Misconceptions about Islam

[Lucifer]

AL-MU'MINUN (THE BELIEVERS) -

Chapter 23 verse 5

And they who guard their private parts

Chapter 23 verse 6

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -

right hand possess= slaves

Misconceptions my foot like I said before I don't believe you.




Hortaa why did I drag my self into the religious section again it's a addiction I need to stop and let reer buraaq fly sky high to samawade with their myths

 

[Layth]

AL-MU'MINUN (THE BELIEVERS) -

Chapter 23 verse 5

And they who guard their private parts

Chapter 23 verse 6

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -

right hand possess= slaves

Misconceptions my foot like I said before I don't believe you.




Hortaa why did I drag my self into the religious section again it's a addiction I need to stop and let reer buraaq fly sky high to samawade with their myths

Yes. It's permissible to have sexual relations with one's spouse or maidservant. What's your point?

The point that I was making was: it doesn't permit rape.

 

[Lucifer]

Yes. It's permissible to have sexual relations with one's spouse or maidservant. What's your point?

The point that I was making was: it doesn't permit rape.

Like a slave would willingly have sex with her enslaver, have sex with a slave like it's your spouse kulaha

 

[Layth]

Like a slave would willingly have sex with her enslaver, have sex with a slave like it's your spouse kulaha

It was a very common practice back then and wasn't viewed as a reprehensible act.

If a maidservant refuses to have any sexual relations with her master, that's her choice. She's not obliged to. The main function of a maidservant isn't to sexually satisfy her master.

Why do you lot make everything about sex?

 

[NoName]

Slaves have their rights too, among them is the right to good treatment.

Premise: it’s forbidden to mistreat a servant

Rape is a form of mistreatment.

Therefore, rape is not permissible.

The fact that there’s expiation (kafaarah) for raping a slave proves that it’s not a permissible act. All scholars have unanimously agreed with this.

What's this? Are you @Dhambaal by any chance?


Also, it's not true that scholars unanimously agree on that. In fact, the opposite is true. You can act any sheikh you want and the answer is likely to be yes, you can have sex with slaves against their will. It appears you're making stuff up now to support your position. Take it easy!

 

[Layth]

What's this? Are you @Dhambaal by any chance?


Also, it's not true that scholars unanimously agree on that. In fact, the opposite is true. You can act any sheikh you want and the answer is likely to be yes, you can have sex with slaves against their will. It appears you're making stuff up now to support your position.

All madhaahib forbid it and there's expiation (kafaarah) for committing such an act.

You're tripping lol.

I've already proven to you that it's not permissible to rape a maidservant, first using narrations, then simple logic i.e. the conclusion based on the premise that mistreatment of slaves is strictly forbidden.

No, I'm not @Dhabaal.

 

[Tramo]

AL-MU'MINUN (THE BELIEVERS) -

Chapter 23 verse 5

And they who guard their private parts

Chapter 23 verse 6

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -

right hand possess= slaves

Misconceptions my foot like I said before I don't believe you.




Hortaa why did I drag my self into the religious section again it's a addiction I need to stop and let reer buraaq fly sky high to samawade with their myths

the verses u guys are quoting simply state that having sex with your slave is not considered adultery or fornication aka not a sin. consent or lack thereof is not what they are addressing

if u wanna discuss non-consensual sex with slaves, quote something else

 

[Layth]

the verses u guys are quoting simply state that having sex with your slave is not considered adultery or fornication aka not a sin. consent or lack thereof is not what they are addressing

if u wanna discuss non-consensual sex with slaves, quote something else

On top of that, it's mentioned in conjuction with "wives" too. Wallahi these people are something else

 

[Lucifer]

It was a

What's this? Are you @Dhambaal by any chance?


Also, it's not true that scholars unanimously agree on that. In fact, the opposite is true. You can act any sheikh you want and the answer is likely to be yes, you can have sex with slaves against their will. It appears you're making stuff up now to support your position. Take it easy!

Wuxuu raabo inuu nagaa dadiiciyow bal firii they are slaves and yes the enslaver can sleep with them but only and check this out like they sleep with their wives BUT she can refuse to sleep with the enslaver and is not obliged to do so and everything will be all fine and dandy I have a easier time believing that MO flew to heaven on the mythical creature called buraaq then believing this load of baloney

 

[Lucifer]

the verses u guys are quoting simply state that having sex with your slave is not considered adultery or fornication aka not a sin. consent or lack thereof is not what they are addressing

if u wanna discuss non-consensual sex with slaves, quote something else

So in the eyes of Islam it's not seeing as rape then say so.

 

[Layth]

Wuxuu raabo inuu nagaa dadiiciyow bal firii they are slaves and yes the enslaver can sleep with them but only and check this out like they sleep with their wives BUT she can refuse to sleep with the enslaver and is not obliged to do so and everything will be all fine and dandy I have a easier time believing that MO flew to heaven on the mythical creature called buraaq then believing this load of baloney

Lakum dinukum waliyadin

 

[NoName]

On top of that, it mentions wives too. Wallahi these people are something else

So what if it mentions wives? Your whole thinking is disordered. You're misusing logic in a way I've seen only one other user misuse it, and you're making stuff up.

if u wanna discuss non-consensual sex with slaves, quote something else

Please explain to me how a slave can give consent to sex with her master.

 

[Layth]

So what if it mentions wives? Your whole thinking is disordered. You're misusing logic in a way I've seen only one other user misuse it, and you're making stuff up.
Please explain to me how a slave can give consent to sex with her master.

When you're at your wit's end, you resort to accusing me of "misusing logic".

These are not only my words but the words of the the Prophet (SAW), companions (RA), scholars, etc.

I'm merely a follower of Islam.

 

[Lucifer]

Lakum dinukum waliyadin

Savages I'll see my self out.

 

[Layth]

Please explain to me how a slave can give consent to sex with her master.

By agreeing to have sex with him?

 

[NoName]

By agreeing to have sex with him?

Again, this exposes your naivety. She's his property. That nullifies any possible consent. Also, you are yet to provide any actual evidence in favour of your argument. The narration you quoted was a man having sex with another man's slave girl (in different riwayas). Of course he would be sentenced like that because she didn't belong to him. Come up with actual evidence.

 

[NoName]

Wuxuu raabo inuu nagaa dadiiciyow bal firii they are slaves and yes the enslaver can sleep with them but only and check this out like they sleep with their wives BUT she can refuse to sleep with the enslaver and is not obliged to do so and everything will be all fine and dandy I have a easier time believing that MO flew to heaven on the mythical creature called buraaq then believing this load of baloney

It's even more absurd when you consider that Muslim wives are cursed by the angels all night when they refuse to have sex with their husbands, yet he wants us to believe the slave girl can do so all fine and dandy!

 

[Layth]

Again, this exposes your naivety. She's his property. That nullifies any possible consent. Also, you are yet to provide any actual evidence in favour of your argument. The narration you quoted was a man having sex with another man's slave girl (in different riwayas). Of course he would be sentenced like that because she didn't belong to him. Come up with actual evidence.

When the Prophet (SAW) forbade mistreatment of slaves; that was a general rule.

There are 1000s of ways to mistreat someone. It’s not as if the Prophet (SAW) would mention every single one of them one by one. “No hitting”, “no scratching”, “no pushing”, etc.

There’s not a SINGLE narration were raping of slaves was turned a blind eye to; NOT A SINGLE ONE.

Rather, what’s evident is that not only is it forbidden, but there are consequences for raping a slave.

You are a liar and not a very good one at that. None of the riwaayas mention that the female was a servant of another man (concerning the narration regarding Umar ibn al-Khattab). Rather, that was a female that has been captured and was given to the individual in question, as a maidservant.

Abu al-Hussain bin al-Fadhl al-Qatan narrated from Abdullah bin Jaffar bin Darestweh from Yaqub bin Sufyan from al-Hassab bin Rabee from Abdullah bin al-Mubarak from Kahmas from Harun bin Al-Asam who said: Umar bin al-Khatab may Allah be pleased with him sent Khalid bin al-Walid in an army, hence Khalid sent Dharar bin al-Auwzwar in a squadron and they invaded a district belonging to the tribe of Bani Asad. They then captured a pretty bride, Dharar liked her hence he asked his companions to grant her to him and they did so. He then had sexual intercourse with her, when he completed his mission he felt guilty, and went to Khalid and told him about what he did. Khalid said: 'I permit you and made it lawful to you.' He said: 'No not until you write a message to Umar'. (Then they sent a message to Umar) and Umar answered that he (Dharar) should be stoned. By the time Umar's message was delivered, Dharar was dead.

Again, I’ll quote some of the seniormost authorities on Islamic law.

In our view the man who rapes a woman, regardless of whether she is a virgin or not, if she is a free woman he must pay a "dowry" like that of her peers, and if she is a slave he must pay whatever has been detracted from her value. The punishment is to be carried out on the rapist and there is no punishment for the woman who has been raped, whatever the case. (Imam Maalik, Al-Muwatta', Volume 2, page 734)

"If a man acquires by force a slave-girl, then has sexual intercourse with her after he acquires her by force, and if he is not excused by ignorance, then the slave-girl will be taken from him, he is required to pay the fine, and he will receive the punishment for illegal sexual intercourse." (Imam Al Shaafi'i, Kitaabul Umm, Volume 3, page 253)

You really are one of the most dense individuals I’ve ever come across; you’ve got to be.

 

[NoName]

You really are one of the most dense individuals I’ve ever come across; you’ve got to be.

The version you quoted says, and I quote 'he had sexual intercourse with her', yet you yourself admit that it's permitted to have sex with slaves as stated in the verse that had been given in this thread. So tell me, using your own brain, why is it that he was to be punished for an act that's permissible? Fucking hell, and you have the audacity to call someone dense! And you still haven't explained how slaves can give consent!

 

[Layth]

It's even more absurd when you consider that Muslim wives are cursed by the angels all night when they refuse to have sex with their husbands, yet he wants us to believe the slave girl can do so all fine and dandy!

A servant is not obliged to sexually satisfy their owner, that's not their main purpose. Their main purpose is labour.

While marriage is obviously a different scenario: since the main purposes include raising a family, comforting each other and so on.

If a woman does not want to have sex with her husband, she can let him know of that and they can come to a mutual understanding. Most of the times, the husband will overlook it and will not really be "angry" at his wife for that.

The version you quoted says, and I quote 'he had sexual intercourse with her', yet you yourself admit that it's permitted to have sex with slaves as stated in the verse that had been given in this thread. So tell me, using your own brain, why is it that he was to be punished for an act that's permissible? Fucking hell, and you have the audacity to call someone dense!

He raped her though, I've quoted scholars subsequently proving that there's expiation for raping a slave. Had it been consensual, there would have been nothing wrong with it. He would have not been punished at all.