Tough question. A number of reasons really - from desire to politics incorporating both and more.

They included the husbands of women being martyred and needing someone to care from them to treaties from other tribes/empires etc.

i think the prophet did it because some of the women had young kids and their husband died in martyrdom and nobody else wanted to/could marry them.

i dont think any man could look after 11 women equally, do you?

Who did the prophet (sallalahu 'ailahi wassalam) married for treaties, can you give us an example please?

i dont think i'd mind if my husband (inshaAllah) gets another wife..as long as he's fair and does all the stuff the prophet said you had to do. if he cant take on the responsability then he shouldnt, but its really up to him, plus living in the UK and having more than one wife might cause trouble so...

s.b.f wrote:

[b]Why did the Prophet marry 11 times?[/b]

Why?

And why are men not allowed to do the same now?

What is your PERSONAL opinion on men being allowed to marry on 4 times?

who said men cant marry lots of women today?

i think its cool to have multiple wives. one in each town. so whereever you go, you got a beautiful woman waiting for you.

sunni muslims can marry up to 4 women in a permanent marraige. but shia muslims can marry as many girls as they like in temporary muta marriages which as for limited period.
so you can have a wife for one day or for a year, and anything in between.

shia muslims believe all this is actually allowed in islam. but sunni muslims think it is not. thats because they dont listen to the Ayatollahs.

True.

We listen to Imam Ali (ra) who said that it isn't allowed.

you are funny.

I know. Thanks.

I am here all day.

Mutah marriages.. Ha!

thats just giving an 'islamic' name to 'going out'.. how very halal

I dont think we should trivialise Mu'tah so much - before it was banned it was allowed (but I realise that the same argument can be used for other things too, like alcohol).

I would suspect it is different from dating (but I do not know what the rules are apart from the suggested free for all that the idea seems to allow, but it cant be that simple).

Personal preference doesn't come in to it. If men are allowed upto 4 wives then they are.

There were a number of things which were exclusively for the Prophet (saw). Marrying more than 4 wives as you have mentioned, and then the wives not being able to marry after his death being another.

MuslimBro wrote:

Personal preference doesn't come in to it.

Yes it does - but not in the sense you took it.

You do not have to take the first person to arrive or all of them.

None of the men nowadays can compare to the Prophet (pbuh)
he mnarried those women because they were social pariahs and noone else would take them

I doubt we can find a man who can treat 2 wives equally

As for Mallik, saying he'd like beautiful women waiting in every town
ur a pig
a chauvinistic pig who thinks that a woman's purpose in life is to please HIM

Most of the guys in this town that I know of have married twice
the first being the mother's choice
theyve HAD to marry them basically
and the second is "their" choice
none of them are treated equally

1R4M wrote:

None of the men nowadays can compare to the Prophet (pbuh)
he mnarried those women because they were social pariahs and noone else would take them

That is simplistic and not true. These are the mothers of all the believers and the prophet also WANTED to marry them.

1r4m wrote:

I doubt we can find a man who can treat 2 wives equally

As for Mallik, saying he'd like beautiful women waiting in every town
ur a pig
a chauvinistic pig who thinks that a woman's purpose in life is to please HIM

Most of the guys in this town that I know of have married twice
the first being the mother's choice
theyve HAD to marry them basically
and the second is "their" choice
none of them are treated equally

Yes, let's blame the men. It easier that way and you can ignore the women who freely and willingly married them - its all the guys fault.

Or does that seem childish?

As for Malik, if he can convince two women to marrh him... who are we to stand in the way? Somehow though I do not consider it especially likely.

1R4M wrote:

None of the men nowadays can compare to the Prophet (pbuh)
he mnarried those women because they were social pariahs and noone else would take them

I doubt we can find a man who can treat 2 wives equally

As for Mallik, saying he'd like beautiful women waiting in every town
ur a pig
a chauvinistic pig who thinks that a woman's purpose in life is to please HIM

Most of the guys in this town that I know of have married twice
the first being the mother's choice
theyve HAD to marry them basically
and the second is "their" choice
none of them are treated equally

sister iram, pigs dont marry, they do haram stuff like zina with their own sisters. thats why they are pigs. disgusting animals. kafirs who eat them behave like them. look how those fathers in uk and austria do zina with their daughters. lanat on all pigs and lanat on kafirs who behave like pigs.

we muslims follow the sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh). he had many wives. you cant deny he had 11 wives of different ages from 6 to 40. if you think he did anything wrong, then maybe you are in the wrong religion. go convert to hinduism or something else, where they burn the wives when their husbands die.

i love islam and everything about islam. it is from Allah and i love it all of it. i dont dislike one bit of islam or on bit of what Prophet did and taught. Prophet (pbuh) is my first master sent by Allah. i adore him and his ways. i do not see anything wrong with islam whatsoever. you shouldnt either dislike islam if you want to be happy here in this life and want to go to heaven in the next. long live islam the true religion.

Technically, pigs are not required to follow the shariah that is for us.

More, they do not have free will.

(I would question the ages you mentioned though - they have been doubted by the historians)

Yes I generalised, the Propher did marry women he loved too
im not deny that (Aisha and Khadija notably)
what im saying is
some of them were divorcees and widows

Lilly wrote:

i dont think any man could look after 11 women equally, do you?

No requirement exists in Islam to treat them equally - they need to be treated with adl (justice)...

Anonymous1 wrote:

Lilly wrote:

i dont think any man could look after 11 women equally, do you?

No requirement exists in Islam to treat them equally - they need to be treated with adl (justice)...

Have you got explanation for that?

My understanding was that a husband had to spend equal time and money on his wives.

Ya'qub wrote:

Anonymous1 wrote:

Lilly wrote:

i dont think any man could look after 11 women equally, do you?

No requirement exists in Islam to treat them equally - they need to be treated with adl (justice)...

Have you got explanation for that?

My understanding was that a husband had to spend equal time and money on his wives.

Maybe you can provide some evidence for your view.

I have yet to come across any verse of Quran that uses the term istiwa'a - they all use the term adl which means justice. Furthermore there are Quranic texts that allow inequality by ordering the husbands not to incline to such a degree to one wife so as to leave the other hanging - thus inequality is no problem, only a problem when the husband inclines to other wives so much whereby the first is left hanging, in a position unclear as to whether she is married or not!

Generally the husband should treat his wives equally and with justice. However there are exceptions where the husband does not need to do the former (eg. he can take one wife with him on a journey and leave the others behind).

Link

I would have mentioned some fiqhi masaails but I think what the shaykh has mentioned is sufficient. If you have studied fiqh (chapter of nikah) then you would know the situations where the husband has to treat his wives equally.

I'm not too impressed with sunnipath - it veers towards a very politically correct agenda putting traditional scholars' views in a western influenced straightjacket - maybe wants to be seen as relevant!

You'll note that he does not cite any evidence that states it is obligatory to treat the wives equally - all the ayaat he cites state adl which is not the same as equality - it means justice which has connotations of fairness and not equality - and even the verse is cited that permits inequality so long as it is not overly-excessive where a wife is left hanging - in no man's land!

Historically scholars had a number of views on the topic eg, Ibn Qudaamah said: He does not have to treat his wives equally in spending and clothing if he does what he is required for each of them.
Ahmad said – concerning a man who had two wives – he has the right to give one more than the other with regard to spending, desire and clothing, if the other has enough, and he may buy a finer garment for her, so long as the other has enough. This is because it is too difficult to treat them equally with regard to all these matters, and if it were made obligatory he would not be able to do it, except with great difficulty. This is why it is not obligatory, such as treating them equally with regard to intercourse. Al-Mughni, 7/232.

Finally you'll see he even cites the hadith where the Prophet(saw) did not treat them equally, eg in travelling but makes it an "arbitrary" exception as opposed to showing it is consistent in that equality is not necessary.

oh yes, when scholars disagree with you "I am not to impressed with them, they are problematic"

ever considered that the problem is in your side?

Have you ever studied with a scholar instead of simply reading books? Any scholar of any sect or group who has any qualifications from any recognised Islamic institure?

I think you just love arguing for the sake of it...

You wrote:

oh yes, when scholars disagree with you "I am not to impressed with them, they are problematic"

ever considered that the problem is in your side?

Have you ever studied with a scholar instead of simply reading books? Any scholar of any sect or group who has any qualifications from any recognised Islamic institure?

I think you just love arguing for the sake of it...

Yes I have thank you - both the Hanafi and Shafii schools of thought in detail and an overview of the Zaidi, Zahiri, Hanbali and Maliki schools.

So you are saying that you have actually sat down with a scholar and the scholar has tought you?

Like a proper lesson?

Because I struggle to accept that.

How many hourts would you say you have had tuition as opposed to reading books on your own?

Anonymous1 wrote:

Yes I have thank you - both the Hanafi and Shafii schools of thought in detail and an overview of the Zaidi, Zahiri, Hanbali and Maliki schools.

I don't see how you can disagree with Mufti ibn Adams answer then as it conforms to the rulings given in the Hanafi school.

The evidence and quotes he gives is more than enough for a lay person.

I would be curious as to know which Hanafi fiqh manuals specifically you've studied as you seem to be very argumentative, and critical of SunniPath who have a mixture of traditional scholars from the Indian-subcontinent, Arab and the West, some of whom are very high in knowledge.

s.b.f wrote:

Oh, this reminds me.

I am supposed to be stealing a book at the minute.

Your point is....?

You wrote:

So you are saying that you have actually sat down with a scholar and the scholar has tought you?

Like a proper lesson?

Because I struggle to accept that.

How many hourts would you say you have had tuition as opposed to reading books on your own?

Years.

You seem to be condescending about those who study from books - but it exposes your ignorance - read the life of Suyuti, one of the greatest jurists of his time and even era! His knowledge came from books, and those who attacked him were even challenged by him!

Have you actually studied any fiqh? Anywhere? Even from a book?

I have not claimed to have studied anything.

(nor have I ever claimed to havbe manners or to be even a half decent person, just so that we are clear. I will be the first to admit that I am a horrible excuse of a person.)

I still don't believe you because knowledge is supposed to have an illuminating impact on people while you with your Masters in psychology and years of studying under the tutilage of a scholar show very little for it in your mannerisms.

You wrote:

I have not claimed to have studied anything.

Absolutely disgusting and disgraceful you have the arrogance to undertake tafsir on ayaat, hadith, issue fatwas on kufr systems being permitted...

Fear Allah and gain knowledge before misguiding others!