Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Enlightened Follower

Irrefutable evidence Islam is against rape

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, E.L King said:

and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war,

Now lets see the answer of Ayatullah Dastghaib once again:

 

3 hours ago, E.L King said:

Yes, it is permissible for a Muslim to apprehend an original disbeliever in any way and from anywhere and enslave him provided he is not under treaty or responsibility of any Muslim (Zimmi). After that his buying and selling is allowed.

Is this ruling compatible with the verse 33:50?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the significance of Quranic phrase "wa ma adraaka"? It is repeated 12 times in Quran.

وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الْحَاقَّةُ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا سَقَرُ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا يَوْمُ الْفَصْلِ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا يَوْمُ الدِّينِ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا عِلِّيُّونَ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا سِجِّينٌ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الطَّارِقُ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الْعَقَبَةُ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا لَيْلَةُ الْقَدْرِ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الْقَارِعَةُ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا هِيَهْ
وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الْحُطَمَةُ

With the reference of above, I would like to discuss the verse 90:11-13 specifically.

وَهَدَيْنَاهُ النَّجْدَيْنِ
فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَة
And pointed out to him the two conspicuous ways?
But he would not attempt the uphill road, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Engineer73 said:

Now lets see the answer of Ayatullah Dastghaib once again:

 

Is this ruling compatible with the verse 33:50?

I will PM you brother something later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, E.L King said:

I will PM you brother something later

I am looking forward for it.

I need to understand this issue, my intellect is advocating against what our scholars have said about this. May the Allah have mercy on me & increase my knowledge so that I can understand these verses and the issue of slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Engineer73 and @E.L King

I did some research on the topic of "Slavery", I have already read some rules about it, that are as under plus some other Hadith of Masomeen from "Shia pen". 

Although this topic has long ended because the custom of slavery has ended and therefore Islam also accepts it as it has always been of the opinion to let the slaves be "free". But because this is one of the most important topics in Jurisprudence so I wished that what I know and have learnt, I must share it with my brothers in faith as well. 

1. It is unlawful to take Muslims as Slave by Muslims. 

2. If a non-Muslim is taken as Slave, then after he or she accepts Islam, the person is not set free and remains slave. 

3. A slave girl who is bought by a father and he looks at her with lustful eyes that she becomes haram for his sons because now she becomes slave wife of his father. 

4. A person cannot offer his slave girl to another person without "Nikah" otherwise, it will be against Quran which forbids from "Prostitution". 

And other material as as follows:

 

Narrated Ali bin Yaqtin that some one asked Abu al-Hassan (as) about the slave: ‘Is it permissible for him to have sexual intercourse with the slave woman without a marriage contract in case the master (of the slave girl) made her lawful to him?’ The imam replied: ‘It is not allowed for him (without a marriage contract)’

Allamah al-Hilli in ‘Mukhtalaf al-Shia’ Volume 7 page 275, Sheikh al-Jawaheri in ‘Jawahir al-Kalam’ Volume 30 page 231 and Sayed al-Khoei in ‘kitab al-Nikah’ Volume 2 page 119 have graded the tradition ‘Sahih’.

Shareef al-Murtudha in ‘Al-Entesar’ page 281 also stated about the condition of Nikah to make a slave-girl lawful to someone else:

يجوز للرجل أن يبيح مملوكته لغيره على معنى أنه يعقد عليها عقد النكاح الذي الذي فيه معنى الإباحة ، ولا يقتضي ذلك أن النكاح ينعقد بلفظ الإباحة

“It is permissible for the man to make his slave-girl halal to someone else, which means (the other man) performs Nikah to make her halal for him and it is not sufficient to make her halal only by saying the word ‘halal’.”

As we reiterated earlier, the master after giving her slave-girl in ‘Nikah’ to someone else i.e. making her lawful to someone else, loses the right to have sexual intercourse with her. If, due to any valid reason, the slave-girl is returns to her master, she will have to observe Iddah which is often called ‘Istibra’ in case of a slave-girl. Al-Muhaqiq al-Heli states in ‘Sharai al-Islam’ Volume 2 page 537:

ويحرم على المالك وطء مملوكته إذا زوجها حتى تحصل الفرقة وتنقضي عدتها

“It is impermissible for a master to have sexual intercourse with the slave girl as long as she remains married, until separation/divorce occurs and her iddah period is completed”

Also Sheikh al-Mufid recored in ‘Al-Muqana’ page 538:

لا يحل لأحد أن يطأ جارية قد ابتاعها أو ورثها من سيدها حتى يستبرئها بحيضة

“It is not permissible for a man to have sexual intercourse with a slave-girl which he owns through buying or inheriting from her master before she ends her ablution by one month period”

Sheikh al-Tusi records in Al-Mabsut, volume 2 page 140:

الاستبراء في الجارية واجب على البايع والمشتري معا ، والإستبراء يكون بقرء واحد وهو الطهر ، ولا يجوز للمشتري وطئها قبل الاستبراء في الفرج ولا في غيره ولا لمسها بشهوة ولا قبلتها

“Ablution for the slave girl is wajib both by seller and the buyer and the ablution is to be performed by one month and it is the monthly period. It is not allowed for the buyer to have sexual relation with her whether through her vagina or other part, to touch her with lust or to kiss her before she performs ablution”

Sheikh al-Mufid records in ‘Al-Muqana’ page 543:

وإذا زوج الرجل أمته من حر أو عبد حرم عليه وطؤها

“If a man makes his slave girl married to a free man or a slave, it is now forbidden for him to have sexual intercourse with her”

Sayed al-Khoei records in ‘Minhaj al-Salihin’ Volume 2 page 227:

يحرم لمن زوج أمته وطؤها ولمسها والنظر إليها بشهوة ما دامت في حبال الزوج وكذلك إذا كانت في العدة

“It is forbidden for the one who marries his slave-girl to another, to have sexual intercourse with her or touch her to look at her with lust, as long she belongs to her husband, so is the case when she is in Iddah”

So we come to know that unlike Ahle Sunnah, according to Shia fiqh a slave-girl has to be treated with dignity and honour and it is absolutely forbidden to make her a tool of sexual indulgence. Sheikh al-Mufid records in ‘Al-Muqana’ page 544:

ولو ملك رجلان جارية وظنا أن وطئها جائز لهما فوطئاها في طهر واحد فحملت لكان الواجب تأديبهما

“If two men possess a slave girl and they thought that it was permissible for them to have sexual intercourse with her in the same period, and she subsequently becomes pregnant, surely they will be physically punished”

The strictness from the perspective of (Shia) fiqh can be deduced from the following words recorded by Sheikh al-Mufid in “Al-Muqan’a” page 502:

‘Whoever bought a slave girl and looked with lust towards any part of her (body) that is illegal for him to look at before he possessed her or even if he touched her, then she will become unlawful for his son’

When this concept is so clear and logical, it beggars belief that these najis Nawasib look down at it, particularly when the same can be found in their own works, and worse they sink to the lowest forms of sexual degradation that we shall evidence later.

The two traditions cited by the author and similar ones found in Shi’a works, do not refer to the ‘loaning of vaginas’ as the Nawasib falsely claim, rather they refer to a Master making his slave-girl lawful to someone else by him marrying her to that man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

@Engineer73 and @E.L King

I did some research on the topic of "Slavery", I have already read some rules about it, that are as under plus some other Hadith of Masomeen from "Shia pen". 

Although this topic has long ended because the custom of slavery has ended and therefore Islam also accepts it as it has always been of the opinion to let the slaves be "free". But because this is one of the most important topics in Jurisprudence so I wished that what I know and have learnt, I must share it with my brothers in faith as well. 

1. It is unlawful to take Muslims as Slave by Muslims. 

2. If a non-Muslim is taken as Slave, then after he or she accepts Islam, the person is not set free and remains slave. 

3. A slave girl who is bought by a father and he looks at her with lustful eyes that she becomes haram for his sons because now she becomes slave wife of his father. 

4. A person cannot offer his slave girl to another person without "Nikah" otherwise, it will be against Quran which forbids from "Prostitution". 

And other material as as follows:

 

Narrated Ali bin Yaqtin that some one asked Abu al-Hassan (as) about the slave: ‘Is it permissible for him to have sexual intercourse with the slave woman without a marriage contract in case the master (of the slave girl) made her lawful to him?’ The imam replied: ‘It is not allowed for him (without a marriage contract)’

Allamah al-Hilli in ‘Mukhtalaf al-Shia’ Volume 7 page 275, Sheikh al-Jawaheri in ‘Jawahir al-Kalam’ Volume 30 page 231 and Sayed al-Khoei in ‘kitab al-Nikah’ Volume 2 page 119 have graded the tradition ‘Sahih’.

Shareef al-Murtudha in ‘Al-Entesar’ page 281 also stated about the condition of Nikah to make a slave-girl lawful to someone else:

يجوز للرجل أن يبيح مملوكته لغيره على معنى أنه يعقد عليها عقد النكاح الذي الذي فيه معنى الإباحة ، ولا يقتضي ذلك أن النكاح ينعقد بلفظ الإباحة

“It is permissible for the man to make his slave-girl halal to someone else, which means (the other man) performs Nikah to make her halal for him and it is not sufficient to make her halal only by saying the word ‘halal’.”

As we reiterated earlier, the master after giving her slave-girl in ‘Nikah’ to someone else i.e. making her lawful to someone else, loses the right to have sexual intercourse with her. If, due to any valid reason, the slave-girl is returns to her master, she will have to observe Iddah which is often called ‘Istibra’ in case of a slave-girl. Al-Muhaqiq al-Heli states in ‘Sharai al-Islam’ Volume 2 page 537:

ويحرم على المالك وطء مملوكته إذا زوجها حتى تحصل الفرقة وتنقضي عدتها

“It is impermissible for a master to have sexual intercourse with the slave girl as long as she remains married, until separation/divorce occurs and her iddah period is completed”

Also Sheikh al-Mufid recored in ‘Al-Muqana’ page 538:

لا يحل لأحد أن يطأ جارية قد ابتاعها أو ورثها من سيدها حتى يستبرئها بحيضة

“It is not permissible for a man to have sexual intercourse with a slave-girl which he owns through buying or inheriting from her master before she ends her ablution by one month period”

Sheikh al-Tusi records in Al-Mabsut, volume 2 page 140:

الاستبراء في الجارية واجب على البايع والمشتري معا ، والإستبراء يكون بقرء واحد وهو الطهر ، ولا يجوز للمشتري وطئها قبل الاستبراء في الفرج ولا في غيره ولا لمسها بشهوة ولا قبلتها

“Ablution for the slave girl is wajib both by seller and the buyer and the ablution is to be performed by one month and it is the monthly period. It is not allowed for the buyer to have sexual relation with her whether through her vagina or other part, to touch her with lust or to kiss her before she performs ablution”

Sheikh al-Mufid records in ‘Al-Muqana’ page 543:

وإذا زوج الرجل أمته من حر أو عبد حرم عليه وطؤها

“If a man makes his slave girl married to a free man or a slave, it is now forbidden for him to have sexual intercourse with her”

Sayed al-Khoei records in ‘Minhaj al-Salihin’ Volume 2 page 227:

يحرم لمن زوج أمته وطؤها ولمسها والنظر إليها بشهوة ما دامت في حبال الزوج وكذلك إذا كانت في العدة

“It is forbidden for the one who marries his slave-girl to another, to have sexual intercourse with her or touch her to look at her with lust, as long she belongs to her husband, so is the case when she is in Iddah”

So we come to know that unlike Ahle Sunnah, according to Shia fiqh a slave-girl has to be treated with dignity and honour and it is absolutely forbidden to make her a tool of sexual indulgence. Sheikh al-Mufid records in ‘Al-Muqana’ page 544:

ولو ملك رجلان جارية وظنا أن وطئها جائز لهما فوطئاها في طهر واحد فحملت لكان الواجب تأديبهما

“If two men possess a slave girl and they thought that it was permissible for them to have sexual intercourse with her in the same period, and she subsequently becomes pregnant, surely they will be physically punished”

The strictness from the perspective of (Shia) fiqh can be deduced from the following words recorded by Sheikh al-Mufid in “Al-Muqan’a” page 502:

‘Whoever bought a slave girl and looked with lust towards any part of her (body) that is illegal for him to look at before he possessed her or even if he touched her, then she will become unlawful for his son’

When this concept is so clear and logical, it beggars belief that these najis Nawasib look down at it, particularly when the same can be found in their own works, and worse they sink to the lowest forms of sexual degradation that we shall evidence later.

The two traditions cited by the author and similar ones found in Shi’a works, do not refer to the ‘loaning of vaginas’ as the Nawasib falsely claim, rather they refer to a Master making his slave-girl lawful to someone else by him marrying her to that man.

Thank you brother for this research! Allah bless our scholars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2017 at 2:49 AM, E.L King said:

 

Allama Tabatabai says:

Nevertheless, it seems a bit difficult to say that it is 'marriage' which is implied by the word, 'forbidden', because of the exceptional clause coming later: except those whom your right hands possess. Sexual intercourse with one's slave women is lawful without marriage. Therefore, it would seem more appropriate if prohibition is taken to refer to sexual intercourse, and not to marriage alone, as will be explained later. The same is the implication of the words: that you seek (them) by means of your wealth ..., as will be described afterwards. Thus the fact emerges that the implied word after 'forbidden' is cohabitation, or another similar word, not marriage. Allah has avoided mentioning it explicitly, because the divine speech refrains from such words and maintains a high moral decorum.

http://m.almizan.org/tafsir/4-23-28/

You quoted this E.L king right ?

See also this. I think, we have to read whole commentary to reach to a conclusion:

Here, I want to add some words from the tafsir of Ayotullah Tabatabi' 

Consequently, the exceptional clause, "Except those whom your right hand possess"; will exclude one's married slave girl from this prohibition. It has been narrated in traditions that the master of a married slave woman may take away that woman from her husband, keep her untouched for the prescribed term, then have sexual relation with her (Iddah followed as possession itself serves as Nikah). 

My words, I have also seen in traditions that if some among our Imam married a slave girl, she was given Islamic knowledge, then was released and then was wedded to Imam. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2017 at 2:49 AM, E.L King said:

 

Allama Tabatabai says:

Nevertheless, it seems a bit difficult to say that it is 'marriage' which is implied by the word, 'forbidden', because of the exceptional clause coming later: except those whom your right hands possess. Sexual intercourse with one's slave women is lawful without marriage. Therefore, it would seem more appropriate if prohibition is taken to refer to sexual intercourse, and not to marriage alone, as will be explained later. The same is the implication of the words: that you seek (them) by means of your wealth ..., as will be described afterwards. Thus the fact emerges that the implied word after 'forbidden' is cohabitation, or another similar word, not marriage. Allah has avoided mentioning it explicitly, because the divine speech refrains from such words and maintains a high moral decorum.

http://m.almizan.org/tafsir/4-23-28/

You quoted this E.L king right ?

See also this. I think, we have to read whole commentary to reach to a conclusion:

Here, I want to add some words from the tafsir of Ayotullah Tabatabi' 

Consequently, the exceptional clause, "Except those whom your right hand possess"; will exclude one's married slave girl from this prohibition. It has been narrated in traditions that the master of a married slave woman may take away that woman from her husband, keep her untouched for the prescribed term, then have sexual relation with her (Iddah followed as possession itself serves as Nikah). 

My words, I have also seen in traditions that if some among our Imam married a slave girl, she was given Islamic knowledge, then was released and then was wedded to Imam. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2017 at 2:49 AM, E.L King said:

 

Allama Tabatabai says:

Nevertheless, it seems a bit difficult to say that it is 'marriage' which is implied by the word, 'forbidden', because of the exceptional clause coming later: except those whom your right hands possess. Sexual intercourse with one's slave women is lawful without marriage. Therefore, it would seem more appropriate if prohibition is taken to refer to sexual intercourse, and not to marriage alone, as will be explained later. The same is the implication of the words: that you seek (them) by means of your wealth ..., as will be described afterwards. Thus the fact emerges that the implied word after 'forbidden' is cohabitation, or another similar word, not marriage. Allah has avoided mentioning it explicitly, because the divine speech refrains from such words and maintains a high moral decorum.

http://m.almizan.org/tafsir/4-23-28/

You quoted this E.L king right ?

See also this. I think, we have to read whole commentary to reach to a conclusion:

Here, I want to add some words from the tafsir of Ayotullah Tabatabi' 

Consequently, the exceptional clause, "Except those whom your right hand possess"; will exclude one's married slave girl from this prohibition. It has been narrated in traditions that the master of a married slave woman may take away that woman from her husband, keep her untouched for the prescribed term, then have sexual relation with her (Iddah followed as possession itself serves as Nikah). 

My words, I have also seen in traditions that if some among our Imam married a slave girl, she was given Islamic knowledge, then was released and then was wedded to Imam. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

You quoted this E.L king right ?

See also this. I think, we have to read whole commentary to reach to a conclusion:

Here, I want to add some words from the tafsir of Ayotullah Tabatabi' 

Consequently, the exceptional clause, "Except those whom your right hand possess"; will exclude one's married slave girl from this prohibition. It has been narrated in traditions that the master of a married slave woman may take away that woman from her husband, keep her untouched for the prescribed term, then have sexual relation with her (Iddah followed as possession itself serves as Nikah). 

My words, I have also seen in traditions that if some among our Imam married a slave girl, she was given Islamic knowledge, then was released and then was wedded to Imam. 

 

What Sayyed Tabataba'i is saying is that this clause also includes married slave girls, meaning slave girls who are married to another man and have a husband. You can easily understand that if you read the quote wholly, it is not difficult:

Consequently, the exceptional clause, "Except those whom your right hand possess"; will exclude one's married slave girl from this prohibition. It has been narrated in traditions that the master of a married slave woman may take away that woman from her husband, keep her untouched for the prescribed term, then have sexual relation with her (Iddah followed as possession itself serves as Nikah).

I hope it is clearer for you now. As you see, it does not contradict the part I previously posted. 

Also brother, I would suggest you learn Aranic as it would make it much easier for one to prove his point in these discussions. A few clicks on Google and the answer would be there.

Brother, I would also like to say this is my final comment on this issue. Especially this thread, which is months old. I believe some of my sisters on here might not like some of the posts on here to put it lightly, so I will refrain from posting from now on. This is my final comment. If you want, you can continue to comment, but I won't. May Allah bless you and help you find the answers which you seek. Fi Aman Illah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, E.L King said:

What Sayyed Tabataba'i is saying is that this clause also includes married slave girls, meaning slave girls who are married to another man and have a husband. You can easily understand that if you read the quote wholly, it is not difficult:

Consequently, the exceptional clause, "Except those whom your right hand possess"; will exclude one's married slave girl from this prohibition. It has been narrated in traditions that the master of a married slave woman may take away that woman from her husband, keep her untouched for the prescribed term, then have sexual relation with her (Iddah followed as possession itself serves as Nikah).

I hope it is clearer for you now. As you see, it does not contradict the part I previously posted. 

Also brother, I would suggest you learn Aranic as it would make it much easier for one to prove his point in these discussions. A few clicks on Google and the answer would be there.

Brother, I would also like to say this is my final comment on this issue. Especially this thread, which is months old. I believe some of my sisters on here might not like some of the posts on here to put it lightly, so I will refrain from posting from now on. This is my final comment. If you want, you can continue to comment, but I won't. May Allah bless you and help you find the answers which you seek. Fi Aman Illah.

No, you did not understand. You did not contradict but the matter is of legitimacy right ? (I want to show you that here possession serves as permission from God). But even then, a male cannot force his slave girl for Islam says, there is no compulsion in Islam. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • I haven't seen a specific narration. It seems to be the reason some fuqaha have this ruling is because it comes under nahi an al munkar. Also, some fuqaha say all sins are punishable under the Islamic court - and this is done through ta'zir. And not wearing hijab would be a sin.
    • It is the best option. Even if it means having one less sin under your name, that means something in Islam. @notme they are much better for boys. Trust me I know from personal experience. If you were to be present in some of the conversations that boys have in the playground about girls you might faint lol
    • Bloomberg and aljazeera.com both reported 12 days ago that the Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority sent a list with hundreds of names to lenders, telling them to freeze any accounts linked to them. Today (November 20, 2017) Reuters is reporting that over 2,000 bank accounts have been frozen. 
    • Of course the story of Adam and Eve was much better suited for them. The Bible and the Quran are far from the only old cultures telling similar stories. 
    • I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. If she didn't want to marry him for whatever reason then that's her right. Now, if that reason was that he wasn't from the US then so be it. Her life, her choice. 
×