Sunday, January 25, 2009

Sunan Abu Dawud and Jami At-Tirmidhi on Sex with Captives

SUNAN ABU DAWUD

Sunan Abu Dawud 2150—Abu Sa’id al-Khudri said: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.

Sunan Abu Dawud 2166—Abu Sa’id al-Khudri reported that a man said: Apostle of Allah, I have a slave-girl and I withdraw the penis from her (while having intercourse), and I dislike that she becomes pregnant. I intend (by intercourse) what the men intend by it. The Jews say that withdrawing the penis is burying the living girls on a small scale. He (the Prophet) said: The Jews told a lie. If Allah intends to create it, you cannot turn it away.

Sunan Abu Dawud 2167—Muhairiz said: I entered the mosque and saw Abu Sa’id al-Khudri. I sat with him and asked about withdrawing the penis (while having intercourse). Abu Sa’id said: We went out with the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to Banu al-Mustaliq, and took some Arab women captive, and we desired the women, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, and we wanted ransom; so we intended to withdraw the penis (while having intercourse with the slave-women). But we asked ourselves: Can we draw the penis when the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) is among us before asking him about it? So we asked him about it. He said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.

Sunan Abu Dawud 2168—Jabir said: A man from the Ansar came to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: I have a slave-girl, and I have intercourse with her, but I dislike her to conceive. He replied: Withdraw you penis from her if you wish, for what is decreed for her will come to her. After a time the man came to him and said: The girl has become pregnant. He said: I told you that what was decreed for her would come to her.

JAMI AT-TIRMIDHI

Jami At-Tirmidhi 1132—Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri narrated: We got some captives on the day of Awtas, and they had husbands among their people. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, so the following was revealed: And women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess [4:24].”

Jami At-Tirmidhi 1137—Jabir bin Abdullah narrated: “We practiced Azl while the Qur’an was being revealed.” . . . Malik bin Anas said: “The permission of the free woman is to be requested for Azl, while the slave woman’s permission need not be requested.”

Jami At-Tirmidhi 3016—Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri said: “On the Day of Awtas, we captured some women who had husbands among the idolaters. So some of the men disliked that, so Allah, Most High, revealed: ‘And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess . . . . [4:24]’”

Jami At-Tirmidhi 3712—Imran bin Husain narrated that the Messenger of Allah dispatched an army and he put Ali bin Abi Talib in charge of it. He left on the expedition and he entered upon a female slave. So four of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah scolded him, and they made a pact saying: “[If] we meet the Messenger of Allah we will inform him of what Ali did.” When the Muslims returned from the journey, they would begin with the Messenger of Allah and give him Salam, then they would go to their homes. So when the expedition arrived, they gave Salam to the Prophet, and one of the four stood saying: “O Messenger of Allah! Do you see that Ali bin Abi Talib did such and such.” The Messenger of Allah turned away from him. Then the second one stood and said as he said, and he turned away from him. Then the third stood before him, and said as he said, and he turned away from him. Then the fourth stood and said as they had said. The Messenger of Allah faced him, and the anger was visible on his face, he said: “What do you want from Ali?! What do you want from Ali?! What do you want from Ali?! Indeed Ali is from me, and I am from him, and he is the ally of every believer after me.”

9 comments:

David Wood said...

Notice two things from the At-Tirmidhi passages. (1) Ali had sex with a captive before the spoils had been divided and without waiting for the woman's period, yet Muhammad did nothing about it. (2) A captive's permission wasn't required for Azl.

Anonymous said...

David, maybe you should point out the flaw in this response:

I already answered you. I already said that we already have statements from the Prophet (peace be upon him) that causing harm and oppression to those under your authority is forbidden.

This is what really happened:

Muslim: "Yeah, you woman over there. I am not allowed to cause you or anyone else harm an or oppression. Which is self-evident because my scripture say so. So I will ask you now:
Is it ok when I kill your husband and take you as a captive?"

Woman: "Well, sure. Why not."

Muslim: "Nice. Let's have sex right after I killed your husband."

[later]

Muslim: "Wait a second, maybe I should ask the messenger of Allah about coitus interruptus.
[he walks to Muhammed]
O Allah’s Messenger! We get slave-girls from the war captives and we love property; what do you think about coitus interruptus?"

Muhammed: “Do you do that? It is better for you not to do it, for there is no living creature which Allah has ordained to come into existence but will be created.”

Muslim: "Ok."

Muhammed: "And maybe yuou should memorize what I just said. Later muslims will need my wise words."

Muslim: "Ok. But I won't tell anything about how I asked the woman if I can kill her husband and take her as war booty. That's self-evident."

Muhammed: "Of course it is. One has to be really desperate to think we would not ask for permission when we take war booty and have sex with captive woman."

B said...

David said: (1) Ali had sex with a captive before the spoils had been divided and without waiting for the woman's period, yet Muhammad did nothing about it.

That particular narration is weak because it contains Yazeed Al Dabghee who has been declared weak by the scholars.

Nevertheless, even if it was authentic this does not show rape. So why are you changing the topic? The commentary on Sunan Al Tirmidhi explains how it was possible that Ali was right and the others were wrong, but I don’t see the relevance in mentioning it since it has nothing to do with rape.

As for the Prophet not condemning Ali, this could be for several reasons.

- The Prophet believed Ali didn’t do anything wrong and they didn’t present evidence for their claim.
- The Prophet didn’t like their attitude in trying to point out a mistake and make a big deal about it in order to try and defame Ali’s reputation.
- The Prophet told us to forgive and overlook minor mistakes made by those who are righteous especially if they were done unintentionally and the Prophet saw that these companions weren’t doing that, so he ignored them and probably rebuked Ali privately.

Regardless of the reason, this has nothing to do with rape.

David said: (2) A captive's permission wasn't required for Azl.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) didn’t say that, Imam Maalik said that. Pay closer attention.

Imam Maalik’s reasoning was that the free woman has the right to have a child. The man doesn’t have the right to forbid his wife from having a child, thus he must ask her permission before doing azl. However, if the Muslim gets his slave girl pregnant, she seizes to become his slave girl and he must marry her. The Muslim therefore, doesn’t have to ask for her permission to do azl when they make consensual sex.

Again, where is the rape? Even if Imam Malik said that you can rape her, which he didn’t, he is not my final authority, the Prophet (peace be upon him) is. So what evidence did Imam Maalik use then from Qur’an and Sunnah to justify his statement that one can rape his slave girl (which he didn’t say, it’s only for the sake of argument)?


David, it’s hopeless. Just admit you are wrong on this particular issue.


Regards,

Bassam

Fernando said...

Bassam saide: «The man doesn’t have the right to forbid his wife from having a child»...

What the point of these argumente? Could he force her to have an abortion? I don't thinke so... then: what the meaning of sayineg that the captive permision wasn't needed to Azl?

Nakdimon said...

Bassam: “The Prophet (peace be upon him) didn’t say that, Imam Maalik said that. Pay closer attention.”

David never said that your prophet said that, he just pointed out what the hadith said. YOU should pay closer attention and stop attacking straw men.

Bassam: “Imam Maalik’s reasoning was that the free woman has the right to have a child. The man doesn’t have the right to forbid his wife from having a child, thus he must ask her permission before doing azl. However, if the Muslim gets his slave girl pregnant, she seizes to become his slave girl and he must marry her. The Muslim therefore, doesn’t have to ask for her permission to do azl when they make consensual sex”


The entire explanation of mister Malik doesn’t make sense! You don’t mean to tell me that Muslims were prohibited to have sex with captive women when they were already married to four wives, are you? Because if that is what you are claiming then please show us the hadith that says so, since Muslims can’t have more than four wives. And if that is not what you are saying and such a hadith to substantiate that claim doesn’t exist, then your entire argument is useless and just another attempt to throw up red herrings. Remember: no hadith is worse than a “weak” hadith!

Furthermore, if azl is only permissible with the consensus of the freed wife, then why did they go to Muhammad instead of the woman they were about to have sex with and subsequently marry if she would become pregnant? If what you are saying about the slave women becoming freed women after they would become pregnant, then that doesn’t make any sense in light of the statement of imam Malik. He said that the slave woman has no saying if she wants the child of the Muslim sex-predator. Since the slave woman would become the wife of the Muslim and thus free, she would have any saying in the matter. It is the world upside down!

And if the women didn’t become pregnant the Muslims wouldn’t marry them, which means that the Qur’an and Muhammad condoned casual sex! Then what are Muslims criticizing the secular Western society for? The only difference between these two would be that the secular societies aren’t on expeditions and the Muslims were. Please comment!

Bassam: “Nevertheless, even if it was authentic this does not show rape. So why are you changing the topic? The commentary on Sunan Al Tirmidhi explains how it was possible that Ali was right and the others were wrong, but I don’t see the relevance in mentioning it since it has nothing to do with rape.”

I am getting pretty tired of the weak excuse about “weak“ narrations. But in any event, there are a lot more ahadith about the women being taken to the private rooms of the Muslims while their husbands are still there. And thus these women are still married and therefore Muhammad condoned adultery and rape. You don’t mean to tell us that the women were willing to have sex with the Muslims while their husbands were right there with them, are you? Please comment!

Bassam: “The Prophet believed Ali didn’t do anything wrong and they didn’t present evidence for their claim.
- The Prophet didn’t like their attitude in trying to point out a mistake and make a big deal about it in order to try and defame Ali’s reputation.
- The Prophet told us to forgive and overlook minor mistakes made by those who are righteous especially if they were done unintentionally and the Prophet saw that these companions weren’t doing that, so he ignored them and probably rebuked Ali privately.”


All conjectural statements. You cry foul when David and other non-Muslims make their analysis based on the text and you demand from them that they show you were it specifically mentions a specific word. Yet you make claims freely without the things you claim being mentioned in the text either. Sorry, but if you are going to set standards for us, then we suggest you meet your own standards. If you aren’t willing to do so, then you have no right to demand those things from us.

Your prophet didn’t condone the men taking from the spoil before he got his cut of the deal. So since Ali took from the spoil before the Chums was taken, he was in clear error. The people that testified against Ali knew that. That’s why they were going to Muhammad. THEY weren’t allowed to take from the spoils before the Chums and so was Ali. And Muhammad’s explanation was nothing like what you are saying he meant. His excuse not to say anything about Ali is very weak and doesn’t make sense.

In conclusion:
The hadiths are clear: The men conquered women, they wanted to have sex with them, their men were still there in their presence and Allah sent down a revelation saying “you can have casual sex with slave women, whether they are married or not”. This accounts not only for rape but for adultery also.

Nakdimon

Anonymous said...

"David, all those passages about sex with captives have nothing to do with rape. If someone takes women as war booty and has sex with them, it's not rape because mountains prevent the earth from shaking. Just become a muslim!"

Nakdimon said...

LOL Matthew. That was funny. Now let's see what Ibn has to say about his prophet getting 1 out of 5 guesses right from only two options!

ben malik said...

Wood, I thought you would be interested in posting this link since it confirms that Muhammad wore women's clothing - http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024617.php

It comes from one of Father Zakaria Botros' lectures.

Unknown said...

In The Arabic text the phrase "in the presence of" doesn't exist.