Who are women whom your right hand possess

[understanding the truth]

The quran states in many verses that men are allowed to see/handle women whom their right hand possess.
Who are these women, many non muslims have interperated them as being concubines? do they still exsist in our society

[sumuque]

Right Hand possess women are Slaves Girls which a Muslim Man can own, its allowed and many Quranic reference can be presented as evidences to confirm it.

"04:24 Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever AllKnowing, AllWise"

23:5-6 And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts); Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame;

And there are other examples too. Its lawful to for Muslims to have sexual acts with their slaves girls. Now main argument against this, presented by Muslims is that it was meant for war times and it was the custom of Arabia in 7th CE, but I don't think that these verses are saying any where anything like this. These are general commands for Muslims to observe, in recent history, Pakistani Army during the time of 1971 war was accused to raped Bangali women, thinking that they are legal war captives. Its not surprise to note that you may find even today in some Islamic states like Saudi Arabia, people having sex with their maids..

The subject is clear from the Quranic point of view, however as you can expect Modern Muslims have a problem accepting some of its legal and moral implications.

Peace

[naderM]

Right Hand possess women are Slaves Girls which a Muslim Man can own

Ma malakat aymanykum, wrongly translated as "right hand" posession has nothing to do with slavery or fornication, as ill prove using the Quran.

-Prisoners of war = Asraa or asira (plural) 8:67,76:8
-Slave = Abdan (Mamluka) 16:75,24:32,2:221, imaakum 24:32 or ammah (singular) 2:221, abid to mean slave(s) of Allah
-YOUR OATHS = Aymanikum 2:224,225,5:89,16:92,94,66:2 THEIR OATHS = Aymanihim 5:108,6:109,16:38,24:53,35:42
-right hand = Maimanah 56:8,90:18 or Yamin 17:71,20:17,56:27,38:90-91,74:39

the Quran NEVER EVER uses the word AYMANIKUM to refer to the RIGHT HANDS but always and exclusively for YOUR OATHS.

Ma Malakat aymanikum (lit. "whom your oaths posess" wrongly translated as right hand possession) is a phrase used for the poor humans whom an oath has been pledged to be taken care of. They are not necessarly prisonners of wars but can be if one wishes to take under his special care (under oath) a war prisonner, ie raising his/her status.
In 33:50, the prophet is told that among the categories of women lawful for marriage are Ma Malakat yaminuka (singular) FROM AMONG the prisonners of wars, which proves they are a seperate group from war prisonners. Further in 33:55, the prophet's wives are not blamed for not wearing the veil in the presence of certain groups, including Ma Malakat aymanikum and this again excludes regular war prisonners. Or in 24:58 setting the limits of privacy inside a home between an adult and the rest of his/her household, including Ma Malakat aymanikum who cannot logically be war prisonners. In the context of marriage, they are also mentionned seperately than regular male/female slaves 24:32-33.
Ma malakat aymanikum are therefore some special people in society, weak and unable to provide for themselves. They might have families but are very poor to take care of them, Islam encourages a wealthy/capable believer to take them under his/her wing through an oath that he/she will provide for them.

16:71,4:33,24:33 remind the people of the moral obligation of sharing from what Allah has given them with the weak and poor, including Ma Malakat aymanikum. Then 4:36 clearly explains that the oath takers must provide Ma Malakat aymanikum i.e. those poor humans in our care under oath, equitably with everyone else "And serve Allah and do not associate any thing with Him and be good to the parents and to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the neighbour of (your) kin and the alien neighbour, and the companion in a journey and the wayfarer and Ma Malakat aymanikum; surely Allah does not love him who is proud, boastful".

No sexual relation (fornication) is allowed with them outside of wedlock 4:3,24:33.
This is emphasized again in 4:25"And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) ma malakat aymanikum from among your believing fatayaat (young women); and Allah knows best your faith: you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters (ahlihuna), and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful", the believer is told to marry Ma Malakat aymanikum if he cannot sustain a free (financially) believing woman, and he has to take the consent of her family (ahlihuna wrongly translated as masters or owners). Ma Malakat aymanikum must be given their dowries justly and in case they commit an indecency they will have half the punishment of the self sustained women, and if one abstains from punishement altogether and is patient with them it is better, due to their past hardships that may have affected their common sense and judgement.

"04:24 Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess

Its lawful to for Muslims to have sexual acts with their slaves girls.

Ma Malakat aymanikum has nothing to do with slavery or unlawful sex as i showed above, now this verse you brought expands on the categories of women unlawful for marriage such as mothers, daughters, sisters etc as well as all married women and the Quran makes an exception that already married Ma Malakat aymanikum are lawful for marriage. This exception comes under very special circumstances explained through 60:10, where we are told that if a believing married woman deserts her unbelieving husband and comes to seek protection and shelter in a Muslim household, she must not be turned back to her previous home and a Muslim man in this household may take her under his wing as Ma Malakat aymanikum, taking an oath to provide for her. If he wishes to marry her later (with hers and her family's consent) he must pay back the dowry to her initial husband, hence annuling the previous marriage.

[sumuque]

Dear NaderM

Thanks for your reply.

"the Quran NEVER EVER uses the word AYMANIKUM to refer to the RIGHT HANDS but always and exclusively for YOUR OATHS"

You came up with something new and its quite interesting to read. However, I am afraid you are just trying to avoid the clear evidence and then indirectly what Quran says and how it was understood so far.

If we look Muhammad and attitude towards captives slaves, then the matter is clear like the day light, for your reference here are few Hadiths from Sahi Bukhari

"Volume 8, Book 77, Number 600:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

That while he was sitting with the Prophet a man from the Ansar came and said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get slave girls from the war captives and we love property; what do you think about coitus interruptus?" Allah's Apostle said, "Do you do that? It is better for you not to do it, for there is no soul which Allah has ordained to come into existence but will be created."

so if the war captives are not "Right hand possess" what kind of women they were mentioned in this Hadith ?

"Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist." "

Let me tell you NaderM, that what you are saying is not what your other Muslim Brothers says, what is this ? Just another interpretation among Million other interpretations ?

Your objection is "Right hand possess" lets see some of the "scholars" on this issue to clear this finally for you.

"16:71 And Allah has preferred some of you above others in wealth and properties. Then, those who are preferred will by no means hand over their wealth and properties to those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, so that they may be equal with them in respect thereof. Do they then deny the Favour of Allah?"

First see what Allah is actually telling us. He actually made some people to be slaved or owned by others, this is their destiny, instead of making them all equal, he admitted that yes, there are people who are to be take as their right hand possess, what a justice, any how lets see the Tafsirs of this verse;

Jalaludding Suyuti said;

"And God has favoured some of you above others in [respect of] provision, thus, some of you are poor, some are rich, some owners, others are owned. Now those who have been [more] favoured, namely, the masters, would not hand over their provision to those [slaves] whom their right hands possess, that is, they would not assign that wealth and other things which We have given them as something to be shared [equally] between them and their slaves, so that they, that is, the slaves and [their] masters, become equal, partners, in respect thereof. The meaning is: they do not have partners from among their slaves in respect of their wealth, so how can they make certain of God’s servants partners of His? Is it then the grace of God that they deny?, [that] they reject, when they ascribe partners to Him?"


pretty clear haan..? now lets see Ibn Abbas injections on it.

"(And Allah hath favoured some of you above others in provision) this verse was revealed about the delegation of Najran who claimed that Jesus was the son of Allah. So Allah revealed this verse to tell people that He has favoured some people to the exclusion of others in relation to the possession of wealth and servants. (Now those who are more favoured) with wealth and servants (will by no means hand over their provision to those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, so that they) i.e. the master and the slave (may be equal with them in respect thereof) about wealth. They said: “We will not do so nor are we happy about this”, and so Allah said: (Is it then the grace of Allah that they deny?) Do you like for Me what you do not like for yourselves, and thus deny the Oneness of Allah?"

Now you should ask yourself a question, if Allah is sanctioning you a right to own a slave, why you are in a mood to reject it ? Logically speaking you do not like to be a slave, so you reject this idea that you should own a slave !! When you rationality does not accept this inhuman concept, then how can you accept such things in Quran ?

I can give you more example, but I think above mentioned is enough to establish the case of right hand possess.

[naderM]

im gonna make somethjing very clear to you.

-do NOT bring me the hadith of men to counter the hadith of Allah

its obvious you have no argument against anything i said so now, you're just indulging in popular appeal. i didnt even read your quotes, why should i when i have the words of Allah in front of me.

also, i clearly explained how the phrase ma malakat aymanikum has nothing whatsoever to do with illegal sex, or slavery so why do you bring me a verse where you add the word slaves before ma malakat aymanikum?
i already cited 16:71 and explained you how this verse reminds us of the moral obligation of sharing from our wealth with ma malakat aymanikum, those whom your OATHS possess. tell me, how can you logically say that ma malakat aymanikum are slaves or war captives when the Quran is giving us the ORDER of sharing from our wealth with them?
these people are clearly, a category of men/women whom an oath has been taken to be provided for.

[aamantubillah]

We read:

The phrase "to share their sustenance with.. .", etc., reads, literally, "to turn over their sustenance to". The expression "those whom their right hands possess" (i.e., "those whom they rightfully possess") may relate either to slaves taken captive in a war in God's cause (see surah 2, notes 167 and 168, and surah 8, note 72) or, metonymically, to all who are dependent on others for their livelihood and thus become the latters' responsibility. The placing of one's dependants on an equal footing with oneself with regard to the basic necessities of life is a categorical demand of Islam; thus, the Prophet said: "They are your brethren, these dependants of yours (khawalukum) whom God has placed under your authority [lit., "under your hand"]. Hence, whoso has his brother under his authority shall give him to eat of what he eats himself, and shall clothe him with what he clothes himself. And do not burden them with anything that may be beyond their strength; but if you [must] burden them, help them yourselves." (This authentic Tradition, recorded by Bukhari in several variants in his Sahih, appears in the compilations of Muslim, Tirmidhi and Ibn Hanbalas well.) However, men often fail to live up to this consciousness of moral responsibility: and this failure amounts, as the sequence shows, to a denial of God's blessings and of His unceasing care for all His creatures.(Quran Ref: 16:71 )

The excerpt above, to my knowledge, is in support of the position of Nader.

[sumuque]

Dear NaderM

Are you saying you deny the Hadiths ? I understand your position and trouble as they do not give you a point on which you can put your legs to stand on! however, what you are saying is merely an attempt to re-write the history of Islam and to avoid the logical consequences.

"its obvious you have no argument against anything i said so now, you're just indulging in popular appeal. i didnt even read your quotes, why should i when i have the words of Allah in front of me"

Perhaps you should do this. It will help you to see the world around you. The real world. You want to read the words of Allah, just like your other Brother in Islam wanted to read when they translated and interpreted these verses with totally different opinions. Have you ever thought about why did they do that ? You think you are some how a better Muslim then the scholars of Islam ?

By the way, the history of Islam and Majority of Islamic scholars agree that these verses do support the notion that a Muslim can own slaves and its legal for them to have sex with them. The only prove you can bring against this is to completely deny it, its up to you.