For updates/revisions and new articles visit our new website

This article may have been revised. For updates/revisions and new articles visit . You can find us on social media as well
Previous Post : Go to the previous Post
Next Post: Go to the Next Post


    1. Asalamualaikum,
      Although it may seem like not many people read this. I encourage you to make these responses, as they are excellent to learn from either from a Muslim's perspective or from a non-Muslim's perspective.
      Ibn Rafe

    2. Jazakallah brother . May Allah grant you good of this life as well as of hereafter. Please suggest how can I popularise your blog.

    3. Jazak'Allah brother

      U can share the topics with ur contacts through email or drop links on some forums or through mails.

      It'll be great if you do it. May Allah reward u for this.

      Remember in prayers akhi!

    4. Assakam Ailekum: The issue of men allowed to have even consensual sex with female slaves in the Quran is highly questionable. It crucially hinges on how one interprets "Ma Malakat Aymanukum" is Surah Al-Muminoon (23:6). This phrase is usually interpreted as "those that your right hands possess" or "female slaves". However, "Ma Malakat Aymanukum" phrase has at least 5 other meanings that are discussed in detail at: http://--------------------care.html This website clearly demonstrates that "female slaves" is not the intended meaning in the Surah 23:6. Also, see Mohammad Asad's translation on this verse. I quote below his detailed explanation of "Ma Malakat Aymanukum": Muhammad Asad - End Note 3 (23:6) Lit., "or those whom their right hands possess" (aw ma malakat aymanuhum). Many of the commentators assume unquestioningly that this relates to female slaves, and that the particle aw ("or") denotes a permissible alternative. This interpretation is, in my opinion, inadmissible inasmuch as it is based on the assumption that sexual intercourse with ones female slave is permitted without marriage: an assumption, which is contradicted by the Qur'an itself (see 4:3, 24, 25 and 24:32, with the corresponding notes). Nor is this the only objection to the above-mentioned interpretation. Since the Qur'an applies the term ''believers" to men and women alike, and since the term azwaj ("spouses"), too, denotes both the male and the female partners in marriage, there is no reason for attributing to the phrase ma malakat aymanuhum the meaning of "their female slaves''; and since, on the other hand, it is out of the question that female and male slaves could have been referred to here it is obvious that this phrase does not relate to slaves at all, but has the same meaning as in 4:24 - namely, "those whom they rightfully possess through wedlock (see note 26 on 4:24) - with the significant difference that in the present context this expression relates to both husbands and wives, who "rightfully possess" one another by virtue of marriage. On the basis of this interpretation, the particle aw which precedes this clause does not denote an alternative ("or") but is, rather, in the nature of an explanatory amplification, more or less analogous to the phrase "in other words" or "that is", thus giving to the whole sentence the meaning, "save with their spouses - that is, those whom they rightfully possess [through wedlock]", etc. (Cf. a similar construction 25:62 - ''for him who has the will to take thought -that is [lit., "or"], has the will to be grateful".) Mohammad Asad's translation is considered to be one of the best one's in English. You can access his translation at the following website: http://www.---------------EnglishTranslations.htm

      (Links have been made nonfunctional!
      And because of edit the change in comment date. It was actually made on 03/11/2010)

    5. I have visited the page and the rest of the explanation. But this is really not true for the reason that it is in complete oblivion to Ahadith about the issue. I know the sources you quoted are such that reject or atleast have a lot of apprehensions about the authority of Hadith.

      Not that otherwise the explanation is plausible. Insha'Allah very soon you will find my detailed rebuttal to such erroneous assertion in the light of Qur'an ALONE.

      For now, general readers ought to now that the stretched assertions above are in complete oblivion to Ahadith about the issue and thus not valid.

      And Allah knows the best!