10 somali guys simping for madow girl

[Angelina]

@World

Mental gymnastics is the only way those lot can keep that belief. Because if they argue that slave women don’t have to cover it betrays the idea that hijab isn’t about modesty but status.

If they also continue this argument it also betrays the idea that it’s acceptable to molest and harass slave women, hence slave women are allowed to be mistreated.

There is no way of hiding from this so you’ll find that none of them will answer your questions properly. It seriously opens a difficult can of worms.

Also, how can women be fitnah based on mens desires if men can touch and look at the beauty of slave women. None of them can ever answer my question. Am I a woman fitnah based on my social status or beauty?

 

[Do]

@World

Mental gymnastics is the only way those lot can keep that belief. Because if they argue that slave women don’t have to cover it betrays the idea that hijab isn’t about modesty but status.

If they also continue this argument it also betrays the idea that it’s acceptable to molest and harass slave women, hence slave women are allowed to be mistreated.

There is no way of hiding from this so you’ll find that none of them will answer your questions properly. It seriously opens a difficult can of worms.

Also, how can women be fitnah based on mens desires if men can touch and look at the beauty of slave women. None of them can ever answer my question. Am I a woman fitnah based on my social status or beauty?

I'd advise you to steer clear from this line of questioning. It might make you come close to extinguishing your faith in Islam, as it did for me a few years ago.

I like to use Reddit as a good starting point for research alongside the usual Wikipedia skim, and I have that found most answers on this topic are only on r/AcademicQuran (filled with atheists) and r/exmuslim (filled with Islam-hating atheists).

 

[Angelina]

He doesn’t believe the man that burned his wife to death in Somalia should be punished, and that it’s justice for him to be freed.

What a disgusting human. No wonder why he thinks like this.

He isn’t the smartest so good luck trying to get him to think logically as well. He’s both brain dead and evil.

I asked him a simple question with regards to Luul since he suggested that the husband wanted to burn the house for inheritance reasons. My point was, how is it possible for you to suggest that he didn’t mean to do it, if that man pre-planned it by buying petrol ect and then proceeded to burn the house whilst his wife, step kids were in the house? Surely if he wanted to burn it for the reason he mentioned which is still heinous, he wouldn’t be doing it whilst his wife is in bed?

This dunya is clearly a test and one thing I’ve definitely noticed is that you have a lot of men who come across as ultra religious but are more evil than the averages man. They’re devoid of any compassion ect. It’s strange to see and it’s obvious from looking at them this isn’t what the deen of Allah is.

 

[Angelina]

I'd advise you to steer clear from this line of questioning. It might make you come close to extinguishing your faith in Islam, as it did for me a few years ago.

I like to use Reddit as a good starting point for research alongside the usual Wikipedia skim, and I have that found most answers on this topic are only on r/AcademicQuran (filled with atheists) and r/exmuslim (filled with Islam-hating atheists).

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

It’s a simple question and they should be able to answer it. Am I a free woman fitnah for men due to my status or beauty. Pretty straight forward.

 

[World]

He isn’t the smartest so good luck trying to get him to think logically as well. He’s both brain dead and evil.

I asked him a simple question with regards to Luul since he suggested that the husband wanted to burn the house for inheritance reasons. My point was, how is it possible for you to suggest that he didn’t mean to do it, if that man pre-planned it by buying petrol ect and then proceeded to burn the house whilst his wife, step kids were in the house? Surely if he wanted to burn it for the reason he mentioned which is still heinous, he wouldn’t be doing it whilst his wife is in bed?

This dunya is clearly a test and one thing I’ve definitely noticed is that you have a lot of men who come across as ultra religious but are more evil than the averages man. They’re devoid of any compassion ect. It’s strange to see and it’s obvious from looking at them this isn’t what the deen of Allah is.

It’s a good thing that they expose themselves like this, by doing so their entire credibility collapses and there’s no need to take anything they say seriously. Man admits to buying petrol, his intention of burning his house that his pregnant wife and step children were in? Nooooo punishing him is wrong, freeing him is justice!!! He only burned his pregnant wife on accident

 

[Angelina]

LOL @World

Even Islamqa admits there is nothing in the Quraan and Sunnah to suggest that slave women shouldn’t wear hijab. In fact it was merely ‘custom’.

There is nothing in the Qur’an or Sunnah to suggest that it is permissible to look at slave women, or that they should not observe hijab and may show their adornments. But the Qur’an does not give the same instructions to them as to free women. The Sunnah distinguishes between them and free women in practical terms, but there is no statement in the Sunnah to differentiate between them in words. Rather the custom of the believers was that free women would observe hijab, and slave women would not.

https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/198645

But even then here I can’t help but feel this is pure cope:

‘The free woman is to observe complete hijab, whereas slave women do not have to wear hijab, and it is permissible for a slave woman to uncover her head, hands and face, because of the need to move a great deal as they do their work, and imposing hijab on them would cause them great hardship, in addition to the fact that people do not usually find them attractive.’

But they use the Ibn Kathir translation in the same Fatwa!


Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The verse {this will make it more likely that they will be recognized [as chaste women] and will not be harassed} [al-Ahzab 33:59] means: if they do that, they will be known to be free women, not slave women, and not prostitutes.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Do]

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

It’s a simple question and they should be able to answer it. Am I a free woman fitnah for men due to my status or beauty. Pretty straight forward.

Alx, I'm glad to hear that.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Angelina]

Alx, I'm glad to hear that.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Apparently some say it’s sahih but I don’t believe it. I don’t care and not believing this isn’t going to take me out of the fold of Islam. I’ve seen this years ago. No one can convince me touching the inside of a woman is acceptable behavior. If someone wants to argue that’s going to take me to hell? They can be my guest. There is a reason why people hardly see that narration because let’s be real, the vast majority of people would be sickened.

@World look at that, what’s your take?

 

[Do]

Apparently some say it’s sahih but I don’t believe it. I don’t care and not believing this isn’t going to take me out of the fold of Islam. I’ve seen this years ago. No one can convince me touching the inside of a woman is acceptable behavior. If someone wants to argue that’s going to take me to hell? They can be my guest. There is a reason why people hardly see that narration because let’s be real, the vast majority of people would be sickened.

@World look at that, what’s your take?

At the risk of sounding like an edgy atheist, I don't see why our disgust as women makes it any less likely of being an authentic narration.

We're often told that morality is determined by what Allah (SWT) allows, and that what is allowed by Him is automatically moral, no ifs or buts about it. We hear and obey khalas, that's what the Salafi users always tell me. If Umar was able to do this in public without being stopped by Nabi Muhammad (SAW) then...

This is why I always say that these types of controversial matters in Islamic history need to be made mainstream in Islamic schools and mosque classes, so they assuage the anxieties of young Muslims who might feel like leaving as well as decrease the chance of those who do leave and become murtads from being radically anti-Islam, in the belief that they're standing up against the 'inhumane spirit' of the religion.

 

[Angelina]

At the risk of sounding like an edgy atheist, I don't see why our disgust as women makes it any less likely of being an authentic narration.

We're often told that morality is determined by what Allah (SWT) allows, and that what is allowed by Him is automatically moral, no ifs or buts about it. We hear and obey khalas, that's what the Salafi users always tell me. If Umar was able to do this in public without being stopped by Nabi Muhammad (SAW) then...

This is why I always say that these types of controversial matters in Islamic history need to be made mainstream in Islamic schools and mosque classes, so they assuage the anxieties of young Muslims who might feel like leaving as well as decrease the chance of those who do leave and become murtads from being radically anti-Islam, in the belief that they're standing up against the 'inhumane spirit' of the religion.

It goes against the Quranic junction of modesty and decency. Also, there is nothing in the Quraan and sunnah to suggest you can do this. Heck even scholars admit there is nothing in the Quraan and Sunnah to even allow slave women to walk around without a veil. This is more than my discomfort but it’s a glaring contradiction of Islamic ethos.

Also, what you showed me isn’t a Hadith.

 

[Do]

It goes against the Quranic junction of modesty and decency. Also, there is nothing in the Quraan and sunnah to suggest you can do this. Heck even scholars admit there is nothing in the Quraan and Sunnah to even allow slave women to walk around without a veil. This is more than my discomfort but it’s a glaring contradiction of Islamic ethos.

Also, what you showed me isn’t a Hadith.

That's what keeps me in the diin. If it was legislated by the Quran in and of itself, which is said to be the direct, uncorrupted word of Allah (SWT), then I would have stormed off out of Islam. But there appears to be a gap between these vomit-inducing classical opinions I've read and the Quran.

Also, which one isn't a Hadith? There's four of them. What is it, then if not a Hadith?

 

[Angelina]

That's what keeps me in the diin. If it was legislated by the Quran in and of itself, which is said to be the direct, uncorrupted word of Allah (SWT), then I would have stormed off out of Islam. But there appears to be a gap between these vomit-inducing classical opinions I've read and the Quran.

Also, which one isn't a Hadith? There's four of them. What is it, then if not a Hadith?

It’s simply someone talking about what a Sahabi used to do.

 

[World]

Apparently some say it’s sahih but I don’t believe it. I don’t care and not believing this isn’t going to take me out of the fold of Islam. I’ve seen this years ago. No one can convince me touching the inside of a woman is acceptable behavior. If someone wants to argue that’s going to take me to hell? They can be my guest. There is a reason why people hardly see that narration because let’s be real, the vast majority of people would be sickened.

@World look at that, what’s your take?

Written 100+ years after the Sahabi Ibn Umar(ra) died, 2000KM away from where he lived. I am not sure why anyone would take these narrations seriously, when they’re accusing him of committing sins. Unless they’ve moved up the goalposts that’s it’s fine to touch up thighs and buttocks since it isn’t an awrah. Saheeh simply refers to the isnad(chain of narrators) meeting the requirement.

 

[Do]

Written 100+ years after the Sahabi Ibn Umar(ra) died, 2000KM away from where he lived. I am not sure why anyone would take these narrations seriously, when they’re accusing him of committing sins. Unless they moved the goalposts to the thigh and buttocks not being an awrah as well. Saheeh simply refers to the isnad(chain of narrators) meeting the requirement.

Written by which scholar? I'd like to read up on it.

 

[JA7997]

Anyone got the video, seems to have been taken down.

 

[World]

Written by which scholar? I'd like to read up on it.

It’s probably in Arabic, not in English.

1. Ibn al Shaybiyyah (died 225 years after Prophet saw) book is called Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, contains 37,000 narrations.

2. Al-Bayhaqi (died 448 years after Prophet saw) book is called Sunan al-Kubra, contains 22,000 narrations.

3. Abd al-Razzaq al-San'ani(died 201 years after Prophet saw) book is called Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq, contains 18,000 narrations.

 

[Do]

Anyone got the video, seems to have been taken down.

We have all moved on to more pressing matters.

 

[نور]

The commandment of veil(niqab), is for the wives of the prophet (saw) specifically which is what the hadith and the Quran says, only you are the one interpreting it to mean that slaves will be physically beaten for wearing hijab.

You are derailing the discussion with your stupid provocative way of asking

On His way from Khaybat to Medina the prophet scw took one of the Jews girl's who was a prisoner of war so the sahaba asked themselves if this new girl will be the prophets wife or just a concubine, one of the clues that they will recognise if Safiya was a concubine or the Prophet's wife was that if he veils her he freed her and she is his wife and if not she was to be his concubine

The Muslims asked whether Safiyya would be considered as his wife or as a slave girl of what his right hands possessed. Then they said, "If the Prophet (scw) screens her from the people, then she Is the Prophet's wife but if he does not screen her, then she is a slave girl."

What do we learn from this straightforward hadith in the sahihayn? We learn that slave women do not wear hijab and are not required to do so

Stop putting words into my mouth. I have never said the Sahaba would borrow from the Romans and Persians and change our religion, they would never do such a thing.

You said this in response to me bringing ahadith saying the awrah of slave women is like that of men and they do not need to wear hijab

The more likely scenario is this: The Byzantine and Sassanid Empire considered hijab and veiling as a mark of high social status, punished lower status people who were modest and they inherited it from the Assyrian Empire penal code(which I will quote below). Once the sahaba conquered these land, their elite did not want this privilege to be given to those they saw as beneath them, merely for being believers

Ah yes, the Umar hadiths that says this, right?

“ During his caliphate, ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb would not permit any slave women to go about veiled. He would say, “The veil is only for free women, so that they will not be harassed.” Saʿīd b. Manṣūr, Sunan Saʿīd b. Manṣūr, ed. Ḥabīb al-Raḥmān al-Aʿẓamī, 2: 98–99.

So, do you think that Muslim slave women don’t deserve to be protected from harassment?

The Last part obviously isn't included in the hadith. This is the hadith:

رأى عمرُ أمةً عليْها جِلبابٌ فقال : عَتَقْتِ ؟ قالتْ : لا ، قال ضَعِيهِ عن رَأْسِكِ ، إِنَّما الجِلْبابُ على الحَرَائِرِ ، فَتَلَكَّأَتْ فقامَ إليها بِالدُّرَّةِ ، فضربَ رأسَها حتى ألقَتْهُ​

Omar saw a slave girl wearing a jilbab and said: “Have you been freed?” She said: “No.” He said: “Take it off your head, for the jilbab is only for free women.” She hesitated, so he went to her with a whip and hit her on the head until she dropped it.

الدرر السنية - الموسوعة الحديثية - شروح الأحاديث

dorar.net

 

[نور]

Now, everyone is hadith scholar and you guys know the authenticity of the reports more than the a'imah of the four schools....

Keep going

 

[Angelina]

You are derailing the discussion with your stupid provocative way of asking

It’s a logical question. If Muslim women are required to wear hijab to escape harassment, do you believe that it’s okay for slave girls to be harassed. It’s a simple yes or no question.

It isn’t stupid.

We wear hijab to avoid harassment……what about slave girls. Very simply point.

Also, is hijab for modesty or social status? I don’t think you realize that with your narrative you undermine the point of hijab. What makes my beauty more than a slave girl? Is a slave girl less of a fitnah even though she’s a biological woman?

On His way from Khaybat to Medina the prophet scw took one of the Jews girl's who was a prisoner of war so the sahaba asked themselves if this new girl will be the prophets wife or just a concubine, one of the clues that they will recognise if Safiya was a concubine or the Prophet's wife was that if he veils her he freed her and she is his wife and if not she was to be his concubine



What do we learn from this straightforward hadith in the sahihayn? We learn that slave women do not wear hijab and are not required to do so


You said this in response to me bringing ahadith saying the awrah of slave women is like that of men and they do not need to wear hijab

The Last part obviously isn't included in the hadith. This is the hadith:

رأى عمرُ أمةً عليْها جِلبابٌ فقال : عَتَقْتِ ؟ قالتْ : لا ، قال ضَعِيهِ عن رَأْسِكِ ، إِنَّما الجِلْبابُ على الحَرَائِرِ ، فَتَلَكَّأَتْ فقامَ إليها بِالدُّرَّةِ ، فضربَ رأسَها حتى ألقَتْهُ​

Omar saw a slave girl wearing a jilbab and said: “Have you been freed?” She said: “No.” He said: “Take it off your head, for the jilbab is only for free women.” She hesitated, so he went to her with a whip and hit her on the head until she dropped it.

الدرر السنية - الموسوعة الحديثية - شروح الأحاديث

dorar.net

You’re not a Hadith scholar as well. Islamqa literally make it clear that there is nothing in the Quran and Sunnah to suggest that slave women shouldn’t wear a hijab. It was custom.

As for the last narrative:


Anas reported:

قَالَ رَأَى عُمَرُ أَمَةً لَنَا مُتَقَنِّعَةً فَضَرَبَهَا وَقَالَ لَا تَشَبَّهِي بِالْحَرَائِرِ
Umar saw one of our maidservants wearing a veil and he flogged her. Umar said: Do not resemble free women.
Source: Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 6/236

The authenticity of this report, through various chains of authority, is questionable. Even if it is authentic, it does not prove anything about the limits of a maidservant’s nakedness.

Ibn al-Qattan commented on this narration, writing:

هذا نصُّه وليس بصحيح ولا فيه أكثر من إنكاره عليها أن تتزيَّا بزي يظن يها من أجله أنها حرة
This was explicitly reported from Umar and it is not authentic. It contains nothing more than his condemnation of her for wearing attire to make others assume she was a free woman.
Source: Aḥkām al-Naẓar 1/230

In other words, this report describes an incident in which Umar punished a woman for wearing a disguise in order to mislead people about her true identity. It was not her modesty that upset him.