Science channel's "Biblical Mysteries Explained"

[Anonymous]

What is the scriptural basis for writing either a wife's divorce clause, or a clause giving a 1st wife the right to consent and/or divorce if he takes a second wife?

Or is this more a secular addition?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the scriptural basis for writing either a wife's divorce clause, or a clause giving a 1st wife the right to consent and/or divorce if he takes a second wife?

Or is this more a secular addition?

The scriptural basis is the nature of Islamic marriage. Marriage in Islam is not a sacrament, it's a civil contract between two willing parties. There is a very strong admonition in Islamic scripture for adhering to contracts and written obligations. Therefore, the parties can write any clauses they wish into the marital contract that do not contradict the religion in principle.

The wife cannot prohibit the husband from taking a second wife but can introduce significant financial penalties for doing so, or insert the right of unilateral divorce if the second marriage is contracted.

There is no prohibition in Islam for wife-initiated divorces, therefore the wife can write it into the contract. It is true that the culture mitigates against the inclusion of this clause in many societies. But there is no scriptural prohibition against it.

[Anonymous]

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, as PP said, there is no explicit requirement that the husband respect the first wife's wishes re a second wife---unless no second wife is written into the marriage contract.

This would be a very rare clause in an Islamic marriage contract. There are perhaps more contracts that allow the wife unilateral right of divorce, but even this provision is not commonly encountered.

Again, it is not wise to look to see common practice and use that as a model of what Islam really is. It really doesn't matter what is commonly practiced. This provision to prohibit taking of a second wife is permissible and available to the wife if she wants it so that is all that matters. However, if you must look at common practice, then consider that the reason including such a prohibition is not commonly done is because the taking of second wives is not a common practice to begin with. Thus, this conversation is futile and pointless. It draws far too much attention to a permissible act in Islam that used to be practiced when Islam was in its infancy and because of the tragic consequences of war leaving widows and orphans unable to care for themselves.

Also, the Quran asks the husband to treat the wife with kindness and respect. It would hardly be kind for a husband to ignore the wife's plea not to take a second wife and still take one. It shows lack of consideration and compassion. Remember also that if the Quran does not explicitly prohibit something, it does not logically follow that it must, therefore be a right or must therefore be permissible. It may be true, but it is not necessarily always true. You can only deduce God's will by reading the entirety of the Quran, which would then allow you to understand whether an action was within the spirit of Islam as opposed to whether it was within the letter of the law.

For example, the Quran also does not smoking. However, it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Again, it is not wise to look to see common practice and use that as a model of what Islam really is. It really doesn't matter what is commonly practiced. This provision to prohibit taking of a second wife is permissible and available to the wife if she wants it so that is all that matters.

That's not true. The wife cannot prohibit her husband from taking a second wife. It is a fundamental principle of fikh that halal cannot be made into haram. The wife can, however, write financial penalties for the husband if the second wife is taken, or she can include a provision of unilateral divorce with full financial benefits and exercise it as she wills. Most scholars agree that prohibition on polygamy in marital contracts is not enforceable.

Anonymous wrote:However, if you must look at common practice, then consider that the reason including such a prohibition is not commonly done is because the taking of second wives is not a common practice to begin with. Thus, this conversation is futile and pointless. It draws far too much attention to a permissible act in Islam that used to be practiced when Islam was in its infancy and because of the tragic consequences of war leaving widows and orphans unable to care for themselves.

Polygamy is practiced widely today and it did not end with Islam's infancy. In addition, it's a specious argument that polygamy was needed to protect widows and orphans. Practically speaking, second wives are rarely older women; they tend to be young and nubile. Scripturally speaking, the provision permitting polygamy in the Quran is as incoherent as it gets, and the notion that it commands polygamy as a way to be kind to orphans is a...fabrication designed to please the ignorant. Let us review two of the many available translations, and note the context:

Here's Mr. Marmaduke Pickthall (what a glorious name! parents must have been very cruel people)

1. O mankind! Be careful of your duty to your Lord Who created you from a single soul and from it created its mate and from them twain hath spread abroad a multitude of men and women. Be careful of your duty toward Allah in Whom ye claim (your rights) of one another, and toward the wombs (that bare you). Lo! Allah hath been a watcher over you.

2. Give unto orphans their wealth. Exchange not the good for the bad (in your management thereof) nor absorb their wealth into your own wealth. Lo! that would be a great sin.

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

4. And give unto the women (whom ye marry) free gift of their marriage portions; but if they of their own accord remit unto you a part thereof, then ye are welcome to absorb it (in your wealth). (HELLO MAHR WAIVER!!)

Here's Mr. Yusuf Ali:

1. O mankind! reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person, created, of like nature, His mate, and from them twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women;- reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (That bore you): for Allah ever watches over you.

2. To orphans restore their property (When they reach their age), nor substitute (your) worthless things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by mixing it up) with your own. For this is indeed a great sin.

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.

4. And give the women (on marriage) their dower as a free gift; but if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, Take it and enjoy it with right good cheer.

As you can see, there is nothing in this surah whatsoever about marrying widows with children who are destitute and need protection, and none of the . In fact, the language of this chapter gives rise to many more questions than answers. What orphans? Why would a man not deal justly with orphans? And more importantly, why and how on earth is unfair treatment of orphans mitigated by marrying multiple women? How exactly does a polygamous marriage encourage a fairer treatment of orphans? And again - what orphans?? None of the Muslim commentators really provide an intelligible answer to these questions other than vague exhortations toward protecting women and orphans. But why through polygamy?

There is a theory - and I say this with very great trepidation because it makes as little sense as anything else, but there are a couple of ahadith underlying it, and you all know in what depth of contempt I hold the entire hadith universe. The theory is that men who took care of orphan GIRLS (not all orphans) who were nice-looking an had some assets could have been tempted to marry them without giving them a proper mahr since they didn't have anyone to negotiate a nice one for them. That didn't sit right with Muhammad, so the verse was brought down instructing men who were thus tempted to marry OTHER women, not these orphans. To me, it's a little shaky as we all know that Islam does not recognize marital property and it is therefore pointless to marry a woman for her wealth since the husband doesn't get any share in it. But perhaps the wisdom is that a wealthy woman deserves a very juicy mahr, and for orphans, that wasn't always in the cards (I also must ask - of all the problems befalling orphans you zero in on asset management?)

Anyway, take it for what it is:

Narrated Aisha:

There was an orphan (girl) under the care of a man. He married her and she owned a date palm (garden). He married her just because of that and not because he loved her. So the Divine Verse came regarding his case: "If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls…" (4.3) The sub-narrator added: I think he (i.e. another sub-narrator) said, "That orphan girl was his partner in that date palm (garden) and in his property." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 97)

Narrated ‘Urwa bin Az-Zubair:

That he asked ‘Aisha regarding the Statement of Allah:

"If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls…" (4.3) She said, "O son of my sister! An orphan girl used to be under the care of a guardian with whom she shared property. Her guardian, being attracted by her wealth and beauty, would intend to marry her without giving her a just Mahr, i.e. the same Mahr as any other person might give her (in case he married her). So such guardians were forbidden to do that unless they did justice to their female wards and gave them the highest Mahr their peers might get. They were ordered (by Allah) to marry women of their choice other than those orphan girls." ‘Aisha added, "The people asked Allah’s Apostle his instructions after the revelation of this Divine Verse whereupon Allah revealed:

‘They ask your instruction regarding women.’ (4.127)" ‘Aisha further said, "And the Statement of Allah: ‘And yet whom you desire to marry.’ (4.127) As anyone of you refrains from marrying an orphan girl (under his guardianship) when she is lacking in property and beauty." ‘Aisha added, "So they were forbidden to marry those orphan girls for whose wealth and beauty they had a desire unless with justice, and that was because they would refrain from marrying them if they were lacking in property and beauty." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 98)

So there you have it. According to this theory, the meaning of this verse is "stop cheating orphan girls of their true value on the marriage market." Commendable? Sure. But how on earth it got packaged as "polygamy helps take care of widows and orphans" boggles the mind because there is zero scriptural support for it.

Anonymous wrote:
Also, the Quran asks the husband to treat the wife with kindness and respect. It would hardly be kind for a husband to ignore the wife's plea not to take a second wife and still take one. It shows lack of consideration and compassion. Remember also that if the Quran does not explicitly prohibit something, it does not logically follow that it must, therefore be a right or must therefore be permissible. It may be true, but it is not necessarily always true. You can only deduce God's will by reading the entirety of the Quran, which would then allow you to understand whether an action was within the spirit of Islam as opposed to whether it was within the letter of the law.

Hundreds of scholars who have read the Quran in its entirety throughout came up with thousands of different tafsirs. That's how you get both Bin Baz and Hamza Yusuf. The idea that there is somewhere out there a single true meaning of the Quran that becomes clear once you read it in its entirety is false on its face.

[Anonymous]

Precisely. Thus, your opinion, Hamza Yusuf, or Bin Baz, or even my opinion does not matter. What matter is that each person read the Quran and study Islam to try to discern what the spirit of Islam is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Precisely. Thus, your opinion, Hamza Yusuf, or Bin Baz, or even my opinion does not matter. What matter is that each person read the Quran and study Islam to try to discern what the spirit of Islam is.

This assumes that a) there IS one, readily discernible spirit of Islam, and b) when discerned, it would be enough to override literal Quranic evidence to the contrary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Precisely. Thus, your opinion, Hamza Yusuf, or Bin Baz, or even my opinion does not matter. What matter is that each person read the Quran and study Islam to try to discern what the spirit of Islam is.

This assumes that a) there IS one, readily discernible spirit of Islam, and b) when discerned, it would be enough to override literal Quranic evidence to the contrary.

Actually no, it does not assume that. You have assumed that. The spirit of Islam may be individually determined. There are and will remain different interpretations of Islam. If your intent is good, however, and you do deeds of kindness in life, God will reward you anyhow.

[Anonymous]

omg

Who in the hell has time for this?

I'd throw myself off a bridge if I had been born into this mess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Again, it is not wise to look to see common practice and use that as a model of what Islam really is. It really doesn't matter what is commonly practiced. This provision to prohibit taking of a second wife is permissible and available to the wife if she wants it so that is all that matters.

That's not true. The wife cannot prohibit her husband from taking a second wife. It is a fundamental principle of fikh that halal cannot be made into haram. The wife can, however, write financial penalties for the husband if the second wife is taken, or she can include a provision of unilateral divorce with full financial benefits and exercise it as she wills. Most scholars agree that prohibition on polygamy in marital contracts is not enforceable.

Anonymous wrote:However, if you must look at common practice, then consider that the reason including such a prohibition is not commonly done is because the taking of second wives is not a common practice to begin with. Thus, this conversation is futile and pointless. It draws far too much attention to a permissible act in Islam that used to be practiced when Islam was in its infancy and because of the tragic consequences of war leaving widows and orphans unable to care for themselves.

Polygamy is practiced widely today and it did not end with Islam's infancy. In addition, it's a specious argument that polygamy was needed to protect widows and orphans. Practically speaking, second wives are rarely older women; they tend to be young and nubile. Scripturally speaking, the provision permitting polygamy in the Quran is as incoherent as it gets, and the notion that it commands polygamy as a way to be kind to orphans is a...fabrication designed to please the ignorant. Let us review two of the many available translations, and note the context:

Here's Mr. Marmaduke Pickthall (what a glorious name! parents must have been very cruel people)

1. O mankind! Be careful of your duty to your Lord Who created you from a single soul and from it created its mate and from them twain hath spread abroad a multitude of men and women. Be careful of your duty toward Allah in Whom ye claim (your rights) of one another, and toward the wombs (that bare you). Lo! Allah hath been a watcher over you.

2. Give unto orphans their wealth. Exchange not the good for the bad (in your management thereof) nor absorb their wealth into your own wealth. Lo! that would be a great sin.

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

4. And give unto the women (whom ye marry) free gift of their marriage portions; but if they of their own accord remit unto you a part thereof, then ye are welcome to absorb it (in your wealth). (HELLO MAHR WAIVER!!)

Here's Mr. Yusuf Ali:

1. O mankind! reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person, created, of like nature, His mate, and from them twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women;- reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (That bore you): for Allah ever watches over you.

2. To orphans restore their property (When they reach their age), nor substitute (your) worthless things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by mixing it up) with your own. For this is indeed a great sin.

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.

4. And give the women (on marriage) their dower as a free gift; but if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, Take it and enjoy it with right good cheer.

As you can see, there is nothing in this surah whatsoever about marrying widows with children who are destitute and need protection, and none of the . In fact, the language of this chapter gives rise to many more questions than answers. What orphans? Why would a man not deal justly with orphans? And more importantly, why and how on earth is unfair treatment of orphans mitigated by marrying multiple women? How exactly does a polygamous marriage encourage a fairer treatment of orphans? And again - what orphans?? None of the Muslim commentators really provide an intelligible answer to these questions other than vague exhortations toward protecting women and orphans. But why through polygamy?

There is a theory - and I say this with very great trepidation because it makes as little sense as anything else, but there are a couple of ahadith underlying it, and you all know in what depth of contempt I hold the entire hadith universe. The theory is that men who took care of orphan GIRLS (not all orphans) who were nice-looking an had some assets could have been tempted to marry them without giving them a proper mahr since they didn't have anyone to negotiate a nice one for them. That didn't sit right with Muhammad, so the verse was brought down instructing men who were thus tempted to marry OTHER women, not these orphans. To me, it's a little shaky as we all know that Islam does not recognize marital property and it is therefore pointless to marry a woman for her wealth since the husband doesn't get any share in it. But perhaps the wisdom is that a wealthy woman deserves a very juicy mahr, and for orphans, that wasn't always in the cards (I also must ask - of all the problems befalling orphans you zero in on asset management?)

Anyway, take it for what it is:

Narrated Aisha:

There was an orphan (girl) under the care of a man. He married her and she owned a date palm (garden). He married her just because of that and not because he loved her. So the Divine Verse came regarding his case: "If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls…" (4.3) The sub-narrator added: I think he (i.e. another sub-narrator) said, "That orphan girl was his partner in that date palm (garden) and in his property." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 97)

Narrated ‘Urwa bin Az-Zubair:

That he asked ‘Aisha regarding the Statement of Allah:

"If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls…" (4.3) She said, "O son of my sister! An orphan girl used to be under the care of a guardian with whom she shared property. Her guardian, being attracted by her wealth and beauty, would intend to marry her without giving her a just Mahr, i.e. the same Mahr as any other person might give her (in case he married her). So such guardians were forbidden to do that unless they did justice to their female wards and gave them the highest Mahr their peers might get. They were ordered (by Allah) to marry women of their choice other than those orphan girls." ‘Aisha added, "The people asked Allah’s Apostle his instructions after the revelation of this Divine Verse whereupon Allah revealed:

‘They ask your instruction regarding women.’ (4.127)" ‘Aisha further said, "And the Statement of Allah: ‘And yet whom you desire to marry.’ (4.127) As anyone of you refrains from marrying an orphan girl (under his guardianship) when she is lacking in property and beauty." ‘Aisha added, "So they were forbidden to marry those orphan girls for whose wealth and beauty they had a desire unless with justice, and that was because they would refrain from marrying them if they were lacking in property and beauty." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 98)

So there you have it. According to this theory, the meaning of this verse is "stop cheating orphan girls of their true value on the marriage market." Commendable? Sure. But how on earth it got packaged as "polygamy helps take care of widows and orphans" boggles the mind because there is zero scriptural support for it.

Anonymous wrote:
Also, the Quran asks the husband to treat the wife with kindness and respect. It would hardly be kind for a husband to ignore the wife's plea not to take a second wife and still take one. It shows lack of consideration and compassion. Remember also that if the Quran does not explicitly prohibit something, it does not logically follow that it must, therefore be a right or must therefore be permissible. It may be true, but it is not necessarily always true. You can only deduce God's will by reading the entirety of the Quran, which would then allow you to understand whether an action was within the spirit of Islam as opposed to whether it was within the letter of the law.

Hundreds of scholars who have read the Quran in its entirety throughout came up with thousands of different tafsirs. That's how you get both Bin Baz and Hamza Yusuf. The idea that there is somewhere out there a single true meaning of the Quran that becomes clear once you read it in its entirety is false on its face.