Can Muslims take women as slaves and then rape them?

[sooda]

I'm sorry that you declined to provide any references for your authority, which is what I asked for. I can certainly find references from multiple sources that suggest a much earlier age, including: Al-Tabari says she was nine at the time of marriage, which was consummated a year later. Sahih al-Bukhari's hadith says "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old;" other sources differ on the age of marriage, but agree that the marriage was not consummated at the time of the marriage contract.

So what sources do you cite, and how do you show that they are right and the others wrong?

Those Hadiths were from Persia 200 years after the death of Muhammed.

 

[Firemorphic]

I'm sorry that you declined to provide any references for your authority, which is what I asked for. I can certainly find references from multiple sources that suggest a much earlier age, including: Al-Tabari says she was nine at the time of marriage, which was consummated a year later. Sahih al-Bukhari's hadith says "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old;" other sources differ on the age of marriage, but agree that the marriage was not consummated at the time of the marriage contract.

So what sources do you cite, and how do you show that they are right and the others wrong?

What reasons to you as an Evangelicalatheist have to trust the most dodgy and most contradictory of all major Hadith Collections (Sahih al-Bukhari - but only Sunnis use it, albeit carefully) on matters that are so thinly sourced?
"al-Bukhari says so" is not a defendable position within Islam. And Sunnis themselves are aware of all the glaring problems that come from that Hadith collection, the best thing you can do with it is take everything in that book, unless proved otherwise to be taken with a grain of salt.
In the case of Aisha's age, it contradicts the rest of Islamic history as well as it's prior history.
I just find it hilariously sad that people want to hold onto this undefendable position that Muhammad was a pedo when it's simply a weak, unsubstantiated and wholly contradictory as a claim.

 

[sooda]

Age of Aisha.

Of Aisha’s age at marriage - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

 

[Firemorphic]

You're talking to a shia.
That's like quoting catholic doctrines to a protestant.

They don't recognise it.

Well, more like 'quoting protestant doctrines to a Buddhist'

 

[sooda]

Aisha's age

Many authentic hadiths also show that Hisham’s narration is incongruous with several historical facts about the Prophet’s life, on which there is consensus. With reference to scholars such as Umar Ahmed Usmani, Hakim Niaz Ahmed and Habibur Rehman Kandhulvi, I would like to present some arguments in favour of the fact that Hazrat Aisha was at least 18 years old when her nikah was performed and at least 21 when she moved into the Prophet’s house to live with him.

According to Umar Ahmed Usmani, in Surah Al-Nisa, it is said that the guardian of the orphans should keep testing them, until they reach the age of marriage, before returning their property (4:6). From this scholars have concluded that the Quran sets a minimum age of marriage which is at least puberty. Since the approval of the girl has a legal standing, she cannot be a minor.

continued

 

[sooda]

1. Age of Prophet's wife Aisha at Marriage - IslamiCity
   Age of Prophet's wife Aisha at Marriage - IslamiCityage-of-prophets-wife-aisha-at-marriage
   Jan 24, 2018 · Age of Prophet's wife Aisha at Marriage. Hisham bin Urwah is the main narrator of this hadith. His life is divided into two periods: in 131 A.H. the Madani period ended, and the Iraqi period started, when Hisham was 71 years old. Hafiz Zehbi has spoken about Hisham's loss of memory in …
   
   
2. What was the real age of Aisha (Ra) at the time of her ...
   https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-real-age-of-Aisha-Ra-at-the...
   Apr 02, 2015 · If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha (ra) should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Ayesha (ra), if she got married in 1 AH (after hijrah) or 2 AH, was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.
   
   
   

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What reasons to you as an Evangelicalatheist have to trust the most dodgy and most contradictory of all major Hadith Collections (Sahih al-Bukhari - but only Sunnis use it, albeit carefully) on matters that are so thinly sourced?
"al-Bukhari says so" is not a defendable position within Islam. And Sunnis themselves are aware of all the glaring problems that come from that Hadith collection, the best thing you can do with it is take everything in that book, unless proved otherwise to be taken with a grain of salt.
In the case of Aisha's age, it contradicts the rest of Islamic history as well as it's prior history.
I just find it hilariously sad that people want to hold onto this undefendable position that Muhammad was a pedo when it's simply a weak and verifiable contradictory as a claim.

I have no "reasons" to trust or accept anything, including what you would have me trust and accept. I am trying to understand, and so far all I have is the sides who make one claim, against the side that makes another.

Shakespeare, in Romeo and Juliet, raised the issue of age in marriage, when he makes it very clear that Juliet is just 13 when her mother broaches the question of marriage: the nurse says, "come Lamas tide at night shall she be 14!") In a later scene, the County Paris says to her father "younger than she are already mothers made," to which father replies, "and too soon marred are those so quickly made."

Much about human history is based on things other than we worry about today. Marriages were often property arrangements, and nobody cared whether the newlyweds even liked one another. Is there a possibility, then, that Mohammed's marriage to Aisha was something other than "love?" Were alliances being formed, for example, in which the age (or consent) or either party wasn't even a consideration? It certainly wouldn't be the first time in history!

 

[Firemorphic]

Much about human history is based on things other than we worry about today. Marriages were often property arrangements, and nobody cared whether the newlyweds even liked one another. Is there a possibility, then, that Mohammed's marriage to Aisha was something other than "love?" Were alliances being formed, for example, in which the age (or consent) or either party wasn't even a consideration? It certainly wouldn't be the first time in history!

Well, as far as marriages in general within Muhammad's life goes, he was with Khadija al-Kubra most of his life and she was a full adult like himself. All other marriages (including Aisha) came towards the end of his life. Sunni views on Aisha tend to think that Aisha was his favorite wife and other sentiments but I have a hard time believing that, she herself had a very malicious character and I don't think Muhammad payed much attention to her or the later wives of which where largely peace agreements rather than romantic marriages (unlike Khadija).
And if you look into her later life (which people such as yourself tend to never think about), she definitely didn't turn out a nice or respectable person.

I have no "reasons" to trust or accept anything, including what you would have me trust and accept. I am trying to understand, and so far all I have is the sides who make one claim, against the side that makes another.

Fair enough (and I generally agree with your statement when it comes to life in general), as long as you realize (in the case of the post you were replying to here) that Hadiths and Hadith collections on their own are not (by any stretch of the imagination) valid by default, there is a process on both sides (Sunni and Shia) when it comes to determining what is what, a 'scientific method' so to speak, which filters the strong from the weak.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Fair enough (and I generally agree with your statement when it comes to life in general), as long as you realize (in the case of the post you were replying to here) that Hadiths and Hadith collections on their own are not (by any stretch of the imagination) valid by default, there is a process on both sides (Sunni and Shia) when it comes to determining what is what, a 'scientific method' so to speak, which filters the strong from the weak.

Then one would expect, if there is "a process on both sides," that there should be some progress towards finding agreement, no? Do you see that happening, between Sunni and Shia?

 

[Firemorphic]

Then one would expect, if there is "a process on both sides," that there should be some progress towards finding agreement, no? Do you see that happening, between Sunni and Shia?

Well if you're insinuating that because Sunnis and Shi'ites have different views on things in general, that you should automatically throw out skepticism and common sense, as well as even the most basic logical deduction skills and just accept everything - then I would say that is not a wise decision, especially when you're dealing with historiography.

 

[sooda]

I'm sorry that you declined to provide any references for your authority, which is what I asked for. I can certainly find references from multiple sources that suggest a much earlier age, including: Al-Tabari says she was nine at the time of marriage, which was consummated a year later. Sahih al-Bukhari's hadith says "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old;" other sources differ on the age of marriage, but agree that the marriage was not consummated at the time of the marriage contract.

So what sources do you cite, and how do you show that they are right and the others wrong?

 

[Shiranui117]

Your Muslim cleric is giving permission to rape before you have even been captured. As for Zechariah 14:2, that has to do with the LORD going forth to fight the nations, and the nations will be defeated by LORD and Judah, and Judah will gather the gold and silver of the nations after the nations die while standing on their feet (Zechariah 14:12-14). Your history and loyalties are a little muddled.

Bro do you even read people's religion tags?

 

[2ndpillar]

No Muslim country's laws are strictly based on the Koran.

So your are saying that the Muslim state supersedes the prophet Mohammad? I thought there was no god but Allah. Such as the 5 pillars. Say god is god, pray to god 5 times a day, circle a cube 7 times, give to the poor in your community of believers, and fast and feast once a year. Are the Muslims praying to the state or to the god of their prophet? It appears to me that the Saudi's have their laws following the Qur'an based on the interpretations of the apparently crazy Wahhabis.

The legal system of Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia, Islamic law derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah (the traditions) of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. The sources of Sharia also include Islamic scholarly consensus developed after Muhammad's death. Its interpretation by judges in Saudi Arabia is influenced by the 18th century Wahhabism.

Legal system of Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_system_of_Saudi_Arabia

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Well if you're insinuating that because Sunnis and Shi'ites have different views on things in general, that you should automatically throw out skepticism and common sense, as well as even the most basic logical deduction skills and just accept everything - then I would say that is not a wise decision, especially when you're dealing with historiography.

But that is definitively NOT what I said. I asked whether there was any movement towards reconciling views, in your opinion. Because you yourself said that there is a process on both sides that can decide which of the hadiths are either strong or weak.

The question remains...

 

[2ndpillar]

[QUOTE, Like the approximate 38,000 sects, she claims to be "Christian", but is an avid supporter of Muslims. Not that she is lost any more than other "Christian", but lost is lost. She referred to the Muslim cleric by calling him out with regards to his interpretation of the Qur'an. She seems to think she is as smart as the pope, and smarter and has more authority than a Moslem cleric. Well, that is like picking off the weak of the litter, but just the same, any looking under the surface will find her house is built on strawmen and obfuscation. Her life was apparently built on Saudi oil income, and she can't apparently acknowledge the taint that money carried with it.

 

[Firemorphic]

So your are saying that the Muslim state supersedes the prophet Mohammad? ............ It appears to me that the Saudi's have their laws following Wahhabis.

Correct, their (Saudi Arabia) laws and agendas are their own, licked, stamped and signed off in the tradition of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The Saudi family build and run their own system, nuff said.

Without the surface appearance of "Islamic culture", you would see very little correlation when holding the two up to the light. The Saudi government are accountable for themselves.

 

[2ndpillar]

I am positive there is a concentrated effort to divert bad publicity from Islam to whatever else one can.

I see it on every thread that has ever existed about Islam. And I've been posting on forums for 10 years.

But the poster is a declared "Christian". Not that Muslims aren't able to lie about their religion, but that would be a stretch. There is an effort as you say, to divert bad publicity, but in this case it would seem to be more in how the person was brought up living in KSA, with a silver spoon of Aramco feeding her. Possibly her mother's family lived in Germany for such a stretch of imagination, but I don't think someone is paying her for her input, but then again, the Muslim's still have deep pockets. Look how far money gets the influence of Soros. Soros lost much of his position, and eventually the Muslim's will have the price of oil drop more, and they will loose their position, and Iran with the help of Russian, will try and eat KSA for lunch. Dropping energy pricing is also hurting Russia.

 

[Cooky]

But the poster is a declared "Christian". Not that Muslims aren't able to lie about their religion, but that would be a stretch. There is an effort as you say, to divert bad publicity, but in this case it would seem to be more in how the person was brought up living in KSA, with a silver spoon of Aramco feeding her. Possibly her mother's family lived in Germany for such a stretch of imagination, but I don't think someone is paying her for her input, but then again, the Muslim's still have deep pockets. Look how far money gets the influence of Soros. Soros lost much of his position, and eventually the Muslim's will have the price of oil drop more, and they will loose their position, and Iran with the help of Russian, will try and eat KSA for lunch. Dropping energy pricing is also hurting Russia.

I'm curious as well. A unique person she is for sure. Hopefully one day we can find out more.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Fair enough (and I generally agree with your statement when it comes to life in general), as long as you realize (in the case of the post you were replying to here) that Hadiths and Hadith collections on their own are not (by any stretch of the imagination) valid by default, there is a process on both sides (Sunni and Shia) when it comes to determining what is what, a 'scientific method' so to speak, which filters the strong from the weak.

Yeah, till the time when Mohammad was alive, Allah could change his istructions at will, abrogating previous instructions. Sunnis and Shias have no such recourse now, and therefore have to discredit Hadiths. Sunnis discredit what is not convenient to them, Shias discredit what is not convenient for them. Both discredit what is not convenient for both of them. Simple.

 

[England my lionheart]

Doesn't Quran 24:33 mean the answer is an unquestionable no??

"If they [female slaves] desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is [to the female slaves], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful."

Seems pretty certain that you can't compel a female slave to acts of sex, under the Quran.

Here's a transliteration from bukhari.

And let those who cannot find a match keep chaste till Allah give them independence by His grace. And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), write it for them if ye are aware of aught of good in them, and bestow upon them of the wealth of Allah which He hath bestowed upon you. Force not your slave-girls to whoredom that ye may seek enjoyment of the life of the world, if they would preserve their chastity. And if one force them, then (unto them), after their compulsion, lo! Allah will be Forgiving, Merciful.

Still reads like that if they do get raped Allah is all forgiving.