Note: You can usually open the interesting advertisement/sponsor links in a new window/tab by RIGHT CLICKING the Ad-Link
then selecting 'Open in New Window' or 'Open in New Tab' from the drop down box. (depending on ad type)





What Do You Think? Forum Index What Do You Think?
A discussion board of different ideas and topics.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
TRoach.Net
r_frame.gif TRoach.Org

Are Slave-Girls in Islam Equivalent to Animals?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    What Do You Think? Forum Index -> Islam Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dorahuegens
member


Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 32

PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:32 am    Post subject: Are Slave-Girls in Islam Equivalent to Animals? Reply with quote

copied from:
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/7425/islam-slave-girls-animals


Are Slave-Girls in Islam Equivalent to Animals?

by Raymond Ibrahim
Jihad Watch
December 14, 2008


Many are now aware that the Koran—that is, Allah's word—permits, not just polygamy, but forced concubinage (sex with captive women), according to Koran 4:3: "Marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice, then only one, or what your right hands possess [captive women taken in war]." There is, however, an interesting, and very telling, linguistic aspect to this verse that is often overlooked—or intentionally obscured.

Oddly enough, the Arabic relative pronoun used to indicate these captive women is "ma": ma [what] malakat [possess] aymanukum [your right hands], literally, "what your right hands possess" (see Shakir's acclaimed English translation [ http://www.mcleanministries.com/ShakirKoran/html/5010/index.toc.html ] which most literally translates this). In Arabic, when one refers to a rational being (i.e., a human), the word used is man, which means "who(ever)"; ma, on the other hand, refers only to things or animals—trees, rocks, dogs and cats—very much similar to the English "it." Thus, in proper Arabic the phrase might have been man malakat aymanukum: "who(ever) your rights hands possess."

For long I assumed this was but a stylistic matter. However, the highly revered Islamic scholar al-Qurtubi (d.1273) also makes this observation in vol. 5, p.12 of his authoritative 20-volume Tafsir Al Koran (Exegesis of the Koran). He points out that members of the human race should be referred to with man (who), whereas only "inanimate objects" or "brute beasts" should be referred to with ma (what).

Does this suggest that the Koran's Arabic—touted as the most perfect Arabic—is flawed? Of course, no Muslim would allow for that. Nor need they, as this phenomenon (portraying concubines as non-human) accords well with a number of hadiths that place females and animals in the same category. Musnad Ibn Hanbal (vol. 2, p. 2992), for example, records Muhammad saying "Women, dogs, and donkeys annul a man's prayer." Indeed, in Qurtubi's same Tafsir (vol.15, p.172), after examining such hadiths, he writes, "A Woman may be likened to a sheep—even a cow or a camel—for all are ridden."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    What Do You Think? Forum Index -> Islam Discussions All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group