This is a concept I have always found a bit confusing. Islam allows sex with your wives and that ‘which your right hands possess’.
Most scholars argue that this was relevant to slave women captured as prisoners of war at that time. While I agree slaves were common in that time and very well treated in Islam, why was sex allowed with them? Theoretically, you could buy a slave to fulfil your needs without even getting married. Why shouldn’t this ruling apply in this day and age (in case there are prisoners of war), when for all other issues, the relevance of Islamic laws does not change with the change in time/era?
Mods might want to move this to the religion forum, I just thought there was an ‘all views’ element to this as to what everyone else thinks about this concept.
No Islam hating please, I respect all Islamic laws but I just don’t understand the logic behind this.
It was allowed during wartime because you couldn't start a proper family using a slave woman or an african american woman for that matter. The society at time wouldn't accept men and women coming from a slave mother. So in order to have a fully functioning and well respected sort of a family you'd have to marry a woman and if you had children from a slave woman then they wouldnt have specific inhertance rules apply to them. However if you had sex with a slave woman and then she had your children they would be considered *******s etc. However it was allowed during wartime it wasn't encourage and certainly wasn't a substitute to a proper nikkah.
Women have needs and if your not going to free them so they can marry someone and get them satisfied then you should be willing to. I think some people automatically think 'sex slave' who you can rape at will, but we know that you are not allowed to assualt or abuse any slaves you own so rape is out of the question. These slave girls must be willing participants otherwise it's abuse.
Most scholars argue that this was relevant to slave women captured as prisoners of war at that time. While I agree slaves were common in that time and very well treated in Islam, why was sex allowed with them? Theoretically, you could buy a slave to fulfil your needs without even getting married.
Safiyah Bint Huyeiy Ibn Akhtab , one of the ummat-ul- momin was taken captive in the war of Khybar and Maria al Qibtiyya , a slave sent to Muhammad PBUH ..
Safiyah Bint Huyeiy Ibn Akhtab , one of the ummat-ul- momin was taken captive in the war of Khybar and Maria al Qibtiyya , a slave sent to Muhammad PBUH .. The both were in the nikkah of Hazrat .. So your statement cant be true !
AFAIK, Islam encourages marrying slave woman if you're unable to marry someone else. It's not compulsory though.
It was allowed during wartime because you couldn't start a proper family using a slave woman or an african american woman for that matter. The society at time wouldn't accept men and women coming from a slave mother. So in order to have a fully functioning and well respected sort of a family you'd have to marry a woman and if you had children from a slave woman then they wouldnt have specific inhertance rules apply to them. However if you had sex with a slave woman and then she had your children they would be considered *******s etc. However it was allowed during wartime it wasn't encourage and certainly wasn't a substitute to a proper nikkah.
Sorry but that doesn't make much sense to me. Are you saying that with slave women, you have to practice 'Azl' because society at the time would not accept their offspring? Obviously where sex is involved there are bound to be some unwanted pregnancies. Why was it allowed in wartime if children weren't an option?
**Women have needs and if your not going to free them so they can marry someone and get them satisfied then you should be willing to. **I think some people automatically think 'sex slave' who you can rape at will, but we know that you are not allowed to assualt or abuse any slaves you own so rape is out of the question. These slave girls must be willing participants otherwise it's abuse.
Hmm. That sort of makes sense, but the concept is still a bit weird. Why not just do a nikkah with the slave woman?
Maybe if the guy already has 4 wives.
But I don't think my augument really stands, what if the slave women has been captured with her husband. Would the owner still be able to have sex with her.
Don't children of slaves (you know you had sex with her yada yada) count as your children and have responsibility on you to take care of them even in inheritance? At least that is what is my understanding of the issue.
AFAIK, Islam encourages marrying slave woman if you're unable to marry someone else. It's not compulsory though.
May be I am short of knowledge on this issue - but despite trying hard I couldn't remember any incident in our Muslim history where our prophet ( PBUH) or any of his prominent Shabas have kept women without nikkah with them ...
And this the beauty of Islam - that it has made the institution of marriage so simple and easy -with meager conditions any body can fill - so why would One disgrace the sunnah ( Nikkah) !
Don't children of slaves (you know you had sex with her yada yada) count as your children and have responsibility on you to take care of them even in inheritance? At least that is what is my understanding of the issue.
Yes they do have rights to inheritance and the child is not a slave either, they are born free.
Did Islam "abolish" slavery? Didn't it just discourage it?
As for the original post, this issue, and the Misyar/Mutah issue never made any sense to me. In fact I was shocked when I first found out. And I still can't digest it. Unfortunately, it ends up weakening my faith.
From what i heard in a show…there are kind of stepwise approach to this…
firstly islam encourages everyone to free the slave…that is the most noble thing to do.
secondly…make a trade/deal with the slave so that he/she can be freed..
if you can not free them then u keep them … and also this way the slave can be a part of society or something..
Slavery still exists, though in a more unconventional state. Human Trafficking, child slavery, debt bondages, servants kept in captivity, even forced marriages are considered as a type of slavery. Theoretically, slavery has been outlawed everywhere, but just to throw a random fact out there, Slavery was officially abolished in 2007 in Mauritania, it is estimated that 20% of their entire population is enslaved with debt bondage.
And in regards to the issue at hand, as far as my limited knowledge goes, i believe Maria(as) was never married to the Prophet (pbuh). Ive asked many scholars in regards to this, and truth be told was never fully satisfied with the answer. My main gripe is, if it was as simple as performing a nikkah, and giving the woman a proper place in society, why not? But, the answer that ive contented myself with is, if its halal, its halal, and there is probably and surely wisdom behind this, but maybe it is my mind which is too feeble to grasp the meaning of it all.
? Otherwise why the concern?