SAM explains Islam

[antineoETC]

Right hand possessions (servants, slaves, captives) are not sexual slaves or even concubines.

Right we are getting somewhere SAM. A "Right Hand Possession" is a servant/slave/captive. So Allah has permitted his messenger and the Muslims to have sexual intercourse with servants/slaves/captives. Now, does the Muslim man have to marry a servant/slave/captive before he can have sexual intercourse with her?

[SAM]

Right hand possessions (servants, slaves, captives) are not sexual slaves or even concubines.

Right we are getting somewhere SAM. A "Right Hand Possession" is a servant/slave/captive. So Allah has permitted his messenger and the Muslims to have sexual intercourse with servants/slaves/captives. Now, does the Muslim man have to marry a servant/slave/captive before he can have sexual intercourse with her?

The story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar is an example of "Right Hand Possession". Help yourself understand behind this story, if you fail to understand it. That's your problem, not me.

[sum]

According to Islam married women captives have their marriage immediately annulled when captured. Muhammad thought of every ruse to enable muslims to have sex on demand with these right hand possessions. Being married was no obstacle to having sex with these poor women because Islam decreed that they were no longer married irrespective of the women`s or their husbands` wishes. It was rape pure and simple and also with divine permission. What a caring and compassionate god Allah was as well as the father of Allah - Muhammad.

If muslims can not see the inhumanity of all this and how it destroys the image of both Allah and Muhammad then they are seriously damaged people with no empathy or true morality.

sum

[SAM]

In the Bible Deuteronomy 21:10-14. sexually desirable non-Jewish women who are captured in war.

When you go forth to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God has delivered them into your hands, and you have taken them captive,
And you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and desire her, and take her for a wife -
Then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and do her nails,
And she shall remove the garment of her captivity from her, and remain in your house and weep for her father and mother a for month, and after that you may approach her and have intercourse with her, and she shall be your wife.
And if you do not want her, you shall send her out on her own; you shall not sell her at all for money, you shall not treat her as a slave, because you "violated" her.

[antineoETC]

The story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar is an example of "Right Hand Possession". Help yourself understand behind this story, if you fail to understand it. That's your problem, not me.

This subforum is "ISLAM questioned, defended and explained" -not the bible. We have moved on from what is a "Right Hand Possession" (RHP) which you have very helpfully defined as a servant/slave/captive. My question now is whether a Muslim man required by Islam to marry a RHP before he can have sexual intercourse with her. Is he? Please answer the question. Why must I trawl through the bible to answer questions about Islam, particularly as Islamic doctrine has it that the bible is a corrupted book?

[SAM]

The story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar is an example of "Right Hand Possession". Help yourself understand behind this story, if you fail to understand it. That's your problem, not me.

This subforum is "ISLAM questioned, defended and explained" -not the bible. We have moved on from what is a "Right Hand Possession" (RHP) which you have very helpfully defined as a servant/slave/captive. My question now is whether a Muslim man required by Islam to marry a RHP before he can have sexual intercourse with her. Is he? Please answer the question. Why must I trawl through the bible to answer questions about Islam, particularly as Islamic doctrine has it that the bible is a corrupted book?

The story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar is an example of "Right Hand Possession" according to the Quran, not corrupted Bible. I repeat again, help yourself understand behind this story, if you fail to understand it. That's your problem, not me.

[manfred]

The biblical story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar is NOT about "right hand possessions". In Islam Hagar is a "wife", not a right hand possession.

In the bible, she is the servant of SARAH, so she cannot be the right hand possession of Abraham, under Muslim rules. (a rule for Muslims, which Mohammed broke....)

What Hagar is, she is the first recorded case of a surrogate mother. If you cannot understand that, that is your problem not mine.

So why will you not answer the question asked of you? Are you embarrassed?

[SAM]

Are you embarrassed?

When you can't get a straight answer ... this is all you can say.

Who cares what you think.

[manfred]

Oh I know the answer SAM, I just want to hear it from you.

[antineoETC]

The story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar is an example of "Right Hand Possession" according to the Quran, not corrupted Bible.

So, with reference to relevent Qur'an passages, does a Muslim man have to marry a "Right Hand Possession" before he can have sex with them?

I repeat again, help yourself understand behind this story, if you fail to understand it. That's your problem, not me.

Maybe I do have a problem with understanding - all the more reason for you to give me the benefit of your superior intellect and expertise by answering my question.

[antineoETC]

Coming back to this previous statement of SAM's which I didn't really pick up on:

There must be a marriage bond like mut'ah marriage or al-misyar marriage is the type of marriage contract.

Does the "Right Hand Possession" (servant/slave/captive) have the right to refuse a Mut'ah or al-misyar marriage to her Muslim captor?

[SAM]

Coming back to this previous statement of SAM's which I didn't really pick up on:

There must be a marriage bond like mut'ah marriage or al-misyar marriage is the type of marriage contract.

Does the "Right Hand Possession" (servant/slave/captive) have the right to refuse a Mut'ah or al-misyar marriage to her Muslim captor?

I know you ignored my answer, and failed to understand what was implied. Which I gave Abraham and Hagar are examples of "Right Hand Possession".

[manfred]

And you were shown that this is simply false in both Jewish tradition and Islamic tradition, so it is a barefaced lie.

[antineoETC]

I know you ignored my answer, and failed to understand what was implied. Which I gave Abraham and Hagar are examples of "Right Hand Possession".

Forget about what was "implied". You have:

a) EXPLICITLY defined a "Right Hand Possession" as a servant/captive/slave

b) stated that before a Muslim man can engage in sex with a servant/captive/slave "There must be a marriage bond like mut'ah marriage or al-misyar marriage...

So i repeat my question: is a Right Hand Possession entitled in the Islamic scheme of things to refuse to enter into mut'ah or al-misyar marriage with her Muslim captor?

[SAM]

I know you ignored my answer, and failed to understand what was implied. Which I gave Abraham and Hagar are examples of "Right Hand Possession".

Forget about what was "implied". You have:

a) EXPLICITLY defined a "Right Hand Possession" as a servant/captive/slave

b) stated that before a Muslim man can engage in sex with a servant/captive/slave "There must be a marriage bond like mut'ah marriage or al-misyar marriage...

So i repeat my question: is a Right Hand Possession entitled in the Islamic scheme of things to refuse to enter into mut'ah or al-misyar marriage with her Muslim captor?

You choose to turn off your own mind, it is your problem to understand Islam, not me.

[antineoETC]

it is your problem to understand Islam, not me.

The following is not specifically directed at SAM. But he is welcome to stick his oar in if he so desires:

And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, (Q 23:44)

Although this passage deals specifically with forcing slave girls (ie Right Hand Possessions) into prostitution it also carries with it a GENERAL principle that if the slave girls wish not to engage in sexual intercourse their wishes must be respected under all circumstances. Therefore, sexual intercourse in Islam must under ALL circumstances be consensual.

Furthermore verse 4:19 states:

O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will.

Which clearly implies that forced marriage of any sort, including mutah etc, is strictly forbidden by Allah. In other words, ALL marriage in Islam must be by MUTUAL consent.


Now, coming back to verse 4:24:

And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess.

This means that the Muslim man can marry and have sex with a Right Hand Possession EVEN IF SHE IS ALREADY MARRIED ie he can marry and have sex with ANOTHER MAN'S WIFE. Since verses 23:44&4:19 establish that Allah only permits CONSENSUAL MARRIAGE/SEX and consensual marriage/sex with an already-married woman constitutes adultery, it logically follows that Islam PERMITS ADULTERY.

Fair enough but, that being the case, I am at a loss to understand SAM's antagonism to the sexual "immorality" of westerners.

[Hombre]

you are citing from the Quran where the serpent raped Fatima in a back ally In Mekkah.
Get your fat straight

According to Jewish medieval traditions, Lilith was Adam's first wife, before Eve. She is described as Lilith as a half-female, half-serpent, who coiled around the Tree of Knowledge. This means that Eve is "Pilegesh" Among the Israelites, men commonly acknowledged their pilegesh (meaning a mistress or half-wife), and such women enjoyed the same rights in the house as legitimate wives..

You are drunk - interjecting back ally Islamic traditions into Judaism.

Here is the full description & meaning of "Pilegesh" (פילגש)
A concubine recognized among the ancient Hebrews. She enjoyed the same rights in the house as the legitimate wife. Since it was regarded as the highest blessing to have many children, while the greatest curse was childlessness, legitimate wives themselves gave their maids to their husbands to atone, at least in part, for their own barrenness, as in the cases of Sarah and Hagar, Leah and Zilpah, Rachel and Bilhah. The concubine commanded the same respect and inviolability as the wife; and it was regarded as the deepest dishonor for the man to whom she belonged if hands were laid upon her. Thus Jacob never forgave his eldest son for violating Bilhah (Gen. xxxv. 22, xlix. 4). According to the story of Gibeah, related in Judges xix., 25,000 warriors of the tribe of Benjamin lost their lives on account of the maltreatment and death of a concubine. Abner, Saul's first general, deserted Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, who had reproached his leader with having had intercourse with Rizpah, the daughter of his royal father's concubine, Aiah (II Sam. iii. 7); and Absalom brought the greatest dishonor upon David by open intercourse with his father's concubines (ib. xvi. 21 et seq.).

The children of the concubine had equal rights with those of the legitimate wife. Abraham dismissed his natural sons with gifts (Gen. xxv. 6), and Jacob's sons by Bilhah and Zilpah were equal with his sons by Leah and Rachel; while Abimelech, who subsequently became king over a part of Israel, was the son of Gideon-jerubbaal and his Shechemite concubine (Judges viii. 31). In the time of the Kings the practise of taking concubines was no longer due to childlessness but to luxury. David had ten concubines (II Sam. xv. 16), who, however, also did housework; Solomon had 300 (I Kings xi. 30); and his son Rehoboam had sixty (II Chron. xi. 21).