Treatment of prisoners-of-war in Islam

['Abd-al Latif]

Treatment of prisoners-of-war in Islam

Q.How are prisoners of war treated in Islam?

A.Praise be to Allaah.

Islam is the religion of mercy and justice; it commands us to call others to the religion of Allaah in a kind and good manner, and to encourage people to enter this great religion. If some people persist in rejecting the religion of Allaah and stand in the way of ruling by that which Allaah has revealed on earth, or they fight against the call to Allaah, then we give them the choice of three things:

Either they become Muslim; or if they refuse they pay the jizyah (whereby they pay a specified amount to the Muslims in return for being allowed to remain their land, and the Muslims undertake to protect them); or, if they refuse that, there is nothing left but the way which they themselves have chosen, which is fighting and dealing violently with those who have persecuted the Muslims and put obstacles in the path of the Islamic da’wah. In this way the Muslims will gain the upper hand and the enemies will be humiliated; then when we have killed and wounded many of them and gained the upper hand over them, we may take prisoners and bind a bond firmly on them [cf. Muhammad 47:4], because in that case it is more in tune with the idea of mercy by choice (not because we are afraid of them); at that point war should not continue any longer than is necessary. War in Islam should not be waged for the sole purpose of shedding blood or seeking vengeance. If the Muslims capture them and take them to a place that has been prepared for them, they should not harm them or torture them with beatings, depriving them of food and water, leaving them out in the sun or the cold, burning them with fire, or putting covers over their mouths, ears and eyes and putting them in cages like animals. Rather they should treat them with kindness and mercy, feed them well and encourage them to enter Islam.

Thumaamah ibn Athaal – the leader of Bani Haneefah – was brought (to Madeenah) as a prisoner and tied to one of the pillars of the mosque. The Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to him and said, “What do you think, O Thumaamah?” He said, “What I think, O Muhammad, is good. If you kill me, you will kill one with blood on his hands – i.e., I will deserve to be killed because I have killed Muslims – and if you release me you will release one who will be grateful. If you want money, then ask, and I will give you whatever you want.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) left him for three days, and each day he would come and ask him similar questions, and Thumaamah would give similar answers. After the third day, he commanded that he should be released. Thumaamah went to a stand of date-palms near the mosque where he bathed (did ghusl), then he came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said, “I bear witness that there is no god except Allaah and I bear witness that Muhammad is the slave of Allaah and His Messenger.” Then he said: “O Messenger of Allaah, by Allaah there was no one on earth whose face was more hateful to me than yours, but now your face is the most beloved of all faces to me. By Allaah, there was no religion that was more hateful to me than your religion, but now your religion has become the most beloved of all religions to me. By Allaah, there was no land more hateful to me than your land, but now your land has become the most beloved to me. Your cavalry captured me when I was on my way to perform ‘Umrah, so what do you think I should do?”

The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) congratulated him, and told him to go for ‘Umrah. When he came to Makkah, someone asked him, “Have you changed your religion?” He said, “No, but I have submitted with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and by Allaah you will not get a grain of wheat from al-Yamaamah unless the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) gives permission.”

Think about this story, may Allaah bless you, and how the kind treatment of Thumaamah led to his embracing Islam, which could not have happened were it not primarily by the grace of Allaah, and also the kind treatment which Thumaamah received.

In the Qur’aan, Allaah says of the righteous (interpretation of the meaning):

“And they give food, in spite of their love for it (or for the love of Him), to the Miskeen (the poor), the orphan, and the captive,

(Saying): ‘We feed you seeking Allaah’s Countenance only. We wish for no reward, nor thanks from you’” [al-Insaan 76:8-9]

Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Ibn ‘Abbaas said: in those days their prisoners were mushrikeen; on the day of Badr the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded them to be kind to their prisoners, so they used to put them before themselves when it came to food… Mujaahid said, this refers to the one who is detained, i.e., they would give food to these prisoners even though they themselves desired it and loved it.”

The ruling on tying up prisoners:

It is well known that if prisoners are able to escape they will not hesitate to do so, because they may be afraid of dying and they do not know what awaits them. Hence the Muslims were commanded to tie up their prisoners and to tie their hands to their necks, lest they run away. This is something that still happens and is well known to all people.

The wisdom behind permitting the taking of prisoners is so as to weaken the enemy and ward off his evil by keeping him away from the battlefield so that he cannot be effective or play any role; it also creates a means of freeing Muslim prisoners by trading the prisoners whom we are holding.

Detaining prisoners

Prisoners should be detained until it is decided what is the best move. The ruler of the Muslims should detain prisoners until he decides what is in the Muslims’ best interests. He may ransom them for money, or exchange them for Muslim prisoners, or release them for nothing in return, or distribute them among the Muslims as slaves, or kill the men, but not the women and children, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade killing the latter. The purpose behind detaining prisoners is so that the Muslims may be protected from their evil. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to enjoin the Muslims to treat prisoners well, whereas the Romans and those who came before them the Assyrians and Pharaohs, all used to put out their prisoners’ eyes with hot irons, and flay them alive, feeding their skins to dogs, such that the prisoners preferred death to life.

Ahkaam al-Sijn wa’l-Sujana’ wa Mu’aamalat al-Sujana’ fi’l-Islam by Hasan Abi’l-Ghuddah, 256

http://islamqa.com/en/ref/13241

[Faye]

Very clear, very concise. Does anybody know where I can find a clear concise fatwa about suicide bombing:
is it permissible to use it as a war tactic against combatants (where no non combatants are affected)?

[Masuma]

Bismillah Hir Rahman Nir Rahim!

Asalamu Alikum Wa Rehmatullahi Wa Barakatuh!

Very clear, very concise. Does anybody know where I can find a clear concise fatwa about suicide bombing:
is it permissible to use it as a war tactic against combatants (where no non combatants are affected)?

Fatwa, I don't know but many of the Moulanas of our country has declared suicide bombing as haram. People like Qazi Huassain declared it as haram. Other Molvis too, and some at the expense of their lives! (As, you must be aware of the suicide killing of 3 Moulvis who called it haram, and the Talibans killed them for it!)

Also, that I heard Dr.Zakir Naik answering a question of similar nature. He said that there is difference of opinion among Islamic Scholars regarding it. Some scholars say that it can be used as a last resort against an enemy. For example, people of Palestine faces much persecution at the hands of Jews. These people, if they don't have any kind of weapons available; nor any other option left, then as a last resort, such people can use this tactic for killing their enemies in wars but please note, he didn't say to kill any innocent! Killing an innocent is forbidden in Islam! Here he was talking about the worst kind of enemies who are difficult to be defeated.

But Dr. Zakir also said that he don't know it for sure. Allah knows best! He only told us about the difference of opinion among the scholars.

[OurIslamic]

Nice post. In Islam, prisoners of war should be treated humanely, not like they are being treated these days. (Guantanamo for example)

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Masuma]

Bismillah Hir Rahman Nir Rahim!

Treatment of prisoners-of-war in Islam

Q.How are prisoners of war treated in Islam?

Asalamu Alikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh!

Dear brother, I haven't read your full post but there is one question which is disturbing me a lot. I once talked to a non-Muslim and she told me that in Islam, at the time of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w), Muslims were allowed to have physical relations with the captured female prisoners of war. These Prisoners of war are mentioned in Quran as "whom your right hand possesses".
But the Muslims had these relations with the female prisoners of war after they married them, right?

She also laid an allegation against Islam, that Islam even permitted those Muslims to have physical relations with married prisoners of war! So what is the actual case here? This allegation is false, right?

[Al Ansari]

Very clear, very concise. Does anybody know where I can find a clear concise fatwa about suicide bombing:
is it permissible to use it as a war tactic against combatants (where no non combatants are affected)?

I have an Ebook called 'self-sacrificial operations' by Shaykh Abu QutaybahAsh Shami. However, it would be better to stick to the topic at hand. I will start a topic on the subject or perhaps someone else can, insha'Allaah.

['Abd-al Latif]

Bismillah Hir Rahman Nir Rahim!



Asalamu Alikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh!

Dear brother, I haven't read your full post but there is one question which is disturbing me a lot. I once talked to a non-Muslim and she told me that in Islam, at the time of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w), Muslims were allowed to have physical relations with the captured female prisoners of war. These Prisoners of war are mentioned in Quran as "whom your right hand possesses".
But the Muslims had these relations with the female prisoners of war after they married them, right?

She also laid an allegation against Islam, that Islam even permitted those Muslims to have physical relations with married prisoners of war! So what is the actual case here? This allegation is false, right?

:wasalamex

They wouldn't be 'married' after their husbands are killed now, would they? Read my next the post below.

['Abd-al Latif]

What is a “right hand servant”? Does the owner of a “right hand servant” have to be married?

Q.What is a right hand servant? Do you have to be married to have one? How can you finalize it and get one and state this person as your right hand servant?.

A.Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

If Allaah enables the Muslim mujahideen to defeat kaafir enemies in war, then the men may be killed, ransomed, set free without ransom or enslaved. The choice between these four options is to be made by the ruler, according to what he thinks is the best course.

With regard to the women, they become slaves and “those whom one's right hand possesses” (described as a “right hand servant” in the question). Male children also become slaves. The ruler shares out these slaves among the mujaahideen.

Shaykh al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The reason why a person may be taken as a slave is his being a kaafir and waging war against Allaah and His Messenger. If Allaah enables the Muslims who are striving and sacrificing their lives and their wealth and all that Allaah has given them to make the word of Allaah supreme over the kaafirs, then He allows them to enslave the kuffaar when they capture them, unless the ruler chooses to free them or to ransom them, if that serves the interests of the Muslims.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan, 3/387

Islam limited the sources of slaves which existed before the mission of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to just one source, namely slavery resulting from capturing prisoners from among the kuffaar.

Islam treated female slaves more kindly in their enslavement than other cultures did. Their honour was not considered to be permissible to anyone by way of prostitution, which was the fate of female prisoners of war in most cases. Rather Islam made them the property of their masters alone, and forbade anyone else to also have intercourse with them, even if that was his son. Islam made it their right to become free through a contract of manumission; it encouraged setting them free and promised reward for that. Islam made setting slaves free an obligation in the case of some kinds of expiation (kafaarah), such as the expiation for accidental killing, zihaar (a jaahili form of divorce in which a man said to his wife, “You are to me as my mother’s back”), and breaking oaths. They received the best treatment from their masters, as was enjoined by the pure sharee’ah.

Secondly:

A mujaahid does not have to be married in order to gain possession of a “slave whom one’s right hand possesses.” None of the scholars expressed such a view.

Thirdly:

If a mujaahid takes possession of a female slave or male slave, it is permissible for him to sell them. In either case – whether one acquires a slave through battle or through purchase – it is not permissible for a man to have intercourse with a female slave until she has had a period from which it may be ascertained that she is not pregnant. If she is pregnant then he must wait until she gives birth.

It was narrated that Ruwayfi’ ibn Thaabit al-Ansaari said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say on the day of Hunayn: “It is not permissible for any man who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to irrigate the crop of another else – meaning to have intercourse with a woman who is pregnant. And it is not permissible for a man who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to have intercourse with a captured woman until he has established that she is not pregnant. And it is not permissible for a man who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to sell any booty until it has been shared out.”

Narrated by Abu Dawood, 2158; classed as hasan by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 1890.

For many reasons, including the fact that the Muslims have long since given up jihad, slavery is now very rare. This means that the Muslims must be extra cautious by examining any case in which it is claimed that someone is a slave, whether male or female.

For more information see question no. 26067

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

['Abd-al Latif]

Ruling on having intercourse with a slave woman when one has a wife

Q.Could you please clarify for me something that has been troubling me for a while. This concerns the right of a man to have sexual relations with slave girls. Is this so? If it is then is the man allowed to have relations with her as well his wife/wives. Also, is it true that a man can have sexual relations with any number of slave girls and with their own wife/wives also? I have read that Hazrat Ali had 17 slave girls and Hazrat Umar also had many. Surely if a man were allowed this freedom then this could lead to neglecting the wife's needs. Could you also tell clarify wether the wife has got any say in this matter.

A.Praise be to Allaah.

Islam allows a man to have intercourse with his slave woman, whether he has a wife or wives or he is not married.

A slave woman with whom a man has intercourse is known as a sariyyah (concubine) from the word sirr, which means marriage.

This is indicated by the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and this was done by the Prophets. Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) took Haajar as a concubine and she bore him Ismaa’eel (may peace be upon them all).

Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also did that, as did the Sahaabah, the righteous and the scholars. The scholars are unanimously agreed on that and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as haraam or to forbid it. Whoever regards that as haraam is a sinner who is going against the consensus of the scholars.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice” [al-Nisa’ 4:3]

What is meant by “or (slaves) that your right hands possess” is slave women whom you own.

And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O Prophet (Muhammad)! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal‑money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses — whom Allaah has given to you, and the daughters of your ‘Amm (paternal uncles) and the daughters of your ‘Ammaat (paternal aunts) and the daughters of your Khaal (maternal uncles) and the daughters of your Khaalaat (maternal aunts) who migrated (from Makkah) with you, and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet, and the Prophet wishes to marry her a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers. Indeed We know what We have enjoined upon them about their wives and those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, in order that there should be no difficulty on you. And Allaah is Ever Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful” [al-Ahzaab 33:50]

“And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts).

Except from their wives or the (women slaves) whom their right hands possess for (then) they are not blameworthy.

But whosoever seeks beyond that, then it is those who are trespassers” [al-Ma’aarij 70:29-31]

Al-Tabari said:

Allaah says, “And those who guard their chastity” i.e., protect their private parts from doing everything that Allaah has forbidden, but they are not to blame if they do not guard their chastity from their wives or from the female slaves whom their rights hands possess.

Tafseer al-Tabari, 29/84

Ibn Katheer said:

Taking a concubine as well as a wife is permissible according to the law of Ibraaheem (peace be upon him). Ibraaheem did that with Haajar, when he took her as a concubine when he was married to Saarah.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 1/383

And Ibn Katheer also said:

The phrase “and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses — whom Allaah has given to you” [al-Ahzaab 33:50] means, it is permissible for you take concubines from among those whom you seized as war booty. He took possession of Safiyyah and Juwayriyah and he freed them and married them; he took possession of Rayhaanah bint Sham’oon al-Nadariyyah and Maariyah al-Qibtiyyah, the mother of his son Ibraaheem (peace be upon them both), and they were among his concubines, may Allaah be pleased with them both.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 3/500

The scholars are unanimously agreed that it is permissible.

Ibn Qudaamah said:

There is no dispute (among the scholars) that it is permissible to take concubines and to have intercourse with one's slave woman, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts).

Except from their wives or the (women slaves) whom their right hands possess for (then) they are not blameworthy.” [al-Ma’aarij 70:29-30]

Maariyah al-Qibtiyyah was the umm walad (a slave woman who bore her master a child) of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and she was the mother of Ibraaheem, the son of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), of whom he said, “Her son set her free.” Haajar, the mother of Isma’eel (peace be upon him), was the concubine of Ibraaheem the close friend (khaleel) of the Most Merciful (peace be upon him). ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) had a number of slave women who bore him children, to each of whom he left four hundred in his will. ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) had slave women who bore him children, as did many of the Sahaabah. ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn, al-Qaasim ibn Muhammad and Saalim ibn ‘Abd-Allaah were all born from slave mothers

Al-Mughni, 10/441

Al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts).

Except from their wives or the (women slaves) whom their right hands possess for (then) they are not blameworthy.” [al-Ma’aarij 70:29-30]

The Book of Allaah indicates that the sexual relationships that are permitted are only of two types, either marriage or those (women slaves) whom one’s right hand possesses.

Al-Umm, 5/43.

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/10382

[maxoverton]

The Book of Allaah indicates that the sexual relationships that are permitted are only of two types, either marriage or those (women slaves) whom one’s right hand possesses.

Al-Umm, 5/43.

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.

And Allaah knows best.


Perhaps you could then clear something up for me. I understand that in Muslim belief the Qur'an (spelling?) is absolute and the Word of God, so does that mean that a Muslim TODAY, IN ANY LAND, has the right to have a concubine and a wife and the wife has no say in the matter? I presume too, he is allowed to take slaves and have intercourse with them.
What happens if he lives in the West where such things are forbidden? Does he disregard the law of the land?

Max

[جوري]

I guess 'he' can have a few elicit relationships on the side a subscription to Hustler and to hooters on the weekend?.. It isn't forbidden to have multiple sexual partners in the west, it is only forbidden to marry more than one.. what can I say of double standards?
all the best

[maxoverton]

Gossamer Skye,

Did I say that I approved of Western practices? I don't. I sought a clarification of the ideas expressed by other forum writers when they say a Muslim man can have sex slaves as well as a wife because the Qur'an says so. I wanted to know what happens when this law runs foul of western laws. Does not Islam hold that a believer should be MORE righteous than an unbeliever? If an unbeliever subscribes to Hustler or visits Hooters, what has that to do with a Muslim man's behaviour?

Also, part of the question related to the wife not having any say in the matter. Most western women do not condone their husbands having intercourse with anyone else. I wonder why Muslim women don't mind, or even welcome the idea.

I do not have a cesspool for a mind, nor am I stupid and I feel slightly offended that you should think so, when all I am doing is seeking clarification. I do not have the benefit of an extensive knowledge of Islam, in this regard you may say I am ignorant, but I am trying to learn.

Peace.

[جوري]

Gossamer Skye,

Did I say that I approved of Western practices? I don't. I sought a clarification of the ideas expressed by other forum writers when they say a Muslim man can have sex slaves as well as a wife because the Qur'an says so. I wanted to know what happens when this law runs foul of western laws. Does not Islam hold that a believer should be MORE righteous than an unbeliever? If an unbeliever subscribes to Hustler or visits Hooters, what has that to do with a Muslim man's behaviour?

you said, and please allow me:

What happens if he lives in the West where such things are forbidden? Does he disregard the law of the land?

Max

so it is a matter of forbearance and allowance.. clearly the 'west' isn't the measure by which one looks for said 'prohibitions' to be enforced.. it is really a mere matter of double standards.. Now are Muslims allowed to have concubines? I do request you bring me where in the Quran it states specifically that 'concubines' are allowed or encouraged.. furthermore, please allow me to question does being more righteous denote taking concubines? I am not following, in fact the point you've made isn't merely incorrect, but it has no relevance whatsoever to someone's character.

Also, part of the question related to the wife not having any say in the matter. Most western women do not condone their husbands having intercourse with anyone else. I wonder why Muslim women don't mind, or even welcome the idea.

Again, I question, where in Islam does it say that a woman has no say in the matter?
Western women mind indeed I have seen it on Jerry springer, does it halt the act do you think? didn't Michael Gambon just have another B astard child with his mistress with his wife's approval?

I do not have a cesspool for a mind, nor am I stupid and I feel slightly offended that you should think so, when all I am doing is seeking clarification. I do not have the benefit of an extensive knowledge of Islam, in this regard you may say I am ignorant, but I am trying to learn.

Peace.

Well, there is a style when you seek knowledge and it starts with a query not an assertion, what do you think?

[maxoverton]

Gossamer Skye,

I do not want to be drawn into an argument that descends into insults. My first question was related to a statement by Abd-al Latif where he quoted -

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/10382

I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that this information was correct. If not, my apologies to all concerned.

I believe my question has relevance in that should I ever visit a Muslim country again I would, as before, obey the laws scrupulously. One may not always agree with them, but one obeys them. I think this should be the case for everyone in whichever country they lived or visited. I am not saying that everyone in the west obeys even their own laws, but they should.

Anyhow, as I said before, I do not want to argue the rights and wrongs of any code of behaviour, only to find out what other people believe and why. If I have offended you or disturbed your peace, I unreservedly apologise. Perhaps I do not belong in this forum. I joined because I wanted information on Islam from Muslims.

Peace be on you all.
Max

[جوري]

Gossamer Skye,

I do not want to be drawn into an argument that descends into insults. My first question was related to a statement by Abd-al Latif where he quoted -

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/10382

How many slave girls have been won over through war now a days for this to be of relevance? further are we discussing slave girls or multiple wives, again for this to be of relevance? POW are not only meant for sexual intercourse, and as above the determination of what becomes of them within the allowed three or four confines described are to be determined upon such events actually taking place.. in other words you discuss a hypothetical upon a hypothetical ... you don't know if Muslim man A is madly in love with his wife and can't stand the thought of another woman.. you don't know if Muslim man B brought the slave girl over to help his wife in her chores or on the field, you don't know if Muslim man C has a wife with congenital adrenal hyperplasia but doesn't want to divorce her but at the same time isn't getting any and that is the purpose for his slave girl, you don't know if Muslim man D has set his slave girl free.. any number of combination can occur, so when you are asking a very imaginative question what kind of response are you actually looking for?
.

I believe my question has relevance in that should I ever visit a Muslim country again I would, as before, obey the laws scrupulously. One may not always agree with them, but one obeys them. I think this should be the case for everyone in whichever country they lived or visited. I am not saying that everyone in the west obeys even their own laws, but they should.

I'd love for you to report back to me how the slave girl thing is working out for you after visiting a 'Muslim country' where you simply must have sex with a slave girl.. I mean how absurd.. firstly you are not allowed to pass your slave girl around for others to have at her so again, I fail to see how this will affect you in any form or fashion?

Anyhow, as I said before, I do not want to argue the rights and wrongs of any code of behaviour, only to find out what other people believe and why. If I have offended you or disturbed your peace, I unreservedly apologise. Perhaps I do not belong in this forum. I joined because I wanted information on Islam from Muslims.

Peace be on you all.
Max

all the best!

[maxoverton]

I am upsetting you, and obviously we are talking at cross purposes. I hoped to have a reasoned discussion but I see that is not possible. I will go now and withdraw my membership and look for answers elsewhere.

Peace be on you Gossamer Skye.
Max

[جوري]

I am upsetting you, and obviously we are talking at cross purposes. I hoped to have a reasoned discussion but I see that is not possible. I will go now and withdraw my membership and look for answers elsewhere.

Peace be on you Gossamer Skye.
Max

I am not upset, I am bewildered at best-- nor do I understand why my alleged 'upsetness' should have any impact your membership here?.. That is unusual behavior really.. I think due in large to what you 'reasoned discussion' which includes how you must obey the laws of the land by taking slave girls..

P.S you can't withdraw your membership here, however you may request a ban!


all the best!

[maxoverton]

Just to clear up a point. I have never had or wanted a slave girl in any country. I do not believe in slavery, sexual or otherwise. A woman should always have a choice. I am monogamous and faithful to my wife. I asked about slaves because apparently the Qur'an said it was permissible back in the 7th century. If this is really the Word of God, then that permission does not change with time or place, does it? There are countries where slavery is still rife - is a Muslim man living in such a country still allowed a slave if the Qur'an says it is permissible? I don't know how much clearer I can make my question. I am not trying to run down Islam, nor say that my beliefs are better. The statement has been made...

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/10382

...I just wanted to know if that was a temporary law or if it still holds today in modern countries.

That's it. I have not met problems in other threads, but I really don't like aggravation or argument. If I am upsetting or bewildering you or anyone else I should quit and leave you to your beliefs. I was hoping you might share them rather than attacking me for imagined faults.

[جوري]

Just to clear up a point. I have never had or wanted a slave girl in any country. I do not believe in slavery, sexual or otherwise.

slavery isn't a belief system or a vague idea for you to express atheism toward the matter!

A woman should always have a choice.

Indeed a free woman does have a choice, and a slave girl may buy her freedom.. some places hold prisoners without trial, some places take POW's for slaves, all is fair in love and war!

I am monogamous and faithful to my wife.

How does this concern me? I am not judging you one way or the other.. this is completely inconsequential!

I asked about slaves because apparently the Qur'an said it was permissible back in the 7th century. If this is really the Word of God, then that permission does not change with time or place, does it?

It is still permissible to take POW's in the 21st, you may google the Geneva convention views on POW and their subcategories.. who is protected and who is up for grabs..

There are countries where slavery is still rife

Indeed.. although I am not sure which is worst the aussie method of ethnic cleansing of the aborigines or simply taking them for slaves even though they had no right to do so (invade and eradicate that is), as the reasons for wars and war ethics are very clearly defined in Islam.

- is a Muslim man living in such a country still allowed a slave if the Qur'an says it is permissible? I don't know how much clearer I can make my question. I am not trying to run down Islam, nor say that my beliefs are better. The statement has been made...

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/10382

If there were a Muslim empire and we were at war with the enemies and some of their combatants fell prisoners, then I don't see any reason why not? again, all is fair in love and war.. you couldn't make your question any clearer and I am not quite certain what it is about the responses is elusive?

...I just wanted to know if that was a temporary law or if it still holds today in modern countries.

It still holds as far as I understand, very few things are said to be abolished in the future such as jizya but I don't believe that holds true for slavery... however there are currently no countries that govern by Islamic sharia'a laws, so again, I am not sure what your concerns actually are?

That's it. I have not met problems in other threads, but I really don't like aggravation or argument. If I am upsetting or bewildering you or anyone else I should quit and leave you to your beliefs. I was hoping you might share them rather than attacking me for imagined faults.

I haven't given you as an individual much thought really to be consumed by emotions over what you write, again bewildered as to your purposes as I can see everything is written out clear as day.. I find it somewhat disporting that you threaten to leave or ban yourself with every chance you get, yet manage to still muster a reply and express your aggravation.. really calm down, it is just a forum.. at the end of the day you could be a computer generated response, my niece's pet school hamster max or some 87 year old woman looking to while her day/night away.. I wouldn't take anything too personally or be too preoccupied on who thinks what of you.. I don't think anyone here knows who you are or cares to open a case file for you!


again, all the best!

[MSalman]

Perhaps you could then clear something up for me. I understand that in Muslim belief the Qur'an (spelling?) is absolute and the Word of God, so does that mean that a Muslim TODAY, IN ANY LAND, has the right to have a concubine and a wife and the wife has no say in the matter? I presume too, he is allowed to take slaves and have intercourse with them.
What happens if he lives in the West where such things are forbidden? Does he disregard the law of the land?

Max

Max, all your questions are answered given that yo actually read and try to understand this whole concept under the light of Islamic principles and understanding. Applying your own standards to understand this whole issue is never going to help you neither is an objective approach.

If you actually have read the posted articles, you would understand the slaves in Islam are prisoners of war and POW are gained when Muslims fight their enemies while they have a leader, a khalifa ruling them. Is this happening today? No, thus, your questions are irrelevant and serve no benefit to anyone. However, if we do have an Islamic state and when this happens, insha'Allah, and we fight the enemies and do capture enemies (including some women) then the khalifa decides what to do with them: 1) free them or 2) exchange them for follow Muslim prisoners or for some ransom or 3) distribute them among the Muslims. If he decides to distribute then proper rulings of distributing are applied and you can read more about it here.

If a Muslim does get a female prisoner of war then in an Islamic state there is no law to prevent him from having a wife and a concubine. He can have up to 4 wives and no limit on concubines. There is no agreement, consent or approval required from his wife.

Muslims whether living in the land of the kuffaar or Muslim countries are not to follow the laws which contradict the shari'ah unless there is an extreme situation (i.e., life threat). Secondly, if a Muslim moves to a kafir land where they do not allow multiple wives or concubines then he is not going to announce to the world that he has concubines and multiple wives. He can live just like rest of the kuffaar who has one 'legal' wife and multiple mistresses. There is no law against this in your countries, is there?

As far whether this whole thing is moral or not, is another issue! Secondly, you do not have uncorrupted standards or principles to derive and understand morality.

Lastly, let me remind everyone, specially the kuffaar like yourself, a religion is not judged by "why it allows slavery" or "why it forbids eating pigs" etc., these are all issues related to jurisprudence. A religion is judged by its doctrine and principles to derive rulings and morality. You people do not even agree with us on the primary core issue then how can you understand the secondary issues?

and Allah knows best

[Masuma]

:wasalamex

They wouldn't be 'married' after their husbands are killed now, would they? Read my next the post below.

Asalamu alikum Wa Rehmatullahi Wa Barakatuh!

Dear brother, can it be the case that the husband of the captured female prisoner of war is not dead yet, but is taken as a prisoner himself?

Then in this case, would it be permissible for the Muslim to have physical relations with that female?

I read your other posts. One thing I wanted to ask is that why didn't the Muslims simply married these female prisoners of war before having any physical relations with them? And why having physical relations with these females allowed in Islam? What is the logical reason behind it?

Wouldn't it be unfair with these female prisoners of war that they provided something to the Muslims but were yet not their wives. I mean, what about the "respect thing"?

Yes I know that Islam treats slaves unlike any other religion! It gives them respect and protection but I don't yet know the logic behind having sex with female slaves.

Is it that these female slaves are already considered to be married to their masters?


And did the beloved Prophet commanded Muslims to never take anyone as a slave again?

[MSalman]

Asalamu alikum Wa Rehmatullahi Wa Barakatuh!

wa alaykum as-salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

sister, please go through following link,http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/a...ale-slaves-433, and insha'Allah it will answer your questions

but let me post one-two liner answers to your questions; however, I strongly suggest that you do go through above link to get a better understanding of this whole issue.

Dear brother, can it be the case that the husband of the captured female prisoner of war is not dead yet, but is taken as a prisoner himself?

Then in this case, would it be permissible for the Muslim to have physical relations with that female?

yes, because in shari'ah once she was captured during war and distributed to a Muslim male her marriage is nullified.

I read your other posts. One thing I wanted to ask is that why didn't the Muslims simply married these female prisoners of war before having any physical relations with them?

because this is permissible in shari'ah and they were not bounded by the rule of must marrying them first.

And why having physical relations with these females allowed in Islam? What is the logical reason behind it?

1 - because it is legislated by Allah and He made it permissible. He is the judge Who decides what we are allowed to do and what we are not allowed to do. Our standards and moral values are not based upon flawed human reasoning and intellect. Therefore, whatever Allah has legislated has benefit for the creation and there is wisdom behind it.

2 - In Islam, the legal/legislative statements are not based upon human logic or reasoning; therefore, they are not bounded by "must work with human intellect and reasoning and if they do not then they are not logical"; neither, they are required any logical explanation. If one says, this is immoral then he first need to show that his principles of deriving morality is superior than ours.

3 - because instead of dumping them into jails or killing them, it brings lots of benefits for them and all this has been explained thoroughly in the link I posted above and in my previous posts on this forum on this issue.

4 - always and always remember that Islam is haqq and we are here to please Allah. Do not let shaytan get to you and falsehood and misinterpretations enter your heart.

Wouldn't it be unfair with these female prisoners of war that they provided something to the Muslims but were yet not their wives. I mean, what about the "respect thing"?

we humans do not decide what is fair or not fair. It is up to the Creator and since He knows what is best for us He decides laws for us. This is our methodology and not half crooked methodology: "I am capable of deciding what is right and wrong".

Secondly, how the "respect" is not given? They are benefiting in return for what they are providing given that they are captured enemies of war. Just because they provide something, which something a wife would do, does not mean they have to be to wife. and just because they are not wife, does not mean they are not getting the respect.

Yes I know that Islam treats slaves unlike any other religion! It gives them respect and protection but I don't yet know the logic behind having sex with female slaves.

already explained above

Is it that these female slaves are already considered to be married to their masters?

And did the beloved Prophet commanded Muslims to never take anyone as a slave again?

answer to both questions is no

and Allah knows best

[OurIslamic]

Gossamer Skye,

Did I say that I approved of Western practices? I don't. I sought a clarification of the ideas expressed by other forum writers when they say a Muslim man can have sex slaves as well as a wife because the Qur'an says so. I wanted to know what happens when this law runs foul of western laws. Does not Islam hold that a believer should be MORE righteous than an unbeliever? If an unbeliever subscribes to Hustler or visits Hooters, what has that to do with a Muslim man's behaviour?

Also, part of the question related to the wife not having any say in the matter. Most western women do not condone their husbands having intercourse with anyone else. I wonder why Muslim women don't mind, or even welcome the idea.

I do not have a cesspool for a mind, nor am I stupid and I feel slightly offended that you should think so, when all I am doing is seeking clarification. I do not have the benefit of an extensive knowledge of Islam, in this regard you may say I am ignorant, but I am trying to learn.

Peace.

There's a difference between slaves and sex slaves...