Is concubine halal or haram in Islam?

[Dima&Damo]

So if i beefed with gaalo's and i won may i take their women folk to bed without retribution from the heavens

 

[Hamzza]

@Angelina

Female slaves at the time of the prophet and the Sahaba didn't wear any veil, this is because Allah didn't make it obligatory for them to wear the Hijab. The Ayah of Jilbab is clearly addressing free women.

With that being said, some of the later scholars have felt there was a problem with this and the Awrah of a beautiful slave woman is indeed a fitnah to men, so they ordered the female slaves to dress like freewomen.

Sheikhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said:

Female slaves at the time of the prophet ﷺ didn't cover themselves because there was no fitna and they were like the Qawa'id(the women who no longer think that they can bear children). As for the beautiful-faced Turkish slave girls of our time, they can never be like the slave girls in the era of the prophet ﷺ, and they must cover all of their bodies from being seen.

 

[Hamzza]

is the practice of concubine halal in Islam?
Or forbidden.

@Hamzza

Halal. Was there any doubt

 

[Angelina]

@Angelina

Female slaves at the time of the prophet and the Sahaba didn't wear any veil, this is because Allah didn't make it obligatory for them to wear the Hijab. The Ayah of Jilbab is clearly addressing free women.

It isn’t clear as Ibn Taymiyah literally said that there isn’t any to suggest that they shouldn’t:

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

Clearly it was based on practicality and custom. Also, the Quran doesn’t say that free old women don’t have to abide by strict hijab ruling yet classical scholars believed that hijab could be more lax for old women.

With that being said, some of the later scholars have felt there was a problem with this and the Awrah of a beautiful slave woman is indeed a fitnah to men, so they ordered the female slaves to dress like freewomen.

Sheikhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said:

Spoiler

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

 

[Macawisley]

is the practice of concubine halal in Islam?
Or forbidden.

@Hamzza

surah al mu'minun ayat 6


إِلَّا عَلَىٰٓ أَزۡوَٰجِهِمۡ أَوۡمَا مَلَكَتۡ أَيۡمَٰنُهُمۡفَإِنَّهُمۡ غَيۡرُ مَلُومِينَ

“Except from their spouses and what their right hands possess, then surely they are not blameworthy. (literally: other than being blameworthy”

it is Halaal.

 

[Angelina]

@Hamzza

Spoiler

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

 

[Hamzza]

It isn’t clear as Ibn Taymiyah literally said that there isn’t any to suggest that they shouldn’t:

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.

What does this even mean? There is no Ayah or Hadith ordering the slave women to cover up. this itself is evidence that they are not required to wear Jilbaab. If we were not ordered to fast Ramadan no one would've been blamed for not doing that.

I don't know why Ibn Taymiyyah would admit that the slave women at the time of the prophet ﷺ didn't cover then come up with this. It's either he believes that the prophet and Sahaba were not following the Sharia properly or Islamqa is misquoting him

 

[Angelina]

What does this even mean? There is no Ayah or Hadith ordering the slave women to cover up.

Spoiler

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

this itself is evidence that they are not required to wear Jilbaab. If we were not ordered to fast Ramadan no one would've been blamed for not doing that.

Some scholars believed that the Ayah didn’t differentiate btw. The ayah says believing women. It doesn’t talk about the status of women. Hence the idea of the Quran only mentioning free women never made sense to me.

Ibn Hazm writes:

وَهِيَ (الْعَوْرَة) مِنْ الْمَرْأَةِ جَمِيعُ جِسْمِهَا حَاشَا الْوَجْهِ وَالْكَفَّيْنِ فَقَطْ الْحُرُّ وَالْعَبْدُ وَالْحُرَّةُ وَالْأَمَةُ سَوَاءٌ فِي كُلِّ ذَلِكَ وَلَا فَرْقَ … وَأَمَّا الْفَرْقُ بَيْنَ الْحُرَّةِ وَالْأَمَةِ فَدِينُ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى وَاحِدٌ وَالْخِلْقَةُ وَالطَّبِيعَةُ وَاحِدَةٌ كُلُّ ذَلِكَ فِي الْحَرَائِرِ وَالْإِمَاءِ سَوَاءٌ حَتَّى يَأْتِيَ نَصٌّ فِي الْفَرْقِ بَيْنَهُمَا فِي شَيْءٍ فَيُوقَفُ عِنْدَهُ
The nakedness of a woman is her entire body excluding the face and palms only. The free man and male servant, the free woman and maidservant are equal in this respect; there is no difference… As for differentiating between the free woman and maidservant, then the religion of Allah Almighty is one, creation and nature are one. All of that in respect to free women and maidservants is the same, unless there is an explicit text to distinguish between them in any way such that it can be applied.
Source: al-Muḥallá 2/241 and 248

Abu Hayyan commented on this verse, writing:

وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ قَوْلَهُ وَنِساءِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ يَشْمَلُ الْحَرَائِرَ وَالْإِمَاءَ وَالْفِتْنَةُ بِالْإِمَاءِ أَكْثَرُ لِكَثْرَةِ تَصَرُّفِهِنَّ بِخِلَافِ الْحَرَائِرِ فَيَحْتَاجُ إِخْرَاجُهُنَّ مِنْ عُمُومِ النِّسَاءِ إلى دليل واضح
The apparent meaning of His saying ‘the believing women’ includes free women and maidservants. The temptation from maidservants is even greater because of their frequent activity, unlike free women. Excluding them from the generality of women requires clear evidence.
Source: al-Baḥr al-Muḥīṭ 8/504

I don't know why Ibn Taymiyyah would admit that the slave women at the time of the prophet ﷺ didn't cover then come up with this. It's either he believes that the prophet and Sahaba were not following the Sharia properly or Islamqa

Spoiler

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

 

[Khaemwaset]

Well that market generates about 150 billion USD yearly. The Pizzagate stuff was mild. This is a full blown market you can access in New york, Atlanta, LA, London, Dubai, Jeddah and so on. You just go to the auction and buy some from what I heard. Mostly are women and children tho.

@Bari🐍 @Abdisamad @Ghengis Kaarhis @Idrus
my bad guys I said 8k-15k but that's if you're buying in stock.
if you wanna buy a slave in 2023 it costs $90 on average

The price of an average slave is $90. The world's slaves generate $150 billion in profit every year.

https://www.theworldcounts.com/challenges/slavery-and-sweatshops/modern-day-slavery-facts

Some of you think the slaves look a certain way but they are your normal girl down the street who lives with this random guy.
Suddenly she's given a ticket for "vacation" to the middle east and she never comes back.
Others are girls who left their parents home to live alone but are vulnerable outside then get kidnapped then sold away.
But I think they ship all the slaves in containers from the east coast to the middle east or East asia

Wasn't there slaves freed from some Arab family living in London? It's mad how much slavery still exists but is kept hidden. I remember in class a couple years back our teacher was talking to is about how it happens in UK and western countries despite us watching documentaries of it only in the third world.

 

[Angelina]

@Hamzza @cooli3o and @Bari🐍

This is what makes sense to me the most:


Shaykh al-Albani likewise documented the weakness of several narrations attributing this meaning to the verse, concluding:

ومن العجائب أن يغتر بعض المفسرين بهذه الروايات الضعيفة فيذهبوا بسببها إلى تقييد قوله تعالى وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ بالحرائر دون الإماء وبنوا على ذلك أنه لا يجب على الأمة ما يجب على الحرة من ستر الرأس والشعر بل بالغ بعض المذاهب فذكر أن عورتها مثل عورة الرجل من السرة إلى الركبة… وهذا مع أنه لا دليل عليه من كتاب أو سنة
It is strange that some exegetes are fooled by these weak narrations, such that they adhere to the view restricting His saying ‘the believing women’ as free women to the exclusion of maidservants, and based upon this that maidservants do not have the obligation to cover their head and hair like free women. Rather, some of the legal schools exaggerate to the point that they mention her nakedness is like the nakedness of men, only from the navel to the knee… Despite this, there is no evidence for it in the Book and the Sunnah.

Hamzza it’s clear that there were hardly any evidence even Ibn Taymiyyah admitted it was about practicality and custom.

 

[Unicorn]

Smh im glad its 2023. Such vile creatures

 

[cooli3o]

@Hamzza @cooli3o and @Bari🐍

This is what makes sense to me the most:


Shaykh al-Albani likewise documented the weakness of several narrations attributing this meaning to the verse, concluding:


Hamzza it’s clear that there were hardly any evidence even Ibn Taymiyyah admitted it was about practicality and custom.

It doesn't make sense to me either tbh. but still some scholars are of the opinion that the verse only refers to believing women.
my opinion is that slave women dressed modestly but didn't need to wear hijab and could uncover parts of their body needed for manual labour, same way an old women doesn't need to wear jilbaab and niqaab and some opinions say old women do not need to wear hijab either and don't need to adhere to the hijaab rulings, in case of neccesity for manual labour or bc they aren't desired anymore
I do not think the sahaba would ever allow slave women to go out naked at all this was made up in the future and scholars allowed it(I still don't understand why) and that they just wore a less covered up clothing compared free women.
but at the same time you could take the other opinion that it refers to all women but that actually seems to be the minority opinion.

 

[cooli3o]

Smh im glad its 2023. Such vile creatures

you do realise its part of Islam

 

[Radical]

It isn’t clear as Ibn Taymiyah literally said that there isn’t any to suggest that they shouldn’t:

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

Clearly it was based on practicality and custom. Also, the Quran doesn’t say that free old women don’t have to abide by strict hijab ruling yet classical scholars believed that hijab could be more lax for old women.

Spoiler

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

 

[Hamzza]

There is no ayah that suggest gaal women have to wear hijab. So in a Muslim society in which there are dhimmis can’t free gaal women walk around with no hijab like they now?

I don't know. I will look on what the ruling about this is.

Some scholars believed that the Ayah didn’t differentiate btw. The ayah says believing women. It doesn’t talk about the status of women. Hence the idea of the Quran only mentioning free women never made sense to me.

Hijab is not wajib on slave women this is clear from the report in Sahih Muslim about Safiyya the wife of the prophet. She was one of the captives in the battle of Khaybar, so the Sahaba speculated if she was a concubine or free wife of the prophet. They said, "If he ﷺ covers her she is his wife, or else(allows her to walk freely without hijab) she is his concubine".


إن حجبها فهي من أمهات المؤمنين، وإن لم يحجبها فهي مما ملكت يمينه، فلما ارتحل وطى لها خلفه ومد الحجاب بينها وبين الناس.»

https://hadithprophet.com/hadith-35648.html

 

[Angelina]

View attachment 291431

Spoiler

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

 

[Angelina]

I don't know. I will look on what the ruling about this is.



Hijab is not wajib on slave women this is clear from the report in Sahih Muslim about Safiyya the wife of the prophet. She was one of the captives in the battle of Khaybar, so the Sahaba speculated if she was a concubine or free wife of the prophet. They said, "If he ﷺ covers her she is his wife, or else(allows her to walk freely without hijab) she is his concubine".


إن حجبها فهي من أمهات المؤمنين، وإن لم يحجبها فهي مما ملكت يمينه، فلما ارتحل وطى لها خلفه ومد الحجاب بينها وبين الناس.»

https://hadithprophet.com/hadith-35648.html

Spoiler

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

 

[Hamzza]

Spoiler

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

Islam retained some of the pre-Islamic customs of Arabia and they are today part of the Deen, with Hajj being a prime example of it.

Ibn Taymiyyah believes Hijab is not wajib on slave women because the Ayah of Jilbaab does not mention slave women. This is what he said:

قوله قل لأزواجك وبناتك ونساء المؤمنين يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن} الآية، دليل على أن الحجاب إنما أمر به الحرائر دون الإماء. لأنه خص أزواجه وبناته، ولم يقل وما ملكت يمينك وإمائك وإماء أزواجك وبناتك

His saying(Allah's saying) is Surah Ahzab:59 is evidence that Hijab is wajib on free women, not slave women because he singled out his wives and daughters, and did not say "What your right hand possesses, the slaves of your wives and the slaves of your daughters"

What did Ibn Hajr say about this topic?

 

[Hamzza]

But another dilemma for me is the idea of women’s beauty being fitnah or that women as a whole being awrah if men were able to resist women that weren’t veiled and dressed the way the average non Muslim woman with her hair out dressed. Ibn Taymiyyah suggested that those women weren’t seen as attractive, but clearly the fact that some were made into concubines and men slept with them says otherwise. It’s a point you’ve also not replied to as I can imagine you’re confused with.

Ibn Taymiyyah suggested they were not fitnah at the time of the prophet ﷺ due to a couple of reasons with the Sahaba being strong people who are not tempted by free women let alone slaves being the biggest reason.

 

[Unicorn]

you do realise its part of Islam

Why are u responding to me everywhere lool