CAPTIVITY, SLAVERY & CONCUBINAGE ACCORDING TO THE QUR’AN

BATTLE CAPTIVES[1], SLAVERY AND CONCUBINAGE

It is against the rulings of the Quran to enslave the male or female war captives and to have sexual relations with them without marriage. Although the verses about this subject are clear, by distorting the meanings of words, a false perception was created and it has been turned into the common view of all sects including Sunni and Shia that captives can be enslaved and female captives  can also be used as concubines.

A-ENSLAVEMENT OF CAPTIVES

Real Muslims work for making the religion of God prevalent, not their own systems. When this work begins shaking the established order, violent opposition is encountered. Those on the opposite side of Muslims may even start a battle for that. The consequences can be fatal unless the battle is responded. God the Almighty has decreed:

“Fight in the way of God against those who fight you, but do not attack unjustly. God does not like those who attack unjustly.” (Al-Baqarah 2:190)

 

Muslims had their first battle in Badr. The Almighty God has sent down the verse below before this battle:

فَإِذا لَقِيتُمُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَضَرْبَ الرِّقَابِ حَتَّى إِذَا أَثْخَنتُمُوهُمْ فَشُدُّوا الْوَثَاقَ فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ وَإِمَّا فِدَاء حَتَّى تَضَعَ الْحَرْبُ أَوْزَارَهَا

“When you meet those who ignore[2] (in battle), smite their necks until you overpower them, then bind your captives firmly; thereafter set them (the captives) free, either by an act of grace, or against ransom. Do this, so that the burden of war is laid down.” (Muhammad 47:4)

Setting the captives free relieves the enemy and also prevents them to be given as a reason of a new battle. God the Almighty has decreed:

وَلَا تَسْتَوِي الْحَسَنَةُ وَلَا السَّيِّئَةُ ۚ ادْفَعْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ فَإِذَا الَّذِي بَيْنَكَ وَبَيْنَهُ عَدَاوَةٌ كَأَنَّهُ وَلِيٌّ حَمِيمٌ

“Good and evil are not equal. Repel evil with good, and the person who was your enemy becomes like an intimate friend. (Fussilat 41:34)

God had criticised Prophet (nabi) Muhammad (pbuh) heavily because he had taken captives without suppressing the enemy in the Battle of Badr:

مَا كَانَ لِنَبِيٍّ أَنْ يَكُونَ لَهُ أَسْرَىٰ حَتَّىٰ يُثْخِنَ فِي الْأَرْضِ ۚ تُرِيدُونَ عَرَضَ الدُّنْيَا وَاللَّهُ يُرِيدُ الْآخِرَةَ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ.

لَوْلَا كِتَابٌ مِنَ اللَّهِ سَبَقَ لَمَسَّكُمْ فِيمَا أَخَذْتُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ. فَكُلُوا مِمَّا غَنِمْتُمْ حَلَالًا طَيِّبًا ۚ

 “It behoves no prophet to take captives until he has sufficiently suppressed the enemy in the battlefield. You merely seek the temporary gains of the world whereas God desires for you the (good of the) Hereafter. God is superior and He judges correctly.
If it were not for your Master’s word (that you will have the victory)[3], a great torment would have befallen you because of what you have taken (the captives).
Enjoy, then, all that is lawful and clean of the things which you have gained in war.”[4] (Al-Anfal/The Spoils of War 8:67–69)

 

 

Our Nabi obeyed the 4th verse of Chapter Muhammad and set the Badr captives free either by an act of grace or against ransom.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) suppressed the Jews of Banu Qurayza after the Battle of the Trenches, during which those Jews had changed sides and collaborated with the enemy. Related verses are as follows:

وَأَنْزَلَ الَّذِينَ ظَاهَرُوهُمْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مِنْ صَيَاصِيهِمْ وَقَذَفَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمُ الرُّعْبَ فَرِيقًا تَقْتُلُونَ وَتَأْسِرُونَ فَرِيقًا. وَأَوْرَثَكُمْ أَرْضَهُمْ وَدِيَارَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ وَأَرْضًا لَمْ تَطَئُوهَا ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرًا.

 

“God brought down from their strongholds those of the People of the Book who supported them, and He cast terror into their hearts. You were killing some of them, and captivating some of them.
He made you heirs to their lands, and their houses, and their possessions – and [promised you] the lands on which you had never yet set foot. God sets measures for all things.” (Al-Ahzaab 33:26-27)

 

At Banu Qurayza siege some people died and the rest were captivated. Their homeland and possessions were left to Muslims. The expression “He made you heirs to their lands, and their houses, and their possessions” in the verse shows that captives were set free as an act of grace, since they neither got the means to fight nor possessions to give as ransom.[5]

Including the captives of Khaybar and Banu Mustaliq, all the captives were treated according to the verse above. It was impossible for Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) to treat any other way, when the Quran has a clear command.

Although the 4th verse of Chapter Muhammad is clear, all sects including the Sunni and the Shia falsely show killing or enslaving the war captives as  the ruling of the verse. In Ahkam al-Quran by Abu Bakr al-Jassas the explanations about the verse are as follows:

{فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ، وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً} فَجَعَلَ اللَّهُ النَّبِيَّ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ فِي الْأُسَارَى بِالْخِيَارِ، إنْ شَاءُوا قَتَلُوهُمْ، وَإِنْ شَاءُوا اسْتَعْبَدُوهُمْ، وَإِنْ شَاءُوا فَادُوهُم

“By the verse “set them free either by an act of grace, or against ransom”, God let his nabi and believers free about captives; they kill them or enslave them or demand ransom for them, they can do the way they will.[6]

 

Ömer Nasuhi Bilmen summarizes the subject as follows:

“The competent authority is free to do one of those about the captives that are taken in the battle: If he wants, he kills the warrior team of the captives and discards the mischief entirely for the benefit of Muslims. If he wants, in order to eliminate their evil, he settles with enslaving or making concubines out of them. If he wants, he grants them freedom under the guarantee of Muslims by bringing them to the position of dhimmi. If he wants, he exchanges them with Muslim captives.[7]

In the exegesis of Tabataba’i who is a member of the sect Jafari, the subject is evaluated as follows:

وقوله: (فإمامنابعدوإمافداء) أيفأسروهمويتفرععليهأنكمإماتمنونعليهممنابعدالاسرفتطلقونهمأوتسترقونهموإماتفدونهمفداءبالمالأوبمنلكمعندهممنالاسارى.

“The verse “set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom” means: Take them captives. Then you either set them free by an act of grace, or enslave them, or set them free against the possessions or captives in their hands.[8]

As it is seen, both Sunni and Shia scholars consider the enslavement of captives as the ruling of the verse, although it is not even mentioned in the verse.

B- USING THE FEMALE CAPTIVES AS CONCUBINES

Sexual relation without marriage has never been lawful neither to the free people nor to the captives. The Almighty God has decreed:

وَأَنكِحُوا الْأَيَامَى مِنكُمْ وَالصَّالِحِينَ مِنْ عِبَادِكُمْ وَإِمَائِكُمْ إِن يَكُونُوا فُقَرَاء يُغْنِهِمُ اللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ . وَلْيَسْتَعْفِفِ الَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ نِكَاحًا حَتَّى يُغْنِيَهُمْ اللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِ .

 “And wed the singles among you, and those who are fit (for marriage) among your male and female captives. If they are poor, God fulfills their needs out of His favor. God has ample means, He is all-knowing. And let those who do not find the means to marry (either free or captive) live in continence until God fulfills their needs out of His favor.” (An-Noor 24:32-33)

Either free or captive, no woman can be wed against her will.
No special condition applies to a woman who wants to get married to a captive man, but a man who has the means to get married to a free woman is not allowed to marry a captive woman. If he wants to marry a captive woman under his guardianship, he has to set her free from captivity first. If he wants to marry another captive woman, he has to pay the ransom for her, and then marry. This will be explained below. If the man does not have the means to set a captive woman free, then he can get married to that captive woman. Related verse is as follows:

 

وَمَنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ مِنْكُمْ طَوْلًا أَنْ يَنْكِحَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ فَمِنْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ مِنْ فَتَيَاتِكُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ۚ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِإِيمَانِكُمْ ۚ بَعْضُكُمْ مِنْ بَعْضٍ ۚ فَانْكِحُوهُنَّ بِإِذْنِ أَهْلِهِنَّ وَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ مُحْصَنَاتٍ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحَاتٍ وَلَا مُتَّخِذَاتِ أَخْدَانٍ ۚ فَإِذَا أُحْصِنَّ فَإِنْ أَتَيْنَ بِفَاحِشَةٍ فَعَلَيْهِنَّ نِصْفُ مَا عَلَى الْمُحْصَنَاتِ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَنْ خَشِيَ الْعَنَتَ مِنْكُمْ ۚ وَأَنْ تَصْبِرُوا خَيْرٌ لَكُمْ ۗ وَاللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

 “Whoever among you does not have the means to marry free chaste believing women, let them marry believing maids from among those who you are guardians of (while she is captive). It is God Who knows all about your faith. All of you are from one another. Marry them (the captive) with the consent of their families, and give them (the brides) their legal share of bride according to the known terms (of the Quran).”  (An-Nisa 4:25)

According to the verse, the family that the captive woman lives in is considered her own family. The authority of the family is limited to inspecting the marriage. The captive woman makes the decision of marriage of her own free will and takes the legal share of bride (mehr) herself.

It is obvious that the verses do not permit a relationship without marriage, neither for the captives nor for the free people. There is no need to be a scholar to understand this. All the scholars of Sunni and Shia sects, by ignoring the related verses, made a consensus that unlimited number of captive women can be used as odalisque. They decontextualize the verses An-Nisa 3&24, Al-Ahzab 50, Al-Mu’minoon 5&6 in order to distort the meanings of the Quran verses, so that the meanings match their opinions. Let’s study those verses one by one:

 

  1. An-Nisa 3rd Verse

وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تُقْسِطُواْ فِي الْيَتَامَى فَانكِحُواْ مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاء مَثْنَى وَثُلاَثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تَعْدِلُواْ فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَلاَّ تَعُولُواْ

“If you fear that you cannot act justly towards those orphans (who have reached the age of marriage), marry two or three or up to four other women you like; but if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards them, then either one woman or that which is under your guardianship. This is better for you not to cause unfairness.” (An-Nisa 4:3)

The part of the verse which is used as evidence by traditionalist scholars is below:

فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تَعْدِلُواْ فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَلاَّ تَعُولُواْ

“But if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards them, then either one woman or that which is under your guardianship.” (An-Nisa 4/3)

Sunnis interpret this verse as follows:

 

{فإن خفتم أن لا تعدلوا … فواحدة } انكحوها{ أو } اقتصروا على { ما ملكت أيمانكم

“(When you are married to more than one wives) But if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards them, then either marry one woman or satisfy yourself with the women who are under your guardianship.[7]

The interpretation of Jafaris is as follows:

فأن خفتم أن لا تعدلوا فواحدة أي فانكحوا واحدة … أو ما ملكت أيمانكم وهى الاماء …كان المراد بذكر ملك اليمين الاكتفاء باتخاذهن وإتيانهن بملك اليمين دون نكاحهن بما يبلغ العدد

“ ‘(When you are married to more than one wives) But if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards them, then marry only one woman; or the women who are under your guardianship…’

 The verse mentioning captives shows that, regardless of their number, because they are under your dominion, sexual intercourse with captives is permitted without marriage and the man can be satisfied with this relation.”

First of all, it is not possible to assign this meaning to the verse, because the expression “ma malakat aymanukum = ما ملكت أيمانكم” is conjoined to the word “wahidatan = واحدة”. The ‘amil of ma’tuf, which is the expression governing the conjoined word (ma’tuf) in syntactical regime in this sentence, can not be different from the ‘amil of ma’tuf alaih, which is the expression governing the word that ma’tuf is conjoined to (ma’tuf alaih).

In other words, the hidden predicate of the expression “the women under your guardianship”  can only be the predicate of the word “one woman”, because the former expression is conjoined to “one woman” in this sentence.

We can explain it as such for those who don’t have the knowledge of Arabic grammar: The hidden predicate of the expression “then either one woman or that which is under your guardianship” is the command “marry”, which is understood from the first sentence of the verse. It is not possible for two noun clauses that are conjoined by the conjunction “or” to have two different predicates. However, these scholars, by altering the structure of the sentence, add a new predicate “satisfy yourself with” in front of the second noun clause. This is nothing but manipulating the verse.

In this verse, God commands the men who fear from not acting equitably to more than one wives to marry either one free woman or to marry one captive woman.

Although most of the translations in English do not repeat this mistake, main classical Arabic commentaries do. As an unfortunate consequence of this, even those who translate the verse correctly happen to interpret it wrongly in the shadow of these wrong commentaries.

One of the most famous and notable classical commentaries is  Jami` al-bayan `an ta’wil ‘ay al-Qur’an, by Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari. Here is the section related to An-Nisa 4:3 in his tafsir:

“If you fear that you cannot act justly to the orphans and similarly you fear unfairness towards women you would marry from two to four of them, then marry only one woman. If you fear from behaving unfairly to one woman too, do not marry her either. However, those your right hands posses are for you. Surely, it is better for you not to act unfairly towards them. [9]

 

Below is the related section of Quran Tafsir by Ibn Kathir, covered under the heading Marrying Only One Wife When One Fears He Might not Do Justice to His Wives:

“(But if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards them, then only one or what your right hands possess.) The Ayah commands, if you fear that you will not be able to do justice between your wives by marrying more than one, then marry only one wife, or satisfy yourself with only female captives, for it is not obligatory to treat them equally, rather it is recommended. So if one does so, that is good, and if not, there is no harm on him.”[10]

 

As we can see, Ibn Kathir repeats the mistake of Sunnis and adds the predicate “satisfy yourselves” without a basis. He then also asserts that the man can satisfy himself with more than one female captives without marrying.

 

Another commentary Tafsir Fi Zilalil Quran, by Sayyid Qutb covers the issue under the heading Relationships with Slave Women:

“So far we have given due importance to the condition attached by the Qur’ān to the concession to marry more than one wife, namely, fair treatment. When a man fears that he may not be able to abide by that condition, the Qur’ānic verse stipulates certain options that are open to him: “If you fear that you will not be able to maintain fairness between them, then marry only one, or those whom your right hands possess.” (Verse 3) This means that where fairness cannot be maintained, marriage should be confined to just one wife. The other alternative touched upon by the phrase “those whom your right hands possess” refers to women who are slaves. The statement is expressed in general terms, without specifying formal marriage.”[11]

Sayyid Qutb repeats the mistake of Jafaris and asserts that men can hold unlimited number of captives and have intercourse with them without getting married to any.

 

2.    An-Nisa 24th Verse

The women who are forbidden to marry are recounted beginning with the verse An-Nisa 22, and the 24th verse continues as follows:

 

وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاء إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ

“And all married women (are forbidden to you) except for those (captives) who are under your guardianship.”  (An-Nisa 4:24)

This verse shows that the women who are captured while they are married will be considered as divorced. Although this verse explains the ruling on marriage of Muslims with married women who are captivated, sects have preferred to use it as an evidence to the legitimacy of sexual relation with a captive woman without marrying her.

Abdullah b. Umar b. Muhammad al-Baydhawi (d. 685/1286), who is a Quranic exegesis scholar, Ash’ari theologian, Shafi jurisprudence scholar and judge interprets the verse as follows in his commentary:

والمحصناتمنالنساءإلاماملكتأيمانكم { يريدماملكتأيمانكممناللاتيسبينولهنأزواجكفارفهنحلالللسابينوالنكاحمرتفعبالسب}

What God means in the verse of “And all married women (are forbidden to you) except for those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” is that: The captive women whose husbands are disbelievers, are lawful to the ones who captivated them. By being captivated the woman’s marriage is annulled.[12]

 

The subject is covered as follows in the interpretation of Tabatabai who is a member of the sect Jafari:

قوله “إلا ما ملكت أيمانكم” رفعا لحكم المنع عن محصنات الاماء على ما ورد في السنة أن لمولى الامة المزوجة أن يحول بين مملوكته وزوجها ثم ينالها عن استبراء ثم يردها إلى زوجها.

“God Almighty’s saying “except for those (captives) whom your right hands possess” shows that married captive’s possessor has the right of intervening between her and her husband as it is mentioned in Sunnah. He calls the captive woman, has intercourse with her after finding out that she is not pregnant, then he sends her back to her husband.[13]

It is obviously seen how the Book and the Sunnah is abused in these interpretations.

In Turkish Translation and Interpretation of the Quran, which is published by Turkish Directorate of Religious Affairs, the subject is explained as follows:

The expression “Al-Muhsanat” used when mentioning the prohibitions of marriage means married women. There is consensus that the expression “illa ma malakat aymanukum = except for those whom your right hands possess” means captives. Islamic scholars try to regulate the sexual relation of the possessor with his captive -which was inevitable  in ancient societies when slavery was common– in the light of the reality of the slavery statue, lineage provisions and the target of Islam to reduce and abolish the slavery progressively. These decrees which belong to the slavery system that Islam took over from the past and aimed to abolish are now history.[14]

 

The mistakes of this interpretation have taken the subject to a different dimension. The Almighty God decrees as follows in the last verse that He has sent down:

“This day I have perfected for you your religion, and have completed My blessing (Quran) upon you. I have favored Islam as your religion.” (Al-Ma’ida 5:3)

If slavery is the system that “Islam took over from the past and aimed to abolish”, then the Islam that is described in the book by Diyanet is not the Islam that is described in the verse above. Because the people who made this interpretation are talking about a religion which is not perfected yet and not completed. If “these decrees which belong to the slavery system  are now history”, they must explain when the nabi of this new religion came because, nothing can be added to or eliminated from the religion of Islam that God has perfected and has completed.

 

3. Al-Mu’minoon 5th and 6th Verses

These verses that are sent down in Makkah, including the other verses in the context, are as follows:

  1. Those believers (whose qualifications are listed below) will attain what they hope for.
  2. They are in awe during their prayers.
  3. They turn away from whatever is vain and frivolous,
  4. They work for improvement (of themselves and others).
  5. They cover their private parts
  6. Except to their spouses or to those under their guardianship. They are not blamed for this (uncovering their private parts to either of these).
  7. Whoever does not cover their private parts to those except these, they are the transgressors.
  8. They (believers) are those who are faithful to their trusts and to their pledges,
  9. And who preserve their prayers.
  10. It is they who shall have a share
  11. A share from the Gardens; [and] therein shall they abide. (Al-Mu’minoon 23/1-11)

As it is seen, each of these verses addresses all believers, including both male and female. Scholars of sects have considered the expression ”to their spouses” in the 6th verse, as an address to both men and women, however they have changed the conjunction “or” with the conjunction “and”, then they interpreted the expression “to those under their guardianship” as “concubines”, thus misusing the verse as an evidence that the concubines are lawful to their possessors without marriage.

In Turkish Translation and Interpretation of Quran Way the meaning of the verse is as follows:

“They cover their private parts. Except to their spouses and to the concubines in their possessions. They cannot be blamed for the relations with them. Whoever goes beyond this, they are the transgressors.”(Mu’minoon 23:5-7)

If the conjunction “or” wasn’t changed to “and” in the translation and the assigned meaning was true, the verse would read: “to their spouses or to the concubines in their possessions”. In that case, a man would be allowed to have sexual relation either with his spouse or his concubine. This is not a decree that traditionalists want. What the tradition wants is man’s being able to have sexual relation with both.

The expression “ma malakat aymanuhum” which is translated as “those under their guardianship” includes the male captives, as well as the female ones. If claims of these people are considered to be true but the translation is not understood as “concubines”, then it is also required to accept the sexual relation of woman with her slave without marriage, where there is no way to accept it.

It’s very clear that the verses include all believers, both men and women. There is no reason to justify that the expression “aw ma malakat aymanuhum” in the 6th verse is attributed a meaning to refer exclusively to men.

a- Grammar Mistakes

There are two unjustifiable mistakes in the traditional translations of verses: the wrong meaning assigned to the exceptive particle (harf al-istisna) and  the wrong meaning assigned to the coordinating conjunction (harf al-atf).

1)      Wrong Translation of the Exceptive Particle

The text of the verse is as follows:

وَالَّذِينَ هُمْ لِفُرُوجِهِمْ حَافِظُونَ  .  إِلَّا عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ

They (men and women) are those who cover their private parts. Except to their spouses or to those (captive spouses) under their guardianship.

 

Abu Bakr al-Jassas explained this verse as follows:

فأما قوله: {إِلَّا عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ} استثناء من الجملة المذكورة لحفظ الفروج وإخبار عن إباحة وطء الزوجة وملك اليمين.

“Except to their spouses and to those under their guardianship” expression is an exception to the sentence about covering the private parts. Also it tells that a person can have sexual relation with his wife and concubine.[15]

 

The interpretation of Jafaris is as follows:

 وقوله: “إلا على أزواجهم أو ما ملكت أيمانهم فإنهم غير ملومين” استثناء من حفظ الفروج، والازواج الحلائل من النساء، وما ملكت أيمانهم الجواري المملوكة فإنهم غير ملومين في مس الازواج الحلائل والجواري المملوكة.

“The expression “Except to their spouses and to those under their guardianship” is an exception to the sentence about covering the private parts. Man cannot be blamed for having sexual relation with women who he is married to from among the women who are lawful to him, and for having sexual relation with the female captives under his guardianship.[16]

People who have this opinion happen to translate the verse as follows:

“They (men and women) are those who cover their private parts. (But the men) [cover their private parts] except to their spouses and to those (concubines) they possess.”

An exceptive clause can never be assigned such a meaning. If the words “but the men” were explicitly mentioned in the verse and the statement was made accordingly, then this meaning could be acceptable. In that case, a man would be allowed to show his private parts to his wife or his female captive, but the wife would not be allowed to show her private parts to her husband, and the female captive would not be allowed to show her private parts to her possessor. This is because the permission would be mentioned only in the sentence relating to men.

2) The Wrong Meaning Assigned to the Coordinating Conjunction “or”

The coordinating conjunction “or =أو” in the 6th verse is assigned the meaning of “و=and” in the translations. Because the conjunction “or” is used for expressing only one of the two options, and “and” is used for both of the options, this change distorts the meaning of the verse seriously. The right translation must be as follows, including both men and women:

Only to their spouses or to those (captive spouses) under their guardianship (they can show their private parts). (Mu’minoon 23:6)

If the false translation of the exceptive clause was considered to be true but the meaning of the conjunction wasn’t changed, then it would be understood that a man could show his private parts either to his wife or to his female captive. This is not the translation that the tradition wants. The first wrong translation requires the second wrong to be done. Therefore, the meaning “and” is attributed to the conjunction “or = أو”.

As it is obviously seen in the other verses about the subject, no matter man or woman, a Muslim’s spouse is either a free person or a captive. He or she can show his/her private parts only to the one whom he or she is married to.

 

c-           Disregarding the Other Verses

In Islam a woman is not allowed to have more than one spouse but a man is. A spouse can be free or captive. A verse is as follows:

“Do not marry mushrik women (who interpose others between themselves and God) until they trust only in God. A captive woman who trusts only in God is better than a mushrik woman even if she (the mushrik) has impressed you much. Do not wed your women to mushrik men (who interpose others between themselves and God) until they trust only in God. A captive man who trusts only in God is better than a mushrik man even if he (the mushrik) has impressed you much.” (Al-Baqarah/The Cow 2:221)

No special condition applies to a woman who wants to get married to a captive man, but a man who has the means to get married to a free woman is not allowed to marry a captive woman. The related verse is as follows:

 “Whoever among you does not have the means to marry free chaste believing women, (let them) marry believing maids from among those who you are guardians of (while she is captive). It is God Who knows all about your faith. All of you are from one another. Marry them (the captive women) with the consent of their families, and give them (the brides) their legal share of bride according to the known terms (of the Quran).”  (An-Nisa  4:25)

According to the verse, a man’s spouse can be either free or captive, cannot be both at the same time.

God commands us to wed the captives as well as the free people. The related verse is as follows:

“And wed the singles among you, and those who are fit (for marriage) among your male and female captives. If they are poor, God fulfills their needs out of His favor. God has ample means, He is all-knowing.”  (An-Noor 24:32)

According to this verse, a free person can get married to a free person, a captive to a captive and a captive to a free person. We can classify them as follows:

A-   Free man – Free woman [An-Noor 24:32]

B-   Free man – Captive woman [An-Nisa 4:25]

C-   Free woman – Captive man [Al-Baqarah 2:221]

D-   Captive man – Captive woman [An-Noor 24:32]

All of these prove that, a believer who is free or captive can open his/her private parts only to his/her spouse who is free or captive. The similarity between the verses Mu’minoon 5-6 and the others is obvious.

 

Mu’minoon5-6 مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْthose under their guardianship أَوْ or

وَالَّذِينَ هُمْ لِفُرُوجِهِمْ حَافِظُونَ  .  إِلَّا عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ

They (men and women) cover their private parts. Except to their spouses.

An-Nisa 3 مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْmarry the woman who is under your guardianship أَوْor

… فَانكِحُواْ مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاء مَثْنَى وَثُلاَثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تَعْدِلُواْ فَوَاحِدَةً

…marry two or three or up to four other women you like; but if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards them, then either one woman

An-Nisa 25 let them marry believing maids from among those who you are guardians of (while she is captive) Whoever among you does not have the means to marry free chaste believing women
Al-Baqarah 221Free manCaptive woman A captive woman who trusts only in God is better than a mushrik woman even if she (the mushrik) has impressed you much Do not marry mushrik women (who interpose others between themselves and God) until they trust only in God
Al-Baqarah 221Free womanCaptive man A captive man who trusts only in God is better than a mushrik man even if he (the mushrik) has impressed you much Do not wed your women to mushrik men (who interpose others between themselves and God) until they trust only in God.

 

As can be seen, a free spouse and a captive spouse have always been evaluated separately in verses. That’s why spouses or those under guardianship are connected to each other with the conjunction “or” in the verse. Let’s review the verse again:

(The believers who will attain what they hope for) are those who cover their private parts. Except to their spouses or to those (captive spouses) under their guardianship. (Mu’minoon 23:5-6)

 

4. Al-Ahzab 50th Verse

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَحْلَلْنَا لَكَ أَزْوَاجَكَ اللَّاتِي آتَيْتَ أُجُورَهُنَّ وَمَا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُكَ مِمَّا أَفَاء اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ وَبَنَاتِ عَمِّكَ وَبَنَاتِ عَمَّاتِكَ وَبَنَاتِ خَالِكَ وَبَنَاتِ خَالَاتِكَ اللَّاتِي هَاجَرْنَ مَعَكَ وَامْرَأَةً مُّؤْمِنَةً إِن وَهَبَتْ نَفْسَهَا لِلنَّبِيِّ إِنْ أَرَادَ النَّبِيُّ أَن يَسْتَنكِحَهَا خَالِصَةً لَّكَ مِن دُونِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ قَدْ عَلِمْنَا مَا فَرَضْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِي أَزْوَاجِهِمْ وَمَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ لِكَيْلَا يَكُونَ عَلَيْكَ حَرَجٌ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا

Oh Prophet! We have made lawful exclusively to you (the following): your wives whose legal shares of bride you have paid, and the ones under your guardianship of who God has turned over to you, and the daughters of your paternal uncles, paternal aunts, maternal uncles, maternal aunts who have migrated with you, and -in case you will[17]– a believing woman who donated herself to the Prophet (nabi). These are only for you to marry, apart from other believers. We know well what We have imposed upon them (other believers) regarding their wives and those under their guardianship. (But We made this exception for you) that there may be no difficulty for you. God is forgiving and beneficent. (Al-Ahzab 33:50)

 

The wrong translation of this verse and false the sense that was created is aimed at using the  female captives sexually. Although all of the decrees in the verse pertain to Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) only, it is accepted as if only a small piece of the verse pertains to him. In Tafsir Ibn Kathir[18]  the meaning of the verse is as follows:

“O Prophet! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their due (mahr), and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses — whom Allah has granted to you, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who migrated with you, and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet, and the Prophet wishes to marry her — a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers. Indeed We know what We have enjoined upon them about their wives and those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, in order that there should be no difficulty on you. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Al-Ahzab 33:50)

 

In fact, the section that begins with “O Prophet!” in the verse does not end until the end of the expression “a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers.” None of the conditions in between are about other believers. The verses about the marriage of other believers were already sent down (An-Nisa 4:3), and the number of wives was limited to four for them. Additionally, marrying a woman who offers herself without determining any mahr is a privilege assigned only to the Prophet (pbuh). After this verse, his marriage to a new spouse was forbidden by the verse below:

“It is not lawful for you to marry other women after this, nor to change them for other wives even though their beauty attracts you.” (Al-Ahzab 33:52)

The following information also serves as evidence that the whole verse pertains to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh): Other believers are not required to have paid the legal shares of brides (mahr) for their marriages to be valid (see Al-Baqarah 2:236). They are not required to have migrated together to be able to get married to daughters of their paternal uncles, paternal aunts, maternal uncles, maternal aunts. That’s why the rest of the verse 33:50 continues as follows:

“We know well what We have imposed upon them regarding their wives and those under their guardianship. (But We made this exception for you) that there may be no difficulty for you.”

So, the following translation, which asserts that only the last part of the verse pertains to Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) is unacceptable:

 “…and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet (without mahr), and the Prophet wishes to marry her – a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers.”

If a believing man gets married to a woman without giving the legal share of bride (mahr), the marriage would be valid but he is still required to pay his wife the mahr which is equivalent to the mahr of a woman who is equivalent to his wife, because the permission that is granted to our Nabi is not given to him -the permission to marry a woman who offers herself without mahr. Other Muslims, even if they divorce without consummation, would still have to grant some benefits to their wives (Al-Baqarah 2:236). This is an important difference.

The main big mistake is made about female captives by translating the related part of the verse as follows:

“We have made lawful for you … the ones under your guardianship of what God has turned over to you as spoils of war.

The reason of the mistake in this sentence is translating the expression “min ma afa Allahu alayka = مِمَّا أَفَاء اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ” as “what God has turned over to you as spoils of war.”

 

The noun related to the verb “afa” that we translate as “turn over to” is “fay”. “Fay” is something that is obtained without fighting, whereas “spoils” is that which is acquired as a result of battle. The verse about “fay” is as follows:

 

مَّا أَفَاء اللَّهُ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْقُرَى فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِي الْقُرْبَى وَالْيَتَامَى وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاء مِنكُمْ

“What God has taken from the residents of those cities and turned over to His Messenger are for (the cause of) God, the Messenger, the kins (of the Messenger), the orphan, the desperate and the stuck travelers. So that, they do not become a wealth that circulates among the rich ones of you.” (Al-Hashr 59:7)

 

The verse related to spoils of war is as follows:

وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّمَا غَنِمْتُم مِّن شَيْءٍ فَأَنَّ لِلّهِ خُمُسَهُ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِي الْقُرْبَى وَالْيَتَامَى وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ إِن كُنتُمْ آمَنتُمْ بِاللّهِ وَمَا أَنزَلْنَا عَلَى عَبْدِنَا يَوْمَ الْفُرْقَانِ يَوْمَ الْتَقَى الْجَمْعَانِ وَاللّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ

“If you trust in God and in that which We have sent down to Our servant on the day when the true and the false were distinguished, the day the two armies met, do know that one-fifth of every spoils belongs to God, His Messenger, the closest relatives of the Messenger, the orphan, the desperate and the stuck traveler. God sets measures for all things.” (Al-Anfal 8:41)

Four fifths (⅘) of the spoils is given to the warriors, but they don’t have any share in fay which is not obtained as the result of the battle. So, Al-Ahzab 50th verse states that Maria, the present from Muqawqis of Egypt to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), is lawful to our Nabi. This decree pertains to him; other believers don’t have that right.

Indeed, captives are included in the spoils, not in fay. It is such a tremendous sin to consider the captives that are obtained at the end of the battle as fay, and then assign the meaning “spoils” to the word “fay” and to disguise the special decree about Maria being lawful to Nabi Muhammad as a general decree, and to use the female captives sexually without marriage, as if it is an indisputable decree of the Quran!

C- WIVES OF NABI MUHAMMAD (PBUH) WHO WERE FORMER CAPTIVES

There are no captives among the women who Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) married, because a Muslim man who has the means to get married to a free woman is not permitted to marry a captive one. The Almighty God has decreed:

“Whoever among you does not have the means to marry free chaste believing women, (let them) marry believing maids from among those who you are guardians of (while she is captive).” (An-Nisa 4:25)

Our Nabi lived a matrimonial life with Maria, who was turned over to him as “fay”. This is because she was not a battle captive but a present, and she was made lawful exclusively to nABİ Muhammad (pbuh) by the decree in verse Al-Ahzab 50. He got married to Juwayriyya, Safiyya and Rayhana, who had been captivated, after setting them free.  Let’s see the details about the lives of these four women:

 1.Maria

Prophet Muhammad had invited thegovernor of Egypt, Muqaqis Jurayj Ibn Mina to Islam by sending him a letter in the 7th year of the Immigration (628 m). It is narrated that Muqaqis did not accept Islam because he was in awe of the Byzantine emperor.Yet, he sent Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) some presents includingMaria bint Sham’un al-Qibtiyya. Maria became Muslim and she was made lawful to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) by the verse Al-Ahzab 33:50. She gave birth to a son named Ibrahim.

The interest of Nabi Muhammad in Maria, who was a beautiful lady, made his wives jealous, notably Aisha.[19] Ibn Abbas tells:

“I asked Umar ibn al-Khattab who the two women supporting each other and mentioned in Chapter at-Tahreem were. He said “Aisha and Hafsa”. Nabi aleyhisselam, had got together with Maria in Hafsa’s home when it was Hafsa’s turn. When Hafsa realised it she said “Oh Nabi of Allah! You did the thing that you didn’t do to any of your wives to me, on my day, my turn and in my bed.” Our Nabi said: “If i forbid her to myself and do not approach her again, would you be happy?” When Hafsa said “yes”, he made her haram to himself and told “don’t tell it to anyone”. But Hafsa told it to Aisha. Allah informed his Nabi about it by sending the following verses:”[17]

“O prophet! Why do you prohibit what God has made lawful exclusively to you, seeking to please your wives? God is Forgiving and Merciful.
God has obliged you to dissolve such of your oaths. God is your Master. He is the All-Knowing, He judges correctly.
The Prophet told something in confidence to one of his wives. But when she disclosed it, and God made it known to him; he communicated part of it, and he avoided another part. Then, when he informed her of it, she said, ‘Who informed you of this?’ He said, ‘The All-Knowing, the All-Informed, informed me.’
Would you, the two wives of Nabi, repent to God, because your hearts have swerved. But if you band together against him, then God is his Ally, as is Gabriel, and the righteous believers. In addition, the angels will assist him.
Perhaps, if he divorces you, his Lord will give him in exchange wives better than you: submissive, believing, obedient, penitent, devout, fasting—previously married, or virgins.” (Al-Tahrim 66:1-5)

 

The related verses confirm what Ibn Abbas told:

 

Al-Ahzab 50th verse that makes Maria lawful (halal)

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَحْلَلْنَا لَكَ…

Oh Prophet! We have made lawful exclusively to you (the following):
Al-Tahreem 1st verse showing that our Nabi made Maria haram to himself

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ

O prophet! Why do you prohibit what God has made lawful exclusively to you

 

“Exclusive to you” is the meaning of lak = لَكَ in the verses. The similarity between the verses Al-Ahzab 50 and Et-Tahreem 1 shows that both verses are about Maria.

2. Juwayriyya

Juwayriyya (d. 56/676) was the daughter of al-Hārith ibn Abi Dirar, the chief of Banu Mustaliq. Before the Battle of Trenches, our Nabi, raided Mustaliqs when he learned that they were preparing for a battle against Muslims. He defeated them and took many captives. Juwayriyya was one of those captives who was only 20. Her husband had died in that battle. She was in the share of Thabit ibn Qays ibn Shammas or of the son of his uncle. After determining the amount of ransom that would be paid for her to be free, she went to our Nabi, introduced herself and asked for help to get her ransom paid. After paying her ransom and setting her free, Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) asked her to marry him. According to another narration about Juwayriyya, her father came to Madina in order to save her daughter and after paying her ransom he wedded her to our Nabi. Muslims hearing that Juwayriyya married Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) set all the captives of Mustaliqs free. This marriage ended the hostility and caused them to become Muslims.[20]

 

3.Rayhana

Rayhāna bint Zayd (d. 10/632) was a woman from theJewish tribe of Banu Nadir . She was married to a man named Abdulhaqem from the Banu Qurayza. During the Battle of Trenches, the Jews of Banu Qurayza violated the agreement they had made with Prophet Muhammad. Therefore, they were surrounded and defused right after the battle. The related verse is as follows:

“God brought down from their strongholds those of the People of the Book who supported them, and He cast terror into their hearts. You were killing some of them, and captivating some of them.

He made you heirs to their lands, and their houses, and their possessions – and [promised you] the lands on which you had never yet set foot. God sets measures for all things.” (Al-Ahzaab 33:26-27)

The expression of the verse “He made you heirs to their lands, and their houses, and their possessions” shows that the captives were set free without a return, because they neither got the means to fight nor possessions to give as ransom.[21]

Rayhana was one of the captives. Her husband was killed in the battle. It was discussed in this article, that it is lawful to marry captive married women (See An-Nisa 24th Verse). One month later, Nabi Muhammad proposed her marriage on condition that she would convert to Islam, and she accepted. Since he had set her free before marrying, he gave her 12 ukiyya of silver as mahr, just like he gave to his other wives, and married her inDhū al-Ḥijjah of the 5th year (May 627).[22]

Normally, a woman whose husband dies can marry after a waiting period of 4 months and 10 days. Since Rayhana was captivated, An-Nisa 24th verse is also the evidence that she did not have such an obligation.

 

4. Safiyya

Safiyya was the daughter of Huyayy ibn Akhtab, the chief of the Jewish tribe Banu Nadir. In the Battle of Khaybar her husband died and she was captivated. Because she was a respectable lady of the tribesBanu Qurayza and Banu Nadir, it wasn’t found appropriate that she would be granted to anyone other than Nabi Muhammad. Our Nabi said he would marry her if she would become a Muslim; otherwise he would set her free and send her back to her family. Safiyya accepted Islam. Our Nabi counted the ransom for her freedom as her legal share of bride (mahr), and married her.[23]

 

CONCLUSION

As it is seen, there is no evidence in the Quran to support the enslavement of captives and using the female captives as concubines. This manipulation which is accomplished by distorting the verses is exactly a deviation (iwaj)[24]. “Iwaj = عوج” is a deviation and aperception management which can only be noticed by pondering on the issue and by far-sightedness.  The Almighty God has decreed about it:

اللَّهِ الَّذِي لَهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ وَوَيْلٌ لِلْكَافِرِينَ مِنْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ. الَّذِينَ يَسْتَحِبُّونَ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا عَلَى الْآخِرَةِ وَيَصُدُّونَ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَيَبْغُونَهَا عِوَجًا ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ فِي ضَلَالٍ بَعِيدٍ.

“… and woe to the ignorers for a punishment that is strictly correlated (with their crime). They prefer the worldly life over the hereafter and prevent (people) from the way of God by seeking to cause deviation (iwaj) to it. They have gone far astray.” (Abraham 14:2-3)

 

“Iwaj” is a kind of perception management that is used to prevent the Quran from being correctly understood. Distorting the meanings of words and taking words / verses out of their contexts are a few means of this perception management. It was performed on many subjects as it is performed on the subject of captivity and concubinage. Besides, the greatest obstacle for the Quran to be understood correctly is that the Wisdom (al-hikmat)[25], which is the user’s guide to the Quran, was made to be forgotten. God has granted the Wisdom together with the Book to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and to all other prophets. Thus, allowing them to answer questions and solve problems. When the Wisdom is forgotten, it is also forgotten that the sayings and practices of Prophet (nabi) Muhammad (pbuh) are wisdoms that were inferred out of the Quran. So, Muslims lost their ability of problem-solving and have themselves become the source of many problems.

The perception management about captives was so effective and permanent that we cannot find in any of the books we can reach that the relations with male and female captives were administered wrongly. That is  because, during ages, in madrasahs and modern institutions of religion education, the Quran was considered as a book which serves to be memorized and to acquire merits by being recited. Since the scholars are conditioned in this way, no one had a suspicion whether the information that they learned in the name of religion was compliant with the Book of God or the Example of Nabi Muhammad (pbuh).

The Almighty God names the people who cannot relate the things they learned about religion to the Book of God as “ummi”. Ummi means someone who doesn’t know reading or writing.  A book which is recited in order toacquire merits rather than being understood is not considered to be read indeed. If you recite the Quran without understanding, you would be someone who didn’t read the main book of this religion. The Almighty God has decreed about Jews:

“Among them are illiterate[26] ones. They do not know the Book, but the fictions[27] about It, and they only make assumptions. But, woe to those who write books with their hands and then say, ‘This is from God,’ in order to make a trivial[28] gain. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they have earned thereby! [29] (Al-Baqarah  2:78-79).

Scholars of all sects including both Sunni and Shia, just as it is mentioned in these verses, only know the fictions about the Book, not the Book itself. They only make assumptions about It. In their opinion, the scholars of their sects do not make mistakes; they don’t say anything that opposes the rulings of the Quran or the Example of the Prophet. Especially if there is ijma (consensus) of Islamic scholars on a subject, then that opinion cannot be possibly wrong. Therefore, these people who obey the previous scholars without questioning think that they are experts in Islam. The books they write serve for nothing but reiterating and transferring the wrong assumptions to the next generations.

These scholars may be forgiven by God because they don’t know it. But the ones who have written those books and attributed their own false decrees to the Quran by means of perception management (iwaj) will most probably not be salvated.

This iwaj, the perception management has been so effective that today, 126 Islam scholars from different countries have written a letter, which includes the following expresions, to the leader of ISIS who declares that they have established a government ruling the conquered places in Iraq and Syria:

“For over a hundred years, Muslims and even the whole world has consensus (ijma) on forbidding the enslavement and considering it as a crime. This is of great importance in the history of Islam. It is haram (forbidden) to have a slave after enslavement is abolished by consensus.[23]”.

 

According to these scholars who do not know that slavery and concubinage were abolished by the 4th verse of Chapter Muhammad, enslavement was forbidden by the consensus of westerners. How can a religion that is subject to change in such a way be the religion appointed by God?

How can these people assume themselves as scholars while they put their names to the rulings which contradict even to the traditional books?

We have been pointing out the mistakes in the current viewpoint and manifesting the correct one by means of our studies that comply with the Book and the Wisdom. Neither thetraditionalist nor the modernist intend to discuss the matter however. I would like to call out to them with the following words of Jesus (pbuh) :

“You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!  (Mark, 7:9)

On the other hand, the following verse suffices to those who trust God:

ا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا عَلَيْكُمْ أَنْفُسَكُمْ ۖ لَا يَضُرُّكُمْ مَنْ ضَلَّ إِذَا اهْتَدَيْتُمْ ۚ إِلَى اللَّهِ مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِمَا كُنْتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ

 “O you who trust in God! You are responsible for your own selves. Those who stray can do you no harm as long as you (yourselves) are on the right path. To God you all will return. Then, He will tell you what you were doing.” (Al-Maidah 5:105)

 

 

 

 


[1]Though the word “captive” means “prisoner” in English, war captives were not held in prisons. They were brought under control of the heads of families and lived like a member of that family, helping with the chores and other work, until they were ransomed or set free without a return (Muhammad 47:4). According to at-Tawba 9:60, one could pay their ransom as a means of zakat. So, shortly after a war there would be no captives left.

[2] Those who insist on ignoring God’s verses

[3] While Muslims were having difficult days in Mecca, the news that the Persians vanquished the Romans. By the following verses that were revealed in the meantime, the information that the Romans will defeat the Persians, and that day Muslims will be joyful with a victory:

ALIF-LAM-MIM! Defeated have been the Byzantines in the lands close-by;  But following their defeat, they will be victorious in a few years. The authority belongs to God only before and after that. On that day, believers will rejoice. It will be with the help of God. He helps those who work. He is superior, He is the Most Gracious. This is God’s promise. Although most of the people do not know, God does not contradict His promise. (The Romans 30:1-6)

[4] If the verse 47 of Chapter Muhammad was not sent down before the battle of Badr, Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) could not be accused of this guilt, because “God does not bind anybody with a responsibility beyond their capability” (Al-Baqarah 2:286).

[5] Although the captives of Banu Qurayza who were able to fight are asserted to have been killed, this is a complete fabrication. For detailed information, see:  Cemal Ahmed Necm, غزوة بني قريظة بين الحقائق والأساطير  http://www.hablullah.com/?p=2100

 

[6]Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Ali ar-Radhi al-Jassas (d. 370/981) Ahkam al-Qur’an, Istanbul 1917, Chapter Muhammad.

[7]Ömer Nasuhi BİLMEN, Hukukıİslamiyye ve IstılahatıFıkhiyye Kamusu, v. III, 399 vd. Istanbul, no date. Expressions are redacted.

[8]Muhammad Husayn Tabataba’i (1902-1981), al-Maizan fi Tafsir al-Quran, Iran-Kum.

[9] Jami` al-bayan `an ta’wil ‘ay al-Qur’an, Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Beirut,Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 1992, v.3, p.577, section 8479.

[10] Translation on: http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=717&Itemid=59.

Original edition: Tafsir al-Quran al-Adhim, Al-Imam al-Hafidh Ibn Kathir; Tahqiq: D. Al-Sayyid Muhammad Al-Sayyid & Others; Dar al-Hadith, 2005 – h.1426,

[11]Fi Zilal al-Quran, Sayyid Qutb, Cairo, Dar al-Shurooq, 1986/1406

[12]Abdullah b. Ömer b. Muhammed el-Beyzâvî, Envâru’t-Tenzîl ve Esrâru’t-Te’vîl, Dâru’r-Reşîd-Müessesetü’l-Eymân, Dımaşk-Beyrut, 2000, Nisa Suresi.

[13]Tabatâî, a.g.e. Nisa Suresi.

[14] Kur’an Yolu Türkçe Meal ve Tefsir,

[15]Cessâs, Ahkâm’ul-Kur’ân, Nisa Suresi.

[16]Tabatâî, a.g.e. Muminûn Suresi.

[17] Iltifat, meaning literally “turning to one side,” is an art in Arabic literature. One of the obvious stylistic features of this art is the use of grammatical shifts from one personal pronoun to another unexpectedly (e.g. third to second to first person or first to second to third person) to emphasize the expression. Sometimes, the tenses of the consecutive sentences may be changed from continuous tense to future, or from future tense to past, etc. Sometimes, the subject of the sentence may shift from singular to plural to express the majesty (e.g. using We instead of I). These are approved as rhetorical practices in Arabic, similar to practices in some European literature. Every language has its own styles of expression. This practice of Arabic confuses the English reader. Therefore, at many of its incidents, expressions have been translated into English by disregarding this literal art.

[18] http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1840&Itemid=89

[19]Aynur URALER, Mâriye, Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi.

 

[20]Rıza Savaş, Cüveyriye, Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi.

 

[21]Although the captives of Banu Qurayza who were able to fight are asserted to have been killed, this is a complete fabrication. For detailed information, see:  Cemal AhmedNecm, غزوة بني قريظة بين الحقائق والأساطير  http://www.hablullah.com/?p=2100

 

[22]Hayati Yılmaz, Reyhâne, Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi.

[23]Aynur Uraler, Safiye, Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi.

[24]er- Rağıb el-İsfahânî,  (ö. 425 h.), Müfredât (thk: Safvan Adnan Dâvûdî) عوجmd.Dımaşk ve Beyrut, 1412/1992.

[25] “al-Hikmat = الحكْمَة” is of the root “hukm = حُْكمْ” which means “judgment”. They are both verbal nouns (masdar), but hikmat is a specific type of hukm. “Correct judgment” is called hikmat. We have translated “al-hikmat” into English as “the Wisdom”. In several verses, both the method of understanding the Quran, and the sound information inferred out of verses utilizing that method are called “al-hikmat”. See http://www.islamandquran.org/research/the-science-of-explaining-the-quran.html for further information on this subject.

 

[26] The word “ummi = أُمِّي” is of the root “umm” which means “mother”. An ummi is a person who remained as if just born from his mother (in the respect of knowledge), who is not learned (Lisan al-Arab, art.أم). Accordingly, it means, “who has not learned what is in God’s Book” in this verse.

[27] The word we translate as “fictions” is the word “amaaniy = أَمَانِيَّ”, plural of “umniyya”. According to Mujahid ibn Jabr, it means “lie”. According to other scholars it means “reading the book without understanding” because this type of reading creates expectations that depend on assumptions (Mufradat, art. مني).

[28] “Qaleel = قليل” is something either little in amount or temporary (Maqayis).

[29] The most frequent way of deceiving people using the name of God is claiming a man-written book to be inspired by God, or creating the impression that declared opinions were taken from God’s Book (Hud 11:1-2, Al-e Imran 3:78).

Facebook'ta PaylaşTwitter'da Paylaş
Date: May 27, 2017
Other Fatwas In This Category:
#   Title Date Reads 
1 Munafiq – Hypocrite 2009.09.07 3,267
2 Human and Nature 2014.08.01 1,289
3 The Situation Of Those Who Don’t Use Their Reason 2014.08.03 1,564
4 Nabi and Rasul According to The Qur’an and Traditional Islam 2014.12.14 4,340
5 Baqara – Sacrificial Bull Issue 2010.11.04 1,316
6 Talaq – Men’s Right To Divorce 2017.04.21 6,470
7 Relation Between Sleep and Death 2014.11.07 9,701
8 Duty of The Messenger in Terms of Making Clear 2015.11.08 1,477
9 Who will enter the heaven 2009.08.25 1,121
10 L’ISLAM ET LE MUSULMAN (İslam ve Müslüman) 2009.06.26 1,223
11 Is Human the Successor (Khalifa) of God? 2015.12.28 1,697
12 Every Human Being Knows the God 2016.02.22 1,459
13 Intercession 2009.09.17 984
14 THE SCIENCE OF DISCOVERING THE EXPLANATIONS OF THE QURAN 2017.03.07 909
15 THE RELATIONSHIP OF KORAN WITH FITRAH 2010.07.11 826
16 Subsistence Money of Women 2011.07.27 2,411
17 Fasting and Prayer During Menstruation and Postpartum Periods 2017.04.06 967
18 Deifying The Prophets 2015.11.01 1,597
19 Prayer Times In Qur’an 2011.09.23 6,417
20 CAPTIVITY, SLAVERY & CONCUBINAGE ACCORDING TO THE QUR’AN 2017.05.27 915
21 Time of Dawn (Fajr) Prayer 2012.01.03 2,481
22 Abrogation (Naskh) and Stoning Punishment (Rajm) 2011.10.30 1,975
23 Sealing of Hearts 2017.05.18 381
24 Muslims Today 2015.11.03 1,695
25 The Question of Authentication in Tasawwuf 2012.02.29 1,008
26 Wife Beating – Is It a Command of God or Fabrication? 2017.10.20 77
27 The Women’s Right To Divorce-Iftida 2009.08.25 3,502
28 The Relation Between Fitra and Qur’an 2012.09.20 2,118
29 Tesbih And Takdis 2009.09.07 1,309
30 Relations with Non-Muslims 2011.06.25 2,661
31 Who Goes to Heaven 2009.09.07 2,065
32 Prayer Times Compliant with the Balance – Including the Polar Regions 2013.07.07 1,965
33 Explanation of the verses 11-16 in surah al-Hajj 2009.09.07 3,382
34 False Roots of Fatalism in Islam – Destiny and Measure 2013.08.03 2,031
35 The Religions 2009.09.07 939
36 Name of Prophet Muhammad is found in the Hebrew Bible! 2012.01.25 1,064
37 Kafir (pl:Kuffar) – Concealer 2009.09.07 1,634
38 The Book and The Wisdom 2014.03.28 1,742