Mohammed Hijab – Equating Polygyny & Cheating (Response)

			Have you are you wasting your time on social media again? Your brothers and sisters in Islam net
from Norway are establishing a masjid a Dawa center. Establishing a masjid to convey the message of
Islam is one of the best deeds a Muslim can do. There's a huge need for an annoying, do you know
this and I know this, so that makes even greater, so give generously and Allah azza wa jal give you
even more
		

			Salam Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh How are you guys doing before we start this video? I think
many of you will be aware of the fact that in Pakistan now there are severe floods. And as the
Muslim community it's really incumbent and worship upon us to step in. You know, Pakistan is one of
the biggest Muslim countries mightiest Muslim countries. And a seventh of the population of Pakistan
is affected by these severe floods. 1100 people have already been, I've already died in these
floods. So I will say please click on the link below and help the individuals and the people in
Pakistan.
		

			The reason why I'm making this video is because actually has come to my attention after the fact
after I've recorded a video with Ali last week, it came to my attention that there was one
incredibly disturbing and alarming thing that I heard, which I think maybe if you've if you listen
to us or come from a Muslim perspective, will agree is totally outrageous, if understood, in the way
that it stated. Let's see what said if a woman stepped out on her marriage,
		

			the vicious poisonous, let's throw her out and get
		

			he could spit on camera, you know, but in a man's position as long as we get a paper from the mosque
and we cover it up. It's
		

			she states if a woman stepped out of her marriage, now, this phrase stepped out of her marriage,
I'll be honest with you.
		

			I thought she meant a divorce and still maintain that she might have meant that if a woman tried to
try to seek a divorce, which tried to go for a whole lot or festival or something like that, then x
y Zed and then she goes on to compare it with a man being married or getting people from the mosque
getting married.
		

			You know, uh, you know, in an illegitimately Islamic way, getting a paper from the mosque, probably
with without the knowledge of his wife. That's my understanding of what's happened. Now, first and
foremost,
		

			I don't want to go straight for the jugular here. Because although Merriam Webster's dictionary and
Cambridge dictionary both of them define the term stepping out as being unfaithful, which of course
includes sexual infidelity here, it's talking about a woman who's committed adultery versus a man
who's married another woman, although that could be interpreted like this, I will not interpret it
like that, because there is plausible deniability. I will employ Hosni oven on this occasion. And I
will actually persuade and encourage everyone else listening to this to do so. However, because the
matter is has some level of Shabbat has some level of ambiguity. I think still, it requires a
		

			refutation. And moreover, I will say this, even if she did not sister somebody did not intend what
she said, or what what I've just described. This comparison we find very widespread among the Muslim
community, a comparison of a polygyny that is done, especially if it's done without the first wife
knowledge with full out adultery, which is Zina in the context of marriage, which as we know, both a
man and a woman in Islam if they commit such an act, both a man or a woman, this is considered one
of the worst, worst sins in all of Islam.
		

			Now, let me attack the notion here. If someone who is a Muslim who claims to be a Muslim, makes such
an in comparison, and tries to create continuity, moral continuities between the two notions, then
they have actually admitted to themselves that there is there is something immoral, in polygyny,
even something immoral in polygyny that doesn't require the first wise permission and or consent.
		

			I will say where's the evidence for that? I will say Where is the evidence for that in Islam? Where
is if one is if one is predicating? Yes, their morality on an Islamic system. I want to know the
evidence where such two things can be compared. In fact, to the contrary, you cannot compare
something the Prophet himself said last time did the Sahaba did with something like this. And doing
so means has exposed quite frankly, would expose? Yeah, it would totally
		

			expose the spiritual bankruptcy that individuals have on this notion it would expose it and I will
go further than this.
		

			I will say not only does it expose it this one mess Allah this one matter here could be a window to
your entire Islam. What is your evidence for that Muhammad? The evidence for that is what Allah's
path is in the Quran ever taught me no no biblical Kitabi will check for Rona we bump for matches Oh
my if I lose early coming Camila, is Yun Phil higher to dunya? Well, Malkia maturo Dona Elijah,
Elijah but I'm Allahu we have often in Ironman alone, that you believe in parts of the book and
reject other parts of the book.
		

			Now, I'm not saying this, by the way, just to make it more clear. This is applicable to SR Samaya.
Because once again, there's plausible deniability. But the notion that two things come like this can
be compared is totally, it's totally incorrect. Now, I want to take a step back and talk about
something quite important.
		

			Individuals because this has has pastoral implications, who are actually going through polygamy and
you know, women, particularly who have serious emotions, because it's difficult. It is a jihad in
itself. It is a struggle, especially for the first wife. You know, it's very difficult anxiety and
jealousy and anger and frustration.
		

			It is not haram for a woman and I make this very clear. It is not haram for a woman to not like
polygamy for herself. The Prophet Muhammad wa salam said clearly hospital genital will mCherry that
Jana has been surrounded by hate things dislike things. And Allah subhanaw taala he says in the
Quran, he says
		

			Why quotevalet como que tal who are cool hola como, wasa and Takahashi and Raha hydro lecom wasa and
Taheebo che and Mahershala Karim Allah Allah and Allah Tala moon,
		

			that fighting has been prescribed for you and it is hated for you. And you can hate something which
is good for you. So there is nothing on Islamic sacrilegious blaspheming about the fact that woman
doesn't want this for herself. I'm making this candidly clear, it's very important.
		

			I mean, most women will not want this for themselves and for good reason. That is within their
nature not to like it. Men should not blame them for that. Let me be clear, men should not blame
them for that, oh, I don't want it No, no, that is within her right and her nature
		

			and effect she will be rewarded if she continues and is resilient and so on.
		

			However,
		

			the problem lies not in the fact that you hate it for yourself, but that you start to abhor it or
find it repugnant in and of itself or as a as a normative practice practiced by certain Muslim
practitioners. Let me make this clear. By giving you giving an analogy, let me give an analogy of
eating meat. Okay, eating meat.
		

			In Islam, eating meat is halal. It is not worship. Just like polygamy is halal. It's not worship,
okay. Now somebody can say I don't want to eat meat because of healthful health reasons and not eat
meat abstain from eating meat, or fat can hate eating meat because of what it does to them
physically, or even feel sickened by eating meat. Maybe they see some animals walking around, and
they feel sick, and that the thought that this animal is slaughtered and then consumed the animal.
Therefore, every time they eat a burger, or whatever, then they actually feel physically sick. And
so they don't eat meat. They don't like meat for themselves. They find it sickening. They don't like
		

			it.
		

			Now it's fine for that Muslim say I feel sick by eating meat and I don't want to eat meat.
		

			But when that Muslim turns around and says, look at those people eating meat, you see now what's
going on. Look at those people eating meat. Look at those people eating meat, they are doing
something immoral. Look how bad they are. How could they eat them? How could they eat meat? How
could they do such a thing, how cruel they are, how barbaric they are, how oppressive they are. Now
you have moved into more than just a gray area. Because you have now attributed oppression to
something which Allah has allowed. Oppression was something which Allah has allowed. And volume in
the Arabic language is what I'll show you if you hate him again, he has so he is putting something
		

			in other than his rightful placement. But then Allah he says coolamon PlayReady Manasa connect it
from whatever you like from what we have allowed and he did not make it harder. So by saying that
about those individuals that eating meat, now you've moved into a major gray area and even more than
a gray area. Now you are going into the comfort zone. I'm not saying you have committed before or
that you are careful, but you're veering. It's a slippery slope. Because the next step of that is
saying eating meat is wrong, which is the equivalent here by saying polygamy is wrong. It's immoral
is unjust is oppressive. That is for our particular Cybermen.
		

			Mala, that is something which is over Akbar the cover that takes somebody out of the religion of
Islam. Because clearly Allah says the opposite. So what I'm saying is that there's a fine line
between analogy one, two and three.
		

			Having said this,
		

			if we go back now, and we talk about why this is so powerful, the idea that this can be seen as
oppressive to even Muslim people, men and women, is actually a powerful proposition. Is it because
there is a great deal of academic evidence and first principle argumentation, from ethics and ethics
and morality?
		

			On consequentialist grounds or a deontological grounds? No, it's not because of any of that. The
reason why this is a powerful argument, is simply because men and women especially Moogfest wives,
have an emotional theological reaction to the matter, and they feel pain because they feel pain.
Pain is a very powerful thing. Pain is a very powerful thing. And then when you have pain, that pink
and then be transferred on to empathetically to other women who put themselves in the position of
that particular woman, first wife, who went through that pain
		

			and this is psychology is referred to as emotive contagiousness, or something to the effect, so you
actually become sorry, empathetic contagiousness empathetic contagiousness is the term that Blum
uses in his book, The empathetic contagiousness that your pain becomes someone else's pain. And then
the general argument is my pain. How could the How could
		

			such a person allow me to be in pain? Pain is oppression, basically pain and personal two sides of
the same coin? That's the brain. If I'm in pain, then whoever is causing that pain to me, is
oppressing me. Of course, such an argument is fallacious is a fallacious argument strictly from an
ethical perspective and unsubstantiated. However,
		

			we'll say something else.
		

			Just because there's a fallacious argument from an academic perspective, it doesn't mean this, the
pain is not real. And once again, we have to acknowledge that women go through a lot of pain,
jealousy, anger, frustration. But just because you're just because it's true that you have pain, it
is true that you have pain, it doesn't mean that your pain is the truth. Meaning here, you cannot
use your pain to diagnose or otherwise arbitrate what is true and what is false from, from moral
perspective. You have no epistemological or theological right to do. So. There's no There's actually
no argument there. You see, and I gave the argument already. I spoke to you in the previous video
		

			which you can watch about certain double standards from a theological paradigm, which certain first
wives who are poor the act to have shown some discontent with it actually employ
		

			but this empathetic contagiousness, although it's not academically robust, it's an emotional
argument. It's a flat out emotional argument, which is filled with Felicity and untruth.
		

			And is baseless, it is still very powerful, because quite frankly,
		

			the statistical abstractions of the consequentialist arguments for polygamy on a collective
collectivist level is something which people can't empathize with. You cannot as Blum said, You
cannot empathize with statistical abstractions. In other words, if I tell you this, for example,
some consequentialist arguments or arguments about consequences if I say to you,
		

			polygamy solves this problem, this societal problem which one for example,
		

			increases the Muslims in the in the world, which for us is an objective Sharia Tanaka Jota Katha the
prophet has told us to do that, for example, if someone polygamy solves another issue, which issue
is this
		

			single mothers or divorcees who need to get married and find it difficult on the marriage market for
many years, five years 10 years, then they finally find somebody through polygamy, which they would
otherwise not have found. So, it solves you have a surplus of women that now it solves an issue
here, it puts more people in psychological utilitarian basis,
		

			state of stability. In fact, those are there was actually a study that was conducted on 15 six
		

			tribes.
		

			Villages Sorry 56 villages, I think is the only one of his kind. And this This was a study that was
done in the Western academic setting. And in that study, they concluded that there is no harm in
polygamy from that perspective. And in fact, they mentioned stock argumentation for some of the
advantages from a collectivist paradigm. They say for example, the economic resources are spread. It
increases education, obviously because of economic resource spread and education within certain
family.
		

			so on. So these arguments I'm putting forward to you now which are collectivist Stickley
consequential in nature are cold rationalization you can't empathize with them. So even though on
this basis, you can make an argument, it's not going to compete for certain people who have had
emotional theological reactions with the bitter pain of the emotional argument, even though it's a
fallacious argument, what is the argument? The argument is, I feel pain, therefore it's oppressive,
which is false is wrong here. And how do you prove how do you jump from A to B? And the point is,
		

			so that's the first thing. So this is very important. The second thing is to do with this the point
of disclosure, because they mentioned that many times in the video, I didn't mention it, then talk
about now in the religion of Islam. The religion of Islam does not encourage that you always have
full disclosure with your partner. In fact, there's a hadith and quite frankly, I'm saying it
reluctantly, because some people may misuse it. Some of us may misuse it, especially young people
like me, will misuse it. Yes. But the Hadith which says lay a halal category left is that lying is
not allowed except in three circumstances. And one of the circumstances is Hadith Rajan Imran.
		

			And to be fair, the Hadith also says, Hadith, Ill Mara Lizo Jia Ocala Casa Salam, that if a if a
husband speaks to his wife, or if his wife speaks to her husband,
		

			the religion of Islam does not encourage full disclosure when it comes to marital affairs. Why
because there are some things which the in romantic relationships are if explained, it can cause
some serious detriment to the marriage. And even the Prophet Muhammad wa salam he did this himself.
Not that he lied, but he kept things secret. And this is in the Quran. With a savannah bu Illa ba ba
as well as you he had eaten, Fela mana better to be Allah Allahu Allah, Lombard. This is in the
Quran. That when the Prophet SAW Salem is a southern EBU, Allah, the Prophet Muhammad, Salah Salem
kept something from some of his wives.
		

			I love about Allah, Allah, Allah, Allah, but he told some of his wife not to tell the other ones.
		

			So this whole discourse, which was quite prominent about is you have to be completely open and
honest, and so on. This is actually not substantiated with the text. There are some things in a
marital situation from Islam perspective, which should not be disclosed, full disclosure is not the
Islamic position, clearly not. So this idea as a Why doesn't he come and speak to her person that,
especially let me make a prediction for you. If, as we're seeing, because a lot of these matters,
are actually interconnected, there's a flesh that joins all of this stuff. In the western context,
for example, we're seeing, and I've mentioned this in previous podcasts, we're seeing, for example,
		

			men's children be taken away from him and weaponized at the expense of the children's well being
their educational health, their physical health, their psychological health, and the man.
		

			Yes, and even the extended family of that man, which includes women, by the way, for his, for
example, the man's mother, etc. So when a dispute happens in a marriage, or that the woman will say
to the man, I threaten you with the kids.
		

			Or if you do this, you're not going to see your kids again. So in this situation, if the man if you
put him in this position, and he gets married without your knowledge, then you have given him some
reasonable basis to do so quite frankly, you have given him a reasonable, you have given him a
reasonable basis to do so. Because you're simply saying, If you I'm going to reward your honesty,
with destruction, how would you expect, quite frankly, a man to respond to such a situation, who,
let's say is physiologically inclined towards a polygynous option? Now, if you're a fool, quite
frankly, if you're a fool, then you will say such a thing, because now you're basically giving him
		

			justification not to disclose certain facts. If you're not a fool, and you handle the matter with
maturity, then surely the man will maybe be honest with you, maybe helpful disclosure and speak to
you about all these matters. This so I predict, so long as we see runaway fathers which I've already
expressed my disdain for, by the way, runaway fathers and mothers who weaponize their children
continue to proliferate in our societies, and acquiescence to such figures. We will see more secret
marriages or let's not call them secret marriages where the first wife does not know in society, and
they are Jews prudentially possible, by the way, as jurisprudential impossible, as, for example, a
		

			woman who does Iraq before a marriage according to the Hambling with him, and some of them are they
have
		

			which is that she says before a man gets married, if you do polygamy, then the divorce will take
place. It's mentioned on Monday but Kodama, many people mentioned this point. give you references
for that. So in other words, if a woman says I insist on monogamy and according to the humbly
method, they accepted, but otherwise they have no sense. So since we're being jurists potentially
open, some of them have their hips No, are you shot to lesufi kitab in like four bottle, they bring
the Hadith or come across asana and they say any condition that is not within the book of Allah,
then it's already nullified and this is the majority of it. Okay. So with this, I feel like what is
		

			being encouraged here was the attack on fatwas, the attack on religion and so on polygyny, and so on
and indirect attack, and also in the 30 with the tea talk sisters, but generally in the Muslim
sphere, especially in the Western world with the influence of feminism is a culture of
jurisprudential sin seriousness.
		

			A gag culture of jurisprudential seriousness where men will feel like they are the only option is X,
Y, and Zed and women don't know also their options that they can do shut up before the marriage and
so on.
		

			And I want to say this, you know, if we do instead of thinking about the matter, with a solid
morality, which is anchored in the Quran, and Sunnah, and in the jurisprudential tradition, but
instead opt to deal with the matter in a way, which is just based on our desires, then we would be
falling into exactly what Allah subhanaw taala refuted insults and put me on what Allah subhanaw
taala says, what is it?
		

			What is that Cabal? Haku? Well, Mala fossa that is somewhat well abdomen V one, and chapter 23,
verse number 71, that had the truth full of dead desires, everything in the universe would have been
completely corrupt. The universe, the heavens and the earth, and everything within them would have
been corrupt meaning Well, meaning that there is a very delicate and sophisticated system for which
the universe operates a very delicate, delicate, sophisticated system, call it the fine tuning
cooler, wherever you like that it's a Goldilocks zone of perfect numbers. Everything is if it wasn't
like this, then the universe wouldn't be a certain way. Now, the same thing applies the phone that
		

			I'm using the microphone, I'm using the screen that you're watching me with right now, all of that
is based on hard geo geometry and mathematics. It's not based on your volatile emotions. When you go
on a plane, it's not based on your volatile emotions, the systems on the plane, the engine on the
plane, the design of the architecture of the plane is not based on emotions, it's based on hard
facts. Because the facts actually are indifferent to your emotions. The facts are indifferent to
emotions, whether you're positive or negative.
		

			Which means now if you decide to let something as volatile, as your own emotions be the guide your
moral guide in life, then you have Volatile Life. You wouldn't allow such a thing to happen on a
plane, you wouldn't say let me based on I am going to ride a plane that is based on a volatile set
of architectural or arbitrary set of haphazard architectural points of reference.
		

			Which means what which means that when you want truth, you opt for the truth which is solid, you
don't owe and organized. Moreover, I want to make the point of cognitive dissonance a lot of our
sisters have it's an bravas quite frankly, Amber's office as well. They have started to develop
		

			this disdain towards something which Allah subhanaw taala has revealed.
		

			And by the way, we've already mentioned that a yet which talk about
		

			EFA told me don't worry about Al Kitab. And Julian even parts of the book in this video and also to
be fair mentioned those yet
		

			which which reference that you can not like something for yourself, but we there's one other set of
eight, which we haven't mentioned, I'll just give you one example. There can be no Homestuck utopia
and the lava Milan, which is that one. So Mohammed Well, Allah Subhana Allah says that is because
they hated what Allah has revealed. So Allah has destroyed and nullified all of their deeds.
		

			If you if you've become an individual who went to stage three in the vegan analogy, which is now
you're starting to say that the thing is immoral itself is then you're an individual who now and
that has hurt or you hate what Allah subhanaw taala does. You hate what Allah has revealed? And
you're, you're going to have nullified actions, you're going to have nullified actions.
		

			Yes, you think this is a laughing matter? In a joking matter? This is a serious matter. It's not
Google culture. Yeah, this is a serious matter. And it creates even on a psychological level, it
creates cognitive dissonance, because cognitive dissonance is a psychological disorder where you
claim to believe in something, but then actually your actions show something completely different.
		

			So individuals who fall for this kind of prey fall prey to this kind of thing. They are the least
psychologically contented individuals, because they're suffering from the deepest and most
entrenched type of cognitive dissonance, which causes an internal struggle within them, which leaves
them unsettled and anxious to say the least.
		

			And one more thing I wanted to say about this whole polygyny issue is about framing how this whole
thing is framed. Now, this might sound unusual to a lot of you, but many of you that will know in
the public discourse, we hear things to the effect of a man a Muslim man has a right to marry a
Christian and Jewish woman.
		

			Okay, so a spoken of what the options of a marital options of a man are spoken of, in terms of
rights. This is framing now, I'm saying okay, but a Muslim man cannot marry a muslim woman
		

			is never framed. A Muslim man does not have the right to marry a muslim, married. Sorry, I'm married
Muslim woman. Yeah. But is never also framed. A Muslim woman has the right to marry a muslim, a
married Muslim man. So the whole rights, responsibilities, rights inhibitions, framing is actually
unusual to me, it is skewed, it is biased, it is wrong. Another thing that can be set
		

			is that, for example, when we're talking about
		

			we're talking rights and responsibilities when we talk about
		

			the issue of polygyny. Some, especially non Muslim detractors is anti Islamic detractors. they frame
the issue as an issue where men are taking advantage of women. But actually, subsequent wives are
also in the framing here. And other words, there needs to be an accomplice. And the accomplice is a
subsequent wife and the subsequent wife is a woman herself. So why is the issue not seen as a woman
versus woman issue? Because it is as as much a woman versus woman issue, as it is a man versus woman
issue. There is as many or even more women involved in the equation of polygyny
		

			as there are women. In other words, more women do polygyny to other women in the equation of Islamic
polygyny than men do. Why because a man can have two wives three or four. In the case we have three
that's two women doing it to one or two women doing it to two.
		

			So how is it an issue of man versus with a framing itself as disturbing?
		

			Finally, we have already covered in great length, the issue of resilience and what is being said to
women and you can leave in this under one very common thing that happens in polygyny is that a woman
will
		

			ask or give them an ultimatum if you don't, if you don't divorce this person, then goodbye.
		

			And the Prophet SAW Salah he said
		

			he clearly said let us Mr. Otto Talaq ot hair, he said a woman should not ask for the divorce of her
sister.
		

			And you should not ask your husband give him the ultimatum is haram
		

			and the issue will not be given except my co dear Allah, what Allah has uncovered on another way
that she will not be given from the dunya except for Allah has has has allowed for her. So if you
try you cannot manipulate the color of Allah subhanaw taala Yeah, try and take someone else's risk
away, this is not right.
		

			And this can be done directly and it can be done indirectly. Because someone will will not say
directly or you know, go and divorce I'll give you an ultimatum. But she'll make the man's life *
and she will indirectly hint at the fact that she wants him to do to divorce. The point being here
is these things are not mentioned in the in the context of polygyny. These things aren't mentioned
in the content and the idea of a woman herself asking for a divorce for no reason. The problem as
Sam said, A Imamura Salah means Oh Jihad Tala can mean lady butts in Fatah for haram Allah Allah
Hara Jana, any woman who asked for my husband, a divorce for no reason, then it's haram for her the
		

			fragrance of heaven. These things are not even mentioned by certain sisters that are talking about
the rights and responsibilities issues like polygyny. And that's why it's very dangerous to come and
speak about these matters without Islamic knowledge or consultation or a fair representation.
		

			And that's why this these kinds of videos are required counter to counter these kinds of other
videos. And what I will say is when you consider the matter clearly, I will finish with what I'm
about to say, when you consider the matter clearly. If and you have to be honest with yourself, if
whether you're a man or a woman, but going back to the vegan example if you are an individual who
has started to find disgusting, the fact that other men practice
		

			This act of polygyny in a normative way. Yeah, whether they do it in a way, which is
jurisprudential, ideal or not, so long as it is halal and is allowable through an opinion whether
it's Miss ER or not. Because Michelle has Tanner's on bottle Haku can is allowed in Islam. Yes, it
is allowed in Islam. So that meant Islam I did this Messiah, the program was awesome. So she's not
doing 5050 such such a model is also flexible enough to be allowable, Islamic, so whether it's Miss
er, or any type of polygyny, which is acceptable Jews prudentially
		

			If you find yourself looking at such a thing and action and saying that that is disgusting, in my
opinion, I find that people do that are oppressive that know that you are skating on thin ice know
that you're playing with your Eman and know that the problem is deeper than this masala. This mess
Ella this issue has just highlighted, highlighted the deeper Eman problem crisis that you have.
		

			Because the real problem is maybe well you have to look at it. The extent to which you actually
believe that the man called Mohammed Abdullah Abdullah, who came in the seventh century, the man who
claimed to be a prophet, the extent to which you believe this is actually the case. That is itself
now in question. Because it's not just a matter of Eman or cover. There is a range of different
Imani man goes up and down. Your kin is at the highest idle your PIN, Almunia kin, top level
		

			certainty that's at the top level here. Yes, but you may be wavering at the 50% mark, you may be at
the 55% 60% this is where the issue is because somebody oxygen will be left Levine, who believes
100% 100% This thing is halal. They will not have a problem with the Helcom itself in any way or the
practitioners of it. They will have a problem with it being done to themselves as we saw with the
Mothers of the Believers and the greatest woman all time, that's fine, that you're allowed to this
is what is allowed. This is absolutely no one should be shamed or blamed for any of that. But this
is how it is. So if you realize that you have a hole in your mind, you have to go back to the
		

			drawing board and read the Siraj read the Quran. Do you ask her because when you do things like
that, then your Eman is raised and this stuff becomes quite easy to believe to be honest, very easy
to believe.
		

			That's all I have to say what Santa Monica Monica July America. The Prophet Muhammad sallallahu
alayhi wa sallam told us to whoever builds a mosque for Allah, Allah were built in a similar house
in Jannah.
		

			And we know the great reward that will not only be gained but rather will fill your grave after your
death. Whenever someone prays that whenever someone gives shahada in the masjid whenever someone
learns something in the masjid, yes, that will be something that you will have on your scale.