Jump to content
  • 0
Guest Curious

Is Rape Allowed in Islam?

Hameedeh

Rape is a serious sexual crime which is punishable in Islam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Islamic_law  

Message added by Hameedeh

Rate this question

Question

Guest Curious

As the question suggests.

Please provide evidence as much as possible, with a short answer of your own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
10 minutes ago, alidu78 said:

The verses said they don't need to be married. 

they don't you havent read the verse properly

The verse says do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, simply means do not compel you slave girls to zina. Prostitution is engaging in sexual activity with someone for payment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
29 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

how about someone who commited zina? like if they repent, because I read from Sayyid Sistani that a man can marry a woman who has committed zina before but has repented

For the punishment of zina you need eyewitnesses to see it, it's not easy to prove. You don't just get to repent when you are caught red-handed.What I said doesn't contradict the ruling of sayyid sistani. There is also a question if we are even allowed to implement the hudood in the ghaybah or not. 

Edited by Shi3i_jadeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 1/5/2018 at 10:45 AM, 3wliya_maryam said:

how about someone who commited zina? like if they repent, because I read from Sayyid Sistani that a man can marry a woman who has committed zina before but has repented

Repentance is a personal matter between an individual and God. It does not absolve the individual from the appropriate punishment for the crime in question, if a hadd exists and if the person is proven to have committed the sin in an Islamic court. Beyond this, an individual may seek repentance from God and this would perhaps save him from torment in the afterlife if sincere.

There are, indeed, reports of individuals who committed major sins during the times of the Imams and who did not have witnesses to their crimes. As such, their sin could not be proven in an Islamic court and, yet, these individuals who later regretted their actions and had repented approached the Imams themselves and insisted that they receive the hadd for their sin. Forgiveness from God does not always translate to forgiveness in the eyes of the law, and neither are they the same, as one relates to the afterlife and the other to this life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
12 hours ago, Sumerian said:

http://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa8167

On the issue of slavery and intercourse @o.p check the link above.

I read your link and i just would like to be sure i understood well a sentence on the link (because english is not my first language).

"One may wonder why Islam has not given these captives the liberty to choose their spouses and does not consider their consent necessary when engaging in sexual relations with them."

So basically does that mean we could force them to have sex with their masters ?

Or i didnt understand something ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

What a strange question! Of course Rape is NOT allowed in Islam!! 

Why would Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى (God) condone Rape?!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, alidu78 said:

I read your link and i just would like to be sure i understood well a sentence on the link (because english is not my first language).

"One may wonder why Islam has not given these captives the liberty to choose their spouses and does not consider their consent necessary when engaging in sexual relations with them."

So basically does that mean we could force them to have sex with their masters ?

Or i didnt understand something ?

It seems to me that it is referring to the obedience aspect, where it is wajib on the slave to follow orders (similar to a husband), not that he forces her, but I don't know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I don't think people here are appreciating what it means to be a slave. Being a slave means that you are a) personally b) socially and c) metaphysically obliged to obey your master. This is within the limits of morality and reason - i.e. if your master asked you stand all day for no reason at all, or he asked you to commit murder, or the like, one is not obliged to obey him.

Now ultimately all men are slaves to Allah. He owns us in every way imaginable and regularly dictates what we can or must do sexually. A man must try to satisfy his wife; at minimum, he must go to her once every four months if he is distant from her, or once every four days if he is available. A wife must satisfy her husband's sexual needs whenever he calls her unless she has a valid excuse. We are prevented from all sorts of sexual behaviour because our Master forbids it (e.g. zina). 

Now, does this mean that if some other human being fails to obey Allah ta'alah, that we can automatically use the most brutal violence against them? For instance, if a wife refuses to satisfy her husband for no shariah valid reason, does this give the right to the husband to immediately hold her down and violently take what he wants, while she screams in horror? No. But is such a case considered "rape"? According to classical Islamic categories, such an action would fall under domestic abuse, not rape. The reason is because rape is defined as forcing someone who is unlawful to you in principle to have sex with you. In a case where a man forces his lawfully wedded wife to have sex with him, he has committed an act of violence - a domestic abuse case, but not "rape" in the classical definition. What is now called "marital rape" is therefore recognized as an abuse in Islam, but the construct is rejected. The reason is because in Islam consent is not the ultimate criterion of judgment - rather what Allah has made lawful or unlawful is. "Marital rape" is a contradiction in terms from an Islamic point of view, because marriage just means (among other things) that the man is legally entitled to his wife's body. You can therefore have domestic abuse and even sexual abuse in a marriage (as when one encourages or psychologically pressures one's spouse to engage in a sexual act that is haraam, like using unlawful toys or the like), but not "marital rape" in the modern sense. A woman could seek compensation in court, and possibly even a divorce for this kind of behaviour (especially if it was repeated), but the man would not be put to death as in the case of what Islam defines as rape. The punishment for rape is death. Forcing one's lawfully wedded spouse into relations does not carry nearly as heavy a penalty, and any person of reason can see why there is a distinction between the two. The real insanity is to categorize these two as if they're the same thing; as if a woman's consent exists in a vacuum independent of the history she's had with a particular individual. A random stranger and a husband a woman intimately knows for many years are thus equated, where no such equation exists in reality.

The reason why this is triggering to the modern mind is because modernity is built on the idea that we're all just atomic individuals related to one another through contractual relationships. This is not how Islam sees things, and in fact it is an objectively false way of viewing human beings. Human beings are related to one another through a much more organic way. We are not just in a giant social contract, we have actual relations and feelings for one another, from family to friends to enemies. And ultimately we are metaphysically related through our wilayah to one another. A father is a walee over his family; there is a bond of wilayah between siblings or between a son and his mother which is slightly different than the wilayah between a mother and her daughter. The Muslims are awliayaa of each other and we are not to take the kufaar as awliyaa. The Ummah is one body. The ties of kinship are sacred. The Islamic view is based on the fitrah and is more organic; it is speaking about reality (which is organic and spiritual) and not simply a mental construct, which is what the atomic individual model is. From the modern point of view consent is made sacrosanct as opposed to one of many considerations, precisely because modernity is based on the idea that "I" determine right and wrong, not some objective standard outside oneself (i.e. God or even nature). It is entirely based on the worship of the nafs, rather than the worship of Allah, and the latter is viewed as optional.

All of this being said, how does one treat a female slave under one's authority, from an Islamic perspective? From the above, it is clear that she would be obliged to obey her master's wishes, but also that a master also has obligations towards her. Suppose she refuses her master's advances. Is the Islamic akhlaq to therefore pin her down and take what you want like an animal, like Daesh did? Obviously not. People need to distinguish between "what is my right in principle" and "what I am allowed to do if my rights are violated." If I steal from you, it does not give you the right to kill my child, for instance. Yes, I might have violated your right, but your response must be just and proportionate; preferably merciful. The Muslim man, therefore, is to treat his slave with magnanimity, as he would his own kith and kin, not as a farm animal who in any case is to be treated honourably as well from an Islamic point of view. A female slave is a human being. Even if she is a disbeliever, her dignity must always be allowed to flourish as Allah honoured Bani Adam. This is not to say a Muslim master would not be allowed to take some disciplinary measures and assert his authority, but it must be coupled with mercy, magnanimity, and dignity.

One last point that I think is of interest in this discussion is that in some historical texts I've found regarding the practice of concubinage among the Muslims is that slave women were seldom so hesitant as one might think. I've read texts from the 1700's of European spies who were mapping out the Ottoman empire and who detail their friendships with certain slave traders. They record how young women captured as slaves would be eager to be sold so as to practice their art. They relished their sexual role. It was in fact young boys who were terrified of being sold (I'll let you imagine why. Honestly when I read stuff like that I understand why Allah humiliated the Muslims and punished us by allowing the colonialists to take over.) From an older, Andalusian Muslim point of view, there is a book called Ring of the Dove which details a bunch of the romantic exploits that high-status Muslim men would have, typically with a slave woman who a particular noble had fallen in love with. Slave women were fetishized and relished for their beauty (as opposed to their wives who they usually married based on family status, preservation of wealth and so forth). In fact, most slave women would seek to be promoted to "concubine" status because it meant an easy life; whereas to be a slave woman without concubine status would relegate one to more mundane labour tasks like cleaning, fetching water etc, Being a concubine meant one would be dressed in the finest clothes with perfumes, make-up, etc. and not have to do labour; rather she would have attendants. (Concubines of the aristocracy were thus treated, at any rate, but there is reason to think concubines were a feature of relatively high-status men anyway. Thus we can assume this general preferential treatment for concubines over non-concubine slave women was a common social feature even among upper-middle class men, say.) Concubines thus had a much different life than we would expect in the modern age, where the abuses and racialization of American slavery have led to a popular myth-history about what slavery was actually like in different eras and societies. People don't realize that human beings are human beings, and that for instance, a slave woman could hurt her master's feelings, or vice versa. Relationships between people, especially in that age when you would live in one or two places your entire life, with mostly the same people, were a lot more organic and deep. It's not as straightforward as people like to think. This is not to say that there weren't slave women who were not abused, or that all of them were eager or the like - but merely that the picture is far more complex than one would think. 

Oh and before I forget:

TRIGGER WARNING

Woops, maybe that shoulda gone at the top.

 

@Qa'im @alidu78 @Sumerian

Edited by Ayuoobi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 1/6/2018 at 8:26 AM, Sumerian said:

http://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa8167

On the issue of slavery and intercourse @o.p check the link above.

Asalam,

Does the man need to have acceptance from the woman (captives from war) before engaging in sexual relations? I have read this article, but that specific section doesn't seem clear.

Edited by Hussaini624

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, Hussaini624 said:

Asalam,

Does the man need to have acceptance from the woman (captives from war) before engaging in sexual relations? I have read this article, but that specific section doesn't seem clear.

Good question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Is Rape Allowed in Islam? LOL. :hahaha:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I don't even understand why we are replying to this topic, still.

Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى gave us a brain, and rape is obviously wrong, even a 12 year old would understand this. Inflicting damage to an another person is haram, and the fact that they will be damaged physically, and mentally will cost you massively, I don't even have to go further. I dislike the fact there are some people who represent Islam whom are ignorant, It is unbelievable how the west world is more concern about terrorism and can't mange to see the difference between culture and Islam, when the terrorists never touch them. The gun voilence is much higher, and It ain't lowing in rate, It is disturbing. The FACT that they don't even try to remove guns in America is a total joke.

Ya Allah, please release Imam Mehdi and let Prophet Isa spread love in the Earth! Ya Rahman, please forgive the Shia of Ali, and have mercy upon the Shia! We are your slaves, and our love for ahlulbayt is a must. We are prepared to sacrifice ourselves! Just give us the chance! 

Al-Hamdiruiallah shukr.

Thank you, sorry If I offended anyone, I am just a bit tensed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, Mishael said:

Well I'm pretty sure you can rape your sex slaves in Islam.

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.

Qur'an 4:24

Right hand possess means concubines if I'm not mistaken.

No wonder you hate Islam. :/

You say it so casually, and It offends me, my religion didn't teach me to force anyone into intercourse, cause I am too weak to get a wife myself. If there was a law that allowed us to have an intercourse with women whom are slaves, I wouldn't object, I can't doubt Allah's wisdom, but don't take my word for this, cause I do not have knowledge about this, ask someone with some more knowledge! But I can I bet on my life that anything called rape doesn't belong in religion of Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
14 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Well according to Sharia if you happen to own a non Muslim slave you are allowed to have intercourse with her it wouldn't be considered rape just as this verse says,

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.

Qur'an 4:24

Rape is rape, brother. With logic and some humanity you can even understand It is wrong, Allah would never want us to do that.

Look at the video of Sayed Ammar, you will understand that we Shia are different, don't take every word literally! We believe that Ahlulbayt is the Quran in body form. Look at their life, and observe. Following them is obeying Allah.

If you really want us to take things literally then I can quote endlessly from the bible how much destruction it spreads. You of all people should know that faith takes part in your life, and love for Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and our Prophets and our Imams. Just like Prophet Jesus (as) spread love and peace, so did our prophet and our Imams. I don't know why you are trying to hard to neglect Islam cause you had a bad experience. Is it just me who see that we are alike, but we shia refuse to put partners to Allah, cause he is one, and unique?

You probably believe that Aisha was 6 or 9 when she was married to our prophet as well? Cause It wouldn't suprise me. No offense.

Al-hamdiruiallah shukr.

Edited by Hamodiii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
23 minutes ago, Hamodiii said:

I don't even understand why we are replying to this topic, still.

Right now ! I am thinking the exact same thing. :hahaha: Everyone !! PLEASE STOP NOW .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
15 minutes ago, Mishael said:

As someone coming from a Sunni background for you to say the Ahulbayt is the Quran in body form would be shirk according to Islam

How is that shirk? They follow Allah's orders and don't sin? Following the Quran is obeying Allah, It goes for the ahlulbayt as well and the prophets, including Prophet Jesus (as). Quran is a guidance as much as ahlulbayt is, Allah gave us so much. Just like how sunnis use Quran to get closer to Allah, we Shia use Ahlulbayt, It is a wasila. Both Quran and Ahlulbayt was sent by Allah, so where is the problem?

Al-hamdiruiallah shukr.

That hadith is irrelevant, we don't believe in all hadiths, only Quran hasn't changed, some hadiths were written by mere hypocritcals and liars, like abo huraria.

Stop reading, If you don't understand the source of the content.

 

Edited by Hamodiii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
31 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Ahulbayt is the Quran in body form would be shirk according to Islam

I just asked about it, they just explain about what Quran is about. My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Bukhari is one of the most trusted Hadith and since when was Abu Huraira a liar that's new.

4.9 hadiths per day, brother. That sounds very logical. He spends his life to write hadiths?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Well Shia view many people Sunnis view as trustworthy as liars. I haven't heard anyone else in Islam call him a liar except Shias I don't think his Hadith would be so highly regarded if he was a liar.

You said it yourself, you hate salifis cause of these liars? How can they be good then? Every single argument base their infomation on these liars? Not all humans are good, the hadiths aren't Quran, It can be changed by humans, Quran can't cause Allah spares it like it is. 

We Shia are different, we don't follow things blindly. Do you understand Arabic? I have some videos that exposes Omar and Abu bakr, and that is enough for you to neglect the fact that Sunni is the right path.

Al-hamdiruiallah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Well Shia view many people Sunnis view as trustworthy as liars. I haven't heard anyone else in Islam call him a liar except Shias I don't think his Hadith would be so highly regarded if he was a liar.

So because the majority believes he is not a liar, then he is not a liar? That is a primitive way of looking at it.

https://www.al-islam.org/articles/abu-hurayra-and-falsification-traditions-yasin-al-jibouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
29 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Well Salafis are pure Muslims they only get their information from Quran and Hadith and Hadiths have chains of narrations and are constantly checked to see if they are accurate or not.

Never said they aren't muslims, but can you skip the pure part? Cause they are far from pure, they spread terrorism in the world, maybe not all of them. 

Edit: People who kills innocent people aren't muslims.

I admire the fact that they read the Quran, but they don't understand it, that is why Ahlulbayt tells us how things work. What things means, and what we need to do to please Allah. Quran is not easily understood, even if you believe in it. 

 

Edited by Hamodiii
Changed of mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×