Why would you want to practice something that has no need in current society?
From a practical standpoint, there is no slavery practiced in the civilized world right now. When battles are fought, captured soldiers are identified as "Prisoners or War" (or in the case of US, "enemy combatents"). Any civilians who are captured are considered prisoners too, and that includes females as well as males. Prisoners of war are interrogated under the Geneva Convention, and if any war crimes are alleged, charges are brought in a court of law and culprits punished. The rest are set free. War is never pretty and this is the way the civilized world handles the issue of captured soldiers and civilians.
So the whole talk of slavery, are you saying, that if an Islamic state were to take power and fight battles, instead of taking prisoners of war, the Islamic state will call them "slaves"? Including females? And then instead of charging them with any war crimes, these will be distributed amongst muslim victors as "slaves", and it will be permitted for muslim men to have nikkah with the female "slaves" and have sexual intercourse with them? And since all this "permitted" in Islam so we should be thinking about all these issues?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
So the whole talk of slavery, are you saying, that if an Islamic state were to take power and fight battles, instead of taking prisoners of war, the Islamic state will call them "slaves"? Including females? And then instead of charging them with any war crimes, these will be distributed amongst muslim victors as "slaves", and it will be permitted for muslim men to have nikkah with the female "slaves" and have sexual intercourse with them? And since all this "permitted" in Islam so we should be thinking about all these issues?
[/QUOTE]
There's no obligation to enslave prisoners. If the ruler of an Islamic state chose to act as per the Geneva convention and simply hold and later release captives, he would not be violating any Islamic principles.
It’s not just that - but particularly to Muslims in the west, it is important to remember that the original Islamic concept of slavery was very different to what the societies we live in carried out in the past few centuries.
The ill treatment and abuse of slaves rife in the 1700s and the 1800s, both in the western world and the Muslim world, was a very different reality to the kind of slavery practiced during the early days of Islam.
Shariah covers Geneva? What about the Nuremberg trials? Was any of the Shriah rules violated?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TeenDabbyWala: *
Maybe I am the only one who sees the problem in such blind thinking and following? Don't question anything, just follow what mullah jee said.
[/QUOTE]
Did u click on that link and read what it had to say? I guess you did'nt, instead you just wanted to say what your 3 lb brain had to say.
Btw...what the hell is Mullah jee Mullah jee? As far as I know there are only two people Iam following. Allah and His Prophet. Who is this third Mullah Jee?
The validity of slavery is one issue. The issue here is having "access" to slave girls.
One says there needs to be a nikkah , another says there is no need for the nikkah - it would help to clarify this point when sorting this issue.
And if there is a nikkah - then why can't this girl have teh same status as a normal wife?
And if there is no nikkah - why not? Can't a girl have the dignity to have at least that?
The concepts seem contradictory - a slave girl one has "access" to has less human rights afforded to her than a woman of the community - but doesn't the Quran say that all humans are equal?
I say this, because sexual intercourse is no joke. Having access to a particular female requires that some respect be maintained in such a relation, and in the allowance of sex with slave girls...this respect seems to falter.
Maybe you haven't figured it out yet, but it's ok for a man to have sexual desires and find relief for his sexual frustrations. But not for women. They are to keep their desires and frustrations secret and only express them with their husband, who may or may not be interested in her sexully, because he has 3 other wives and slave girls for that.
I know you are playing devil's advocate here, lekin phir bhi. Who says women don't have sexual frustrations? My example is quite valid. If you get to do your slave girl, I get to do my pool boy.
But this would be counterintuitive, again, wouldn't it?
Taking of slaves is only possible when you have a proper Islamic Jihad. Since none of the wars going on rite now are Islamic Jihad's in its true sense, capturing of slaves is not permissible.
Secondly its the Ameer ul Muslimeen who hands out slaves to the those who fought. Who is the Ameer ul Muslimeen rite now? There is none. And then Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, introduced new laws which condemned slavery to some extent.
So my argument is that under present conditions slavery is not permissible.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
And if there is a nikkah - then why can't this girl have teh same status as a normal wife?
[/QUOTE]
Who says she does'nt have a status as a normal wife? Go read first and find out what status Islam gave to slave girls.
hah! So then why did Umar cut down on the slavery?
Obviously there is more to this than meets the eye.
its still less than the status of a community-derived wife.
And this doesn't make sense to me either - I thought Haajra is said to be the 2nd wife of Ibrahim - this is the first time I'm seeing that she is considered his concubine...
PcG if you want a complete overview of Shariah's view on slavery, than click on the link i posted above. Trust me on it will erase many of your doubts.
One of the law he introduced was no arab shall be slaved. Thats because all of Arabia was under Islamic Rule. Enslaving arabs made no sense. There were a couple of more rules too...but i dont remember them rite now, but they were surely introduced because of the changing circumstances.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
And this doesn't make sense to me either - I thought Haajra is said to be the 2nd wife of Ibrahim - this is the first time I'm seeing that she is considered his concubine...
[/QUOTE]
see...
Could u even think of her as being his concubine? Two or three of prophets wives were his concubines. They bore his sons. Even i did'nt know of that fact, but were they treated any less than his wives? They were given status of his wives.
It was a long time ago, so it is ok to forgive the guilty people. It’s now 21st century, society is a lot more civilized than was the case back then. Slavery wasn’t officially abolished in Saudi Arabia well into the 60s, and even later than that in Yemen. Sadly, it still exists in Pakistan. It’s an evil practice, regardless of who does it.
I did read it - so here's a twist - which is not unrealistic.
What if the slave girl did not consent to having intercourse with her master? Lets say she has a husband in her hometown and the Islamic state now considers this marriage (which it was not even in charge of implementing in the first place) null. But of course, she was taken against her will from her home as booty, and now she is given to this muslim soldier as booty.
She doesn't want him. She wants her home with HER husband.
Is it lawful for him to do what he wants with her??
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
I did read it - so here's a twist - which is not unrealistic.
What if the slave girl did not consent to having intercourse with her master? Lets say she has a husband in her hometown and the Islamic state now considers this marriage (which it was not even in charge of implementing in the first place) null. But of course, she was taken against her will from her home as booty, and now she is given to this muslim soldier as booty.
She doesn't want him. She wants her home with HER husband.
Is it lawful for him to do what he wants with her??
[/QUOTE]
she cant be taken from he HOME....thats the misconception..she is taken prisoner if she FIGHTS or joins the army or accompanies it. wallah o alam
but any how, brother sharabi i would like to disagree with you on that issue that there is no jihad going on. there is legit jihad in chechnya, kashmir, palestine, iraq and afghanistan . there is also legitimate struggles in algeria and saudia and pakistan (these are not jihad where we can take war booty/ slaves because it is a civil war among muslims, but one side is definately wrong and one is definately right)
are u kidding me? Are you telling me that in that day and age in the Arabian penninsula...women were actively fighting in war?
Because only that would explain the high number of "slave girls" being reported.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
are u kidding me? Are you telling me that in that day and age in the Arabian penninsula...women were actively fighting in war?
Because only that would explain the high number of "slave girls" being reported.
[/QUOTE]
women used to go to war with the men, not for fighting but for other purposes such as healing and providing water to the injured...etc