Reply to What does Islam say about concubines?

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "What does Islam say about concubines?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
 - to consent to "marriage" 
   [b]If she had the right to ask to negotiate her freedom, why would she not have the right to refuse consent to marriage also?[/b][/quote]

Several people had asked you: what did she, a slavewoman, had to negotiate with?  Free women can refuse marriage, can a concubine refuse concubinage? Can she say to an Ameer who's handing out her and her sisters to the soldiers, "sorry, I don't want to be his concubine.  There's a chick on DCUM who says I can.  I'll be on my way then."  Is there any scriptural support, in the Quran/ahadith that any female captive ever walked out on her owner?  Stop saying she could refuse consent to marriage, concubines had to be freed first to be married, one couldn't marry a concubine who would remain a concubine.

[quote=Anonymous]
 - to receive a dowry
   [b]If the owner married her, yes, he did have to give her a dowry.[/b][/quote]

If her owner married her, she would no longer be a concubine - irrelevant.

[quote=Anonymous]
 - to ask for "divorce"
   [b]If the owner married his concubine, yes, she could seek a divorce through the court.[/b][/quote]
If the owner married his concubine, she would have been a free woman at that point.  Could a concubine walk out on her master?

[quote=Anonymous]
 - pregnancy didn't set them free, the death of the owner to whom they've born a child did.  You're tripping here. If they had to be free upon pregnancy, their masters would have lost the right to intercourse with them (since they would no longer be owned by that particular man) and would have to marry them to continue to enjoy that right. The concubine who had children by her owner would be set free but only after her master died.[/quote]
     [b]If the concubine had the owner's child, she could no longer be sold. That means she acquired a different, elevated status, and was a permanent member of his household. Her child would be free. [/b][/quote]

But her pregnancy - as you mentioned first - didn't make her free. Lying isn't very nice.  That she could no longer be sold doesn't mean she became free. [/quote]

Show me where you read that she was NOT free after having a child.[/quote]
Show me where you read that she WAS free upon delivery of a child.[/quote]

Well, I was going to wait till you brought your sources. But being an inquisitive sort, here you are:

Early Maliki Law: Ibn 'Abd Al-Hakam and His Compendium of Jurisprudence, Chapter "The Umm Walad", a common name in Arabic for the concubine who had a child by her master. Literally means "mother of child."

http://books.google.com/books?id=ciSskcBCi3EC&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=%22umm+walad%22+and+islam&source=bl&ots=E57hlRP7Ot&sig=GotTXAB-94yWToPp93XUH0Lw8fs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Y9ENVMWjI4_bsAST84GoDQ&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22umm%20walad%22%20and%20islam&f=false

Wish could cut and paste, but here's a summary: "umm walad" was freed only upon death of her master, and sometimes her children would have to wait for the master's death, too.

Now please, bring your evidence that a concubine is freed immediately upon pregnancy or delivery.

And if you are the poster who rejects the validity of Shariah as manmade, then I will find it very amusing that you will have to go to the source you despise for references on what exactly it proposed to do with umm walad's.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics