[Thread]

@ApostateRidvan made the point that if a society had widespread polygamy, then there wouldn’t be enough women to go around, and therefore it would throw society out of balance. He wasn’t wrong, prima facie.

I will explain why Ridvan is wrong, in the Islamic context.

In a Muslim state that actively engages in jihad, there would be a constant inflow of slaves, of which there would be many young women of fertile age. Concubinage was one of the biggest reasons for why the population of nascent Ummah boomed in the years of caliphate expansion.

Many of the imams of the salaf were born of slaves from various parts of the empire. A good example is Imam al-Awza’i, the founder of the Awza’i madhab of al-Sham, who’s ancestry goes back to Sindhi slaves. These slaves would be incorporated into the social fabric of the ummah.

In such a society, men preferred concubinage over marital polygyny, because the former has less responsibilities - a concubinage doesn’t have the same rights as a wife; no need for equal visitation, expenditures, nor does the husband need to oblige her desire to bear children.

On a side note, it was in this specific context where concubinage widely was accessible for men, that some of the fuqaha discouraged polygyny because of the great responsibility that comes with it. Here we see the importance of discussing fiqh rulings in their historical context.

@Haqiqatjou, thoughts?