Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

There IS a punishment for rape in Islam

Announcements Posted on
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by S'Class)
    Of course there is no consent when taking them - they are prisoners. I'm talking about having sex with them. Here, I listed how you are meant to treat your slave, and that's why you can't rape them. Also, slavery isn't exclusive to women, it seemed that you were implying that.
    If there's no consent then it's termed rape. Are you also one of those people who also claim that a man can't rape his wife? I literally can't believe that people like you exist. Not to mention the fact that you agree with slavery.

    No I didn't imply that only women can be slaves.
    • Thread Starter
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonfly07)
    If there's no consent then it's termed rape. Are you also one of those people who also claim that a man can't rape his wife? I literally can't believe that people like you exist. Not to mention the fact that you agree with slavery.

    No I didn't imply that only women can be slaves.
    What are you talking about? I said, if the things I listed are how you are meant to treat your slave, how can you be allowed to rape them? Meaning, you can't rape them. And not raping means you are asking for consent.
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by S'Class)
    What are you talking about? I said, if the things I listed are how you are meant to treat your slave, how can you be allowed to rape them? Meaning, you can't rape them. And not raping means you are asking for consent.
    All you said is that a master should give his slaves food and clothes.

    Yeah keep your slaves alive, that'll make them feel better. A person's life is worth nothing if they can't be free and make their own decisions.

    You can't take people's freedom away from there regardless of if it's war or not, especially if they're just citizens and not fighting people.

    Mentioning a few basic "rights", which those people should have regardless of whether they're slaves or not, doesn't make it any more right. Yeah throw in some daily showers too, why not?

    Nowhere does it mention consent of slaves anywhere in the quran or hadith. Slaves aren't meant to give consent, that's why they're slaves. If you asked them for consent to do anything they'd be free people.
    • Thread Starter
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonfly07)
    All you said is that a master should give his slaves food and clothes.

    Yeah keep your slaves alive, that'll make them feel better. A person's life is worth nothing if they can't be free and make their own decisions.

    You can't take people's freedom away from there regardless of if it's war or not, especially if they're just citizens and not fighting people.

    Mentioning a few basic "rights", which those people should have regardless of whether they're slaves or not, doesn't make it any more right. Yeah throw in some daily showers too, why not?

    Nowhere does it mention consent of slaves anywhere in the quran or hadith. Slaves aren't meant to give consent, that's why they're slaves. If you asked them for consent to do anything they'd be free people.
    This debate isn't whether they consent to being slave, it's if it's allowed to rape or not. Now I'll repeat those rights.

    -SAME AMOUNT of food and clothing of SAME QUALITY as the master.
    -They must be treated with kindness - how can you rape when they must be treated kindly?
    -No hitting - how can you rape when hitting is not allowed?

    These show that you can't rape your slave.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonfly07)
    All you said is that a master should give his slaves food and clothes.

    Yeah keep your slaves alive, that'll make them feel better. A person's life is worth nothing if they can't be free and make their own decisions.

    You can't take people's freedom away from there regardless of if it's war or not, especially if they're just citizens and not fighting people.

    Mentioning a few basic "rights", which those people should have regardless of whether they're slaves or not, doesn't make it any more right. Yeah throw in some daily showers too, why not?

    Nowhere does it mention consent of slaves anywhere in the quran or hadith. Slaves aren't meant to give consent, that's why they're slaves. If you asked them for consent to do anything they'd be free people.
    Firstly, 'slavery' as understood in the West is completely different to slavery in Islam. By western standards, a slave in Islam may as well be a free man, just like you said in your post.

    There's something called 'mukataba' which is a contract between the master and the slave which allows the slave to be emancipated by paying a certain amount of money. Slavery isn't forced on a person, nor is it a permanent thing in Islam. If someone wants to be free, they have the right to be freed. In Islam, slave have rights, they are to be treated well, they are respected. If you look at some of the slaves in Islamic history, you'll see that many became scholars/kings (many slaves during the time of the tabi'een became scholars, and as for kings just have a look at the mamluk dynasty (a.k.a the slave dynasty). Islamically, slaves are to be educated and integrated into society. Do you think that would ever happen in the western institution of slavery? Also, (unlike in the West) slavery has nothing at all to do with race - a slave could be arab/white/black/persian. Tbh, slavery in Islam is considered as nothing more than a profession.

    It's also worth mentioning that the act of freeing a save is a highly praised and encouraged in Islam (as an act of charity for the sake of God) and many cases slaves are to be freed as an expiation for having not fulfilled a certain duty (e.g. breaking a vow or having intercourse during the day in ramadhan (the month of fasting)).

    This is a brief summary of some of the principles of dealing with slaves in a just and kind manner:

    1 – Guaranteeing them food and clothing like that of their masters.

    It was narrated that Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “They are your brothers whom Allaah has put under your authority, so if Allaah has put a person’s brother under his authority, let him feed him from what he eats and clothe him from what he wears, and let him not overburden him with work, and if he does overburden him with work, then let him help him.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6050).

    2 – Preserving their dignity

    It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: I heard Abu’l-Qaasim (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whoever accuses his slave when he is innocent of what he says will be flogged on the Day of Resurrection, unless he is as he said.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6858).

    Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) manumitted a slave of his, then he picked up a stick or something from the ground and said: There is no more reward in it than the equivalent of this, but I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whoever slaps his slave or beats him, his expiation is to manumit him.” Narrated by Muslim (1657).

    3 – Being fair towards slaves and treating them kindly

    It was narrated that ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan tweaked the ear of a slave of his when he did something wrong, then he said to him after that: Come and tweak my ear in retaliation. The slave refused but he insisted, so he started to tweak it slightly, and he said to him: Do it strongly, for I cannot bear the punishment on the Day of Resurrection. The slave said: Like that, O my master? The Day that you fear I fear also.

    When ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf (may Allaah be pleased with him) walked among his slaves, no one could tell him apart from them, because he did not walk ahead of them, and he did not wear anything different from what they wore.

    One day ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab passed by and saw some slaves standing and not eating with their master. He got angry and said to their master: What is wrong with people who are selfish towards their servants? Then he called the servants and they ate with them.

    A man entered upon Salmaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) and found him making dough – and he was a governor. He said to him: O Abu ‘Abd-Allaah, what is this? He said: We have sent our servant on an errand and we do not want to give him two jobs at once.

    4 – There is nothing wrong with slaves having precedence over free men in some matters

    - with regard to any religious or worldly matters in which he excels over him. For example, it is valid for a slave to lead the prayer. ‘Aa’ishah the Mother of the Believers had a slave who would lead her in prayer. Indeed the Muslims have been commanded to hear and obey even if a slave is appointed in charge of their affairs.

    5 – A slave may buy himself from his master and be free.

    If a person is enslaved for some reason but then it becomes apparent that he has given up his wrongdoing and forgotten his past, and he has become a man who shuns evil and seeks to do good, is it permissible to respond to his request to let him go free? Islam says yes, and there are some ***aha’ who say that this is obligatory and some who say that it is mustahabb.

    This is what is called a mukaatabah or contract of manumission between the slave and his master. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allaah which He has bestowed upon you”

    [al-Noor 24:33]

    This is how Islam treats slaves justly and kindly.

    One of the results of these guidelines is that in many cases, the slave would become a friend of his master; in some cases the master would regard him as a son. Sa’d ibn Haashim al-Khaalidi said, describing a slave of his:

    He is not a slave, rather he is a son whom [Allaah] has put under my care.

    He has supported me with his good service; he is my hands and my arms.

    Another result of the Muslims treating slaves in this manner is that the slaves became part of Muslim families as if they were also family members.

    Gustave le Bon says in Hadaarat al-‘Arab (Arab Civilization) (p. 459-460): What I sincerely believe is that slavery among the Muslims is better than slavery among any other people, and that the situation of slaves in the east is better than that of servants in Europe, and that slaves in the east are part of the family. Slaves who wanted to be free could attain freedom by expressing their wish. But despite that, they did not resort to exercising this right
    Sadly a lot of the time non-Muslims have their own understanding on a particular topic that's also dealt with in Islam, and instead of properly researching on Islam's stance, they just apply non-Islamic rulings to Islamic ones (I'm speaking in general terms). So hopefully that's cleared some things up for you.

    Oops, this is really off-topic and doesn't really belong in this thread :/ I'd be happy to take this to PM.
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by At peace)
    Firstly, Arab is not equal to Muslim, and Arab ways not equal to Islam.

    Secondly, Islam encourages and appreciates women to learn to drive, lays emphasis on education (females are especially encouraged to get med and teaching degrees.) THe greatest of all Islamic scholars was a female. And in the present age, muslim women are competing with men in every field and there is NO islamic law stopping them. If there is, please do share. I'd love to know about it. Make sure it's authentic though. I don't want filth. Check out some info on the world largest female uni project. So please atleast give us a break and do "read" about islam before hating like mad.

    Thirdly yes a woman can go out without a male unless the distance is more than 80 miles. And yes she covers. That's in Qur'an. There is no harm whatsoever in doing so. If there is. Quote it. You are wrong again. For a muslim man is to lower his gaze and control himself. Read some Qur'an. The Qur'an and Hadeeth and more strict on this than on women covering from head to toe. Weather a woman wears a bikini or a burka. By the Islamic law, the Muslim man is not to even look at her, let alone flirt or touch her.

    Hey, if the woman has no problem dressing like a "slut" what's "your" problem. I mean if I cover from head to toe and/or I cover my eyes too. Why is it bothering you? You are not doing the western any favours by saying most the stuff wrong like this

    I am not 'hating'. Your post to which I was replying said that women are "10th Class citizens" in the West. I replied that they are treated worse in the Middle East generally, not necessarily just because they are Muslims.
    The only place I said 'Islam' was at the end with 'Seriously, you are not doing Islam or the non-Western world any favours saying this.'
    This was because you, as a Muslim, said that women are treated worse in the West than in the East, which simply isn't true. This suggests that you do agree with the treatment of women in the Arab states.
    So your comments that Islam does not agree with or want the type of rules that Arab states regarding women may be true (as I don't know about Islam) -but I did not ever say that Islam did. I said that your comment that life is better for Eastern rather than Western women is wrong, whether that relates to Islam or not.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    I dream that, one day, someone will tell me who follows Islam properly and where

    whenever I criticize the Islam I can see around me, I am told that what I criticize is not "true Islam"

    slowly, I am reaching the conclusion that "true" Islam is simply an abstract concept : it doesn't exist in reality and has never existed, except in the narrations about Muhammad and the rashidun (rightly-guided) Caliphs

    Best
    What do you criticise precisely?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Study)
    "Morrocan Law" Not islamic...
    Lighten up and read previous posts.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Study)
    What do you criticise precisely?
    hmmmm

    perhaps, it would be easier to list what I don't criticise

    honestly, I see very little really positive in Islam

    as to my criticism, nothing new: sexual segregation, discrimination of women, of non-muslims, of homosexuals, physical punishments ,confusion between State and reilgion, no respect for freedom of expression and democratic institutions, idealization of a mythical past

    the general impression I have is of a religion stuck in deep contradictions between wanting to preserve its "authenticity" and the challenges of modernity

    However, each time this is remarked, we get the standard answer "this is not real Islam, real Islam is in the Quran and Sunnah"

    This is simply not good enough. Books are just that.... books. They are not living reality. The best programme (on paper) can turn out to be the worst nightmare in reality (in fact, this tends to happen almost systematically). And, to be quite frank, quite a good part of Islam doesn't look good even on paper, let alone in reality.

    You can derive quite a few good books from reality, but very little reality from books.

    Best
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by musabjilani)
    TBH I never really thought about that before because it never occurred to me that the criminality of rape would ever be challenged.



    It's not about changing what the Qur'an says or means when it suits you, it's about understanding that a static interpretation of the Qur'an would be inconsistent with the Qur'an's own view of the world as a dynamic, continuously evolving existence. Laws have to be dynamic, and Islam itself realized the need for this dynamism and created the institution of Ijtihad to accommodate it. This isn't something I came up with to win a debate on TSR! It's a philosophy that has been carefully worked out by several Muslim thinkers, a philosophy that allows the Qur'anic message to stay current in a world of perpetual change.
    It's funny, but I didn't ever think that talking disrespectfully about someone's imaginary friend would ever be thought to be a crime either. Clearly, such things need to be made clear.

    I'm not accusing you of making it up. I'm accusing the very echelons of Islamic scholarly thinking of being hypocrites Something cannot be timeless, unquestionable and perfect, and yet be constently revised, as the Quran and Hadith are. Of course the words don;t change, but what Muslims are told they mean does, and this is to all intents and purposes the same thing. Muslims will accuse Christians of not following the Bible closely enough, but would a Muslim from 1400AD recognise the majority of todays Muslim community as proper Muslims? Would they agree with the modern interpretations of the Quran? I don't think so.

    (Original post by mariachi)
    The problem of not having "rape" specifically defined as a precise crime is that "zina" (illegal sexual intercourse), while still technically accurate, does not however really fit. As we have shown, prosecuting "rape" via "zina" can have perverse effects.

    The least we can say is that, since "zina" has to be proved by confession and/or 4 witnesses, most of the cases wil not fall under hadd (obligatory punishment), but under tazir (judge's discretion) .

    And here, it's really anybody's guess what would happen, what proof standards would be requested, what would be the range of punishments. Punishment could be very severe or very light, according to the judge's discretion.

    If an armed threat is involved, on the basis of Shariah the rapist (considered as a "moharreb" - one who wages war on Allah) could either find himself crucified, or with hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or simply "exiled from the land" - but this is a separate case.

    In any case, there is very, very little "certainty of law", and IMHO far too much is left to the judge's discretion.

    Best
    Well I'm sorry, but any God that says Rape is even in the same catagory as sex outside of marriage is an idiot.

    I'm again, I am not talking about Hadith or Shariah, I'm not talking with the addendum of Tasfir and 'interpretation', I'm talking about the Quran.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    any God that says Rape is even in the same catagory as sex outside of marriage is an idiot..
    "God" has said nothing about rape

    and that is part of the problem. The rest of the problem are: Shariah as developed in Islamic fiqh (jurisprudence) on rape and Shariah as implemented by State authorities in Muslim-majority States.

    As to whether God is an idiot or not, God knows best.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    "God" has said nothing about rape

    and that is part of the problem. The rest of the problem are: Shariah as developed in Islamic fiqh (jurisprudence) on rape and Shariah as implemented by State authorities in Muslim-majority States.

    As to whether God is an idiot or not, God knows best.
    The Quran is Allah's word as transcribed by Mohammed is it not?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I'm not accusing you of making it up. I'm accusing the very echelons of Islamic scholarly thinking of being hypocrites Something cannot be timeless, unquestionable and perfect, and yet be constently revised, as the Quran and Hadith are. Of course the words don;t change, but what Muslims are told they mean does, and this is to all intents and purposes the same thing. Muslims will accuse Christians of not following the Bible closely enough, but would a Muslim from 1400AD recognise the majority of todays Muslim community as proper Muslims? Would they agree with the modern interpretations of the Quran? I don't think so.
    To the part in italics, odd thing to add a smiley to. To the part in bold, well, that's your opinion. I would think that versatility and flexibility -- the ability to adapt to change -- are necessary for anything to be timeless. But I don't see us reaching agreement on this so good day to you. Enjoy being closed-minded.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    The Quran is Allah's word as transcribed by Mohammed is it not?
    as we all know, this is what Muslims believe (except that most consider that Mohammed was illiterate, so other people transcribed)

    i have looked a bit into this, and found that it's a rather strange idea

    absolutely nothing in the Quran points in that direction

    but, of course, we should read it in Arabic etc etc

    it's even stranger that Allah would send a "revelation" whose truth is not accessible for the vast majority of those it is designed for

    makes no sense whatsoever, but hey! he's God, so he can do what he wants : why should he make any sense ? some people will believe him anyway, so he takes it easy
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by musabjilani)
    To the part in italics, odd thing to add a smiley to. To the part in bold, well, that's your opinion. I would think that versatility and flexibility -- the ability to adapt to change -- are necessary for anything to be timeless. But I don't see us reaching agreement on this so good day to you. Enjoy being closed-minded.
    Close minded :mmm:

    My dear, objective assesment of a religion such as it differs with your opinion does not make me close minded.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    hmmmm

    perhaps, it would be easier to list what I don't criticise

    honestly, I see very little really positive in Islam

    as to my criticism, nothing new: sexual segregation, discrimination of women, of non-muslims, of homosexuals, physical punishments ,confusion between State and reilgion, no respect for freedom of expression and democratic institutions, idealization of a mythical past

    the general impression I have is of a religion stuck in deep contradictions between wanting to preserve its "authenticity" and the challenges of modernity

    However, each time this is remarked, we get the standard answer "this is not real Islam, real Islam is in the Quran and Sunnah"

    This is simply not good enough. Books are just that.... books. They are not living reality. The best programme (on paper) can turn out to be the worst nightmare in reality (in fact, this tends to happen almost systematically). And, to be quite frank, quite a good part of Islam doesn't look good even on paper, let alone in reality.

    You can derive quite a few good books from reality, but very little reality from books.

    Best
    Nothing really wrong with sexual segregation, and I don't really see how it discriminates against woman in the Qur'an, they have all the basic rights. I think the thing more stressed upon them is to dress modestly or cover up. When the state was correctly based upon religion (basically first 2 caliphs), we really thrived. Modern muslim leaders seem to be all hypocrites e.g. saudi arabia, they treat non arab muslims as scum, they drink alcohol etc...

    Freedom on expression, if its something thats going to cause outrage I'd rather ban it outright. Freedom of speech etc is so flawed, any idiot can go around saying what they want e.g. even be racist as hell and its part of their human right...

    Democratic institutions?First four caliphs were voted in anyway by chosen groups of people after the hypocrites basically took leadership e.g the umayad caliphate, I suppose your judge from governments like saudi arabia? Libya, Egypt , Syria?

    You don't seem to have done much research unless you just look at bigot sites, bad "muslim" governments, sorry my answers weren't in dept or very clear as detailed info was required to make things clear in this case.

    I see nothing wrong with physical punishments, e.g. if a person murders someone they should pay for the crime.
    Yes being gay in forbidden in Islam, I see nothing wrong with it.
    Erm mythical past? Don't get you.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Study)
    Nothing really wrong with sexual segregation, etc .
    thank you for your interesting views

    if this can be of any use to you, I think that we disagree on practically everything you listed in your post

    best
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by musabjilani)
    I would think that versatility and flexibility -- the ability to adapt to change -- are necessary for anything to be timeless.
    you have to change, but you have to be timeless. Adapt to modernity, but be valid for all times and for all places.

    A tall order.... where exactly do you cross the red line between adaptation and innovation ? and how can this huge effort of adaptation be accomplished without a "new" revelation ? clearly, it will go in lots of different directions, even much more than has happened until now

    Historically, this is how religions evolved : new revelations brought significant "updates" . But this avenue is not available for Islam, with its insistence on Muhammad as the "seal of prophets".

    Not an easy situation.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Close minded :mmm:

    My dear, objective assesment of a religion such as it differs with your opinion does not make me close minded.
    What makes you closed-minded isn't that your opinion disagrees with mine, but that you regard your opinion as objective fact and are unable to admit other positions.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by musabjilani)
    What makes you closed-minded isn't that your opinion disagrees with mine, but that you regard your opinion as objective fact and are unable to admit other positions.
    And I have done that where exactly?

    I await your answer with baited breath.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 14, 2012
New on TSR

GCSE mocks revision

Talk study tips this weekend

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.