US Muslim prof says Boko Haram violates Qur’an — but omits sex-slavery verses

koran-kalashnikovArsalan Iftikhar is “an international human rights lawyer, founder of and adjunct professor of religious studies at DePaul University in Chicago.” He is also the former National Legal Director of the Hamas-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Here he offers a reassuring piece claiming that Boko Haram, that is, the Congregation of the People of the Sunnah for Dawah and Jihad, are misunderstanding Islam and misinterpreting the Qur’an, which, he says, categorically rejects “kidnapping young girls and threatening to sell them into sexual slavery.” He offers two verses to support this idea: one that says that “oppression is worse than murder” (2:191) and another declaring that nobody “shall force girls to commit prostitution” (24:33).

Neither of these, unfortunately, are precisely on point. “Oppression” is in the eye of the beholder; Abubakar Shekau thinks he is following the Qur’an’s dictates, and that that couldn’t possibly constitute oppression, no matter what. And these girls aren’t being forced into prostitution; they’re being sold off, as Iftikhar himself says in this very piece, into forced marriages with Boko Haram members.

Iftikhar doesn’t even mention the verses that Muslims like Abubakar Shekau point to in order to justify kidnapping young girls and selling them into sexual slavery:

If you fear that you will not act justly towards the orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two, three, four; but if you fear you will not be equitable, then only one, or what your right hands own; so it is likelier you will not be partial. (Qur’an 4:3)


And also prohibited to you are all married women except those your right hands possess. (Qur’an 4:24)

The mainstream Muslim commentary Tafsir al-Jalalayn explains that 4:3 tells Muslims to “marry only one, or, restrict yourself to what your right hands own, of slavegirls, since these do not have the same rights as wives.” The twentieth-century Qur’an commentator Maulana Bulandshahri explains the wisdom of this practice, and longs for the good old days:

During Jihad (religion war), many men and women become war captives. The Amirul Mu’minin [leader of the believers, or caliph — an office now vacant] has the choice of distributing them amongst the Mujahidin [warriors of jihad], in which event they will become the property of these Mujahidin. This enslavement is the penalty for disbelief (kufr).

He goes on to explain that this is not ancient history:

None of the injunctions pertaining to slavery have been abrogated in the Shari’ah. The reason that the Muslims of today do not have slaves is because they do not engage in Jihad (religion war). Their wars are fought by the instruction of the disbelievers (kuffar) and are halted by the same felons. The Muslim [sic] have been shackled by such treaties of the disbelievers (kuffar) whereby they cannot enslave anyone in the event of a war. Muslims have been denied a great boon whereby every home could have had a slave. May Allah grant the Muslims the ability to escape the tentacles of the enemy, remain steadfast upon the Din (religion) and engage in Jihad (religion war) according to the injunctions of Shari’ah. Amen!

This is by no means an eccentric or unorthodox view in Islam. The Egyptian Sheikh Abu-Ishaq al-Huwayni declared in May 2011 that “we are in the era of jihad,” and that as they waged jihad warfare against infidels, Muslims would take slaves. He clarified what he meant in a subsequent interview:

…Jihad is only between Muslims and infidels. Spoils, slaves, and prisoners are only to be taken in war between Muslims and infidels. Muslims in the past conquered, invaded, and took over countries. This is agreed to by all scholars–there is no disagreement on this from any of them, from the smallest to the largest, on the issue of taking spoils and prisoners. The prisoners and spoils are distributed among the fighters, which includes men, women, children, wealth, and so on.

When a slave market is erected, which is a market in which are sold slaves and sex-slaves, which are called in the Qur’an by the name milk al-yamin, “that which your right hands possess” [Qur’an 4:24]. This is a verse from the Qur’an which is still in force, and has not been abrogated. The milk al-yamin are the sex-slaves. You go to the market, look at the sex-slave, and buy her. She becomes like your wife, (but) she doesn’t need a (marriage) contract or a divorce like a free woman, nor does she need a wali. All scholars agree on this point–there is no disagreement from any of them. […] When I want a sex slave, I just go to the market and choose the woman I like and purchase her.

Right around the same time, on May 25, 2011, a female Kuwaiti activist and politician, Salwa al-Mutairi, also spoke out in favor of the Islamic practice of sexual slavery of non-Muslim women, emphasizing that the practice accorded with Islamic law and the parameters of Islamic morality.

…A merchant told me that he would like to have a sex slave. He said he would not be negligent with her, and that Islam permitted this sort of thing. He was speaking the truth. I brought up (this man’s) situation to the muftis in Mecca. I told them that I had a question, since they were men who specialized in what was halal, and what was good, and who loved women. I said, “What is the law of sex slaves?”

The mufti said, “With the law of sex slaves, there must be a Muslim nation at war with a Christian nation, or a nation which is not of the religion, not of the religion of Islam. And there must be prisoners of war.”

“Is this forbidden by Islam?,” I asked.

“Absolutely not. Sex slaves are not forbidden by Islam. On the contrary, sex slaves are under a different law than the free woman. The free woman must be completely covered except for her face and hands. But the sex slave can be naked from the waist up. She differs a lot from the free woman. While the free woman requires a marriage contract, the sex slave does not–she only needs to be purchased by her husband, and that’s it. Therefore the sex slave is different than the free woman.”

Arsalan Iftikhar doesn’t mention the Qur’an verses used to justify this practice, even to offer an alternative understanding of them. He doesn’t acknowledge of the existence of Muslims like these authorities who believe that sex slavery is justified, even to explain how they’re wrong. Consequently, it must be concluded that, like so many other Muslim spokesman, he wants to give the appearance of moderation without the substance of reform. If Abubakar Shekau read his piece, he would immediately see the glaring omission, and realize that Ifitkhar is writing not to offer a genuine Islamic alternative to Shekau’s view, much less to refute that view, but to lull Infidels into continuing complacency regarding jihad and Sharia.

“Hey Boko Haram, pick up a Quran and bring back our girls,” by Arsalan Iftikhar, CNN, May 6, 2014 (thanks to Sonny):

(CNN) – Hey Boko Haram, have you read the Quran lately?

Most of the 1.6 billion Muslims in the world have, and we’re utterly certain that it condemns kidnapping young girls and selling them into slavery – no matter what you say “Allah” tells you.

According to Amnesty International, several hundred schoolgirls – both Christian and Muslim – between the ages of 16 and 18 were abducted at gunpoint on April 14 from their rooms at the Government Girls Secondary School in Chibok, Nigeria, where they had been sleeping.

The armed extremist group Boko Haram, which roughly translates to “Western Education is Sin,” claimed responsibility for these mass kidnappings and threatened to sell these young girls for as little as $12 into sex slavery or forced “marriages” to members of their group.

“I abducted your girls. I will sell them in the market, by Allah,” a man claiming to be Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau said in a video first obtained by Agence France-Presse.

“There is a market for selling humans. Allah says I should sell. He commands me to sell. I will sell women. I sell women,” he continued, according to a CNN translation from the local Hausa language.

‘I will sell them,’ Boko Haram leader says of kidnapped Nigerian girl

As a Muslim human rights lawyer, it is obscene and absolutely un-Islamic for these lunatic human traffickers to invoke the name of God while kidnapping young girls and threatening to sell them into sexual slavery.

The leaders of Boko Haram have clearly never read the Holy Quran, which states quite clearly that “oppression is worse than murder” (2:191) and that nobody “shall force girls to commit prostitution” (24:33).

They must have also missed the numerous times that the Prophet Muhammad categorically stated during his life that women or children were never to be harmed under any situation….

Baltimore Muslim leader says Islam doesn't justify abduction -- doesn't mention sex slavery passages of Qur'an
Sri Lanka: Four Buddhist monks accused of insulting Qur'an
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint


  1. Angemon says

    They must have also missed the numerous times that the Prophet Muhammad categorically stated during his life that women or children were never to be harmed under any situation….

    Like that time when he, asked about polytheist women and children who might be killed during a night raid, said: “they are from them”, meaning that they were from their enemies and so could be killed. Or that time he had an adulterer woman stoned to death. Or when he captured Mecca in 630 and demanded that two female slaves be put to death alongside their master because they had mocked him in a song. Or when he had Umm Qirfa, a very old woman, killed by putting a rope into her two legs and to two camels and driving them until they rent her in two for the crime of being a tribal leader.

    It seems mr. Arsalan Iftikhar is not very knowledgeable of his own sources. Because he wouldn’t be lying on purpose, would he?

    I mean, surely he knows that 2:191 refers to when muhammad’s followers attacked a meccan caravan and killed a man during the holy months when all fighting was prohibited, and muhammad started by saying “i want none of the booty” but then had a revelation saying “persecution (fitnah ) is worse than murder”, meaning that “ok, you attacked a caravan and killed a man when fighting is prohibited, but it’s OK because we were kicked out of Mecca so they were persecuting us, now give me my 20% share of the booty”. As for 24:33, well, they’re being raped and married off, they’re not prostituting themselves.

    What’s he going to talk about next, the one about killing someone being killing the whole mankind and saving someone being saving the whole mankind? Because that’s been done to death.

  2. RodSerling says

    Arsalan Iftikhar: “The leaders of Boko Haram have clearly never read the Holy Quran, which states quite clearly that “oppression is worse than murder” (2:191) and that nobody “shall force girls to commit prostitution” (24:33).”

    Actually, what Qur’an 2:191 says is that “…al-fitnah is worse than killing.” In the context provided by Islamic texts including the Hadith and Sira, the verse was “revealed” post hoc to justify Muslims’ killing of some polytheists. According to Islam, fitnah has nothing to do with slavery or what modern Westerners consider to be “oppression.” Fitnah refers to trials, testing, discord, seduction away from one’s religion, or internal conflict between Muslims.

    No verse in the Qur’an prohibits Muslims from taking male or female slaves, either in jihad, through trade, as punishment for crimes, or as “gifts” received. Several verses specifically permit the sexual enslavement of females (23:5-6, 70:29-30, 4:24, 4:3, 33:50-52), and Muhammad practiced it, never forbade it, and used it as one of the incentives for Muslim males to go into battle (i.e., to capture the non-Muslim women and girls).

    “They must have also missed the numerous times that the Prophet Muhammad categorically stated during his life that women or children were never to be harmed under any situation.”

    In fact, Muhammad never made such a sweeping categorical statement about not harming non-Muslim women and children. What Iftikhar is probably alluding to there is Muhammad’s prohibition on killing women and children in jihad. For one thing, even this prohibition was not sweeping and categorical; rather Muslims were permitted to kill them collaterally in jihad raids (e.g., see the hadith about the “night raids”). For another, the reason women and children were in general not to be killed was that they were instead to be enslaved. Muhammad and the Qur’an permitted the Muslims to enslave and rape the women and girls. That is obviously harm by our modern non-Muslim standards. Muhammad and his men seemed to recognize that enslaving women and children was harmful, but they did it anyway, claiming that it was a justified punishment, boasting about “humiliating” the women of such-and-such tribes that they had attacked, and so on.

    Muhammad even ordered that children be beaten if they did not attend to prayers.

    • RodSerling says

      Iftikhar: “…nobody “shall force girls to commit prostitution” (24:33).””

      In fact, the “girls” mentioned in this verse refers to slave girls. In context, it refers to slave girls who had converted to Islam, i.e., they became Muslims, after which it was forbidden to forcibly prostitute them.

      Even if we take this as generally applicable to both Muslim and non-Muslim females, it’s only saying to Muslim men [or anyone else under Islamic law] don’t forcibly prostitute them (i.e., to other men). Only the legal owners of the slave girls were allowed to have sex with them. (Multiple masters could own “shares” in a slave, i.e., an individual slave in Islam could have multiple masters). The idea that Islam prohibits prostitution is laughable: The Qur’an has no punishment for it. Mutah and misyar “marriages” effectively allow it. What Islam prohibits (outside of jihad and other exceptional conditions) is women obtaining a profit as prostitutes without the Islamic authorities approving it by those aforementioned so-called Islamic marriages, or through trading and trafficking in sexual slaves. Also, jihadists are permitted to have sex with any non-Muslim females they like, including prostitutes. Indeed, male jihadists can have sex with males if it will further the cause of Islam.

  3. Wellington says

    I for one am exceedingly tired of the perverse word gymnastics that Muslims engage in. Yes, breaking it all down and minutely examining the verbal rot and doublespeak that Islam spawned is necessary because knowledge is power, but this doesn’t mean it’s a pleasant task or certainly that such garbage (yeah, it’s garbage) poses any kind of true intellectual challenge or should ever be admired.

    Islam is a monster of a religion, it is a death cult precisely proportional to how fervent a Muslim is and it is deep bad news for non-Muslims and for liberty. Utterly sick of this silly, but unfortunately, destructive and lethal faith. How disgusting it is. And all this terrible nonsense begins with the reputed founder of this malevolent religion, a twisted human being (albeit clever) if ever there were one.

    • RodSerling says

      Me too, Wellington.
      I refute this stuff pretty much as a reflex action at this point. In this case the argument is once again, framed by the Islam propagandists, as being about what is true Islam. (It’s framed that way because Islamic propagandists are using this latest outrage of the enslaved girls to promote and defend Islam). That’s not what should primarily concern us. Muslims are the ones either (a) running around murdering, enslaving, raping, etc., and/or (b) lying about (a). Muslims are the problem, regardless of whether their beliefs are or are not exactly in accord with Islam.

      • RodSerling says

        “That’s [i.e., what’s true Islam] not what should primarily concern us.”

        It is a secondary concern of course, but only because of what Muslims in such large numbers are doing in the world today, not all of which is strictly in accord with the Islamic texts.

      • Wellington says

        “Reflex action” is a good way to put it, RS. It has to be done but it shouldn’t have to be done.

        And who has to examine the words of, say, Buddhists and Christians to determine if they really are going to take slaves in battle, or make non-believers pay a special tax, or wage offensive or “only” defensive war, or treat non-believers as the equivalent of human waste, or kill those of them who convert to another faith, or…,or…,or….

        Islam is alone among religions in being a pain in the ass to the world at large. Sick of it——–but it must be fought relentlessly though damn it for wasting so many peoples’ lives, time and money (just ponder what is spent by Western nations to protect us from Islamic terrorism, and then consider that essentially nothing has to be spent to protect us from Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, agnostic, atheist, Taoist, Confucianist, etc. terrorism).

        Yeah, damn Islam to Hell. Dante was eminently correct to put Mohammed where he did.

        • Champ ✿ says

          Yeah, damn Islam to Hell. Dante was eminently correct to put Mohammed where he did.


          I second that, Wellington!

    • Davegreybeard says

      “I for one am exceedingly tired of the perverse word gymnastics that Muslims engage in.”

      Yeah, Liberals also are proficient in “word gymnastics.”

      Here’s the newest, latest truth defying trick – are y’all ready?

      On Meghan Kelly’s show, just now, she was discussing the girls, kidnapped by Boko Haram. Her guest was a self described Liberal (air head) woman, who went on and on about how Islam is NOT the problem. We have freedom of religion, doncha know, and many women convert to Islam and that’s JUST FINE, of course, because the kidnappings have NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM – everyone knows this, of course. So, it’s definitely NOT Islam, ‘cause everyone knows Islam is a MAJOR religion and it CAN’T be the problem.

      No, you see the problem is Sharia-ism, and Sharia-ism has NOTHING to do with Islam, no siree bob. So it’s this Sharia-ism that we must confront – just as soon as we figure out what it is.

      So hilarious that I about choked on my Zinfandel.

      I am so disappointed in Meghan.

      • duh_swami says

        I saw that jaw dropping idiotic piece also. The biggest problem with duffus like that is they get a national platform, FOX in this case, with a large audience, to spout misinformation, that no one challenges.

      • Wellington says

        Hi, Davegreybeard. Hope you are doing well and have a fine stock of Zinfandel. Yeah, liberals sure do like word games too. One of my favorites is the way they don’t talk about “spending” on this or that. Oh no. That’s old hat. Now the the libs talk about “investing” in this or that. Well a weed by any other name is still….

        Respecting the distinction the lib made between Islam and Sharia, it seems for many whatever it takes to exculpate Islam will be done. God forbid we say that it is actually Islam which is the problem (though it is of course). Even highly well educated individuals, btw, have tried to make this distinction between Islam and Sharia. For instance, Daniel Pipes, whom Robert Spencer knows and who has his doctorate from Harvard in medieval Islamic Studies and is fluent in Arabic has spoken and written to the effect that a lot of Sharia is really only applicable to the seventh century. He apparently really believes this. Trouble is there are tons of Muslims in the twenty-first century who don’t.

        As I’ve written before here at JW, the corner of corners will have been turned when Islam, all of Islam, nothing but Islam, is identified as a negative. When this happens everything else will start to fall into place. Not there yet.

      • Jim Heller says


        I think the problem isn’t shariaism but shariaismism


  4. jewdog says

    It’s a bit difficult to explain that Islamic scripture actually endorses the taking of sex slaves; the right-hand possesses thing is a little subtle for the average beer-guzzling couch potato. There are other obstacles to stark realism: the psychological tendency for people to want to believe that Islam is really benign at heart, the tendency of liberals to only see evil if it’s Western racism, and the who-the-hell-cares attitude about what happens to black Africans in some Third World hellhole. Still, this story does hit you over the head, and, if we keep fooling ourselves about Islam, we will be hit over the head ourselves.

    • Boaz says

      The treasonous liberals and feminazis were conspicuously silent about Brandeis University retracting Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s honorary doctorate at the behest of Satan’s soldiers. The left strangely still claim that the death penalty is NOT a deterrent of any sort….

    • Januk36 says

      I wonder why I grew up in Europe in a country without a colonial past and still fully aware of “our” crimes against africans, the “crimes” committed by the Americans against “their” slaves, while only decades later I learnt accidentally about the enslavement of millions of Europeans by berber and ottomans.
      Those practises weren’t stopped by an internal cultural or philosophical refinement of the islamic societies but with cold steel and lots of suffering.

      • Ayatrollah says

        Or, the west does not allow what Allah and his Rassual allow, and it is every Muslims duty to fight us. According to the big time scholars, it would be a sin not to let the Muslims have western sex slaves.

  5. mortimer says

    Arsalan Iftikhar, like all Muslim males, has heard from his youth from other Muslim males that kafir women are halal and that their morals are loose and that they are waiting for a ‘real man’ like a Muslim male who knows how to take charge of them and bring them into the submission they secretly long for.

    Muslim males are appointed by Allah for the sexual harvesting of kafir women.

    Arsalan Iftikhar knows this, know other Muslim males know this and he counts on the fact that most kafirs do not know this.

  6. RodSerling says

    Ishaq, p. 511. (Raid on Khaybar, continued)
    “When the apostle raided a people he waited until the morning. If he heard a call to prayer he held back; if he did not hear it he attacked. We came to Khaybar by night, and the apostle passed the night there; and when morning came he did not hear the call to prayer, so he rode and we rode with him….We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, ‘Muhammad with his force,’ and turned tail and fled. The apostle said, ‘Allah akbar! Khaybar is destroyed. When we arrive in a people’s square it is a bad morning for those who have been warned.’”
    “The apostle seized the property piece by piece and conquered the forts one by one as he came to them. …The apostle took captives from them among whom Safiya d. Huyayy b. Akhtab who had been the wife of  Kinana b. al-Rabi‘ b. Abu’l-Huqayq, and two cousins of hers. The apostle chose Safiya for himself. …The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims.”

    Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 432:
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
    that while he was sitting with Allah’s Apostle he said, “O Allah’s Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?” The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.

    Note: “Prices.”
    Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 93, Number 506:
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
    That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relation with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interruptus. The Prophet said, “It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection.” Qaza’a said, “I heard Abu Sa’id saying that the Prophet said, ‘No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it.”

    Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
    We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.”

    Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 718:
    Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
    I saw Abu Said and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said said, “We went with Allah’s Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the ‘Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah’s Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, “It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence.”

    Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371 (3371-3388):
    Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.
    Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.95:
    Yahya related to me from Malik from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Habban that Ibn Muhayriz said, “I went into the mosque and saw Abu Said al-Khudri and so I sat by him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said al-Khudri said, ‘We went out with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, on the expedition to the Banu al-Mustaliq. We took some Arabs prisoner, and we desired the women as celibacy was hard for us. We wanted the ransom, so we wanted to practise coitus interruptus. We said, ‘Shall we practise coitus interruptus while the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is among us before we ask him?’ We asked him about that and he said, ‘You don’t have to not do it. There is no self which is to come into existence up to the Day of Rising but that it will come into existence.’ ”
    Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2153:
    Narrated Ruwayfi’ ibn Thabit al-Ansari: Should I tell you what I heard the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say on the day of Hunayn: It is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the last day to water what another has sown with his water (meaning intercourse with women who are pregnant); it is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the Last Day to have intercourse with a captive woman till she is free from a menstrual course; and it is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the Last Day to sell spoil till it is divided.

    Malik’s Muwatta, Book 30, Number 30.2.13:
    Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, “A man came to Abdullah ibn Umar when I was with him at the place where judgments were given and asked him about the suckling of an older person. Abdullah ibn Umar replied, ‘A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, ‘I have a slave-girl and I used to have intercourse with her. My wife went to her and suckled her. When I went to the girl, my wife told me to watch out, because she had suckled her!’ Umar told him to beat his wife and to go to his slave-girl because kinship by suckling was only by the suckling of the young.’ ”

    Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3373:
    Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We took women captives, and we wanted to do ‘azl with them. We then asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said to us: Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judgment must be born.

    Note: the above reports suggests that coitus interruptus should not be practiced, or else it does not matter whether it is practiced.

    Practice of Coitus Interruptus with slave girl
    Sunan Abu Dawud Book 11, Number 2166:
    Narrated AbuSa’id al-Khudri: A man said: Apostle of Allah, I have a slave-girl and I withdraw the penis from her (while having intercourse), and I dislike that she becomes pregnant. I intend (by intercourse) what the men intend by it. The Jews say that withdrawing the penis (azl) is burying the living girls on a small scale. He (the Prophet) said: The Jews told a lie. If Allah intends to create it, you cannot turn it away.
    Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.99:
    Yahya related to me from Malik from Damra ibn Said al-Mazini from al-Hajjaj ibn Amr ibn Ghaziya that he was sitting with Zayd ibn Thabit when Ibn Fahd came to him. He was from the Yemen. He said, “Abu Said! I have slave-girls. None of the wives in my keep are more pleasing to me than them, and not all of them please me so much that I want a child by them, shall I then practise coitus interruptus?” Zayd ibn Thabit said, “Give an opinion, Hajjaj!” “I said, ‘May Allah forgive you! We sit with you in order to learn from you!’ He said, ‘Give an opinion! ‘I said, ‘She is your field, if you wish, water it, and if you wish, leave it thirsty. I heard that from Zayd.’ Zayd said, ‘He has spoken the truth.’ ”
    Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.100:
    Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, “Tell them.” She was embarrassed. He said, “It is alright, and I do it myself.” Malik said, “A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else’s slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission.”

    Malik’s Muwatta, Book 2, Number 2.23.90:
    Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that the slave girls of Abdullah ibn Umar used to wash his feet and bring him a mat of palm leaves while they were menstruating.
    Malik was asked whether a man who had women and slave girls could have intercourse with all of them before he did ghusl. He said, “There is no harm in a man having intercourse with two of his slave girls before he does ghusl.[1] It is disapproved of, however, to go to a freewoman on another’s day. There is no harm in making love first to one slave girl and then to another when one is junub.” [2]
    Malik was asked about a man who was junub and water was put down for him to do ghusl with. Then he forgot and put his finger into it to find out whether it was hot or cold. Malik said, “If no filth has soiled his fingers, I do not consider that that makes the water impure.”
    Ed. notes:
    [1] ghusl: full ablution (ritual washing to remove some “impurity”).
    [2] junub: in a state of impurity following sexual activity.

    Quranic verses and tafsirs:
    “…what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp, …”

    “…except from their spouses, that is, to their spouses, and what [slaves] their right hands possess, that is, concubines, for then they are not blameworthy, in having sexual intercourse with them.”

  7. RodSerling says

    Note “his [Muhammad’s] guidance”

    Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya:
    Zad al-Ma’ad
    Regarding His Guidance With Respect to Prisoners of War
    p. 319
    “And the correct opinion which is based upon his guidance and that of his companions is that the Arabs may be taken as slaves and it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with the slave women from among them without it being conditional upon their embracing Islam.”
    [cites Malik and Bukhari]

    The Reliance of the Traveller:
    When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.”

    The Risala of ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (310/922 – 386/996) A Treatise on Maliki Fiqh (Including commentary from ath-Thamr ad-Dani by al-Azhari)
    Chapter 32: On marriage, divorce, remarriage, ‘Dhihar’-repudiation, vows of celibacy within marriage, mutual cursing (li’an), ‘Khul’-‘divorce, and suckling
    […] “Marriage in the sense of intercourse is only permitted in the Shari’a by one of two matters: the contract of marriage or ownership by the words of the Almighty, “those who guard their private parts – except from their wives or those they own as slaves, in which case they are not blameworthy.” (23:5-6)”

  8. mortimer says

    Mufti Ebrahim Desai writes “The concept of slavery should be regarded as a concept of mercy, as the heinous crime of rejecting Allah as our Master demands IMMEDIATE TERMINATING OF LIFE. Allah, our kind Master, has granted an opportunity to his very negators to enjoy a second chance of life and redirect it to the right avenue by submitting to Him as the ultimate Master-and Allah Ta’ala Knows Best.”

    Slavery is ‘merciful’ in a Muslim’s twisted thinking.

  9. Jay Boo says

    Boko Haram has pushed their luck too far this time.

    Kidnapping, rape and even murder can be ignored, but when the story goes viral and you EMBARRASS Muslims at CAIR and the Gulf states and the White House admin — look out!

    Even Hollywood liberals can smell Islam’s stink this time and the usual policy of adding more perfume is no longer working.

    Call out the drones
    Bring in the hostage negotiators loaded with barrels full of appeasement money.
    Open up the White House hot-line to Boko Haram so Kerry can apologize for western education.

  10. Steffen Larsen says

    There’s a new take on the words “Boko Haram”, putting more blame on the English imperialists for the phenomenon. It seems the English were the first to introduce modern and foreign ways and education – in their own interest, naturally – and this was much resented.

    The difference is not huge: “Newman accepts (as can been in the passage above) that “boko” is reasonably associated with “Western education” in English translation today. But the actual resistance was to something being imposed by triumphant foreigners.”

  11. says

    Taqiyyah(‘deceit’ Q3:28, 16:106)-visage US Muslim prof

    Q4:3 allows sex slavery, Muh. was a slaver! (33:50)

    8:55 “Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve”, 98:6 “worst of creatures (unbelievers)”, 6:70 (Repeated in 10:4) “… they will have for drink (only) boiling water, and for punishment, one most grievous: for they persisted in rejecting Allah.”

    “I REJECT Islam because Islam rejects ME”Pat Condell (UK)

  12. says

    “… into forced marriages (Q65:4, the ugliest paragraph of pedo Allah) with (devout)Boko Haram members.”


    “… Silent children” Bukhari Book 62, Number 67, 68 ‘… I said, “O Allah’s Apostle! A virgin feels shy.” He said, “Her consent is (expressed by) her silence.”

  13. Buraq says

    @ Arsalan Iftikhar

    You can fool some of the infidels all of the time, all of the infidels some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the infidels all of the time – especially if they read Jihad Watch!


  14. duh_swami says

    ‘Everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it’….If Arsalan is concerned, why is he telling kuffar all about it? He should hop on a plane to Nigeria and explain to Boko in person how wrong they are.

  15. Twostellas says

    I’d have to give Arsalan’s attempt at this whitewash a D-, this is a laughable attempt. I guess the taqiyya artists haven’t had much practice with trying to whitewash away sex slavery and war booty “marriages” to the world. Not that it hasn’t been ongoing, just now the world knows about it.

    They usually kidnap and do this to girls at a trickle, so much easier to lie about it then. (The girl wanted to be kidnapped and converted to islam and marry a stranger! Bring her to court and let her say so. all the while under threat and she knows her family will be brutally murdered if she tells the truth.) Cant pull that fast one now. Oh what a conundrum for ‘the believers’.

  16. paul says

    the Koran should be banned since it is so open to misinterpretation.
    muslims should be banned because they are prone to misinterpret the Koran,
    resulting in violent and unacceptable behavior.
    mohd should be stripped off his “prophet” status because of his criminal behavior and is a bad example for the muslims who admire his devious ways.

    • Jay Boo says

      I tried to have a serious conversation with Islam’s top-dog Allah, about how Muslims ‘misinterpret’ their Qur’an, but he just let out a hearty laugh and walked away carrying his pitchfork and wagging his pointed tail.

  17. Ayatrollah says

    So who is the general public to believe? Hamas linked CAIR, or big time Islamic scholars?

  18. Jay Boo says

    Islam does not permit sexual slavery.
    Islam does permit sexual slavery.
    Truth can be whatever a Muslim wants it to be when a Muslims wishes to use the Qur’an to deceive.
    Just another elliptical dance around reality in order to hide the use of circular logic based on the Qur’an which is based on a set of lies from a hearsay supposed conversation that a delusional false prophet psychopath claimed to have been privy to.

  19. awake says

    “… several hundred schoolgirls – both Christian and Muslim – between the ages of 16 and 18 were abducted at gunpoint on April 14 from their rooms at the Government Girls Secondary School in Chibok, Nigeria, where they had been sleeping.”

    Both Christian and Muslim girls? Can anyone confirm this? If this is not so, then Iftikhar’s sins of verse baiting and switching and guilt by omission pale by comparison to that.

  20. Philip Jihadski says

    It is worth noting that, by his own admission, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia stated (in the late 80s, I think) that in the whole of Saudi Arabia, there were about 5000 slaves…he admitted to having 400 at his palace in Nassariyah, outside the old walls of Riyadh.

    Modern-day Islam in Saudi would not survive without the use of slaves, for the Saudis vehemently eschew any form of manual labour, and in fact, look upon those who do engage in manual labour (hired or forced) as being beneath contempt.

    In my days there, I never saw one Saudi doing ANY physical work – it simply was not done.

  21. Carolyne says

    it’s very strange that Islam and it’s adherents are preoccupied with sex. Who can have it, when, where, how, with whom, why……. It’s a perversion, not a religion.

  22. says

    Remember that the main and overarching impetus and goal of PC MC is two-pronged:

    1) to detach Islam from “extremism” — i.e., to make sure to detach Islam itself from any bad things Muslims may be doing or saying;


    2) to detach Muslims from the “extremists” — i.e., to make sure to detach the vast majority of Muslims from the Tiny Minority of Extremists whose bad speech and behaviors do not reflect Islam (see how #2 dovetails with #1).

    This main goal of PC MC — the dominant and mainstream paradigm of the West (this article is one example out of literally thousands one could adduce: the Islamopologist is a professor at DePaul University in Chicago, and his carefully crafted deceit is promoted by CNN, a major mainstream news venue) — dovetails perfectly with the main goal of Muslims in their Stealth Jihad.

  23. Cunamarra says

    It is my understanding that the quote from the second Sura comes from a place where Allah is addressing the situation where the Meccans had persecuted the Muslims to the point that they had left Mecca and then weren’t allowed back into the Kabaa area to perform the pilgrimage. Allah wants his followers to fight back and kill these Meccans because the persecution they have endured in not being able to fully practice Islam is worse than the Muslims slaughtering the Mushrikun.

    The “professor” implies here that murder is a great sin under Islamic morality and that “oppression” is even worse. He is preying on the ignorance of his audience, the American people, who refuse to educate themselves on the tenets of Islam and the doctrines and character of its false prophet. No one at CNN informed their audience of the passage that the quote is from and the background to the story nor did anyone explain the Islamic doctrine ,sound from an Islamic premise, that Boko Haram is working from.