UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Topic initiated on Thursday, October 5, 2006 - 6:18 AM
|whom your right hands possess’|
quran 4: 24-25
(24) (Forbidden to you also) are married women, except those whom you own. Such is the decree of Allah. All women other than these are lawful to you, provided you seek them with your wealth in modest conduct, not in fornication. Give them their dowry for the enjoyment you have had of them as a duty; but it shall be no offence for you to make any other agreement among yourselves after you have fulfilled your duty. Allah is Knowing, Wise.
(25) If any one of you cannot afford to marry free believing women, (let him marry) from among the owned believing women. Allah best knows your faith: you are all alike (in terms of religion). Marry them with the permission of their masters and give them their dowry in all justice, provided they are honorable and chaste and have not entertained other men. If after marriage they commit adultery, they shall suffer half the penalty inflicted upon free adulteresses. Such is the law for those of you who fear to commit sin: but if you abstain, it will be better for you. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
The verses referred here, are the last revealed verses in the series of orders regarding physical relation with possessed-women. The earlier revelations in this connection came in Makkah. It was common practice in Arabia to maintain sexual relations with slave-women. The practice, just like prohibition, was restricted in phases, instead of its abolition in one go . First, in Makkan-era, the married persons were directed to snap sexual relations with them.
“Who guard their modesty except with those joined to them in the marriage bond or the (captive) women in their possession. They are free from blame”. (23:5-6 and 70:29-30)
Mark the word “OR” in the above verse. ‘Wives or possessed-women’, (not ‘the wives and possessed women’) were the initial restrictions. Then a few years later, in Madinah, the final verdict came; “If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may marry (instead of resorting to free sex with) believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess. Moreover, Allah has full knowledge about your faith. You are one from another. Marry them with the leave of their owners and give them their Meh’rs according to what is reasonable... This (permission of marriage with captive-women) is for those among you who fear sin but it is better for you that you practice self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving. Most Merciful” (4:25)
For reasons, not being discussed here, Islam does not approve of marriage of free men with possessed-women. (by stating, ‘ you are one from another’, it has been made clear that all people are from one man and woman, and the reason of the above disapproval is not racial). However, if a person cannot afford to marry a girl from the free society, and he fears that he will not be able to practice restraint, and fears to commit sin, he is permitted to marry the possessed women. If Islam permitted sex with captive women, there was no need for the above elaboration.
The sequence of orders of the holy Qur’an is a very clear cut. Those who have misunderstood it, have erred, however great they were.
In no verse, Qur’an has approved of slavery. Please note that the phrase, ‘whom your right hands possess’, has been used on all such occasions instead of being kept in jails, be distributed among the victorious believing men where they can observe the living examples of Islam in practice. No charter of rights for war captives can compare the code, Islam implemented on the possessors of such captives. They were directed to clothe and feed the captives as they themselves wore and ate. When the practice of slavery was prevalent throughout the world, it was not wise to stop believers to purchase the slaves. Instead, it was a boon for the slaves if the believers purchased them from those who treated them worse than animals. Muslims were given great incentives to free the slaves but it was not made obligatory for them that they should necessary free them after spending enormous sums. Qur’an used the phrase, ‘whom your right hands possess’, instead of ‘your slaves’, Qur’an further proclaimed.
“O mankind, we created you from a single male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, so that you may recognise each other. Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)”. (49:13)
As, the Islamic social order based on the above principle, took reign and its influence spread, the kind of slavery, in which slavery, in which slaves were traded in the market was automatically abolished from the Muslim ruled lands. It was still not advisable to debar the believing men from acquiring slaves from other parts of the world, who after being purchased became “the people who were possessed” from the slaves they earlier were. The most striking example of the social transformation was exhibited by the Prophet (Pbuh) himself. He possessed a boy Anas who refused to go home with his father when he came to claim him. With the further spread of Islam over a larger part, the sale-purchase of men was automatically abolished and the phrase, ‘whom your right hands possess’, became applicable to the war captives only. The application of the phrase is still open and today it can be applied to yet other categories of people who are possessed by others in many ways.
courtsey Islamic voice
Edited by: raushan on Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:54 AM
Posted - Thursday, October 12, 2006 - 2:39 AM
I wonder why dd you go to such a length to put limitation on the sex relations among men and women in the name of Quran and Islam. The matter of fact is that sex purely a biological and cultural matter not susceptible to any religious pontification, least of all by Islam. Sex is a life force which has its own laws. In any case Islam did not declare the pre-Islamic sex relations or their offspring as illegitimate.
Btw, what do you say about the relaton of the prophet(pbuh)with hazrat Zeinab, the divorced wife of his adopted son which even the 'libertine' Arab culture did not accept.
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posted - Thursday, October 12, 2006 - 10:00 AM
|Zainab, Zaid's divorced wife: |
"And when thou saidst to him to whom Allah had shown favour and to whom thou hadst shown a favour: Keep thy wife to thyself and keep thy duty to Allah; and thou concealdest in thy heart what Allah would bring to light and thou feardst men, and Allah has a greater right that thou shouldst fear Him. So when Zaid dissolved her marriage-tie, We gave her to thee as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers about the wives of their adopted sons, when they have dissolved their marriage-tie. And Allah's command is ever performed." (Qur'an 33:37)
"Zaid was a freed man already, but from today he will be my son." Seeing this affection between Zaid and the Prophet, Zaid's father and uncle went back and Zaid remained with the Prophet (Hisham).
Zainab was the Holy Prophet's first cousin, being the daughter of his aunt, Umaimah, daughter of ‘Abd al-Muttalib. Zainab a full blooded Arab was intensely proud of her ancestry and exalted social status.
The Prophet wished to marry Zainab to Zaid who in spite of having been liberated by the Prophet and called his son, unfortunately still carried the stigma of slavery in the minds of some people. It was exactly this invidious distinction between ‘free’ and ‘slave’ which the Holy Prophet sought to remove by Zainab’s marriage with Zaid.
The marriage leveled to the ground of all class distinctions and divisions. It was a practical demonstration of Islam’s noble ideal.
The marriage was however, not a happy one. The marriage ended in failure not so much due to a difference in the social status of Zainab and Zaid as to the incompatibility of their dispositions and temperaments and also due to a feeling of inferiority from which Zaid suffered. Differences arose, and Zaid expressed a desire to the Holy Prophet of divorcing Zainab.
The news was grieving for the Prophet, for it was he who had insisted upon the marriage, and he therefore advised Zaid not to divorce her.
The failure of the marriage naturally grieved the Prophet but it also served as a very useful purpose. In pursuance of Divine command, the Prophet himself married Zainab, thus cutting at the very root of another obnoxious and deep seated Arab custom, that it was sacrilege to marry the wife of one’s adopted son. The custom of adoption was abolished and with it went also this foolish notion.
Thus Zainab’s marriage with Zaid served one very noble object and its failure another highly successful purpose.
According to one interpretation, it is to this circumstance that the words refer, "and thou feardest men, and Allah has a greater right that thou shouldst fear Him.” According to this interpretation it is also to the same matter that the words ‘"and thou concealdest in thy heart what Allah would bring to light” refer, for the Prophet did not like that the disagreements between Zainab and Zaid should become generally known. The Prophet’s injunction to Zaid not to divorce his wife is contained in unmistakable terms in the Holy Qur’an. But it was all in vain, and Zaid at last divorced Zainab.
According to another interpretation, however, the words ‘and thou concealdest in thy heart to thou shouldst fear Him, are a continuation of the advice which the Prophet gave to Zaid not to divorce Zainab. This interpretation suits the context even better than the first interpretation, for as we further on told in verse 39, the Prophets fear none but God. "Those who deliver the messages of Allah and fear Him, and fear none but Allah. And Allah is Sufficient to take account" (Qur'an 33:39)
After Zainab was divorced the Holy Prophet took her in marriage, that being the wish of the lady and her relatives before her marriage with Zaid, and the Prophet was, now that the marriage arranged by him proved unsuccessful, morally bound to accept their wishes. Moreover, the Qur’an had declared against an adopted son being regarded as if he were a real son, and now there was an opportunity where the Holy Prophet could by his own example deal a death-blow to that custom. The reason is plainly given in the second part of the verse: “We gave her to thee as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers about the wives of their adopted sons.”
The divorced woman is generally looked down upon in popular estimation, and this was a case in which a freed slave divorced a lady of high birth. By also taking such a divorced woman as his wife, the false notion that divorce degraded women was removed as well. Thus by this act, to which he was morally bound because the lady had been at first offered in marriage to him, he elevated the whole class of divorced women who would otherwise suffer life-long humiliation in society.
This simple story is made the basis of a mean attack on the Holy Prophet. It is stated that the Holy Prophet, having seen Zainab by chance through a half-open door, was fascinated by her beauty, and that Zaid, having come to know of this divorced her, and then she became the Prophet's wife. That Muir and Arnold, not to mention more prejudiced writers accept this, only shows how far religious prejudice may carry "criticism." It is admitted Zainab was the daughter of the Prophet's real aunt; it is admitted that she was one of the early believers in Islam who fled to Madinah; it is admitted that the Prophet himself had arranged the marriage between Zaid and Zainab; and finally it is admitted Zainab desired, as did also her brother, before she was married to Zaid, that she should be taken in marriage by the Holy Prophet. If he had any desire for self-gratification or if he had any passion for the lady, he would not have refused her when she was offered to him as a virgin. Refusal of her hand in the first instance, and take her in marriage when being divorced she was lowered in general estimation, shows conclusively that his motive in this marriage was anything but self-gratification.
The good and noble Rev. Bosworth Smith finds nothing in this marriage to cavil at. He says “It should be remembered, however, that most of Muhammad’s marriages may be explained, at least, as much by his pity for the forlorn condition of the persons concerned, as by other motives. They were almost all of them widows who were not remarkable for their beauty of their wealth, but quite the reverse. May not this fact, and his undoubted faithfulness to Khadija till her dying day, and till he himself was fifty years of age, give us additional ground to hope that calumny or misconception has been at work in the story of Zainab" (Muhammad and Muhammadanism)
Posted - Friday, October 13, 2006 - 12:33 AM
|Excuse me dear Raushan you indulged in a lot of uncalled for hanky panky just to avoid answer to the points raised by me. |
My point was that human relations, especially, the sexual ones, are the function of a given culture and are not determined unilaterally by the religious edicts, unless of course a religion becomes successful in changing the very culture without, in any way, passing any judgment on the legality or legitimacy of the existing sex-relationships and/or their consequences and offshoots.
My view is that Islam did not make much dent in the Arab culture which allowed both marital and extra-marital sex relationships. You quoted Quran:
"“We gave her to thee as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers about the wives of their adopted sons.”
It goes to prove that Allah wanted to remove difficulties by relaxing the cultural taboos on sex relationships rather than putting any new limitations on it. I wonder how you interpreted this Ayah as putting ban on adoption, a very useful cultural institution indeed to give parentage to the children forsaken or lost by their real parents.
Posted - Friday, October 13, 2006 - 12:49 AM
By accepting the norm of arab culture (with regard to sex with unmarried slaves), Islam infact condoned this act quite clearly.
What about Ismael's mother Hajjar (salam on them)? Was she not a slave of Ibrahim (salam on him)
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posted - Saturday, October 14, 2006 - 10:38 AM
|quote:Btw, what do you say about the relaton of the prophet(pbuh)with hazrat Zeinab, the divorced wife of his adopted son which even the 'libertine' Arab culture did not accept.|
this is why I post the entire story related to the marriage with adopted son.
Qote:My view is that Islam did not make much dent in the Arab culture which allowed both marital and extra-marital sex relationships.
_-------Islam reformed the society in the most acceptable way ,done in stages .the useful customs were left untouched whereas those which may cause problem in civic life has been changed slowly.Extra-marital sex relationships,wine and gambling etc declared haram after a passage of time educating people.
quote:It goes to prove that Allah wanted to remove difficulties by relaxing the cultural taboos on sex relationships rather than putting any new limitations on it.
-----You are free to draw any conclusion.
I m not agree that this ayah suggests a ban on adoption.
I think the thing which is proved here is that adopting a child will not make you the real parent.
the value of ''Yateem ''is enough to suggest what treatment these children deserves under the umbrella of Islam.
The matter of fact is that sex purely a biological and cultural matter not susceptible to any religious pontification, least of all by Islam. Sex is a life force which has its own laws. In any case Islam did not declare the pre-Islamic sex relations or their offspring as illegitimate.
plz give more focus on underlined.
All Islam cnveyed that whatever wrong they have done before iman is forgiven .All such things are forbidden and whoever repeat will be punished.
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posted - Saturday, October 14, 2006 - 10:50 AM
|Are Captive Women Lawful for Men |
After the revelation of Surah Nisa (No-4) in Madina, the comprehensive law can be read as under:
1. (The believers) who guard their chastity except with their wives or (The captives) whom their right hands possess, for them they are not blame worthy. (23:5,6 & 70:29:30)
2. And whosoever is not able to afford to marry free believing women, let them many from the believing maids whom your right hands possess instead of availing free sex with them. Allah knoweth best (concerning) your faith. You proceed from one another (so the racialism is not behind the wisdom of this order). Wed them by permission of their folk and give unto them, their dowers (Mehrs) according to what is reasonable. They should be chaste, not fornicators (who submit to sex without marriage), nor of loose conduct.. this (leave of marrying captives) is for him among you who fear sin. But it is better for you (who have no means to marry free believing women), if you practise self restraint (instead of availing leave of marrying captives). Allah is forgiving, Merciful. (4:25) Therefore, in the light of the 2nd rule, the first rule will read as: “Who guard their chastity except with their wives (taken from the free believing women) or (the believing captives in their marriage) whom their right hands possess, for then they are not blame worthy.” ...
Posted - Saturday, October 14, 2006 - 2:30 PM
|Later on in 4.45 it says punishment for adulterous ex-slave is 1/2 that of free person. Is a reason given for it?|
If a man married a slave, then she is no longer a slave?
Also note that the law of halving the punishment for adultery goes against the stoning to death punishment of adultery. You cannot stone a person half-way to death. I do not understand why the mullahs insist on stoning the adulterers.
Posted - Sunday, October 15, 2006 - 9:13 AM
|QUOTE: - f a man married a slave, then she is no longer a slave?|
I agree with you.
Posted - Monday, October 16, 2006 - 1:13 AM
"All Islam conveyed that whatever wrong they have done before iman is forgiven .All such things are forbidden and whoever repeat will be punished."
You can't brush away this point so easily ,dear raushan. Sex is not simply a one time wrong. Like 'Sadqahe Jaariah' its 'Gunah-e-Jaariah'. The wrong sex-act may be forgiven but what about its consequences, the offspring resulting from it, which may continue indefinitely, without any cut-out point. How can you legitimize those who are born out of 'zina' (called 'Walduzzina'). It's a very tricky problem which, in my humble view, can be solved only if you treat sex-relationship as a purely cultural function having no cut-out point.
Posted - Monday, October 16, 2006 - 2:25 AM
"I think the thing which is proved here is that adopting a child will not make you the real parent."
It is stating the obvious. But what about the prohibition on calling the adopters as parents when they are in effect virtual parents of the adoptee. I personally know the cases where some abandoned children were given parentage by their adopters as their real parentage could not be found out. You can well imagine what will be the social status of a man especially in a Muslim muaashirah when his ID card shows 'parentage not known'.
I know a child in Attock city who was abandoned by his mother who was a lunatic with unknown antecedents. The child was brought up first by my parents-in-law and then taken up by their neighbour who was a policeman who was transferred away from the city and took the child with him. After about 30 years I saw the boy who now
appeared to be a respectable person sitting in the office of my brother-in-law. I could not recognize him but my brother told me that he was Javed who was brought up for sometime by them. Javed told me that he worked as a manager of some transport company (Khan Bus perhaps) at Feisalabad and had come to Attock to trace out his real parentage or any relationship though, as he said, his IDC does carry his adopter's name as his father. What a human problem it was, a man tracing out his identity after such a long time. I sympathised with him and tried my best to trace out any link of his family but all in vain. Old people remembered him as a child and his lunatic mother who roamed in the streets but no body could give any link to his family. So after weeks of useless search the man went back to his home disappointed.
Posted - Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 6:59 AM
|Can I ask about your opinopn on Maria rta in light of above|
Posted - Friday, October 27, 2006 - 2:46 AM
Can I ask about your opinopn on Maria rta in light of above
Sorry, I don't know either about Maria rta or her case. I can give my opinion if you let me know about the case.
Posted - Friday, November 3, 2006 - 4:11 PM
|a good response on this, and one that actually make more sense is to be found here: -|
It can do with some expanding which I may do on my site eventually insa' allah (http://marwanboustany.googlepages.com/)
“Ma Malakat Aimanukum” is one of the most misunderstood, misused and abused term of the Quran. It is usually taken as to mean “female slave”. Before we discuss the correct meaning of this term, it must be borne in mind that there is a specific word in Arabic language for female slaves and this word has been used at least twice in the Quran, once as a singular [“amatun” which is used in 2:221] and secondly as a plural [“imaaun”, which is used in 24:32].
“Ma Malakat Aimanukum” literally has the following meanings:
-What your right hands possess
-What you rightfully have
-What you [already] have
-What is rightfully yours
Now “what your right hands possess”, or “what you rightfully have” or “what is rightfully yours” or “what your [already] have” could be any of the following:
-Your possession, or property
-Your slave [both male or female] because “Ma Malakat Aimanukum” refers to a neutral gender which is applicable to both male or female.
-Your prisoner of war
Now let us explore each key word in the term “Ma Malakat Aimanukum”, a little further.
The word “Malakat” has the root meem-laam-kaaf [M-L-K]. It primary signification is:
-To possess or own [something or someone], particularly with ability to have it to oneself exclusively
Other meanings include:
-To have power to command or exercise authority
-To take over
As can be seen that one of the meanings is “to marry”. This is according to one of the most authentic dictionaries of Arabic language [Lisan-ul-Arab by Ibn-Manzoor Vol. 13, page 184]. Another authentic dictionary of Modern Arabic also describes this meaning [The Hans Wehrs Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, page 1081].
According to Lisan-ul-Arab, al-milaak means
-The bond of holy matrimony
According to the same dictionary, milaakun also means
The word “milkun” which has plural “amlaak” means:
The word “mulkun” means:
-Right of possession [what is rightfully yours]
In the term “Ma Malakat Aimanukum”, the word MALAKAT is in the PAST tense, which signifies “What you ALREADY have”, or “what you ALREADY possess” or “what CAME in your possession”. The word, grammatically, cannot be taken as to mean “what you WILL possess” or “what you WILL have”. The future or present tense form of this word is altogether different and has been used in various verses of Quran [5:17, 5:76, 10:31, 13:16, 16:76, 17:56, 19:87, 20:89, 25:3, 29:7, 34:22, 34:42, 35:13, 39:43, 43:86, 82:19]
Now let us see the word “Aimanukum”.
The word “Aimanun” is the plural of “Yaminun” and means “Right hands”. The root of this word is ya-meem-noon [Y-M-N].
The word “Yaminun” also means:
The word “Yumnun”, has the same root Y-M-N and means:
Now think of “Marriage” which is also a covenant [as described in Quran] and an event of auspiciousness, then see the suitability of the use of word “Aimanun” in context of marriage, as well.
From the above it can be seen that “Ma Malakat Aimanukum”, may not only refer to “slave” [which could be both male or female] but also to:
-Prisoners of war
-What is rightfully yours
Before we move further, another important word [which is used as conjunction] must also be explained. The word is “AW”, used in the phrase “aw ma malakat aymanukum”. “AW” is usually translated as “OR”. There is no doubt that “OR” is one of the meanings of “AW” but as a matter of fact, this word is used in no less than 12 different ways [also explained in Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon]. One of the uses of this word is TAFSEEL, [i.e. elaborative or explanatory]. In other words, “aw” is also used to add some meaning to the previous word or to explain a previous word or to give some attribute or characteristics of the previous word.
Please refer to 17:110. In this verse, there is a phrase “odAAoo Allaha awi odAAoo alrrahmana”. Note carefully how “Allah” and “Rahman” are separated by the word “aw”. Now here “aw” does not imply that “Allah” and “Rahman” are two different Beings. Without doubt, “Allah” and “Rahman” is one and the same Being. “Rahman” is an attribute of “Allah”.
Now refer to verses 23:6 and 70:30.
23:6 Illa AAala azwajihim aw ma malakat aymanuhum fainnahum ghayru maloomeena
70:30 Illa AAala azwajihim aw ma malakat aymanuhum fainnahum ghayru maloomeena
In both the above verses, “azwajihim” and “ma malakat aymanuhum” are separated by “aw”. Here it does not mean that “azwajihim” and “ma malakat aymanuhum” are two different objects. Actually, they refer to one and the same object. “azwajihim” ARE “ma malakat aymanuhum” i.e. “their spouses” are “what they rightfully possess”.
In 4:24, the term “ma malakat aymanukum” refers to those married women which are wives of the disbelievers [as explained in 60:10]. The verse 4:24 makes unlawful to marry all married women except those married women that have come to the believers as prisoners of wars or emigrants but their husbands are non-believers. [After becoming of these women believers, Quran renders their previous marriage to the unbelievers, null]
In 4:3, the term “ma malakat aymanukum” means “what you rightfully possess” or “what you [already] have”.
In 33:52, the Prophet is forbidden to marry any more women in spite of their beauty except to MARRY only the slave girls or prisoners of war referred in 60:10, to make them part of the family and give them status.
Posted - Friday, November 3, 2006 - 11:54 PM
Living in and beset by western culture you seem to be apologetic and defensive about Islam.
Btw, what have you to say about my post above of 16th October?
Posted - Saturday, November 4, 2006 - 10:01 AM
I am not apologetic, my goal is to properly establish what is the right understanding of the Qur'an.
regarding what you wrote above, I'm assuming this is regarding the whole adoption issue..
"...Nor has He made your adopted sons your (biological/real) sons. Such is (only) your (manner of) speech by your mouths. But Allah tells (you) the Truth, and He shows the (right) Way. Call them by (the names of) their fathers; that is juster in the sight of Allah. But if you know not their father's (names, call them) your brothers in faith, or your trustees. But there is no blame on you if you make a mistake therein. (What counts is) the intention of your hearts. And Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful."
So that sums it up really. You can take care of a child, but you must never make them believe they are your child or that you are their father. The truth must be told to them. Sometimes the truth hurts, but it can hurt more not to know it.
As Muslims the truth is our first priority to Allah and ourselves.
Edited by: marwan on Saturday, July 10, 2010 12:12 PM
|Reply to Topic