sex with the captives?
-
Peace agentxxx. I agree with a lot of your very good post.
I wonder if all the people of the past took those verses literally?And was it right to take them literally even in those times?(note in yusufs time they had the infrastructure to build a prison.) I agree with your general comments regarding the scope,method and reason for punishments; however i think the term 'reform' is better than the word punishment. Do we want to punish/brand negatively? Or do we want to negate/change/reform the persons harmful behaviour positively. -
Salaams Agent.
you said
"533-The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed OR CRUCIFIED or THAT THEIR HANDS AND FEET BE CUT OFF ON ALTERNATE SIDES or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution. "
This is the other translation-i think.
523
The only reward (of) those who wage war (against) Allah and His Messenger and spread in the earth mischief that they are fought against or they receive harsh/avericiouse treatment or cut off their power and their freedom from opposing or be exiled from the land that for them ?????.
Remember the law eye for an eye law of Qasaas , quranic law.
When one does something the retribution you will find similer (or forgiveness) from the quranic point of view , anything else can only be wrong.
Shalaam.
-
peace simple. That sounds a much more decent,rational and humane interpretation of 533. Quisas i think is not equality( or literal eye for eye.) ,but being rationally proportional to the crime commited.(ie not excessive,due to emotion/revenge.) Forgiveness(or completete forgiveness.) is an important factor,which can be apllied according to the circumstances,especially if remorse is felt as well as an attitude from an individual to reform their behaviour.
Peace all. -
peace enquirer,
you wrote
Peace agentxxx. I agree with a lot of your very good post.
I wonder if all the people of the past took those verses literally?And was it right to take them literally even in those times?(note in yusufs time they had the infrastructure to build a prison.)Thank you bro for your comments, You are right , the Egyptians had the infrastructure but my reference was regarding the Arabs of that time .
enquirerI agree with your general comments regarding the scope,method and reason for punishments; however i think the term 'reform' is better than the word punishment. Do we want to punish/brand negatively? Or do we want to negate/change/reform the persons harmful behaviour positively.
I agree with you, Definitely Reform is a much better term then punishment, and the aim should be to reform a person?s harmful behavior but again it depends upon the gravity of the person`s crime.
Last week a six year old girl was raped and murdered in Lahore, since I loooooove small kids, I simply adore them, and it doesn?t matter who they are, so those who rape or kill these innocent/harmless angels, there can be no reform, only punishment with a capital P for thempeace.
-
peace simple,
you wrote
Salaams Agent.
you said
"533-The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed OR CRUCIFIED or THAT THEIR HANDS AND FEET BE CUT OFF ON ALTERNATE SIDES or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution. "
This is the other translation-i think.
523
The only reward (of) those who wage war (against) Allah and His Messenger and spread in the earth mischief that they are fought against or they receive harsh/avericiouse treatment or cut off their power and their freedom from opposing or be exiled from the land that for them ?????.
Salaam bro simple, This translation reminds me of a pentagon spokesman, Who When asked to comment about an air attack on targets in civilian area, responded, ?it was not an air attack but air support for our ground forces?. In Pakistan now a day, when they arrest a popular political figure they say he/she has been taken into protected custody rather then saying the person has been arrested. So I think we may use whatever words we think are appropriate to define a certain law/commandment/statement, in the end what matters is how we implement/apply it.
peace.
-
peace agentxxx. I think brother/sister simple made a valid translation,which differed significantly from the original in not being literal.(eg no amputations,crucifixtions etc.)
I agree with your sentiments on crimes against children.(i have two young children of my own.) However i believe reform is still possible,and studying people who commit these horrendous crimes may help us understand how to prevent these atrocities,whilst also keeping these people in a controlled environment so they cant commit further offences ,and may be reformed.If they are just executed how can we learn why these events happen,or reform these people?
peace all. -
peace enquirer,
you wrote
peace agentxxx. I think brother/sister simple made a valid translation,which differed significantly from the original in not being literal.(eg no amputations,crucifixtions etc.)
I like this translation, but contrary to your views, the objection I have concerning this translation is, that it doesn?t reflect the actual Arabic meanings of the words used in this verse.
33-34-The recompense of those who are against the Divine System and go about spreading disorder in the land is execution, crucifixion, physical restraint**** and banishment from the country. This is their punishment and disgrace in this world and in the Hereafter they will have even greater chastisement.
**** The literal meaning of the text is ?to cut their hands and feet.?
I think that this is a better way of explaining a verse, where you explain what the literal meanings of the words/verse are along with the other meanings that are being used.
What I understand from this verse is that crucifixion and amputation are not mandatory but rather optional, so i dont understand the need to Negate the fact that they exist in the verse/quran?enquirerI agree with your sentiments on children (i have two young children of my own.),but i believe reform is still possible,and studying people who commit these horrendous crimes may help us understand how to prevent these atrocities,whilst also keeping these people in a controlled environment so they cant commit further offences ,and may be reformed.If they are just executed how can we learn why these events happen,or reform these people?
May God bless them both with good health, good fortune and a happy prosperous long life ) .
Brother you are talking logically on this issue and perhaps I am talking emotionally, but I simply want to see them disappeared from the society, locked away for good or may be even executed .Peace.
-
Peace agent,
if you let me ask, what do you want to know? what the quran really says of also if those practices were correct in the past because the quran mentions or allows them?
What I understand from this verse is that crucifixion and amputation are not mandatory but rather optional, i dont understand the need to Negate the fact that they exist in the verse/quran?
In the past there were no jails where the war captives could be held, so the war captives were distributed amongst the participants of the war and once given to someone they were considered as that persons legal possession and hence he was entitled to practice sex with them .
Now to approve or disapprove this practice is another issue, but to deny that it didn?t happen in the past or that there is no mention in the quran regarding this practice is false as far as my study is concerned. -
Peace agentxxx. Thank you for your very kind words.. May you also be blessed with happiness and success.(and everyone else too.) D
-
Paz elena,
you wrote
if you let me ask, what do you want to know? What the quran really says of also if those practices were correct in the past because the quran mentions or allows them?
That?s it hermana , I want to understand EXACTLY what the QURAN ACTUALLY SAYS .
78.And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.
This is the way I was until few years back when I decided to study my religion for better understanding. I started with the hadith books and Islamic history, right from the start certain hadiths seemed illogical and absurd, still on the whole things were fine with me, until I started reading the Urdu translation of quran. Then I gradually realized that most of my concepts/beliefs were false and in contradiction to what the quran say. My belief/trust in the hadiths and Islamic history soon shattered.
Now I have found out that even the translation of the verses of quran can be wrong because people have translated them according to their own preferences/desires?
Today dozens of different translations are available for comparison on Internet and there are many disagreements on the meanings of certain words and their interpretations, also about certain commandments, practices, and rituals etc.
The scenario at the moment is
Hadiths----------------------------------------- ----fabricated lies
Islamic history-------------------------------------fabricated lies
Translation of verses one disagrees--------wrong translationSo what and where is the reality/truth? how does a non-Arabic speaker like me distinguish between right or wrong translations? Honestly I have no choice but to go with the translations of the majority while still trying my best to check the meanings of the Arabic words from some dictionary.
I don?t want to know the book of Allah through my desires/guesswork ; I want to know what in actuality was allowed and what was forbidden and why?
We must portray the scripture the way it is.
If sex with the captives, crucifixion, cutting of hands etc are mentioned in the scripture, we must admit it and try to figure out the logical reasons as to why they were allowed. If not then we have to figure out why they have been injected in the translations?
5328-Their attitude is not based on knowledge and reality but on mere guesswork. It is obvious that such guesswork cannot be compared to reality and truth . Such guesswork may work in the era of ignorance, but it loses impact when faced with knowledge and truth.
Information like in the link below also adds to my skepticism.
http//www.understanding-islam.com/related/history.aspI hope you have understood my confusion ? ?
Peace.
-
peace agentxxx. I have been through the same scenario that you have. first i read quran in english,then hadith and islamic history. later i studied arabic and learnt how to read for myself.At the same time i read most translations that i could get my hands on. I went through the confusion of ;what is salat?hajj?hand chopping?literalism etc.. I wanted to know what the literal quran said,not what someone translated or interpreted. Then after much soul-searching and discovery...i realised the quran contains some of the general universal laws that are present in all the scriptures,and more importantly those laws that can be discovered by observing life. You watch life itself and see how a child learns..pure investigation and instinct...trying to see things as they are,not as we just suppose or are told they are. Books and scriptures are symbolisms and descriptions for a reality which goes beyond books and words. My confusion started to end when i realised some of the answers are within my own soul and the world around me.
Still your mind of preconceptions and innappropriate thoughts,and just observe things impartially without lots of emotion. You may then see reality as it is. You dont essentially need arabic or a specific scripture to gain enlightenment of reality.These thing are just tools. My mother does not understand the quran(she cant read arabic.) yet many of her morals and behaviours are in line with the quranic morality because she has 50 years and 5 kids worth of life experience and learning. Life is one great infinite scripture,and the language is universal and accesible to all. we dont need to understand the arabic word 'hibb'(love.) to understand what love is. we dont even need the word to understand what love is..A baby can understand love without any words,or extensive study. Your own conscience,experience,intuition and humility are some of the greatest tools we have to understanding reality. Hope this helps.
Peace all. -
Paz agent, thanks for answering
I hope you have understood my confusion ? ? .
The first part of my question yes, the second part, not yet (if you want to know if those practices were correct in the past because the quran mentions or allows them)If sex with the captives, crucifixion, cutting of hands etc are mentioned in the scripture, we must admit it and try to figure out the logical reasons as to why they were allowed.
we must admit that the quran actually mentions them or we must admit too that those practices are right since quran (if) allows them?
and,
what logical reasons can there be in sex with slave girls?
How can you have any doubt that it is not right? depending on a book/revelation? how a book /revelation can make it to look correct, more when you dont know the content of the book well? (the content in general, not only about this subject) -
Peace elena. That is the point i was trying to make...We dont neccessarily need a book to tell us what we know is definately wrong.The book is there as a collection of wisdom and thoughts and an attempt to describe reality and morals from the previous generations understanding,at that time.. Universal facts are found by observing life and from your conscience.We need to use universal facts and our conscience when interpreting the quran,or any scripture/book.
peace all. -
peace enquirer,
Thank you brother for your rational input, I agree with it almost completely, there is indeed no short cut for what you learn through your own experience/observation/analyses in life.
To run any society in a peaceful manner, some general laws have to be observed/obeyed, I believe the essence/importance of these laws now, before, and forever will be the same. They are described in every scripture/orally transmitted, and almost every humane being is familiar with these general laws even if he/she has never read any scripture.
I agree with you that we don?t need to learn Arabic to understand the meanings of honesty, justice, tolerance, love or other general laws/emotions, but to understand some issues knowledge of Arabic could be very handy.
Thank you once again.
Peace. -
paz Elena,
you wrote
The first part of my question yes, the second part, not yet (if you want to know if those practices were correct in the past because the quran mentions or allows them)
I want to know why these practices were permitted in the quran, because I absolutely don?t like the idea of permitting the strong to exploit his position and force the weaker to surrender to his sexual desires.
agentxxx wrote
If sex with the captives, crucifixion, cutting of hands etc are mentioned in the scripture, we must admit it and try to figure out the logical reasons as to why they were allowed.ElenaWe must admit that the quran actually mentions them or
We have to be honest and admit it, IF IT IS A REALITY.
Elenawe must admit too that those practices are right since quran (if) allows them?
No sister, sorry to say even if they are allowed in quran I will not say that it is/was right.
ElenaAnd, what logical reasons can there be in sex with slave girls?
This is what I wanted to find out myself? But the focused instead shifted to the right or wrong translations. The only reasons I can think of are the environment/period/social setup of the Arabs of that time .
ElenaHow can you have any doubt that it is not right? depending on a book/revelation? how a book /revelation can make it to look correct, more when you dont know the content of the book well? (the content in general, not only about this subject)
I think you intended to say wrong
Sis this is my original post please read it.
Peace all,
235-Who abstain from sex 236-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 237-But those whose desires exceed those limits are transgressors. 7029-And those who guard their chastity
7030-Except with their wives and THE (CAPTIVES) whom their right hands possess for (then) they are not to be blamed 7031-But those who trespass beyond this are transgressors.
Indeed they are transgressors, who while having four wives and captives would still look for their satisfaction somewhere else ,they deserved to be lashed in public.
324-And all married women (are forbidden unto you SAVE THOSE (CAPTIVES) whom your right hands possess.
no regards for married women from the other side.
How many captive/concubines are/were allowed in Quran/islam? Or does it depend upon the status of a person? Why sex with the captives was allowed? Was it to add a juicy incentive for the jihadis? Can it still be practiced?
are these verses the bases of COITUS INTERRUPTUS practiced by the jihadis with their captives as defined in the hadiths?All these verses depict the male dominated tribal culture?s psyche where killing / plundering others and taking their females as sex slaves was considered normal .
How can a captive willingly indulge in sexual activity with someone who is directly/indirectly responsible for the murder of her spouse/family/tribe? I think it is an extreme form of misuse of power. I don?t know why the almighty/most gracious allowed this..?
2433-??.. BUT FORCE NOT YOUR MAIDS TO PROSTITUTION WHEN THEY DESIRE CHASTITY in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them yet after such compulsion is Allah Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful (to them).
Ironically no punishment is suggested in the above verse for those who forced their captives into prostitution.
may be now I have made myself clear ?
Peace.
-
Peace Agent
may be now I have made myself clear
yes, I got it ) and I agree with everything, I was confused by the 'logical reasons' possibility, but it is clear now.Did you see the Muhammad Zafrulla Khan translation?
-- there shall be no blame on them in respect of their wives and those under their control; but whoever seeks anything beyond that is a transgressor --
just 'under their control' It is so ample expression.Elena
-
peace elena,
you wrote
yes, I got it
mucho gracias
elena
Did you see the Muhammad Zafrulla Khan translation?
-- there shall be no blame on them in respect of their wives and those under their control; but whoever seeks anything beyond that is a transgressor --
just 'under their control' It is so ample expression.yes sis i have and here are some others for you to see.
023006
SALE--1734
Or the WHICH THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS;PALMER--1880
Or WHAT THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESSRODWELL--1861
Or THE SLAVES WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESSMAULANA MOHAMMED ALI--1917
Or THOSE, WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,PICKTHAL--1930
Or the (SLAVES) THAT THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,YUSUFALI--1934
Or (the captives) WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,-SHERALI--1955
Or WHAT THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,ARBERRY--1955
And WHAT THEIR RIGHT HANDS OWNDARYABADI--1957
And THOSE WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS OWNSHAKIR--1959
Or THOSE WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,MUHAMMAD TAQI-UD-DIN AL-HILALI ?MOSIN KHAN--1977
Or (THE CAPTIVES AND SLAVES) THAT THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,SARWAR--1981
And SLAVE-GIRLS.SAYYID ABULALA MAWDUDI-TRANS- ZAFAR ANSARI--1967
Or THOSE WHOM THEY RIGHTFULLY POSSESS;MUHAMMAD AYUB KHAN
Or WHAT THEIR RIGHT HANDS OWN,AL-MUNTADA ALISLAMI
Or THOSE THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,ANEESUDDIN
Or THOSE WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS,HASSAN QARIBULLAH AND AHMED DARWISH--2001
And WHAT THEIR RIGHT HAND POSSESS,OMAR AHMED
Or (the captives) WHOM THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESSM.A. QADRI
OR THE LEGAL BONDWOMEN THAT THEY POSSESS,MAULANA SHAH AHMED RAZA KHAN
Or lawful handmaids WHO ARE THE PROPERTY OF THEIR HANDABDUL QASIM
Or THOSE THEIR RIGHT HANDS POSSESSIRVING--1985
and WHOMEVER THEIR RIGHT HANDS MAY CONTROL,ZAFARULLAH KHAN--1971
and those under their control;GHULLAM AHMED PERVAIZ
OR SLAVE MAIDSMUHAMMED AHMED- SAMEERA
Or WHAT THEIR RIGHTS/OATHS OWNED/POSSESSED (i.e. caregivers under contract)RASHAD--1985
OR THOSE WHO ARE RIGHTFULLY THEIRS,FREE MINDS
Or THOSE WHO ARE THEIR DEPENDANTS,BIJAN MOEINIAN
Only with their own wives BASED UPON DIVINE LAWS.MUHAMMAD ASAD--1980
That is, those whom they rightfully possessABDUL MANNAN OMER
that is those whom they justly and rightfully own in proper wedlock,SHABBIR AHMED--2003
That is, those whom they each other rightfully possess.peace.
-
peace all,
MUHAMMED ASAD
236
with any but their spouses - that is, those whom they rightfully possessBut then he himself uses aw as a permissible alternative in 43 and translates MMA as captives taken in a war in God?s cause? ?
4 3
?.. OR THOSE WHOM YOU RIGHTFULLY POSSESS.** This will make it more likely that you will not deviate from the right course.**Lit., "whom your right hands possess" - i.e., FROM AMONG THE CAPTIVES TAKEN IN A WAR IN GOD'S CAUSE (regarding which see notes on surah 2, notes 167 and 168, and surah 8, note 72). It is obvious that the phrase "two, or three, or four but if you have reason to fear...", etc. is a parenthetic clause relating to both the free women mentioned in the first part of the sentence and to FEMALE SLAVES - for both these nouns are governed by the imperative verb "marry". Thus, the whole sentence has this meaning "Marry from among women such as are lawful to you, OR THOSE WHOM YOU RIGHTFULLY POSSESS ?
Peace.
-
peace agentxxx. I admire your honesty and courage in standing up for what is right,even if it seems the quran is saying something which is objectionable. (of course,the objectionable view could be due to mistranslation/misinterpretation.)
Take care.
peace.