in an international organization. The majority of my colleagues are non-Muslims. While talking to them, a question came up, for which I want to find an answer of convincing grounds. The question is that why a man in Islam can marry four women at a time and a woman is not allowed to marry even two men?! I tried to convince them with straightforward examples, but unfortunately could not. Please answer my question with reference and solid background. Thank you very much.


Answer


As-salaamu `alaikum wa-rahmatullahi wa-barakatuh Thank you for your very interesting question, and please accept our sincere apology for the delay. Among the numerous misconceptions about Islam, is that it is the only religion that permits polygamy, and that Muslims are the only people who might practice it. On the contrary, polygamy was never prohibited in Judaism and Christianity, until a few centuries ago. Besides the fact that most of the prophets mentioned in the Old Testament were polygamous - both Jews and Christians practiced polygamy throughout a long period of their history. However, when examining the teachings of both faiths, neither Christianity nor Judaism provided clear guidelines and regulations in regards to this practice. In contrast with Judaism and Christianity, Islam dealt with polygamy more clearly. It provides legal requirements that restrain it, to a certain extent and this amounted to the discouragement of practicing polygamy. First of all, you should know that the general norm in Islam is monogamy and not polygamy. Also, the position of Islam towards polygamy is that it is neither mandatory nor encouraged, but merely permitted. More importantly, the permission to practice polygamy is associated with compassion towards widows and orphans, and is not associated with mere sexual satisfaction. Allah says:
If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.
Noble Quran Surah 4 Verse 3
Dr. Jamal Badawi, a prominent Egyptian scholar residing and teaching in Canada,wrote in an essay titled, Polygamy in Islamic Law: ‘It is evident that the association of "polygamy" with Islam is not only unfair or biased but based on a serious misunderstanding. Polygamy was practiced, often without limitations nor regulations , in almost all cultures. It was sanctioned by various religions, and practiced, both before Islam, and for many centuries thereafter. The Mormons presently practice it - though secretly. Christian missionaries, in Africa and other areas, where polygamy is a social necessity, also allow it. It is both, honest and accurate, to say that it was Islam that regulated this practice, limited it, made it more humane and instituted equal rights and status for all wives. What the Qur’anic decrees amount to, taken together, is a discouragement of polygamy, unless necessity for it exists.’ Now, we come to the main part of your question; which is why in Islam polygamy is permissible, whereas polyandry (a woman marrying more than one man) is prohibited. I believe that the answer has many dimensions, which are related to the physical nature of woman and her position in the society. Yet, above all reasons, comes the fact that polygamy fits within the framework of the purpose of shari`a (Islamic law), whereas polyandry goes directly against its objectives. The purpose of revealing shari`a was to serve the interests of people (masalih al-`ibad). According to scholars of Islam, these interests are preserving:
Belief (deen)
Life (an-nafs)
Intellect and reason(al-`aql)
Wealth (al-maal)
Family and lineage (an-nasl)
All the rules, regulations, and laws in the Islamic legal system are dedicated to preserve these five major interests. They are known as the five ultimate objectives (al-kuliyaat al-khams). Hence, the rules and regulations related to marriage and polygamy were drawn to preserve an-nasl (family and lineage). The wisdom of preserving an-nasl is to assure the recognition of the right lineage of people and their children, by which the social kinship and social network is kept sound and stable. Since lineage through the fathers is hard to demonstrate compared to mothers, it would be saved and preserved through polygamy. On the other hand, it would be impossible through polyandry. In the case of polygamy, the father of a child is always known and therefore the lineage is easily determined. As for the case of polyandry, the father is not necessarily obvious and therefore the lineage of a child is also obscured. It was mentioned in answer
Absent fathers thaட்்A is still not accepted as sufficient evidence to prove lineage by Muslim Jurists. I would like at the end, to add shortly that the philosophy of dealing with body and sexuality in Islam is a very important issue here and comparative insights are very revealing. Giving the human being the ultimate control over the body without any shared norms and accepting relativist morality to rule in this domain might guarantee satisfaction of desires, but it would not allow the society to be built on strong pillars of a sound concept of the family, social coherence and also common civic virtues. Polygamy did not disappear in modern societies, but it just became practiced outside the bonds of marriage. It may be under the label of individual choice and freedom, but is happens with no commitment, rights or responsibilities put on the shoulders of either party. It resulted in the dissolution of norms of sexuality in orientation, preference, forms and practices. So from a realistic point of view, Islam addresses realities and sets boundaries and formulates balances of reciprocal rights and responsibilities. Needless to say, that in order to understand the social logic of Islam, this issue needs to be framed within the whole set of norms and rules upon which the Islamic society is built. If we do otherwise, our view is no longer comprehensive but partial and superficial. Allah knows the best Wa-salaam You may also find the following links useful: Women Marriage Between Polygyny and Polyandry

============================================================================================================


http://www.ourdialogue.com/p15.htm#1 (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

Polygamy: Rights of wives

When a woman learns of her husband intending a second marriage, is it permissible for her to tell him that he may not bring his second wife in her home and that he must provide a second accommodation for her. Can she say that even when her husband has only a small house provided to him by the company and he has only a limited income which may not be sufficient to keep two houses. Can he choose a Christian woman for his second wife?

Islam views marriage as a relationship between human beings. Therefore, the rights and privileges as well as the feelings and emotions of each partner in this relationship must be taken into consideration. Since the woman is the weaker partner in a marriage relationship, Islam has taken care to ensure that her rights are respected. When a man defaults on his duties towards his wife, this constitutes sufficient ground for the nullification of the marriage, if an Islamic court determines that the situation cannot be mended. Such annulification can be enforced despite the objections of the defaulting husband.
Every married woman is entitled to have a decent home of the standard to which women in her social status are accustomed. If she agrees to marry a man of limited income, she implicitly consents to have a home of the standard her husband can afford. Whatever may be the family circumstances, her right to a decent home is undeniable. This is part of something greater to which she is also entitled by right, namely, a family atmosphere based on care, affection and compassion. In short, a homely life.
It is well known that Islam allows a man to marry up to four wives at a time. When a man intends to marry a second wife, it is not obligatory that he should seek or obtain his first wife's consent. But she remains entitled to all her rights and privileges. The second wife also enjoys similar rights. Both of them are entitled to equal standard. He cannot, say, give one of them a detached two-story villa with a garden and accommodate the other in a small apartment in a large block of flats. If he does that, then he is guilty of unfair and unequal treatment.
When we consider this very carefully, we realize that it is the duty of any man who intends to marry a second wife to make sure that he can support both of them on an equal basis. The Qur'anic instruction is very clear: "If you fear that you may not treat them equally, then limit yourself to one (wife)." It may so happen that a married man finds himself deep in love with another woman and she consents to be his wife, knowing that he is of limited means. He should reflect, however, that marriage is not a temporary arrangement. He must never overlook his duties toward his first wife, or indeed the second.
The first question he should ask himself is whether he would be able to maintain two homes. It is not lawful for a man who has married two women to force them to live in the same house, whether it is big or small, unless both of them agree to that arrangement without coercion. This is due to the fact that in such circumstances it is only natural for them to harbor feelings of jealousy and hostility toward each other. Each of them will be always on the watch, trying to discover any sign of favoritism which her husband shows toward his other wife. That will inevitably lead to endless quarrels and the atmosphere in the family home will be unhealthy for the upbringing of the children. Moreover, why should a wife be exposed to such a situation which enhances ill-feelings. On the basis of this, it is perfectly legitimate for the first wife to tell her husband when he embarks on a second marriage that he must not at any time enforce on her the burden of sharing her home with his second wife. If she makes that clear to him and he nevertheless tries to impose it, then this constitutes a basis for the nullification of the marriage, if she so desires. She will be entitled to all her rights.
Having said that, I realize that not every woman who finds herself in such a situation would like to have her marriage nullified. A wife may still be young and she may have young children who need to have both their parents around. She may have no feasible alternative. If she gets her marriage nullified, she may face the problem of being separated from her children. Many a woman would sacrifice her happiness in order to stay with her children. Therefore, it is only right that a woman is given the freedom of choice with regard to the type of home she may have when her husbands marries a second or a third wife. As I have already said, a man may not force his two wives to share one house without their consent. If both of them agree to such sharing, they are forgoing part of their right and this must be on the basis of free choice.
A husband may arrange for both his wives to have separate rooms in one house only if such is the nature of housing people in the same social status as his wives have. If, for example, a man's wife comes from a family which shares her home with another family, then such a shared accommodation is the type of her equals. He may, then, ask her to have separate rooms in a house which she shares with his other wife.
When we consider all this, we find that in the case the (lady) reader cites, the husband will be ill-advised to marry a second wife. His company is unlikely to give him a second home for the second wife. Therefore, he will have to rent a flat for her which will constitute a heavy financial burden and will take a considerable portion of his income. If he is thinking of getting both his wives to share his small accommodation, he is depriving both of them of their rights. As we have said, he cannot do that unless both of them freely consent.
What we have also to consider is that Islam allows polygamy only as a solution to social problems. When a man is happy with his family life with his first wife, he should not think of marrying again. His own happiness is at stake. Having said that, it is perhaps valid to say that a man does not normally think of a second marriage, if he is happy with his first wife. When a woman finds herself threatened with the prospect of having to share her husband with another woman, she should examine her situation very carefully and think whether her husband is motivated to take such a step by the lack of happiness in the family home. Perhaps she may do something about that to ensure that everyone of her family is leading a happy life.
The other point the lady reader raises is whether it is permissible for a man who is married to a Muslim wife to choose a Christian for his second wife. The answer is that it is permissible, but far from recommended. What we have also to understand is that Islam may permit certain things but it advises its followers against resorting to them. We know that divorce is permissible, but is one legal thing which Allah dislikes most. Allah would not have allowed it, had it not been for the fact that there is a certain social need for its legality.
The same applies to marrying a woman who adheres to another faith. The problems which may arise in such a marriage are enormous, but it has been legalized nevertheless because there are circumstances which make it the most practical solution.
• Polygamy: Unacceptable second marriage
Can a man marry a second wife in order to punish his first wife for her disobedience and failure to fulfill her duties towards him?
Islam provides a system which regulates family life as well as the life of the community as a whole. In every respect of its legislation and in its regulation of relations between various groups and individuals in society, Islam maintains justice, fair treatment and a balance between rights and responsibilities. In this way it provides a solid basis for a strong, closely knit community.
Within the family, Islam has established certain rules and distributed responsibilities to each of the two partners, adding commensurate rights which should be observed and fulfilled by both of them. A woman should obey her husband as long as he does not tell her to do something which is unlawful, from the Islamic point of view. In return, she is to be treated with respect and kindness and to be well looked after so that she has no worries about her own or her children's needs.
Because the woman is the weaker partner in the family relationship, Islam places strong emphasis on the importance of being fair to women, and not to abuse them in any way. The Prophet describes those who are kind and good to their wives as the best of people. He says : "The best among you are those who are best to your households; I am the best among you to my house-hold." This is a clear statement which encourages every kindness toward one's wife and children. Such a kindness is certainly a measure of good character. It is also the gauge for a happy family life. There is no doubt that by the way a man treats his wife and the care and kindness he shows her, he sets the pattern of life in the family home. If he is kind, good and caring, mutual affection and happiness will be well established. If he is quarrelsome, unkind and dictatorial, his life at home will be beset with problems. While a woman can influence the pattern of life at home to a large extent, there is no doubt that the ultimate responsibility for the happiness of the family lies with the man.
When we say this, we are certainly speaking in a general manner. Families differ as much as individuals differ in their habits, temperaments, cares and prejudices. Moreover, they differ according to the degree of compatibility between man and wife. Everyone of us requires certain qualities in his or her life partner. It is no exaggeration to say that none of us finds in the other the ideal partner that he or she has imagined before marriage. There is always need to compromise. That need continues with us through life and the more ready we are to make such compromises, the happier we become. It is perhaps with an eye to this need that one of the final commandments of the Prophet was concerned with the treatment of wives and women generally. On his deathbed, the Prophet continued to remind the followers of three areas as needing continuous attention. The first concerns man's relationship with Allah while the other two are concerned with human relations, concentrating on the need to protect the rights of two vulnerable groups in society, namely, women and slaves. He said repeatedly : "Attend to your prayers. Do not ask those whom your right hands possess to accomplish for you what they cannot do. Fear Allah in your treatment of women."
With such emphasis on the rights of women and the need to extend to them the proper and kind treatment they expect and deserve, every Muslim must do his best to ensure that in his treatment of his wife and the rest of his household, he provides an example to be followed by others. We all know that Islamic society is compassionate and caring. These characteristics start in the family home and with every member of the family extending them to the others, according to each one's responsibilities and duties.
On the basis of the foregoing principles, we look at the question posed by our reader. It is well known that Islam allows a man to marry up to four wives at any one time. Furthermore, Islam allows divorce. In each of these two cases of polygamy, there are rights which belong to the husband and each of his wives.
A man may marry a second wife for any one or a number of reasons. These, however, do not include punishing his first wife for her non-fulfillment of her duties towards him. She may be disobedient and totally undutiful. Her behavior may leave much to be desired. The proper way to correct such a situation is not by marrying a second wife. It is true that such a marriage may jolt her violently and she may correct her attitude towards her husband. But then, that is not the primary consideration in such an equation. We have to begin with the second wife who is being used as a means of punishment or retaliation in a situation in which she remains not involved up to the point of her marriage. When she accepts to marry her husband, she may be totally unaware of his intentions and the general situation which exists in his home and the relationship between him and his first wife. On the other hand, she may be given a highly false impression of that situation. What will happen next is, in most cases, a continuing rivalry, fed up by jealousy, between the two women, until one is finally able to win a special position of favor with the husband who may, in turn, suffer as a result of this rivalry. In such a situation, the making of a good family home is totally lacking. The real sufferers, at the end of the day, are the children of either one or both of the two women.
If the second marriage is intended as punishment for the first wife, is it not appropriate to ask : what happens if the punishment works and the first wife becomes obedient, loving and caring? Will the husband in this case divorce the second wife, as the role which she was brought in to play has been fulfilled? If the answer is in the affirmative and that a divorce will take place, then the whole affair is absurd. It involves an exploitation of a human being, the second wife, to remedy a situation which is neither of her making nor of her concern. Nor has she been told that her role will be over when the punishment proves to be effective. Moreover, by that time, children may have been born to the second wife and they have rights to claim against their father.
If the answer to the above question is that no divorce will take place and the second marriage is permanent, as every marriage should be, then the husband is guilty of playing games with the interests of the family as a whole. This is something which Islam does not accept at all. Islam views marriage very seriously and emphasizes that all rights of all partners must be honored and strictly observed.
To sum up, the second marriage while retaining the first wife is allowed in Islam for any of the good reasons for which such a concession has been allowed us by Allah. The duties of husband and wife must be fulfilled, as they are commensurate with their rights. A wife obeys her husband and looks after her. Both care for each other and respect and honor each other. A second marriage contracted with the aim of punishing the first wife for her lack of observance of her duties towards her husband cannot be approved because it involves unfairness to others. Moreover, it betrays an unacceptable attitude to marriage as a whole, which Islam views very seriously.


Polygamy
Why has polygamy been allowed in Islam? What is the punishment for illegal contact between a man and a woman?
Polygamy has been permitted in Islam as a solution to social problems that may not have any other satisfactory solution. Take, for example, the case of a woman who has a chronic illness which makes her unable to satisfy her husband's needs. Rather than divorce her, her husband is allowed to have a second wife. Other examples can be given in which marriage with a second wife provides a better solution to a problem than any other alternative.
There is an important condition for a second or third marriage, namely that the husband should treat his wives with absolute fairness and equality. If he feels that he may not be able to do that, then he must not take a second wife.
Punishment for fornication [or intercourse between unmarried persons] is flogging in public with 100 lashes. Punishment for adultery [or intercourse between the married persons] is stoning to death. However, these punishments cannot be enforced unless proof is obtained either through freely given confession, [which, incidentally, may be retracted] or through the testimony of four men who testify under oath to have seen the offense being committed. Otherwise, punishment is left to Allah to inflict on the day of judgment, or in this life as He pleases. It is his prerogative to inflict punishment or to forgive the offender.

============================================================================================================






http://www.answering-christianity.com/polygamy.htm
(LINK CHECKED - WORKING)

When is Polygamy allowed in Islam?
The sections of this article are:
The sections of this article are:
1- The Noble Verses? 2- What was the purpose of Noble Verse 4:3? - The way I read Noble Verse 4:3.
3- Why didn't Allah Almighty directly prohibit polygamy? 4- Why then did Prophet Muhammad practice polygamy? 5- Can anyone be absolutely fair? 6- Too much illiterate and starving kids damage the society and Islam. 7- What if the person is rich and can afford polygamy?
8- An email I received from a Christian. Polygamy was only allowed because of the orphans.
9- Conclusion.

1- The Noble Verses:
Marriage from multiple women in Islam might not be allowed for those who might result in damaging the society with their marriage by bringing more illiterate, poor, and in many cases starving children to the society.
Let us look at Noble Verse 4:3 "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice."
Notice how Allah Almighty orders men to be either fair to their wives or never marry more than one wife.
Let us look at Noble Verse 4:129 "Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful." Here we clearly see that Allah Almighty tells men that they will never be fair to their wives.
Let us see why then Allah Almighty temporarily ordered polygamy but yet very highly discouraged it, and why I personally believe from the Noble Quran that polygamy should not be allowed today to most Muslim men in the Muslim world.

2- What was the purpose of the Noble Verse 4:3?

Noble Verse 4:3 was revealed to Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him in Madina after he migrated to it from Mecca and established an Islamic state there right after the battle of Uhud in which the Muslims not only had lost badly against the Pagans, but also suffered a dramatic decrease in the number of Muslim men. The Muslim men before that battle were approximately 700. They became only 400 after the battle. This loss had left so many Muslim women (1) Widows, and (2) Not able to get married if they were single.
To make matters even worse, the Muslims had faced yet another battle against the Pagans in Mecca and its neighboring tribes who wanted to attack the Muslims in Madina to finish off Islam once and for all, and by the Jews and the Christians in Madina who betrayed the Muslims in the "battle of Trench" after signing a defense treaty with Muhammad peace be upon him against the Pagans.
All praise due to Allah Almighty. With Allah's Will and Mercy, the Muslims had miraculously won the battle against the Pagans of Mecca and drove them back to where they came from, and then attacked the Jews and the Christians who betrayed the defense treaty and kicked those hypocrites out of Madina forever!
These continuous battles against the Muslims were very costly in terms of Muslim men's lives. The women had to be taken care of one way or another. For this reason, Allah Almighty had revealed the Noble Verse 4:3 to Muhammad peace be upon him to solve the social problems that the Muslims were facing. That is why at the very beginning of the Noble Verse 4:3 we see Allah Almighty setting a conditional clause for Orphans "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans...(4:3)." This Noble Verse came down for the purpose of protecting the Orphans and to increase the number of the Muslims by allowing the men to marry multiple wives (preferably from the grown Orphans at that time), up to four wives only. The purpose was absolutely not for man's sexual pleasure nor privilege, nor was it to support man's personal ego. It was revealed to solve a major social problem to prevent major sins such as illegal sex and prostitution.
Polygamy is not encouraged in the Noble Quran, nor Allah Almighty had allowed it because He really liked it. He was clearly careful to highly discourage polygamy to men by telling them "but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one...(4:3)" which clearly orders men to either be fair or to not marry at all, despite the fact that we lost many men, Allah Almighty still didn't want polygamy to really take place. That's why He later told men "Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire...(4:129)" which clearly nullifies the excuse that He gave them to practice polygamy. Is this a contradiction then? Absolutely not!. It clearly proves that when Allah Almighty allowed polygamy, He only allowed it because we (the Muslims) had an emergency; we lost almost half of our men if not even more. When Islam later became much stronger and Muslims defeated the infidels in the continues battles that were forced upon them (the Muslims), Allah Almighty nullified the excuse that he gave to men to practice polygamy, which would then lead to prohibiting polygamy altogether.

The way I read Noble Verse 4:3 is as follows:
Allah Almighty ordered us to take care of the Orphans in our Islamic society (Noble Verses 2:177, 2:215, 2:220 and much more). He then commands us that if we fear that we will not be able to provide enough support for the too much Orphans in our society (especially after the battle of Uhud where more than half of the Muslim men were lost), then marry up to four of them to provide a social balance between men and women. But if a person feels that he can't handle multiple women, then one is just fine.
That's really all there is to it. Please read the Noble Verse again and compare it to my brief explanation above:
"If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (The Noble Quran, 4:3)"

3- Why didn't Allah Almighty then directly prohibit polygamy?

Because Islam is the most straight forward religion, and because Islam is truly a religion for all times and all places that doesn't need to be modified as some of the other religions in the world do (including Christianity). Allah Almighty left the issue of polygamy open for Muslims in case Muslims face dilemmas in the future like the ones we faced during Islam's weak times by losing too many men. In cases like this, Muslim scholars should look into allowing polygamy. But until then, polygamy should be completely prohibited by the Muslim scholars according to the commands of Allah Almighty.
To see polygamy in the Bible where a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry, see Exodus 21:10 in the Bible. Please note that King David in the Bible had six wives and numerous concubines according to 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3. King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines according to1 Kings 11:3. Also, Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines according to 2 Chronicles 11:21.
Please visit:
Polygamy in both the Old and New Testaments in the Bible. Jesus himself in the New Testament allowed Polygamy.

4- Why then did Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him practice polygamy?

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him can be treated as an exceptional case. The Noble Verses that I presented above clearly talked about men and women in general. They apply to all men and all women. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was a Messenger of GOD (filled with sympathy and mercy to people) and a leader for all Muslims. He didn't practice polygamy for the sake of sexual pleasure at all. Most of his wives were either widows (older than him in age too) or divorced women (also most of them were either older or same age). Only one of his wives was a virgin, and he only married her because her father was his best friend. He wanted to strengthen that relationship. And it was her father who offered her to our Prophet peace be upon him anyway.
If our beloved Prophet peace be upon him really seeked sexual pleasure, then he would've married young virgins from the Muslims. Back then, people loved Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him so much, that they would literally do anything for him. Certainly fathers would've given him their young virgin daughters if he wanted to. Many people offered him their young virgin bosomed daughters anyway to raise their families' honor, but our Prophet never seeked that sexual privilege in life.
Because Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was a smart political leader and a wonderful humble merciful true Messenger of Allah Almighty, he chose to marry the weak from his people to encourage the Muslim men to do the same; to create a balance in the Muslim society. Again, another emergency case that existed during Islam's weak times that forced the Muslims (including Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him) to practice polygamy.

5- Can anyone be absolutely fair?
No one on this earth including Muhammad peace be upon him can be absolutely fair. Our Prophet peace be upon him used to pray in one of his prayers to Allah Almighty by saying in Arabic "Allah humma innaka taalamu be anni aadiloo bima astatee', wa lakinnee la aadiloo bima la astatee'," which means in English "Dear Allah, you are well aware that I try to be just with all I can, but I can't be just with what I can't." This prayer means that our Prophet always tried to be fair as much as possible, but he couldn't always do that.
One time, Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said this prayer, because he used to love his wife Aisha (who was the youngest of his wives) the most, and he always feared that he would not be fair to the rest of his wives. Muhammad peace be upon him recognized that he was only a human being, and he can not be fair especially in his feelings at all time.
This clearly proves that Islam highly discourages the marriage of multiple wives for (1) Because no one can be fair; (2) polygamy is only allowed when the male species is endangered in a society; and (3) The Noble Verse 4:3 orders us to marry only one wife if we feel that we will not be fair.
The Noble Verse that I presented above also clearly proves that no one can be absolutely fair; "Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (The Noble Quran, 4:129)"

6- Too much illiterate and starving kids damage the society and Islam:
Today in some of the poor Muslim countries, some poor men still practice polygamy. What benefit would it really serve the society and Islam for a person to bring more illiterate and starving kids into this world?
I honestly believe that practicing polygamy among the poor and starving is not allowed in Islam. Allah Almighty will hold accountable every man who practices polygamy. Poor men practicing polygamy don't provide fairness to the newly born kids and to the economically crippled society, and certainly not to their wives either.
If people practice polygamy without being thoughtful to others, then I am certain that Allah Almighty will take that negatively toward them, because Allah Almighty clearly demanded that we be fair, and think thoroughly before having multiple wives. He clearly encouraged just having one wife.
7- What if the person is rich and can afford polygamy?
I think it would be ok, but the man would still be taking a very high risk in displeasing GOD Almighty for anything that goes wrong in the marriages and the damages that it would cost the wives and the kids. If his kids will not be a burden on the society, and he makes sure that his wives are all treated well and equally as much as he can, even though he will never be perfectly just, then he might be ok.
Brining well educated kids into a Muslim society definitely helps. But if a rich guy practices polygamy the way some of the oil rich Gulf-Arab multi billionaires practice it; by marrying and divorcing on Thursdays which ensures that he never exceeds four women, and at the same time he always experiences new sexual pleasure with a new woman every week, then believe me Allah Almighty will damn him really bad in the Day of Judgment, because this is not the spiritual point from allowing polygamy in the Noble Quran!
I think practicing polygamy among those who can afford it really depends on the individual case. If the man's wife strongly opposes to polygamy to a point that she would seek a divorce, then obviously he can never satisfy her, and most probably can never be fair enough with her because he would be always fighting and arguing with her, where it may not be the case with the other wife. So destroying a marital life and damaging the kids for a personal reason is really not fair by itself, unless of course the wife is unbearable and the man and wife don't want the divorce, which in this case it would be a great idea for the man to have another wife.
Also, some Muslim women don't mind polygamy. And yes, some of them even seek wives for their husbands. If this is the case, then polygamy in this case would not be a problem, provide that the man can financially afford it and can provide a good quality life for all of his wives, and most importantly, can provide a good quality of education to his children.
As I said above, Allah Almighty clearly revealed Noble Verse 4:3 for the protection of the Orphans and to solve a major social imbalance between men and women. The Noble Verse never really came for man's pleasure, nor did it come for general purposes like in the Bible
where men can practice polygamy for just about any reason.
So men in Islam are really taking risks when they practice polygamy for personal reasons only, because they will be held accountable for everything that goes wrong in the multiple marriages, and for any martial dissolutions that will ultimately hurt the kids the most.

8- An email I received from a Christian:
(Emphasis below are mine)
From: ***** <*****@hotmail.com> To: QuranSearchCom@yahoo.com Subject: Your web article on polygamy in the Bible Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:41:59 -0500
God (YHWH - the Eternal One) portrays Himself, through the words of His prophet, as the Husband of two "wives," Aholah and Aholibah, representing Samaria (Kingdom of Israel) and Jerusalem (Kingdom of Judah). Now this is a spritual figure, not a literal physical one, for God is not a man, with literal wives. Yet, the physical, temporal example used to illustrate a spiritual lesson or point must be valid. Nathan, God's prophet, chastised King David for raping Bathsheba and having her husband, Uriah the Hittite (probably a proselyte to the faith of God), murdered. He said to David that God had given much to David, including his 'master's' (Saul, David's predecessor on the throne) WIVES. These in addition to the number of wives David already had, plus a number of concubines. And, Nathan said, if those had not been enough God would have given him more!! It is not certain that the father of the man who took his father's wife was a polygamist. He well could have been a widower who had remarried whose son, the fornicator, had lain with his second wife, not the son's mother but his stepmother. The son's own mother may have been dead. At any rate, the son did not respect the status of his stepmother and her relationship with his father but treated her as an harlot. It is also possible that the father was also dead and the son in his lust pretended that he could take his (in his opinion) former stepmoter to bed, or wherever he took her.
Polygamy is a concession to the imperfections and imbalances in humanity. There have never been provided one woman for every man and one man for every woman. In all cases of civilized society (ignoring a few frontier, unsettled regions and war-torn areas) there are always more women of marriageable age than men of marriageable age. For one thing, women attain marriageable age several years earlier than men. Mary, mother of Jesus, is believed to have been 13 or 14 when she bore Him. Was God, the Holy Spirit, a statutory rapist by our standards? Hardly. God is not ruled by man's laws and customs or opinions. English common law set the minimum age for marriage at 12 for females. Jewish tradition set it at 10. Many American states set the minimum age at 12, 14, 15 and 16. Canada allows females members of native American tribes to marry at 7 according to their tribal laws, though when they reach 14 they can repudiate such marriages as lacking their understanding consent (after being married for 7 years and even bearing several children?).
Unlike the Mormon teachings the Bible does not encourage polygamy; it simply permits it. This is similar to Mohammed's permission of up to 4 wives but then only if the man is certain he can treat them all equitably and love them without favoritism other than due respect to his first wife.

My response:
Dear Sir,
I agree for a good part with all of your points above except for the last statement about Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, permitting up to 4 wives. It wasn't the Prophet of Islam who permitted anything, but rather Allah Almighty. But I see your point clearly, and yes, the Noble Quran does indeed discourage polygamy. I have demonstrated this with several Noble Verses at:
www.answering-christianity.com/polygamy.htm.
Polygamy is not always bad and discouraged. When Allah Almighty allowed polygamy in Islam, it was due to primarily protecting the orphans:
"If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (The Noble Quran, 4:3)"
Back then, when the Muslims fought their battles against the countless pagan tribes who waged many wars against Islam because they felt threatened from Islam since Islam called for the demolishing of all idols and only worshiping the One, Living and True GOD Almighty, many Muslim men found themselves with:
1- Orphan children of other Muslim warriors who died in the battle field.
2- Orphan children from the infidels' side.
3- Widowed and single women from the Muslims' side.
4- Widowed and single women from the infidels' side.
So here we have Osama Abdallah (me) who only has one lovely wife with few children, and then all of the sudden, he finds himself given 20 orphan-children to take care of along with his own children that his wife is already busy with. What do we do? Allah Almighty allowed for Osama Abdallah to:
1- Sponsor these orphans and to marry up to four Muslim wives to take care of them.
2- Sponsor these orphans and only keep his one wife and bring instead few new harems to help take care of the orphans.
If Osama Abdallah sees that too much trouble will result in the future between the women - that he will find himself in a major civil war between them over him because he's just too handsome - and he is too busy to get involved and solve the problems, and the women will cause him too much headache through their endless fights and screaming, then Osama Abdallah will most certainly support such civil war....no ehmm#%&@....I mean Osama Abdallah will only keep one wife, because he is commanded by Allah Almighty to only keep his one and only lovely wife provided that the orphans are not compromised, because Allah Almighty clearly Said: "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans..." Osama Abdallah will have to make that call based on his best and honest judgment :>) before Allah Almighty.
So as you clearly see, Allah Almighty's Divine Law regarding polygamy is quite just and beautiful in the Noble Quran. It's main reason was never to allow the man to sexually enjoy more women, but rather to solve a major social problem that occurred 1,500 years ago, and that is protecting the helpless orphans by the aid of as many women as needed, whether wives or harems!
May Allah Almighty continue to Lead you and open your heart to Islam. Ameen.

Conclusion:
Islam does not allow marriage of multiple wives for males' sexual privileges and desires as Anti-Islamics claim. A normal man who makes enough money to keep him surviving in life can not provide a fair quality of life to all his wives, which means that he must not be allowed to marry multiple wives because he will only make his society worse.
Noble Verse 4:3 came to solve social problems. Unfortunately today, some Muslims intensify the Muslim's social problems in the Islamic poor countries by marrying multiple wives and bringing more and more illiterate and poor kids into the society which on the long run will only keep their entire society below the level of poverty. Therefore, Noble Verse 4:3 doesn't allow polygamy just for anyone or any reason and Noble Verse 4:129 certainly nullifies the excuse Allah Almighty gave to Muslim men to practice polygamy. Therefore, unless we have social or personal dilemmas where too many Muslim men were lost, or there is problems with the wife toward her husband, then polygamy should not be allowed nor justified in my Islamic view.
And Allah Almighty knows best, and may He forgive me if I made any mistakes in this article.

See polygamy in the Bible's Old and New Testaments. Jesus himself allowed polygamy in the New Testament.
Our Prophet's marriages and the discourage of Polygamy in Islam.
Is Muta (temporary marriage) allowed in Islam?
Women in Islam and Christianity section.
Please email me at Osama Abdallah
Back to either http://www.aol40.com/ or http://www.answering-christianity.com/


===============================================================================================================


http://www.islamfortoday.com/polygamy5.htm (LINK CHECKED-WORKING)

Polygamy in Islamic LawDr. Jamal Badawi examines polygamy in the Muslim, Jewish and Christian traditions.
Introduction
Like Judaism and Christianity, Islam does not provide an explicit prohibition of Polygamy. Unlike Judaism, Christianity and perhaps-other religions as well, Islam deals with the issue more clearly and provides certain legal requirements and restraints that amount to the discouragement of such a practice.
The reason for not prohibiting polygamy categorically is perhaps due to the fact that there are certain conditions which face individuals and societies in different places and at different times, which make the limited practice of polygamy a better solution than either divorce or the hypocritical pretence of morality.
Out present day feelings about what is "tasteful" or "distasteful" are something we cannot force on all people everywhere, at all times and under all conditions, unless it is a question of a law coming God. This leads to the following question.
Is polygamy immoral per se?
To shorten the discussion, let us begin with the assumption that religions are acceptable sources of "morals". Let us also select two religions (Judaism and Christianity) which are the closest to Islam, in order to see where they stand on that issue.
a) In Judaism: It is notable that most of the Old Testament Prophets are polygamous. According to the Old Testament, Abraham "the friend of God" had more than one wife, David had one hundred wives, and Solomon is even said to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
If polygamy is immoral per se, then these and other leading figures in the Biblical traditions are immoral. In this case, there would be no sanctity attached to the Bible, its Prophets, or it teachings! No sincere Jew, Christian or Muslim would regard God’s chosen Messengers as immoral persons!
The Dictionary of the Bible states: Polygamy meets us as a fact: e.g. Abraham, Jacob, the Judges, David, Solomon…In Deuteronomy 17:17, the King is warned not to multiply wives; later regulations fixed the number at eighteen for a king and for an ordinary man.
The Philosophy behind the legalisation of polygamy is explained in the Encyclopedia Biblica: The man who owns his wife as a chattel can on the same principle own as many as he pleases, that is to say, as many as he can afford to buy and keep…The Talmudists formulate the rule that no Jew may have more than four wives, kings may have at most eighteen.
It was only at the beginning of the eleventh century (about four centuries after the advent of Islam!) that polygamy was expressly prohibited in Judaism. According to Westermarck: "Among European Jews polygamy was still practiced during the Middle Ages, and among Jews living in Muhammadan countries it occurs even to this day.
An express prohibition of it was not pronounced until the convening of the Rabbinical Synod at Worms, in the beginning of the eleventh century. This prohibition was originally made for the Jews living in Germany and Northern France, but it was successfully adopted in all European countries. Nevertheless, the Jewish Marriage Code retained many provisions, which originated at a time when polygamy was still legally in existence."
b) In Christianity: As the Old Testament is a vital part of the Christian Faith, it cannot be disregarded in this discussion.
It was concerning the Old Testament laws and Old Testament Prophets that Jesus (as) said plainly that he came not to destroy the Law or the Prophets but rather to fulfil. In addition, there is no passage in the New Testament that clearly prohibits polygamy. This was the understanding of the early Church Fathers and for several centuries in the Christian era.
Westermarck, the noted authority on the history of human marriages states: "Considering that monogamy prevailed as the only legitimate form of marriage in Greece and Rome, it cannot be said that Christianity introduced obligatory monogamy in the Western World. Indeed, although the New Testament assumes monogamy as the normal or ideal form of marriage, it does not expressly prohibit polygamy, except in the case of a bishop or deacon. It has been argued that it was not necessary for the first Christian teachers to condemn polygamy because monogamy was the universal rule among the peoples in whose midst it was preached: but this is certainly not true of the Jews, who still both permitted and practiced polygamy at the beginning of the Christian era. Some of the Fathers accused the Jewish Rabbis of sensuality, but no Council of the Church in the earliest centuries opposed polygamy, and no obstacle was put in the way of its practice by kings in countries where it had occurred in the times of paganism. In the middle of the sixth century Diarmait, King of Ireland, had two queens and two concubines. Polygamy was frequently practiced by the Merovingian kings. Charles the Great had two wives and many concubines; and one of his laws seems to imply that polygamy was not unknown among priests. In later times Philip of Hesse and Frederick William II of Prussia contracted bigamous marriages with the sanction of the Lutheran clergy. Luther himself approved of the bigamy of the former, and so did Melanchthon. On various occasions Luther speaks of polygamy with considerable toleration. It had not been forbidden by God: even Abraham, who was a "perfect Christian", had two wives. It is true that God had allowed such marriages to certain men of the Old Testament only in particular circumstances, and if a Christian wanted to follow their example he had to show that the circumstances were similar in his case; but polygamy was undoubtedly preferable to divorce.
In 1650, soon after the Peace of Westphalia, when the population had been greatly reduced by the Thirty Years’ War, the Frankish Kreistag at Nuremberg passed resolution that thenceforth every man should be allowed to marry two women. Certain sects of Christians have even advocated polygamy with much fever.
In 1531 the Anabaptists openly preached at Munster that he who wants to be a true Christian must have several wives. And the Mormons, as the entire world knows, regard polygamy as a divine institution."
What is the Legal Status of Polygamy in Islam?
The Verse that allows polygamy "was revealed after the battle of Uhud in which many Muslims were killed, leaving widows and orphans for whom due care was incumbent upon the Muslim survivors."
The translation of the verse is as follows: "If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then (marry) only one…" (Qur’an 4:3)
From this verse a number of facts are evident:
1 That polygamy is neither mandatory, nor encouraged, but merely permitted.
2 That the permission to practice polygamy is not associated with mere satisfaction of. Rather, it is associated with compassion towards widows and orphans, a matter that is confirmed by the atmosphere in which the verse was revealed.
3 That even in such a situation, the permission is far more restricted than the normal practice which existed among the Arabs and other peoples at that time when many married as many as ten or more wives.
4 That dealing justly with one’s wives is an obligation. This applies to housing, food, clothing, kind treatment…etc., for which the husband is fully responsible. If one is not sure of being able to deal justly with them, the Qur’an says: "then (marry) only one." (Qur’an 4:3)
This verse, when combined with another verse in the same chapter, shows some discouragement of such plural marriages. The other verse plainly states: "You are never able to be fair and just between women even if it is your ardent desire…" (Qur’an 4:129)
The requirement of justice rules out the fantasy that man can "own as many as he pleases." It also rules out the concept of a "secondary wife", for all wives have exactly the same status and are entitled to identical rights and claims over their husband. It also implies, according to the Islamic Law, that should the husband fail to provide enough support for any of his wives, she can go to court and ask for a divorce.
5 The verse says "marry," not kidnap, buy or seduce. What “marriage” is as understood in Islam? Marriage in Islam is a civil contract which is not valid unless both contracting parties consent to it. Thus, no wife can be forced or "given" to a husband who is already married.
It is thus a free choice of both parties. As to the first wife:
A She may be barren or ill and see in polygamy a better solution than divorce.
B She may divorce him (unilaterally) if he is married to a second wife provided that the nuptial contract gives her the right of unilateral divorce (ismah)
C She can go to court and ask for a divorce if there is evidence of mistreatment or injustice inflicted upon her.
But if polygamy is discouraged and loaded with such constraints, could it have been better if the Qur’an simply forbade it? To answer this question, we may have to raise another one: Can Polygamy be a Better Solution in Some Cases?
Scholars in the past and at present, Muslims and Non-Muslims have consistently pointed out such cases. The following are a few examples, which are tied in with the general approach of Islam to individual and social problems.
A Individual Cases
1. A man who discovers that his wife is barren, and who at the same time instinctively aspires to have children and heir. In a situation as this, then man would either have to:
- Suffer the deprivation of fatherhood for life.
- Divorce his barren wife and get married to another woman who is not barren.
In many cases, neither solution can be considered as the best alternative. Polygamy would have the advantage of preserving the marital relationship without depriving the man of fathering children of his own.
2. A man whose wife becomes chronically ill would have one of possible alternatives:
- He may suppress his instinctive sexual needs for the rest of his life.
- He may divorce his sick wife at a time when she needs his compassion most, and get married to another woman, thus legally satisfying his instinctive needs.
- Or he could compromise by keeping his sick wife, and secretly take for himself one or more illicit sex partners.
Let us discuss these alternatives from the point of view of the Islamic Teaching. The first solution is against human nature. Islam recognises sex and sexual needs and provides legitimate means for their satisfaction. The second solution is clearly less compassionate; especially where there is love between two parties. Furthermore, divorce is described by the Prophet Muhammad (saw) as the "permitted thing that is hated most by God". The last solution is plainly against the Islamic teaching which forbids illicit sexual relationships in any form.
To sum up, Islam being against immorality, hypocritical pretence of morality and against divorce unless no better solution is available, provides for a better alternative which is consistent with human nature and with the preservation of pure and legitimate sex relationships. In a situation like this, it is doubtful that any solution would be better than polygamy, which is, after all, and optional solution.
B Social Cases
1. Anthropologists tell us that among various tribes and societies, polygamy
is a social and economic necessity. In some very poor areas, the infant mortality is very high. Children on the other hand, are a source of additional labour for the earning capacity of the family. To have more children under such circumstances would require the practice of polygamy. It is by this very reason that Christian missionaries in some African regions justified their permission to local people to practice polygamy without being excommunicated from the church. One researcher has even found, through his studies that women in such societies not only accept polygamy, but some of them even prefer this.
2. Aside from cases where women outnumber men, devastating wars, in the past and at present, have taken their toll mainly among men. The result is not simply more women who cannot find husbands, but even more widows who may aspire to a respectable family life. In such a situation, if polygamy is bad, the limitation on polygamy is even far worse.
Both unmarried women and widows are human beings. Unless their instinctive needs are legitimately satisfied, the temptation is great for corruption and immorality. But aside from the moral question these women are also exploited. They are used as tools for men’s pleasures, yet have no guarantees, no rights or security, financial or emotional. Should they become pregnant, it is their burden alone. But even if such women are ready to pay the price for this personally, society also suffers seriously from such situations. The increasing number of illegitimate children born today under conditions such as these provides a potential base for tomorrow’s maladjusted and criminals. Furthermore it is inhuman, humiliating for those children to grow p without knowing who their fathers were and without enjoying a clean and normal family life.
One question remains:
Why Not Polyandry (plurality of husbands for the same women?)
It is evident that the nature of women is physiologically and psychologically different from that of men. Psychologically speaking, the woman is monogamous by her very nature. Furthermore, in all cultures, new and old, the headship of the family is normally man’s. One can imagine what would happen if the family had two or more heads. Furthermore, if the woman was married to more than one husband, which would be the father of her children?
Conclusion
It is now evident that the association of "polygamy" with Islam is not unfair or biased but based on serious misunderstanding. Polygamy was practiced, often without limitations, in almost all cultures. It was sanctioned by various religions, and practiced both before Islam and for many centuries thereafter. It is presently practiced, though secretly, by the Mormons, and it is allowed by Christian missionaries in Africa and other areas where polygamy is a social necessity.
It is both honest and accurate to say that it is Islam that regulated this practice, limited it, made it more humane, and instituted equal rights and status for all wives. What the Quranic decrees amount to, taken together, is a discouragement of polygamy unless necessity for it exists.
It is also evident that the general rule in Islam is monogamy and not polygamy. However, permission to practice limited polygamy is only consistent with Islam’s realistic view of the nature of man and women and of the various social needs, problems, and cultural variations.
The question is, however, far more than the inherent flexibility of Islam; it also is frank and straightforward approach of Islam in dealing with practical problems. Rather than requiring hypocritical and superficial compliance, Islam delves deeper into the problems of individuals and societies, and provides for legitimate and clean solutions that are far more beneficial than would be the case if they were ignored. There is no doubt that the second wife legally married and treated kindly is better off than a mistress without any legal rights or security. There is no doubt also that the legitimate child of a polygamous father, born in the "full light of the day, " and who enjoys all the rights and privileges of a son or daughter, is far better off than the wanted or unwanted illegitimate child (especially if it is a girl).
It is fair also to say that polygamy may be harmful in many respects. Islam, however, does not regard polygamy as a substitute for monogamy. Realising its disadvantages Islam allows it under strict conditions and when no better alternative is available. This is actually consistent with a general rule in Islamic Law, "The Lesser of Two Evils." This means that if a harm is certain, and if there is no way to avert such harm unless some other harm is done, then it is better to cause the lesser harm in order to avoid the greater. It is like a captain who gets rid of the ship’s freight in order to save the lives of the sailors.
This vitality, flexibility, and far-sightedness of the teachings of Islam cannot possibly be attributed to any man or group of men, including Prophet Muhammad (saw) himself. Its secret simply lies in its Divine Source, God Most High, who knows in entirety what human needs and problems are.
Man can reject the guidance of God, become his own god, and establish his own standards of morality. Ultimately, however, he may discover the mirage that alluded him. A few honest questions finally: What is the situation in countries that banned polygamy? Do they really enjoy sincere and faithful "monogamy"? What is the degree of cohesion of the family? Is there any significant number of mistresses, "sweethearts", and illegitimate children? How observant are married men and women of the strict "monogamous" relationship? Are infidelity and secret extramarital sexual relationships more moral than the legitimate, legally protected husband-wife relationships, even under polygamy if there is a pressing need for it? Which of the two situations is best? After all, Islam, by its nature, is a universal religion which is revealed by God to guide people in all places at all times.
This guidance can hardly be secured by avoiding issues and problems which are real, even as they are relevant to human life on earth with its diversity. Hypocrisy, apology, or burying one’s head in the sand are hardly realistic means of achieving righteous human life. They are not effective in achieving moral upliftment either.
Dr. Jamal BadawiReproduced from "Polygamy In Islamic Law" © copyright 1998. Dr. Jamal Badawi
===============================================================================================================




http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/Q_WI/polygamy.htm (LINK CHECKED)

POLYGAMY

Missionaries and orientalists treat the subject of polygamy as if it were one of the rites of Islam, or one of its duties, or at least a desirable practice in Islam. This is an inaccuracy or a misconception. The overwhelming norm of marriage, for a Muslim, is to marry one woman to be his solace, the joy of his heart, the keeper of his house, and the one to trust with his secrets. Thus, quietude, love, and mercy, the foundation of married life according to the Qur'an, would support them. Therefore, the learned say, "It is disliked for a man who has a wife who is chaste and modest and who is enough for him to marry another. This will subject him to what is forbidden." The Almighty says: "You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced nor married)". [Surah 4:129]
The Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) said, "The man who had two wives and was inclined towards one of them will come on the Day of Judgement bent to one side". [ Transmitted by Abu Dawud - his own wording - (3133), Al Termithy (1141), A-Nisa'i, 7/63, Ibn Majah (1969), Al-Doramy p.539, and Ahmad, 2/347, 471. All on the authority of Abu Huraira.] As for the man who is unable to sustain a second wife, or who is afraid of not being fair [ The obligatory fairness is to treat them equally in maintenance, clothing and housing. He is forbidden to go to the one on the night devoted to the other except out of expedience such as a crisis or grave illness. He is also forbidden to go there in the day time except for necessity such as a visit for a harmless illness, or to inquire about a certain matter he needs. If he does not stay long, there is no expiation because it is a slight matter. If he stays or has his lust consumed, he should expiate by going to the one he treated unfairly and staying at her place the same time he stayed with the first woman. That is what is decided as an elucidation of the obligatory justice.] to both of them, it is for bidden for him to marry another. The Almighty says:" but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one". [Surah 4:3]
Though it preferable for a man to have only one wife to avoid slips and out of fear of troubles in this world as well as punishment on the Day of Judgement, there are other humane considerations for the individual and society-which we will mention-that made Islam allow the Muslim to marry more than one wife. This is because Islam is the religion which conforms to sound naturalness and treats reality with out escape, exaggeration or fantasy.
Polygamy in olden times and in Islam
Some people talk about polygamy as if Islam was the first to permit it. This is incorrect and a dismissal of history.
Many nations and religions before Islam had allowed marrying a great number of women, tens of them, even a hundred, without any conditions or limitations. The Old Testament mentioned that David had three hundred women and that Solomon had seven hundred, some of whom were wives, while others were concubines.
With the advent of Islam, a condition and a limitation were laid on polygamy. The limitation made the maximum number of wives four. Ghilan Ibn Salma became a Muslim while he had ten women, so the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) said to him, "Choose four of them and leave (divorce) the others". [ Transmitted by Al-Termithy (1128) and Ibn Majah (1953) On the authority of Ibn 'Umar] The same thing happened to those who embraced Islam while having eight or five wives; they were ordered by the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) not to keep more than four.
As for the marriage of the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) to nine women, it was something restricted and specified by Allah for him for the Islamic call and for the nation's need of them after his passing away. He lived most of his life with one wife, Khadijah, may Allah be pleased with her. That was a glorification by Allah of the Prophet's wives, who chose the way of Allah, His Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) and the afterlife. Therefore, Allah forbade him to marry any others nor to choose another instead of one of his wives. The Almighty says: "It is not lawful for you (to marry other) women after this, nor to change them for other wives even though their beauty attracts you". [Surah 33:52]

Fairness is a condition of polygamy

As for the condition set forth by Islam for polygamy, it is the self-confidence of the Muslim to be fair in his treatment to his two wives in food, drink, clothing, housing and sustenance. If one is not sure of his ability to fulfil such duties equitably and fairly, he is forbidden to marry more than one wife. Allah says: " But if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one". [Surah 4:3] The Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) said, "Whoever has two wives and is more inclined towards one of them, he will come on the Day of Judgement dragging one of his sides while it is drooping". [ Transmitted by Abu Dawud - his own wording (3133), Al-Termithy (1141), Al-Nisa'i, 7/63, Ibn Majah (1969), Al-Doramy p.539, and Ahmad, 2/347, 471. All on the authority of Abu Huraira.] The inclination which the Hadith warns us of takes place when he overlooks her rights and not when he merely inclines in feelings toward her, which is part of the equity that is not possible and which is forgiven by Allah. The Almighty says: " You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision)". [Surah 4:129] For this reason, the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) used to divide equitably between his wives and say, "Allah, that is my division as it is in my power to do so. Do not blame me for what You have and I have not. [ Transmitted by Abu Dawud (2134), Al-Termithy (1140), Ibn Majah (1971), Al-Doramy Book of Marriage p.540, and Ahmad 6/144 on the authority of isha.] By what he had not got , he meant feelings and inclination towards one of them in particular. Whenever he used to travel, he turned to drawing lots; the one whose arrow appeared would accompany him. He resorted to that in order to avoid jealousy and to satisfy them all.
Islam is the last word of Allah by which all His messages are concluded (sealed). Therefore, it came with a general and eternal Law to embrace all nations, all ages and all people. Islam has not made laws for the urban while overlooking the rural, nor for the cold regions and not the hot ones, or vice versa; nor for a certain age while ignoring the rest of the ages and the other generations. Islam appreciates the importance of individuals as well as communities.
A man could have a strong desire to have children but find him self married to a wife who is childless because of infertility or illness, or any other reason. Would it not be more respectable and better for her if he married another to realise his wish while at the same time keeping the first and ensuring her rights?
Some men are more sexual and lusty, but one could be married to a wife who has little desire for men, or who is ill or has a long period of menstruation or whatever. She does not satisfy the desire of his instinct nor fill his lustful eyes that seek other women. Would he not be allowed to marry another in a lawful manner instead of seeking another as a mistress, or instead of divorcing the first one?
In addition, the number of eligible women for marriage might be more than the men able to marry, especially after wars that deplete the best of men and youth. It might be in the interest of the society and the women themselves who would prefer being second wives than living as spinsters all their lives, deprived of married life and what it has of quietude, love and protection, deprived of the bliss of the motherhood their instincts call for. There are only three ways for these surplus women:
1 - to spend their whole life feeling the bitterness of deprivation of married life and of motherhood, which is a severe punishment for them as they did not commit any crime.
2- or give them some freedom to follow their instincts and accept the means of pleasure with corrupt men who, after satisfying their desires, cast them away when their bloom and youth are gone. This is in addition to what might happen afterwards of begetting illegitimate children, increasing the number of fatherless children deprived of physical and psychological rights who become unproductive citizens and tools of destruction and corruption.
3- or to allow them each to marry a married man who is able to sustain and protect her, confident of his fairness as Allah Almighty has commanded.
Doubtless, this last alternative is the ideal, fair solution and a curing balm. That is what Islam has decreed: "And who is better in judgement than Allah for a people who have firm Faith". [Surah 5:50]
Polygamy as a moral, human system

The system of polygamy according to Islamic Law is a moral, human system. It is moral because it does not allow man to have intercourse with any woman he wishes, at any time he likes. He is not allowed to have intercourse with more than three women in addition to his (first) wife, and he cannot do that secretly, but must proceed with a contract and announce it, even among a limited audience. The people in charge of the woman should know about this lawful intercourse and agree to it or at least should not object to it. It should be registered-according to the modern system-in a specialised court for marriage contracts. It is desirable to have a special dinner for the occasion in which the man invites his friends. Dufoof (hand drums) may be played to express utmost joy and hospitality.
It is human because through it a man lessens the burdens of the community by sheltering a woman who has no husband and transforms her to a chosen, protected wife. It is also human because he justifies his sexual intercourse based on a legal marriage for which the bridegroom provides a dower, furniture and expenses. Also of social benefit is the establishment of a social unit (family) capable of producing working progeny. It is also human because he is not only responsible for the woman with whom he has intercourse, but he is responsible when she suffers from the troubles of pregnancy. He does not leave her to bear it alone, but he bears a part of it by paying for her sustenance and expenses during her pregnancy and for her delivery. It is also that he recognizes the children begotten through sexual intercourse and presents them to the society as the fruits of a noble and honourable love, which are cherished by him and will be by the society in the future.
Dr Mustafa El-Siba'i, may Allah have mercy on him, said of the system of polygamy, "Man distributes and lessens his lust to a certain extent, but he multiplies his burdens, troubles and responsibilities to an unlimited extent." Certainty, it is a moral system protecting morals, and it is a human system honouring mankind.

The Western system of promiscuity is immoral and inhuman

How different the Islamic system is from the actual promiscuity in the life of the Western society! One Western writer insisted that no one on his death-bed could confess to the priest that he had not had intercourse with a woman (other than his wife) at least once in his life-time. This promiscuity of the West is without a law; moreover, it occurs while the law stands by. It does not happen in the name of wives, but in the name of friendships and mistresses. It is not limited to only four, but is unlimited. It is not announced in order to be celebrated by the family, but happens secretly without anyone knowing about it. In addition, it does not commit the doer to any financial responsibility towards the women he has intercourse with. Suffice it for him to tarnish their honour and then leave them to scandal and poverty and to endure the troubles of pregnancy and delivery. Besides, he is not committed to recognise the children begotten as the outcome of the intercourse. They are considered illegitimate, bearing the stigma of being bastard children as long as they live.
It is a legal promiscuity, but it is not called "polygamy". It is void of any moral behaviour, awakening of sensibility or human feeling. It is a promiscuity directed by lust and selfishness which flees from any responsibility.
Which of the two systems then is closer to morality, more allaying to lust, more honourable to women, more denotative of progress and more righteous to humanity? [ See Women Between Jurisprudence and Law (Al-Mara'ah baina al-Fiquh wal-Qann) by Dr Mustafa El-Sibai. See also The Liberation of Woman in the Period of the Messenger (Tahrir al-Mara'ah fe Asr Al-Resalah) by Abd Al-Haleem Abu Shaqqah, fifth part.]
The abuse of the license of polygamy
We do not deny that many Muslims have abused the license of polygamy as decreed by Allah in the same way they have abused the license of divorce, as explained earlier. The failure is not in the Law itself but in the application due to misunderstanding, ill manners, or lack of the teachings of the religion.
We have seen some men marry more than one when the man is not certain of his fairness, which is a condition set by Allah for marrying another. Some of them marry more than one when they are unable to sustain both nor, in addition, what follows the marriage, i.e. children and responsibilities. Some men are able to sustain more but are unable to protect them.
Frequently, the abuse of this right leads to harmful consequences for the family as a result of pampering the new wife and treating the old one unfairly. He could totally end his inclination towards her until she is left hanging in the air, so to speak, neither married nor divorced. This frequently leads to envy among children who belong to one father because he is not fair to them in their rights, nor does he treat them equally in moral and financial dealings.
Whatever the transgression of some people in that realm, it will never reach the evil to which the Westerners have lowered themselves by considering the moral polygamy a crime while allowing the immoral promiscuity. (However, polygamy is longer a problem in most Muslim societies, as marriage to one woman has now become a great problem.)
The call of westernized people to forbid polygamy
Unfortunately, some people calling for Westernisation in our Arab and Islamic countries have made use of what has happened because of the Muslims who transgress; they raise their voices asking for polygamy to be abolished completely. Day and night the disadvantages of polygamy are reiterated while silence is kept about the disadvantages of adultery and fornication, which is, unfortunately, allowed by local laws which rule over Muslim states nowadays. The mass media, especially films and serials, have played a serious role in spreading repulsive feelings toward polygamy, among women in particular, so that some of them would tolerate the husband when he commits adultery but not when he marries another.
The basis on which those who call for rejection of polygamy rely
Such advocates have succeeded in some Arab and Islamic countries, and laws have been issued forbidding what God has ordained and made lawful, thus allowing the laws of the West. There are still others who call for these changes in other countries.
The incredible thing in this case is they want to justify their system of polygamy in the name of Islamic Law and have proofs in the form of jurisprudence. They have objected it is the right of the person in authority to prevent what is allowed when it is in the interest of the people, or to avoid harm. Such a pretext is unacceptable by Islamic Law. Some have even gone so far as to attempt, in a rude and audacious way, to use the Qur'an to justify their claims. The Qur'an has put a condition for the man who marries more than one to be sure of his fair treatment of the two (or more) wives, and whoever is afraid of not being fair should keep only one. Allah says: "And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan-girls, then many (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one". [Surah 4:3] This is the Qur'an's condition for polygamy-fairness. However, the Quran, they claim, has clarified in another verse in the same Surah that the conditioned fairness is not possible, in the verse: "You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision)". [Surah 4:129] Therefore, it is claimed, this verse has negated the previous one In fact, all the evidence which is being used is false and cannot stand sound criticism. Each will be discussed.
1- Islamic Law does not allow something whose evil outweighs its good
The claim that polygamy has caused social and familial corruption and detriment is an open fallacy; Islamic Law cannot permit something which will do harm; likewise, it does not forbid something of benefit. This is expressed in the Qur'an in the most eloquent and comprehensive phrases with the description of the Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him), and addressing the people of the Book (i.e., the Jews and Christians). "He commands them for Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e.disbelief polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Tayyibat [(all i.e. good and lawful) as regards things deeds, beliefs, persons, foods etc] , and prohibits them as unlawful Al-Khabaith (all i.e. evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods etc.), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah's Covenant), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them. [Surah 7: 157] All that is permitted by Islamic Law has pure benefit or benefits which outweigh harm. All that is forbidden by Islamic Law must have pure harm or the harms must outweigh the benefits. This is clear in what is said in the Qur'an about alcohol and gambling: Say, "In them is great sin, and (some) benefit for men, but the sin of them is greater than their benefit". [Surah 7:219] This is also what Islamic Law has provided for in polygamy, as it balances interests and corrupting matters, benefits and harms.
It permits what the individual needs and is able to do as long as he is sure of his fairness, and is not afraid of being unjust or having a greater inclination towards one of them: "but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one". [Surah 4:3]
It may be in the interest of the first wife to be the sole one on the throne of marriage without any rivals, and she sees that she will be harmed by the presence of another wife; but it is also in the interest of the husband to marry another to protect him from illicit relationships or bring him an awaited-for child, etc.; moreover it may also be in the interest of the second wife to have someone take care of her.
To have half a husband, to live under his protection and be in his charge may be better than living as a spinster, widow or divorcee, in deprivation.
It is also in the interest of society to protect its men and women by legitimate marriage-in which each of them bears the responsibility for himself or herself and the spouse and for what Allah may give them of children-that is, instead of promiscuity, allowing the multiplicity of mistresses, which is immoral and inhuman, and in which each has the pleasure of a companion without any responsibility for what follows, even if a child is born of that illicit relationship. In turn, the child is then considered a wild plant without a father to belong to, or a family to give him love and compassion or a heredity to cherish.
Which harms should be avoided then? On the other hand, Islamic Law has reserved the first wife's right to equity between herself and the second wife concerning maintenance, housing, clothing and staying at her place. That is the equity put as a condition for polygamy. It is true that some husbands do not observe the justice commanded by Allah, but the misapplication does not mean the basic principle should be cancelled; otherwise the whole of Islamic Law and all other laws would be abolished. Adherence of the law should be enforced.
2- The right of the person in authority to prevent what is allowed
As to the claim that the person in authority has the right to prevent some of what is allowed, we have the following to say: what the Law has given to the person in authority is the right to limit some of what is permitted for a weighty interest at some times, or in some cases, or for certain people. He should not generally or utterly prevent it forever because that would be like forbidding, which is only Allah's right, denied by the Qur'an to the People of the Book. "They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah". [Surah 9:31] The Hadith came to interpret the verse, "They allowed for them and forbade them and thus followed them". [ Transmitted by Al-Termithy on the authority of Adeyy ibn Hatim in the interpretation sections (3095) and by lbn Jarir in his interpretation section (16631). Al-Termithy said this Hadith is ghareeb (i.e., it has only one transmitter), but in the section about Hudhaifa, it is mauqf (i.e., it was narrated by the Companions, not by the Prophet [blessings and peace be upon him]) and transmitted by Al-Tabary (16634).]
To limit what is allowed is like preventing the slaughter of animals on certain days to lessen their consumption, as happened at the time of `Umar, may Allah be pleased with him; or like preventing excess cultivation of a certain crop so cultivation space will not encroach upon the space attributed to growing grains and other nutritious crops that are staple foods for the people. It is also similar to preventing the highest ranks of military officers or diplomats from marrying foreigners for fear of leaking state secrets through women to the enemies. It is also like preventing men from marrying a Christian or a Jew out of fear that it would affect Muslim women, especially in the communities that have small Islamic minorities and limited Muslim expatriates.
But to come to something allowed by Allah in His Book and mentioned by His Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him), established in the state, such as divorce or polygamy, and to prevent it utterly and forever is considered something different from limiting what is allowed according to the examples given.
The meaning of You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives. [Surah 4:129]
As to the illustration from the Glorious Qur'an, it is wholly rejected. It is a corruption of the order of words and carries within it an accusation against the Prophet Mohammed (greetings and peace be upon him) and his companions (may Allah be pleased with them), implying they did not understand the Qur'an, or maybe that they did but intentionally deviated from its precept. The verse quoted to illustrate the point also gives an answer if the meaning is perused; Almighty Allah has allowed polygamy on the condition of fairness, then highlights the fairness needed in the same chapter when He says: " You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced nor married)". [Surah 4:129] This verse indicates that complete and absolute justice between women is impossible due to the nature of the human being because complete justice requires equity between them in everything, even in the inclination of the heart and in sexual desire, and that cannot be controlled by the man. He may love one more than the other, incline towards one more than another. Hearts are controlled and turned by Allah in the way He likes.
Therefore, the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) used to say after dividing between his women the apparent affairs of maintenance, clothing and spending nights, "Allah, that is my division as it is in my power to do so. So not blame me for what You have and I have not". [ Transmitted by Abu Dawud (2134), Al-Termithy (1140), Ibn Majah (1971) Al-Doramy Book of Marriage p.154; and Ahmad 61144 on the authority of - isha] He meant the heart's inclination. It is this inclination in which one cannot be fair that Allah has pardoned, as the Almighty does not rebuke man for something beyond his ability when it is not in his power to do it.
Therefore the noble verse says: "You will never be able to do pefect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other suspended (i.e. neither divorced nor married)". [Surah 4:129] What is understood from this verse is that some inclination, which is the emotional inclination, is forgivable.
The amazing thing is that some Arab countries adopt the forbiddance of polygamy, though in their legislation they do not forbid adultery, except in certain cases when one is forced (rape), or in the case of the woman's marital infidelity if the husband does not drop the charge. Adultery is described by Allah as a great sin: "And come not near to the unlawful sexual intercourse. Verily, it is a fahshah (a great sin), and an evil way". [Surah 17:32]
I came to know through the great Imam Sheikh `Abd Al Haleem Mahmud, may Allah have mercy on his soul, that a Muslim living in an African-Arab country which had laws against polygamy secretly married another wife through a legitimate conventional contract, abiding by all its conditions except that it was not authenticated. This is because the country's established law refused to authenticate or admit it and considered such a marriage a crime for which he would have to be punished. The man used to frequent the house of his (second) wife, so the police watched him and came to assume that she was his wife and that he had committed an offence against the law. One night they waited for him, arrested him at his wife's place and took him to court accusing him of marrying a second wife.
The man was clever and asked those interrogating him, "But who told you she is my wife? She is not a wife. She is a mistress whom I took as a companion and I call on from time to time " The interrogators were taken aback and told the man very politely, "We are awfully sorry for the misunderstanding. We thought she was a wife and did not know she was a companion." Thereupon, they released him because, to them, to have the illicit company of a woman as a mistress to commit adultery with is considered within the framework of personal freedom protected by the law.


================================================================================================================



http://www.al-islam.org/WomanRights/11.htm (LINK CHECKED – WORKING)

Polygamy


Monogamy (Practice of being married to only one woman at a time) is the most natural form of matrimony. The spirit of exclusive relationship or individual and private ownership prevails in it, though this ownership is different from that of wealth or property. In this system the husband and wife each regard the feelings, sentiments and the sexual benefits of the other, as exclusively belonging to him or to her.
The opposites of monogamy are polygamy (Custom of having more than one wife at the same time) and sexual communism. The latter, in a sense, may also be regarded as a form of polygamy.
SEXUAL COMMUNISM
Sexual communism means no exclusiveness. According to this theory, no man should exclusively belong to any particular woman, nor should any woman belong to any particular man. It amounts to complete negation of family life. History and the theories related to pre-historical times do not point to any period when man totally lacked family life and when sexual communism prevailed. What is claimed to have existed among certain barbarian tribes was a midway state between exclusive family life and sexual communism. It is said that among certain tribes it was the usual practice that several brothers jointly married several sisters, or several male members of a clan jointly married several women of another clan.
Will Durant in his book, 'History of Culture', Vol 1, writes that at certain places collective marriage was popular in the sense that several male members of a clan jointly married several female members of another clan. For example, it has been customary in Tibet that several brothers have an equal number of sisters as their wives. Nobody knows which sister is the wife of which brother. Every brother cohabits with any of the sisters he likes. A sort of sexual communism exists there. A similar custom existed in ancient England. The custom, which was prevalent among the Jews and some other people of the past and, according to which, after the death of a brother, another brother married his widow, was a remnant of this ancient custom.
PLATO'S VIEW
It appears that, while enunciating his theory of 'philosopher-rulers', Plato has suggested in his book, "The Republic", a sort of family socialism for this class. Several leaders of communism in the 19th century also made a similar suggestion, but, as reported by the author of the book, 'Freud and the Prohibition of Consanguineous Marriage', after some bitter experiences, several of the powerful communist countries officially recognised the law of monogamy in 1938.
POLYANDRY
Another form of polygamy is polyandry, viz. a woman having more than one husband at the same time. According to Will Durant this custom is found among certain tribes of Tibet etc.
Al-Bukhari, in his famous corpus of traditions, as-Sahih, reports Ayesha as having said that among the pre-Islamic Arabs there existed four kinds of conjugal relations. One of them was the proper marriage that is still being practised. In this form a man proposes to a girl through her father and, after the fixation of dower, carries her. There can be no controversy about the father of the children born in such a wedlock. There was another kind of marriage, which was called 'istibza To procure a better progeny for himself, the husband selected a man and asked his wife to allow him to have access to her for a fixed period. He himself kept aloof till the pregnancy of the woman. It was a marriage within a marriage and was indulged in with a view to improving the breed. According to another custom, a group of men consisting of less than ten people, established a liaison with a particular woman. On becoming pregnant, she called all of them, and, as the custom of the day was, they had to respond to her call. At this time she selected one man as the father of her child out of those who were willing to take that responsibility. The man, after being so chosen, could not decline to accept the fatherhood of the child.
The fourth kind of conjugal relations was known as prostitution. The prostitutes had a flag on the top of their houses. It served as their distinguishing mark. Anybody could have access to these women. If such a woman gave birth to a child, she called all those who had intimacy with her, and with the help of a physiognomist, determined who was the father of the child. The man concerned had to accept the decision of the physiognomist and to own the child.
These were the forms of the conjugal relations which prevailed in pre-Islamic Arabia. The Prophet abolished all of them, except the one which is practised today.
This shows that the custom of polyandry existed among the pre-Islamic Arabs also.
Montesquieu reports that the Arab globe-trotter, Abu Zahir al-Hasan, found this custom in India and China during his visit to these countries in the 9th century and regarded it as a form of debauchery. He also writes: "On the coast of Malabar there lives a tribe called Nair. The male members of this tribe cannot have more than one wife, but the women are allowed to choose several husbands. Probably the reason is that the Nairs belong to a martial race and their profession is fighting and hunting. Just as we discourage the marriage of the soldiers in Europe so that it may not interfere with their profession of fighting, the Malabar tribes have also decided that, as far as possible, the male members of the Nair tribe should be excused from shouldering family responsibilities. As, owing to the tropical climate of the area, it is not possible to ban marriage totally, it has been decided that several men should have only one wife, so that they may not be heavily burdened with family responsibilities and their professional efficiency may not be affected".

DEFECTS OF POLYANDRY
The main and the basic defect of the system of polyandry is that the paternity of the children practically remains uncertain. In this system, the relations between the child and the father are undetermined and that is the reason why it has not been successful. As sexual communism 1L1~ not been able to take roots anywhere, this system also has not been accepted by any society worthy of the name. As we have said earlier, the family life, the building of a home for the future generation and the definite connection between the past and the future generations are some of the demands of the human instinct. The exceptional cases of the existence of plurality of husbands among certain sections does not prove that the desire of the formation of one's own family is not an instinct of man. Similarly, perpetual celibacy or complete abstinence from conjugal life, as practised by a number of men and women, is also a sort of deviation. Polyandry is not only inconsistent with man's monopolistic nature and his paternal love, but it is opposed to the nature of woman also. Psychological investigations have proved that woman wants monogamy more than man.

POLYGAMY :

Another form of polygamy is plurality of wives. It has been more commonly and successfully practised than polyandry and sexual communism. It has not only existed among the barbarian tribes, but has also been practised by many civilised people. Apart from the Arabs, it has been practised by the Jews, the Iranians of the Sasanian period and several other people. Montesquieu says that in Malaya it was permissible to have three wives. He also says that the Roman Emperor, Valentinian II, had, by an edict, allowed the subjects of the Empire to marry several wives, but as this law was not suited to the climate of Europe, it was repealed by other emperors like Theodore etc.

ISLAM AND POLYGAMY :

In contrast to polyandry, Islam has not totally abolished polygamy, but has restricted it. On the one hand, it has fixed the maximum number of wives, which one can have, at four, and, on the other, it has stipulated certain conditions and has not allowed everyone to indulge in having several wives. We shall discuss the conditions stipulated by Islam later and will explain why Islam has not banned polygamy.
It is surprising that during the Middle Ages, when anti Islamic propaganda was at its highest, the opponents of Islam used to say that it was the Prophet of Islam who, for the first time, invented the custom of polygamy. They claimed that this custom was the basis of Islam and the rapid spread of Islam among the various people of the world was due to it. At the same time, they claimed that polygamy was the cause of the decline of the people of the East.
Will Durant in his 'History of Culture'. Vol.1, says that the ecclesiastics of the Middle Ages believed that polygamy was an invention of the Prophet of Islam, whereas this is not a fact. As we know, the matrimonial life in most of the primitive societies proceeded according to this system. There are many causes of its emergence. In the primitive societies men were mostly busy in hunting and fighting and the rate of mortality among them was naturally high. As the number of women exceeded the number of men. it became essential to adopt this system. It was not possible to allow some women to remain unmarried, for the rate of mortality being high in the primitive societies, every woman was required to procreate children. There is no doubt that this system suited those societies, not only because of the excess of women over men, but also because it strengthened them numerically. In modern times the most strong and healthy men usually marry late in life and beget only a few children. But in the olden days the strong men could have the best wives and could procreate a large number of children. That is why this practice continued to exist for a very long time, not only among the primitive people but even among the civilised ones. It is only recently that it has gradually begun disappearing from the countries of the East. Agriculture has stabilised the life of men and reduced the hardships and perils of the ancient times, with the result that the number of men and women has almost equalised. Now polygamy, even in primitive societies, has become a privilege of a small wealthy minority and the masses have to be content with only one wife and, as an additional enjoyment, they can only indulge in adultery, whenever possible.
Gustav Leabeon in his book, 'History of Culture', says that no Eastern custom is so infamous in Europe as polygamy, nor has Europe misjudged any other custom to the extent that it has misjudged this. The European writers have believed polygamy to be the basis of Islam and the main cause of its spread. They also hold this custom to be mainly responsible for the decline of the Eastern people. Other objections apart from these, showing sympathy with the women of the East, are raised alleging that these ill-fated women are detained within the four walls of their houses, under the hard-hearted eunuchs. They further say that the slightest action on their part, which may displease the head of the household, renders them liable to be put to death. Such notions have no basis at all. '[he unbiased Europeans should know that it is the custom of polygamy that has strengthened the family relations and uplifted the moral spirit of those people among whom it is prevalent. It is due to this custom that woman in the East enjoys more respect than she does in Europe. Before proving this point, we must make it clear that this custom is in no way related to Islam. Even prior to Islam, it was practised by all the people of the East, including the Jews, the Iranians, the Arabs etc. The people who embraced Islam in the East did not derive any benefit in this respect. So far, no such mighty religion has appeared in this world as could invent or abolish such a custom as polygamy. It has not been first introduced by any religion. It is the creation of the climatic and the racial characteristics and other causes related to the way of life in the East. Even in the West, where the climate is not congenial to the existence of such a custom, monogamy is a thing which is found in law books only. In actual life there is no trace of it. It is not known how and in what way the lawful polygamy found in the East is inferior to the clandestine polygamy of the people of the West. Apparently, the former is better and more dignified than the latter. The people of the East, when they visit a European country and are confronted with the European criticism of their custom, are naturally bewildered and feel offended.
It is a fact that Islam has not invented polygamy. It has only restricted it. It has prescribed a maximum limit for it. It has laid down strict conditions for it. This custom already existed among most of the people who accepted Islam. They were only compelled to comply with the conditions laid down by Islam.
In his book, 'Iran During the Sassanian Period', Christenson writes: "Polygamy was considered to be the basis of the family. Practically, the number of wives, which a man could have, depended on his means. The poor people apparently could not afford to have more than one wife as a general rule. The head of the family had special rights as such. One of the wives was regarded as the favourite wife and enjoyed full rights. Some other wives were treated as servants only. Legal rights of these two categories widely differed. The slave girls were included among the servant wives. It is not known how many favourite wives a single man could have. But there has been a mention of two favourite wives in the course of several legal discourses. Each of them was called the lady of the house. Apparently they lived in separate houses. The husband was bound to maintain the favourite wife so long as she lived. Every son till he reached the age of puberty, and every daughter till she was married, had the same rights. But only the male children of the servant-wives were admitted to the paternal family".
In the 'Social History of Iran from the fall of the Sassanians to the fall of the Omayyads' the late Sa'id Nafisi writes: "The number of women whom a man could marry was unlimited and at times it is observed in the Greek documents that one man had hundreds of women in his house."
Montesquieu, quoting a Roman historian, says that several Roman philosophers, who were being tortured by the Christians because they refused to embrace Christianity, fled from Rome and took refuge in the court of the Iranian King, Khusro Parviz. They were astonished to see that not only polygamy was legal there, but the Persian men had intimacy with the wives of others also.
It may be pointed out here that the Roman philosophers took refuge in the court of the Persian king, Anushirwan, and not in the court of Khusro Parviz. Montesquieu has mentioned the name of the latter owing to some misunderstanding.
During the pre-Islamic period, the Arabs could have an unlimited number of wives. It was Islam that prescribed a maximum limit. This naturally created a problem for those who had more than four wives. In exceptional circumstances, some had even ten. They had to part with six of them.
From the above it is evident that polygamy is not an invention of Islam. Islam only restricted it. Anyhow, it did not abolish it totally. In the following chapters we shall discuss the causes which gave rise to this custom and shall explain why Islam did not do away with it. We shall also discuss the reasons which in modern times have impelled both men and women to rise against this custom.

HISTORICAL CAUSES OF POLYGAMY (I)
What are the historical and social causes of polygamy? Why have many nations of the world, especially the Eastern nations, accepted this custom, and why have other nations, such as the Western nations, never practised it? How is it that out of the three forms of polygamy only plurality of wives could gain considerable popularity? Polyandry and sexual communism either have never been practised or have been practised rarely, and only in exceptional cases.
Unless we look into these questions, we cannot discuss the question of polygamy from the point of view of Islam, nor can we study it from the viewpoint of modern human requirements.
If we do not take into consideration the ample social and psychological studies made in this respect, we, too, may, like many superficial writers, harp on the old tune and say that the causes of polygamy are obvious. That is, this custom has come into existence as a result of the high-handedness and the domination of man and the subjugation of woman. It is an outcome of the patriarchal system. As man has dominated woman and has ruled over her, he has given the laws and the customs a turn to his own benefit. That is how he enforced this custom which is beneficial to him and harmful to woman, and has been practising it for centuries. As woman was suppressed, she could not put polyandry into practice. As now the age of the high-handedness of man is over, the privilege of polygamy should, like many other false privileges, make room for equal and reciprocal rights of man and woman.
This way of thinking is very superficial and puerile. Neither the cause of polygamy is the oppression of man nor that of the failure of the polyandry the suppression of woman. If the custom of polyandry has practically come to an end, that is not because the age of man's high-handedness is over. Man has lost no privilege; he has actually gained an advantage over woman.
We do not deny the factor of oppression as one of the factors which give a particular turn to history. We also do not deny that man has, throughout history, misused his domination over woman. But we believe that it is sheer short-sightedness to explain family relations on the basis of the oppression factor only.
If we admit this view, we must also admit that during the period when polyandry was popular among the pre-Islamic Arabs or, as reported by Montesquieu, among the Nairs on the Malabar coast, woman had got an opportunity to dominate over man and impose polyandry over him. It also must be admitted that that period was the golden period of woman. But we know for definite that the pre-Islamic period of Arabia was one of the darkest periods in the life of woman. Earlier we have quoted Montesquieu as saying that the custom of polyandry among the Nairs was not due to the domination or respect of woman, but was the result of the decision of society to keep the soldiers free from the burden of family responsibilities.
Further, if patriarchy is responsible for polygamy, how is it that this system did not gain popularity in the West? After all, the patriarchal system is not confined to the East. Have the people of the West been, from the beginning, pious Christians believing in the quality and reciprocity between man and woman? Has the factor of domination worked to the benefit of man in the East and for the promotion of justice in the West?
Till half a century ago, the Western woman was among the most unlucky of the world. Even her own property was controlled by her husband. The Europeans themselves admit that during the Middle Ages the position of the Eastern woman was far better than that of her counterpart in the West. Gustav Leabeon says that Islam, in its early days, gave the woman exactly that position, which the European woman could get after a very long time; that is, after the chivalry of the Arabs of Andolusia was transmitted to Europe. Courteous behaviour towards woman is the main part of the chivalry which the Europeans learnt from the Muslims. It was Islam, and not the religion of Christ, as is believed by the common people, that enhanced the position of woman. During the Middle Ages the chiefs and barons, though Christians, never held woman in respect. A study of ancient history leaves no doubt that the behaviour of the dukes and barons of Europe towards woman was most barbaric.
Other European authors have also given a more or less similar description of the position of women during the Middle Ages. Though patriarchy prevailed in Europe during that period, polygamy could not become customary.
The fact is that neither polyandry (wherever it was practised) was ever due to the power and domination of woman, nor was its ultimate failure due to her weakness and suppression. Similarly, polygamy in the East is neither due to the oppression and high-handedness of man, nor is it unpopular in the West owing to the existence of equality between man and woman.

CAUSES OF THE FAILURE OF POLYANDRY
The main cause of the failure of polyandry is that it neither suits man's nature nor woman's. It does not suit man's nature, because firstly, it does not conform to his monopolistic spirit and, secondly, because it is not in agreement with the principle that a father should be confident of his paternity. It is human nature to have an attachment with one's children. Every human being is, by nature, keen to beget children and wants that his relationship with his past and future generations should be definite and satisfactory. He wants to know whose son and whose father he is. Polyandry does not agree with this instinct of man. On the other hand polygamy creates no such problem, neither in the case of man nor in that of woman. It is reported that once, about forty women came to Imam Ali (P) and asked him why Islam had allowed men to have several wives, but had not allowed women to have several husbands. They asked whether it was not a case of undue discrimination.
Imam Ali (P) ordered some cups of water to be brought in and gave one cup to each women. Then he ordered them to pour all the water into a big utensil, which was placed in the middle of the room. When the order had been carried out, he asked them to fill their cups again, but only with the water which they originally contained. The women said that it was not possible as the whole water had mixed. Imam Ali (P) said that if a woman had several husbands, they would naturally have sexual connections with her. If she became pregnant and gave birth to a child, it would not be possible to determine as to who was the father of that child.
As far as woman is concerned, polyandry is neither in her interest nor does it conform to her nature. Woman does not want a husband to satisfy her sexual instinct only. Had it been so, it could be said: 'the more, the better'. Woman wants a man whose heart she may control, who may be her protector and defender, who may make sacrifices for her and who may work hard and bring money for her. The money which a woman earns through her own work and labour neither meets her requirements, nor has the same value as that which is given to her by the man who loves her. A husband meets the financial needs of his wife with the spirit of sacrifice. The wife and the children are the best and the strongest incentive for man to work.
In the case of polyandry woman cannot claim the love, devotion and sacrifice of any man. That is why, like prostitution, it has always been abominable to woman. Hence, polyandry neither conforms to the wants and the leanings of man, nor to those of woman.

FAILURE OF SEXUAL COMMUNISM
In the case of sexual communism, neither a man can align himself with any particular woman, nor can a woman with any particular man, and that is the reason why it could never become popular. It was proposed by Plato who limited its scope to the ruling class or the 'philosopher-rulers'. But his suggestion was not liked by others, and he himself had to revise his opinion.
During the past century, Frederick Engels, the second father of communism, put forward this idea and strongly advocated it. But it was not accepted by the communist world. It is said that the Soviet Union tried to implement the family theory of Engels, but following some bitter experience had ultimately to recognise monogamy as the official policy.
Polygamy may be regarded as a matter of pride for man, but polyandry has never been and will never be a matter of pride for woman. The reason is that man wants the body of woman and woman wants the heart of man. So long as man controls the body of woman, it is immaterial for him if he loses her heart. That is why man attaches no importance to the fact that, in the case of polygamy, he is deprived of the love and devotional sentiments of woman, But for woman the main and the most important thing is man's heart and his sentiments. If she loses them, she loses everything.
In other words, there are two important elements of matrimonial life, one material and the other sentimental. The material element of matrimony is its sexual aspect, which is at its height during youth and gradually declines afterwards. The sentimental element consists of mutual tender feelings and earnest devotion. It grows and becomes stronger with the passage of time. The nature of woman being different from that of man, she attaches more importance to the sentimental aspect of matrimony. But for man either the material aspect is more important or, at least, both the aspects are of equal importance.
We quoted earlier a lady psychologist who is of the view that woman has a mental disposition of her own. The child develops and grows in her womb and is nursed on her lap. She badly needs the devotion and attachment of her husband in the capacity of the child's father. Even the amount of her own affection and love for her children is directly in proportion to the amount of the love shown to her by their father, Only monogamy can meet this requirement.
It is a grave mistake to compare polyandry with polygamy and to say that there is no difference between them. It is also wrong to say that polygamy became popular in certain parts of the world, because man belonged to the stronger sex, and polyandry could not do so, because woman belonged to the weaker sex.
A contemporary writer, who happens to be a woman, says:
"We can say that as man can have four wives, woman also should have a similar right, for both are human beings. This logical conclusion is most appalling to men. They are enraged on hearing such an argument and shout: "How can a woman have more than one husband?" In reply we quietly say: "How can a man have more than one wife?"
She further says: "We do not want to promote immorality or to belittle the importance of chastity. We only want to make men understand that the views held by them, about women, are not based on any solid ground. Man and woman are equal as human beings. If man has the right to have four wives, woman also must have the same right. Even if it is granted that woman is not intellectually superior to man, it is certain that spiritually and mentally she is not weaker than he is."
As you might have observed, the above statement makes no distinction between polyandry and polygamy, except that man being the stronger sex has adopted polygamy to his own advantage, and woman being the weaker sex could not do so.
The above writer further says that man regards woman as his property, and that is why he wants to have several wives. In other words, he thus wants to acquire as much property as practicable. Woman, being in the position of a slave, cannot have more than one master.
Contrary to the views of this writer, the fact that the system of polyandry has never been accepted by any large section of people proves that man does not regard his wife as his property, for, as far as property is concerned, it is a common practice all over the world to own it jointly and to be benefited by it jointly. Had man considered woman to be his property, he certainly would have had no objection to sharing it with others. There is no law in the world, restricting the ownership of a property to one owner only.
It is said that the husband is one individual and the wife is another individual. They should have equal rights. Why should the husband have the right of enjoying polygamy and why should the wife not have the right of enjoying polyandry?"
We say, here lies the mistake. You presume that polygamy is a part of the rights of the husband and polyandry a part of the rights of the wife. The fact is that polygamy is a part of woman's rights and polyandry is neither a part of man's rights nor of woman's rights. It is against the interests of man and woman both. We shall prove later that the system of polygamy has been laid down by Islam with a view to safeguarding the interests of woman. Had the intention been to be partial to man, Islam could have allowed the husband to have extra-marital affairs with a woman other than his wife and would have laid no responsibility on him with regard to his legal wife and legal children.
Polyandry has never been in the interests of woman. It is not a right of which she has been deprived.
The writer whose views we have quoted has said: "We want to make men understand that the views held by them about women are not based on any solid ground".
Coincidentally, that is what we also want to do. In the following chapters we propose to explain the basis of the Islamic views regarding polygamy.
We invite all thinking people to look into it and see if the Islamic views are, or are not, based on any solid ground. We give our word of honour that we shall withdraw all what we have said, if it is proved by anybody that the basis of the Islamic viewpoint is defective.

HISTORICAL CAUSES OF POLYGAMY (II) :

Man's lust for indulgence in sensual pleasure and his unrestricted domination alone are not a sufficient cause for the emergence of polygamy. There must be some other contributory causes also for a licentious man to satisfy his taste for variety. It is easier and less cumbersome to indulge in free love instead of having a woman of his choice as his legal wife and shouldering the responsibility of the maintenance of her possible future children. Plurality of wives gains popularity only in the societies where there are moral and social restrictions on free love and a voluptuary has to pay the price of seeking variety by accepting the woman concerned as his legal wife and by shouldering the responsibility of fatherhood of her children.
Now let us see whether there is any contribution of geographical, economic or social factors in this respect.

GEOGRAPHICAL FACTORS
Montesquieu and Gustav Leobeon insist that climatic conditions are the main cause of the development of polygamy. These intellectuals believe that the climate of the East is such that this custom is inevitable there. In the Eastern countries puberty and old age in females commence earlier and, therefore, a man requires a second and a third wife. Moreover, they think that one woman cannot satisfy the sexual needs of a man brought up in the Eastern climate.
Gustav Leobeon in his book, History of Islamic and Arab culture says: "The custom of polygamy was not introduced by religion. It is an outcome of the climatic conditions, the racial characteristics and other causes related to life in the East. It needs not be emphasised that these are very strong and effective factors. Furthermore, their physical and temperamental traits, their nursing of children and their ailments and diseases often
force the women of the East to keep themselves aloof from their husbands. As the climatic conditions and the national characteristics of men in the East are such that they cannot bear even temporary separation, polygamy has become customary".
Montesquieu in his book, the Spirit of Law says: 'In tropical countries women attain puberty at the age of eight, nine or ten years and after being married, soon become pregnant. It may be said that in tropical countries, pregnancy immediately follows marriage".
Predo, giving an account of the life of the Prophet of Islam, states that he married Khadijah, at the age of five and consummated the marriage at the age of eight. Because of a very early marriage, women in the tropics become old at the age of twenty. He says that before they become mature, they are already old. In the countries having a temperate climate women retain their charm and beauty for a long time. They attain puberty at a later age and they are more mature and experienced at the time of their marriage. They have children at a comparatively advanced age and the husband and the wife become old almost at the same time. That is how equality between man and woman is established and men do not need to have more than one wife.
Thus it is because of the climatic conditions that the law prohibits polygamy in Europe and allows it in Asia.
The above explanation is in no way correct. The custom of polygamy is not confined to tropical regions in the East. During the pre-Islamic period this custom was common in Iran, where the climate is temperate. It is purely fictitious to say that in the tropics, women get old at the age of twenty, as alleged by Montesquieu. It is even more fantastic to say that the Prophet of Islam, married Khadijah at the age of five and consummated it at the age of eight. Everyone knows that at the time of their marriage Khadijah was forty and the Prophet was twenty -five.
Secondly, if it is accepted that the early onset of old age in women and the intense virility in men are the causes of this custom, why did the people of the East not adopt the practice of free love and debauchery, as the people of the West did both during the Middle Ages and in the modern times. In the West, as Gustav Leabeon has pointed out, monogamy is found only in the legal books and there is no trace of it in daily life.
Again, in the East polygamy exists in its legal form. The man has to accept the woman as his legal wife and has to bear the responsibility of her children. In the West, it exists in an illegal and clandestine form. Man indulges in free love and escapes all matrimonial responsibility.

POLYGAMY IN THE WEST :

We deem it necessary to give a brief account of polygamy in Europe during the Middle Ages, as described by an eminent Western historian. This account should convince those who criticise the East for polygamy that in spite of all its defects it is much more dignified than what existed in Europe.
Will Durant in his book, History of Civilization, vol.17, gives an interesting account of the state of morality in Italy during the renaissance. We give below a summary of what he has said under the heading 'Morals in Sexual Relations'.
In the course of his brief introduction he says that before describing the morals of the laity it may be pointed out that by nature man is polygamous. Only strict moral restrictions, an adequate amount of hard work and poverty, and a continuous vigilance of the wife can compel him to maintain monogamy.
Then he says that adultery was not uncommon during the Middle Ages, prior to the Renaissance. As during the Middle Ages the guilt of adultery was extenuated by chivalry, similarly, during the Renaissance period, it was watered down among the educated classes by the craving for the polished manners and the refined spirit of the females. Girls belonging to respectable families were, to a certain extent, kept segregated from the males not connected with their own family and were taught the merits of pre -marital chastity. Sometimes these instructions were exceptionally effective. It is reported that a young woman, after being assaulted, drowned herself. That must have been an exceptional case, because a bishop took the trouble of installing her statue after her death to commemorate her chastity.
The number of pre-marital affairs must have been considerable, because there were innumerable children born of illegitimate relations in every town of Italy. It was a matter of pride not to have an illegitimate child, but to have one was not a matter of shame. Usually a husband persuaded his wife at the time of the marriage to bring her illegitimate child with her, to be brought up along with his children. Illegitimacy was not a slur on the reputation of anyone. Furthermore, a certificate of legitimacy could easily be obtained by bribing a clergyman. In the absence of other lawful or eligible heirs, an illegitimate son could inherit property and even a crown, as Frante-I, succeeded Alfonso-I, King of Naples. When in 1459 Pius-II came to Bavaria, he was received by seven princes, all of whom were illegitimate. Rivalry between the legitimate and illegitimate sons was an important cause of a long series of commotions during the Renaissance period. As far as homosexuality is concerned, it was only a revival of the ancient Greek tradition.
San Bernardino found this sort of perversion so common in Naples that he thought it to be threatened with the fate of Sodom. Artino found the perversion equally prevalent in Rome. The same thing can be said about prostitution. In 1490, out of a total population of 90,000, there were 6,800 registered prostitutes in Rome. Of course, this figure does not include clandestine and unofficial prostitutes. According to the statistics of 1509, out of a population of 300,000 of that city, there were 11,654 prostitutes. In the 15th century, a girl who had reached the age of 15 without having a husband, was regarded as a slur on the fair name of her family. In the 16th century, the 'age of disgrace' was extended up to 17 years, to enable the girls to receive higher education. Men, who enjoyed all the facilities provided by widespread prostitution, were attracted to marriage only if the woman concerned promised to bring a considerable dowry. According to the system of the Middle Ages, husband and wife were expected to love each other and share each other's joy and grief. Apparently in many cases this expectation came true, but still adultery was rampant. Most of the marriages of the upper classes were diplomatic unions contracted for political and economic gains. Many husbands regarded it as their right to have a mistress. The wife might feel dejected, but usually connived at the situation.
Among the middle classes, some people thought that adultery was a lawful pastime. Machiavelli and his friends apparently did not feel uneasy about the stories of their unfaithfulness which they exchanged with each other. When in such cases, the wife followed the example of her husband to wreak vengeance upon him, he usually connived at her behaviour and did not feel jealous or perturbed.
This was a specimen of the life of the people who regard polygamy as an unpardonable crime of the East and have occasionally blamed its climate for this supposedly inhuman custom. As far as their own climate is concerned, it does not allow them to be unfaithful to the wives and to exceed the limits of monogamy!
By the way, it should be remembered that the absence of lawful polygamy among the Europeans, whether good or bad, has nothing to do with the religion of Christ, who never prohibited it. On the other hand, it confirms the rules of the old Testament, which expressly recognise polygamy. Thus we can say that, in fact, the religion of Christ allows polygamy, and the ancient Christians have actually practised it. Hence, the legal abstinence of the Europeans from it must have some other reason or reasons.
MENSES
Some others attribute polygamy to woman's menstrual periods and her aversion to sex during that time as well as to her exhaustion after child-birth and her desire to avoid sexual intercourse during the nursing period.
Will Durant says that in the primitive societies women grow old quickly. That is why, in order to be able to nurse their children for a longer period, to lengthen the interval between their own pregnancies, without interrupting the husband's desire to have children, and to enable him to satisfy his sexual urge, they encourage their husbands to have a new wife. It has been often observed that the first wife, with a view to making her own burden lighter, has persuaded her husband to contract another marriage in order to have more children and to acquire more wealth.
There is no doubt that woman's menstrual periods and her exhaustion as the result of child-bearing place man and woman, sexually, in dissimilar positions.
These reasons often make men turn to another woman, but they alone cannot be a sufficient cause of polygamy, unless there exists some social or moral impediment preventing man from indulging in free love. The above factors can be effective only when man is not free in the pursuit of his sexual desires.


LIMITATION OF THE PERIOD OF FECUNDITY IN FEMALES
Some believe that the limitation of the period of fecundity of a woman and her menopause, are one of the causes which gave rise to polygamy, for it may happen that a woman reaches this age without being able to bear enough number of children. It is also possible that her children may have died.
In such cases, if the husband does not like to divorce his first wife and at the same time wants to have more children, he has no alternative but to have a second, or sometimes even a third wife. Similarly, the sterility of the first wife may be another reason for the husband in contracting a second marriage.

ECONOMIC FACTORS
Some economic factors have also been mentioned as the cause of polygamy. It is said that in ancient times, several wives and a large number of children were regarded as an economic asset. Man extracted work from his wife and children and treated them like slaves. Sometimes he even sold them out. Most of the slaves were not captured in battles, but were sold by their fathers.
This may be a cause of polygamy, because man can have children only by accepting the woman as his legal wife. Free love cannot ensure this advantage. Anyhow, this cause cannot explain all the cases of polygamy.
Some primitive people had several wives with this idea. But that was not the case with all the people. In the ancient world polygamy was customary among the classes which lived with dignity and decorum. The kings, the princes, the chiefs, the divines and the merchants had several wives.
As we know, these classes never exploited economically their wives and children.

NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF A FAMILY :

Interest in the numerical increase of the children and the expansion of the family has been another cause of polygamy. The position of a man and a woman with regard to the number of children each of them can have is different. The number of children a woman can bear is very limited, whether she has one husband or several husbands. But the number of children which a man can beget depends on the number of women he has at his disposal. It is theoretically possible that a man may have thousands of children by hundreds of wives. Unlike the modern world, in the ancient world the number of family members was counted as an important social factor. The tribes and the clans did all they could to increase their numbers It was a matter of pride for the ancient people to have a large tribe. It is obvious that polygamy was the only means of achieving that end.

NUMERICAL SUPERIORITY :

The last and the most important factor, which has contributed to the emergence of the custom of polygamy, is that women have always outnumbered men. It is not that the birth-rate of females is greater than that of males. If occasionally in certain places more females are born, in other places more males are born. But still the number of the women eligible for marriage is always higher than the number of men so eligible. The reason is that the mortality rate among men has always been higher. It is possible that, in case monogamy is enforced strictly, a large number of women will go without having legal husbands, legal children and a household life.
There can be no doubt that at least in the primitive societies this was the position. We have already quoted Will Durant, who says that in primitive societies the life of man was constantly in danger because he was always busy with hunting and fighting, and that is why the rate of mortality among men was higher than among women. As the number of women increased, there were only two alternatives: either to adopt polygamy or to force a large number of women to pass their entire life as spinsters.

RECAPITULATION :

We have described above all the causes which can be presumed to be the source of polygamy. As you must have observed, some of these causes such as climate are actually no causes at all. Hence we ignore them. Other causes can be classified into three categories. The first category includes those causes which might have been effective in persuading man to adopt polygamy, but they provide no justification for his action. They have an aspect of oppression, high-handedness and cruelty. The economic causes come under this category.
It is evident that the sale of children is one of the most cruel and barbaric human acts. To resort to polygamy for this purpose is as unlawful as this act itself.
The second category includes those causes which may be regarded as a justification as far as the husband or society is concerned. Sterility of the first wife, her reaching the age of menopause while the husband still requires a child or the need of a large body of people by the tribe or the country, are such causes. As a general rule, all causes, which emanate from the dissimilarity between husband and wife as regards their sexual needs or procreation power, have a justifying aspect.
The third category consists of a cause which, if it is admitted that it ever existed or still exists, not only provides a justification for polygamy, but also makes it obligatory. In this case, polygamy is a woman's right which man and the society must discharge. This cause is the numerical superiority of women over men. In case the number of women eligible for marriage is larger than the number of such men, polygamy becomes an obligation of men and a right of woman, for, in the case of legally enforced monogamy, a number of women are bound to be deprived of their right of family life.
The right of marriage is a basic human right and no one can be deprived of it under any pretext. Society cannot take any action which may deprive a section of the people of this right.
The right of marriage is as natural a right as the right of freedom, the right to work and the right to get food, shelter and education. Hence, the law of monogamy is repugnant to the natural human rights in the case of the existence of a larger number of women eligible for marriage than the number of available men.
This, at least, has been the case in the past. In the next chapter we shall see whether there still exist circumstances which not only justify polygamy, but also create a woman's right to it. And if such circumstances do exist what is the position of this right vis-a-vis the right of the first wife?

RIGHT OF WOMAN IN "MORE-THAN-ONE" MARRIAGE :

We have explained the causes of the failure of polyandry and the prevailing of polygamy and have shown that multifarious causes have contributed to the origin of the latter custom. Some of the causes originated from the man's spirit of oppression and domination and others from the disparity between man and woman as regards the duration of their power or procreation and the number of children which each of them can beget. The latter type of causes can be regarded as a justification for polygamy. But its main cause, throughout history has been the numerical superiority of women eligible for marriage over such men. This cause leads to the creation of a right of woman and an obligation of man.
To avoid a lengthy discussion, we skip over those causes which can be regarded merely as a justification for polygamy and confine our attention to its main cause which, when in existence, turns it into a right of the fair sex.
To prove the case two preliminary points have to be established. First it is to be proved that according to the reliable statistics the women eligible for marriage actually outnumber such men. The second point to be proved is that the actual existence of circumstances creates a right which married men and women owe to the women who have been deprived of marriage.
As for the first point, fortunately almost authentic statistics exist in the modern world. A census is taken in every country periodically. In the advanced countries not only are the total figures of males and females collected, but the number of men and women in various age groups is also shown. These figures are regularly published by the United Nations in its annual reports on world population.(We have before us the 1964 report, republished in 1965.)
It may be pointed out that for our purpose it is not enough to know the total number of males and females in any given country. Simultaneously, we should also know the ratio between the number of men and the number of women eligible for marriage. In most cases this ratio is different from that which exists between the total population of males and the total population of females. There are two reasons for this difference. One is that the onset of puberty in females is earlier. That is why in most countries the legal age of consent in the case of girls is lower than in the case of boys. Practically in most of the countries of the world the husband is on an average five years older than the wife.
The other and the more important reason is that the mortality rate among the boys is higher than among the girls, with the result that during the marriageable age the balance between them is upset. Sometimes the disparity becomes very marked. It may be that the total number of males and females in a country is almost equal, or even the number of males is higher, but still the girls of marriageable age far exceed the boys of the corresponding age group.
The United Nations Population Report for the year 1964 bears witness to this fact.
For instance, according to this report, the total population of the Republic of Korea is 26,277,635 people. Out of this total 13,145,289 are males and 13,132,346 are females. Thus the number of males is 12,943 more than that of females. This ratio is maintained in the children of less than one year, of 1 to 4 years, of 5 to 9 years, of 12 to 14 years and of 15 to 19 years.
Statistics show that in all these age groups the number of males is larger than that of females. But in the age group of 20 to 24, the ratio changes. In this age group the total number of males is 1,083,364 and the total number of females is 1,110,051. In all the higher age groups, which are the groups of marriageable age, the number of females is greater.
Still the case of the Republic of Korea, where the total number of males is greater than females, is exceptional. In almost all other countries, not only in marriageable age groups but also in the total population, the females outnumber the males. For instance, the total population of the Soviet Union, is 216,101,000 and out of this total 97,840,000 are males and 118,261,000 are females. This disparity is maintained throughout all age groups, pre-marriageable as well as marriageable, that is from 20 years to 24 years, from 25 years to 29 years, from 30 years to 34 years and even from 80 years to 84 years.
The same is the case with other countries, such as England, France, West Germany, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Rumania, Hungary, U.S.A., Japan etc. Of course at certain places, such as West Berlin and East Berlin, the disparity between the number of males and the number of females is abnormally large.
In India, in the marriageable age group the number of men exceeds the number of women. Only in the age group of 50 and above, the number of women is greater. Apparently the supposed paucity of women is due to the fact that many people in that country do not like to mention the names of their young wives and young daughters at the time of census.
According to the figures of the last census, Iran is one of the exceptional countries, where the number of males exceeds the number of females.
It is surprising that some critics insist that the law allowing polygamy should be abolished at least in those countries where the number of men exceeds the number of women. In the first instance, this law is universal. It is not meant for any particular country. Secondly it is not enough to know the ratio of males and females in the total population. We have seen that in the Republic of Korea, though the number of males is greater in the total population, there are more females in the marriageable age group. Furthermore, the census figures are not very reliable in many countries. For example, we know for definite that though polygamy has been customary in Iran, both in the urban and the rural areas, yet never has a shortage of would-be brides been felt there. This fact speaks better than the census figures.
Ashley Montague, in his book, 'Woman the Superior Sex', admits that throughout the world the number of women in the marriageable age exceeds the number of men.
The statistics of 1950 show that the number of women of marriageable age in America exceeded the number of men by about one million four hundred and thirty thousand.
Bertrand Russell in his book, 'Marriage and Morality' says that, in the present day England, more than two million women exceed men. According to the custom they should forever remain childless, which is a big privation for them.
Some years ago a news item appeared in the press. It said that following much pressure by those German women, who were unable to get husbands and family life, because of the huge German casualties in the Second World War, the German Government had approached Al-Azhar University to provide it with the formula of polygamy. Later it was learnt that following serious opposition by the Church the proposal had to be dropped. The Church preferred the privation of women and the spread of licentiousness to the system of polygamy, because this system is Eastern and Islamic.

WHY ARE THERE MORE WOMEN OF MARRIAGEABLE AGE THAN MEN?
Though the birth rate of girls is not higher than that of boys, yet there are more women of marriageable age than men. The reason is clear. The mortality rate of men is higher. Deaths usually occur at the age when man should normally be the head of a family. If we take into consideration the deaths which occur following accidents such as, wars, drowning, falls, motor collisions etc. we shall find that most of the victims are men.
It is seldom found that woman is among the victims. Whether it is a case of a clash between human beings or between man and nature, most of the victims are male adults To know why the balance between men and women of marriageable age is upset it is enough to realise that since the beginning of human history there has not been a single day when wars have not been waged and men have not perished.
The casualties resulting from wars in the industrial age are a hundred times more than those which occurred in the hunting age or in the age of agriculture. During the last World War, the casualties numbered about seven million. You will agree with us if you calculate the casualties of the regional wars in the Far East, the Middle East and Africa during the past decade only.
Will Durant says that several factors have contributed to the decline of this custom (polygamy). Stable agricultural life has lessened the hardships and perils of the life of men, with the result that the number of men and women has almost equalised.
What Will Durant has said is quite amazing. Had the losses of human life been confined to the struggle of men against nature, there would have been a difference between the hunting age and the agricultural age. But the wars have taken a greater toll of men's lives and the number of war casualties has not gone down in any age. Further, the main reason why women have suffered less casualties is that men have always protected them and have themselves shouldered the most dangerous jobs. Thus like the hunting age disequilibrium has continued during the agricultural age also.
Will Durant has not uttered a word about the industrial age, though this is the period which has witnessed the greatest killings of men and during which the balance has been badly upset.

WOMAN HAS A GREATER POWER OF RESISTANCE AGAINST DISEASES :
It has been lately discovered that man possesses lesser power of resistance against disease than women. This is another reason why the mortality rate among men is higher.
Some years ago, the French Bureau of Statistics reported that in France, 105 boys were born against every 100 girls and the number of women exceeded the number of men by one million, seven hundred and fifty-eight thousand. It attributed the difference to the female power of resistance against disease.
Not long ago an article was published in the illustrated UNESCO magazine, Courier. According to this article, woman is intellectually superior to man. Her average longevity is more. Usually she is healthier than man and has a greater power of resistance against disease. She is cured earlier. Against one stammering woman there are five stammering men. Against one colour-blind woman there are 16 colour-blind men. Haemorrhage is almost confined to men. Women are more immune against accidents. During the last World War it was proved that, in similar circumstances, woman could bear the hardships of blockades, prisons and concentration camps better than man. Almost in all countries the cases of suicide by men are three times those by women.
Ashley Montague has mentioned his theory of woman's greater power of resistance against disease in his book, 'Woman - the Superior Sex'.
If by chance one day man decides to wreak his vengeance upon woman and succeeds in plunging her into the most dangerous and fatal jobs or pushes her into the battlefield to face the guns and the bombs, even then the balance between men and women will not be restored, because she has a greater power of resistance against disease.
This much is about the first point viz. numerical superiority of the women of marriageable age over the men of marriageable age. We know that this superiority is an actual fact. We also know its causes. And its cause or causes from the beginning of the human history do exist even now.

RIGHT OF WOMAN IN POLYGAMY :

The second point is that the numerical majority of women of marriageable age not only creates a right for them but also an obligation for men and married women.
There is no denying the fact that marriage is one of the most natural and most basic rights of human beings. Everybody, whether man or woman, has the right to lead a family life and have children. This right is similar to that of doing work, having a house, receiving education, utilising the health services and enjoying freedom and security.
It is the duty of the society not to place any obstacles in the way of the enjoyment of this right. On the other hand, it should provide all possible facilities for this purpose.
In our opinion it is a big drawback of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that it has not paid any attention to this right. It has recognised the right of liberty and security, the right of approaching competent national tribunals, the right of having a nationality and changing it, the right to marry without any limitation of race or religion, the right to own property, the right to form an assembly, and the right of rest and leisure, but it does not mention the right of leading a legal family life.
For a woman this right is of utmost importance, for she needs a family life more than a man. As we have already said, to a man the material aspect of marriage is more important and to a woman its spiritual and sentimental aspect. If man has no family, he can at least partially fulfil his needs by indulging in free love and debauchery. But to a woman a family has a greater importance. Debauchery cannot even partially fulfil her material and sentimental needs.
To a man the right of having a family means the right to satisfy his lust, the right to have a partner in life and the right to have legal children. But to a woman it also means the right to have a protector and patron and the one from whom she may draw moral support.
After the establishment of the two premises, viz. the number of women eligible for marriage is larger than the number of men and it is a natural human right to have a family life, it is easy to draw the conclusion that if monogamy is regarded as the only legal form of marriage, a large number of women are bound to be deprived of their natural right, and it is only polygamy, which of course with specific conditions, can restore it.
It is the duty of liberal-minded Muslim women that they, in the name of defending the just rights of women at large, in the name of protecting morality and in the name of protecting the human race, call upon the U.N. Commission for Human Rights to recognise officially the Islamic system of plurality of wives as a human right, and thus render a great service to the fair sex and to morality. The fact that a formula has come from the East and the West has to follow it, should not be regarded as a sin.

RUSSELL'S THEORY
As pointed out earlier, Bertrand Russell was conscious of the fact that in the case of monogamy being the sole form of marriage, a large number of women are to be deprived of their right. He has suggested a very simple solution to the problem. He wanted women to be allowed to entice men and bear father-less children. As the father usually supports the children, the government should take his place and give a subsidy to the unmarried mothers.
Russell says that at present, in Britain, there are more than two million surplus women who cannot ever hope to have children because of the law of monogamy. This is a big privation. He says that the system of monogamy is based on the presumption of approximate numerical equality between men and women, but where no such equality exists it gives a raw deal to those women who, in accordance with mathematical law, are doomed to remain unmarried. Anyhow, if it is desired to increase the population, such a raw deal is not even in the public interest, let alone in the private interest.
This is the solution of this social problem, as suggested by a great philosopher of the 20th century. But, according to Islam, the whole problem is solved if an adequate number of men having the necessary financial, moral and physical qualifications agree to bear the responsibility of more than one legal wife showing no distinction between her and his first wife and between the children by both of them. The first wife should accept the second one cheerfully with the spirit of doing a social duty, which is most necessary and the best form of morality.
Contrary to the Islamic mode of thinking, this philosopher advises the deprived women to steal the husbands of other women and call upon the government to support the children born of such illicit connections.
It appears that this philosopher of the 20th century maintains that woman needs marriage only for three reasons:
to satisfy her sexual needs, to get children and to meet her economic requirements. The first two needs can be met on the sly. As for the third one, it should be looked after by the government. He forgets that woman also has some sentimental needs. She wants that she should be under the protection of a loving husband and that her contact with him should not be merely of a sexual nature. Another point to which this philosopher attaches no importance, is the position of the children born of illicit connections. Every child needs well-recognised parents and their sincere love and affection. Experience has shown that the mother seldom shows affection to that child of hers whose father is not known. How can the lack of this love be compensated? Can the government do anything in this respect?
Lord Russell regrets that a large number of women will have to remain childless unless his proposal is given a legal form. But he should have known that the British women cannot wait for any law. They themselves have already solved the problem of maidenhood and the fatherless child.
In the annual report for 1958, prepared by Dr. Z.A. Scott, head of the Medical Department of the London Council, it was pointed out that out of every ten children born in the previous year one was illegitimate. The report further said that illegitimate births were constantly on the increase. The figures of illegitimate births shot up from 33,838 in 1957 to 53,433 in the following year.
It appears that the British people have solved their problem without waiting for the enactment of Lord Russell's suggestion.

POLYGAMY PROHIBITED, HOMOSEXUALITY PERMITTED!
The British Government instead of acting upon the advice of Lord Russell and solving the problem of unmarried woman has taken a step in the opposite direction. It has more than ever deprived woman of the male sex by legalising homosexuality. At present polygamy is prohibited in Britain, but homosexuality is lawful.
In the eyes of the British people it is inhuman to have a woman as a second wife. But if the second "wife" happens to be a male, then there is no harm. They regard homosexuality to be a dignified act in conformity with the requirements of the 20th century. According to the verdict of the British authorities, plurality of wives is not objectionable provided the wives other than the first one have whiskers. It is said that the Western world has solved the sexual and family problems, and we should follow its example. This is how it has solved them.
This Western action is not surprising in the least, for it is a logical outcome of the way the West is going.
What is surprising is that our people, especially the educated young men, have lost their power of independent thinking and analysing problems. They have lost their personalities. They are too credulous. If they have a diamond in their hand and the people from the other side of the world say it is a walnut, they throw it away. But if they see a walnut in the hand of an alien and are told that it is diamond, they readily believe that.

IS MAN POLYGAMOUS BY NATURE?
You will be surprised if you are told that the psychologists and the social philosophers in the West believe that man is born polygamous and monogamy is against his nature.
Will Durant, explaining the present day moral chaos, says that much of it is due to our incurable interest in variety. Man by nature cannot be content with one woman.
He says that by nature man is polygamous. Only the strongest moral restrictions and an appropriate amount of poverty and hard work, along with the external vigilance of the wife, can impose monogamy on him.
The German professor, Schmidt, says that throughout history man has been unfaithful to his wife. There are indications that even during the Middle Ages the young men changed their sweet-hearts again and again, and 50% of the married men were unfaithful to their wives. Robert Kinsey in his report, known as the Kinsey Report, says that American men and women surpass all other nations in unfaithfulness. In another section of the report he says that, unlike man, woman dislikes diversity and that is why she often does not submit to his overtures, but man regards diversity as an adventure. What is more important is that he is more interested in physical pleasure than in spiritual and sentimental pleasure. Man pretends to have a purely sentimental and spiritual relation only so long as he does not get an opportunity to have physical contact. A famous physician told Kinsey that obviously man was polygamous and woman monogamous, because millions of sperm developed in man while one ovum was produced in the ovary of woman during each period of fecundity. Apart from the theory of Kinsey, it will not be a bad idea if we ask ourselves whether it is difficult for a man to be faithful.
A French sociologist answering this question says that for a man to be faithful is not merely difficult but it is impossible. One woman is born for one man, but one man is born for all women, If a man is unfaithful and betrays his wife, he is not to blame. It is the fault of nature, which has put all the forces of unfaithfulness in him.
A French magazine under the heading, "French way of Love and Marriage", writes that French couples have solved this problem. They know the rules of the game. So long as the husband does not exceed the limits, his occasional affairs with other women are of little importance. As a rule a husband can in no case remain faithful after two years of married life. It is somewhat different in the case of women and fortunately they are aware of this difference. In France, a wife does not feel offended if her husband commits adultery
She consoles herself by saying that he might have taken his body to another woman, but his soul and sentiments continue to be her own.
Some years ago there was a controversy on the views expressed by a biologist named Dr. Russell Lee. He was of the view that a man's contentment with one wife weakened his progeny and hence this action amounted to an act of treachery against the human race. He thought that the system of multi-relations made the children healthy and strong.
We believe that the above description of the nature of man is not correct at all. These thinkers appear to have been inspired by the particular atmosphere prevailing in their own part of the world.
Anyhow, we believe that both biologically and psychologically man and woman are dissimilar to each other and nature has purposely made them so. Therefore, the equality of their rights should not be used as a pretext for the uniformity of their rights. Even from the viewpoint of those who support monogamy, the spirit of woman is different from that of man. Woman is monogamous by nature. Polyandry is against her spirit and does not conform to what she expects of her husband. But man is not monogamous by nature in the sense that polygamy is not against his spirit and is not inconsistent with what he expects of his wife.
But we do not agree with the view that the spirit of man does not conform to monogamy. It is absolutely incorrect to say that his passion for diversity is incurable. We also do not believe that man cannot be faithful, or that one woman is born for one man and one man is born for all women.
To our belief the causes of man's unfaithfulness are related to the social atmosphere and man's nature is not responsible for it. Factors causing unfaithfulness stem from that atmosphere which, on the one hand, encourages woman to employ all sorts of temptations and seductions to lead a stranger astray and, on the other hand, deprives millions of women of their right of marriage by enforcing the law of monogamy.
In the Muslim East, prior to the introduction of Western ways and manners, 90% of the men adhered to monogamy in the real sense. They neither had more than one legal wife nor did they indulge in concubinage.

POLYGAMY AS THE FACTOR SAVING MONOGAMY
You will be surprised if we say that polygamy was the most important factor which served monogamy in the East. Its legality is really the biggest saving factor, in case the number of women requiring marriage exceeds the number of men eligible for it, because if the right of the surplus women to marriage is not recognised and the morally, financially and physically well-qualified men are not allowed to have more than one wife, free love and concubinage are bound to become rampant, destroying the very basis of real monogamy.
In the Muslim East, on the one hand polygamy was permissible and, on the other, temptations and provocations to immorality did not exist. Therefore, true monogamy prevailed in most of the families. Concubinage never developed to the extent that gradually a philosophy had been invented to justify
it. In the East, it was never claimed that man was born polygamous and could not at all adhere to monogamy.
It may be asked what alternative a man has when polygamy is legally prohibited and, as the intellectuals say, man is polygamous by nature.
According to the thinking of these gentlemen the answer is quite clear. Man should be legally monogamous and practically polygamous. He should not have more than one legal wife, but he can cohabit with any number of women he likes. Concubinage is the natural right of man. It is unchivalrous to restrict him to one woman.
We believe that the time has come when the readers should have a clear idea of the problem and should know what the question really is. It is not the question whether polygamy is better or monogamy. There is no doubt that monogamy is preferable, for monogamy means an exclusive family life. In this system the body and the soul of each of the husband and the wife exclusively belong to the other. It is obvious that the spirit of marriage is the union of hearts which manifests itself better in an exclusive marriage. Humanity does not have to choose between monogamy and polygamy.
The only problem is that absolute monogamy is not practical in certain social circumstances, especially when the number of women in need of marriage is greater than the number of eligible men. Absolute monogamy pervading every family is only a fiction. There are only two alternatives: either to officially recognise polygamy or to encourage unrestricted concubinage. In the case of the first alternative only a small percentage of married men, in no case more than 10% will have more than one wife and all women in need of a husband will be able to secure a home and family life. In the case of the second alter-native every woman having no legal husband will have sexual relations with several men, and thus almost all married men will become practically polygamous.
This is the correct picture of polygamy. But the partisans of the European way of life are not prepared to present the true picture of the problem. They do not want to tell the truth openly. In reality they defend concubinage. They regard the legal wife as a burden and a stumbling-block in their way. T() them even one wife is too much, let alone two, three or four. They pretend to be the supporters of monogamy, but, in fact, complete freedom from matrimonial restrictions is what they would like to have.

WILES OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY MAN
The 20th century man has succeeded in befooling woman on many questions related to family rights. He uses the high-sounding words of equality and liberty to reduce his own commitments and to add to his opportunities of enjoyment. But there are few questions in respect of which he has been so successful as in disparaging polygamy.
Occasionally we come across writings that make us wonder whether their authors are simpletons or rogues. One writer says: At present, in the advanced countries relations between husband and wife are based on a system of reciprocal rights and obligations, and for that reason it is as difficult for a woman to recognise polygamy in any form, as for a man to bear the existence of rivals in the field of his conjugal relations.
We do not know whether that is their conception of the problem, or they really do not know that polygamy has resulted from a social problem, which puts a heavy responsibility on the shoulders of married men and women and of which, so far, no solution other than polygamy has been discovered. Shutting the eyes to the real problem and raising the slogans 'long live monogamy' and 'down with polygamy' can serve no purpose.
Do they not know that polyandry is neither a part of woman's rights nor a part of man's rights. It has nothing to do with their reciprocal rights.
It is ridiculous to say that it is as difficult for woman to agree to polygamy as it is for a man to tolerate the existence of rivals in the matter of conjugal relations. Apart from the fact that such a comparison is wrong, it appears that these gentlemen do not know that the present-day Western world, by the glitter of which they are so greatly dazzled, actually requires the husband to respect the love-affairs of his wife and tolerate the existence of rivals. It deprecates any interference on the part of the husband as jealousy and fanaticism. We wish that our young men had a deeper knowledge of what is going on in the West.
As polygamy is the outcome of a social problem and is not man's instinct, it is obvious that in a society where women are not in a numerical majority, it should automatically disappear or at least its incidence should be minimised. But it will not be proper to ban it even in such circumstances, if such circumstances exist at all. Legal prohibition of polygamy is neither sufficient nor something correct. There are certain prerequisites to achieve this end. First of all, social justice should be ensured and adequate opportunities of suitable employment made available for every man, so that everyone eligible for marriage should be in a position to have a family life. The second condition is that every woman should be free to choose her husband and should be under no compulsion by her guardians or anyone else to marry any particular person of their choice. It is obvious that a woman who has a chance to marry a bachelor will never like to marry a man who has a wife. It is only their guardians who sell women for the sake of money and give them in marriage to the moneyed people.
The third condition is that there should not exist too many temptations that seduce even women having husbands not to mention women having no husbands.
Should society be earnestly interested in reformation and in enforcing true monogamy, it should endeavour for the fulfilment of the above three conditions. Otherwise, a legal ban on polygamy will only lead to moral depravation.

CRISIS RESULTING FROM THE PRIVATION OF THE WOMEN HAVING NO HUSBANDS :
If the women in need of marriage outnumber such men (bachelors), the prohibition of polygamy is a treachery to
humanity. It is not merely a question of suppressing the rights of some women only. Had it been so, it could have been tolerated to a certain extent. The crisis which society faces as a result of legally enforced monogamy possess a bigger danger than any other crisis, for the family organisation is more sacred than any other organisation.
A woman who is deprived of her natural right is a living being prone to all the reactions of a living being such as in the case of privation. She is a human being who is susceptible to psychic disorders and complexes. She is an Eve armed with the weapons for seducing men.
She is not wheat or barley, the surplus stock of which can be dumped into the sea or stored for any future emergency. She is not a house or a room which, if not acquired immediately, can be locked. She is a living person. She is a human being. She is a woman. She has marvellous potentialities. If she is frustrated she can ruin the society. She cannot be an idle onlooker while others enjoy life. Her privation will give rise to complexes and malice. If malice and instinct join hands together, the consequences can only be catastrophic.
The women deprived of family life will do their utmost to seduce men and to exploit their weakness in this respect. Even then the matter will not end. The wives who will find their husbands to be unfaithful, will think of taking revenge upon them and thus will themselves become unfaithful. About the final result the less said the better.
This final result has been summarised in the well-known Kinsey Report in one sentence: "The men and women of America have surpassed all other nations in unfaithfulness."
It is to be noted that the matter does not end with the corruption and perversion of men. The conflagration in the end also engulfs the women having husbands and families.

VARIOUS REACTIONS ABOUT THE EXCESS OF WOMEN :
The phenomenon of the comparative super-abundance of women has always existed in human history, but the reactions to this phenomenon, which create difficulties for the society, have not been the same in all societies. The people who were more attached to the spirit of piety and chastity and were guided by the teachings of the great heavenly religions, solved the problem by adopting the system of polygamy. Other people who were not so greatly attached to this spirit used the phenomenon as a means of indulging in debauchery.
Neither was polygamy in the East introduced by Islam, nor its prohibition in the West in any way related to the religion of Christ. This custom existed in the East before the inception of Islam and was sanctioned by the Eastern religions. Even in the Bible, it has not been prohibited expressly.
A greater blow has been given to monogamy by the nations, which have taken to debauchery, than by those which have adopted polygamy.
Dr. Muhammad Husayn Haikal, author of the book, 'Life of Muhammad' after quoting several verses of the Holy Qur'an on the question of polygamy, says: These verses favour adherence to monogamy. They say that if you fear that you will not be able to do justice to more than one wife, then have only one. Incidentally, they emphasise that absolute justice is not possible. Anyhow in view of the fact that there may be occasions when polygamy is unavoidable, they allow it conditionally. The Holy Prophet himself contracted several marriages, when a large number of Muslim women lost their husbands during the early battles of Islam. Is it possible to say that following wars, epidemics and disturbances which take a toll of thousands and sometimes millions of people, it is still preferable to adhere to monogamy rather than to adopt polygamy as an exceptional case and with the condition of doing justice to their wife or wives? Can the people of the West claim that after the World War the law of monogamy has been enforced in the same way in which it now exists in name?

DRAWBACKS AND DEFECTS OF POLYGAMY :
A happy married life depends on sincerity, tolerance, sacrifice and unity. All these things are endangered in the case of polygamy. Apart from the unenviable position of the wives and the children in a plural marriage, the responsibilities of the husband himself are so heavy and crushing that it is no fun to shoulder them -Most of the men, who are happy and satisfied with polygamy, are those who practically evade their legal and moral responsibilities. They turn all their attention to one wife and ignore the other, whom they leave, in the words of the Holy Qur'an, 'hanging', What is called polygamy by such people is in reality a sort of monogamy coupled with high-handedness, tyranny and criminal injustice. There is a proverb current among the common people which says: 'One God, One Wife'.
That has been and is the belief of most of the people and, if we measure the problem by the standard of individual happiness, it is correct. The rule of monogamy, if not applicable to all men, is certainly applicable to most of them.
If someone thinks that polygamy, with all the legal and moral responsibilities it entails, is a bed of roses, he is sadly mistaken. From the angle of personal comfort and happiness, monogamy is definitely preferable.

CORRECT APPRAISAL :
Anyhow, a correct appraisal of the system of polygamy, which emanates from personal and social needs, cannot be made by comparing it with monogamy. The right way of evaluating such a system is to give consideration to the causes which give rise to it, to see what evil consequences will follow, if those causes are overlooked, and at the same time to give a thought to the defects and drawbacks of the system itself. It is only after fully weighing all the pros and cons of a system that we can arrive at the right conclusion. To illustrate the point we give an example. If we look at the system of conscription only from the angle of the interests and inclinations of a family, to which a recruit belongs, there can be no doubt that the law of conscription is not a good law. It would have been much better if there had been no such law, and no darling of a family had been snatched from his family and, occasionally, sent to the warfront.
But this is not a correct evaluation of the question. Along with the separation of a son from his family, we should also take into consideration the defence requirements of the country. If we do that, it will appear perfectly reasonable and logical that an adequate number of citizens should always be kept ready for the defence of the country and their families should willingly put up with the inconveniences caused by the compulsory military service.
Earlier we referred to some individual and collective needs which sometimes justify polygamy. Now, to prepare the ground for an overall judgement, let us discuss the defects and drawbacks of this system. We admit that it has certain demerits, but we do not believe that all that is said against it is valid. Anyway, we propose to discuss its defects from various angles.

FROM THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ANGLE :
The conjugal relations are not confined to such material and physical matters as bodily contact and financial support. If they had been so confined, it would have been easy to justify polygamy, for material and physical matters are divisible between several people, each having a share.
The basis of conjugal relations is emotional and psychological. They are based on such things as love, emotions and feelings. Married life means the union of hearts. Like all metaphysical things, love and feelings are not divisible. They cannot be rationed among several people nor can a definite quota thereof be allotted to any one. A heart cannot be divided between two people. Love and worship are concomitant. They do not admit a rival. Love cannot be measured and distributed like wheat and barley. Furthermore, feelings cannot be controlled.
The heart dominates man, man does not dominate the heart. The spirit of marriage, that is, its human aspect, which distinguishes the relations between two human beings from the purely instinctive relations between two animals, is neither divisible nor controllable. Hence, polygamy should not be permitted.
To our belief the above statement is exaggerated. It is true that emotions and feelings constitute the spirit of marriage. It is also true that feelings are not controllable. But it is pure fancy, rather a fallacy, to say that feelings are not divisible.
It is not a question of dividing and distributing feelings in the same way as a material object is divided and distributed. It is a question of the mental capacity of man, which is not too limited to accommodate relations with two people. A father having ten sons loves all of them to the extent of worship and makes sacrifices for them.
Anyhow, one thing is definite. Love cannot be as intense in the case of several wives as it can be in the case of one. Intense love is not consistent with plurality, but it is not consistent with reason too.
Russell in his book, 'Marriage and Morality'. says that many people today regard love as a fair exchange of feelings. This argument alone, irrespective of all other arguments, is enough to condemn polygamy.
If it is only a question of fair exchange of feelings. we wonder why the exchange should he monopolistic. A father having several children loves them all and they all reciprocally love him. Is not the exchange of feelings between them fair? Incidentally even in the case of several children, a father's love for each of them is always greater than the love of each child for the father.
The most amazing part of the above statement is that it has been made by a person who advises the husbands to respect their wives' love-affairs with strangers and not to interfere in them. He gives the same advice to the wives also. Does he believe that the exchange of feelings between a husband and a wife will still be fair?

FROM THE ANGLE OF BEHAVIOUR :
In the case of polygamy the relations between co-wives are proverbially notorious for incongruity. A woman usually regards the co-wife as her worst enemy. Plurality often induces wives to action against each other and occasionally against the husband also. It creates malice and turns the family atmosphere, expected to be an atmosphere of sincerity and serenity, into a veritable battlefield. Enmity and rivalry existing between the mothers passes on to their children and two or more blocs are formed. The family atmosphere, instead of being the first school of moral training for the children, turns into a school of dissensions and inhuman behaviour.
There is no doubt that polygamy has all these evil effects. But one point must not be overlooked. We have to see whether they are the natural effects of plurality or the product of the unreasonable attitude of the husband and the second wife. We believe that most of the evil effects are not the direct result of plurality, but are the consequences of its wrong implementation.
Suppose a husband and a wife live together and lead a normal life. In the meantime the husband comes across another woman and takes a fancy to her. After a secret understanding between the two, the second woman raids the house and takes undue advantage of the husband, and challenges the authority of the first. It can be easily imagined what the reaction of the first wife would be. There is nothing more disturbing to a woman than the impression that her husband despises her. To be unable to retain the affection of her husband is the biggest failure of a wife. When the husband takes to arrogance and licentiousness and the second wife plays the role of a freebooter, it is useless to expect the first wife to be patient.
But the things will be different and the internal conflict will be greatly reduced if the first wife knows that her husband is justified in having a second wife and that he is not fed up with her. The husband also must not assume arrogance nor should he indulge in sensuality. After having a second wife, he should more than ever be kind to his first wife and should more than ever respect her feelings. The second wife also should remember that the first wife has certain rights which are to be respected. In short, all the parties concerned should remember that they have taken a step to solve a social problem.
The law of polygamy is a progressive solution of a social problem and is based on the broader interests of the society. Those who execute it, should possess a standard of high-thinking and should be well-trained in the Islamic ways.
Experience has shown that if the husband is neither licentious nor arrogant and the wife is convinced that he needs a second wife, she herself volunteers to arrange the second marriage of her husband. In such cases the aforementioned troubles do not arise, as most of them result from the misbehaviour of the husbands.

FROM THE MORAL ANGLE :
It is said that polygamy means indulgence in sensuality. Morality demands that the gratification of sexual desire is minimised, for the nature of man is such that the more he indulges in sex, the more intense his yearning for it becomes.
Montague in his book, 'Spirit of Laws', while dealing with the question of polygamy, says: "The King of Morocco has, in his harem, women of all races including white, yellow and black. Even if this man had twice as many women as he has, he still would have craved for more. Sensuality is like miserliness. The more it is practised, the more intense it becomes. As the collection of more and more gold and silver intensifies greed and avarice, indulgence in polygamy promotes vicious and unnatural ways of love-making, for in the field of sensuality every act which exceeds the limit encourages perversion. When disturbances broke out in Istanbul, not a single woman was found in the harem of the ruler, because he indulged in unnatural love-making (homosexuality).
This objection can be looked at from two angles. Firstly, it has been claimed that sexual acts are repugnant to pure morality and that sexual desire should be controlled to the utmost extent. Secondly, it has been asserted that human nature is such that the more a man indulges in sex, the more intense his yearning for it becomes.
As regards the first view, it may be said that unfortunately it represents a wrong thinking. It has been inspired by Christian, Hindu, Buddhist and Cynic ideas of morality based on renunciation. From the Islamic point of view, it is not correct to say that the less the gratification of sexual desire, the more moral it is. (Perhaps according to this theory perfect morality means no gratification at all). It is only excessive indulgence which is regarded by Islam as repugnant to morality.
To ascertain whether polygamy means excessive indulgence let us see whether by nature man is or is not monogamous. As stated earlier, now nobody believes that man is purely monogamous or that polygamy is an act of perversion. To the contrary many sociologists are of the view that by nature man is polygamous and monogamy is as unnatural as celibacy.
Though we do not believe that man is polygamous by nature, we also do not believe that he is purely monogamous and that polygamy is unnatural and a sort of perversion like homosexuality.
Those who, like Montesquieu, regard polygamy tantamount to licentiousness, have harems in their mind. They think that Islam, by allowing plurality, wants to provide an excuse for the harems of the Abbasid Caliphs and the Ottoman Sultans. But in fact Islam is totally opposed to such a thing. The terms and conditions laid down by Islam in respect of plurality are such that the chances of licentiousness are absolutely eliminated.
As for the second point: that the more the natural desires are satisfied, the more they grow and the more they are suppressed, the more they are pacified, it is diametrically opposed to the current Freudian theory.
According to the Freudists, instinctive desires are pacified if they are satiated, hut if they are suppressed, they become violent. That is why the Freudists advocate complete freedom and the violation of all traditional restrictions and restraints in sexual matters. I wish that Montesquieu had been alive today and had seen how his theory is being ridiculed by the Freudists.
From the Islamic point of view both the theories are false. Human nature has its own laws and limits which must be recognised. It becomes passionate both as a result of privation as well as unrestricted freedom.
Anyway, neither polygamy is immoral and disturbing to spiritual peace, as Montesquieu and the like presume, nor is it against human nature, to be content with one or more legal wives as the Freudists claim.

FROM THE LEGAL ANGLE :
By virtue of a marriage contract both the husband and the wife belong to each other, and each of them has a right to enjoy the other. As far as the marital benefits are concerned, the marriage contract creates a sort of proprietary right. In the case of polygamy it is the first wife who has the first claim to the marital benefits, and as such any transaction between the husband and another wife is ultra vires, for the goods under transaction, as marital benefits may be called, have already been sold to the first wife. Hence no subsequent transaction can be valid without her consent. As such, if polygamy is to be allowed, its validity must depend upon the consent and agreement of the first wife. She should have the right to decide whether she can or cannot allow her husband to have another wife.
This means that to have a second, third and fourth wife is just as if a person had sold his property to a person and then resold it to a second, third and fourth customer. The validity of such a transaction will depend on the consent of the first, second and third buyers respectively. If the vendor actually delivers the property to the subsequent buyers without such a consent, he is liable to prosecution.
This objection is based on the presumption that the legal nature of marriage is that of exchange of benefits, and that each of the husband and the wife owns the marital benefits accruing from the other. Though this presumption is not sound, for the present we do not want to dispute it. Let us presume the position to be actually so. But this objection can be valid only in case the husband takes another wife only for fun. Obviously if it is admitted that the legal nature of marriage is that of exchange of marital benefits, plurality of marriage is not justifiable only so long as the wife can in every respect meet the lawful needs of her husband. But if there exists any of the justifying causes mentioned earlier, the objection becomes void. For instance, if the wife is barren or has attained the age of menopause and the husband is still in need of a child, or the wife is sick and not fit for cohabitation, the right of the wife will be no bar to plurality of marriage.
This is the position in case polygamy is only a personal requirement of the husband. But if it is a social requirement, for example, if women outnumber men in a society or the society needs a larger population, then the case is quite different. In such cases, plurality is a duty which is to be performed by an adequate number of men. It is a duty to be carried out to save the society from corruption and prostitution or to increase the population of the community. When it is a question of social duty, obviously the question of the consent and permission of the wife does not arise. Suppose in a society women outnumber men or the society needs a larger population, then a social duty devolves on all married men and women which should be carried out by an adequate number of them in the spirit of self-sacrifice. This is exactly like the case of conscription. The defence of the country devolves a duty on all families to send
their dear ones to the front for the sake of the society. In such cases there is no question of the consent of the parties concerned.
They who maintain that justice demands that polygamy must depend upon the consent of the existing wife, look at the question from a narrow angle. They think that a husband always wants to have more than one wife only for pleasure and variety. They forget that there can be other individual and social needs also. Basically plurality of marriage should not be acceptable even with the consent of the existing wife, if no individual or social need is involved.

FROM THE PHILOSOPHICAL ANGLE :
The law of polygamy is repugnant to the principle of equality between man and woman as human beings. As man and woman both have equal rights, either both of them should be allowed to practise polygamy or neither of them. It is a pure and simple discrimination to allow man to have several wives and not to allow woman to have several husbands. To allow man to have up to four wives means that the value of a woman is only one-fourth that of man. This position is derogatory to woman and is not even in keeping with the Islamic view in respect of inheritance and evidence. In respect of giving evidence, two women are regarded as equal to one man.
This is the most flimsy objection. It seems that the critics have paid no attention to the individual and the social causes of polygamy. They think that it is only a question of passion. Hence man and woman should be treated equally. We have already discussed the cases in which polygamy is justified. We have also pointed out the circumstances in which a duty in respect of a husbandless woman devolves on all married men and women. Hence, it is not necessary to dwell on this question any more.
It is enough to say that if the teachings of Islam in respect of polygamy, inheritance and evidence had been due to any apathy to woman's rights, and had Islam discriminated between man and woman as human beings, it would have held a uniform view on all relevant questions. In the case of inheritance it would not have allowed woman only a half of the share of man in some cases and an equal share in others. Similarly, in the case of evidence there would not have been different rules in different cases. All this shows that Islam has some other philosophy. We have already explained the question of inheritance in a preceding chapter. We have also pointed out elsewhere that from the Islamic point of view the question of equality between man and woman as human beings is a part of basic human rights. Anyhow, while dealing with family rights, Islam has taken into consideration certain other aspects also which are more important than the question of mere equality.

ROLE OF ISLAM IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF POLYGAMY :
Islam neither invented polygamy (for it had been in existence for centuries before the inception of Islam), nor did it abolish it, for there existed no oதிr solution of certain social problems. Islam only reformed this ancient custom.

LIMITATIONS
Before Islam, one could have an unlimited number of wives and could form a harem. Islam prescribed a maximum limit. It did not allow anyone to have more than four wives. Those who had more than four wives at the time of embracing Islam were required to release the extra wives.
We come across the names of several such people in the early history of Islam. A man named Ghaylan bin Aslamah had ten wives. Another man named Nawfal bin Mu'awiyah had five. The Holy Prophet ordered them to part with their extra wives.
The Shi'ah traditions report that during the days of Imam Sadiq (P) a Zoroastrian embraced Islam. He had seven wives. The Imam was asked as to what that man should do with his wives. The Imam said that he must part with three.

JUSTICE AND EQUAL TREATMENT :
Another reform introduced by Islam was the condition of giving equal treatment to all the wives. Islam does not allow any discrimination between the wives or between their children. The Holy Qur'an expressly says: "If you [ear that you will not do justice (to them) then have one only". (Surahan-Nisa,4:3)
The Pre-Islamic world observed equality neither between the wives nor between their children. We have already quoted Christenson and others who say that during the Sassanian period polygamy was customary in Iran. One or more wives were called favourite wives and they enjoyed full rights and others known as servant-wives had lesser legal rights. Only the male children of the servant-wives were recognised to be the members of the paternal family.
Islam abolished all such customs and usages. It does not allow any wife or her children to be regarded as inferior to the other wife or children of her husband.
Will Durant in his book, History of Culture, Vol. I, says:
"When a person accumulated wealth he feared that if it would be divided among all his children, each one of them would receive only as small portion of it. So he felt anxious to make a distinction between his real and favourite wife and other mistresses to enable the children of the real wife only to inherit from him."
This shows that in the ancient world discrimination between the wives and between their children was common. Anyhow, surprisingly enough Will Durant adds: "Till recently this continued to be the case in Asia. Gradually the real wife took the position of the sole wife. Other wives either disappeared or became clandestine mistresses."
Will Durant did not take notice of the fact, or he did not want to do so, that 14 centuries ago Islam abolished discrimination between the children. To have one real wife and several secret concubines is a European and not an Asian custom. It has only lately infiltrated into Asia.
Anyhow, the second reform which Islam introduced in the domain of polygamy was the abolition of discrimination between the wives and between their children. No form of favouritism with any particular wife is permissible. Almost all jurists are unanimous on this point. Only a few minor juristical schools have interpreted the rights of women in a way that smacks of discrimination. But there is no denying the fact that their view is in contradiction with the correct interpretation of the Qur'anic passage. The Holy Prophet is reported by both the Shi'ah and the Sunnis to have said: "He who has two wives but does not treat them equally and shows leaning towards one of them, will be raised on the Day of Resurrection in such a state that one side of his body will be dragging along the ground. He will eventually go to Hell".
Justice is the greatest moral virtue. To prescribe the condition of justice and equal treatment means that the husband is required to be in possession of the highest moral qualities. As the feelings of man in respect of all his wives usually are not the same, observation of justice and abstinence from unequal treatment is one of his most onerous duties.
We all know that the Holy Prophet, during the last ten years of his life, that is, during the period of his stay in Madina, married several women. This was a period of Islamic wars and at that time the number of women, who had nobody to look after them, was quite large. Most of the wives of the Prophet were widowed and aged. Several of them had children by their former husbands.
The only maiden he married was Ayesha, who often proudly said that she was the only woman whom no husband other than the Prophet, had ever touched.
The Holy Prophet, always gave strict equal treatment to all his wives and never discriminated between them. Urwah bin Zubayr was a nephew (sister's son) of Ayesha. He inquired of his aunt as to how the Holy Prophet treated his wives. Ayesha said that he treated them with justice and complete equality.
He never gave preference to anyone of them over anyone else. Almost daily he called on every wife and inquired after her health etc. He passed the night with one wife, turn by turn. If by chance he wanted to pass a night with another wife, he formally came to the wife whose turn it was and took her permission. If the permission was given, he would go, otherwise he would not. Ayesha said that she personally declined to give permission as and when he asked for it.
Even during his last illness which led to his death and when he was too weak to move, the Holy Prophet scrupulously adhered to the principle of equality in his treatment with his wives. His bed was shifted from one room to another daily. At last, one day he called all his wives and asked them to permit him to stay in one room. With their permission he stayed in the room of Ayesha.
At the time when he had two wives, Imam Ali (P) was so particular that he performed even ablution before prayer (wuzu) in the house of the wife whose turn was there.
Islam attaches so much importance to the principle of justice and equality in treatment that it does not allow the husband and the second wife to enter into an stipulation at the time of their marriage, by which the second wife agrees to live on unequal terms with the first wife. This means that it is an obligatory duty of the husband to treat each wife on terms of strict equality, and that he cannot renounce this responsibility by entering into a prior agreement with anyone of his wives. All that the second wife can do is to forego some of her rights for practical purposes. But no such condition can be stipulated, nor is it possible that she should not have equal rights. Similarly, the first wife also can voluntarily forego some of her rights for practical purposes, but she cannot formally renounce them.
Once Imam Baqir (P) was asked whether by mutual consent it could be stipulated that the husband would visit one of his wives only once a week or once a month, or that the maintenance allowance of one wife would not be equal to that of another wife. The Imam said that such stipulations were not valid even with the consent of any wife. By virtue of marriage, every wife was entitled to full marital rights. All that she could do was to forego some or all of her rights after marriage, either to please her husband or for some other reason.
With all these strict moral conditions polygamy becomes a duty instead of being a means of pursuit of pleasure. Pursuit of pleasure and licentiousness are possible only in an atmosphere of complete freedom to pursue one's desires. But where there is a question of discipline, justice and duty, there can be no room for lewdness.
Those who indulge in licentiousness under the pretext of polygamy misuse an Islamic law and the society has every right to call them to account and punish them.

APPREHENSION OF NOT DOING JUSTICE :
To be fair, it must be admitted that the number of those, who observe in letter and spirit all the conditions laid down by Islam in respect of polygamy, is very small. According to the Islamic law, if a man apprehends that the use of water may be harmful to him he should not perform ablution for prayers, and if he apprehends that fasting may be harmful to him he should not keep fast. You come across many people who inquire of you whether they should or should not perform ablution, or whether they should or should not keep fast, for they apprehend that performing ablution or keeping fast might be harmful to them. Such inquiries are in order. Such people should not perform ablution and should not keep fast.
But the Holy Qur'an specifically says that if you fear that you will not treat your wives equally, you must have only one wife. Still you do not come across a single person who may say that he apprehends that he might not be able to treat two wives equally, and may inquire whether in his circumstances he should or should not have a second wife. It is evident that some people knowing well that they will not be able to do justice, still have several wives. They do so under the cloak of Islamic law. These are the people who bring a bad name to Islam by their unworthy action.

HAREMS
Another reason why Islam is criticised for polygamy is the system of harems adopted by the former caliphs and sultans. Some Christian writers and missionaries have described polygamy in Islam as equivalent to the system of harems with all its shameful and cruel aspects.
Unfortunately some of our own writers who, like a parrot repeat the ideas expressed by the Europeans, unnecessarily associate polygamy with harems. They are not endowed with enough independence of thinking to be able to distinguish between the two.

OTHER CONDITIONS
Besides the condition of justice and equality of treatment, there are also other conditions which a husband has to fulfil. We all know that a wife has a number of financial and other rights which the husband has to discharge. A husband has the right of having more than one wife, provided his financial condition allows him to do so. Financial soundness is a pre-requisite to monogamy also. Anyhow, we skip over further discussion of this question.
Physical and sexual potentialities are another pre-requisite.
It is reported in Al-Kafi and Al-Wasail that Imam Sadiq (P) has said that in case somebody collects several women, while he is not fit to satisfy them all, he will bear full responsibility if any of them takes to sin.
The historical accounts of the harems narrate many stories of young women, who, forced by the pressure of their sexual urges, had recourse to sin and occasionally became the cause of crimes and murders.
By now our readers should have become aware of the causes of polygamy and why Islam has not abolished this system. They should also have become aware of the conditions and limits prescribed by Islam in this respect. Islam has not disparaged women by allowing this system, but has rendered a great service to them. If polygamy is not allowed even where women of marriageable age outnumber men, women may become worthless toys in the hands of men. They may be treated worse than slave-girls, for man recognises the child of a salve-girl as his own, but he makes no such commitment in respect of his mistresses and concubines.

MODERN MAN AND POLYGAMY :
Modern man is averse to polygamy, not because he wants to be content with one wife, but because he wants to satisfy his sense of variety by indulging in unlimited adultery, for which ample facilities are available. Sin and not fidelity has taken the place of polygamy. That is why modern man is opposed to plurality of wives which commits him to many duties and responsibilities, financial and otherwise. In the past, even for a licentious man, opportunities of sin were limited. That is why he had to take recourse to polygamy and, in spite of evading many duties, he still had to shoulder certain responsibilities in respect of his wives and children. The modern man who has ample opportunities of enjoyment does not see any necessity of making the least commitment. Hence he is averse to polygamy.
The modern man employs women as secretaries, typists etc. for his enjoyment, and credits the expenses to the account of the government, his firm or any other organisation in which he may be working, without having to pay a single penny from his own pocket.
The modern man changes his mistress after every few days without undergoing any formalities of dower, maintenance and divorce. M. Tshombe was vehemently opposed to polygamy, but he always had a young, beautiful secretary at his side whom he changed every year. With such possibilities there is evidently no need to countenance polygamy.
We read in the life account of Bertrand Russell, who was a severe opponent of polygamy, that two women, besides his grandmother, played an important role in his life. One was his wife, Alice, and the other was his sweet-heart, Morrel. Morrel who was one of the most prominent women of that period, was on friendly terms with a number of the writers of the early 20th century. Evidently such a man could not support polygamy.
Apparently it was Russell's extra marital love which put an end to his relations with Alice. He himself writes that one afternoon, while he was going on a bicycle to a summer resort in the suburbs, he suddenly felt that he no longer loved Alice.


================================================================================================================




http://www.muslimworld.co.uk/polygamyuk.htm (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

POLYGAMY


This article is not put together in defense of polygyny (plural marriage) for Allah has already confirmed its validity as clearly stated in the Noble Quran: “Marry of the women that please you, two, three or four, but if you fear that you will not be able to deal justly with them,
then only one.” (Qur’an 4:3)

Moreover, the Prophet (pbuh) demonstrated in detail how polygyny should be put into practice by his divinely guided lifestyle. Polygyny was the practice of most of the major companions of the Prophet (pbuh) as well as many outstanding Muslim scholars from the earliest time of Islam up to the present. Polygyny was also practiced among a portion of the general masses in most Muslim countries before and after the advent of European colonization.
In fact, it is only in recent times (early twentieth century) that a loud new cry has been raised by non-Muslims attacking the institution of marriage in Islam due to its recognition of polygyny and the ease with which divorce may be obtained. They propose the replacement of the Islamic form of marriage with restrictive impractical monogamy practiced in the West, arguing that it is the only just and civilized form of marriage! However, to this day, polygyny continues to be practiced by some Muslims throughout the Muslim world.
Having said that, however, there are a few points raised by the opponents of Islam that should be answered:
Firstly: Among these is the totally erroneous claim that Christianity's introduction of monogamy not only protected the rights of women but also had a civilizing effect on the world in the realm of human relations. First of all, it should be noted that there are no scriptural accounts of Jesus prohibiting polygyny, and early Christians were polygynous, following Jewish tradition.
Some of the Church Fathers accused the Jewish rabbis of sensuality, yet not a single church council in the early centuries opposed polygyny nor was any obstacle placed in the way of its practice. In fact, St. Augustine declared openly that he did not condemn it. Luther, on occasion, spoke of it with considerable toleration and was known to have approved the bigamous status of Philip of Hesse. In 1531, the Anabaptists openly preached that a true Christian must have several wives.
There was even a time in 1650 when some of the Christian leaders resolved that every man should be allowed to marry two women. It is also recorded that the German reformers, even as late as the sixteenth century, admitted the validity of a second and third marriage contemporaneously with the first in default of issue and other similar causes.
In fact, it was only after Christianity was revised according to Paulian doctrines that concepts of monogamy were introduced into Christian philosophy in order for it to conform to Greco-Roman culture! Greece and Rome had evolved an institutionalized form of monogamy in societies where the majority of the population were slave women who could be used freely for sexual purposes. Hence what was termed monogamy in theory was in fact unrestricted polygamy.
Secondly: Along with the development of monasticism there arose a philosophy which regarded every gratification of the sexual impulse with suspicion and disgust. For those who chose celibacy or self-denial as their way of life, the greatest challenge was their own sexual desires.
The writings of early monks are filled with their descriptions of dreams in which they are tormented by beautiful and alluring women. Many Christian saints were reported to have been convinced that they were tempted at night by voluptuous and lascivious female demons called “succubi” that tormented them.
While nuns and other Christian women, on the other hand, asserted that they were visited at night by equally alluring beings called “incubi” who had sex with them. Women were despised and blamed for corruption based on Eve's supposed submission to the Devil and her subsequent encouragement to Adam to eat from the forbidden tree. Some Christian scholars of the past even interpreted the forbidden tree as sex itself!
The following are statements of canonized saints of Christianity concerning women: “Woman is the daughter of falsehood, a sentinel of Hell, the enemy of peace; through her Adam lost paradise. (St. John Damascene)”. “Woman is the arm of the Devil, her voice is the hissing of the serpent. (St. Anthony)”. “Woman has the poison of an asp, the malice of a dragon. (St. Gregory the Great)”. Hence, sex was looked upon as an evil impulse necessary for procreation but despised for pleasure. And, the acceptable form of marriage was reduced to the simplest possible terms, monogamy.


Monogamy and Polygyny:
The question remains why a male-dominated society should be so opposed to polygyny when such a large number of its married members practise a form of it by engaging in illicit or casual relationships. Some males self-righteously assert that monogamy is maintained to protect the rights of women. But, since when has the western male been concerned about women's rights?
Western society is riddled through and through with socio-economic practices which oppressed women and led to the upsurge of women's liberation movements in recent years, from suffragettes of the early nineteen hundreds to those of recent times. The reality is that monogamy protects the males right to play around without any responsibility, since the incidence of infidelity among them is usually much higher than among females!
The birth control pills and easy access to abortions opened the door to illicit sex and the female became tempted to join in the fun. In spite of her natural and general inclination towards meaningful relationships, she became caught up in the so-called sexual revolution. However, she is still the one who suffers from the side effects of the pill, coil and the loop or the trauma of abortion in much the same way as she suffered in the past the shame of child birth out of wedlock.
Meanwhile the male continues to enjoy himself worry free, aside from the recent plagues of venereal disease, herpes and AIDS, which are now causing many to reassess their sexual habits. Males in general continue to be protected by monogamy, while prostitutes, call girls, mistresses, secretaries, models, actresses, store clerks, waitresses and girl friends remain their playground!
The fact is that polygyny is vehemently opposed by male-dominated Western society because it would force men to fidelity. It would encourage them to take socio-economic responsibility for the fulfillment of their polygynous desires and provide protection for the weaker members of society, women and children from mental and physical abuse.
Some might argue that if the stigma of illegitimacy were removed, the problem could be solved without having to resort to the legalization of polygyny. However, every child has a natural desire to know its parents and the resulting chaos in ancestry could easily lead to incestuous relationships. Females have a vested interest in institutional polygyny because of the obvious socio-economic protection it provides.

Women Outnumber Men:
For the preponderance of females in the world is an established fact. The death-rate at birth is much higher for boys, and women as a whole live longer than men; not to mention the large numbers of men who die daily in the various wars around the world. Thus, although the ratio may vary from country to country the results are still the same; women outnumber men. This apparent imbalance has been further aggravated by the fact that homosexuality appears to be more frequent among men than among women.
Hence there are more females competing for a diminishing number of males. Consequently, there will always remain a large segment of women unable to fulfill their sexual and psychological needs through legitimate means in monogamous societies. Their presence in an increasingly permissive society also contributes to the break down of Western family structure.
A strong family structure is an absolute requirement for a strong and a healthy society. And, the only way that the family can remain strong and responsive to the needs of its male and female members is through the Islamic form of marriage of which polygyny is a part.
The Monogamous marriage system, clearly, does not take into consideration the real needs of human society. It limits possibilities for both men and women while claiming to protect the latter. Instead of providing protection for women, it provides a hypocritical shield for men to hide behind while favoring a wife to the detriment of a girl friend or vice versa.
Islam has a complete marriage system, which takes into account all the human variables and provides men and women with viable options. To deny the validity and legality of polygyny is tantamount to denying the comprehensiveness of the Islamic marriage system and the wisdom of the divine decree.

It is not possible that everything in life should happen according to our feelings and desires. Nor is it possible to live without
experiencing pain. On the contrary, Allah has stated in the Noble Qur’an that Muslims shall be tested: “Be sure that We shall test you with something of fear and hunger, some loss in goods or lives or the fruits (of your labor), but give glad tidings to those who are patient.” (2: 155)
He also says: “Do people think that they will be left alone on saying, ‘We believe’, and that they will not be tested?” (29: 2)
Neither tests nor pain, whether physical or emotional, can be avoided in this life. Nor can any aspect of the Islamic system be negated merely to justify a particular individual's or groups' opinions. Although polygyny may be painful for some women, it is also beneficial for other women and society as a whole. Muslims must accept the whole of Allah's message and submit to the fact that Allah's wisdom is superior to our opinions.
This page is on
www.MuslimWorld.co.uk

================================================================================================================





Polygamy in Islam

http://www.renaissance.com.pk/index.html (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)

Shehzad Saleem

Among many other misconceptions about Islam is the notion that it unconditionally allows a Muslim to have four wives. In this regard, some scholars have gone as far as to say that keeping four wives is a man's essential physiological need. We are afraid that this point of view is in direct contradiction with the Quran. It is, in fact, a distortion of the stance of Islam and as such has gone a long way in disillusioning many a people from the call of this faith. The opening verses of Surah Nisaa, in which this matter is discussed, read as follows: "If you fear that you would not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry two, three or four of the women who are lawful for you. But if you fear that you would not be able to deal justly [with them] then [restrict yourself to] one only." (4:3) Three implications of the verse quoted above are very clear: Firstly, Muslims have been allowed to have more than one wife only in case of some indispensible need. In the time of the Prophet (sws), one such need arose when many Muslims were martyred in various battles. Many helpless widows and children were left behind. In this situation, Muslims were urged to look after these children and if they feared that they would not be able to do justice to them, they should marry their mothers. It is, therefore, obvious from this that the permission of marrying more than one wife has nothing to do with a man's lust for more than one wife. A person can have more than one wife if a moral or social need arises and a man's lust is certainly no such need. Secondly, whatever the need be, the number of wives cannot exceed four in any circumstances. Thirdly, howsoever important the need be, if a person cannot maintain balance and do justice to his wives, he must restrict himself to one. However, as clarified by the Quran*, justice and balance do not entail that he should have equal inclination towards all his wives, for this is not humanly possible. What is required is that he should treat them equally as far as their rights are concerned. Furthermore, according to the Quran, in normal circumstances, a family comes intoÿbeing only through wedlock between a single pair of man and woman. A subtle reference to this is made by the Quran where it alludes to the fact that when the Almighty created Adam, he made Eve for him as his only wife. Naturally, had the Almighty intended that a man should have more than one wife, he would have created more wives for Adam instead of just one. This shows us that as far as a man's physiological needs are concerned, they are completely satisfied even if he has a single wife. Also, in normal circumstances the ideal family is one formed by a single couple. Moreover, if it is felt that people are exploiting the permission granted to them by marrying not owing to some need, but merely to satisfy their desire, an Islamic government can legislate against this trend. It can obligate a person to satisfy a court that his marriage is due to some social or moral need. However, the prevailing law in this regard, in accordance with which a person has to seek permission of the first wife, is not practicable at all. It is clear from this discussion that polygammy in Islam is conditional upon certain circumstances. It is certainly not a licence for men to satisfy their lust. The permission is, in fact, a proof of the universal applicability of Islam. A number of problems can be solved by using this attitude which would have been impossible to overcome had Islam totally forbidden polygammy. For example, in our society, many young widows and divorced women with small children have to live a life of misery and no one is willing to accept them as wives. Such widows and children can lead normal lives if this permission is benefitted from. We have presented the stance of Islam on polygammy. It can be seen that, in present times, the fog of alien concepts has enveloped it. Once it is got rid of, the stance of Islam dazzles with the splendour of the midday sun. The Quran says: "You shall never be able to deal justly [as far as the inclination of the heart is concerned] between your wives, even if it is your ardent desire. So turn not away [from a wife] altogether so as to leave her suspended [in a state of uncertainty]." (4:129)




============================================
=================================================================

http://www.islamicvoice.com/october.2000/family.htm#mor (LINK CHECKED – WORKING)
ISLAM AND FAMILY ISSUES

A Morally Healthy Alternative
Polygamy
A Morally Healthy Alternative
When doors are slammed shut on a second marriage, the society seeks escapes through illicit liaison
Munir Armaan Nasimi


SOME of the Western writers, either out of ignorance of teachings of the Quran and the Hadith or out of malice, have criticised Islam for not giving enough protection to the rights of women. Here we will discuss Polygamy.
It is a fact that the Holy Quran permits polygamy only in special circumstances for the upkeep of a healthy society. Almost all prophets such as Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon (Pbuh) were polygamous. Only exception was Jesus, whom Muslims believe as a major Prophet. He lived for only 33 years, always moving from place to place with his disciples and was haunted by the Jews who, in their knowledge, put him on the cross. As Jesus was single and his mother Mary was virgin; Christianity deprecates the institution of marriage and promotes celibacy. This is the teaching of Catholic Church, whose ministers are not allowed to marry. Even Catholics go to an extent of believing sex as evil, while Protestants glorify the institution of marriage citing some of the sayings of Jesus in favour of family life.
The Mormons, an important denomination of Christians in the US practised polygamy officially till 1890. It is said that in Utah where they are in large numbers, many middle class people at present secretly practise polygamy. They are followers of Joseph Smith. They call him as a Prophet. Brigham Young, one of their saints, left 17 widows and 47 children when he died in 1877. They practised polygamy out of necessity for survival and propagation of their clan. When their prophet practised new religion, they were very much persecuted and many were killed by other Christian fanatic denominations. They took to polygamy as a ‘revelation from God’ for preservation of their tribe. They constitute the best people of USA in relation to their health and morals. They do not consume alcohol, tea, coffee and coke. Pre-marital sex and intimacy is lowest in them. Some of the Christian churches have given permission for polygamy to their converts in Africa considering necessity of time and circumstances.
The verse permitting polygamy was revealed in the Holy Quran out of necessity and due to the demands of the circumstances. After the battle of Uhud in 3rd Hijrah, large number of Muslim men were killed leaving many widows and orphans. The verse came as follows:
“If you fear that you won’t be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry the woman of your choice, two, three or four; but if you fear that you will not be able to deal justly (with wives), then (marry) only one” (Quran 4:3)
From the verse it is quite evident that the permission is given to solve social emergency. It is not obligatory. The negative aspect of the verse, the second part, is to be seriously considered before taking a second wife. Anyone can imagine the social condition of Arabia in early 7th century AD, when one man could keep wives upto ten or more. The number was restricted to four only with strict conditions of imparting justice among wives, which is very difficult.
In the present time due to devastating wars of many years, the number of males is much reduced. How to solve the problem of widows? In Afghanistan due to protracted war, certain districts have large population of war-widows. In some places it has reached 1:6, i.e. one man to six women. Only solution to rehabilitate the war-widows is to have multiple marriages. This is a very honourable way of solving this social problem. Several years ago in Europe, after 30 years of war, male population had been reduced drastically. A law was passed in Assembly in Nuremberg that all able men should marry two women to make up male population and to get the widows settled. The age-old evil practice of prostitution can be restricted by polygamy. In Muslim countries where polygamy is allowed, prostitution has vanished.

Extra-marital sex or legal second wife?
The countries where polygamy is illegal, large number of people practise extra-marital sex or live with a mistress. The number of mistress may go up to a dozen or so. The Western society and the church have closed their eyes to this particular sinful act in their own country and criticise Muslim countries for polygamy. French President Francois Mitterand kept a mistress for long years. She stunned the country when she appeared at Mitterand’s funeral with two kids she had sired by him. In some of the provinces of India such as Gujarat, recently there have been certain instances of Maitri-Bandhan i.e. ‘Friendship Tie’ between a married man and a woman other than his wife. They live together without marriage and escape the charge of polygamy. Sometimes, the friendship is registered in the court of law. Neither the government nor the society can do anything to them.
In India it has been statistically proved that more Hindus practise polygamy than Muslims. Hindus are not legally allowed polygamy, while Muslims are allowed as per their Personal law. Muslims are economically poorer than Hindus are. They cannot afford the luxury of maintaining second wife and their children.
In some modern Muslim countries such as Egypt and Turkey one has to show enough evidence of necessity to take a second wife in the Court of law. It is permitted only when the wife is terminally ill or barren. Sometimes first wife’s permission is also needed. At the time of marriage-contract, the first wife may put a condition on husband not to take second wife without her consent. If the husband violates, she can divorce him unilaterally and demand compensation in the Court of law.
Mrs. Annie Besant, a founder member of Theosophical Society, Madras, India in her book Life and Teachings of Mohammed writes “There is pretended monogamy in West, but it is really polygamy without responsibility; the mistress is cast off when the man is weary of her, and she sinks gradually as the `woman of street’, for the first lover has no responsibility for her future. She is hundred times worse of than the sheltered wife and mother in polygamous home. We see thousands of miserable women who crowd the streets of Western countries during the night. We must surely feel that it does not lie within the Western mouth to reproach Islam for polygamy. It is better for woman, happier for woman, more respectable for woman, to live in polygamy, united to one man only, with legitimate child in her arm, surrounded with respect than to be seduced and cast off in the street, perhaps with an illegitimate child outside the pale of Law”.


==============================================================

http://www.jamaat.org/islam/FamilyGuardian.html#Polygamy (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)
The Family As Guardian Of Desires:
We now come to the second pillar, that of family life as guardian of the natural erotic desires of man. It is on purpose that I would give Eros preference over Sex since this word has been misused so badly that it tends to distort rather than to describe what I want to say. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) has said:
"Marriage is a part of my sunnah, whoever runs away from my path is not from amongst us". In the Qur'an, Sura II, Verse 187 men are told "They (your wives) are your garments and you are their garments.... So now associate with them". Islam being the complete way of life that always takes into consideration the natural disposition of man, enjoins marriage. And it tells us in a few beautiful words how husband and wife should, like garments, cover and protect each other, how they may find fulfilment in each other in their erotic urges, in their desire for children and in mutual exchange of love and tenderness. I would like to add a few personal words here since as a convert to Islam I am sometimes asked how I feel about the approach of Islam towards matrimony.


Arranged Marriage
What I appreciated by watching how well it is usually working out, is firstly the custom in Muslim families of so-called arranged marriages. During my stay in a Muslim country, as well as from the numerous former students and other Muslim friends whom I have known over 15 years, I could always observe that family life in arranged marriages is far more lasting and stable than in the average Western family. It seems that where parents or relatives with much insight and experience propose marriages, they do it on a broad basis considering family background, education, ambitions, likes and dislikes and so many other things. And though nearly all Muslim marriages are conducted by buying the cat in the bag (as we say in Germany) which means it is not discovered beforehand whether the partners fit together sexually, as is customary in the West, they can be called far more successful than marriages here.


Secondly it is the ticklish matter of polygamy. Before the Registrar married me to my European Muslim husband, he warned me of the four wives
which would be admissible to him if we would ever live in Muslim country. Though a bit awe-struck at first, I soon learned that just because having more than one wife is allowed in Islam, it is practised very seldom. And since this official concession to the polygamous disposition undoubtedly inherent in some men, or to extraordinary circumstances like constant illness or barrenness of the first wife on the other hand, completely prohibits sexual relations outside marriage, I hold it to be a very wise decision. If a Muslim man for this or that reason simply cannot help desiring more than one wife, he is not forced by this urge to resort to any sinful act but may quite lawfully enjoy its fulfilment along with shouldering the consequent responsibilities. That, in my eyes, is the main point: hardly any man will merely for the sake of his greediness support more than one wife and the children out of this liaison, justly dividing his attention between his wives and offspring. He will think more than twice before he acts, while in societies without such sensible rules it is so terribly easy to jump into bed and walk away afterwards. Instead of the essential human dignity for the other woman, nothing but misery and degradation is in store for her and perhaps even her child. There are so many sad examples before us that no further comments are required on this subject.

Divorce
Thirdly, in matters of divorce I hold the Islamic solution to be much superior to any others I know. If for any reason, seldom though this does happen in practice, husband and wife consider it impossible to live together any longer, there is no loathsome chain keeping them together by force. They may separate in peace and each of them may seek fulfilment with somebody else. If a wife cannot stand her husband taking another wife, she can always ask for a divorce and is not forced to tolerate what seems intolerable to her. Is it not more in tune with human dignity if in these matters no mystery-mongering is required? The husband does not have to tell fantastic lies whenever he wants to meet his girlfriend, the wife needn't pretend not to notice what is going on behind her back? Or if a husband thinks he cannot put up any longer with some bad habits or other things in his wife, there is no need for him to torture her by illtreatment--he simply separates from her. And the same applies to the wife. In this way, human society will be much more clean and healthy, homes will not be miserable for children and none of the spouses is condemned to lifelong unhappiness. There are a number of laws and regulations concerning divorce which I consider as most sensible, be it in respect to the financial position of a divorced woman and her children or in other respects, but it would lead us too far off to discuss them here. As Abu Dawud relates, the Prophet has said: "Of all things permitted by law, divorce is the most hateful in the sight of Allah". And I think, this very strong tradition is also responsible for the fact that divorce, necessary though it may be in certain cases, is practised so extremely seldom in Muslim families.

Woman's Status :
And fourthly, I want to say a few words about the status of women in Islam. In the Qur'an we read:
Women have the same (rights in relation to their husbands) as are expected in all decency from them; while men stand a step above them" (2:228)
Those who want to find fault with Islamic regulations, consider this detrimental to the dignity of women. But I am of the opinion that this one sentence includes all that is necessary for my happiness as a woman. It grants me all rights for which I aspire--the right for education, for my own property, for being the guardian inside the house and even for a job if circumstances demand it, to name only a few aspects. But, most important of all, it grants me the right to depend on my husband, be it in matters of my livelihood or in regard to any important decisions that have to be taken for the benefit of the family. On the husband, however, rests the great responsibility of caring for his family and finding by consulting his wife and making use of all his wisdom, the best possible solutions. Does it not lie in the considerate husband who is capable of taking these decisions? This, I think, is the ideal family life as envisaged by Islam. In such an atmosphere, both partners will find fulfilment in erotic matters as well as in all other matrimonial fields of which rearing children has pre-eminence.

http://www.jamaat.org/islam/FamilyCharacter.html (LINK CHECKED-WORKING)

The Family And Character Building
In regard to the third pillar, that of human virtues like love, kindness and mercy, I would like to let the Qur'an speak for me:
"We have instructed man to be kind to both his parents. His mother bears him with nausea and gives birth to him painfully. Bearing him and weaning him last thirty months, until when he attains his maturity and reaches forty years (of age), he says:
"My Lord, make me grateful for Your favour which You have shown to me and to both my parents, and let me act honourably so that You may approve of it. Be good to me with respect to my offspring; I have turned toward You and am one of those who are Muslims" (46:15)
We are further told in the Qur'an:
"Your Lord has decreed that you should worship nothing except Him, and (show) kindness to your parents; whether one or both of them attain old age (while they are) still with you, never say to them: 'Shame!' nor scold either of them. Speak to them in generous fashion. Protect them carefully and SAY: "My Lord, show them mercy, just as they cared for me as a little child" (17:23-24)
What a spirit of mutual kindness, this lowering of the wing of mercy on us while we are helpless. And later on, our protecting tenderness to our children and our elders when they are in need of it! If we are good and patient, understanding and encouraging in our behaviour towards our family members, thus bringing forth the very same virtues in them as well, we are sure to carry these virtues forward into human society as well. A tender and considerate family father will also be good to those whom he meets outside the home, just as he will be strict and uncompromising when he has to protect his family or his fellow men against vices that are out to undermine or destroy these virtues.

THE FAMILY AS REFUGE
And to round off the argument, the fourth pillar grants us within the fold of family life a secure refuge against inward and outward troubles. In a time when people mistrust each other, when everybody thinks of himself first and it is considered a crime to be bothered with the worries of others, only those are well off who know that there is for them at least one place of refuge. Here we may get either good advice or a piece of bread, a helping hand or a bed. Here we can be sure to be defended against the outside world, and we know that the other family members are expecting of us so much to unfold our best qualities. Thus, the family is marvellous institution for the needy as well as for those who are able to help. No other social institution has so far shouldered similar responsibilities as successfully as the family.
The more perfect a society has become in the eyes of a superficial spectator, the more heart-rending may all its utterly impersonal social achievements appear in the sight of those who know the cherishing care and warmth of a truly Islamic family life.
Polyandry
Question: I would like to ask a question in relation to polygamy. If one concedes the arguments you have given in support of a man having more than one wife in certain circumstances, would the same arguments be extended to the situation of a woman in relation to her husband/husbands? To be more precise, if a woman becomes invalid and sexually incapacitated and because of that the husband is allowed to have second wife, why the same should not hold good in respect of men. If a husband becomes invalid, would it be permitted for the wife to have a second husband?
B. Aisha Lemu: The instances which I quoted were examples of human circumstances where there is a genuine problem and I mentioned that in the Western world the options are limited. That is, either you stay with it or you obtain divorce, you cannot bring the third alternative of another wife. Now the question of a woman having more than one husband raises a number of other problems. One of them is the question of inheritance. If a woman has more than one husband, there is something which will be very disturbing to men, not to be sure that a certain child is their own, that it might be the child of another husband. Another problem that one could foresee here is that for a woman to look after one husband is, generally, considered to be quite enough trouble (laughter and applause) without bringing upon herself more than one. So there is no provision, as far as I am aware, under Islamic law for this to take place, who can give more information than I have.
Khurshid Ahmad: May I add a word or two to what Sister Aisha has said. First let us understand the Islamic position. Islam allows polygamy in certain cases but it does not allow polyandry, that is a woman having more than one husband, in any case. This is the legal position. The question arises why is this so. Sister Aisha has made two points. Along with her subjective retort that one husband is more than enough, she has pointed to the complexities this would raise for establishing the paternity of the children, and secondly about the problems of inheritance. I would like to invite you to a few other aspects.
First, sociologically speaking, the institution of a family in a patriarchal set-up can operate effectively in case of polygamy but it would simply disintegrate under polyandry. For arguments' sake, it is possible to have polyandrous families in a matriarchal set-up, but this would mean a change in the entire social matrix.
Secondly, from a sexo-socialogical viewpoint, it is possible for a man to have sexual relations with all his wives, if he has more than one, and impregnate them. But if a wife has more than one husband, she can, even in that case, be impregnated only by one.
This should also be kept in view that once a woman is pregnant she is not available for sexual relations for some of the time. In fact, one of the arguments advanced by some sexologists in favour of polygamy (See Ludovici, Anthony M., Woman: A Vindication, Constable, London; and MacFarlane, J. E. Clare, The Case for Polygamy) is that as sexual relations are not possible with the wife during these periods, forced monogamy is unnatural. If the possibilities of a properly married second wife are denied, the dangers of illicit sex become very real. If this is the situation in a one-husband-one-wife equation, what would be the predicament in a many husband-one-wife polygamy?
Thirdly, even from the physo-sexological viewpoint this arrangement would be an anomaly. Of the many aspects let us just refer to one. If we examine the origin and not merely communication of venereal diseases, we find that they originate from a woman being sexually visited by more than one man. As long as there is a one-man one-woman relationship, venereal diseases would not originate. If a man has sexual contact with more than one woman but the woman with whom he is having this relationship is not in sexual relationship with any other man, venereal diseases would not originate. But if a woman has sexual relations with more than one man the possibilities of the origination of venereal diseases present themselves. It is the nature of things and a violation of this would disturb the entire scheme of life. Polygamy has a place in this scheme, polyandry has none.
Islam has forbidden polyandry not for any partiality towards man, but for the good of man and woman both and of the entire human society.
=============================================================================================================

http://www.isesco.org.ma/pub/Eng/islamAIC/Chap13.htm (LINK CHECKED- WORKING)
Polygamy
Many a time I read and heard more than one criticism, both open and veiled - as the case may be - from well-informed and very learned Christian Western sources. The gist of this criticism is that Islam, which came after Judaism and Christianity, that is, in relatively modern times, lawfully permits polygamy : up to four wives. In this respect, Islam is viewed as a "reactionary and backward" religion which takes the human being back to primitive times and societies.
This is an opportunity for me to draw attention to the verse which allows polygamy up to four wives. It is the third verse of the Surah "Women". When cited, this verse is never quoted in full, which results in erroneous interpretations, for the conditional clause is always missing. The verse is :
"If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess. That will be more suitable to prevent you from doing injustice", [Women: 3].
This verse proclaims that polygamy is an objective set by Allah - to Whom belongs Might and Majesty. It is the realization of justice, dealing justly with the orphans whom Allah has surrounded with His unfailing Love and Mercy in more than one verse; He commanded the believers to be kind to them. It is extremely important to point out that the aforementioned verse was revealed after the Battle of Uhud, in which, as we know, many Muslims fell, leaving behind widows and orphans with no one to provide for them.
This is why Allah has permitted Muslims - those with financial capabilities, who wish to do good, who are impartial and do a righteous deed, and who fear they might not be able to establish justice - to marry the mothers of the fatherless children, so that they would not have to beg for food and lead a life of wretchedness and ignominy.
It is evident that polygamy is a sacrifice and a righteous deed, not an enjoyment, a pleasure and a satisfaction of carnal appetites.
That is the verse in letter and spirit. Like all the verses of the Holy Quran, it sticks together with its coherent sentences, and it cannot be broken up into independent units of meaning; nor can the context in which it was revealed be ignored in its application.
Also worth pointing out is the fact that Allah - the Great, Almighty - has embedded in the verse another condition when he says : "but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one".
If a man - who is the best judge of himself and of his possessions - knows that he will not be able to deal justly with his wives, he must desist and marry only one.
If the main objective of polygamy is to achieve justice, this objective becomes nonexistent when justice has not been achieved.
Based on the text of the verse mentioned earlier, it seems to us that polygamy in Islam is an exception imposed by unusual circumstances attributed to the aftereffects of the Battle of Uhud, as we have already said. The rule, therefore, is monogamy, not polygamy.
Muslim writers are almost agreed that "Islam has established the principle of polygamy because it aims very high in social reform: among men there are those whose carnal appetites cannot be curbed; Islam has allowed these men to have more than one wife, not only as a way out for their guilt, but also as a protection for woman from so widespread an evil.
In Western societies, where polygamy is not allowed, men of such carnal appetites have mistresses who are denied their rights.
"The injustice done to women through such a common practice knows no limits", says Afif Tabrah (1979), "The goal of Islam is, therefore, to protect the woman from finding herself in a situation of wretchedness wherein she has no social guarantees, in which case she ends up amongst women of evil repute. Islam wants the woman to be treated in all cases on the basis of her being a legitimate wife who has her rights. Which of the two situations is better and more honorable for the woman : to be a second wife of a man who must provide for her and her children, and whom she and her children can inherit when he dies, or to be just a mistress, a girlfriend, who has no right over her boyfriend, and does not inherit him - nor do her children - in which case she and her children become a burden on people ?"(*).
With all due respect to the author of this analysis, and by way of information, we must point out that the third verse of the chapter "Women" does not, whether implicitly or explicitly, include such considerations. By citing this verse, the author did not seek to shed light on the purpose of allowing polygamy, but to list its benefits and positive sides.
Having become aware of the spirit of the verse [Women : 3] mentioned previously, the author said : "From this it becomes evident, and without abuse in the interpretation, that the Koranic text has greatly narrowed the scope of polygamy, because it made the mere fear of not being able to be just and equitable a prohibitive factor against polygamy and a compulsory factor for having one wife only"(**).
Islam allows polygamy, but only as an exception; it has allowed it for the good of society and for doing the righteous deed.



====================================
(BROKEN LINK)
Polygamy in Islam
Conditions and Advantages


Polygamy or plurality of wives is one of the controversial questions connected with the family system of Islam. In this connection a few points are worth consideration in an effort to show how much the West was and still is completely misguided and misguiding in its conception of this issue
(a) Natural and social prerequists of Polygamy It is evident that the question of polygamy arises when: - The number of women eligible for marriage is more than the number of men - There are women who are willingly prepared to marry a man already having a wife and consider such a marriage to be in their interest.
Hence the question of polygamy does not arise firstly if the number of marriageable women is less than that of eligible men; and secondly if the women are unwilling to marry men having other wives. Now let us see in the case of the existence of the two conditions mentioned above, as to what can be the most reasonable and practical way of preserving the family system and safeguarding the interests of such women. Here another question arises and that in itself is worthy of taking into consideration. It is the question of the disparity between men and women in the age of fecundity which has two aspects: (1) marriage age of puberty mostly commences earlier in girls than in boys. (2) The power of procreation of women ceases at a certain age, after which they become pregnant in very rare cases, whereas there is no such fixed age for men.
(b) Polygamy before Islam It should be remembered that the custom of polygamy existed before the advent of Islam among the Jews, the Arabs, the Persians and many other peoples of the world. All that Islam has done is that it restricted it. During the Middle Ages it was propagated in Europe that the practice of polygamy was first introduced by Islam. Will Durant has denied this charge. In his book, History of Civilization (vol.1 p.61) He says: The clerics in the Middle Ages thought that polygamy was an innovation of the Prophet of Islam. But that is not the case. As we have seen, it has been practised in most societies before Islam. Without paying attention to its natural or social causes the Europeans over many centuries tried to describe polygamy as a big weakness of the Islamic teachings. At last some scholars unveiled this myth and showed how topsy turvy is the picture painted of this custom and how unjust is its attribution to Islam. The French historian Gustave Le Bon says in his book: In Europe no Eastern custom has been so much criticized as polygamy and Europe has also not gone so wrong about any usage as about it. The European writers have considered polygamy to be the foundation of Islam and have described it as the root cause of the spread of this religion as well as of the decline of the Eastern people. If the readers of this book cast off their European prejudice for a while, they will admit that polygamy is a good custom as far as the social system of the East is concerned. It has enabled the people by whom it is practised to strengthen and invigorate their family relations. Thanks to this custom the woman enjoys more respect in the East than in the West. Before introducing our arguments to prove what we say, we have to mention that polygamy has not been first introduced by Islam, for this custom was prevalent among the pre-Islamic people of the East, including the Jews, the Persians, the Arabs ...e.t.c. Even in theWestern countries, though the climate of none of them is conducive to such a custom, monogamy is a thing which is found only in the legal books. I do not think that it can be denied that in actual practice monogamy does not exist in our society. I wonder how and why the legalized polygamy of the East is inferior to the clandestine polygamy of the West.
Polygamy and its Conditions in Islam Islam allows polygamy on three basic conditions: (1) Preservation of the purity and cordiality of family life so that it may not become the cause of disruption of the family affairs. (2) Number of wives not to exceed four. (3) Equitable treatment of all the wives. Now let us see what the Quran says in this respect: "Marry women of your liking, two or three or four, and if you fear that you shall not deal justly with so many then (marry) only one" (Surah AI-Nisa, 4:3) As we mentioned earlier, prior to Islam there existed no limit as to the number of wives. lt was Islam which restricted it and prevented the formation of harems found in the lives of the wealthy persons, rulers and sultans. Furthermore, Islam has emphasized that taking advantage of this permission is conditional on the observance of complete equitability between the wives. This precondition requires the presence of a special spirit in the man. If he lacks it, he is not allowed to take more than one wife. In the end, it is to be pointed out that the basic objective of conjugal life in Islam being the contentedness of the family members and mutual love and benevolence of the husband and wife, the best and the most satisfactory form of marriage is naturally monogamy. Hence the men should avail themselves of the permission of polygamy only in very exceptional circumstances and that too on the condition that they find themselves Competent enough to satisfy all the material and moral needs of their wives and treat them equitably. In any case Islam has drawn in detail the conditions of a happy marriage, as follows:
Family Manners

The Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H.) has said: "The best men among you are those who are the best husbands of their wives". The best of your women are those:Who are loving and kindly; Who look after their chastity; Who are not arrogant or disobedient to their husbands; Who are faithful to their husband in their absence. Imam Ali (A.S.) has said: "Be kind to your wife and treat her well. Kindness will change her for the better, will keep her satisfied and will preserve her health and beauty". "Do not stop your wife from spending and being generous in the house. Do not be stingy in this respect". "By your chastity protect your wife from casting an evil eye on others stealthily and entertaining an idea of sin". "Your attitude towards her should be such that she may not think of un-lawful means to satisfy her lawful desires "Do not behave with her in such a way that she may notice when you are despondent and sexually exhausted".









http://www.muhammadspeaks.com/Polygamy2.html (THIS WEBPAGE HAS NOW BEEN REMOVED) (LINK IS BROKEN)

Teachings of the Holy Qur'an
On Polygamy
Excerpt reprinted from the Maulana Muhammad Ali translation of the Holy Qu'ran on page xxiii

It is, however, asserted that polygamy and the seclusion of women, as enjoined in the Holy Qur'an, have done more harm to woman than the benefit conferred on her by bestowal of property rights. The fact is that a great misunderstanding exists on these two points. MONOGAMY IS THE RULE IN ISLAM and polygamy only an exception allowed subject to certain conditions. The following two verses are the only authority for the sanction of polygamy, and let us see how far they carry us:
"And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice between them, then marry only one or what your right hands possess: this is more proper that you may not deviate from the right course" (4:3).

"And they ask thee a decision about women. Say, Allah makes known to you His decision concerning them, and that which is recited to you in the Book concerning orphans of the women to whom you do not give what is appointed for them while you are disinclined to marry them" (4:127).
Now the first of these verses allows polygamy on the express condition that "you cannot act equitably towards orphans” and what is meant is made clear by the second verse, which contains a clear reference to the first verse in the words, "that which is recited to you in the Book concerning orphans of women".
The Arabs were guilty of a double injustice to widows: they did not give them and their children a share in the inheritance of their husbands, nor were then inclined to marry widows who had children, because the responsibility for the maintenance of the children would in that case devolve upon them. The Qur'an remedied both these evils; it gave a share of inheritance to the widow with a share also for the orphans, and it commended the taking of such widows in marriage, and allowed polygamy expressly for this purpose. It should, therefore, be clearly understood that monogamy is the rule in Islam and polygamy is allowed only as a widow and her children.
This permission was given at a time when the wars, which were forced on the Muslims, had decimated the men, so that many widows and orphans were left for whom it was necessary to provide. A provision was made in the form of polygamy so that the widow should find a home and protector and the orphans should have paternal care and affection.
Europe to-day has its problem of the excess of women, and let it consider if it can solve that problem otherwise than by sanctioning a limited polygamy. Perhaps the only other way is prostitution, which prevails widely in all European countries and, where the law of the country does not recognize it, it is recognized in practice.
Nature will have its course, and allowing illicit intercourse is the only other alternative to a limited polygamy.



=========================================================================================================






No comments: