![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |
Is it possible to think over image of Nadia Murad or may be a collage of images as a lead image for this article.
Unfortunately we do not have many original images of sexual slaves during Islamic rules, for both reasons first is in Islam imagery of any living being including that of humans was is strongly discouraged, secondly in many parts of the world once captured, even if successful in an escape these sexually slaved women used to be despised even in their original communities without any mistake of their own so putting them on a canvass their real plight did not occur to most artists many artist in modern times drew female slaves in oriental frames objectifying them. We need to have more representational images in a collage.
Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) was a slave–concubine, though she was a war captive, history is not fully aware how many times she was sold and resold, and she was among fewer fortunate ones who could make to top of elite ladder. So she can not be considered full representative of a sexual slave in Muslim world. Rather image of Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) is used to eulogize possibilities of material and power opportunities; in reality only few did have that chance and position of rest of most female slaves had to suffer through despicable parade of sexual exploitation.
Singularly eulogizing fortunes of Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) and few consensual elite concubines in Muslim world creates untrue distorted picture of larger reality leads to condoning phase of captivity, resale and sexual exploitation and normalizing the same even to 21 century audiences. There is no mistake on part of Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) hereself but it is untrue narrative that wishes to show every Umm Walad was a happy being detached from her original family and community sans explicit consent. These Umm Walads/ concubines and sexual slaves in Muslim world used to have little choice of their own but to not to succumb and adjust and accept to misfortune. Once one is raped had a child and no easy options to feed the child a raped slave even might ask not to have emancipation in spite not liking status of slavery. That kind of compulsion do we understand as human?
It is very insincere on part of those who can believe in narratives that state of female slaves of medieval and premodern Muslim World was much better than what happened to ISIS female slaves. If '...' religion is superior then their followers would have understood and reflected upon simple thing that there is no reason what so ever to captivate, detach and enslave non–combatant females is violation of simple humanism. If captured then return them without condition. And if any sexual relationship taking place then with full explicit consent as happens in regular Nikah marriage; but unfortunately that was not to happen in the history of Muslim world.
There was/is no individual, group or philosophy fully perfect. On part of every individual, group or philosophy to hide imperfections on own side and do whataboutism and push sanitized narratives giving status of reliability to questionable narrative sources is not only insincere to oneself; Consider only five percent of women were sexually exploited through slavery, whether one is Muslim or not, over the centuries every one of us would have part of X chomosome in their genes which might have been sexually exploited in some previous generation unknown to us lost in the history. I wish our editors are more composed before engaging in edit wars, single minded pushing own versions and dislodging competitive versions and competing editors is being insincere to our own unfortunate X chromosome gene passed on to us from generation to generation. Anyways I am looking forward to better and more representative collage images at lead picture of the article.
Rather than just spending time on edit wars here please do give thought to update any of following drafts.
Draft:Women's rights in Muslim societies
Draft:Women, conflict and conflict zones
Draft:Comparison of rights and limitations of Muslim wives, female slaves and concubines
Draft:Slavery in Mecca and Medina
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 07:08, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
1) "Lead images should be natural and appropriate representations of the topic; they should not only illustrate the topic specifically, but also be the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works, and therefore what our readers will expect to see. Lead images are not required, and not having a lead image may be the best solution if there is no easy representation of the topic."
2) "Lead images should be of least shock value; an alternative image that accurately represents the topic without shock value should always be preferred."
"the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works", that anything Islamic State-related is not
"least shock value", and also, possibly,
"not having a lead image may be the best solution". Iskandar323 ( talk) 12:04, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Lead images should be natural and appropriate representations of the topic
Sotheby's catalogues may help with getting the name of paintings right.
-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:22, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Rosati is an Orientalist painter. This genre was well known for applying certain stereotypes against Middle Easterners [8] [9]. For example, Ottoman women were depicted by Orientalists as sexual, lascivicious, and lazy [10]. Feminist and art historian Linda Nochlin went as far as to call these stereotypes racist [11]. Racist or not, these stereotypes were definite exagerrations. Fatima Mernissi, an Arab feminist, "adroitly deconstructs the myth of the harem as paradise, an exotic place populated by nude, voluptuous women, as perpetuated in Orientalist literature and paintings." [12] This is similar to what Nishidani pointed out earlier. And the stereotype of seeing harem women as sexual and lazy are plain to see in the painting too. If you read Concubines and courtesans, you'll see that these women were incredibly multi-dimensional people, whether royalty or commoner. VR talk 23:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
You people are again working in circles . . just for the sake of contradicting me
"a rather spectacular piece by Giulio Rosati". Iskandar323 ( talk) 07:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
"virulently anti-Islamic". Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:15, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
He devoted himself particularly to representations of the Maghreb, that he never visited himself" and "
he never journeyed to the Middle East". Rosati is also chronologically far removed from the events he tries to depict. So why not consider artists who were both local and contemporaneous to the people they depict? The cover of the scholarly book Concubines and Courtesans depicts an image from the Akbarnama. This work is about Mughal India, by people who lived in India and during Mughal times. The exact painting that's on the book cover is this one and it seems to be public domain and is probably the best candidate for a lead image. VR talk 13:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
"...Sufi are fringe, Shia are fringe...", which I sincerely doubt anybody has ever said. The question therein being: who are you talking to? Is this an internal monologue? If so, again, please save the space and keep it to yourself. As the text at the top of many talk pages says, this is not a forum. If you want to rant, head to reddit. Logic fallacy? Hardly. Because no one has suggested it. If there is a sensible discussion to be had about imagery, this is not it. To your more general point - going back to Wikipedia ABC: Just because something has some link to a subject does not automatically make it notable with regards to it. This is not a directory: this is an encyclopedia - the lowest bar of inclusion is not existence, i.e.: anything that may or may not have Islamic characteristics, but notability, i.e.: stuff that is reliably established in notable sources to be representative of a subject at large. I frankly don't even know where to begin with the rest of the above. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:03, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
I suggest editors get back to specifics. All of this talk takes on, wittingly or not, the semblance of cunctator tacticism, burying general consensus about, for example, the need for a title change. The page needs steady focused section by section revision to make it an informed neutral survey of feminine slavery in the Islamic world. Nishidani ( talk) 15:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Extensive discussions requiring at this point a result
"more realistic"one because this is an unqualified adjectival statement. Inspecting New Arrivals shows a specific male-female type encounter that may or may not be entirely unrealistic. The Harem Dance simply shows women in a lavishly decorated harem-type setting guarded by what I presume is a male eunuch -- all of which, if true, seems fairly par for the course of Ottoman-style harem setups. You ignored the Laurens option? Iskandar323 ( talk) 18:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Here is my summary of choices:
VR talk 20:20, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
I do not know the technical thing for the reason link to just before mentioned, Caroline Blyth and Jane Davidson-Ladd's article (Chapter 9) A Theology of Rape: Plundering the Woman’s Body in Deut. 21:10–14 is not working, may be some one can help.
The same article discusses, Louis John Steele’s female slave related painting ' Spoils to the Victor' reviewing Christian female slavery side, the reason part of that discussion is relevant here is, it analyses and helps making difference between a nude drawn for depiction of realism and a nude drawn for male gaze. And that discussion can be useful hear to discuss and decide what an artist is achieving depiction of reality or painting viewer's male gaze? Their discussion is longer and interesting, those interested need to read there first is better. Again one need to make distinguish between depiction of male gaze of male in the drawing and male gaze for the viewer of drawing.
With Rosati's inclusion of Arabic script in painting and many real seeming series on Ottoman time markets, if he has not visited Muslim world then he might have been closely assisted. Paintings do not depict Ottoman world in any deliberate negative light. Focused on presenting the world as is. He might have produced series of paintings so we come across different paintings in same series, but over all percentage of nude slave paintings is limited in comparison to rest of series focusing on rest of market activities like selling carpets and cloth etc.
IMO Rosati seem to depict common female slave at private female slave sale hall. Rosati's painting seem less interested in painting for viewer's male gaze but seem to normalize 'attitude' and male gaze of female slave owners and buyers, while female slave's plight seems taken into account but still relatively marginal. Better part, at least he is covering sexual exploitation of commoner female slave to an extent.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 09:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
@ Iskandar323: regarding this edit, I'm not sure if there was consensus to add all images to the article. I think Nishidani had suggested an 'Orientalist' image or two, and I prefer also that we limited it to two. As said many times before, I'd prefer indigenous works (from Persia, India and Ottoman Empire) over foreign ones. Examples of how Ottomans ( [16] [17]) viewed women entertainers. There's also a gallery of women in Persian harem (including entertainers). Here's a Mughal painting that seems to be depicting new arrivals. This is the entrance of where they were kept. The oldest paintings of concubines might come from Hadith Bayad wa Riyad. According to this book, this painting is entitled "Riyad prostrates at the Sayyida’s feet, while the slave girls and the 'ajouz look on", and this one is supposed to have a slave girl singing. Last but not least, here's an actual photograph of women in the harem. VR talk 21:38, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
I have added the following as a first sentence of the article:
The history of concubinage in the Muslim world encompassed the practice of a man living with a woman without marriage, where the woman was generally a slave, though sometimes free. If the concubine gave birth to a child, she attained a higher status known as umm walad.
I'm open to other alternatives as well. VR talk 03:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Grufo, I don't agree with your recent edits (hence will revert them) for the following reasons. First, there are at least two sources (more cna be provided) that indicate non-slave concubines without limiting this phenomenon to the Timurids. This includes Dalton Brock who says "However, that did not deter wealthy households from also seeking and acquiring freewomen as concubines, although such a practice was argued to be in violation of sharia law." Secondly, I don't agree with the text "where the woman was a slave, in agreement with Islamic laws
". This is not NPOV, as it ignores the vast majority of contemporary Muslims who do not regard this practice legal. The Islamic law part is already mentioned in the second paragraph of the lead.
VR
talk
05:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
The Short description currently reads: Female slavery in Islamicate territories
, which is fine, but the word "Islamicate" is not present in the lead or anywhere else in the article. Should it be? —
GhostInTheMachine
talk to me
21:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
This whole section seems largely off-topic. I've already removed the totally off-topic part entirely related to the enslavement of Muslim women in India. The second section, on the enslavement of Muslim women for concubinage by Muslim men, may be relevant to include somewhere else in the article as it pertains to the laws, enforcement and disregard of laws relating to the practice of concubinage. However, the first section, on specific reactions to Christian enslavement of Muslim women during the reconquista in Al-Andalus, does not seem particularly useful. Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
The forced conversion section was relying on some dubious sources and also misrepresenting what the source was saying, see the discussion here: [18]. Based on that I summarized that section down into 2 shorter paragraphs and moved it one level outwards. Jushyosaha604 ( talk) 17:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Old version | Jushyosaha604's version |
---|---|
Most traditional scholars require the conversion of a
pagan slave-girl before sex, even through force if necessary.
[1] The majority of jurists do not allow sexual intercourse with Zoroastrian or pagan female captives. They require a conversion of these women before sex can take place.
Ibn Hanbal allowed sexual intercourse with pagan and
Zoroastrian female captives if they are coerced to become Muslim. Many traditions state that the female captives should be coerced to accept Islam if they do not convert willingly.
Hasan al-Basri narrates that Muslims would achieve this objective through various methods. They would order the Zoroastrian slave-girl to face the
qiblah, utter the
shahada and perform
wudhu. Her captor would then have sex with her after one menstrual cycle. However, others add the condition that the slave-girl must be taught to pray and purify herself before the master can have sex with her.
[2]
The scholars significantly lower the threshold of conversion for the girls so that the master may be able to have sex with her as soon as possible. Only a few early scholars permitted sex with pagan and Zoroastrian slaves girls without conversion. [2] Al-Mujahid and Safiid bin al-Musayyab say the master can still have sex with his Zoroastrian or pagan female slave even if she refuses to convert. [1] Imam Shafi'i claims that the Companions of Muhammad did not have sexual intercourse with Arab captives until they converted to Islam, but Ibn Qayyim argues that the Companions of the Prophet had sexual intercourse with Arab captives, such as the women of the Banu Mustaliq tribe, without making the sex conditional on the conversion of the women. He also asserted that no tradition required the conversion of a slave-girl before her master can have sex with her. [1] |
Traditional scholars differed on whether a
pagan concubine was required to convert to Islam before sex, with many stating that sex was only allowed with a Muslim, Jewish or Christian concubine. Among those who required conversion, they differed on whether pressure or coercion was acceptable.
[1] The Caliph
Umar argued a slave could not be forcibly converted to Islam on the basis of verse 2:256.
[1]
Scholars differed as to what constituted conversion. Uttering the shahada was usually not enough and the woman had to also perform wudhu and pray in order to be considered a convert. [3] Ibn al-Qayyim argued that the conversion of a polytheist woman to Islam was not necessary for sexual relations with her, citing the fact that no tradition required the conversion of a slave-girl before her master can have sex with her. [4] |
References
Friedmann107
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Friednmann176
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Jushyosaha604's version used exactly the same sources as the old version so the justification that it was was relying on some dubious sources
does not make sense. So I have reverted. If you have specific objections to part of the text, please explain them here on the talk page.--
Toddy1
(talk)
19:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
It is also worth noting that Jushyosaha604's cut-and-paste version introduced three citation errors, which have been removed by reverting
--
Toddy1
(talk)
19:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |
Is it possible to think over image of Nadia Murad or may be a collage of images as a lead image for this article.
Unfortunately we do not have many original images of sexual slaves during Islamic rules, for both reasons first is in Islam imagery of any living being including that of humans was is strongly discouraged, secondly in many parts of the world once captured, even if successful in an escape these sexually slaved women used to be despised even in their original communities without any mistake of their own so putting them on a canvass their real plight did not occur to most artists many artist in modern times drew female slaves in oriental frames objectifying them. We need to have more representational images in a collage.
Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) was a slave–concubine, though she was a war captive, history is not fully aware how many times she was sold and resold, and she was among fewer fortunate ones who could make to top of elite ladder. So she can not be considered full representative of a sexual slave in Muslim world. Rather image of Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) is used to eulogize possibilities of material and power opportunities; in reality only few did have that chance and position of rest of most female slaves had to suffer through despicable parade of sexual exploitation.
Singularly eulogizing fortunes of Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) and few consensual elite concubines in Muslim world creates untrue distorted picture of larger reality leads to condoning phase of captivity, resale and sexual exploitation and normalizing the same even to 21 century audiences. There is no mistake on part of Hurrem Sultan (Roxalena) hereself but it is untrue narrative that wishes to show every Umm Walad was a happy being detached from her original family and community sans explicit consent. These Umm Walads/ concubines and sexual slaves in Muslim world used to have little choice of their own but to not to succumb and adjust and accept to misfortune. Once one is raped had a child and no easy options to feed the child a raped slave even might ask not to have emancipation in spite not liking status of slavery. That kind of compulsion do we understand as human?
It is very insincere on part of those who can believe in narratives that state of female slaves of medieval and premodern Muslim World was much better than what happened to ISIS female slaves. If '...' religion is superior then their followers would have understood and reflected upon simple thing that there is no reason what so ever to captivate, detach and enslave non–combatant females is violation of simple humanism. If captured then return them without condition. And if any sexual relationship taking place then with full explicit consent as happens in regular Nikah marriage; but unfortunately that was not to happen in the history of Muslim world.
There was/is no individual, group or philosophy fully perfect. On part of every individual, group or philosophy to hide imperfections on own side and do whataboutism and push sanitized narratives giving status of reliability to questionable narrative sources is not only insincere to oneself; Consider only five percent of women were sexually exploited through slavery, whether one is Muslim or not, over the centuries every one of us would have part of X chomosome in their genes which might have been sexually exploited in some previous generation unknown to us lost in the history. I wish our editors are more composed before engaging in edit wars, single minded pushing own versions and dislodging competitive versions and competing editors is being insincere to our own unfortunate X chromosome gene passed on to us from generation to generation. Anyways I am looking forward to better and more representative collage images at lead picture of the article.
Rather than just spending time on edit wars here please do give thought to update any of following drafts.
Draft:Women's rights in Muslim societies
Draft:Women, conflict and conflict zones
Draft:Comparison of rights and limitations of Muslim wives, female slaves and concubines
Draft:Slavery in Mecca and Medina
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 07:08, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
1) "Lead images should be natural and appropriate representations of the topic; they should not only illustrate the topic specifically, but also be the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works, and therefore what our readers will expect to see. Lead images are not required, and not having a lead image may be the best solution if there is no easy representation of the topic."
2) "Lead images should be of least shock value; an alternative image that accurately represents the topic without shock value should always be preferred."
"the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works", that anything Islamic State-related is not
"least shock value", and also, possibly,
"not having a lead image may be the best solution". Iskandar323 ( talk) 12:04, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Lead images should be natural and appropriate representations of the topic
Sotheby's catalogues may help with getting the name of paintings right.
-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:22, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Rosati is an Orientalist painter. This genre was well known for applying certain stereotypes against Middle Easterners [8] [9]. For example, Ottoman women were depicted by Orientalists as sexual, lascivicious, and lazy [10]. Feminist and art historian Linda Nochlin went as far as to call these stereotypes racist [11]. Racist or not, these stereotypes were definite exagerrations. Fatima Mernissi, an Arab feminist, "adroitly deconstructs the myth of the harem as paradise, an exotic place populated by nude, voluptuous women, as perpetuated in Orientalist literature and paintings." [12] This is similar to what Nishidani pointed out earlier. And the stereotype of seeing harem women as sexual and lazy are plain to see in the painting too. If you read Concubines and courtesans, you'll see that these women were incredibly multi-dimensional people, whether royalty or commoner. VR talk 23:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
You people are again working in circles . . just for the sake of contradicting me
"a rather spectacular piece by Giulio Rosati". Iskandar323 ( talk) 07:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
"virulently anti-Islamic". Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:15, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
He devoted himself particularly to representations of the Maghreb, that he never visited himself" and "
he never journeyed to the Middle East". Rosati is also chronologically far removed from the events he tries to depict. So why not consider artists who were both local and contemporaneous to the people they depict? The cover of the scholarly book Concubines and Courtesans depicts an image from the Akbarnama. This work is about Mughal India, by people who lived in India and during Mughal times. The exact painting that's on the book cover is this one and it seems to be public domain and is probably the best candidate for a lead image. VR talk 13:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
"...Sufi are fringe, Shia are fringe...", which I sincerely doubt anybody has ever said. The question therein being: who are you talking to? Is this an internal monologue? If so, again, please save the space and keep it to yourself. As the text at the top of many talk pages says, this is not a forum. If you want to rant, head to reddit. Logic fallacy? Hardly. Because no one has suggested it. If there is a sensible discussion to be had about imagery, this is not it. To your more general point - going back to Wikipedia ABC: Just because something has some link to a subject does not automatically make it notable with regards to it. This is not a directory: this is an encyclopedia - the lowest bar of inclusion is not existence, i.e.: anything that may or may not have Islamic characteristics, but notability, i.e.: stuff that is reliably established in notable sources to be representative of a subject at large. I frankly don't even know where to begin with the rest of the above. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:03, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
I suggest editors get back to specifics. All of this talk takes on, wittingly or not, the semblance of cunctator tacticism, burying general consensus about, for example, the need for a title change. The page needs steady focused section by section revision to make it an informed neutral survey of feminine slavery in the Islamic world. Nishidani ( talk) 15:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Extensive discussions requiring at this point a result
"more realistic"one because this is an unqualified adjectival statement. Inspecting New Arrivals shows a specific male-female type encounter that may or may not be entirely unrealistic. The Harem Dance simply shows women in a lavishly decorated harem-type setting guarded by what I presume is a male eunuch -- all of which, if true, seems fairly par for the course of Ottoman-style harem setups. You ignored the Laurens option? Iskandar323 ( talk) 18:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Here is my summary of choices:
VR talk 20:20, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
I do not know the technical thing for the reason link to just before mentioned, Caroline Blyth and Jane Davidson-Ladd's article (Chapter 9) A Theology of Rape: Plundering the Woman’s Body in Deut. 21:10–14 is not working, may be some one can help.
The same article discusses, Louis John Steele’s female slave related painting ' Spoils to the Victor' reviewing Christian female slavery side, the reason part of that discussion is relevant here is, it analyses and helps making difference between a nude drawn for depiction of realism and a nude drawn for male gaze. And that discussion can be useful hear to discuss and decide what an artist is achieving depiction of reality or painting viewer's male gaze? Their discussion is longer and interesting, those interested need to read there first is better. Again one need to make distinguish between depiction of male gaze of male in the drawing and male gaze for the viewer of drawing.
With Rosati's inclusion of Arabic script in painting and many real seeming series on Ottoman time markets, if he has not visited Muslim world then he might have been closely assisted. Paintings do not depict Ottoman world in any deliberate negative light. Focused on presenting the world as is. He might have produced series of paintings so we come across different paintings in same series, but over all percentage of nude slave paintings is limited in comparison to rest of series focusing on rest of market activities like selling carpets and cloth etc.
IMO Rosati seem to depict common female slave at private female slave sale hall. Rosati's painting seem less interested in painting for viewer's male gaze but seem to normalize 'attitude' and male gaze of female slave owners and buyers, while female slave's plight seems taken into account but still relatively marginal. Better part, at least he is covering sexual exploitation of commoner female slave to an extent.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 09:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
@ Iskandar323: regarding this edit, I'm not sure if there was consensus to add all images to the article. I think Nishidani had suggested an 'Orientalist' image or two, and I prefer also that we limited it to two. As said many times before, I'd prefer indigenous works (from Persia, India and Ottoman Empire) over foreign ones. Examples of how Ottomans ( [16] [17]) viewed women entertainers. There's also a gallery of women in Persian harem (including entertainers). Here's a Mughal painting that seems to be depicting new arrivals. This is the entrance of where they were kept. The oldest paintings of concubines might come from Hadith Bayad wa Riyad. According to this book, this painting is entitled "Riyad prostrates at the Sayyida’s feet, while the slave girls and the 'ajouz look on", and this one is supposed to have a slave girl singing. Last but not least, here's an actual photograph of women in the harem. VR talk 21:38, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
I have added the following as a first sentence of the article:
The history of concubinage in the Muslim world encompassed the practice of a man living with a woman without marriage, where the woman was generally a slave, though sometimes free. If the concubine gave birth to a child, she attained a higher status known as umm walad.
I'm open to other alternatives as well. VR talk 03:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Grufo, I don't agree with your recent edits (hence will revert them) for the following reasons. First, there are at least two sources (more cna be provided) that indicate non-slave concubines without limiting this phenomenon to the Timurids. This includes Dalton Brock who says "However, that did not deter wealthy households from also seeking and acquiring freewomen as concubines, although such a practice was argued to be in violation of sharia law." Secondly, I don't agree with the text "where the woman was a slave, in agreement with Islamic laws
". This is not NPOV, as it ignores the vast majority of contemporary Muslims who do not regard this practice legal. The Islamic law part is already mentioned in the second paragraph of the lead.
VR
talk
05:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
The Short description currently reads: Female slavery in Islamicate territories
, which is fine, but the word "Islamicate" is not present in the lead or anywhere else in the article. Should it be? —
GhostInTheMachine
talk to me
21:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
This whole section seems largely off-topic. I've already removed the totally off-topic part entirely related to the enslavement of Muslim women in India. The second section, on the enslavement of Muslim women for concubinage by Muslim men, may be relevant to include somewhere else in the article as it pertains to the laws, enforcement and disregard of laws relating to the practice of concubinage. However, the first section, on specific reactions to Christian enslavement of Muslim women during the reconquista in Al-Andalus, does not seem particularly useful. Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
The forced conversion section was relying on some dubious sources and also misrepresenting what the source was saying, see the discussion here: [18]. Based on that I summarized that section down into 2 shorter paragraphs and moved it one level outwards. Jushyosaha604 ( talk) 17:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Old version | Jushyosaha604's version |
---|---|
Most traditional scholars require the conversion of a
pagan slave-girl before sex, even through force if necessary.
[1] The majority of jurists do not allow sexual intercourse with Zoroastrian or pagan female captives. They require a conversion of these women before sex can take place.
Ibn Hanbal allowed sexual intercourse with pagan and
Zoroastrian female captives if they are coerced to become Muslim. Many traditions state that the female captives should be coerced to accept Islam if they do not convert willingly.
Hasan al-Basri narrates that Muslims would achieve this objective through various methods. They would order the Zoroastrian slave-girl to face the
qiblah, utter the
shahada and perform
wudhu. Her captor would then have sex with her after one menstrual cycle. However, others add the condition that the slave-girl must be taught to pray and purify herself before the master can have sex with her.
[2]
The scholars significantly lower the threshold of conversion for the girls so that the master may be able to have sex with her as soon as possible. Only a few early scholars permitted sex with pagan and Zoroastrian slaves girls without conversion. [2] Al-Mujahid and Safiid bin al-Musayyab say the master can still have sex with his Zoroastrian or pagan female slave even if she refuses to convert. [1] Imam Shafi'i claims that the Companions of Muhammad did not have sexual intercourse with Arab captives until they converted to Islam, but Ibn Qayyim argues that the Companions of the Prophet had sexual intercourse with Arab captives, such as the women of the Banu Mustaliq tribe, without making the sex conditional on the conversion of the women. He also asserted that no tradition required the conversion of a slave-girl before her master can have sex with her. [1] |
Traditional scholars differed on whether a
pagan concubine was required to convert to Islam before sex, with many stating that sex was only allowed with a Muslim, Jewish or Christian concubine. Among those who required conversion, they differed on whether pressure or coercion was acceptable.
[1] The Caliph
Umar argued a slave could not be forcibly converted to Islam on the basis of verse 2:256.
[1]
Scholars differed as to what constituted conversion. Uttering the shahada was usually not enough and the woman had to also perform wudhu and pray in order to be considered a convert. [3] Ibn al-Qayyim argued that the conversion of a polytheist woman to Islam was not necessary for sexual relations with her, citing the fact that no tradition required the conversion of a slave-girl before her master can have sex with her. [4] |
References
Friedmann107
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Friednmann176
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Jushyosaha604's version used exactly the same sources as the old version so the justification that it was was relying on some dubious sources
does not make sense. So I have reverted. If you have specific objections to part of the text, please explain them here on the talk page.--
Toddy1
(talk)
19:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
It is also worth noting that Jushyosaha604's cut-and-paste version introduced three citation errors, which have been removed by reverting
--
Toddy1
(talk)
19:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)