Female servants and maids

kgwithnob

Whether we like it or not, slavery, for mostly economic reasons, had been an integral part of the human society?s fabric for thousands of years in the past. It was a norm, a way of life, accepted by the society as a whole, otherwise it could not have lasted for so long. Abolishing of slavery in the United States took around five years and cost hundreds of thousands of human lives.

Going back historically to the time of the revelation of The Qur?aan, slavery is part of the fabric and culture of the society. Therefore, The Qur?aan at the time accepts it and deals with it the way it deals with it. Who are we to jump in the middle and interpret the related verses and twist the word of ALLAAH, swt, according to our likings and conjectures just because we?re living in the 21st century, and thank GOD, slavery is no more and sounds disgusting? We are not allowed but to convey the meaning of the verses of The Qur?aan the way they really mean.

So, interpreting ?MAA MALAKAT AYMAANUKUM? other than meaning ?the slaves that you own? is not Qur?aanic. Anyone interested, we can reason over it according to The Qur?aan.

Peace,
Khalil

Man_of_Faith

Peace kgwithnob,

Thanks for your input. There we have a reason why I would feel that the Quran is corrupted. Never in my life would I think God would advocate slavery. It is just outside the boundaries of a Most Gracious and Most Merciful God.

I know that slavery was very common not long ago, just about a 100 years ago it was completely abolished, but to think that God would add elements that justifies slavery or sex with slaves is something which I go against. If it is God's will I certainly feel like disobeying and going to Hell rather than it. Fortunately I am sure God never has encouraged that and it is rather either a corruption or a misinterpretation of Quran.

There must be another explanation than that God justifies slavery in the Book. I think rather my talk about servants is what the Quran would mean in that case.

God bless you

Noon_waalqalami

Assalam alaikom everyone. Hope you all are well.

I was teaching my Help for the Convert Class and I had a sister that almost floored me with her statement. She was told by her husband that he could have sex with their maid because Allah allows Him. That the Prophet had sex slaves like Maryam. Men are allowed to have intercourse with maids/servants since they are right hand possessions nope Imagine her horror as a 2 month convert!

I know there were many topics on this. I tried to explain but it gets confusing to explain. I was trying to remember the quotes from Quran that many posted here. I also tried to find an article that explains the right hand possession.

Anyway this girl is freaking out about the maid and will not think of leaving the house when she is there. I told her I would get some information on Right Hand Possession and she could study and decide for herself.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks so much.

231 hence succeed the believing
232 the ones they in prayers theirs humbling
233 and the ones they about the nonsense turning
234 and the ones they of purification works doing
235 and the ones they of private parts theirs guarding
236 except on spouses theirs or what possess right hands/trust theirs so indeed they not blameworthy
237 so from seeks after that so indeed those are the transgressing

2431 and say to the believers (feminine plural) should lower from gaze theirs and should guard chastity theirs and not display adornment theirs except what apparent from it and let draw with covering theirs on bosoms theirs and not display adornment theirs except to husbands theirs or fathers/forefathers or fathers husbands theirs or begot/sons theirs or begot/sons husbands theirs or brothers theirs or children brothers theirs or children sisters theirs or nisahinna/women theirs (i.e. female relatives) or what possess right hands/trust theirs or the followers behind not the ones the desire from al-rijal/the gentlemen or the young the ones not aware they on private the women and not beat with feet theirs to make evident what conceal from adornment theirs and turn yeh to the god all of you the believing that may you succeeding

Peace -- thus according to her husband, she too can have sex with their male gardener, mechanic, dentist, doctor, etc.

huruf

I think that when somebody has something in his or her yad, it is within his or her power, authority, etc. When it is the right hand, it is for a good purpose, what sense would it if not have to say the right hand. Some people here say oath, but I think it comes to the same, you undertake to protect somebody, you engage yourself to protect somebody, be it in a marriage, be it in a capacity as employer, be it as somebody under your roof and care... What it is, as abdelilah says, should be in the rules of engagement. But I think that it is an umbrella denomination for a protective relationship without specifying which one. The specification should come as each comes up.

Salaam

unknownuser

Peace Earthdom,

I still think the Truth is something like what I wrote in my last post. That the "slavery" is rather talk about servants that work for you. Possibly you are allowed to have sex with them, but I think it is if you are not married yet, and I doubt you can force a servant to have sex with you against her/his will. Servants in the past were often bound by oaths to work for you for a fixed number of years for a certain reward.

Thanks Man of Faith for the input, but this it not what I meant.Please re-read my post again.

Whether we like it or not, slavery, for mostly economic reasons, had been an integral part of the human society?s fabric for thousands of years in the past. It was a norm, a way of life, accepted by the society as a whole, otherwise it could not have lasted for so long. Abolishing of slavery in the United States took around five years and cost hundreds of thousands of human lives.

Going back historically to the time of the revelation of The Qur?aan, slavery is part of the fabric and culture of the society. Therefore, The Qur?aan at the time accepts it and deals with it the way it deals with it. Who are we to jump in the middle and interpret the related verses and twist the word of ALLAAH, swt, according to our likings and conjectures just because we?re living in the 21st century, and thank GOD, slavery is no more and sounds disgusting? We are not allowed but to convey the meaning of the verses of The Qur?aan the way they really mean.

So, interpreting ?MAA MALAKAT AYMAANUKUM? other than meaning ?the slaves that you own? is not Qur?aanic. Anyone interested, we can reason over it according to The Qur?aan.

Thankyou Khalil for give information regarding slavery in US.Yes aymaan = slave is not Quranic and an innovation.
But again it still not answer my question My question is What is malakat aymaanuhuna/posses right hand/maintain the oath in 2431 according to you, brother?

Peace -- thus according to her husband, she too can have sex with their male gardener, mechanic, dentist, doctor, etc.

&

kgwithnob

Thankyou Khalil for give information regarding slavery in US.Yes aymaan = slave is not Quranic and an innovation.
But again it still not answer my question My question is What is malakat aymaanuhuna/posses right hand/maintain the oath in 2431 according to you, brother?

I believe you misunderstood me. I said "MAA MALAKAT AYMAANUKUM" means "the slaves that you own". If someone interpret it to mean anything different would not be Qur'aanic.

Peace,
Khalil

diamantinehoneybunch

Salaam,

Why is there a person who seems to support slavery on this topic? Seriously it makes my faith become shaken.

Kind regards,
Yuliana

hicham9

Why is there a person who seems to support slavery on this topic? Seriously it makes my faith become shaken.

Don't let the impulsive and contemptuous whims of some shake your own faith, Yuliana! We're not allowed to own slaves, on the contrary. The Qur'an (960) clearly specifies that slaves and bonded labourers are to be freed (by us). This is not an option. This is an OBLIGATION ( &#1616.

The term "owned slave" ('abdan mamlukan &#1575 occurs once in the entire Quranic text. In it (1675), ALLH Almighty presents an example of an owned slave who spends on the needy from his own money. In the sight of ALLH, he's way higher in rank than his avaricious (so-called) master.

SLM.

Man_of_Faith

Sorry. Internet lag caused me to post twice.

Man_of_Faith

Peace hicham9,

So then obviously the Quran is either contradicting itself or the verses which allegedly supports slavery are misunderstood and rather mean servants that are bound by contract to you. Never in my life I can believe God is supporting slavery. Thanks for mentioning 960, it makes the Truth more clear. God does not support slavery but is actually anti-slavery. The verses with right hand possesses must mean something else.

God bless you

kgwithnob

(1675), ALLH Almighty presents an example of an owned slave who spends on the needy from his own money. In the sight of ALLH, he's way higher in rank than his avaricious (so-called) master.

SLM.

I take it that you were unaware of misquoting and twisting the meaning of the above verse when you did it. See the verse and its true meaning below.

1675,

Allah coineth a similitude there is a bondman enslaved who hath no power over anything; and there is one whom We have provided from Ourselves with goodly provision and he expendeth thereof secretly and openly; can they be equal? All praise Unto Allah; but most of them know not.

Peace,
Khalil

hicham9

... the verses which allegedly supports slavery are misunderstood and rather mean servants that are bound by contract to you. Never in my life I can believe God is supporting slavery. Thanks for mentioning 960, it makes the Truth more clear. God does not support slavery but is actually anti-slavery. The verses with right hand possesses must mean something else.

I fully agree my brother, the Qur'anic term/concept in question is definitely misunderstood by many! ALLH Almighty does not support slavery AT ALL, rather He condemns it, and demands the liberation of slaves by manumission, even if one has to purchase them first.

I personally believe that "maa malakat aymanukum" is related to "legal relationships", such as marriage. For example, in 423-24, ALLH Almighty prohobits intimate relationships with our

mothers
daughters
sisters
father's sisters
mother's sisters
brother's daughters
sister's daughters
0 mothers who nursed us
sisters through nursing
wives' mothers
step-daughters (except if you didn't have sex with her mother)
wives of our biological sons
two sisters simultaneously
Married women ( &#1616

Exactly after "married women" ALLH Almighty states "EXCEPT "maa malakat aymanukum". Meaning, I'm prohibited from having sex with married women EXCEPT the woman with whom I'm bound by oath (my beloved wife). How is this related to slavery again?!!!

diamantinehoneybunch

I take it that you were unaware of misquoting and twisting the meaning of the above verse when you did it. See the verse and its true meaning below.

1675,

Allah coineth a similitude there is a bondman enslaved who hath no power over anything; and there is one whom We have provided from Ourselves with goodly provision and he expendeth thereof secretly and openly; can they be equal? All praise Unto Allah; but most of them know not.

Peace,
Khalil

Salaam,

Hmmmmmm you are a supporter of Marmaduke Pickthall and his translation aren't you? And you justify slavery using his translation.

Pickthall was the one who translated the word idribuhunne in verse 434 into scourge.
By the way pardon me if the translation you use is not Pickthall's.

Why do you support slavery anyway?

Kind regards,
Yuliana

kgwithnob

Salaam,

Hmmmmmm you are a supporter of Marmaduke Pickthall and his translation aren't you? And you justify slavery using his translation.

Pickthall was the one who translated the word idribuhunne in verse 434 into scourge.
By the way pardon me if the translation you use is not Pickthall's.

Why do you support slavery anyway?

Kind regards,
Yuliana

1stHow about EIGHT English translations of verse 1675, OTHER THAN Pickthall's, below?

Sahih International Allah presents an example a slave owned and unable to do a thing and he to whom We have provided from Us good provision, so he spends from it secretly and publicly. Can they be equal? Praise to Allah ! But most of them do not know.

Yufus Ali Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly are the two equal? (By no means praise be to Allah. But most of them understand not.

Shakir Allah sets forth a parable (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah! Nay, most of them do not know.

Muhammad Sarwar God tells a parable about a helpless servant and one to whom He has given honorable provisions and who has spent for the cause of God privately and in public. Can these two people be considered equal? It is only God who deserves all praise, but most people do not know.

Mohsin Khan Allah puts forward the example (of two men a believer and a disbeliever); a slave (disbeliever) under the possession of another, he has no power of any sort, and (the other), a man (believer) on whom We have bestowed a good provision from Us, and He spends thereof secretly and openly. Can they be equal? (By no means, not). All the praises and thanks be to Allah. Nay! (But) most of them know not.

Arberry God has struck a similitude a servant possessed by his master, having no power over anything, and one whom We have provided of Ourselves with a provision fair, and he expends of it secretly and openly. Are they equal? Praise belongs to God! Nay, most of them know not.

Daryabadi Allah propoundeth a similitude there is a bondman enslaved who hath not power over aught; and there is one whom We have provided from Ourselves with goodly provision and he expendeth thereof secretly and openly; can they be equal? All praise Unto Allah; but most of them know not.

Mufti Taqi Usm Allah gives an example There is a slave owned (by someone), who has no power over anything, and there is a person whom We have given good provision from Us, and he spends out of it secretly and openly. Are they equal? Praise be to Allah. But, most of them do not know

2ndlease read my original post below, in its entirety, then judge me.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605590.msg332907#msg332907

Peace,
Khalil

hicham9

I take it that you were unaware of misquoting and twisting the meaning of the above verse when you did it. See the verse and its true meaning below.

Dear khalil,

Calm down a little! Take a deep breath and act rationally as you proceed.
No human is infallible... further, we're discussing the Book of God, not the Book of kgwithnob!

You interpret "" (i.e., and whom) as "and THERE IS ONE whom"! Where did you get "THERE IS ONE" from?!

Allah coineth a similitude there is a bondman enslaved who hath no power over anything; and THERE IS ONE whom We have provided from Ourselves with goodly provision and he expendeth thereof secretly and openly; can they be equal? All praise Unto Allah; but most of them know not.

God sets forth an example An owned slave, unable to do a thing, and (on) whom We have bestowed goodly sustenance from Us, so he spendeth thereof secretly and openly. Can they be equal? Praise be to God. Nay, (but) most of them do not know. {75} And God sets forth an example Two men, one of them is mute, unable to do a thing, while he is a burden to his guardian. Wherever he directs him, he brings no good .... {76}

kgwithnob

...You interpret "" (i.e., and whom) as "and THERE IS ONE whom"! Where did you get "THERE IS ONE" from?!...

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605590.msg333060;topicseen#msg333060

Peace,
Khalil

hicham9

Didn't think so either.

diamantinehoneybunch