u/Reasonable_Box_4226

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