Right hand possesses in Quran

Noon_waalqalami

For a long time, until the early 18th century Crimean Khanate maintained massive slave trade with the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East. Between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast.

http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_slavery#Arab_slave_trade

They could be big white slaves also yes

Yes could have been big strong Albanian too ? laugh

I'm familiar, actually one of my great grandfathers was a big Imam with Janissaries (he didn't have slaves) which back then was known as the garden of Viziers 37 of Albanian origin ruled the Empire while Sultans many were mixed Balkan/Slavic were busy in haram.

Nice series, heard Brad Pitt will make an appearance next month when it comes out again.

http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=nigpxSgzGi4

Maha

You are getting emotional.

Please explain to me who are these women who are my possession but not my wife and I don't have to guard my private parts from them ?

No my dear. I am just calling a spade for a spade. Here on freeminds most people are decent civilized human beings who oppose slavery and other kind of opressions as you can see. We believe in samething called "human rights".

Which women ? And which possession are you talking about ?

rameez

No my dear. I am just calling a spade for a spade. Here on freeminds most people are decent civilized human beings who oppose slavery and other kind of opressions as you can see. We believe in samething called "human rights".

I am not saying it is "fard" to keep slaves. But it is mentioned in Quran as permissible and established practice of Muhammad(PBUH) and His Companions.

Which women ? And which possession are you talking about ?

women in possession mentioned in 236,7030,3350,424

rameez

No my dear. I am just calling a spade for a spade. Here on freeminds most people are decent civilized human beings who oppose slavery and other kind of opressions as you can see. We believe in samething called "human rights".

I am not saying it is "fard" to keep slaves. But it is mentioned in Quran as permissible and established practice of Muhammad(PBUH) and His Companions.

Which women ? And which possession are you talking about ?

women in possession mentioned in 236,7030,3350,424. For clarification arabic words please refer to Reply#16.

Noon_waalqalami

Please clarify what do you mean by Big black male slaves.

Facts are that Arabs with your mentality who said it?s OK fueled the slave trade by enslaving Africans.

For the verse 3355 , yes it is talking about slaves, but there is nothing about SEX or PRIVATE PARTS in this verse. It just talks about those people with whom women can converse without hijab.

It?s more than conversing ?

2431 and say to the believing (feminine) they should lower from their gaze and they should guard their chastity and not display their adornment only what apparent from it and let them draw their covering over their bosoms and not display their adornment only to their husbands or their fathers or fathers their husbands or their sons or their sons their husbands or their brothers or children their brothers or children their sisters or their women or what possess their right hands (i.e. their big black male slaves according to you) or the followers /walkers behind not those the desire from al-rija/the men or the children the ones who not aware over private the women and not beat with their feet to know what they conceal from their adornment and turn to The God all O you the believers that you may prosper

For 236 , it is a consensus that it is referring to "wives" and female slave girls, there is no difference of opinion in this.

Then better look it up and verse clearly addresses males and females, spouse is already mentioned?

7029 and the ones who they of their private parts guardians
7030 only over their spouses or what possess their right hands (i.e. their big black male slaves according to you) so indeed they not blameworthy

They will be distributed among mujahideens and they must take care of them. One permission granted to the owners of slave girls is that they can have sexual intercourse with them. I don't know how you consider this to be rape.

How would one go about getting female slaves; OK to beat you senseless take your females?
What about the American soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia is it OK for them too?

Maha

I am not saying it is "fard" to keep slaves. But it is mentioned in Quran as permissible and established practice of Muhammad(PBUH) and His Companions.

women in possession mentioned in 236,7030,3350,424. For clarification arabic words please refer to Reply#16.

Wrong. The Quran doesn't allow slavery. I don't know anything about the socalled companions but if they were rapists god will punish them in the here after. And I already know that a guy called Mohammed in the Hadith was a rapist and slave owner. Thank god the messenger of Quran wasn't like that.

I read the verses yo? quoted. I don't see the word "possessions" neither do I see any women mentioned there. You are really in trouble if you say that ma malakat aymanakom means "what you right hand possess" due to following

Ma malakat ayamakum is in past tense. So If your weird translation is true, it Should be "possessed" and not "possess". So can you tell me how you can rape sex slaves who aren't your possession
anymore ?
Ma malakat aymanakum is genderless. So I it's mystery for me why you call them "women".

Peace

nimnimak_11

I am not saying it is "fard" to keep slaves. But it is mentioned in Quran as permissible and established practice of Muhammad(PBUH) and His Companions.

women in possession mentioned in 236,7030,3350,424

235-6 and the unguarding of the private parts to slaves doesn't appear in line with the rest of the Quran. Also given that a slave is supposed to do whatever it is told to do (hence the Quran's advice to free them) they can be forced into sex. Even if this isn't exactly the violent rape where she is trying to escape, it's still rape in the sense that the slave, doesn't want to engage in sex but still has to as she is a slave.

But overall I cannot see how anyone with a sense of justice would allow themselves to have slaves because it's not ownership of the services of someone (like a lawyer or doctor, or caretaker) but it's ownership of a self. Thus I don't think the prophet would have had a slave. Thus I don't think that 3350 is referring to slaves.

Also how do you get from right hand possession to slave?
Those whom you possess indicates slavery, but those whom your right hands possess? What exactly is the function of aymunkum in MMA?

rameez

It?s more than conversing ?

2431 and say to the believing (feminine) they should lower from their gaze and they should guard their chastity and not display their adornment only what apparent from it and let them draw their covering over their bosoms and not display their adornment only to their husbands or their fathers or fathers their husbands or their sons or their sons their husbands or their brothers or children their brothers or children their sisters or their women or what possess their right hands (i.e. their big black male slaves according to you) or the followers /walkers behind not those the desire from al-rija/the men or the children the ones who not aware over private the women and not beat with their feet to know what they conceal from their adornment and turn to The God all O you the believers that you may prosper

I was talking about 3355. This verse (2431) asks women to guard their chastity and the second order given to them in same verse is to "not display their adornments and cover their bosoms(headscarf,covering chest etc). Third order is that they can display their adornment to certain people that are mentioned in which "right hand possessions(slaves)" are also mentioned. It no where says that they are allowed to expose their private parts to "right hand possession"

Then better look it up and verse clearly addresses males and females, spouse is already mentioned?

7029 and the ones who they of their private parts guardians
7030 only over their spouses or what possess their right hands (i.e. their big black male slaves according to you) so indeed they not blameworthy

I do not depend upon simple reading of translation or picking up word in isolation . Quran orders me to "Obey the Authorities(Amr) along with Allah and Messenger". All people of knowledge agrees that this is "wives and female slaves", there is no difference of opinion in it.

How would one go about getting female slaves; OK to beat you senseless take your females?
What about the American soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia is it OK for them too?

They are war captives .
What American soldiers doing is already wrong . If they take Muslim women its our duty to strive against them. If we take their women and they have power to fight us they are most welcome to fight back and strive against us. There is no "crying like a baby" logic, if they have power to take their women,children and men back , they are most welcome to do so.

Wrong. The Quran doesn't allow slavery. I don't know anything about the socalled companions but if they were rapists god will punish them in the here after. And I already know that a guy called Mohammed in the Hadith was a rapist and slave owner. Thank god the messenger of Quran wasn't like that.

You consider them rapists but they were not. They are role models for us.

I read the verses yo? quoted. I don't see the word "possessions" neither do I see any women mentioned there. You are really in trouble if you say that ma malakat aymanakom means "what you right hand possess" due to following

Ma malakat ayamakum is in past tense. So If your weird translation is true, it Should be "possessed" and not "possess". So can you tell me how you can rape sex slaves who aren't your possession
anymore ?

My weird translation ? It is not me , all the translations(except new moderates or quranists) + commentaries agree on this.

236 (Sahih International) Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -
236 (Pickthall) Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy,
236 (Shakir) Except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable,
236 (Yousuf Ali) Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,
236 (Wahiuddin) except with their wives, and what their right hands possess for then they are free from blame,
236 (Ali Unal) Save from their spouses or (as a permission for men) those (bondsmaids) whom their right hands possess, for with regard to them they are free from blame.
236 (Hamid Aziz) Except for with those joined with them in marriage or the captive whom their right hand possesses, for then, verily, they are free from blame.
236 (Taqi Usmani) except from their wives or from those (bondwomen who are) owned by their hands, as they are not to be blamed.
236 (Tahir Ul Qadri) Except from their wives or those slave-girls who are the possessions of their hands. (If they go to them according to the Islamic injunctions), there is surely no blame on them.
236 (Maududi) save from their wives, or those whom their right hands possess; for with regard to them they are free from blame

Word to word dictionary http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=23&verse=6

I do not want to waste my time posting commentaries, all the commentaries agree with what I am saying. Its a consensus.

Ma malakat aymanakum is genderless. So I it's mystery for me why you call them "women".

Read my statement in same comment above

rameez

235-6 and the unguarding of the private parts to slaves doesn't appear in line with the rest of the Quran. Also given that a slave is supposed to do whatever it is told to do (hence the Quran's advice to free them) they can be forced into sex. Even if this isn't exactly the violent rape where she is trying to escape, it's still rape in the sense that the slave, doesn't want to engage in sex but still has to as she is a slave.

But overall I cannot see how anyone with a sense of justice would allow themselves to have slaves because it's not ownership of the services of someone (like a lawyer or doctor, or caretaker) but it's ownership of a self. Thus I don't think the prophet would have had a slave. Thus I don't think that 3350 is referring to slaves.

Also how do you get from right hand possession to slave?
Those whom you possess indicates slavery, but those whom your right hands possess? What exactly is the function of aymunkum in MMA?

Please explain what are "right hand possession". What do you call a possession ? Something that is my property. You don't want to use the word "slave" , it doesn't matter. Possession is what you are owner of.

Maha

Rameez

was talking about 3355. This verse (2431) asks women to guard their chastity and the second order given to them in same verse is to "not display their adornments and cover their bosoms(headscarf,covering chest etc). Third order is that they can display their adornment to certain people that are mentioned in which "right hand possessions(slaves)" are also mentioned. It no where says that they are allowed to expose their private parts to "right hand possession"

Quran 2431 And tell the believing females to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those maintained by their oaths, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.

So yes woman can show their private part to what you can ''right hand possession''

Quran orders me to "Obey the Authorities(Amr) along with Allah and Messenger".

The verse is O you who believe, obey God and obey the messenger and those in authority among you. But if you dispute in any matter, then you shall refer it to God and His messenger if you believe in God and the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for knowing.

All people of knowledge agrees that this is "wives and female slaves", there is no difference of opinion in it.

wrong. Most people here dont agree on that. I dont know who ''all people of knowledge' is. Please explain.

What American soldiers doing is already wrong . If they take Muslim women its our duty to strive against them. If we take their women and they have power to fight us they are most welcome to fight back and strive against us. There is no "crying like a baby" logic, if they have power to take their women,children and men back , they are most welcome to do so.

Hehehehehehehhe rotfl dude, you have such a tribal mentality a la Rape our women and we will rape your women rotfl rotfl

You consider them rapists but they were not. They are role models for us.

yes your role models are rapists. That already says a lot about you

My weird translation ? It is not me , all the translations(except new moderates or quranists) + commentaries agree on this.

236 (Sahih International) Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -
236 (Pickthall) Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy,
236 (Shakir) Except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable,
236 (Yousuf Ali) Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,
236 (Wahiuddin) except with their wives, and what their right hands possess for then they are free from blame,
236 (Ali Unal) Save from their spouses or (as a permission for men) those (bondsmaids) whom their right hands possess, for with regard to them they are free from blame.
236 (Hamid Aziz) Except for with those joined with them in marriage or the captive whom their right hand possesses, for then, verily, they are free from blame.
236 (Taqi Usmani) except from their wives or from those (bondwomen who are) owned by their hands, as they are not to be blamed.
236 (Tahir Ul Qadri) Except from their wives or those slave-girls who are the possessions of their hands. (If they go to them according to the Islamic injunctions), there is surely no blame on them.
236 (Maududi) save from their wives, or those whom their right hands possess; for with regard to them they are free from blame

Word to word dictionary http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=23&verse=6

No. Free minds dont translate it to 'right hand possesions'' neither do any other non-hadither translation translate it to ''right hand possesion'. You see, since we dont believe in Hadith we are not required to follow hadither translations.

Its obvious that you dont speak arabic. Let me teach you something. Malakat is in past tense, ask anyone who knows arabic about it. Hence, it should be 'what your right hand possessed

Now kindly explain to me, can you rape a sex slave who isnt your sex slave anymore?

I do not want to waste my time posting commentaries, all the commentaries agree with what I am saying. Its a consensus.

No there is no consensus about it. There are many commentaries who dont agree with it as well. Get your information right. If you expect sunni hadither responses, then definately you are just wasting your time here.

Read my statement in same comment above

try to learn arabic, that would help you. Ma malakat aymanakum is genderless just like the word ''friends''.

Maha

Something that is my property. You don't want to use the word "slave" , it doesn't matter. Possession is what you are owner of
.

Wrong. you dont own ANYTHING. Not even your body. Its only God, who can own. Not humans. See, thats the difference between us and hadithers. We give God the authority on everything, while you give humans the authority.

Abdun_Nur

Salaam, the Qur'an has absolutely no support for slavery; it is an implanted corruption of the translation taken from the idea of those your right hand possesses. That idea has nothing to do with slavery, but is a concept that applies to your children, parents, wife, and sometimes to the opposite sex, you possess the love of them, and they possess the love for you, such a deep love their heart is possessed in your right hand. In relation to falling in love when you are already married, if a woman loves a man deeply, he possess her in a way no other can; if a man loves a woman deeply she possess him in a way no other can, it would not change if they were married or not, their love would exist as a far stronger bond than marriage, this is why, if they are not both single already, it removes the burden upon the woman or the man to suffer within an existing marriage, when they have developed a deep love for another, they must remove themselves from the marriage with compassion and unite with the person they love, the Creator recognises the torment and suffering someone has if they are prevented from that union, and allows a way of equity and remedy.

rameez

Simply answer me what is "what possess their right hand" in 236,7030 , 424 and 3350 as they are mentioned separately from wives. And in 424 it also says that even if "what possess their right hand" are married they are not prohibited to you. Please explain it instead of giving emotional drama to me or bringing any interpretation that has no basis from the verses of Quran.

rameez

.

Wrong. you dont own ANYTHING. Not even your body. Its only God, who can own. Not humans. See, thats the difference between us and hadithers. We give God the authority on everything, while you give humans the authority.

Complain this to Allah as he says "what their right hand possess".

Noon_waalqalami

They are war captives .

There is a section on dealing with war captives; none are allowed to rape or molest them.

Likewise verse addresses believers males and females; why they need to ask permission?

2458 O you the ones who believe let ask your permission the ones who possess your right hands

rameez

2458 O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not reached puberty among you ask permission of you at three times before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing at noon and after the night prayer................

What does this verse prove ?

rameez

There is a section on dealing with war captives; none are allowed to rape or molest them.

Likewise verse addresses believers males and females; why they need to ask permission?

2458 O you the ones who believe let ask your permission the ones who possess your right hands

Still I am unable to find any exact definition of "what their right hand possess". Is it so difficult for your people of knowledge to give the exact meaning of this short word ?

huruf

The question is what is the right hand doing in the whole thing, because somebody may yamlik something without the need for any right hand. So what does the right hand do there.

On the other hand, why take it that malak means possess or own, it also means to rule or have authority over somebody or something. Authority may be derived from many things and be restricted to certain aspects. So where that all this twisted talk about possessing persons come from. The whole thing is ridiculous.

Also, as I say if the verb mala does by itself mean own or possess or have authority what is the function of the right hand possessing, ruling, owning or having authority. It is not there for adornment.

Salaam

Noon_waalqalami

Still I am unable to find any exact definition of "what their right hand possess". Is it so difficult for your people of knowledge to give the exact meaning of this short word ?

You stated that it means slave/sex slave (male or female), is that not true anymore?

Maha

Rameez

Simply answer me what is "what possess their right hand" in 236,7030 , 424 and 3350 as they are mentioned separately from wives

wrong . they are mentioned separately from 'spouses'. Woman also have 'ma malakat aymanakom'