Surah An-Nisaa (4) — Ayah 3

3. And if you fear that you will not deal justly with orphan girls [5], then marry other women of your choice—two, or three, or four [6]. But if you fear that you will not be just, then marry only one, or those whom your right hands possess [6.1]. This is more suitable so that you do not commit injustice.

[5]
Injustice Towards Orphan Girls:

And most of the rights violations used to happen to orphan girls. Now, it is obvious that the guardian (wali) of an orphan girl can only be a close relative, and it is possible that the guardian and the orphan girl share in the inheritance. When the girl reached adulthood, three situations could arise: First, if the girl was not beautiful and the guardian did not have any affection for her, but he married her merely out of greed that her inherited wealth would slip from his hands. Such a marriage is also an injustice to the girl. Second, if the girl was both beautiful and wealthy, in this case, the guardian would marry her but would give her much less dowry (mahr) than she could get from others, and no one else could marry her in the presence of the guardian, especially if the guardian himself desired her. This too was a form of plundering the rights of orphan girls. These were the injustices that Allah Almighty has mentioned here. Regarding the context of the revelation (sha’n-e-nuzul) of this verse, consider the following hadiths:
1. Sayyida Aisha ؓ narrates that a man used to raise an orphan girl and married her only for the reason that she was the owner of a date palm tree, otherwise he had no affection for her in his heart. This verse was revealed regarding him. One of the narrators of this hadith, Ibn Jurayj, says: I think that the girl was a partner with the man in that tree and other property. [بخاري۔ كتاب التفسير]
2. Sayyida Aisha’s ؓ nephew, Urwah bin Zubair ؓ, asked her about the meaning of this verse. She replied: Nephew, the meaning of this verse is that an orphan girl is under the guardianship of her wali and, by inheritance, is a partner in the inherited property. The guardian likes her wealth and beauty but is not willing to give her as much dowry as others would, so he should not marry her. Yes, if he gives her as much as others, then he can marry her. Otherwise, he should marry other women he likes, up to four wives are permitted. [بخاري۔ كتاب التفسير] The third situation is that the girl is neither beautiful nor wealthy, in which case the guardian has no interest in marrying her.

[6]
Permission to Marry Up to Four Wives:

The guardians of orphan girls were prevented from both these injustices and were told that if you can pay as much dowry to a beautiful girl as she could get from outside, then you may marry her; otherwise, there are many other women, you may marry up to four wives as you wish. But with the condition that you maintain equality among them, and if you cannot do this, then suffice with one wife, or with those slave women whom you possess. The following two hadiths also shed light on these rulings.
1.
More Than Four Wives:

Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Umar ؓ says that when Ghaylan bin Salamah Thaqafi ؓ accepted Islam, he had ten wives. The Prophet ﷺ said to him: “Choose any four of them (and leave the rest).” [ابن ماجہ۔ کتاب النکاح۔ باب الرجل یسلم و عندہ أکثر من أربع نسوۃ]
2. Sayyida Aisha ؓ narrates that when the Prophet ﷺ intended to travel, he would draw lots among his wives. Whose name was drawn, he would take her with him, and he would assign one day and one night to each wife. [بخاری۔ کتاب الہبہ۔ باب ھبۃ المرأۃ لغیر زوجھا]
However, the case of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ is entirely different because his noble wives are the mothers of the Ummah and could not marry anyone else. Therefore, all the marriages he had contracted were declared lawful and permissible for him. Some people have understood from this verse that there is no limit to polygamy in Islam, and the words “two, three, four” in the Quran are just idiomatic, meaning permission is for two, or three, or four, and similarly for five, six, and so on. This reasoning is wrong for two reasons: First, if general permission was intended, then just saying ﴿مَا طَابَ لَكُمْ مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ﴾ would have sufficed; there was no need to specify up to four. Second, the Sunnah has determined the limit up to four, so after that, it is not possible for any Muslim to say otherwise, as is evident from the hadith of Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Umar ؓ mentioned above. These are those who went to excess, and some went to the other extreme, saying that the general principle is to marry only one woman. Their reasoning is that Allah Almighty said that if you fear you cannot do justice among them, then one is enough. Then, in verse 129 of this surah, it is said: “Even if you wish to do justice among your wives, you will not be able to.” Thus, the conditional permission for polygamy given in verse 3 is, according to this verse, completely abrogated. Therefore, the original rule is that there should be only one wife.

The Argument for Monogamy and Its Refutation:

This reasoning is incorrect because in verse 129 of the same surah, it is further stated: “So at least do not incline completely to one side and leave the other hanging.” And the matters in which injustice is indicated are such as: for example, one wife is young, the other is old; or one is beautiful, the other is unattractive or of average appearance; or one is a virgin, the other is previously married; or one is good-natured, the other is ill-tempered or bad-natured; or one is intelligent and clever, the other is completely ignorant and dull. Now, it is clear that although the wife has no control over these qualities, these things do become a cause of inclination or disinclination for the husband, and this is a natural matter. This is the kind of injustice mentioned here. And since in such inclinations or disinclinations a person has no control, there is no accountability or reproach from Allah Almighty for such matters. The demand for justice from the husband is only in those matters which are within his control, such as maintenance, taking care of her needs, and assigning turns for spending the night, etc. Who does not know that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ loved Sayyida Aisha ؓ more than his other wives, and the reasons were that she was a virgin, young, intelligent, and beautiful. Thus, the Prophet ﷺ used to pray: “O Allah! In matters where I have control, I treat all my wives equally, and in matters where I have no control, forgive me.” Those who go to the extreme of monogamy are actually deeply influenced by Western civilization, where only one wife is permitted. Nowadays, this view is represented by Ghulam Ahmad Parwez Sahib. Seeing the word “yatama” (orphans) in this verse, he has linked the permission for polygamy to emergency situations and war. Thus, on page 315 of “Letters to Tahira,” he writes: “The meaning is clear that if, in an emergency situation, such as after a war when a large number of young men have perished and such a situation arises that orphan children and unmarried young women remain without husbands in society, then what is the solution? To deal with this emergency, it is permitted to temporarily relax the law of one wife.” Then, further on, he explains the meaning of ﴿فَانْكِحُوْا مَا طَابَ لَكُمْ مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ مَثْنيٰ وَثُلٰثَ وَرُبٰعَ﴾ as: Marry from among those women whom you like. In this way, (and in the case of widows, their children as well) absorb them into the family. This is just treatment towards them. If the problem can be solved by marrying two, then marry two each; if by three, then three each; and if by four, then four each. This is the collective decision. [طاهره كے نام خطوط: ص 316] Now, the first question that arises here is: where did this condition of emergency and war come from? Is it impossible for orphans to exist in a society without emergency or war? Or is there any indication of emergency or war in any word of the Quran? Well, let this matter go; let us accept that Parwez Sahib is correct. According to him, only the Battle of Uhud can be considered as fitting his theory, because seventy Muslims were martyred in it. In no other battle did Muslims suffer such a great loss of life. The number of Muslims who participated in this battle was seven hundred, and if the hypocrites are also counted among the Muslims, then it was one thousand. And this was the number that went out to the battlefield; otherwise, the total number of Muslims was much greater. And with seventy Muslims martyred, seventy women became widows (because according to Parwez Sahib’s theory, the original rule is monogamy). Now, their orphan children, i.e., young girls—multiply this number by four, i.e., about 300 women needed to be married, and according to Parwez Sahib, since this was a collective issue, then out of fifteen hundred Muslims, if only three hundred took another wife, the problem would be solved, and this was being done at the governmental level. Then, when there were not even enough women for all the men to marry two each, what is the meaning of marrying three or four women? And this collective decision is also a strange kind of manipulation. The Quran says ﴿ فَانْكِحُوْا مَا طَابَ لَكُمْ﴾ i.e., Muslims may individually marry whichever women they like, and you are calling it a collective decision. So this is Parwez Sahib’s Quranic insight, which is actually a product of that Western imagination in which marrying more than one wife is considered a reprehensible act. The matter was very clear: Islam has commanded marrying one wife, but has permitted up to four. Polygamy is a permission, not a command. And the reason for this permission is that the Quran is a code of life for everyone and for all times until the Day of Judgment. Therefore, people of any country and any era can benefit from it according to their customs or needs. For example, in our country Pakistan, the concept of separate ownership for women does not exist. If a man is the owner of the house, the woman is the housewife. Therefore, if someone marries two wives here, countless troublesome issues arise. So, if someone marries a second or third wife here, it is certainly due to some special need, and 95% of the population does not benefit from this permission and considers one wife sufficient. In contrast, in Arabia, even today, the concept of separate ownership for wives exists. Therefore, even with up to four wives, rivalry among wives and problems for the husband are very rare. There, divorce is also not considered such a crime that it would create enmity between two families as it does in Pakistan. Therefore, more than half the population there benefits from this permission of the Quran. Thus, from a Shariah perspective, neither the custom of Pakistan can be blamed, nor that of Arabia. The Western notion of considering more than one wife as a reprehensible act is based on two foundations: The first is the general permission for obscenity, adultery, keeping mistresses, and sexual promiscuity, which in the West is not considered a reprehensible act but rather perfectly permissible and even commendable. The second foundation is materialism, in which everyone wants to raise their standard of living and provide the best education for their children, but since these things require enormous expenses which not everyone can afford, they prefer to have no children or as few as possible. And it is obvious that such a society can barely tolerate even one wife, and it is considered better not to have a wife at all and to make do with fornication or adultery. But Islam places the greatest emphasis on the chastity of men and women and declares all forms of obscenity as reprehensible acts, and instead of raising the standard of living, it teaches to live a simple life. That is why, according to needs and circumstances, it has permitted up to four wives. Now tell me, is there any way to reconcile this Western notion with the Islamic concept?

The Law of Taking Permission from the First Wife for a Second Marriage:

Influenced by this Western notion and the demands of some “civilized women,” during the era of President Ayub, the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance of 1961 was passed in Pakistan. One of its clauses was that if a man is already married and wants to marry a second time, he must first obtain the written consent and permission of his first wife, then obtain a permit from the Arbitration Council, and only if the Arbitration Council also grants permission can he marry a second time. As is clear from clauses 21 and 22 of this ordinance. In other words, the government imposed such restrictions on second marriage that no one could even think of a second marriage without extreme necessity, and practically, the permission that Allah Almighty had given to men was abolished. Because no woman can tolerate that a co-wife comes into her home. Now, those who wanted to marry a second time and were displeased with the attitude of the first wife or considered a second marriage necessary for some other reason, found an easy solution to this unnatural restriction: they divorced the first wife and then freely married the second. Thus, the law that was made to protect women’s rights itself became the cause of their distress. Because such an unnatural interpretation of Allah’s commands is tantamount to mocking the verses of Allah, and such a society is bound to suffer its consequences.

One Woman, Four Husbands:

Then, some shameless, Westernized, liberal women raised the objection: What kind of justice is this that a man can marry four women, but a woman must be content with only one man? And it is obvious that such an objection can only be raised by an immodest woman who wants that she too should be allowed to marry at least four men at the same time. The answer to this is that just as sexual desire exists in humans, it also exists in animals. And while a man is allowed four wives, we see among cattle owners that if a herdsman keeps twenty buffaloes, there is only one male buffalo. Has it ever been seen that a herdsman keeps twenty male buffalos and only one buffalo? Just reflect on why this is so and why it is not the other way around. The fact is that a man, during his youth, is always ready to fulfill his sexual desire, but a woman is never in such a state. Every month, during her menstrual period, she naturally dislikes this act. Then, a man finishes the act of intercourse in two or three minutes and has no further part in childbirth, whereas if a woman conceives, during the entire period of pregnancy and then during breastfeeding, she is naturally not inclined towards this act. However, due to her husband’s love and insistence, she may agree to it, but often a woman refuses as well. But a man cannot be patient for such a long period. Now, he has only two options: either marry again or turn to obscenity. And Islam has chosen the first option. Then, even if a man keeps four wives, it does not cause confusion in lineage nor any complications in matters of inheritance. Whereas if a woman has relations with even two men, the lineage becomes doubtful, because lineage is related to the man, not the woman, and complications arise in matters of inheritance as well. Now, if you do not consider these matters worthy of attention, just consider this: if a woman is allowed four husbands, whose house will she live in? And who will be responsible for her maintenance and the expenses of her children? Then, will a husband tolerate that his wife openly goes to others as well? In fact, I say, put Shariah aside and try the idea of a woman with four husbands and see how a society is destroyed within a few years. Anyone may deny Islam, but no one can deny that Shariah rulings are based on human interests. Now, consider this issue from another angle. Everyone knows that during youth, sexual desires reach their peak in every person, and a young and healthy man is capable of having intercourse at least once a day without harming his health. And if this sexual desire is suppressed for a long time, there is a risk of illness. In such circumstances, a person has only three options:

The Consequences of Celibacy:

The first is to suppress this desire by various means, whether by castration or by extreme dietary restriction, as yogis, sadhus, or ascetics do. There is no doubt about the unnaturalness of this method. Its greatest harm is the extinction of the human race, and its second harm is that obscenity seeks secret ways. Such people, under the guise of piety, commit adultery. This was common in Christianity. Such ascetic men and women who remained free from sexual entanglements all their lives and were devoted to the service of the church, among them there was a widespread secret practice of illicit relations, and illegitimate children were disposed of in various ways, and countless such incidents are still recorded in the pages of history. The second way is to fulfill sexual desires openly without hesitation. Western writers have spent more than a century campaigning to abolish the restrictions of marriage and have finally succeeded in making such obscenity common. Their reasoning was that man has three essential needs: hunger, sleep, and sexual intercourse. If these are not fulfilled, a person’s health is badly affected. Sleep, in any case, takes its due. As for hunger, if one is not at home at mealtime, he fulfills this need from the market, hotel, relatives, wherever he may be, and is not dependent solely on his home. So, just as the need for food is, so is the need for sex; therefore, the idea of fulfilling it only with one’s wife is unnatural. Also, if someone cannot get a wife, what should he do?

Is Sexual Promiscuity an Essential Need?

In this reasoning, food hunger and sexual hunger are presented on the same level, whereas this is fundamentally wrong, and the reasons are as follows:
1. There is no remedy for food hunger except to fill the stomach with food, but sexual hunger is naturally remedied. When semen increases in a person, it is discharged through nocturnal emission, and thus sexual hunger is automatically reduced.
2. Sexual hunger can also be reduced by eating less and by fasting, but food hunger can only be satisfied by eating.
3. Food hunger arises by itself, whereas sexual hunger is, to a great extent, self-induced. You can protect yourself from sexual thoughts and environments, and if you keep yourself busy with other useful activities instead of being immersed in sexual thoughts and environments, this sexual hunger will not even arise. And if you remain immersed in sexual thoughts and environments, read obscene literature and novels, watch dance and music programs on cinema and television, listen to provocative songs, and live in an environment that keeps sexual desires aroused, then this sexual hunger will reach its peak. In other words, creating or not creating this sexual hunger, keeping it moderate or nurturing it, is largely within a person’s own control, whereas food hunger is not within one’s control. Is it not enough to confirm our claim that even in today’s society, you can find many students and chaste young people who do not marry until the age of twenty or twenty-five, and their lives are spotless, even though sexual desires begin to awaken after the age of ten or eleven?

The Path of Moderation:

And the third way is the path of moderation between the two, which Islam has adopted: since sexual desire is a natural urge, suppressing it is unnatural. However, it has not been left so unrestrained that the very foundations of society are shaken; rather, it has been bound by the conditions of marriage. And we have already made it clear that sexual excitement in men is so intense that often one wife cannot suffice for him. Therefore, to avoid obscenity and indecency, polygamy was necessary, and this is the natural and Islamic way, and this is the way that most of the noble Prophets have adopted, who were sent in different eras for the reformation of human society. And this also refutes the view of those who say that the original command in Islam is to marry only one woman. Whereas this is a very important and fundamental issue of society, so if Islam advocated monogamy, there would have been a very clear and explicit command about it, because polygamy was so prevalent in Arabia that Islam had to restrict it.
[6۔ 1] For the conditions of benefiting from slave women, see footnote number 40 of this surah.