u/Reasonable_Box_4226

I genuinely want to understand

Why do some people reject hadiths (because of sexual slavery) as if milk al-yamīn in Islam had any interpretation other than sex with slaves?? There was no other interpretation for it centuries ago

Non-slavery interpretations of milk al-yameen only started popping up in the 19th and 20th centuries when slavery was already dying out and even then those views were super minor

My point is that you can't really call it a misinterpretation or an abuse of power if no other reading existed back then. That would mean the message was never corrupted and that our God, our Prophet, the companions and everyone else fully approved of it. I'd actually be suspicious if some people back in the 8th century or something were arguing that these verses didn't allow sex with enslaved women but those opinions just don't exist

I've been feeling really depressed for five months over this. I'm not trying to attack anyone I'm just genuinely confused

I'm having a bit of a career crisis and could use some advice

I'm trying to decide between studying Engineering (open to most fields) and going all-in on an AI degree

I have no problem studying either (or even finding a way to combine both) but I'm really worried that AI isn't a 'real' standalone career / might just be a trend rather than a stable long-term 'career' path

There's this lingering thought in my head that Engineering will always be the 'safer' and 'better' bet in the job market

On top of that there's so much talk right now about CS jobs being at huge risk because of AI which makes leaning into traditional tech feel scary. I know how fast tech evolves

my biggest fear is that the flexibility feels like a one-way street. The fact that an Engineering grad can always learn AI after finishing their degree and pivot into tech but an AI major can't just 'pick up' traditional engineering later on is genuinely scary to me. It feels like picking AI closes doors while Engineering keeps them all open

(What tf am I getting downvoted for)

I'm having a bit of a career crisis and could use some advice

I'm trying to decide between studying Engineering (open to most fields) and going all-in on an AI degree

I have no problem studying either (or even finding a way to combine both) but I'm really worried that AI isn't a 'real' standalone career / might just be a trend rather than a stable long-term 'career' path

There's this lingering thought in my head that Engineering will always be the 'safer' and 'better' bet in the job market

On top of that there's so much talk right now about CS jobs being at huge risk because of AI which makes leaning into traditional tech feel scary. I know how fast tech evolves

my biggest fear is that the flexibility feels like a one-way street. The fact that an Engineering grad can always learn AI after finishing their degree and pivot into tech but an AI major can't just 'pick up' traditional engineering later on is genuinely scary to me. It feels like picking AI closes doors while Engineering keeps them all open

هوا انا هندم لو كتبت هندسة مع اني مهتمة جدا بمجال الذكاء الاصطناعي ونفسي فعلا ادرسه (عارفه ان المجال نفسه مش واضح لانه يعتبر لسه جديد بس انا بحب جدا ال deep learning / machine learning )

انا متأكدة اني بحب المجال لاني قريت عنه كتير وشوفت مميزاته وعيوبه وكل حاجه من الأجانب وانا اصلا اول مره قعدت علي الكمبيوتر كان وانا عندي 5 سنين فا هي مش موضة بالنسبالي

هل هندم لو دخلت هندسة واخدت إعدادي ومجبتش قسم حاسبات (لاني بتنافس مع ناس متفوقة كتير وهما بياخدو 50-120 واحد بس حسب الجامعة يعني عدد قليل جداً)

انا بقول ممكن ادخل هندسة ومثلا اغير رأيي واهتم بقسم ثاني أو لو مصرة علي ذكاء اصطناعي خلاص احول لحاسبات واكون حاولت مع هندسة

ايه التفكير الصح هنا ؟ الواحد بس مش عايز يندم لأن الفرصة دي بتيجي مره واحدة لحد زيي مش هيدفع فلوس في كريدت

I always wanted to major in something related to marketing, art, and animation because that’s what I love. It sucks that I can’t do that now, but what sucks even more is seeing how quickly AI art is progressing

Have scholars permanently prohibited it? I'm asking because I'm not sure and I'd appreciate it if people could cite their sources.

And if there's a majority opinion can you please mention it first?

Have scholars permanently prohibited it? I'm asking because I'm not sure and I'd appreciate it if people could cite their sources.

And if there's a majority opinion can you please mention it first?

Learning that Islam allows concubines has made me depressed for three months now

after a year-long search into this topic, including the sahih athars I have read and the rulings concerning enslaved women, everything points to r•pe. No matter how much I read or how hard I try to believe otherwise, it is simply more logical to conclude that this was the case. I have entire rants written in my notes that can prove this and demonstrate how heavily sugarcoated this topic is.

I feel like this is pushing me away from Islam, even unconsciously, and it really hurts. I'm a practicing muslim, I pray regularly for years. I think about it almost all the time

I have never felt this depressed before. This is the first time I am experiencing doubt.

I have no energy to discuss it with anyone anymore, but I'm going to ask a female scholar about it after I finish my exams

Full-on rant ahead. If you don't like these kinds of posts, please scroll past and don't interact

(This will probably get removed and get me banned, but I'm trying anyway since I can't talk to anyone irl about it)

I posted a post here 24 days ago ranting about slavery and asked a lot of questions but that got removed. I knew about concubines 1 year ago (I'm almost 19yo \\ born muslim) and at first I didn't realize how messed up some stuff are until maybe 3 months ago.

Before I start ranting, I need to explain some core things first so that you can understand how I think and how I view core things about slavery.

I have no problem with slavery itself because it makes sense why it wouldn't disappear with how things are during wars and how Muslims are taken as slaves by the enemy and so on.

But even though Islam orders us not to beat them, it's pretty realistic to conclude that you can discipline a slave for being disobedient. Why?

If you look into the hadiths mentioning beatings, they always talk about excessive TORTURE or beating a slave for something they didn't cause (or slapping their face).

Sahih Muslim 1657b

(Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him (without any serious fault), then expiation for it is that he should set him free.)

If I can't force my slaves to be slaves, why would they even consider complying with my demands?

If a concubine refuses s\*x, how else would I be able to stop her? By selling her? Okay, she'd do that to the next owner, and the next, and the next. Is this really realistic to you? Don't you think in this situation she'd deserve to be reminded that she's property? Obviously you can't torture her, but you'd need to discipline her because you're providing her with everything that is obligated on you, and she's not doing her part.

A slave obeying their owner is so emphasized in Hadiths. There's a hadith warning that a runaway slave's prayer would not be accepted.

Now obviously many slaves wouldn't resist because of the reality of the environment and economics of the time (being on your own vs having someone take care of you). Even though you hate them because they most likely killed your entire family, you'd agree to s\*x because it's their right. They would either discipline you or sell you to another owner, so you have no way out of s\*xual intercourse, and that is with ignoring the insane difference in power dynamic.

"Oh actually she can save herself from forced s"x by mukataba!"

This is something that made me peaceful for a long time until I realized that the majority opinion (4 Sunni schools) is that mukataba is not obligatory on the owner. There is a hadith of Umar ibn al-Khattab RA compelling Anas ibn Malik to grant a Mukataba to his slave Sirin. But when you realize that this was not common back then (that mukataba is obligatory) you'd realize that this was simply Umar's ijtihad like his personal opinion, like how many other companions did on different topics.

Umar himself believed that it was prohibited to marry a Christian woman due to her shirk. So that's why marrying a non-muslim can be considered makruh but not prohibited. And that's why scholars said it's mustahab to allow mukataba and you'd get a high reward, but you're not a sinner if you don't because you can't be forced into it and after all a slave is property.

"Female combatants became POWs. But not those who didnt participate or who stated at home."

No, the wives and daughters of the fighters COULD be enslaved, and the slaves were enslaved again. I can't find anything about letting a woman go unless she fought directly. Safiyya bint Huyayy herself was enslaved (before she got freed) and she didn't participate in the war.

"But why does it matter to you? slavery doesn't exist anymore! you are ruining your time! learn productive things instead!"

This is terrible short-sighted thinking, gonna be honest. "Hey guys, let’s just talk about the aspects of Islam that make it look good relative to the modern western status quo! It’s totally not gonna make Muslims doubt once they research the religion more and see that you’ve been hiding everything like this from them!!!” Like just stop. It is absolutely beneficial to talk about these things because they need to be fully accepted by the Ummah and normalized by society. Sweeping it under the rug is going to cause more problems than not

I need to know how Islam treated the most vulnerable people in history like enslaved women. Ignoring it because it's uncomfortable is avoidance, and assuming slavery is a permanently closed door is kinda not true. History shows that when legal systems collapse / economies crash or major wars break out that the strongest target the most vulnerable. Human trafficking and modern forced labor prove that the desire to own and exploit other people never went away it just changes form depending on the laws of the time. If we don't understand how it was justified in the past we won't recognize it when it tries to return.

Now I will start to rant.

I never once had a talk with my mother about something that I didn't understand or was uncomfortable with in Islam. I always searched alone and found my answer الحمد لله, I never complained to my mom about anything.

Months ago I was very stressed and didn't understand the whole picture of concubinage. I asked my mom why and how, and she turned the conversation into "Be careful, if you keep thinking like this you'll turn into an atheist." It made me feel very guilty and I apologized to her, saying that I didn't mean to but it's something that really bothers me. My mother is the sweetest person ever, but religion is her weak spot (I'm not saying she's wrong but I'm just explaining that she's not a bad mother at all)

My mom doesn't know about slavery and concubinage and doesn't want to learn about it, so I searched myself and watched the opinions of many great sheikhs and... so much sugarcoating keeps being said. I don't think that, with the amount of information I know about slavery and how many sahih athars I know, I would delude myself into believing these women weren't r°ped. Like, the more I look for answers, the more it becomes clear to me that it was non-consensual.

My mom noticed how much I started to lose weight \\ not eating and not focused like how I was on my studies, and my exams are a month away. That's why she asked me what was wrong. I tried to not say because I knew she wouldn't take it well, but I was so depressed and stressed that I couldn't stop myself from admitting that concubinage upsets me so much.

I started to tell her some hadiths about how married slaves get forcibly divorced from their husbands and get owned by Muslim men. I talked about how there is no clear consent from a slave to have s\*x with her, and how even the istibra for a virgin slave is debated. I started to mention how I find some of what Umar ibn al-Khattab RA did like striking a slave for wearing the hijab and him being able to touch and examine slave women in markets (like other men) deeply upsets me. I said just why is her awrah so different? Is this really fair? Why not let free women examine slave women and not let slave women get touched by different men?

She started to attack me, saying that I have the same logic as atheists, that I'm questioning the wisdom behind Allah's rulings, and how much I'm wrong for looking up topics like this. I told her that yes I'm aware of it, but are you okay with women being r°ped? She said yes if Allah allows it, and that's the men's gift just like Hoor Al Ayn. I told her that Hoor Al Ayn is so much different because there is no women getting harmed. She then attacked me for mentioning those athars of Umar ibn al-Khattab RA, saying they could be not true because he was such a good man he did this and that and and and...

I only gave her like 40% of the sahih athars I knew, and I told her that I know hadiths are much more authentic than athars, but those athars actually have a chain of transmission and can be very reliable.

The reason why I looked into athars is because consent with a slave is so vague, and that's why I needed to see how life was back then and how those concubines were treated. Across all four classical Sunni schools, a female slave’s consent was not a legal requirement for sexual relations. Some Shafiʿi jurists recommended seeking a concubine’s consent as an ethical matter especially for a virgin, though this was praiseworthy conduct not a binding obligation.

Outright harmful or sadistic force was obviously prohibited, but the dominant legal rule remained that s°xual access was a consequence of ownership and did not depend on the slave’s consent.

Actually, scholars that mention consent are modern scholars. I can't see most men waiting a year or two so that any trauma their slave woman had would be gone and she could consent to sex. And I can't see how r°pe could be proven (even martial r°pe is debated) That's why I got crazy and started to look for any authentic peace of information That's why I needed more information on what actually happened. I didn't even say every athar I know of and its context because she didn't let me.

I'm not saying my mother is wrong, I wish I can think like how she does. But my personality is so different compared to her.

Imagine a woman being enslaved by people who most likely killed her family, her kids, her husband, and being offered basic human necessities, then get forced into s°x because it's the man's right in Islam...

A free woman can take care of a slave man without needing s°x.

"Women must compensate for their physical vulnerability with s°x!"

A woman can cook, clean, sew, spin wool, nurse the sick, teach children, nurse children, tend livestock. Countless forms of productive labor.

"Oh but she gets clothed and fed so she'll grow to like him!"

I'd agree if s°x wasn't a right to the man. How would MOST women love a man who gets everything from her and she doesn't? A man literally gets everything from her as he would from a wife, and yet she has much less rights than a free woman? (Especially if she doesn't become umm al walad, and even a free wife has more rights than umm al walad).

She doesn't even have a say in AZL, and can keep getting sold if she doesn't get pregnant... what if she was infertile?

Female slaves are treated as less in everything and yet men get everything from them.

My mom told me that I should ask a highly respected scholar face to face because she knows that I do my research well in any topic and that I can be very stubborn and annoying. But I don't think anyone would convince me that there was consent and that men having so much s°xual freedom with female slaves was right.

I don't know what to do. Since my last conversation with my mom 3 days ago I have been getting random bursts of tears and got so much more depressed.

I don't know how to accept this, it's driving me crazy.

There's a topic in Islam that gives me some 'ethical unease,' though I’d rather not get into the specifics. I've come across some athars that I find kind of disturbing.

Even if an athar has an authenticated, unbroken chain of trustworthy narrators connecting back to the Companion or early follower who first said or did it, is there any possibility that it might still not be reliable?

I'm a 19 yo practicing Muslim, and Alhamdullilah, I have never left Islam.

The miracles of the Quran are more than enough for me to remain a Muslim. I truly believe in Islam, I love it and its rulings, and I genuinely find it beautiful (in most things)

But the reason I'm posting here is that I'm looking for people who might have also struggled with the fact that sex with concubines/captive women was permissible without marriage (without consent)

(To be specific, my issue is with the sexual aspect of it, not the institution of slavery itself at that time)

I’ve searched a lot for answers. I’ve read so many fatwas and watched so many videos, but the more I dig the more disturbing Sahih Hadiths and Athars I find. At this point, I think I know Hadiths and Athars related to slavery that 90% of Muslims aren't even aware of because of how deeply I’ve researched this topic over the past year.

Now whenever I watch a video on YouTube about slavery in Islam, all I notice is how much sugarcoating is being done, and that just makes me more upset.

If anyone here has struggled with this exact doubt and finally managed to find peace with it could you please DM me? I'm genuinely so depressed over this topic, and finding even more disturbing Athars just yesterday has made everything feel so much worse

" A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be eupon him) and said:

Messengerof Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) laughed."

Sahih Muslim 1453a

I literally just found out about this

how is this even sahih? Why would Muhammad PBUH do that? Was it really necessary? it didn't look necessary at all

islamweb fatwa 342208

**The issue of breastfeeding an adult person is simpler than to raise all such fuss. It is a matter of Ijtihaad (personal reasoning) and ‘Aa’ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, was inclined to the view of establishing Tahreem (i.e. making a male and female Mahram [permanently unmarriageable] to each other) through breastfeeding an adult person based on the hadeeth about Saalim, the freed-slave of Abu Hudhayfah – who was not his son; rather, he was his freed-slave. Imaam Muslim narrated that Umm Salamah said to ‘Aa’ishah, may Allah be pleased with them both, “Boys at the threshold of puberty whom I do not like to enter upon me enter upon you!” ‘Aa’ishah said, “Do you not see an example to follow in Allah's Messenger? The wife of Abu Hudhayfah said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, Saalim enters upon me and now he is an adult, and Abu Hudhayfah feels uneasy about that.’ The Messenger of Allah sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention ) said to her, ‘Suckle him (so that he may become your foster-child), and thus he can enter upon you (freely).’”

The Mothers of the Believers opposed ‘Aa’ishah in this respect and were not of this view. Imaam Muslim narrated that Umm Salamah, the wife the Prophet sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention ) used to say that all the wives of the Prophet sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention ) disclaimed the idea of letting someone enter upon them through this kind of breastfeeding, and they said to ‘Aa’isha, “By Allah, we do not find this but a concession given by the Prophet sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention ) only for Saalim, and no one is to enter upon us or see us through such breastfeeding.”

Most scholars are against such Tahreem and see that the story of Saalim is peculiar to him alone. Nonetheless, some Tabi’i (generation following that of the Companions) scholars agreed with ‘Aa’ishah, such as ‘Ata’ and Al-Layth ibn Sa’d.**

why wouldn't we follow what Aisha and Muhammad pbuh think is okay?

I want someone to tell me exactly where I'm wrong and why my arguments don't make sense. But please read everything first.

I'm turning 19 soon and this topic is driving me freaking crazy.

I can’t even focus on my studies and my exams are in 1 month..

I'm planning to ask a scholar, but I feel like it’s pointless.. I’ve searched so much about this topic and I’ve seen so many answers..

I actually don’t consider myself a ‘progressive’ Muslim because I follow both the Quran and the Hadith. (Sorry if I don’t really understand the difference between a progressive Sunni Muslim and a regular Sunni Muslim, I genuinely don’t know.)

But I’m REALLY frustrated because I keep posting this everywhere and it gets deleted after a few hours, or even minutes.

I literally tried posting this on every Muslim subreddit.

\l-------------------------------------------------------------------

this was what I wrote

Let me start by saying that I know you must treat slaves with kindness and it's advisable to free them, but my problem is that sex with female slaves isn't considered a bad thing... It's never seen as a bad thing. It's seen as something that is rightful to the owner...

I'll start with my problems and I don't care if people call me a "feminist" or "emotional" because I'm not here to argue and I'll most likely not respond to anyone. I just want people to help me with literally any knowledge on this.

How are men allowed to sleep with countless slaves who they are not even married to? They only need to own them? How do some people not find this dehumanizing? How are men supposed to respect women if they're looked at as sexual objects? And worst of all is, they were rap-d! I can't convince myself that they weren't! If you owned them, you're allowed to have sex with them. They're your property now; that's literally how it is.

Some jurists said that it's haram to force intercourse (this was an ethical recommendation regarding kind treatment, rather than a mainstream, binding legal mechanism that invalidated the master's inherent right of access), but many do not! they see it as a right

It's not explicitly stated if you can or can't, but it's so obvious that you can have sex with them because they're slaves who were forcibly divorced from their husbands and taken hostage...

Sahih Muslim (1456a)

"Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:

"And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end)."

Those slaves were married.

They just had to make sure they weren't pregnant. The only thing that really mattered was the guy's lust and her iddah, not her consent.

How would they be okay with having sex with strangers who killed their families / husbands? Even if these strangers were angels and provided everything for them,

there is a big possibility that some of these women loved their husbands so much that they didn't want to replace them...

If Israeli soldiers took women captive and had sexual intercourse with them because it's in their religion, would we really be okay with it? Just because it's "okay" religiously?

How did Umar ibn al-Khattab STRIKE a slave girl for wearing a head covering?? HOW IS THIS ETHICAL?

"Do not resemble free women!"

WHAT

It's been months since I read this athar, and I still can't believe it! The poor girl was probably trying to stop men from ogling her body... She's literally treated like a sex object here.

The "common" opinion among the classical jurists is that the awrah of a female slave is the area between the navel and the knees, so there is a big possibility she was also breast nak-d...

It's just the fact that their awrah is different from "free women" that is bizarre to me. If this doesn't scream objectification, I don't know what would.

Another sahih athar from albani

"Whenever Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave-girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks."

...Uh, so WHY CAN'T A WOMAN DO THIS? IS IT REALLY NECESSARY? If this was for medical purposes, I'm sure there was at least 1 female who could inspect them?!!

How does our religion teach us not to touch the opposite sex and not to commit zina, yet this exists?

Sunan an-Nasa'i, Hadith 3411

"It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but 'Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed:

"O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you..." until the end of the Verse."

I was shocked a year ago when I learned that Muhammad (PBUH) owned slaves... I know he married a lot of women mostly to help them, but a female slave is literally used for sexual enjoyment... And he already has many wives... And here they are even showing jealousy.

And it's like women's emotions don't matter when it comes to men's lust, because in the end, it's "halal". Isn't this the point of this hadith?

Now, tell me, how am I not supposed to be heartbroken after reading this? First, my problem was jealousy, but now I just feel sad and empty.

Please help me. You don't know how much I cried due to all of this.

Oh, and if it's not obvious, I'm 19, though I'm sure many already knew I was just a teen ranting.

\\------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are more things I have questions about:

Sahih Muslim 1657b (a sahih report)

Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him:

I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him (without any serious fault), then expiation for it is that he should set him free."

This is the son of Umar ibn al-Khattab... the son of one the Companions...

Look, I get that everyone sins, but isn’t beating someone and enslaving them obviously causing physical and mental harm? Shouldn’t it be obvious that this is immoral?

Just look at the slave’s reaction… he’s saying he wasn’t even hurt after being beaten so badly that he had marks.

Okay, never mind that. My bigger issue is: how wasn’t the slave forcibly freed if he was abused like this? Is freeing a slave only something the owner can do? (Unless the slave buys their own freedom.)

The owner gets scared of their sin and frees them… but that’s only as an expiation, not something a court automatically enforces.

So how are owners not just going to abuse the heck out of that? How is slavery supposed to gradually end if the owners had this much power?

\\------------

Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 162 (a sahih report)

'Amra reported that 'A'isha had made one of her slavegirls a mudabbar (one who would be set free after her death). Then 'A'isha became ill and her nephews consulted a gypsy doctor. He said, "You are asking me for information about a bewitched woman. A slavegirl of hers has bewitched her." 'A'isha was told and asked the girl, "Have you put a spell on me?" "Yes," she replied. "Why?' she asked. "Because you will never free me," she answered. Then 'A'isha said, "Sell her to the worst masters among the Arabs."

Even if what the slave did was messed up, I think it’s a huge reflection of the psychological strain slaves were under. She was clearly at her breaking point. When you’re being controlled like that, the desire for liberation can drive you to do some pretty extreme things just to reclaim your life.

I’m pretty sure the whole mudabbar status (being freed only after the master dies) could create a psychological nightmare. It basically made the slave’s freedom dependent on the master’s death

(especially if they couldn’t buy their own freedom)

If the master lived another 40 years, then the slave stayed a slave for another 40 years.

That kind of situation could easily create resentment. The master staying alive becomes the thing standing in the way of the slave’s freedom.

You can see why the girl in the report felt like she would ‘never’ be free. To a young person, waiting decades probably feels like an eternity.

this is the end of my rant

I seriously don’t know what to do or what to think anymore.

I love Islam, and I’ve been praying regularly for years.(I’m almost 19) I’m scared of drifting away from it.

I hope the moderators can approve this, because whenever I post it in other Muslim subreddits, it always gets removed after hours / minutes

I can’t even focus on my studies and my exams are in 1 month.

I made this post on another sub (got removed) and this is what I wrote

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me start by saying that I know you must treat slaves with kindness and it's advisable to free them, but my problem is that sex with female slaves isn't considered a bad thing... It's never seen as a bad thing. It's seen as something that is rightful to the owner...

I'll start with my problems and I don't care if people call me a "feminist" or "emotional" because I'm not here to argue and I'll most likely not respond to anyone. I just want people to help me with literally any knowledge on this.

How are men allowed to sleep with countless slaves who they are not even married to? They only need to own them? How do some people not find this dehumanizing? How are men supposed to respect women if they're looked at as sexual objects? And worst of all is, they were rap-d! I can't convince myself that they weren't! If you owned them, you're allowed to have sex with them. They're your property now; that's literally how it is.

Some jurists said that it's haram to force intercourse (this was an ethical recommendation regarding kind treatment, rather than a mainstream, binding legal mechanism that invalidated the master's inherent right of access), but many do not! they see it as a right

It's not explicitly stated if you can or can't, but it's so obvious that you can have sex with them because they're slaves who were forcibly divorced from their husbands and taken hostage...

Sahih Muslim (1456a)

"Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:

"And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end)."

Those slaves were married.

They just had to make sure they weren't pregnant. The only thing that really mattered was the guy's lust and her iddah, not her consent.

How would they be okay with having sex with strangers who killed their families / husbands? Even if these strangers were angels and provided everything for them,

there is a big possibility that some of these women loved their husbands so much that they didn't want to replace them...

If Israeli soldiers took women captive and had sexual intercourse with them because it's in their religion, would we really be okay with it? Just because it's "okay" religiously?

How did Umar ibn al-Khattab STRIKE a slave girl for wearing a head covering?? HOW IS THIS ETHICAL?

"Do not resemble free women!"

WHAT

It's been months since I read this athar, and I still can't believe it! The poor girl was probably trying to stop men from ogling her body... She's literally treated like a sex object here.

The "common" opinion among the classical jurists is that the awrah of a female slave is the area between the navel and the knees, so there is a big possibility she was also breast nak-d...

It's just the fact that their awrah is different from "free women" that is bizarre to me. If this doesn't scream objectification, I don't know what would.

Another sahih athar from albani

"Whenever Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave-girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks."

...Uh, so WHY CAN'T A WOMAN DO THIS? IS IT REALLY NECESSARY? If this was for medical purposes, I'm sure there was at least 1 female who could inspect them?!!

How does our religion teach us not to touch the opposite sex and not to commit zina, yet this exists?

Sunan an-Nasa'i, Hadith 3411

"It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but 'Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed:

"O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you..." until the end of the Verse."

I was shocked a year ago when I learned that Muhammad (PBUH) owned slaves... I know he married a lot of women mostly to help them, but a female slave is literally used for sexual enjoyment... And he already has many wives... And here they are even showing jealousy.

And it's like women's emotions don't matter when it comes to men's lust, because in the end, it's "halal". Isn't this the point of this hadith?

Now, tell me, how am I not supposed to be heartbroken after reading this? First, my problem was jealousy, but now I just feel sad and empty.

Please help me. You don't know how much I cried due to all of this.

Oh, and if it's not obvious, I'm 19, though I'm sure many already knew I was just a teen ranting.

\------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are more things I have questions about:

Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him:

I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him (without any serious fault), then expiation for it is that he should set him free."

Sahih Muslim 1657b

This is the son of Umar ibn al-Khattab... the son of one the Companions...

Look, I get that everyone sins, but isn’t beating someone and enslaving them obviously causing physical and mental harm? Shouldn’t it be obvious that this is immoral?

Just look at the slave’s reaction… he’s saying he wasn’t even hurt after being beaten so badly that he had marks.

Okay, never mind that. My bigger issue is: how wasn’t the slave forcibly freed if he was abused like this? Is freeing a slave only something the owner can do? (Unless the slave buys their own freedom.)

The owner gets scared of their sin and frees them… but that’s only as an expiation, not something a court automatically enforces.

So how are owners not just going to abuse the heck out of that? How is slavery supposed to gradually end if the owners had this much power?

\------------

'Amra reported that 'A'isha had made one of her slavegirls a mudabbar (one who would be set free after her death). Then 'A'isha became ill and her nephews consulted a gypsy doctor. He said, "You are asking me for information about a bewitched woman. A slavegirl of hers has bewitched her." 'A'isha was told and asked the girl, "Have you put a spell on me?" "Yes," she replied. "Why?' she asked. "Because you will never free me," she answered. Then 'A'isha said, "Sell her to the worst masters among the Arabs."

Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 162

Even if what the slave did was messed up, I think it’s a huge reflection of the psychological strain slaves were under. She was clearly at her breaking point. When you’re being controlled like that, the desire for liberation can drive you to do some pretty extreme things just to reclaim your life.

I’m pretty sure the whole mudabbar status (being freed only after the master dies) could create a psychological nightmare. It basically made the slave’s freedom dependent on the master’s death

(especially if they couldn’t buy their own freedom)

If the master lived another 40 years, then the slave stayed a slave for another 40 years.

That kind of situation could easily create resentment. The master staying alive becomes the thing standing in the way of the slave’s freedom.

You can see why the girl in the report felt like she would ‘never’ be free. To a young person, waiting decades probably feels like an eternity.

this is the end of my rant

I seriously don’t know what to do or what to think anymore.

I love Islam, and I’ve been praying regularly for years.(I’m almost 19) I’m scared of drifting away from it.

As expected, my post was deleted from another Muslim subreddit after 9 hours. I'm posting it here now because I’m desperate for answers. While some of the previous comments shifted my perspective slightly, I’ve decided to keep the text exactly the same in case someone here has better insight

Let me start by saying that I know you must treat slaves with kindness and it's advisable to free them, but my problem is that sex with female slaves isn't considered a bad thing... It's never seen as a bad thing. It's seen as something that is rightful to the owner...

I'll start with my problems and I don't care if people call me a "feminist" or "emotional" because I'm not here to argue and I'll most likely not respond to anyone. I just want people to help me with literally any knowledge on this.

How are men allowed to sleep with countless slaves who they are not even married to? They only need to own them? How do some people not find this dehumanizing? How are men supposed to respect women if they're looked at as sexual objects? And worst of all is, they were raped! I can't convince myself that they weren't! If you owned them, you're allowed to have sex with them. They're your property now; that's literally how it is.

Some jurists said that it's haram to force intercourse (this was an ethical recommendation regarding kind treatment, rather than a mainstream, binding legal mechanism that invalidated the master's inherent right of access), but many do not!

It's not explicitly stated if you can or can't, but it's so obvious that you can have sex with them because they're slaves who were forcibly divorced from their husbands and taken hostage...

Sahih Muslim (1456a)

"Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:

" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end)."

Those slaves were married.

They just had to make sure they weren't pregnant. The only thing that really mattered was the guy's lust and her iddah, not her consent.

How would they be okay with having sex with strangers who killed their families / husbands? Even if these strangers were angels and provided everything for them,

there is a big possibility that some of these women loved their husbands so much that they didn't want to replace them...

If Israeli soldiers took women captive and had sexual intercourse with them because it's in their religion, would we really be okay with it? Just because it's "okay" religiously?

How did Umar ibn al-Khattab STRIKE a slave girl for wearing a head covering?? HOW IS THIS ETHICAL?

"Do not resemble free women!"

WHAT

It's been months since I read this athar, and I still can't believe it! The poor girl was probably trying to stop men from ogling her body... She's literally treated like a sex object here.

The most widespread and "common" opinion among the classical jurists is that the awrah of a female slave is the area between the navel and the knees, so there is a big possibility she was also breast naked...

It's just the fact that their awrah is different from 'free women' that is bizarre to me. If this doesn't scream objectification, I don't know what would.

Another sahih athar from albani

"Whenever Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave-girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks."

...Uh, so WHY CAN'T A WOMAN DO THIS? IS IT REALLY NECESSARY? If this was for medical purposes, I'm sure there was at least 1 female who could inspect them?!!

How does our religion teach us not to touch the opposite sex and not to commit zina, yet this exists?

Sunan an-Nasa'i, Hadith 3411

"It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but 'Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed:

"O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.' until the end of the Verse."

I was shocked years ago when I learned that Muhammad (PBUH) owned slaves... I know he married a lot of women mostly to help them, but a female slave is literally used for sexual enjoyment... And he already has many wives... And here they are even showing jealousy.

And it's like women's emotions don't matter when it comes to men's lust, because in the end, it's "halal". Isn't this the point of this hadith?

Now, tell me, how am I not supposed to be heartbroken after reading this? First, my problem was jealousy, but now I just feel sad and empty.

Please help me. You don't know how much I cried due to all of this.

Oh, and if it’s not obvious, I’m 19, though I’m sure many already knew I was just a teen ranting

Let me start by saying that I know you must treat slaves with kindness and it's advisable to free them, but my problem is that sex with female slaves isn't considered a bad thing... It's never seen as a bad thing. It's seen as something that is rightful to the owner...

I'll start with my problems and I don't care if people call me a "feminist" or "emotional" because I'm not here to argue and I'll most likely not respond to anyone. I just want people to help me with literally any knowledge on this.

How are men allowed to sleep with countless slaves who they are not even married to? They only need to own them? How do some people not find this dehumanizing? How are men supposed to respect women if they're looked at as sexual objects? And worst of all is, they were raped! I can't convince myself that they weren't! If you owned them, you're allowed to have sex with them. They're your property now; that's literally how it is.

Some jurists said that it's haram to force intercourse (this was an ethical recommendation regarding kind treatment, rather than a mainstream, binding legal mechanism that invalidated the master's inherent right of access), but many do not!

It's not explicitly stated if you can or can't, but it's so obvious that you can have sex with them because they're slaves who were forcibly divorced from their husbands and taken hostage...

Sahih Muslim (1456a)

"Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:

" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end)."

Those slaves were married.

They just had to make sure they weren't pregnant. The only thing that really mattered was the guy's lust and her iddah, not her consent.

How would they be okay with having sex with strangers who killed their families / husbands? Even if these strangers were angels and provided everything for them,

there is a big possibility that some of these women loved their husbands so much that they didn't want to replace them...

If Israeli soldiers took women captive and had sexual intercourse with them because it's in their religion, would we really be okay with it? Just because it's "okay" religiously?

How did Umar ibn al-Khattab STRIKE a slave girl for wearing a head covering?? HOW IS THIS ETHICAL?

"Do not resemble free women!"

WHAT

It's been months since I read this athar, and I still can't believe it! The poor girl was probably trying to stop men from ogling her body... She's literally treated like a sex object here.

The most widespread and "common" opinion among the classical jurists is that the awrah of a female slave is the area between the navel and the knees, so there is a big possibility she was also breast naked...

It's just the fact that their awrah is different from 'free women' that is bizarre to me. If this doesn't scream objectification, I don't know what would.

Another sahih athar from albani

"Whenever Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave-girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks."

...Uh, so WHY CAN'T A WOMAN DO THIS? IS IT REALLY NECESSARY? If this was for medical purposes, I'm sure there was at least 1 female who could inspect them?!!

How does our religion teach us not to touch the opposite sex and not to commit zina, yet this exists?

Sunan an-Nasa'i, Hadith 3411

"It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but 'Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed:

"O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.' until the end of the Verse."

I was shocked years ago when I learned that Muhammad (PBUH) owned slaves... I know he married a lot of women mostly to help them, but a female slave is literally used for sexual enjoyment... And he already has many wives... And here they are even showing jealousy.

And it's like women's emotions don't matter when it comes to men's lust, because in the end, it's "halal". Isn't this the point of this hadith?

Now, tell me, how am I not supposed to be heartbroken after reading this? First, my problem was jealousy, but now I just feel sad and empty.

Please help me. You don't know how much I cried due to all of this.

Oh, and if it’s not obvious, I’m 19, though I’m sure many already knew I was just a teen ranting