SomaliNet Forums

Inaayah wrote:

InaSamaale wrote:

CigaalSHiiDaaDCFC wrote:I am not against polygamy allah made it halal and men don't have to marry a widow or an old unmarried women it's sunnah to marry a widow as prophet csw did but isn't the only way men can have more than one wife. The only condition Allah had mentioned in his quran is to be caadil between them nd give each wife her xaq. If a man can do that then he can marry masnaa wa sulaasa wa rubaac. But what we have to admit here is there are a few who can fulfill that condition. Look at this guy 4 wives in one house

Exactly, I'm yet to see a polygamous relationship where haqq is taking place. Either they marry back home and live with mainly one wife in the west & act like an ATM machine to the other back home wife. That's not justice.


In the west, its near impossible. Unless both wives agree to be provided only the bare minimum. Mind you when you marry a woman, she's entitled to the same level of comfort that she was raised with.

I hope Sumu reads this highlighted part.

Gabadh ku soo kortay guri sedex dabaq ayu doonaya inu furaash dhulka u dhigo because he thinks that's acceptable diini ahaan.

Entitle too ? So if her father spoiled her, she is entitled to larvish lifestyle? Uma malaynaayo.

Bro Zumaale, well done. Great efforts there.

The only proper way I can think of for a man to have multiple wives is to marry them the same time.. One wedding...

There's no hurt, blame and Angela Bassett waiting to exhale moments...cause all the women involved know exactly what they're getting themselves into.

zumaale wrote:
Rebuttal to Paragraph 1

I do not choose to explain why the Ayah starts with a reference to Adam CS and Hawa, that would be foolhardy. My statement was a critique of your attempt to interpret the Ayah without having a solid foundation of the Deen. If you were to ask me to elaborate on the Ayah, I would have refrained from making an independent analysis, and referenced the Tafsir of established scholars such as Tabari and Ibn Kathir. Laymen with little understanding of the Sunnah and the setting of the Ayah cannot speculate on it unless they have comprehensively pursued Cilm. Hence, it is best to hold our tongue in matters where we are deficient. My understanding of the beginning of that Ayah is based on the Tafseer of Ibn Kathir

Did you know some people believe that Muslims cannot get any understanding from the Quran without Imams who they view as keepers of the scripture? You need to figure out how much room you have to gain meaning from the Quran when you read it and in addition what Allah might mean when He says “those who reflect”. No one, no matter how educated in scripture can tell us the why as it pertains to Allah’s actions.

What I said was that Allah sets the scene by saying he created one man and one woman, not two, or three or four women. That is a fact. Why He did so, I couldn’t speculate. The meaning that can be derived from having done that might vary. Ibn Kathir whom you’ve quoted has chosen to link it to compassion, others link this with the status afforded to women in Islam in that Allah says “from them both” and does not only focus on the male.. Again your reflection, your research, your understanding - or not, depends on your view. I find it interesting that in a Surah called The Women Allah starts off by telling us that He created one soul, then created its mate then from them both, He created many men and women. Nothing wrong with linking that to compassion. There are an array of tafsirs to chose from which in itself is a reflection of why most people who speak of Islam say Allahu aclam.

zumaale wrote:
Rebuttal to Paragraph 2

I was merely dismissing your anecdotal statement that the 'women' in the Ayat refers to destitute women according to some scholars. A man is not restricted in who he can take as a second wife according to consensus of the Four Madhabs; some of the schools of thought advise against taking more than one wife but non put conditions on the state of the second wife.

Moreover, I have a very basic grasp of Arabic but one does not need to be a fluent speaker such as Hyper, Wayeel or Mon Cherie to know that mina Nisa refers to women in general, so does the literal and Tafsir understanding of it.

You oversimplify it. When being translated to English the same verse tends to have multiple translations depending on the version of Quran you own. We are not speaking about the interpretation of the rules of polygamy, we are talking about this specific verse and how the article used affects meaning. However, like I said, I do not speak Arabic so can’t comment but others have.

zumaale wrote:
Rebuttal to Paragraph 3.

I was not suggesting it is tedious or less meaningful but was merely highlighting how we are warned through out the Quran not to disobey Allay or his rulings. In this particular Ayah, we are warned more of not transgressing on the property of orphans. You appeared to link the severe warning in the latter parts of the Ayah with polygamy when in actual fact it is reserved for the rights of orphans and those that seek to marry them. In regard to polygamous marriage, one is advised to avoid it if they cannot act justly.

They are two ayats, the first the warning is regarding consuming the orphan’s property. The second ayat is about marriage. The warning is to deal justly and if you can’t, to stay away from it. It starts with orphans and then moves to the other women. I haven’t linked it myself, it’s right there for you to read. Verse 3. Allah linked them.

zumaale wrote:

Rebuttal to Paragraph 4

Irrelevant to the point I was making, my aim was to highlight how erroneous your statement that a woman has a right to accept it or not when that is not the case. Her ability to accept it or not depends on the Madhab she and her husband follow.

Not irrelevant because the only way a man can take away a woman’s right to accept or reject such a situation would be to misrepresent himself and lie. If what you are saying is that a man can refuse to enter such an agreement (for whatever reason including the request being at odds with a school of thought) then I agree , if what you are saying is that a man can pretend to agree since he won’t have to honour the agreement as per the Madhan he follows then I would challenge you to produce evidence. In reality, the woman still has a choice if she chooses to act upon it.

zumaale wrote:
Answer to Paragraph 5

Read the Ayah being discussed again, what do you think 'your right hand possesses' in this Ayah and the following one from Al Muminoon refers to?

Right hand posses means a lot of different things. It’s not that part that I am concerned about but the next part of your statement. Perhaps I misunderstood but you should know it comes across as though you are saying the Quran and Hadith justify illegal sexual intercourse so long as it’s with a non-Muslim.


Also can I just say it's bad form to argue about the Quran, I don't expect that there are many Somali men or women for that matter who will understand these verses as I do and that's okay. I am happy to agree to disagree lest either of us say something that counts as dambi.

BVSNet wrote:

Did you know some people believe that Muslims cannot get any understanding from the Quran without Imams who they view as keepers of the scripture? You need to figure out how much room you have to gain meaning from the Quran when you read it and in addition what Allah might mean when He says “those who reflect”. No one, no matter how educated in scripture can tell us the why as it pertains to Allah’s actions.

What I said was that Allah sets the scene by saying he created one man and one woman, not two, or three or four women. That is a fact. Why He did so, I couldn’t speculate. The meaning that can be derived from having done that might vary. Ibn Kathir whom you’ve quoted has chosen to link it to compassion, others link this with the status afforded to women in Islam in that Allah says “from them both” and does not only focus on the male.. Again your reflection, your research, your understanding - or not, depends on your view. I find it interesting that in a Surah called The Women Allah starts off by telling us that He created one soul, then created its mate then from them both, He created many men and women. Nothing wrong with linking that to compassion. There are an array of tafsirs to chose from which in itself is a reflection of why most people who speak of Islam say Allahu aclam.

You oversimplify it. When being translated to English the same verse tends to have multiple translations depending on the version of Quran you own. We are not speaking about the interpretation of the rules of polygamy, we are talking about this specific verse and how the article used affects meaning. However, like I said, I do not speak Arabic so can’t comment but others have.

They are two ayats, the first the warning is regarding consuming the orphan’s property. The second ayat is about marriage. The warning is to deal justly and if you can’t, to stay away from it. It starts with orphans and then moves to the other women. I haven’t linked it myself, it’s right there for you to read. Verse 3. Allah linked them.


Not irrelevant because the only way a man can take away a woman’s right to accept or reject such a situation would be to misrepresent himself and lie. If what you are saying is that a man can refuse to enter such an agreement (for whatever reason including the request being at odds with a school of thought) then I agree , if what you are saying is that a man can pretend to agree since he won’t have to honour the agreement as per the Madhan he follows then I would challenge you to produce evidence. In reality, the woman still has a choice if she chooses to act upon it.


Right hand posses means a lot of different things. It’s not that part that I am concerned about but the next part of your statement. Perhaps I misunderstood but you should know it comes across as though you are saying the Quran and Hadith justify illegal sexual intercourse so long as it’s with a non-Muslim.


Also can I just say it's bad form to argue about the Quran, I don't expect that there are many Somali men or women for that matter who will understand these verses as I do and that's okay. I am happy to agree to disagree lest either of us say something that counts as dambi.

This debate is becoming cyclical.

The gist of my argument is that uneducated individuals (vous/moi) should not take it upon themselves to comment on the Quran without having some expertise to back up their statements. I referenced Ibn Kathir because his commentary on the Quran is considered to be the most prominent scholarly work along with Tabari. The literal translation of the Quran is not really in dispute but what scholars such as Al Tabari and Ibn Kathir have done is to contextualise it by referencing the Hadiths of the Prophet SAWS and the historical setting when commenting upon the Quran. I believe that reliable Islamic texts that were compiled closer to the time of the Prophet SAWS have more relevance than any modernist 'interpretations' that seek to 'reinterpret' the Quran so as to make its teachings more compatible with the 'modern' age we live in.

In regard to my comment on a woman's right to refuse a husband's request to seek a second wife, your reply was again irrelevant. Did I mention a man can bear false witness in regard to a marriage contract? You on the other hand started by stating that a woman has the right to choose, I corrected you by highlighting how her right to stay in a polygamous hinges on what Madhab her and spouse belong to. Thus, why bring up an irrelevant narrative?

It is not open to debate that 'Right Hand' refers to slaves that one owns. What is so difficult to understand in my initial statement that a man can have Xalal sex with an unbelieving woman that he legitimately owns as a slave? It is not Xaram but is something that is sanctioned in the Quran and the conduct of the Prophet SAWS. Do you know that the Prophet SAWS received two Coptic sisters as gifts from the ruler of Egypt, one of them (Maria) bore a son (Ibrahim) for him whilst he gifted her sister to a Sahaba called Hassan Al Thabit. He never married Maria, she remained his concubine until his SAWS death. There are historical resources that document how Muslims during the time of the Prophet SAWS would divide war booty (women included) among themselves after the defeat of a Non Muslim enemy and having sex with them was not an illegal Xaram act. On the contrary, any children from such a sexual union are deemed as Xalal. Do you think these slave women could resist the advances of their master?

Hadu naag kale rabo tii ka horeysay marka hore ha furo.I dont undrstand why men assume the first wife has no choice but accept the second wife.

Barta waraaqded dhig ka bacdi mesha aad doontid ka bax.

zumaale wrote:This debate is becoming cyclical.

The gist of my argument is that uneducated individuals (vous/moi) should not take it upon themselves to comment on the Quran without having some expertise to back up their statements. I referenced Ibn Kathir because his commentary on the Quran is considered to be the most prominent scholarly work along with Tabari. The literal translation of the Quran is not really in dispute but what scholars such as Al Tabari and Ibn Kathir have done is to contextualise it by referencing the Hadiths of the Prophet SAWS and the historical setting when commenting upon the Quran. I believe that reliable Islamic texts that were compiled closer to the time of the Prophet SAWS have more relevance than any modernist 'interpretations' that seek to 'reinterpret' the Quran so as to make its teachings more compatible with the 'modern' age we live in.

In regard to my comment on a woman's right to refuse a husband's request to seek a second wife, your reply was again irrelevant. Did I mention a man can bear false witness in regard to a marriage contract? You on the other hand started by stating that a woman has the right to choose, I corrected you by highlighting how her right to stay in a polygamous hinges on what Madhab her and spouse belong to. Thus, why bring up an irrelevant narrative?

It is not open to debate that 'Right Hand' refers to slaves that one owns. What is so difficult to understand in my initial statement that a man can have Xalal sex with an unbelieving woman that he legitimately owns as a slave? It is not Xaram but is something that is sanctioned in the Quran and the conduct of the Prophet SAWS. Do you know that the Prophet SAWS received two Coptic sisters as gifts from the ruler of Egypt, one of them (Maria) bore a son (Ibrahim) for him whilst he gifted her sister to a Sahaba called Hassan Al Thabit. He never married Maria, she remained his concubine until his SAWS death. There are historical resources that document how Muslims during the time of the Prophet SAWS would divide war booty (women included) among themselves after the defeat of a Non Muslim enemy and having sex with them was not an illegal Xaram act. On the contrary, any children from such a sexual union are deemed as Xalal. Do you think these slave women could resist the advances of their master?

Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I disagree with you that:

1. Muslims should not get an understanding from reading the Quran and instead abdicate responsibility to others
2. A Muslim man has the right to force polygamy upon a Muslim woman
3. Rape has endorsement from Islam under any circumstance


lakum deenukum waliya deen

BVSNet wrote:

zumaale wrote:This debate is becoming cyclical.

The gist of my argument is that uneducated individuals (vous/moi) should not take it upon themselves to comment on the Quran without having some expertise to back up their statements. I referenced Ibn Kathir because his commentary on the Quran is considered to be the most prominent scholarly work along with Tabari. The literal translation of the Quran is not really in dispute but what scholars such as Al Tabari and Ibn Kathir have done is to contextualise it by referencing the Hadiths of the Prophet SAWS and the historical setting when commenting upon the Quran. I believe that reliable Islamic texts that were compiled closer to the time of the Prophet SAWS have more relevance than any modernist 'interpretations' that seek to 'reinterpret' the Quran so as to make its teachings more compatible with the 'modern' age we live in.

In regard to my comment on a woman's right to refuse a husband's request to seek a second wife, your reply was again irrelevant. Did I mention a man can bear false witness in regard to a marriage contract? You on the other hand started by stating that a woman has the right to choose, I corrected you by highlighting how her right to stay in a polygamous hinges on what Madhab her and spouse belong to. Thus, why bring up an irrelevant narrative?

It is not open to debate that 'Right Hand' refers to slaves that one owns. What is so difficult to understand in my initial statement that a man can have Xalal sex with an unbelieving woman that he legitimately owns as a slave? It is not Xaram but is something that is sanctioned in the Quran and the conduct of the Prophet SAWS. Do you know that the Prophet SAWS received two Coptic sisters as gifts from the ruler of Egypt, one of them (Maria) bore a son (Ibrahim) for him whilst he gifted her sister to a Sahaba called Hassan Al Thabit. He never married Maria, she remained his concubine until his SAWS death. There are historical resources that document how Muslims during the time of the Prophet SAWS would divide war booty (women included) among themselves after the defeat of a Non Muslim enemy and having sex with them was not an illegal Xaram act. On the contrary, any children from such a sexual union are deemed as Xalal. Do you think these slave women could resist the advances of their master?

Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I disagree with you that:

1. Muslims should abdicate responsibility to others more knowledgeable than them in matters of Deen until they have acquired enough knowledge to formulate reasoned arguments for or against and should also desist from commenting on matters of Fiqh when they clearly lack the Islamic judicial expertise.
2. A Muslim Man following the Shafii or Maliki Madhab has the right to engage in polygamy with or without the blessing of the first wife and no Nikax Clause can invalidate his right to do so.
3. A women taken as a slave in a manner condoned by the Sharia cannot say no to Nookie and must satisfy her master's lusts.


lakum deenukum waliya deen

Fixed.

Habeen Wanagsan Huuno.

The nikaax clause can't stop a man from getting a second wife but can invalidate the first marriage by that act. All agreements are binding on us as Muslims.

Legal perspective aside, why would you want to keep a wife that no longer wants to be with you after you're actions hurt her? All the obsession about rights makes some men appear lacking in compassion.

zumaale wrote:Fixed.

Habeen Wanagsan Huuno.

Lakum deenukum waliya deen

Well done bro Zumaale

Some of our Somali sisters should understand that they can't suddenly become Islamic scholars simply because they're opinionated on certain topics. One can't twist the faith to his (or her) liking. And when someone can fulfill the conditions that Allah set for marrying several women(up to 4), no condition in a nikaax can ever nullify it.

Folks, look at the precedent that these feminists are setting: Every group - who already has an agenda and is very opinionated about certain topics - can come all kinds of conditions and use their own interpretation of the faith while disregarding the consensus amongst the Islamic scholars. This is very dangerous, and what they are doing is no different than what the uncle tom Leftist is advocating for.

The Holly Quran and authentic hadiths are the source for all Muslims to find guidance, and to do that, we need to follow the interpretation of the established Islamic scholars.

The last thing we need is some girls who learned a new and dangerous phenomena aka feminism before they even learn Islam, and then bringing that opinionated mindset into the deen and Muslim families. A dangerous approach indeed!

gegiroor wrote:Well done bro Zumaale

Some of our Somali sisters should understand that they can't suddenly become Islamic scholars simply because they're opinionated on certain topics. One can't twist the faith to his (or her) liking. And when someone can fulfill the conditions that Allah set for marrying several women(up to 4), no condition in a nikaax can ever nullify it.

Folks, look at the precedent that these feminists are setting: Every group - who already has an agenda and is very opinionated about certain topics - can come all kinds of conditions and use their own interpretation of the faith while disregarding the consensus amongst the Islamic scholars. This is very dangerous, and what they are doing is no different than what the uncle tom Leftist is advocating for.

The Holly Quran and authentic hadiths are the source for all Muslims to find guidance, and to do that, we need to follow the interpretation of the established Islamic scholars.

The last thing we need is some girls who learned a new and dangerous phenomena aka feminism before they even learn Islam, and then bringing that opinionated mindset into the deen and Muslim families. A dangerous approach indeed!

I have noticed this tendency with u.Why get passive aggressive.Just be a man and address the person you want to confront as a feminist.We all know you are talking to/about Bv.

InaSamaale wrote:
Legal perspective aside, why would you want to keep a wife that no longer wants to be with you after you're actions hurt her? All the obsession about rights makes some men appear lacking in compassion.

That's the short of it...it's not enough to say that one has a right to a thing and be sullen about it. No one can force anyone else and if a woman finds it unpalatable to be one of several, she too has that right.

Why do people complicate things horta? If the man is financially and sexually capable of taking on another wife/wives then he has the right to do so. Even though it's not explicitly stated in the deen, I'd say telling the first wife of your plans of taking on another wife is the sane and compassionate thing to do, and only a callous man devoid of empathy would tell the first wife after he's married the other woman. The first wife has the right to refuse or accept it. If she refuses to give him permission, the man can still go ahead but with the knowledge that this may very well destroy his first marriage, because the first wife has the right to leave the marriage if she wants to. Basically meeshan khasab ma jiro and everyone can exercise their rights, he can marry more than one and the first can leave if she's not having it.

Tuushi wrote:

gegiroor wrote:Well done bro Zumaale

Some of our Somali sisters should understand that they can't suddenly become Islamic scholars simply because they're opinionated on certain topics. One can't twist the faith to his (or her) liking. And when someone can fulfill the conditions that Allah set for marrying several women(up to 4), no condition in a nikaax can ever nullify it.

Folks, look at the precedent that these feminists are setting: Every group - who already has an agenda and is very opinionated about certain topics - can come all kinds of conditions and use their own interpretation of the faith while disregarding the consensus amongst the Islamic scholars. This is very dangerous, and what they are doing is no different than what the uncle tom Leftist is advocating for.

The Holly Quran and authentic hadiths are the source for all Muslims to find guidance, and to do that, we need to follow the interpretation of the established Islamic scholars.

The last thing we need is some girls who learned a new and dangerous phenomena aka feminism before they even learn Islam, and then bringing that opinionated mindset into the deen and Muslim families. A dangerous approach indeed!

I have noticed this tendency with u.Why get passive aggressive.Just be a man and address the person you want to confront as a feminist.We all know you are talking to/about Bv.

Actually it was intended to many who commented including you, but after re-reading it, I would've chosen different words. I can take the loss of using somewhat harsh language, but at the end I made my point. Bottom line not only marriage, but in other topics, including owning dogs where some have stated they want to own dogs in their houses and want to find justification in the deen. Uncle Tom Leftist went too far and stated he will 'reform' Islam, so what he described as 'Liberalism' can find justifications.

My take is if you're already opinionated and have already made up your mind, don't try to find justifications in the deen. Go to the deen for guidance, and follow it. If you're not sure about it, unless you devote your whole lifetime learning Islam, don't try to suddenly become an Islamic scholar; you ain't one!