Polygamy: An effort to get more out of Islam than there is



Geert Wilders thinks polygamy is all part of 2009 Europe, thanks to Islam, without ever knowing whether polygamy is a man or a horse. Click here for Wilders’ site:

Bigamy — or for that matter polygamy — as one of Islam’s widely misread concepts has just been examined with a fine-toothed comb and put in perspective by India’s law commission, a government panel for legal reforms.

To put the record straight, the law commission in its 227th report has said the popular view that Muslims could simply have two wives at a time was flawed. One of the authors of the report was Tahir Mahmood, a front-ranking legal expert on Muslim law, aside from the commission’s chairman AR Lakhsmanan.

“It is generally believed that under Muslim law, a husband has an unfettered right to marry again even when his earlier (read present) marriage is continuing. On a closer examination of the relevant provisions of the Quran and other sources of Islamic law, this does not seem to be true,” the commission’s report states.

These comments however were incidental to the main theme: “Preventing Bigamy via Conversion to Islam”. The legal experts were seized with cases of Hindu men using Islam as a licence to marry a second time without dissolving their existing marriage.

Since Islam itself did not permit a licentious use of bigamy provisions, the commission suggested amendments to the Hindu Marriage Act to put a stop to Hindus misusing Islam’s highly conditional permission to have a second wife concomitantly with the first one.

Islam is not what it is often made out to be and the real surprise is that realities are often ignored. You can pick several issues, like polygamy. There are more serious ones: if you kill enough non-Muslims you might even get to romp in a heavenly bedroom with 72 virgins. (I really doubt if God meant group sex! And even if He did, Islamophobes cringe at the very thought when Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Mansion has far more bedrooms with far sexier bunnies.)

If I were to tell my wife that I care for second one now, I am not sure whether she will file for divorce. Eat me alive, she will for sure. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Muslim countries themselves have clear laws that do not view polygamy approvingly; Tunisia and Turkey having banned it completely. In Egypt, if a woman can prove that her husband is married to another, he can be prosecuted for bigamy.

Turkish family law and marriage legislation and regulations uphold monogamy. A second marriage cannot be executed unless the first is dissolved.

In Syria, polygamy is highly regulated. A judge “may refuse permission for polygamous marriage unless husband establishes lawful cause and financial capacity”. Inability to conceive is one widely held ground for Islamic bigamous marriages. Click here.

In Morocco too, polygamous marriages are discouraged. Polygamy may not be permitted if a woman fears unequal treatment, according to Moroccan family laws. Click here.

In India, polygamous Muslim marriages are indeed few and far between. Old wives’ tales to the contrary, the National Survey Commission on the Status of Women in India (1975), one of the few surveys on polygamy in India, found that incidence of bigamy and polygamy was higher among Hindu tribals than Muslims.

In the two decades between 1931 and 1951, the incidence of polygamy among Hindus and Muslims were comparable: 6.79% for Hindus and 7.29% for Muslims in 1931-41; and 7.15% for Hindus and 7.06% for Muslims in 1941-51. With access to education and its concomitant modern values, polygamy declined on the whole for all Indians, Hindus and Muslims. During 1951-61, 5.06% Hindus engaged in polygamy in contrast to 4.31% figure for Muslims.

It is universally acknowledged that the Quran does permit polygamy. My stand is that the conditions it puts are designed to actually discourage polygamy.

Four wives, that tempting luxury, are dealt with in Chapter 4 or Surah An-Nisa (Women) of the Quran, verse 3.

Here’s Pickthal’s translation: “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.”

It is common for theologians to explain it to madrassah students this way. God says ‘marry one, two or four’, you have to the freedom. But remember, you have to do equal justice to not just all of them, but also all your children, especially if they are orphaned. The verse then enjoins Muslims to restrict themselves to just one (wife) if they fear doing injustice.

How long can we go on propagating the myth that Islam permits reckless freedom to marry four wives at a time?

However, with those having pre-conceived notions, statistics don’t work. Prejudices do not melt away easily. Man finds it difficult to stomach anything that goes against his instincts.

If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, said Bertrand Russell, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. “If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.”

Islam appears radical only when you “essentialize” it. Examples: polygamy it’s there in the Quran; beating women, it’s there in the Quran. So, Islam endorses both. But then the Prophet never ever beat a woman in his life.

There are problems with the way Muslims have interpreted the Quran. There is a difference between religion and religious knowledge. Religion is divine, according to Muslim faith, but knowledge of Quran and how it is applied is not. Religious knowledge is human-developed. There is a need for non-Muslims and Muslims to shift from a literalist reading of the Quran to a liberatory one.

I am saying there can be more than one way of reading the Quran and we need to re-read it. I am against treating the Quran as an absolute text. That betrays its very meaning. True, the texts don’t change. But the Contexts do.

If you want an answer on whether I would criticize something I don’t like about Quran, then you have to understand the goalposts. There cannot be clinical answers to crises.

Are we dealing with a crisis in Islam? Yes. Am I looking to please an audience? No. If I say I disagree with a certain line in the Quran, this may please a big section of the audience. This is not the purpose. People who believe in a faith don’t question God. Atheists do. The solution in my considered opinion is to re-read the Quran and privilege a liberatory reading over literalist reading.

More and more Muslim countries have realized that what is applicable to religion may not be applicable to the state. Marriage is just one of them.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (12 votes, average: 3.25 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
  • Ankit

    I was interested when I read this sentence “My stand is that the conditions it puts are designed to actually discourage polygamy.” But I never found the evidence in your article to support this sentence. Is it this “The verse then enjoins Muslims to restrict themselves to just one (wife) if they fear doing injustice.” ?

    [Reply]

    S Reply:

    Hers is a translation.Hope it helps

    If you fear that you will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one or one that your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.” (Quran 4:3)

    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).” (Quran 4:129)

    [Reply]

    Anil Reply:

    Muhd himself was utetrly fond of his youngest bride Aayehsa so much so he used to reaon wiht other wives to let aayesha have her term in muhd’s bed.. obviously muhd was not just in his dealing and yet he kept all those wives. so much for tall claims

    [Reply]

    S Reply:

    Prophet, as muslims consider him best among humans, but he is not God . So as a human being he has all the behaviour of a normal human being.We consider him to be the best role model but still a Human being , just like you & me.(long story)

    What you say is correct, but here is the difference ,He treated all his Wives & gave them all there rights they deserved.see the above Qutation Quran 4:129.(Please understand what it says)

    Explanation to the best of my ability :-
    say you get married & after some time have a second marrige.But it’s pretty human to like or love someone more & someone less.So you start treating your first wife badly, you stop looking after her.Don’t provide her emotional & physiycal comfort etc. So what happens, the first wife is not treated well by you & she hangs in middle, she is still your wife , but you are not fulfilling your role as husband towards her. So Quran asks if such a position arrives in your marrige , it’s better to divorce then continue an unhealthy marrige.

    In the case of Prophet this never happend,he treated them well & did the best according to his ability to treat them fairly.Neither of his wife’s were hanging in the middle,as the quran says.

  • Nusrat

    So, u did’nt get any reviews for this article…perhaps many may not have read but for those who have ..Bertrand Russell’s saying applies.

    [Reply]

  • gopi thomas

    Ok fgriend, you are right, Muslims do not practise bigamy/polygamy. it is all others, mainly Hindus…

    [Reply]

  • K

    “Islam appears radical only when you “essentialize” it.” – well, this to me sounds like ’smoking is bad on when you smoke’ , so under other conditions smoking may actually be interpreted as good !

    My friend Zia, I dont know why you think you have to rationalize everything that muslims do or everything thats written in the Holy Quran.

    Times have changed – this book is thousands of years old and not all books have to stand the test of time.

    Educated muslims in this day and age live a perfectly meaningful life without having to get a ‘no objection certificate’ from the Quran for every decision.

    Because everything good that a muslim does, comes from the allah inside him. Everything that a muslim does thats right, doesnt have to come from the Quran.

    [Reply]

    vikram Reply:

    Thats the most enlightened thing i have ever heard “Because everything good that a muslim does, comes from the allah inside him. Everything that a muslim does thats right, doesnt have to come from the Quran.” this applies to all religions. I can be a perfectly good hindu maybe without agreeing to everything which is said in the ramayana, Mahabharat or manusmiriti. in fact if there is something blatantly wrong then we should simply update that part with a short footnote saying “uh oh u got it wrong there buddy here let me help u correct it” what the hell is wrong with that. Books are written by people and people make mistakes.

    [Reply]

    K Reply:

    Absolutely !! I hope you agree. It is as true for Quran as it is for any other book.

    Humans need to listen to the allah or bhagwan inside them and not the book outside. This is what our religions believe in – I know this is what Hinduism believes in.

    [Reply]

  • K

    Sorry, I meant – smoking is bad only when you smoke

    [Reply]

  • http://thegoofysufi.blogspot.com/ Amit Julka

    Hi Zia,

    The verse that you mentioned was also critically analysed by Maxime Rodinson,whose books are quite an authority on the Prophet and Islam in general.His interpretation is quite opposite to yours.However,that is not my point.My point is,isn’t it quite illogical to relate everything concerning Muslims with the Quran.
    No doubt,Quran is a splendid book which probably gave mankind it’s first glimpse into a classless and a divisionless society.But at the same time,if I am not mistaken,Quran mentions some verses which point to a requirement of 4 female witnesses against one male.Instead of having an apologist’s take on it,why not accept the fact that the verse has lost it’s validity and move on(The way I don’t buy the Manu Smriti’s nonsense on caste distinctions etc.).

    [Reply]

    S Reply:

    That verse to the best of my knowledge is applicable in finanial transactions & not in other matters.

    But it has been misued by muslim countries.

    why:- Women 1400 years back werent really high flying executives with great finacial experties in matters of money.This is a general assumption , exceptions are always there.(Exception :P rophets first wife Khadija, who was a bussiness women, Prophet used to work for her,& coz of his honesty, she praposed marrige(she was a widow , her first husband hadi died))

    I know it has been misuesd, this is my two cents on this issue.

    Every law has a reason, there was reason why it was valid & can be valid now.When that reson does not apply that law(or saying of prophet does not apply(This is what i belive)).So if we find a women witness knowledgeable in finance , why should it be disregarde.
    If say has a men, has less knowlege about finance then a women witness, then it’s pretty common sense whos word need to be taken.

    [Reply]

    Aamina Reply:

    “According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of the 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry”

    Polygyny is the situation in which one man is either married to or involved in sexual relationships with a number of different women at one time. This is the most common form of polygamy

    It’s a lot more common than we realize and lets not be so hypocritical about it.
    Wiki has a vey good article on it with some pretty good sources listed.

    Please check it out.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy

    Islam works with the realities of this world not impractical idealism. To a lot of societies listed, 4 wives is actually a limitation not an excess.
    While I personally discourage polygamy, I’d like readers to first have a more world view of the state of polygamy today before making any conclusions about Islam.

    [Reply]

    VARUN SAXENA Reply:

    Polygamy is not some practical idealism.
    If you start becoming practical then men will want to have sex with every other women.

    Polgamy was practised in every society merely because men have ruled over women for many years now. Their wills and desires have been more addressed to rather than a female’s.

    In older times males used to provide security financially and physically to their women.
    Women could not earn as most of the jobs required huge amount of physical strength.
    Because of these reasons it still made some sense in old times but is a horrendous practice to continue in modern times because of the nature of work in today’s society does not require much physical work.

    Also yes a woman has to give consent to second wife. But when the women is totally dependent on her husband for even food what other option does she have other than meekly surrender to her husband’s lustful desires.
    Economic independence is the key in women making independent decisions
    Why is it most laws are biased in favor of women in INDIA. This is because women are disadvantaged braodly speaking and cannot fully exercise their will.
    Even if she takes divorce. Who loses if the women is not earning(the case with majority of Muslim women)

    Polygamy is just about lust and is a product if a patriarchal society(whether amongst Hindus, Muslims or whatever), If polygamy is to be allowed polyandry shud also be allowed neither none of them should be allowed.

    Aamina Reply:

    Mr Varun Saxena,

    You’re still looking at things from an urban perspective. These ‘modern times’ people keep talking about exist in only small pockets around the world. Hard labour is still a large part of people’s occupation. You speak as though these things don’t happen anymore.

    And in case of polyandry, in more cases than not, it is still exploitative of women. Young girls are forced to marry many men at the same time especially in areas where there is a disparity in the male:female sex ratio.

    My point is, even in societies where polygamy is banned, it exists.

    “Polygamy is illegal in India for Hindus under the Hindu marriage Act. It remains legal for Muslims under the terms of The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937, as interpreted by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board. Ironically, according to the 1961 census (the last census to record such data), polygamy was actually less prevalent among Indian Muslims (5.7%) than among several other religious groups. Incidence was highest among Adivasis (15.25%) and Buddhists (7.9%); Hindus, by comparison, had an incidence of 5.8%.”

    So when I mean working with the realities of life, so rather than banning it completely, the Quran permits polygamy on certain grounds which is defined by the socio-economic conditions of the various societies that decide to follow it.

    Rajeev Reply:

    I am pretty sure if census are done today, it will be close to 0% for hindus and more than 20% for muslims.

    Anil Reply:

    All those hindus have double wifes under umbrella of islam.. You ask them and each and everyone of them have some muslim name on paper

    K Reply:

    Aamina,

    I completely agree with you, but the author isnt trying to defend polygamy he is trying to defend the Quran, which he doesnt have to.

    Noone can claim that only muslims indulge in sex with more than one woman. But the author seems to make a presumption that polygamy is bad so he is defending Quran. This is a different perspective from yours.

    You dont need to worry, because islam is not being cornered here. I personally believe that polygamy is the reality of the current day and age, irrespective of religion.

    Jai Reply:

    @Aamina,
    “To a lot of societies listed, 4 wives is actually a limitation not an excess.”

    If only, if only more women thought like you. Sadly, we men are always misunderstood. There is no fairness in this modern world. It makes my heart bleed.

  • http://thegoofysufi.blogspot.com/ Amit Julka

    By the way,with respect to my previous comment….I don’t claim authority on anything I wrote.It is just a point of view…If anyone finds any errors,please don’t hesitate in pointing them out

    [Reply]

  • Mitra

    I agree with most of this. It is correct that 1) Islam permits polygamy only under certain conditions
    2) Many Muslim countries have introduced further restrictions on polygamy- and some have prohibited it outright. 3) Bigamy or polygamy is increasingly viewed unfavorably among educated Muslims in India as well as in Muslim countries.

    However, it is hard to deny that 1) Having laws on your books that permit polygamy is highly discriminatory against women and places them in an unfavorable position. Laws matter- imagine if India’s laws permitted dowry or dowry related torture. Lot of bad things happen in any society, but the function of law should be to discourage them. 2) indian society is highly patriarchal- the same is true for most Islamic countries. Under these conditions, giving men the right to marry again- tilts the bargaining position further against women in significant ways 3) In many Islamic countries, personal law is administered by Sharia courts (Malaysia for example), and polygamy becomes part of a broader package all elelments of which discriminates against women. In Malaysia, there was a ruling that you can divorce your wife through a SMS! Sharia courts also tend to have regressive laws on divorce and alimony which tend to be less pro-women than similar laws in the West.

    Zia cited the Law Commision report. The report didn’t even talk about reforming Muslim personal laws to prohibit polygamy- they were too scared to go there. But even then- some Muslim religious clerics were so bothered by the Law Commision’s conclusion that polygamy was not strictly speaking permitted in Islam that they were taking it as an assault on their religous identity and planned to meet the Prime Minister to warn the government against any attempt to reform the laws. What does that tell us?

    [Reply]

    S Reply:

    In Islam , marrige is a civil contract between man & women.

    A women , if she want’s can put any condition she feels like will protect her or be beneficial to her.If both the parties agree. Those conditions become binding on the husband.Same rights are provided for men too.

    Some examples :-

    1. Husband will ask for written permission ,if he desires to have second wife.
    2. Husband will neve have second wife , till they both are married.
    Get a divorce,if husband is misuing the law(plogamy), or you belive he will not treat you fairly.
    No body forcing a women into polygamy,she can get a divorce if she & her husband do not agree.
    3. Alimony ,or what we call Meher, is compulsory on the part of men to give to women(even in no divorce conditions),The amount can be anything, it depends upon the agreement between man & wife.(You still dont have that right)(Men dont have any right to any kind of Alimony in Islam, discrimanatory for men, Ha ha !!!)

    The two women or more have a right to separate houses, how many men can afford this???

    4.Yes men & women have different ways of divorcing each other, can be said to be easier for men.But women also have the right,even when husband refuses to cooperate.In his absence divorce can be given & have been given.

    5.In India we have moved to stage were in few years we will be allowing marrige btween same sexes.But you still have a problem with polygamy,

    6.A few countries in europe(google it) recently allowed marrige between more then on partners.
    one man two wives, or even two men one wive if they desire to.

    Yes i belive men have misued certain freedom given to them, this is what i want from Indian Gov.

    discrimination is not coz of polygamy, coz men misuse it & goverment looks the other way.
    Or you belive women shold also have the right tomarry more then Husband as men have can marry more then one women.(then probably no discrimantion, according to you)

    Make it possibel for women(Muslim Personal Law) to bring criminal charges , if he marries second time without her permission.
    Or after marrying a second time with her permission,but does not treat her as he should.

    I personally know a Sikh gentelman who has two Wives.both are happy , Should they be divorced & put in jail ????????????
    I know some one in election commision who were in the procees of making electroll rolls for elections.they told me they found many instances of Polygamy(inHindus, sorry no offence) , were both the wives lived in the same house. What is your opinion on this ??????????

    Regarding Laws:-
    Hindus have Hindu marrige act
    Muslims have Muslim Personal Law
    Same goes gor othe communities too.

    Best that can be done, maintain these laws, & bring a personal law for every one who desires to be governed by it.
    A good source to read Asgar Ali Ebgineer on these issues.

    [Reply]

  • Sam

    Zia,
    Should polygamy be permitted in today’s India for muslims only ?

    Do the current conditions warrant it ?

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Sam, @K, @SKS
    Re’ polygamy:
    Been reading up a fair bit. I guess the questions I am grappling with are:
    1. Is polygamy justified?
    – under any circumstance?
    – for both men and women or only for men?
    2. Is marriage sacrosanct?
    – what is the definition of marriage?
    – can the definition of marriage itself evolve over time?
    3. Is marriage a private institution or a public institution? Is it a matter of civil rights?

    I think almost 99% people commenting here are against “polygamy”. Certainly, speaking for myself, I react to it almost at a visceral level.
    But, then I ask myself, testing my libertarian instincts more than anything else:
    - if I can whole-heartedly support homosexual unions, bowing to the principle of individual liberty and freedom, then can I not apply the same principle to a man being in a relationship (within a marriage or otherwise) with 2 women; or vice versa?
    - what about a large number of “couples” I know who are together, without being married? What about folks I have known, who lead a “carefree” existence, avoiding commitments, far less marriage?
    - is the function of marriage only to enforce monogamy? Or, does your desire to be monogamous lead to marriage?

    The prevailing wisdom and social mores seem to support monogamy. However, a parallel trend, in many parts of the world is collapse of traditional marriage as an institution. In many of the countries where marriage has become passe’, it has not led to the collapse of “family values” or abuse of children and like. In fact, many of those countries are way ahead in HDI parameters.

    World is changing too fast for us to make sense of in most times.
    However, invoking scriptures to justify or not is dicey. In most cases, people have moved on and thankfully so.

    [Reply]

    Rizwan Reply:

    A Big YES

    [Reply]

  • Ankit

    Most of the blogs that you have written talk about “the quran has been misinterpreted….this is not what the quran said and etc etc etc”. But what about common sense, and rational decision making process? should’t that come before any holi text ? (and i would say the same to all the communities)

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Ankit,
    Precisely.

    [Reply]

  • Anil

    Already LAw minister has clarified that he meant Hindus who convert to islam in order to save their skin in case of bugamy will nto be allowed to do so i future.. Muslims still remain free to indulge in polygamy..

    And if Sunnat is to be followed even sex-slave is allowed..

    Yon can try as much as you want but I can quote Quran hadeeth to show how sex-slave and polygamy is part of sunnat.. I know telling te obvious inhereant in holy book makes me hindu extremist and has no bearing on the scriptures where this kind of sick tradition flows..

    tsk tsk

    [Reply]

  • Anil

    Just a question do you even know how Sufiyah a 17 year old girl was forced to have sex the very night her husband was murdered ..

    This si SUnnat to..

    Btw I have talked to many muslims all of them say actuallY Sufiah married willingly.. Let us for a second accept that premise can anyoen tell me is sex on mind of a girl the day her husband gets butchered .

    IN fact that girl first was about to be defiled by soem leitenant of Muhd’ army but when he saw her beauty he though prophet deserved her..

    Very idea that twithin 24 hours of husband’s killing killers had sexual copulation with the girl tells me it was rape..

    I neevr stumbled upon these kind of indefensible while reading abotu Buddhar or Jesus why do I stumblem upon this kind of utter nonsense in name of religioisity while reading Quran/Hadeeth

    Muslims must give a serious thought how in the world can you justify romp with a girl whose husband has been murdered few hours ago.

    [Reply]

    Sam Reply:

    Not just her husband, her brother is also killed.
    Mohd (islam’s founder) then sleeps with this girl on the same night.

    If someone does it now, they will probably punished for rape.
    (ofcourse the apologists say that the girl freely chose to marry Mohd and enjoyed the night)..

    [Reply]

    Anil Reply:

    I have heard myriad alibis for that sick event..
    (1) like Prophet had special sanction to indulge in things like that..
    Nobody asks why wud God give this kind of sanction for one man and creat bad example
    (2) Girl married him.. Fine I cud have bought this argument had this marriage takne place after sometime but my mind can;t accept the fact that even before her husband brother father everyone was buried she was keen to get married and have sec
    (3)If girl had problme she could have poisoned muhd later on
    There was another girl who called for her tribemen to avenge her husband’s death and that girl got mercilessly killed.. Yes no doubt she cud have poisoned him if she wanted but then what those vultures wud have left her alone
    (3) prophet was so charismatic and good looking that the girl fell in love wiht prophet and willingly had sex with him..They claim even today arab muslims get so many sexual overtures from rest because they are so good looking

    This was the lamest excuse I got no girl can jump into bed with killer of her husband within hours of the killing..

    Moreover mind you that girl was first abotu to be raped by soem minion of prophet only because she was very beautiful she landed into prophet’s bed.

    I even asked one fo the muslim guy what if I kill you and do the same with your wife will that be oke.. his reply was you have not been sancitoned by GOD to do so.. I asked what if I claim the same just like porphet.> after all noone saw God sanctionig these kind of sick acts for prophet..

    No sane person can justify these things..

    As I said befoe netiehr jesus nro Budha has this kind of nonsense in their profile and I have no problme with looking at their preachigns for merit but soemhow I can’t brign myself to trust words fo characters like prophet..

    All thsi certainlymakes me hindu extremist and I am proud of that

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Anil,
    the point is that looking to scriptures for guidance to modern living is fraught with dangers..

    There are perhaps 2 ways of dealing with ancient texts (of any religion) today .. revisionism or reinterpretation. (I have a 3rd way- ignore; but let that pass :-) )
    Most religions accept revisionism in some form or the other (even the Church came around to accepting the earth is round and while they still peddle creationism, maybe they will come around on that as well.. couple of Papacies later).
    Re-interpretation can address non-essential parts; perhaps the “ritualistic” parts of religion. But, revisionism is akin to surgical treatment.
    Maybe, and this is not a flippant comment and said with all sincerity at my command:
    The answer is to have an abridged version/ essential version of the Holy Quran for the believers which does not have the non-essential references that maybe considered open to misinterpretation.
    - misogynistic references
    - any reference to other religions/ non-believers which are, ahem, defamatory
    - calls to violence
    Remember the old British injunction? “Don’t do what I do, do what I say”.
    It should be possible, given the volume of the work to find verses that do not offend the senses of a modern citizen and create a body of work which is the “Essential Quran”.
    I am not saying discard the full, unabridged version. Just follow the abridged one.
    We Hindus also have all sorts of nonsense in our scriptures; but, we get by just fine by ignoring the ****.
    Perhaps, a fanciful thought. Again, I am an atheist and nothing gives me more pleasure than being an iconoclast. Revisionism would have been the best. But, my approach may not work for everyone; particularly for those with faith.

  • Anil

    If our legislaots had sense they would have in one go implemented UCC..

    If muslims livign in other secular republic can abide by oen wife law why can;t they in India.. but then that would be sensible thign to do and if you talk sense you are a hindu extremist…

    Even Hindu kings of yester-eyars used to have several wives.. King Dashrath Rama’s father had three wives Hindus don;t go around complainign how their religion is being compromised by not allowing polygamy.. but then hindus or for that matetr any other vedantic religion are evolving religion.> here we are talking about a religion which claims all the intellect intelligence in matters of faith got frozen in 7th century AD .. I hope they understand how this kind of thinking is slap to the intellect of post seventh century generation muslim non-muslim alike..

    [Reply]

  • http://- Rajeev

    Zia as a muslim will never contradict Quran and if he does he will be castigated by his community and even his allah who may send him to hell for questioning Quran (a brainchild of arab tribals who never had any philosophy of their own).

    I once asked my highly educated muslim friend that many things in Quran are out of sync with modern world and why do muslims like him accept all this mumbo jumbo in Quran?

    His answers is still fresh in my memory-
    “Quran me akal ka dakhal nahi chahiye”.

    This was taught to him right from childhood.

    The people like Zia are nothing but literate Jahils.

    [Reply]

  • SKS Mumbai

    Dear Mr. Zia

    Yes, I have also heard many times that this 72 virgin part is long standing myth. But I have been unable to find any site which actually gives comprehensive answers to all the related questions. For e.g.

    1. I am sure there would be many ways of reaching the heaven but would killing of non-muslims by itself result in disqualification from the heaven? Or is it that the killing should be for some valid reasons only and not necessarily of non muslims?

    2. Is it that the heaven does not offer it at all, I mean not even one? Or it offers only a limited no?

    3. Is it possible that these virgins are some symbolic things, with sex not being in picture at all? That they are meant for some other purpose. Although I read somewhere that formal marriages are also envisaged, in which case it is pretty much the same as the earth, with numbers being the only difference. The ultimate dream of men to have someone who won’t exist before or after the act would still remain unfulfilled.

    Or is the problem related to taking things out of context? Or bad translation?

    On group sex part, I fully agree with you that God couldn’t have meant Group sex, given that group sex is defined as sexual behaviour involving more than two participants “At the Same Time”. But with 72 virgins, there are other exciting possibilities, say, something like continuous batching process.

    But what I am completely at a loss to comprehend is the part you wrote about “Islamophobes cringing at the very thought when Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Mansion has far more bedrooms with far sexier bunnies” what are you trying to say here, that Islamophobes don’t have a problem with playboy mansion or that they are actually jealous of him?

    [Reply]

  • http://- Rajeev

    I think, polygamy is morally wrong and any book including Quran that tries to justify is equally wrong.

    Why should women be considered as walking Vaginas instead of human beings? What gives men right to keep harem of women?

    The women who justify polygamy based on Quran need to come out salvery and live in modern world.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Zia,
    Can you tell me why Mohammad took new wives only after death of his first wife Khadija (who was also his employer)? Was he scared of her or there were no widows at that time?

    Why did he marry 9 year of Ayesha? She was no widow or helpless women?

    Why did he marry wife of his adopted son? Was he trying to help his helpless SEXY daughter-in-law?
    Why did he ban adoption of kids in Islam? Is it because he wanted muslims to follow his example?

    [Reply]

    Anil Reply:

    In fact in case fo Aayehsa Muhd did kind of resevation when Aayesha was born allah in his infinte wisdomw wnated that girl to be married to him god knows what wisdom came out of this only thign that i can see is that sunnah of muhd has given licence to islamsit to marry 6-9 year old kids to 60 year old men..
    Khadija was powerful lady mind you muslims would like you to belive women were oppressed any pre-islam era in arbai btu here is a powerful lady owning her own business and no pagan tried to snatch her wealth..

    [Reply]

    Rizwan Reply:

    Because those pagans were Arab and did not come from Gujrat

    Anil Reply:

    It’s not just polygamy Islam even condones sex-slavery and concubine-keeping tradition.. Slavery was endorsed too.. IN fact basra in Iraq used to be called slave capital.. Once these slaves revolted and for 8-9 months Iraq’s governorship was under seirosu threat from thsi slave revolt…
    One of the hadith I found very revolting..Once a girl was broguht to prophet .. her crime was that she became pregnant out of wedlock of course punishment for ghe girl was what wa.. then the question was asked what will happne with the kid born muhd’s verdict was that he will become slave and anyoen can buy him.. Some sprititual guide mr. muhammaed was.. When you read these things you stop taking anythign coming from this gentleman;s mouth seriously..

    [Reply]

    Rizwan Reply:

    What is wrong if two women agree to marry a man out their FREE WILL and are happy with him – Where does the role of other people or state come in – What about the LIBERTY & FREEDOM & HUMAN RIGHTS of these women and man if all the three agree -

    The fact is that polygmay cleanses the society from Zina (Adultery) and Adultery is what YOU people like (Ramayana & Mahabharata & Khajuraho!!!)

    And all this for the sake of your religion – Muslims never make a problem for Hindu Religion ( I wonder if there is really one) like worshipping rats, elephant with man head, or the big black penis of Shiva (Linga)-

    And an advice for Mr. Zia – Let us start a new discussion about a very impotant topic concerning our Country – ” MURDER OF HINDU GIRLS BY THEIR PARENTS EVEN BERFORE THEY ARE BORNED ”
    Yes the Female Feoticide by the Hindus-
    Good Job Mr Zia & nice comments by Aamina

    [Reply]

  • Pulkit

    Zia has mentioned enough details that give a different dimension to the non-Muslim idealists to think about Muslims and the Islamic culture in itself. For a decent time, Muslims and lower castes are blamed for the ever growing pop-density of the nation. Hopefully the citations shall clear some mental cob-webs of non-Muslim hardliners.

    [Reply]

    Rizwan Reply:

    You are right – More truth to be exposed – Need for more people like JASWANTH SINGH & HEMANT KARKARE

    [Reply]

  • Ashish

    Bertrand Russel revisited:
    A Muslim man is offered a “fact” that the Holy Quran actually discouraged polygamy; but, this goes against his instincts (which is polygamous). So, he scrutinizes the Holy Quran closely, and looks for evidence (empirical) in support of the said “fact”. The evidence is underwhelming; so, he goes ahead and becomes polygamous anyway because Koran encouraging polygamy may be a myth, but, it is a fact that Muhammad is the most “beautiful pattern of conduct” and “example” for mankind to follow (Qur’an33:21), as well as the “exalted standard of character” (Qur’an 68:4)

    @Zia, if Quran discourages polygamy, well and good. We believe you. So, outlaw it like the rest of Indians. When? What’s stopping you?
    Unless you tell us that the problem is actually within. Most Muslims perhaps do not agree with your interpretation. How can Hindus help, other than stop propagating “myths”?
    How many public appeals have you issued to mobilize public opinion among the Muslims against multiple marriages?

    [Reply]

    Anil Reply:

    Zia is apologist even he would come in the field opposing you and I the moment UCC issue comes.. He knows if Prophet was perfect man and he did marry kids and he did have sex slaves then all those thigns become halal for muslims..

    [Reply]

  • Ashish

    I meant outlaw polygamy; just being abundantly clear here :)

    [Reply]

  • Yasmin

    Polygamy is permitted in Islam with a number of conditions, which have been discussed.
    There is one more point which should be highlighted, Polygamy was introduced in Islam at a time when there were wars being fought very frequently, & men were dying in large numbers. There were too many widows & orphans in the society. Men married a number of times to give widows & the orphans a roof over their heads.
    Polygamy has been exploited the most…the limit is when somebody embraces Islam just for a second marriage.

    [Reply]

    Anil Reply:

    Really that’s whY muhamamd sahbe out reservation on a newly born baby named Aayehs athat if and when she eaches 9 years he will marry her.. I am sure there would have bene no lack of offers from young suitors for her..

    And how about when he forces his adopted son to divorce hsi wife so that he can marry her..

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Isn’t it true that a Muslim men can have 4 wives at one time?
    But Mohammad had more than 4 wives (around 6 or 7) at the same time. Did he not commit sin against commands of Allah (Quran)?
    If he is a sinner, why do you follow Sunnat?

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    The fact is that Mohammad was horny men who mis-used his position and forced people to give him SEXY girls to sleep with.

    If this is the definition of prophet then every rapist qualifies to be Prophet?

    [Reply]

    Yasmin Reply:

    Where are you getting your facts from? Before you slander a religion & use such strong words you have to to think twice??
    Well, polygamy was prevalent in all religions at that time & all the gods etc. whom I do equate to “Prophet” ….did have a number ( ?) of wives or, whatever.
    We CAN NOT keep harping on what was done at that time, times change & so do the concepts in the religion. Whatever has been written in the Quran has been interpreted in many ways by many people. It depends on us, to choose what is right. You have a mind , don’t you??
    One is allowed 4 wives in Islam even now, but has to treat them equally. Is it humanely possible? So, consider this luxury of 4 wives as good as useless. And if someone wants to marry 2 times or 4 times too, it depends on that individual more than whether he is a Hindu Or a Muslim.
    Please use milder words…

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Total BS.
    Why can a men have 4 wives? You justify it based on some pre-condition that all 4 have to be treated humanely (I will read it as EQUALLY).

    However why is this special right reserved for men only?

    Why can’t a women keep 4 husbands provided she treats them equally?

    Your kind of women are the biggest enemy of women and society.

    Your prophet was nothing but a sex-addict who couldn’t control his Dlck.

    Rajeev Reply:

    Please pardon my language but do answer my questions on Mohammad.

    The muslims have divine right to run down every religion but they can’t take even little heat.
    The Indian muslims firm their muslimness by abusing faiths of non-muslims especially hindus. I am not saying this based on any hearsay but I have seen it with my own eyes.

    By the way I have absolutely no soft corner for pajama chhap hardline hinuds. I’d definitely not like hindus to behave like muslims.

    SKS Mumbai Reply:

    Boby
    All you say is True. The Gospel

    The previous post and your responses there are a moving testimony to futility of questioning faith.

    Of course, the difference as usual is not obvious to you. You are being only clever when you say my problem should have been what happened to victims, but here I am crying over denigration of hindus. The sentence was meant to say what it did. What you are trying to imply from that is nothing but clever use of my less than careful language

    What I find interesting is that you show here a till now unseen capability of (mis) using the words to achieve your end objective. Admittedly, my sentence did leave that scope. Strangely but not surprisingly, I did not notice even a very low level demonstration of these skills while interpreting the news reports on previous post.

    Where a “could be” from an Indian Secular becomes a Gospel.

    “Did say” or “said” by a Judge translates into “could have possibly meant to say”. Where it helped the “Right Cause”, then denial (fully or partially, ) or refusal to acknowledge even existence of those statements, hardly presented a problem. (e.g. Judge’s remark “the Report did say certain things, but 100’s of new accused were also added”, ). Having gone through your ideologically convenient interpretation skills, I have no more desire to debate this any longer. It is just my civility that I characterize all that in such respectable words.

    What is even more interesting is for the seculars to expect and also demand compassion for the victims (of course victim means. ……….. ) from even those who are officially declared as BIGOTS.
    This is so even as the first to last line of defenders of secularism Inc have never stopped (a) finding provocations, (b) asking for deeper analysis of the political context (c) citing socio-economic data and pointing at root causes, to sanitize (justify isn’t too far from here) the Godhra train burning and countless terror attacks. And History ? You can as well say, how are you feeling, History.

    You can even ‘comment’ on the language used by others especially after having established the Model Standards of Debating and showing the effectiveness of cutting edge debating techniques such as labelling, issuing IQ certificates And you have a problem with Language? Give me a list of abuses, which the moderator would have allowed but you did not use on Sanjeev, Rajeev, myself, Ashish and other Bigots.

    Your wisdom and profound analysis should not be wasted on arguing with low IQ bigots. As for me, It does take too much to overcome the temptation of not ripping apart your polysyllabic profundity (ies) and to not show you up for your True Beliefs and your scholarly methods. In the last post also, by the end of it I had humbly submitted to your staunch faith. But the temptation! Nevertheless I am reverting to my original position as far as responding to you is concerned. Of course once in a while, I might respond, but only to reiterate the reasons for letting your profoundities pass.

  • SKS Mumbai

    Dear Rajeev,
    I have a request to you, can we make the same point without resorting to abusive language ?

    About, your question of Probhet (PBH) marrying more than four times,I think there was some specific revealation which allowed Prophet (PBH) more than 4 marriages for some specific reason.

    I may be wrong,so I request someone with correct information to put this in perspective.

    [Reply]

    S Reply:

    Hi, yes you are right.

    war widows of his very close friends, political alliance etc.

    there were many reasons why he married some of the women, And there were many women who he refused to marry, or asked them to marry some one else.There were many women who came on their own to offer marrige.Some out of repect for the prophet & a chance to serve him, some maybe opportunistic or other considertaions.

    Some of the women were widowed during wars,due to political resons etc.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Pl. tell be if Ayesha (9 year old) did fit the criteria that you described or wife of his adopted son or Jew women won in war.

    Pl. stop this unnecessary appeasement of muslims and call spade a spade.

    [Reply]

    Yasmin Reply:

    Dear Mr. Zia,
    Is there no moderator on this site? How can such cheap language be allowed ?? Are these educated people? Some limits in the sense of decency has to be maintained.
    We read the blogs & their comments to gain some insight , don’t want to get in the debate of foul language.

    Rajeev Reply:

    Yasmin,
    Pl. ignore my foul language. Now explain me ratinale behind mohammad’s marriage with 9 year old ayesha.

    Don’t give me silly reasons based on “in those times”…A child is a child whether it is 5000 BC or 2500 AD.

    SKS Mumbai Reply:

    Hi Ashish and Rajeev (or can I use Bigots collectively?)

    For things to change or for progressive Muslims to demand and succeed in changing anything important, they have to address a very fundamental problem.

    Islam has always presented itself as something which is meant for all time (eternal) and all place (universal). all. Tenets of Islam we are told, are different from other semitic religions, because while others have suffered textual corruption over time, Koran has been preserved in its original form. And there is the question of Ijtihad. Whether reopening the doors to Ijtihad (closed centuries ago) would make any difference is difficult to say. I see the wider debate within Islam, loosely revolving around two types of arguments.

    One which claims everything is perfect, only if implemented fully. They will justify everything, including Polygamy and also produce what they call scientific evidence. That could range from a Zakir Hussain, saying Male-Female ratio requires polygamy, because Female population is always going to be more than male and it is not so in India and in some other countries because of societal preferences for male child, female infanticide etc to a Keralite maulavi saying, women are “out of service” for one week every month, so you need four to have full time service.
    In this group I see even those who rarely fail to extol the virtues of an Islamic state and this also includes highly educated Muslims.

    The other arguments either suggests the original itself has been misinterpreted or that we need to look at the context (when those verses were revealed) for understanding the current meaning or to adapt them to the current context. Of course the first part of their arguments does not hold much water or is unlikely to be taken seriously by those who matter. Because those interpretations are backed by a long history of evolution of Islamic jurisprudence, with at least 4 schools of sunni jurisprudence itself. On some of the most difficult questions (I will not name them here) all the four schools are either in agreement or present alternatives ranging from Conservative to Ultra conservative. The most liberal view would also be difficult be accept in a modern state based on principles of equality and individual freedom.

    For those who want to employ context based interpretations, they need to first address the Universal and Eternal theory. Some would claim that Universal and Eternal is for Koran not for its interpretations. If this arguments flies with the concerned people, it is great, but I don’t see that as a great hope. After all there is a limit to what you can achieve by playing with words without addressing the philosophy.

    There are some which are unlikely to be acceptable in any context, except that God wanted it. Again I am avoiding any specific references.

    How Victimology and the secular stance prevent or impede these processes are another story.

    Your comment don’t sell ice cream to Eskimos does explain one of the fundamental approaches of the defenders.

    Make a comment something in Islam is misunderstood, blame all and sundry for misinterpreting and Islamophobia etc. When you ask them specific questions as to what is the correct understanding, be sure you would be lectured on secularism, tolerance, bigotry, followed by Islam is a religion of Peace and some platitudes like, we are all one, there is one God, Allah is same as God, never ever answering the specific question with reference to verses of Koran. Ask again, you will get round answers, which will never address the specific question. For good measure, some verses like “no compulsion in religion” and “if you kill one. . . . . . . .” are also added, never mind the question. If till now you have not been classified as hate monger, prejudiced etc then your time is now.

    sanjeev Reply:

    All the discussions above clearly shows that Moha-Mad was a paedophile, rapist, murderer and womanizer, incest behaviour etc.

    As long as muslims will derive their morality from Quran these things will continue in the world.

    Sam Reply:

    I want to better than Mohammed.

    how can I get a new religion recognized in india ?

    In this new religion, I guarantee that God has spoken to me.

    Now he wants each man to have 40 wifes.

    Slavery is allowed.
    Woman captured in a war belong to you.

    SKS Mumbai Reply:

    Pulkit:

    “For a decent time, Muslims and lower castes are blamed for the ever growing pop-density of the nation. Hopefully the citations shall clear some mental cob-webs of non-Muslim hardliners”

    Now why don’t you do us a favor, like clear our mental cob-webs.

    Please give us the names of those Non-Muslim hardliners who blame “lower castes” also for population growth.

    Find out India’s 2001 census and give us the figures for religionwise growth rates for all post Independence decades.

    Do that and then tell us to clear our mental cob webs..

    Hasn’t secularism become way too easy.

    Rajeev Reply:

    SKS,
    I only use harsh words when these fundoos starting using twisted logic to justify unjustifiable facts.

    Please visit http://www.faithfreedom.org (run by EX-MUSLIMS) who have bared Islam for all of us.
    I have absoultely no problem with spirtual side of Islam but political and social Islam is threat to civillized world.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Ashish & others,
    I have not only interacted with Indian muslims but also muslims around the world. I was polite like you but it never helped because muslim community is full of people like Zia and Bobby who will keep using twisted logic, cry foul or become agressive when asked a justified question.

    You all can try your polite ways but it will not yield any result.

    You can not fight canon fire with swords (as Rajput did against muslim invaders). We hindus have a mentality of giving in right from the days of buddha and we haven’t learnt our lessons yet.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    It is PBUH (peace be upon him) but I refuse to use it for Mohammad.

    Get true info. on this warlord from http://www.faithfreedom.org and read articles and debates (with muslim scholars). Mr.Ali Sina (PBUH) has revealed the secrets of Mohammad on this website and challenged the muslim fundoos and apologists for debate. Not a single muslim fundoo (including Dr.Naik) have been able to defeat him in debate.

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Rajeev,
    I have problems with political Islam too but, I have a problem with foul language as well.

    Let’s not try and match Zakir Naik. Or Sadhvi Rithambhara for that matter.

    Logic and reason are the best friends in a debate. Intemperate language, worse, foul language just weakens your case.
    There are verses in Quran that many of us find difficult to digest. There are behaviours and/ or actions which are incompatible with modern thoughts. Even Krishna used to frolic with Gopinis; I must admit when I grew up it was a source of considerable envy :-) However, should a Hindu remember Krishna just as a deviant who could not control his libido?
    I maintain that while the existence of these verses can not be denied, a large number of Muslims lead a life blissfully ignoring them. What I have an issue with is going back to the scriptures to look for all the answers and in the insistence that all the verses of Quran are essential for a Muslim to believe in and adhere to. This ends up being a handy tool in the hands of manipulators of all hues, religious, misogynists, terrorists…
    Language such as yours is unhelpful, to say the least.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Krishna is never considered a role model for being good husband.

    You can say that Krishna too had uncontrollable libido. This certainly doesn’t offend me as I am not taught to defend moronic acts of gods or their avatars unlike my muslim friends.

    Pl. do visit wikiIslam to know truth about this political ideology.
    You can also read testimonies of ex-muslims who felt like prisoners when they were under the grip of Islam.

  • SKS Mumbai

    Rajeev
    I have been to that website and have read most of the debates and the articles there. Since 26/11

    But I remember one of your comments saying Hindus should stop behaving as .. …………

    In addition, a neutral or a new reader is unlikely to take your views as seriously as he would have with a less abusive comment.

    I do realize it is easier said than done, especially with the kind of responses we normally get here, on our bigotry, on our IQ etc. But isn’t that supposed to show the difference.

    Isn’t Bhagvad Geeta in some sense supposed to have preached ” do your duty with absolute detachment and don’t allow feelings of anger and joy to disturb you from your objective.

    In fact, my biggest problem with the approach of some of the hindutva proponents is precisely this. We like it or not but one Babri Masjid, one Gujarat and one Malegaon has enabled India’s secular establishment to wipe out centuries of history and countless terrorist attacks.

    [Reply]

    Bobby Reply:

    Dear SKS,

    “In fact, my biggest problem with the approach of some of the hindutva proponents is precisely this. We like it or not but one Babri Masjid, one Gujarat and one Malegaon has enabled India’s secular establishment to wipe out centuries of history and countless terrorist attacks.”

    Its very sad that your biggest problem with hindutva propents is just this that its giving hinduism a bad name or as you poetically put it wipe out “centuries of history and countless terrorist attacks”.

    What you say is similar to someone saying that his biggest problem with a rapist is that he gave his family a bad name and not that a women was raped. I would have hoped that your biggest problem with these murderers would have been that innocents are being murdered. Its really shameful but the difference between people like you and nuts like Rajeev is just the language.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    We all can see who is true nut in this case.

    You will become less muslim if you criticise anything that Mohammad did. Accept it and stop these pretensions of being an intellectual.

    I have debated with people like you who keep spewing garbage and when challenged you get agressive and use foul language. I was not the first one to use foul language but you and your co-religionists keep calling others nutcase, stupid etc.

    This is the exact reason you people are not liked by peace loving people.

    You will keep cribbing evenif whole world converts to Islam. Nothing can satisfy your victimhood mentality.

    [Reply]

  • Bobby

    Dear SKS,

    If you meant anything else than what was the only obvious interpetation I could make out, then I apologize.

    Regarding the other issue that was being discussed in the earlier blog post, as I have mentioned several times there, the Gujarat government has a history of lying and get the one civilian resistance that has come up against it to be maligned. It has tried it earlier by bribing Zaheera Sheikh to lie about Teesta and which was later found out when the SC gave her a clean chit and accused the BJP MLA for bribing Zaheera.

    Everything in the press points to precisely the same thing happening again i this instance. The SC has in fact if anything admonished the GoG council, and the HT report also says that the SIT has called the motive dubious, while the CJP reply clearly says that was “quoted in the court” was from a four page note.

    Anways this is the last time I am responding on this issue.

    Regarding language, I stand by what I said about the “Jeev twins”. They are first rate Nuts.

    [Reply]

  • Ashish

    @Yasmin,
    Okay, so it was acceptable in those days to be polygamous; 1 man marrying multiple women. So, you are saying polygamy is to be seen in the context of the times.
    Today, those conditions do not exist. The contexts have changed. Why not change the law?

    Please know that the leadership of the Muslim Indian community made public statements as late as last week asserting the inalienable right of a Muslim man to marry four times and asserting unqualified sanction from the Quran for this practice that is continuing “for a long time”.

    Secondly, what both you and Zia are very cleverly avoiding the mention of is this:
    immediately after this report was published, the Ulema council led a hue and cry. Familiar rant: “Islam in danger”. I am not going to mince words and will call this tendencious reporting full of half truths. The commission had to clarify that no change to MPL is being considered.
    Are the Hindus holding your leadership back from enacting a law banning polygamy among Muslims saying it is Un-Islamic as per Quran?

    Which Hindu individual, far less an organization did you see demonstrating asserting their right to convert so that they can marry a second time?

    If Pakistan can allow a movement led by its women as far back as in 1960s to the extent that today the life of a bigmist is made virtually untenable, why is the dominant Muslim Indian mindset “touch me not”?

    [Reply]

  • Yasmin

    Changing The MPL might not be acceptable to all the Muslims, because you know there is no dearth of fanatics in any religion & they will go to any lengths. Also, the change will not pertain only to polygamy…& we do not need to give the “Ulema” more fuel to light the fire.
    The life of a polygamist is virtually impossible anywhere, more so in the educated class. Muslim men who have an iota of sense do not go for a polygamous relationship. As I said earlier, it all depends on an individual. And yes, the times have changed & so has the application of many laws in Islam, for a majority of us.

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Yasmin,
    Now you are a victim of the Ulemas?
    So you want to wait till abolition of polygamy is acceptable to ALL the Muslims? And, of course bye bye UCC.
    If the Brits had waited till every Hindu had developed revulsion towards the practice of Sati to abolish it bowing to the demands of Rammohan Roy, or outlawing child-marriage or multiple marriages for Hindus.. I shudder. And, find a Hindu bigot on this blog who will want to restart Sati/ child-marriage..
    Please tell me: do the Ulemas represent a majority view in your community? Or a significant minority or an insignificant minority?
    And, why don’t you, try writing to the Ulema council with your views on why Quran prohibits multiple marriages? Give your correct postal address and name when you do. You know, we guys are sold; we agree with you. So, stop selling an ice-cream to the Eskimo; find the right audience.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Ashish,
    I challenge you that you can not make these muslim fundoos (bobby etc.) accept a single negative thing against muslim society and Islam.

    I’ll follow your POLITE discussions with these nuts (infected by arabic slavery called Islam) and see if you can get anything thru their underused brain.

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Rajeev,
    I dount I will get an answer, a straightforward one at any rate. If this was a personal blog and not hosted on HT blogs, I would not waste my time here.
    But, since it is hosted on a national daily, I expect this not to be used for propagating falsehoods/ half-truths about any society, give a distorted/ selective or motherhood version of history or current affairs and promote victimhood.
    As specific examples I object to the mention of the terms of the references of the commission without mentioning that the objections to the terms of reference or the conclusions never came from the Hindus but from the Muslims. I object to the citing of Tahir Mahmood without mentioning that he had to issue immediate clarifications that MPL was not being targeted for any amendments whatsoever.
    I object to the view that is being promoted on this blog that all the problems of the Muslims in India are because Hindus are misunderstanding them or at worst singling them out for victimization.
    I laugh at the attempts made to corner the Hindu Bigots by presenting “facts” which do not really wash. We are told that there was a Fatwa by Deoband against Terror but when we read the Fatwa, we find no condemnation of terrorists whatsoever. Admittedly I read the fatwa in translation but, I read it in a Muslim blog.
    And, I see no effort to underline the internal problems of the MUslims community in INdia. I would have thought a sincere effort would have constituted in highlighting the existing problems inside the Muslim Indian community, explain how those are holding them back and what internal challenges they face in reforming. But, no. Hindus are victimizing them. If that continues to be the problem, I don’t see 800 million Hindus vanishing in a hurry; so, find another solution!

  • http://- Rajeev

    There is silence on sex adventures of Mohammad…Where is prophet of truth BABBY?
    This is the way muslim avoid tough questions.

    By the way these victims have new issue on hand “Insult of bollywood icon SHAHRUKH BHAI at the hands of Satans”.

    [Reply]

    Ashish Reply:

    @Rajeev,
    I got the treatment once at Denver International; explosives scan, swabs taken from my laptop, air-blasts in an enclosed chamber and detailed questioning on my passport (all 5 booklets :-) )
    But the folks following me were really weird; it was an all white American family with 2 kids (both below ten). My surname is not Muslim nor was that of the American family.
    Racial profinling probably does exist, who can tell? But, from personal experience, I have seen many whites (Americans, Germans, Belgians..) being pullled in as well.

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Absolutely correct. There may be some instances of racial profiling but all in all it is a big NO NO.

    Isn’t it racial profiling when non-muslims are directed on freeway in mecca, not to enter city of mecca?

    [Reply]

  • http://- Rajeev

    Yasmin,
    Will be marry four men provided you treat them equally? Or do you think this right is only for Piddu Mian like Bobby?

    [Reply]

  • http://- Rajeev

    You can see how our pro-muslim media reacted when APJ was humiliated and when SRK was humiliated.

    It made very clear to us who they consider as true MUSLIM (SRK ofcourse).

    I am yet to meet a muslim who considers APJ as role model. Most of them talk about heroes who are slayers of Kafirs.

    [Reply]

    Ashish Singh Rathore Reply:

    @rajeev,
    “Krishna is never considered a role model for being good husband.

    You can say that Krishna too had uncontrollable libido. This certainly doesn’t offend me as I am not taught to defend moronic acts of gods or their avatars unlike my muslim friends.”

    Dear Rajeev ,
    you are free to belive what you belive but do not work on two realems simultaneosuly which are opposite. never try to understand the divine subject from your limited material logic perception.
    i doubt whether you will be able to grasp since vedic knowledge is very sublte and far different from sectrian Religion.but i will try to make you understand .

    Krishan was not Prophet, son of God , messanger etc but he was orginal GODHEAD which is source of every thing. All universe comes from GOD it means all good & bad exist in GOD .
    unless rascaldom exist in GOD it can not exist in us. but since he is GOD his every thing is perfect which is not in our case. GOD’s killing is as good as doing favour to his beloved one. that’s why all the demons killed by him as been sent to his spritual Planet( pls be careful not to read it as heavenly planet,since heavely planet is seen in vedic dharma(not religion) on material realem & seen very low esteem since is nothing but place to fullfil all lusty materialistic desire.)but same can not be true in the case we kill some one. so dont try to intimate the GOD .

    Krishan ’s dealing with gopis are seen as very high class vaisnav philoshpy which cant be unserstood unless & untill you have some idea of all the opulence of GOD.
    tha’s why these dealing with GOPI’s were given only in 10th chapter in Bhagvatam only after explaining who is krishna in first nine chapter. these dealing are not munadne attraction between boys& girls. & completely oppostite the material context here discussed of Hazrat Md dealing with girs/womens.

    1000 year’s of brutal ,fanatic rule of ISLAM has been survived by this great culture only due to the power of various saints like Kabir,tulsi,soodas& Abdul Raheem KhanKhana ,meerabai & numerous other like them by chanting the HOLY name of Krishna. The Bhagvat Gita is book not witten for some fanatic , barber tribale socity but is written for all living being (not only Human being) and till date considerd as most nobel book of Mankind dully endrosed by all intlecullas from all relgion.

    So pls be very careful while using the name of Krishna in material topics .
    and as far as ISLAM is considred defenietly it is true relgion but very thorughly exploited by it’s preacher & follwer to suit their wild lusty desire. every religon is true as long it teaches love to GOD & see all the creation of GOD as good as GOD himself , but as soon as it start discrimanating the livng creature eg we can eat animals becasue they are lower to us, we can kill people who worship GOD diffrent way , it becomes saitainic Religion.

    we should fight all these injustice & Adharma with all such capaciteis & capabilties given by GOD.
    so that this Land where God do not send any one but come himself can be saved so that HUMANITY can also be saved. if we keep offending GOD then no amount of wordly power can stop this land becoming the HELL like Afganistan or Pakistan. which was once part of this culture but only because our sin lost to us.
    Hare Krishna

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    My religion gives me freedom to criticise hindu gods as per my understanding without the fear of getting roasted in hellfire.

    I like many aspects of Krishna but it is not mandatory for us to support everything Lord Krishna did.

    This is very unlike muslims who simply can not raise questions on Mohammad’s life.

    [Reply]

    Ashish Singh Rathore Reply:

    Yes it is defenitely true that you are 100 % free to criticise the GOD as per our Dharma (not relegion) even GOD will not mind such thing. becuse you are part & parcel of GOD.
    but i request you pls gain some little more knowledge about the transedental subject of GOD so that you can know their is nothing like Good GOD & Bad GOD. and then you will be better equipped to face the assult on Hindu Dharma.
    This is weakest point of Hindus & they consider this Ignorance as Pride .thier is inherent inferiority complex in Hindus due to massive propoganda which was strated during English rule & after independence seudo secular Leader had maintained the staus que to exploite this situation. That’s the reason all other secterian relegion are launching attack on us in many diffrent ways for example conversion of Hindus.
    for this i recommend ” Bhagwat Gita as it is” from ISCKON & some Books of Swami Vivekanand .
    pls think

    and NOTE also that there are not “GODS” but GOD is only one & he manifest in infinite ways and many Demi-gods(which you are calling GOD ) are nothing but his diffrent energies for doing diffrent work like ministres in the cabinet of Prime-ministers. There is no bar on GOD ,tha’ts why he is GOD . This is our Philoshpy and Beauty of Hinduism.

    Rajeev Reply:

    I have very good understanding of my religion but I hate to flaunt it.
    This is between me and my god.

  • Paul

    Hi Zia

    I like the flexible approach, i like the approach where common sence is supreme and the understanding that nothing is absolutley right or wrong…irrespective of releigious beleifs… i think the intentions are more long lasting than the actual rules or advice given centuries before… but not everything becomes wrong too…. I think thats what creates problems… its individual perspective….. but i think thats where debate comes in… helps you understand your own beleifs better… i like the approach bro….Best Of Luck….

    [Reply]

  • Rizwan

    THE HOLY QURAN IS THE WORD OF ALLAH – READ IT WITHOUT ANY BIAS AND U WILL REALISE

    [Reply]

    Rajeev Reply:

    Both Quran and Allah are creation of Mohammad’s epileptic mind..

    [Reply]

    Ahmed Reply:

    The Concept & beleif of God is there in all humanity – All major religions of the world Christianity , Islam & Jews beleive in God inspite of diffferences .
    However what is idiotic is to worship the urine of cow – the cow itself, Idiot with an Elephant head {Ganpati) assumed to be created with the dirt of Parvati’s beautiful body – the penis of shiva – the rats – Idiots gods with many heads – naked & semi naked women !! Where will these hindus stop?

    [Reply]

  • http://islam100.wordpress.com Muqeem

    Geert Wilder stance is not new but it is revival of the ignorance of seventeenth century. Can you imagine hight of plurism in Islamic Society since and e during the last 1000 years even in the in the Europe Jews and Muslims were persecuted in Spain but Muslims were protecting Jews in Turkey. Christians lived under the islamic rulers in Syria, Palestine Egypt . No forced conversion and demolishing or restriction on church building was imposed but even Govt were repairing ailing church buildings. Evidence is there after 1400 year of Muslim rule a significant number of Christian live in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt. They were never persecuted due to religion , obtained high position in the Courts.
    I have strong and evident opinion that attitude and propaganda like Geert Wilder’s will increase rate of conversion in every country in Europe. Higher will be resistant and propaganda higher will be conversion to Islam. European individuals are educated and free opinion makers. When any body see Islam from the window of comparative religion, he decides in favor of Islam

    [Reply]

  • http://www.iphoneringtonemakers.net/ iphone ringtone maker

    Quite right! It is good idea. I support you.

    [Reply]

  • http://provestrastore.com provestra

    Very nice information.

    [Reply]

  • http://www.topvideoconverter.com/ video converter

    I apologise, would like to offer other decision.

    [Reply]

  • http://www.topfaxsoftware.com/ fax software

    Yes, I understand you. In it something is also thought excellent, agree with you.

    [Reply]

  • http://www.news-article.net/sports/training-for-century-make-use-of-mind-to-cycle-100-miles.html CenturyTraining

    Century Training…

    [...]change your ridingUsing heart rate monitors was probably the single [...]…

  • Anonymous

    How bad ? The PM has to assure the EC, ” Beta, do your work, no body will bother you !” Does EC look like a Constitutional authority ? Will the fate of Lokpal be the same ? The Khangress has reduced our institutions in to street show plays, inspired, written & directed by Maino clan.

    [Reply]

  • Raja Babu

    Facts about Jyoti Mirdha: M.B.B.S. Educated at SMS Medical College,Jaipur, Rajasthan. Of note, she was not selected through Rajasthan Pre-Medical Test, but because of familial political influence, she was nominated as a State candidate (Governor’s quota) of Manipur or Mizoram. This is strange as she was not a resident of either state; whereas these seats are reserved for state citizens, who on completion of medical training, return to these states where there are no medical institutes, and provide essential medical services to their citizens (which “Dr.” Mirdha has never done. Infact, “Dr.” Mirdha has never practiced medicine after “passing” out of MBBS and once even contemplated doing a fashion/interior designing course before jumping into politics on her Grandfather’s “Jat jagir”. She has wasted a seat from these North-Eastern states after obtaining it illegally and now is an MP). Later, her selection for post-graduate medical training was cancelled by a Rajasthan court, as she was found to be amongst the 30 undeserving candidates (who secured the 1st 30 positions in the 1997 Rajasthan Pre-PG Medical examination, never having performed with such brilliance in their MBBS course) found to have used unfair means (obtained a paper unfairly prior to exam- a leak) when taking the Rajasthan Pre-PG Medical test

    [Reply]

    dheeraj jain Reply:

    This is completely rubbish and defamatory…bunch of lies…

    [Reply]