It is no secret that
polygamy of a sort is widely carried on in Europe and America. The
difference is that while the Western man has no legal obligations
to his second, third or fourth mistresses and their children, the
Muslim husband has complete legal obligations towards his second,
third or fourth wife and their children.
Perhaps the aspect of Islam in
respect of women which is most prominent in the Western mind is
that of polygamy. Firstly let me clarify that Islam does not
impose polygamy as a universal practice. The Prophet himself was a
monogamist for the greater part of his married life, from the age
of twenty-five when he married Khadija until he was fifty when she
died.
One should therefore regard
monogamy as the norm and polygamy as the exception.
One may observe that, although
it has been abused in some times and some places, polygamy has
under certain circumstances a valuable function. In some
situations it may be considered as the lesser of two evils, and in
other situations it may even be positively beneficial
arrangement.
The most obvious example of this
occurs in times of war when there are inevitably large numbers of
widows and girls whose fiancées and husbands have been killed in
the fighting. One has only to recall the figures of the dead in
the first and second world wars to be aware that literally
millions of women and girls lost their husbands and fiancées and
were left alone without any income or care or protection for
themselves or their children. If it is still maintained that under
these circumstances a man may marry only one wife, what options
are left to the millions of other women who have no hope of
getting a husband? Their choice, bluntly stated , is between a
chaste and childless old maidenhood, or becoming somebody's
mistress, that is an unofficial second wife with no legal rights
for herself or for her children. Most women would not welcome
either of these since most women have always wanted and still do
want the security of a legal husband and family.
The compromise therefore is for
women under these circumstances to face that if given the
alternative many of them would rather share a husband than have
none at all. And there is no doubt that it is easier to share a
husband when it is an established and publicly recognized practice
than when it is carried on secretly along with attempts to deceive
the first wife.
There may be other circumstances
unrelated to war--individual circumstances, where marriage to more
than one wife may be preferable to other available
alternatives--for example where the first wife is chronically sick
or disabled. There are of course some husbands who can manage this
situation, but no one would deny its potential hazards. A second
marriage in some cases could be a solution acceptable to all three
parties.
Again there are cases in which a
wife is unable to have children, while the husband very much wants
them. Under Western laws a man must either accept his wife's
childlessness if he can, or if he cannot he must find a means of
divorce in order to marry again. This could be avoided in some
cases if the parties agreed on a second marriage.
There are other cases where a
marriage has not been very successful and the husband loves
another woman. This situation is so familiar that it is known as
the Eternal Triangle, Under Western laws the husband cannot marry
the second woman without divorcing the first one. But the first
wife may not wish to be divorced. She may no longer love her
husband, but she may still respect him and wish to stay with him
for the security of marriage, for herself and their children.
Similarly the second woman may not wish to break up the man's
first family. There are certain cases such as this where both
women could accept a polygamous marriage rather than face divorce
on the one hand or an extra-marital affair on the
other.
I have mentioned some of these
examples because to the majority of Westerners polygamy is only
thought of in the context of a harem of glamorous young girls, not
as a possible solution to some of the problems of Western society
itself. I have given some time to it not in order to advocate its
indiscriminate use, but in an attempt to show that it is a
practice not to be condemned without thinking of its uses and
possible benefits in any community.