FAO: Fatima (Islam Questions)

4:24 And [forbidden to you are] all married women other than those whom you rightfully possess [through wedlock]: this is God's ordinance, binding upon you. But lawful to you are all [women] beyond these, for you to seek out, offering them of your possessions, taking them in honest wedlock, and not in fornication. And unto those with whom you desire to enjoy marriage, you shall give the dowers due to them; but you will incur no sin if, after [having agreed upon] this lawful due, you freely agree with one another upon anything [else]: behold, God is indeed all-knowing, wise.

4:25 And as for those of you who, owing to cir­cumstances, are not in a position to marry free believing women, [let them marry] believing maidens from among those whom you rightfully possess.  And God knows all about your faith; each one of you is an issue of the other.   Marry them, then, with their people's leave, and give them their dowers in an equitable manner - they being women who give themselves in honest wedlock, not in fornication, nor as secret love-companions.  And when they are married, and thereafter become guilty of immoral conduct, they shall be liable to half the penalty to which free married women are liable. This [permission to marry slave-girls applies] to those of you who fear lest they stumble into evil. But it is for your own good to persevere in patience [and to abstain from such marriages]: and God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.

Rational Mind, they cannot have sex without being married.  If a Muslim man wants to have sex with a woman, slave or not, she must become his wife FIRST or it becomes fornication.

Rational Mind wrote: I went to school today and my teacher said you're "evil" lol and she told me to eat chrips when I was fasting so I ate them. She told me "tell her about these hadith" and she showmed me some hadith. She told me to post them to you... Volume 3, Book 47, Number 765: Bukhari Narrated Kurib: the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles." She has freed her slave GIRL, but Mo says that she would have got MORE REWARD if she had given the slave girl to her uncles. Why would that get her more reward?

First off, let me correct a couple of items that you have "assumed".

It is to one of her maternal uncles, not to all of them.

Furthermore, you are trying to jump to conclusions that are not implied or stated. Nothing in the commentary states that she was going to be used.

All the hadith states is that a Muslim was told it would have been better if she had given the slave to one of her uncles, vs setting her free.

Given that in Islam, it is a huge reward to let a slave go, without any command that one must own a slave, then the need of the uncles in terms of charity would have out weighed the good of freeing a slave.

Since you have been unable to provide the context that contains the details, and you have only been able to fill in the gaps with assumptions and conjecture, then I would say that you and your teacher have nog rounds on which to make a case against Islam based upon the information provided in the hadith.

Your teacher is out of their league, and you are extremely misguided.

The reward being that her sicko uncles could have used another slave girl fro some sex.

Conjecture. Unsubstantiated conjecture. The hadith does not imply anything like this.

Volume 3, Book 41, Number 598: Narrated Jabir: A man manumitted a slave and he had no other property than that, so the Prophet cancelled the manumission (and sold the slave for him). No'aim bin Al-Nahham bought the slave from him. The man freed his slave, but Mohammed cancelled it and sold the slave instead.

The hadith is not about keeping slaves. This narrative is about paying back debt. You should not die while owing people money. He freed his slave before he payed off his debts. It was the owners fault, not the Prophet's. The man was unable to take care of his debts, and did not have any property to sell in order to take care of debt. So a slave that was just released was take back so that the man's debt could be cleaned up. If his creditors did not want to wipe off the debt, then the slave was the last thing of value.

This is my current understanding of the context, and if I am wrong, may Allah forgive me.

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 711: Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: A man amongst us declared that his slave would be freed after his death. The Prophet called for that slave and sold him. The slave died the same year. man promised to free his slave when he died, so Mohammed sold him instead, which in turn ensured that the slave would die as a SLAVE.

You are "extrapolating", meaning you are drawing a conclusion based upon your own prejudice, or opinion, and not what is stated in the narrative. You have no clue about the context or the details.

You are producing a common trick by detractors: List vague hadith, without any study of the hadith which would provide a context and background, assert some conclusion not stated in the narrative, and then demand that someone prove other wise.

This is a good trick because it keeps Muslims busy, while the scammer can get by without making any real effort in the thread. And when the narrative gets old, then you can find another one, which is vague enough to allow you to input yoru own prejudice, and then sit back and make demands.

1) Please provde the context of the hadith. If you do not have it, then you have no bases from which to launch slander (it is slander if you cannot back up any alleged intentions or actions of people you do not know)

2) Please make a point about the narrative

There is more, so much more. And those are from Bukhari so they are SAHIH. (Her words)

Interesting. What is sahih?

Bismillah irrahman irrahim

"rational mind", just one question, have you not got a mind of your own? If you are as you claim 14 years old boy, then when you joined IC in september you only had two or three years in secondary school depending when your birthday is, in legal terms you still are considered a minor. Now a teacher (most probably RE) saw an 11 years old vulnerable kid annoyed at his dad and puting all the blame on the religion and took her chance. How can any1 give any credibility to her shouting about morals and ethics when she herself is misusing her position as a teacher, she is abusing the trust put in her by her organization and parents. Today if you go and say that you going to tell the headteacher about your change of religion and you are going to live with your 'nice teacher' as she promised. See what happens if she has to choose between getting a sack or putting you and your story in a sack of rubbish and brand you with same label as me.

You say about how majority of muslims dont really know much about Holy Quran and basic islamic laws. How much do you and this teacher of yours really know? Not even the basics, and please dont tell me that you do. I asked you to find some thing out for me in last post. Let me remind you, which hijri the incident with asma bint marwan happened? Now dont run back to your teacher, she is not going to know because it is not in the major books of sirah, it is only found on those typical website, where i am quite sure she is a frequent visitor of. Secondly anybody who dont know why muslim women cover up and give the pathetic explanation that you posted, does not help his 'rational' cause. Another thing when i asked how do you know about the verse in surah 3 meant badr and not uhud while the topic was of uhud. You gave a lame excuse of many surahs stating many other things other than their title. Well 3rd surah is called 'aale imran' and no where there it is hinted that it talks about uhud, neither is the whole surah about uhud. So a simple reading through does not point out to which battle is this mention of.

These three things are from top of my head and if i go back i will find many more. The only reason i did not argue or tried my utmost to beat you in this stupid war of words is that i thought you might be here wanting to learn. If you sincere about wanting to know the true islam then you need to start from Holy Quran. You need to get your base level firm before you even think of building ten other stories on top of that. I really have not got time of a day for a person who does not even have mental strength or capacity to decide for what is good for him. I will try to explain this slave 'business' with you and if you keep up this habbit of puppet show, i am sorry but i aint replying.

Yes islam does allow to have physical relationship with slave girls. It is in Holy Quran but people like you and your teacher forget to quote the ayaah,  'If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah hath full knowledge about your faith. Ye are one from another: Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable: They should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours: when they are taken in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; but it is better for you that ye practise self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful' (4:25).

Another important thing to know is that slave girls were not just given out like that, they had legal bindings with them. Just like a marriage certificate, a certificate of ownership was given by amir to that person. The slave girl was not a person to go round, only one person had right to her. It is shariah law that slave girl also has the right of provision. There is a greater wisdom behind this, if a person can not afford to wed a free woman, then in that case he takes a slave girl. Because you do not have to give mahr to her but only her provision is your responsibility. This was done as Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala forbids fornication. Another reason is that just like Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala sent the law that His law should be enforced every where so that people could learn about His religion. Same way when these non-muslim slave girls were taken, they were treated so good and they saw the behaviour and ways of early muslims that mojority of these captives became muslims and were freed and were taken in marriage. Brother andalus has explained to you Hikmah behind the ahadith you mentioned so i dont need to go there.

Its upto you what you want with your life, your teacher can not save you from anything if Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala wills it. If you do decide to use the cells in your skull then you will inshaAllah get help and explanation for things but otherwise have a good life.

Want to leave you with this,

'Every soul shall taste of death, and you shall only be paid fully your reward on the resurrection day; then whoever is removed far away from the fire and is made to enter the garden he indeed has attained the object; and the life of this world is nothing but a provision of vanities. You shall certainly be tried respecting your wealth and your souls, and you shall certainly hear from those who have been given the Book before you and from those who are polytheists much annoying talk; and if you are patient and guard (against evil), surely this is one of the affairs (which should be) determined upon' (3:185-186).

'And this life of the world is nothing but a sport and a play; and as for the next abode, that most surely is the life-- did they but know! So when they ride in the ships they call upon Allah, being sincerely obedient to Him, but when He brings them safe to the land, lo! they associate others (with Him); Thus they become ungrateful for what We have given them, so that they may enjoy; but they shall soon know' (29:64-66).