... whom your right hand possesses

C

Confused0122

Senior Member
Messages
91
Reaction score
7
salam. does anyone know what exactly this means? I've seen it in the Quran translations many times but don't really understnd it.. THanks
 
:sl:
The verses would indeed be helpful. From memory, the phrase is used as a sort of umbrella term for anyone who is elligible to be married or whom you are engaged with.
 
Last edited:
Anything to do with this?

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

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]
 
I'm sorry but i disagree. How can islam allow concubines when we're told to stay away from sexual relationships out of marriage?
 
i think there is a thread on this... *quickly runs out finding the thread.
 
 
:salamext:


And those who guard their chastity,

Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (then) they are not to be blamed,


[Quran Al Ma'arij 70: 29-30]



That aayah explains that women who your 'right hand possesses' are permitted in these types of relationships [something which Allah has permitted], but anyone who goes further than what is mentioned in the verse above will be blameworthy.


Now you might wonder why someone is allowed to do that act with them. The basic rule is that when the man has a child with the slave woman, when he dies - she automatically becomes free, and so does the child.


So Islam actually gets rid of slavery in an amazing manner that the woman is free, and her child is free - when he dies. Causing more people to be set free instead of tied to slavery even after their owner dies [try reading about how the Abbasid kings were arab, greek, africans, turks, and all sorts of races!] This is why you'll see in our islamic history that slavery decreased at a drastic level because the woman had a child, so when the male owner died - her and her child were free people.


You may say 'why didnt they reject the concept of slavery altogether when islam came?' Its not that simple because most of the time, these people were slaves only because they fought Muslims and they would have done the exact same to them if the Muslims were caught! This concept was so common in the world at that time - the same way its so uncommon in the world at todays time (- its Islam that actually removed the concept so much that we find it strange today.)

So something practical had to be done about it to slowly set people free. If Muslims said, you can go back home now after fighting us - then wouldn't the Muslims always be at the disadvantage? So by making them slaves - but respecting them, giving them similar rights - Islam changed the concept of slavery altogether in the world (but again this changed when queen Victoria came to Africa.)



What did Allah's Messenger say about slaves? [translation of meaning];

" Those slaves are your brothers, only God gave you an upper hand over them. So let that who has his brother (i.e. slave) under him give him the same food he himself eats, and the same clothing as he himself wears. The master may not give his brother a task that is beyond his ability. If he does give him such task, let him lend him a hand."

Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29


also read;

islamic slavery; a refutation of doubts:
http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=815&section=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions


​
You can read what queen victoria did to slaves when she brought them from africa. These were mainly Muslim slaves that she brought over.





marriage is encouraged more in islam though.


Sahih Al Bukhari Volume 1, Book 3 [book of knowledge], Number 97:

Narrated Abu Burda's father:

Allah's Apostle said "Three persons will have a double reward:

1. A Person from the people of the scriptures who believed in his prophet (Jesus or Moses) and then believed in the Prophet Muhammad (i .e. has embraced Islam).
2. A slave who discharges his duties to Allah and his master.
3. A master of a woman-slave who teaches her good manners and educates her in the best possible way (the religion) and manumits her and then marries her."



​
Allahu a'lam.
 
Last edited:
Thank you brother, but is it okay for someone to FORCE a woman? THere is also an ayat: "And let those who do not find the means to marry keep chaste until Allah makes them free from want out of His grace. And (as for) those who ask for a writing from among those whom your right hands possess, give them the writing if you know any good in them, and give them of the wealth of Allah which He has given you; and do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail good of this world`s life; and whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (Q:24:33)
I am convinced that Islam tells us to treat them well, because we couldn't get rid of slavery all at once, but in the ayat He also says that whoever does compel the slave woman to prostitution, he will be forgiven? I'm not sure if that's what it means exactly but I don't understand it because the men are told NOT to compel them to prostitution when they desire to remain chaste, yet men will be forgiven even if they do this?
 
I am sure there were female soldiers who fought jihad along with the Prophet (PBUH), and they too had slaves so does that mean that they were allowed to have a sexually relationship with their male-captives :blind:
 
Confused0122 said:
lol im just confused about why Allah s.w.t would allow men to force women into things and then forgive them afterward.. this would totally allow the men to use the girls and then expect to be forgiven.. :cry: i don't know what to think.. imsad
Click to expand...

:sl:

Firstly, this isn't the core issue. The issue you're having is with the concept of 'slavery' itself. When one says 'slavery' the word entails the Western definition of slavery which was based on race and cruelty, which is drastically different than what Islam considers 'slavery', which is in the lines of 'servant'. I thought you might have read the posts I linked to earlier. This isn't such a big issue. Take a look at the historical context, the society when the Qur'an was revealed; slavery was rampant and deeply entrenched into the fabrics of society, not to mention that it made up a very big part of the economy as well, therefore, to tackle the issue without causing economical problems, Islam provided a way through which slavery would eventually be abolished. You cannot provide quick solutions to a problem that has been around for centuries, it takes gradual stages to get rid of it. That is why Islam made it permissible with conditions and rulings, but at the same time gave great incentives to free slaves. Please read:

Ansar Al-'Adl said:
:sl:

From Shaykh Abdullah Al-Faqîh's fatwa on IslamWeb:
From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man. (SOURCE)​
From Dr. Habib Siddiqui:
The ancient world was deeply entrenched into slavery, and the Arab society in Muhammad’s (S) time was no exception. The pagan aristocracy in Makkah, Jewish landowners and merchants in Madinah and many wealthy Christian Arabs were slave owners.[17] Most of the early believers in Muhammad’s (S) message of pure monotheism, on the other hand, were slaves, who were brutally tortured for their faith by their non-Muslim slavers. It became, thus, incumbent upon the Prophet (S) and his Companions (notably Abu Bakr and Uthman – may Allah be pleased with them) to free those slaves. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.[18] It was no wonder that some of the best-known Muslims and soldiers in the defense of Islam were these former slaves and their children.[19]

The Qur'an unequivocally makes it clear that no man, irrespective of his status (including a prophet), can enslave any other human being: "It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given him the Scripture and wisdom and 'Nabuwah' (Prophethood) that he should afterwards have said unto mankind: Be slaves of me instead of Allah …" [3:79]

Thus, Islam’s credit lies in being the only major religion to curtailing slavery and encouraging emancipation of slaves. (See the Qur’an for many such references, e.g., 4:92, 5:89, 58:3, 90:13, 24:33, 9:60, 2:177, 2:221, 4:25, 4:36.) Following the dictates of the Qur’an, personal and public wealth from zakat fund and the Baitul-Mal was used for manumitting slaves.20 Here are some relevant Traditions (ahadith) encouraging emancipation of slaves, Muslims and non-Muslims alike:

"A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave, even his private organs for the sake of the freed slave's organs." - Muhammad (S) [Bukhari and Muslim: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

“The atonement for beating or slapping a slave (Muslim or non-Muslim) on the face, for no fault of his, is that he should be set free.” - Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Ibn Umar (RA)]

"Give food to the hungry, pay a visit to the sick and release (set free) the one in captivity (by paying his ransom)." - Muhammad (S) [Bukhari: Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (RA)]

“Allah the Most High said, I will be the opponent of three persons on the Day of Resurrection. They are the one who makes a covenant in My name and then prove treacherous. Or the one who sells a free person (Muslim or non-Muslim) as a slave and appropriates his price for himself. And the one who hires a laborer and having taken full work from him, fails to pay him his wages." - Muhammad (S) [Hadith Qudsi, Bukhari: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

"There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person (Rajulun iitabada muharraran)." – Muhammad (S) [Abu Dawud]

"No son can repay his father unless he finds him as a slave and purchases him and sets him free.” – Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

As hinted earlier, many of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (S) were freed slaves who went on to become great leaders of the Islamic community. Bilal the Abyssinian became the first caller to Islam [note: the position of mu’addhin is next to the imam]. Ammar ibn Yathir was from Yemen, Salman al-Farsi was from Persia, Suhayb al-Rumi was from Byzantium. Many of the rulers in Muslim territories were freed slaves and their descendants.
__________________
[17]A study of the lives of many former slaves who became the Companions of the Prophet (S) is sufficient to prove this. For instance, Salman al-Farisi’s (RA) slave master was a wealthy Jew from Banu Qurayza. (See also Maulana Rumi’s masterpiece - Mathnabi.) [back]
[18]Human Rights in Islam by Abul ‘Ala Mawdudi. [back]
[19]Read this author’s The Book of Devotional Stories (in print) for stories of some of these early Muslims. [back]
[20]See Fethullah Gulen’s article: How is it that Islam, a religion inspired by God for the good of humanity, allows slavery? - Islam Herald.
​
Malise Ruthven writes:
Restrictions were placed on enslavement. It was forbidden to enslave free members of Islamic society, including dhimmis (nonMuslims) residing in dar al-Islam.
​
Marjorie Kelly writes in Islam: The Religious and Political Life of a World Community:
Because of socioeconomic considerations, however, slavery was not abolished.
​
John L. Esposito writes in Islam and Politics:
Slavery had long existed among the Arabs. Although the Quran commanded the just and humane treatment of slaves ( 4:40, 16:73) and regarded their emancipation as a meritorious act, the system of slavery was adopted in modified form. Only captives in battle could be taken as slaves. Neither Muslims nor Jews and Christians could be enslaved in early Islam.
​
Kenneth W. Morgan writes in Islam- The Straight Path: Islam Interpreted by Muslims
Slavery was customary at the time that Islam was revealed, but Islam prepared the grounds for its elimination. It encourages the emancipation of slaves by giving them the possibility of purchasing their freedom, it urges that part of zakat be given to slaves to help them free themselves, and it offers the possibility of atonement for certain sins, such as having sexual intercourse during fasting days, by releasing slaves.​
Edward Blyden, on of the most important Pan-Africanist thinkers of the 19th century, points out that Islam is what saved much of Africa from slavery:
The introduction of Islam into Central and West Africa has been the most important, if not the sole, preservative against the desolations of the slave trade. Islam furnished a protection to the tribes who embraced it by effectively binding them together in one strong fraternity and enabling them by their united efforts to baffle the attempts of powerful pagan slave hunters. (Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race, p. 215)​
At the end of the 18th century, Mouradgea d'Ohsson (a main source of information for the Western writers on the Ottoman empire) declared:
"There is perhaps no nation where the captives, the slaves, the very toilers in the galleys are better provided for or treated with more kindness than among the Muhammedans." (As quoted in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol.I, p. 35.)​
Napoleon Bonaparte is recorded as saying about the condition of slaves in Muslim countries:
"The slave inherits his master's property and marries his daughter. The majority of the Pashas had been slaves. Many of the grand viziers, all the Mamelukes, Ali Ben Mourad Beg, had been slaves. They began their lives by performing the most menial services in the houses of their masters and were subsequently raised in status for their merit or by favour. In the West, on the contrary, the slave has always been below the position of the domestic servants; he occupies the lowest rug. The Romans emancipated their slaves, but the emancipated were never considered as equal to the free-born. The ideas of the East and West are so different that it took a long time to make the Egyptians understand that all the army was not composed of slaves belonging to the Sultan al-Kabir." (Cherfils, Bonaparte et l'Islam (Paris, 1914))​
Annemarie Schimmel writes:
"The entire history of Islam proves that slaves could occupy any office, and many former military slaves, usually recruited from among the Central Asian Turks, became military leaders and often even rulers as in eastern Iran, India (the Slave Dynasty of Delhi), and medieval Egypt (the Mamluks). “ (Islam: An Introduction", p. 67)​
:w:
Click to expand...

Ansar Al-'Adl said:
I think if you bothered to read my post carefully you would find that this was answered; Islam does not give an endorsement or even plain license of slavery as you are implying. Islam came at a time when slavery was deeply entrenched in the society, so Islam worked towards the gradual elimination of slavery.
  • Islam encouraged the emanciplating of slaves; The Qur'an does so in many places:
    4:92, 5:89, 58:3, 90:13, 24:33, 9:60, 2:177, 2:221, 4:25, 4:36.​
    The Prophet said:
    "A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave (Sahîh Bukhârî, and Sahîh Muslim)​
    Shaykh Abu Bakr Al-Jazâ'iry writes:
    Islam orders making an agreement to facilitate a slave in buying back his freedom if he requests such an agreement, and it encourages helping him in that with shares or wealth. Allah the Almighty said:
    And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation) give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allah which He has bestowed upon you. (Qur'an 24:33)
    (Al-Jaza'iry, Minhaj Al-Muslim, vol. 2, p.551)​
    The Prophet said: "If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward. " (Sahîh Bukhari)
  • Islam eliminated and restricted the sources of slavery, prohibiting the enslavement of free people, the Prophet said:
    The Prophet said, "Allah says, 'I will be against three persons on the Day of Resurrection: [...] One who sells a free person (as a slave) and eats the price[/b] (Sahîh Bukhari)
    "There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person (Rajulun iitabada muharraran)" (Sunan Abî Dawûd)​
  • Islam obligated freeing slaves in many circumstances as expiation. Expiation for breaking an oath is freeing a slave (2:221), unintentionally causing a Muslim's death is freeing a slave (4:221), expiation for Zihâr is freeing a slave (4:221), breaking one's fast in ramadan is freeing a slave (Sahîh Muslim), etc.
  • Islam elevated the status of slaves and promoted universal human equality; the Prophet said:
    "Yield obedience to my succesors, even if he is a black ethiopian slave" (Mishkat al-Masaabih, At-Tabreezee)
    "No one should say, "my slave" as all of you are slaves of Allah." (Bukhari, Muslim, An-Nasaa'ee and Ibn Hibban)​
  • Islam prohibited the poor treatment of slaves; the Prophet said:
    "Whoever strikes his slave or beats him, then his expiation is to free him." (Sahîh Muslim)
    They are your brothers; give them to eat what you eat; give them to wear what you wear. (Sunan At-Tirmidhi)
    "He who treats his slave badly will not enter Paradise". (Musnad Ahmad)
    "You are to honor them and to treat them like your children, and feed them from what you eat" (Musnad Ahmad)​
So your claim that Islam simply allowed slavery is not true at all. Islam was actually instrumental in the gradual elimination of slavery for the reasons listed above. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.

If you know arabic, you know that the word 'abd means slave, so there is nothing 'horrendous'' or 'abhorrent' here.

You can obsinately continue to deny the fact that Islam did NOT leave slavery as it was, allowing it to continue unfettered. Islam placed steps in place (which I have outlined for you in a very basic fashion) for the elimination of slavery. What Islam did was the best thing that could be done in that era, as historians have testified, both Muslims and Non-muslims. You initially pretended you were just interested in an answer to your question but it seems quite evident that you are locked in bigoted denial of reality and do not seek any answer.

:w:
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Kadafi
Then clearly you're not well acquainted with the econimcal condition in Middle Ages. Back then, the gap for economic opportunies was very narrow for freedslaves as was independency for a freedslave who didn't posses any property nor was educated. This in turn leads the freedslave going back to his former master and sell his labour in return for economical dependancy. This is also from the Islamic POV as I haven't mentioned the economical disasters in Americas slavery but then again, I wouldn't justify the slavery in Americas and the cruel treatment that they had to endure. I hope such part of history never repeats itself.

Your definition of slaves is what any historian refers to as western definition. The Islamic definition is the same as the definition of a servant. I suppose the humane treatment, the ability to achieve great ranks, etc, has been already mentioned.
[...] I disagree with you strongly on that issue. Can you provide [any] evidence that freed slaves had personal, psychological or economic resources to secure themselves a dignified independence. I assume you are aware of the past consequence that was heaped on the freed slaves after the civil war.

Frederick Douglas said, regarding the ex-slaves after the civil war:
"free, without roofs to cover them, or bread to eat, or land to cultivate, and as a consequence died in such numbers as to awaken the hope of their enemies that they would soon disappear."
​
Islaam aimed at abolishing slavery gradually without introducing any negative consequences on the stability neither of the community nor in the economical status. This is because slaves represented a big economic power before the advent of Islaam. Another additional reason was that during that period, nations were lacking a solid system to exchange POWS. The only options that they enforced was either by putting the POWS to sword, keep them as captives, allow them to return to their people or distribute them as part of the spoils of war.

And the oft-used option was the last one. But Islaam replaced the cruel inhumane treatment that captives used to receive with compassion and justice.

Let me cite an example of a captive named Emmanuel d'Aranda, a student from Flanders who was caught at sea in 1640, and remained captive in the Regency of Algiers for two years (1640-2), narrated his experience. His first master was Cataborne Mostafa, who shared his meals with him, and his company. Then at some point his master, as a punishment following a quarrel with an army officer, was sent away for military duty for six months. Here is what d’Aranda has to say:
"I was sad about my master, who told me: `henceforth you will go and live at Mahomet Celibi Oiga; I hope with God’s help, before my return you will be free, and if I had money I will share it with you.’’ I answered: `Master, I know about your good will and your poverty; I kiss your hands, thanking you as much as I can for the good treatment I received in your house.’ He said "When you are back in Flanders, give my greetings to your parents."
Found in Emmanuel d’Aranda: Relation; op cit; In Denise Brahimi: Opinions et regards; op cit; pp. 45-6.
​
Labat (Priest) addresses the misconception that the slaves were treated inhumane by their Muslim captors. He wrote in his memoir:
"We imagine that the Christians who have the misfortune to be slaves in Barbary, are tortured in a very cruel manner and the most in-humane treatment inflicted on them. There are people who in order to stir the charity of the faithful pour with great assurance these lies: their intention, although good, is still always a lie. They forget that in this instance that it is not right to cause harm so as to derive good. I, too, have been in this situation like many others…. But what I saw in Tunis has convinced me these people are full of humanity, as I witnessed that our slaves on the boats waiting to sail were fed every day (fruit, meat, bread…)… and some of these slaves demanded that they stayed with their masters until the day they left for home; and I agreed. Their masters shared their meals with them, gave them tobacco, and looked after them as if they were their own children. They kissed them on the day of parting, and assured them, that if business or misfortune brought them back to the country, they could freely live with them, and they will be more than welcome."​
Click to expand...
In regards to female slaves and rulings:

Discussing slavery is best described by Shaykh Salman Al-'Awdah in his book, Drowning in minor details, as follows:
How many people talk about the issue of slavery and the legal rulings that are associated with it, like the minimum dress a slave girl must wear? Sometimes these discussions can get very drawn out. Where are the slave girls and where is slavery in the world today? These things are nonexistent today. If slavery does exist somewhere in the world then it is an extremely rare thing. So then, why busy ourselves with such a topic?​
Inshaa'Allah, I intend to demonstrate that Islam was not instituting an oppresive system with regard to slavery, but was rapidly eradicating an oppresive system that was already in place. Moiz Amjad writes:
Firstly, the fact that Islam considered the institution of slavery a social vice is the obvious corollary of the various directives of Islam regarding freeing of slaves. Had Islam not considered slavery to be a social vice, there was no reason to promote freeing of slaves as a great virtue.

Secondly, the words 'Islam accepted slavery as a social vice' clearly imply that even though Islam considered slavery to be a vice against humanity, yet due to its deep roots in the world society, at the time, and due to the extra-ordinary social implications that could have followed any drastic measures of the complete and immediate abolition of the institution, Islam tolerated its existence till the time that the world was emotionally and psychologically prepared for its abolition. During this intermediary time, it was equally essential for the Prophet (pbuh) to promote the moral value of treating one's slaves with respect, honor, love and justice.

...It should be remembered that the correction of all such social vices that are as deeply rooted in a society as was slavery in the world of old, clearly need a two faceted approach in their correction. Firstly, the society should be psychologically, emotionally and physically prepared to relieve itself of such vices - which can sometimes translate into a long-term corrective process. Secondly, during this intermediary time, the society should also be taught to deal with the prevalent situation in the best possible manner.​
Likewise, Hischam Khan writes:
We must remain conscious of the fact that the Qur'an was revealed in an environment in which slavery was accepted as a normal social custom. This custom was around for so long that everybody accepted it. Had you and I been living there at the time, we too would have seen nothing wrong with it. Therefore, it should be cleared up at the outset that the Qur'an neither created this practice nor encouraged it in any way, shape or form. It only accepted that this has been deeply rooted in that society and would not be eradicated easily. So, a simple demand to free all slaves was unrealistic. Besides, the slaves; many of which were elderly poor people, had nowhere to go and would therefore probably end up becoming beggars and only further the burden upon society. As such, a gradual approach had to be taken for the eradication of this vice. Please remember that the steps toward this taken by the Qur'an would have been seen as abnormal to the people of the time, as keeping slaves feels to you and I. It should be recognized that slavery was a social phenomenon of an international nature, Islam could not have completely abolished slavery, while the world culture remained the same.

...Considering all of this, I really cannot see how the Qur'an displays a "disturbing concept" in regards to slaves. Actually, I reckon that the Qur'an provided the best groundwork toward the actual abolition of slavery itself. Had the Qur'an decided to declare slavery forbidden immediately rather than gradually removing it while giving a set of rules for their better treatment in the mean time, then it would have caused various problems on different levels. In the world at the time, there were such a huge number of slaves that releasing them would have left them without food, money, jobs and care. Many of them were already very vulnerable and would therefore never have been able to cope with such a thing. The societies would never have been able to provide for them all and they may as a result have turned to illegal means to earn a living (e.g. brothels may have been opened etc). Thus, there was wisdom behind the decision to abolish slavery gradually rather than immediately.

You write:
"Secondly, where Quran mentions the prohibition of illegal sexual intercourse, the only exceptions are with a person's wife or SLAVES/ CAPTIVES that their right hand possesses."

Having explained what the social customs were at the time, it should be understood that sexual intercourse with one's slave was considered part of the norm. The slaves too saw nothing wrong in this. In fact, before the advent of Islam the slaves were considered no more than their master's possessions and therefore absolutely anything could be done with them. In other words, they could even take their slaves' lives when and as they pleased. Islam removed such vices and raised them to the position of fellow humans with similar rights. However, as long as slavery was not completely removed, having sexual relations remained part of the master-slave relationship.

Concerning the master-slave relationship, I think it is but natural to assume that it was very close. It seems obvious enough that the master and slave would be around each other a lot of the time. Therefore, it would probably have been difficult to expect them not to have a sexual relationship, especially if the slave happened to be very attractive. However, depicting it as the master “raping” and “abusing” his slave is far from the truth. The slave was fully aware that this was a part of the relationship much like the husband and wife knows that sexual relations are a part of the couple’s relationship. Such was not a hidden relationship; it was known and was also legally and morally accepted, both in the society and the world at large. So, it was not fornication. Quite to the contrary, the exceptions to the impermissibility of having sexual relationships are those under marriage and those with one’s slave. Therefore, it is also incorrect to term it “fornication” (do note that of course, the only permanent exception to the impermissibility of having sexual relations was that under marriage).

Had slavery been abolished on the spot it would have caused chaos in the society and the world at large. It just was not possible. However, the Prophet (p) changed their status and tried to get his people into treating them as fellow members of the family. For this reason, a “master-slave” relationship turned into more of a Father-son, or husband-wife relationship.

The “slaves” were to be fed with the same food as that of the master, clothed with the same clothes (yes, same clothes!), and not asked to do more than they could handle. Nay, the master was even told to assist the slave if the slave was found to be having any difficulties. They were not to refer to them as “slaves” anymore. These are your brothers and sisters, it was declared. Yet further, they were not allowed to hit their slaves. If these slaves objected to their position and desired to be freed, then if the potential and ability to live and cope independently was seen in them, they should be helped toward being freed. Accordingly, what Islam envisaged and wanted to produce, was a treatment of “slaves” that was absolutely free of cruelty and harm. Actually, keeping such things in mind probably renders this undeserving of the term “slavery”.​
And in the link I gave you to IslamOnline, they wrote:
The word “right hands” here refers to women taken as prisoners of war. It is by no means an implication of concubinage, for this is totally prohibited in Islam. Nor does it refer to purchasing female slaves from market to be used to satisfy sexual urge. It’s during warfare that the right hand actually takes possession of captives, and this is what the Qur’an means. That’s point number one.

Point number two is that, the word “right hands possess” also has another significance that clearly reflects the great concern Islam has for preserving the rights of those captives. As we know, the right hand has its special merit and privileged functions that man instinctively reserve for it. Imam Kurtubi, in his commentary on this verse, says: “Allah Almighty uses the word ‘right hand’ here for it denotes great honor and respect. It suffices that it’s the one used when referring to spending, as mentioned in the hadith ‘… he who provides charity (seeking only Allah’s reward) in a way that his left hand does not know what his right hand spends …’ And it is the very hand used in making pledge of allegiance … etc.”

All this indicates that the word “what your right hand possess” has a special and glorified meaning in Islamic usage. In fact, it signifies the great care and good treatment that captives or prisoners of wars should be accorded. This is how Islam dealt with the issue from the earliest stages.

All this did not materialize all of a sudden, for slavery was a social ailment that needed to be addressed. So it was a gradual strategy laid down by Islam, not only to eradicate slavery, but also to give the freed slaves a complete social rehabilitation. First of all, Islam stipulated that all masters should take care of their captives; they should not be overburdened with tasks, nor should they be deprived of their human rights. The Prophet (pbuh) made this clear in his hadith that masters should treat their slaves as their brothers and female captives as their sisters, if not in faith, at least in humanity. He said:

“Your servants are thy brethren. Allah has put them under your control. He could, if He willed, make you under their control. Thus, whoever has his brother under his control, let him feed him of his same food and dress him of his same dress. Never saddle them with work that goes beyond their capability. If the work happens to be somehow difficult, lend them a helping hand.”

As for female captives, Imam Bukhari quotes the Prophet, as saying:

“If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward.”

You see; that’s how Islam set the course of emancipating slaves. They should definitely be well treated. Also, educating female captives and marrying them, after emancipation is considered an act of charity, which would earn one great reward. Not only that. Islam further put an end to the habit of using derogative names of “slaves” or “servants”. For in Islam, man must not show servitude to anyone besides Allah the Almighty. So it was stipulated that the captives should be addressed by “fatah” (boy) or “fatat” (girl). Besides, the act of emancipating slaves used to be a competitive work among the Prophet’s Companions, for it was highly recommended by Islam and was considered an act of worship. ​
Click to expand...
http://www.islamicboard.com/127799-post10.html
 
Sister confused maybe this will help :D:D



Are Captive Women Lawful for Men

Q. I am a member of an Islamic Organization called the sister of the Islamic Society. We undertake Dawah and community service. We have discussions, discourses and seminars through which we learn more and remove our doubts. But there has been a question to which none of us could find a suitable explanation. Time and again we have come upon this phrase in the Qur’an. “And we have made lawful to you your wives and those whom your right hands possess” or “And those who guard their chastity, except with their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess, for them they are not to be blamed” (70:29,30) According to the precepts of Islam, until a man and woman are bound by the lawful tie of marriage, whatever physical relationship or emotional connection they have outside it is akin to adultery or fornication. So, then my question is, how are the captives which your right hands possess lawful to a man without him giving them a marital status?
Naaz Fathima; Madras.

A. Though widespread, it is a wrong notion that Islam holds no bar on free sex with the enslaved women taken as war captives. Women are justified for having reservations against such practice (though rarely applicable in present days) said to be permitted by Deen-e-Fitrat. The verses you have quoted from 70:29-30 also occurred in 23:5-6. Both these Surahs (23&70) were revealed in Makkah. Later, in Madina, the law concerning sex with captive women was completed vide 4:25. Which specifically mentions Nikah with them after the payment of Mehr. It is like the order concerning drinks which were not strictly banned in the beginning but were later declared unlawful. All the three orders related to drinks should be read together for a complete understanding of the law, which now states: 1. There are some benefits of drinks but its evil surpasses its benefits. 2. Salat is not valid if offered while under influence of intoxicants. 3. Intoxicants are unlawful. Similarly the law regarding captive women can only be comprehended when all the verses concerning them are put together. Before elaborating it further, I might point out a slip by many a translator while translating these verses (i.e. 23:6 and 70:30). The Arabic word ‘WA’ means ‘AND’, while ‘AU’ is for the word ‘OR’. In both these verses ‘AU’ has occurred implying the permission of sex with their wives or the captives they possess. Replace ‘OR’ by ‘AND’ in the above and the meaning changes. Now compare it with the verse 33:50 where ‘WA’ (AND) has been used while describing an order exclusively for the Prophet (Pbuh). The verse reads: “O Prophet (Pbuh), indeed, we have made lawful unto you your wives unto whom you have paid their dowries ‘AND’ those whom you possess out of those whom Allah has given you as spoils of war...., a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) believers. We are aware of that which we enjoined upon them concerning their wives and those whom they possess (as captives). (This has been made clear) so that you may be free from difficulty... “ (33:50) Read the correct word ‘OR’ in context with the believers (other than the Prophet) making it their wives ‘OR’ their captives and then read the exclusive order for the Prophet (Pbuh) in the above verse which allows your wives ‘AND’ your captives and then ponder over the explanation given in the last part of the verse (23:50), it will become evident that for general believers, the sexual relation with captives while they have wives, is not permitted. Another point which must be made clear is that for a number of reasons, (racial discrimination, not very certainly being one of them), which are not being discussed here, Islam in general does not approve of the marriages between free men and enslaved women, though it does not prohibit them. That is why they have been described as a different category alongwith wives, although they would also become wives after Nikah with them (which is a pre-condition for sex). Till the clear cut order of legitimate marriage with captive women was not revealed, sex without taking them into marriage was not prohibited, which explains the earlier practice and traditions. After the revelation of Surah Nisa (No-4) in Madina, the comprehensive law can be read as under: 1. (The believers) who guard their chastity except with their wives or (The captives) whom their right hands possess, for them they are not blame worthy. (23:5,6 & 70:29:30) 2. And whosoever is not able to afford to marry free believing women, let them many from the believing maids whom your right hands possess instead of availing free sex with them. Allah knoweth best (concerning) your faith. You proceed from one another (so the racialism is not behind the wisdom of this order). Wed them by permission of their folk and give unto them, their dowers (Mehrs) according to what is reasonable. They should be chaste, not fornicators (who submit to sex without marriage), nor of loose conduct.. this (leave of marrying captives) is for him among you who fear sin. But it is better for you (who have no means to marry free believing women), if you practise self restraint (instead of availing leave of marrying captives). Allah is forgiving, Merciful. (4:25) Therefore, in the light of the 2nd rule, the first rule will read as: “Who guard their chastity except with their wives (taken from the free believing women) or (the believing captives in their marriage) whom their right hands possess, for then they are not blame worthy.”

http://www.islamicvoice.com/october.97/ourd.htm
 
23. al-Mu'minun: The Believers

5 And who guard their modesty -
6 Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy,
7 But whoso craveth beyond that, such are transgressors –


70. al-Ma`arij: The Ladders

29 And those who preserve their chastity
30 Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy;
31 But whoso seeketh more than that, those are they who are transgressors;


Sura - 4 Women (Al-Nesaa')

[4:25] Those among you who cannot afford to marry free believing women, may marry believing slave women. GOD knows best about your belief, and you are equal to one another, as far as belief is concerned. You shall obtain permission from their guardians before you marry them, and pay them their due dowry equitably. They shall maintain moral behavior, by not committing adultery, or having secret lovers. Once they are freed through marriage, if they commit adultery, their punishment shall be half of that for the free women. Marrying a slave shall be a last resort for those unable to wait. To be patient is better for you. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
[4:26] GOD wills to explain things for you, and to guide you through past precedents, and to redeem you. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise. ​

The first two surahs were revealed in Makkah, while Sura An-Nisa was revealed in Madina.

So one please correct me if i am wrong.
 
Confused0122 said:
Thank you brother, but is it okay for someone to FORCE a woman? THere is also an ayat: "And let those who do not find the means to marry keep chaste until Allah makes them free from want out of His grace. And (as for) those who ask for a writing from among those whom your right hands possess, give them the writing if you know any good in them, and give them of the wealth of Allah which He has given you; and do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail good of this world`s life; and whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (Q:24:33)
I am convinced that Islam tells us to treat them well, because we couldn't get rid of slavery all at once, but in the ayat He also says that whoever does compel the slave woman to prostitution, he will be forgiven? I'm not sure if that's what it means exactly but I don't understand it because the men are told NOT to compel them to prostitution when they desire to remain chaste, yet men will be forgiven even if they do this?
Click to expand...


:salamext:


Allah has permitted it for males to have these types of relations with their female slaves as is shown by the earlier verse from surah Ma'arij. Women do not have these relations with their slaves since its not a sign of honour for them, besides - if they had a child, how would they be sure who the child belongs to?


The issue of forcing slave women into prostitution is a totally different subject, because people would sometimes force their slave women into prostitution so she could get money for the owner. This is forbidden in Islam, but for her to have relations with her owner is not a sin - therefore not prostitution.


Ibn Kathir comments on that verse;
[وَلاَ تُكْرِهُواْ فَتَيَـتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَآءِ]

(And force not your slave-girls to prostitution...) Among the people of the Jahiliyyah [people of ignorance before islam], there were some who, if he had a slave-girl, he would send her out to commit Zina [fornication] and would charge money for that, which he would take from her every time. When Islam came, Allah forbade the believers to do that. The reason why this Ayah was revealed, according to the reports of a number of earlier and later scholars of Tafsir, had to do with `Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul. He had slave-girls whom he used to force into prostitution so that he could take their earnings and because he wanted them to have children which would enhance his status, or so he claimed.

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=24&tid=35958


​
There's some things we might not totally understand due to our time circumstances, but Allah is the Wise, the Knowing. See how His wisdom ended slavery on a mass scale, to the extent that we hardly see slavery at all in the world today.
 
Last edited:

Similar Threads

Back
Top