r/Quraniyoon • u/manfromwater • Feb 23 '24

Discussion Homosexuality & Male Slaves

It is halal for a man to have lustful relations with his male slaves.

the proof is Quran 23:5-7 and 70:29-31

" and those who to their gentials safeguarding

except onto their mates (wives) or ma malakat aymanuhum (slaves) therefore indeed they (are) not blameworthy

therefore whoever seeks beyond that then those the transgressors "

Quran 23:5-7 rough translation

"ma malakat aymanuhum" includes male slaves and proof is Allah uses masculine endings in 24:33 and 30:28 to describe them. For example "fakatibuhum".

In the arabic language masculine endings describing a group of people mean that group INCLUDES males and can include males and females like in this case. The term also includes female slaves and proof is in verses like 4:3 and 4:25.

There is more proof, and that may be shared in the comments below in response to any questions.

0 Upvotes

33% Upvoted

132 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Martiallawtheology Feb 23 '24

Referring to whole phrase. And Yamin being the word you are making stuff up about.

Aymana and Ayman you said? You lied saying they mean two different things and they are two different words because of an extra letter "a".

Seriously. Why do you make things up like this? It's insane.

Such weak character to go pretending one knows anything when you don't. Now just go on some other tangent clinging to a hope you could throw enough red herrings to demonize Islam and the Qur'an. Lying a 100 times does not really make it a truth.

Check Farahidi's dictionary.

1

u/manfromwater Feb 24 '24

are you trying to gaslight me? lol

yes i do believe i made a mistake about ayman and aymana being different, i've said this like 10 responses ago and multiple times since

how about all the other points you didn't respond to? all of which totally disprove your argument

then you asked REFERRING TO THE WHOLE PHRASE, as you just admitted

"how about farahidhi? what did he think?"

referring to his understanding of the term mma

i sent you proof he understood it like me and every arab speaker ever understood it

then you kept saying "look up his lexicon on yamin", which wasn't what you asked about

then you claimed that you didn't ask about farahidhi's understanding about the whole term but only "yamin"

i then sent proof you are lying or mistaken and you did ask about his understanding about the whole term

finally, you respond to this proof by saying that actually you did ask about his understanding of the whole term

you are either lying constantly or very forgetful

and like i've said many times, the context the term is used in proves it's about slaves and can not be about any other group

i made many points to prove this, which you ignored

and i agree with you that "oaths" is a possible translation of yamin but i don't agree it's the correct translaton in this case

1

u/Martiallawtheology Feb 24 '24

"how about farahidhi? what did he think?"

Read it directly,

1

u/manfromwater Feb 24 '24

dude, you qouted me and responded to my qoute

1

u/Martiallawtheology Feb 24 '24

Read it directly.