Sex with slaves in Islam

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There are three who will be given a double reward: a man from among the people of the Book who believed in his Prophet, then lived to see the Prophet (S) and followed him and believed in him– he will have a double reward; and a slave who fulfils his duty towards Allaah and towards his master – he will have a double reward; and a man who had a slave woman whom he fed and fed her well, and taught her and taught her well, then he set her free and married her – he will have a double reward”


narrated by al-Bukhaari (97) and Muslim (154).


 
Try looking it up on other tafsir. The verse says to guard your private parts except from your wives AND slaves.
As I said before, there seems to be a discrepancy with individual translator footnotes regarding that verse (some say xyz, others say abc). Thus, it is clearly a complex matter that requires scholarly level knowledge of Qur'an, which none of us on this board possess.
 
Last edited:
if a slave appears worthy to be set free AND pays you their ransom then when you set them free give them some provisions from what you have.

Asalaamu Alaikum,

I'm in a hurry, but I just had to reply to this.

It's in the verse -

And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you.

Islam (from my understanding) is the only Religion to do this, freeing a Slave is one thing (but it's pointless if their going to be on the streets left to die or end up being captured by someone else), thus the Master has to pay them and give them a good opportunity to live their own life.

Maybe this may explain what is meant by random -

"The law of slavery in the legal sense of the term is now obsolete. While it had any meaning, Islam made the slave's lot as easy as possible. A slave, male or female, could ask for conditional manumission by a written deed fixing the amount required for manumission and allowing the slave meanwhile to earn money by lawful means and perhaps marry and bring up a family. Such a deed was not to be refused if the request was genuine and the slave had character. Not only that, but the master is directed to help with money out of his own resources in order to enable the slave to earn his or her own liberty."

Now you might say "the slave may be overworked" into winning their freedom back? -

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "When the slave of anyone amongst you prepares food for him and he serves him after having sat close to (and undergoing the hardship of) heat and smoke, he should make him (the slave) sit along with him and make him eat (along with him), and if the food seems to run short, then he should spare some portion for him (from his own share) - (another narrator) Dawud said:" i. e. a morsel or two". 4097. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4096)"


Narrated Al-Ma'rur: "At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29)"


Narrated Anas: "The Prophet said, 'None of you will have faith till he wishes for his (Muslim) brother [this includes slaves, since a slave is considered a brother as shown above] what he likes for himself.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 12)"

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari: "The Prophet said, "Give food to the hungry, pay a visit to the sick and release (set free) the one in captivity (by paying his ransom)." (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Food, Meals, Volume 7, Book 65, Number 286)"

"Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him, then expiation for it is that he should set him free. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4079)"


Interesting how even the smallest of things warrents a slave to be set free, this was 1400 years ago when people (as the Bible suggest) would beat their slaves to an inch of their life.


This may interest you aswell -



First, it is important to know that thousands of years ago life was different than today. Today, people wouldn't accept slavery for any reason. The reason for this is because people are a lot more independent both financially, education wise, mentally, etc... But people back then were different. When a tribe or a group of people lose a major battle and their money is mostly, if not all, is taken as war booty by the other side, then people could and would accept being slaves for the following reasons:
1- Both financial and social security. When their country or tribe lost the war, they also lost most or all of their money as war booty. Being out of money and food, it becomes necessary for an individual to find the means for basic survival in life. Living as a slave would provide this.
2- Protection from hostile individuals. Even under the Islamic rule, you can still find hostile individuals who violate the Law and take matters into their own hands. An enemy family can be sometime in danger if they don't have a "protector".
3- Widows, Orphans, and the extremely poor of the enemy side need the financial and social protection from a Master. Back then, there were no governments with good social system that protects everyone. Slavery back then was that social system in special cases.


What was notably different from the slavery of the western world, however, was the degree to which they [slaves] were protected by Muslim law. When the law was observed, their treatment was good. They might expect to marry and have families of their own, and they had a good chance of being freed. There were also built in avenues of escape.
Gwyn Campbell; Frank Cass, The Structure of Slavery in Indian Ocean Africa and Asia, 2004


Really doubt you can argue against the fact that Islam did discourage Slavery, never in the Quran was it mentioned in positive light to have slaves, yet everywhere theres mentions of freeing slaves and treating them well.
 
I don't see why everything has to be compared to Christianity and the Bible to show how much better Islam is. No one one this thread is trying to say the Bible spoke against slavery or Christian slaves were treated better.

Interesting quotes though. Why did people bother owning the slaves to start with? Like the man in the quote by Qatada, he still bought the slave woman regardless of how he treated her, he's still assuming he has the right to control another person's life and apparenlty sleep with her if she's willing. Isn't the Qu'ran condoning slavery by saying a slave who fulfils his duty to his master will get a double reward in heaven?
 
Asalaamu Alaikum,

I'm in a hurry, but I just had to reply to this.

It's in the verse -

And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you.

Islam (from my understanding) is the only Religion to do this, freeing a Slave is one thing (but it's pointless if their going to be on the streets left to die or end up being captured by someone else), thus the Master has to pay them and give them a good opportunity to live their own life.

Maybe this may explain what is meant by random -

"The law of slavery in the legal sense of the term is now obsolete. While it had any meaning, Islam made the slave's lot as easy as possible. A slave, male or female, could ask for conditional manumission by a written deed fixing the amount required for manumission and allowing the slave meanwhile to earn money by lawful means and perhaps marry and bring up a family. Such a deed was not to be refused if the request was genuine and the slave had character. Not only that, but the master is directed to help with money out of his own resources in order to enable the slave to earn his or her own liberty."

Now you might say "the slave may be overworked" into winning their freedom back? -

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "When the slave of anyone amongst you prepares food for him and he serves him after having sat close to (and undergoing the hardship of) heat and smoke, he should make him (the slave) sit along with him and make him eat (along with him), and if the food seems to run short, then he should spare some portion for him (from his own share) - (another narrator) Dawud said:" i. e. a morsel or two". 4097. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4096)"


Narrated Al-Ma'rur: "At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29)"


Narrated Anas: "The Prophet said, 'None of you will have faith till he wishes for his (Muslim) brother [this includes slaves, since a slave is considered a brother as shown above] what he likes for himself.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 12)"

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari: "The Prophet said, "Give food to the hungry, pay a visit to the sick and release (set free) the one in captivity (by paying his ransom)." (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Food, Meals, Volume 7, Book 65, Number 286)"

"Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him, then expiation for it is that he should set him free. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4079)"


Interesting how even the smallest of things warrents a slave to be set free, this was 1400 years ago when people (as the Bible suggest) would beat their slaves to an inch of their life.


This may interest you aswell -



First, it is important to know that thousands of years ago life was different than today. Today, people wouldn't accept slavery for any reason. The reason for this is because people are a lot more independent both financially, education wise, mentally, etc... But people back then were different. When a tribe or a group of people lose a major battle and their money is mostly, if not all, is taken as war booty by the other side, then people could and would accept being slaves for the following reasons:
1- Both financial and social security. When their country or tribe lost the war, they also lost most or all of their money as war booty. Being out of money and food, it becomes necessary for an individual to find the means for basic survival in life. Living as a slave would provide this.
2- Protection from hostile individuals. Even under the Islamic rule, you can still find hostile individuals who violate the Law and take matters into their own hands. An enemy family can be sometime in danger if they don't have a "protector".
3- Widows, Orphans, and the extremely poor of the enemy side need the financial and social protection from a Master. Back then, there were no governments with good social system that protects everyone. Slavery back then was that social system in special cases.


What was notably different from the slavery of the western world, however, was the degree to which they [slaves] were protected by Muslim law. When the law was observed, their treatment was good. They might expect to marry and have families of their own, and they had a good chance of being freed. There were also built in avenues of escape.
Gwyn Campbell; Frank Cass, The Structure of Slavery in Indian Ocean Africa and Asia, 2004


Really doubt you can argue against the fact that Islam did discourage Slavery, never in the Quran was it mentioned in positive light to have slaves, yet everywhere theres mentions of freeing slaves and treating them well.

Sorry brother, but TheRationalizer isn't trying to debate about emancipation, his only aim in this thread is to find out why Islam allowed sex between a man and a female slave (without actually marrying her first)
 
And doesn't the wife have a right to voice her opinion about the matter? Why don't you put yourself in the shoes of a woman rather than the men who create all these laws. I presume you think the female slave should give her consent too?


"And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them:"

Doesn't (my writing's red now but I can't be bothered to change it lol) this suggest that the slaves had to buy their freedom, not just be automatically freed with money given to them. If that was that case then surely no one would stay a slave?

Muslims were also heavily involved in the slave trade in more recent times, profiting from selling people across continents. It wasn't just Christians. But I don't see how any God could approve of slavery at all and none of these people are truly Muslims or Christians at all, just concerned with greed and profit. Both groups were as bad as each other. Slavery is something that makes me angry, it makes you want to jump back in time and slap someone in the face. I'm writing an essay partly about it at the moment and the attitudes of some people, I just don't understand it. We musn't forget slavery's still going on though. :heated:

Asalaamu Alaikum,

Actually, the reason why people compare Islamic Slavery to others (including Christians) is because a person who has no home, no family and is likely to get captured (after a war) would much rather be the Slave of a Muslim, where they are treated as family and actually have a enormous chance of being free, than a Christians where they are likely to get beaten to an inch of their life.

I'm refering to the Bible/Christian teaching, and Islamic teaching, one discourages Slavery the other doesn't. Muslims (after the Prophet) had they continue'd down the path of following Islam in regards of Slavery, it would've and shoul've been abolished long before then it did, which in my admittance is a shame.

It's estimated that the Prophet(pbuh) and his companions free'd over 300,000 slaves in their time.
 
Not on slavery itself but specifically the subject of being permitted to have sex with your slaves, what is the consensus on that?

If salvery is outlawed by Islamic concensus how can you have sex slaves??
 
first define that what do you mean when you say "to cheat on one's wife." are you using the modern framework that a man cannot have sexual relations with anyone except his wife? How did this conception arise? Do humans in a relationship always explicitly state this assumption? why is it always assumed that now once we are in relationship, sexual relations outside are forbidden? even if yes then why so? There are many flaws with this mdoern conception and hence I do not agree with it. I am not saying that in Islam a man must then start committing zina with other women. All I am saying is that having a wife does not forbid him from having sexual relations with those other permitted women and in islam female slaves or what one's right hand possess are one of those. if the wife gets pissed off, so be it. Man has the freedom to exercise his god-given right.

hey if that's your cup of tea then by all means drink it.
just sort of adds credibility to the theory that a bunch of men (or man) from 1400 years ago wrote the quran from their perspective ;)

hopefully no future Islamic state will think to exercise their right to enslave & have sex with the 'spoils of war' from warring countries.

x) x)
 
I'd like to pull this thread back onto topic. This thread is not about emancipation but what you are permitted to do with your slaves whilst they are still your slaves.

23:5 to 6 and 70:29 to 30 *both* say that there is NO sin in having sex with your slaves.

@Perserveranz
These women and their children were utterly dependant on their slave masters for everything, at the very least there would be pressure to have sex with their master so that they don't upset him - if he is happy then he is more likely to be kind when giving provisions to her and her children. It's the kind of prostitution that desolate women have been forced into for many many years all over the world. It is far more likely that a slave woman will have sex with her owner through the needs of herself and her children than it is that she is sexually attracted to him and doesn't mind having sex with one of the men who killed her husband in battle.

Then of course there is the man's right over his wives. If you read Ibn Kathir on 4:34 it says that his wife must obey him, and if she doesn't the angels will curse her until morning, if she continues to disobey him he is allowed to beat her as long as it is not too severe and not in the face. I doubt that slaves girls had more rights than their master's wives did they?
 
does slavery still exist? is it even possible to take slaves?
 
hopefully no future Islamic state will think to exercise their right to enslave & have sex with the 'spoils of war' from warring countries.

no muslim state enslave & have sex with "spoils of war" from warring countries.

Instead, you get USA killed, tortured, abuse, and sexually molested "spoils of war" from the countries they invaded.

Want evidence?

So much for your theory, eh?

You always make theories based on absurd claims about Islam, and while it has been presented to you all facts about slaves, their rights, the rewards for freeing slaves, etc, you choose to ignore all of them, and go on some imbecilic remark like the one above.
 
Sorry brother, but TheRationalizer isn't trying to debate about emancipation, his only aim in this thread is to find out why Islam allowed sex between a man and a female slave (without actually marrying her first)

Asalaamu Alaikum,

I'm sure he's already got his answer to that.
 
hi..im new hre.
To rationalizr :the thng is,you want d muslims hre2 tel tht islam does alow men to hav sex with slave girls against their wish..i cal tht rape. Thts dfntly nt alowd..wotevr ur belief..ITS NT OK TO RAPE.
Y is evrybdy tryn so hard to mke hm undrstnd when he clearly doesnt want to?
To muslims: wont it be a gud idea to nt kp cmparin wit christians,especialy wn the topic isnt abt cmparin sme rule law etc wit theirs? If i wer a christian id realy b offended if,out of d blue, u kp accusing my religion. :hmm:
 
@Perserveranze: If I have my answer as to why it is okay then I am not aware of what it is.

@sherz_umr: When a women depends on a man for the food, clothing, and shelter of herself and her children and has no option of leaving him you can bet that she will be reluctantly willing to have sex with that man in order to keep him supplying those provisions out of love for her own children. The man doesn't have to rape her, but she is still being sexually exploited.
 
@sherz_umr: When a women depends on a man for the food, clothing, and shelter of herself and her children and has no option of leaving him you can bet that she will be reluctantly willing to have sex with that man in order to keep him supplying those provisions out of love for her own children. The man doesn't have to rape her, but she is still being sexually exploited.

Can you have sex with a woman who has children? If you have children with a slave woman it is in fact a way for her and her off spring to be emancipated. do you read anything that is written or merely desire to conjecture without forethought? I think a good home and an honest living beats prostituting oneself on the streets, what say you? That is in fact what is currently happening to the women of Iraq after the Americans brought their brand of freedom over:

http://articles.cnn.com/2007-08-15/...women-prostitution-yanar-mohammed?_s=PM:WORLD

Talk about sexually exploited!... inevitable some would say indeed.. I think it would do you a world of good to study the situation from all angles, including all those dark ones you prefer not to acknowledge in your own society or as brought on by your own philosophies before criticizing some situation that hasn't nor likely to occur merely to satisfy your own personal delusions of what is 'idyllic' as per ONLY you!

all the best
 
When a women depends on a man for the food, clothing, and shelter of herself and her children and has no option of leaving him you can bet that she will be reluctantly willing to have sex with that man in order to keep him supplying those provisions out of love for her own children. The man doesn't have to rape her, but she is still being sexually exploited.

again, you twist everything that the Qur'an and hadiths say. this is not the first time.

Please tell me where in the qur'an that allows muslims to withhold provisions for slaves in exchange for sex?
 
@Perserveranze: If I have my answer as to why it is okay then I am not aware of what it is.

Asalaamu Alaikum,

Your along the lines of "they get raped or are forced into having sex", which is completely off target. Even though I've told you this, your not willing to go off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top