Dr Jonathan Brown devotes an appendix to his latest work Slavery and Islam to the very controversial claim that the Prophet had a slave-concubine called Mariya. Apparently only in recent decades has Mariya been portrayed as a wife rather than a slave-concubine. Brown assesses all the relevant historical evidence and concludes:
In summary, the only evidence that Mariya was the wife of the Prophet as opposed to his slave-concubine is both extremely rare and unreliable, or it is ambiguous. The evidence explicitly identifying her as his slave-concubine is overwhelming.
I have photoed the chapter below for your reading pleasure. For further reading online –
Arguing that Mariya was a wife of the Prophet:
Rebuttal to Ali Sina’s article “Mariyah the Sex Slave of the holy Prophet” by Bassam Zawadi
Prophet Muhammed’s Wife Mariyah (Maria) by Kaleef K. Karim
Arguing that Mariya was a Concubine of the Prophet:
Mary, Muhammad’s Concubine by Sam Shamoun
Categories: Dr Jonathan Brown, Islam, Slavery
Heads up folks:
This is a very incendiary topic and liable to elicit passionate comments.
Please keep it civil.
Maybe somebody can explain. What does it mean to be a slave-concubine in Islam? That they were not married or? What kind of slave work is a slave-concubine expected to perform? What kind of concubine work is slave-concubine expected to perform? What rights or privileges is a slave-concubine not entitled to that an ordinary wife is?
According to authoritative classical Arabic dictionary Lisān al-ʿArab, the term slave concubine surriyya سُرِّيَّةٌ was analogous to a marriage but with notable difference that it is kept hidden, from the root sirr meaning secret.
for more information:
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-concubines/
Also this comment from “Omar” is useful:
https://bloggingtheology.com/2020/05/04/was-mariya-the-wife-or-concubine-of-the-prophet/#comment-38781
@ Ryder
Down the line:
1. What does it mean to be a slave-concubine in Islam?
She is locked into a contract with one man unless sold (provided they don’t make a contract together on her freedom, or if she becomes pregnant then she is subject to same rulings as a wife, can’t be sold and is freed upon the death of the master)
2. That they were not married or?
It’s was encouraged to do so but not required:
Narrated Abu Musa:
Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “He who has a slave-girl and educates and treats her nicely and then manumits and marries her, will get a double reward.”
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/49/28
3. What kind of slave work is a slave-concubine expected to perform? What kind of concubine work is slave-concubine expected to perform?
The best I can describe is imagine if you had a maid you were allowed to have sex with if you all decided to go that route together.
4. What rights or privileges is a slave-concubine not entitled to that an ordinary wife is?
Not much, they’re essentially “tiny wives”. Top of my head dowry, divorce, doesn’t require to be equally spent on (if not pregnant), doesn’t require equal time with and can be unlimited.
You have lectures by Yasir Qadhi who said Muhammad was caught with the sex slave. Although I don’t think he used the word concubine. It’s clear he does not believe she was the wife of Muhammad. It’s on youtube.
@ Vax
Several points:
1. Agreed she was more than likely a concubine and not a wife (even if for argument’s sake we say she was he(saw) still had three more). With that being said a concubine is not a “sex slave” (she was given to him by a Patriarch of the Coptic Church) they are a relationship setup that is a lesser form than a wife. Children born of this union are still of the man’s lineage, inherit, etc. This was pretty normal until recently across a variety of cultures:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concubinage
2. Yes, this is in Yassir Qadhi’s Seerah.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vbjHqqeluM
3. May Allah forgive him, Yassir Qadhi is incorrect on this incident as a hadith in Bukhari and Muslim by Aisha(ra) who is one of the wives mentioned in the Surah, clearly states why Tahreem came down:
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/83/68
https://sunnah.com/muslim/18/28
The story of Maria and Hafsa(ra) I’ll allow this site to sum it up:
“This narration comes on the authority of Zaid ibn Aslam who was from the third generation and not a witness to the events in question. Hence, Ibn Hajar rules that this narrations’s chain of authorities is incomplete (mursal) in Fatḥ al-Bārī 9/288. For this reason, the explanation was not universally agreed upon by the classical commentators.
Al-Qurtubi mentions first the story of Aisha followed by narrations that include Maria, then he says:
The most correct of these opinions is the first of them, and the weaker of them are the others.
Source: Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī 66:1
In other words, the authentic explanation is the one given by Aisha and the stories that include Maria are weak by comparison.
Ibn Al-Arabi concludes:
Indeed, the only authentic narration is that it was about honey, that the Prophet drank it with Zainab, and Aisha and Hafsa pretended to be offended by it. There occurred what occurred and the Prophet made an oath never to drink it again. He confided that to his wife and the verse was revealed regarding all of them.
Source: Aḥkām al-Qur’ān 66:1
So he basically is saying let’s take someone who is a 3rd generation away over the testimony of one of the parties involved.
I agree with Dr Brown that from the Islamic traditions, Mariya was overwhelmingly portrayed as concubine of the Prophet. The question remains as to whether she officially became prophet Muhammad’s wife, or was just a concubine.
Even if Mariya remain the prophet concubine, though sounds peculiar in recent times, I don’t think this should be a controversial issue at all. Except those Islamophobes type of portrayal, who like to give Prophet Muhammad a bad name, slave concubinage was always a marital model which God has approved to His people along with wife. Prophet Muhammad like other God’s major prophets took slave concubines to provide more children and to enhance their family’s domestic well-beings. Concubine was also endowed with rights and protections equal in status to a wife.
@ Eric
Exactly this setup was done by multiple prophets even in the Bible so this is just plain stupid for Christians to attack this. As I said, I fail to see how his sex life is a reflection of his message.
Interrelated to this topic, I personally found this useful, well written article, which claried many issues, misunderstandings for me:
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2012/09/no-rape-slave-women-islam.html
All these points are categorical and unquestionable evidence that Islam does not anyway view slave-women as objects to be used for the pleasure of Muslim men; rather it views them as dignified citizen with secured rights and provides for them multiple ways to freedom.
It collective evidence above also verifies our assertion that physical intimacy is not the purpose of taking women as captives. It is most certainly not the recommended practice for Islam actually wants them to be properly wed. And even the intimate relation is developed between the slave-girl and her master, she is given honor, her chastity is protected, rights of her children are guaranteed and her freedom is ensured.
This morning upon doing my daily recitation of the Qur’an, I came across a topic which I deemed pertinent to this issue, the sūratul-nisāa 4:24 and 25.
The Qur’an talks about the prohibition for a muslim man to marry (already) married woman (except those you posses rightfully (malakat aymānukum [1]) and the requirement for muslim man to marry (yankiḥa – meaning in a wedlock) his believing slave women (malakat aymānukum / fatayātikum) if a muslim man can not afford to marry a free believing woman (al-muh’sanātil-mu’mināti). Even then it must be in mutual consent.
[1] meaning through proper marriage (ie in a wedlock or obtaining it legally) as some early ulemas understood it —> see Qurtubi commentary below:
Pondering upon this, it is impossible to think that the Prophet consummation with Mariya was done without a proper Nikāh (ie in a wedlock), to me the contention now revolve around whether this had brought Mariya a status of a free-wife (zaujat) as opposed to slave-concubine (surriyya). While Dr. Brown has correctly pointed out that more evidences refer Mariya explicitly as slave concubine (as this was not something unusual or to be resisted as this was her status before she was consummated by the Prophet), I posited that because Mariya had become patently referred as such title, it is plausible that she later became the Prophet’s free wife after their Nikāh. Of course the received opinions establish that Mariya was the Prophet slave concubine but as Dr. Brown put it, the riwayah from Mus’ab bin ‘Abdallah Al Zubayri which mention that the Prophet later took her as a wife (tazawwaja) ie. free-wife, does not in conflict with the fact that Mariya was jāriya/ umm al-walad.
Thanks!
Eric: Pondering upon this, it is impossible to think that the Prophet consummation with Mariya was done without a proper Nikāh (ie in a wedlock)…
Why is it be impossible to think that? As his slave-concubine he was entitled to have sexual intercourse with her according to 4:24 perhaps after seeing her first menstruation. This is what the Prophet allowed in the reports of, Qurtubi, Jalalyn the tafsir attributed to Ibn Abbas (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs) and Ibn Kathir:
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.) The Ayah means, you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married,(except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, “We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed, (Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women.” This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa’i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih. Allah’s statement.
http://www.recitequran.com/en/tafsir/en.ibn-kathir/4:24
Eric: Mus’ab bin ‘Abdallah Al Zubayri which mention that the Prophet later took her as a wife (tazawwaja) ie. free-wife, does not in conflict with the fact that Mariya was jāriya/ umm al-walad.
This is not found in the manuscripts of the critical editions as Dr. Brown points out.
Because in Qurtubi it is said that there were some (Ibn Al Aliyah, Ubaidah bin As-Salmani, Thawus, Said bin Jubair and Atha’, also riwayah from Ubaidah via Umar – I gave the reference above) who had the opinion that malakat aymānukum means through proper Nikāh
In Tafsir Jalalayn also we read
It might be your understanding arise upon reading the proceeding clause which seems to indicate the permissibility of having sexual intercourse (wat’a) for captives of war. But this must be understood in relation to subsequent verse 4:25 which regulate how such permissibility was done, that is by fully marrying them (yankiha) with the prerequisite of only applies for believing women only.
And whoever has not the means wherewith, [whoever] is not wealthy enough, to be able to marry believing (al-mu’minat), ‘believing’, is in accordance with the prevalent practice, which was understood, free, women in wedlock, let him take, in marriage, believing maids whom your right hands own…
Eric: Mus’ab bin ‘Abdallah Al Zubayri which mention that the Prophet later took her as a wife (tazawwaja) ie. free-wife, does not in conflict with the fact that Mariya was jāriya/ umm al-walad.
I do not have access to Al Mustadrak of the Dar Al Kutb Al Imiya and Dar Al Haramayn nor those critical editions, but what Dr Brown is saying there are differences in manuscripts so this is still a point of debate. And if we take the Mus’ab bin ‘Abdallah Al Zubayri narration as authentic, my point was the isolated report Al Zubayri which mention that the Prophet later took Mariya as a wife (tazawwaja), does not in any way remove the possibility that this (change of her status) might have happened after their marriage (Nikāh) in accordance with the Qur’an (4:25).
I hope you see my point.
Good point Riqaf.
@ Eric
I see your point and Allah hu alim just want to pick your brain a little as I’d like to explore it more. Would you say that this ayah would apply to Mariah’s situation? For example:
“Whoever doesn’t have the financial means to marry a free believing woman may then marry a believing woman that’s a slave. God knows about your state of faith, (as) you are all one. So marry them with the permission of their family and give them their dowry according to what’s reasonable. They should be virtuous and not sleeping around with random people nor having secret boyfriends. But once they’re brought into the fortress of marriage, if they commit the shameless act of an affair, then give them half the punishment of an unmarried free woman. This ˹rule˺ is for those of you who fear the great harm of a sin coming your way, however, it’s better for you to be patient because God is the Most Forgiving and Forever Merciful.” (4:25)
I didn’t this ayah is what gives permission for concubines. I thought the ayah was a1 “if you can’t do this, then do this” type of command. So instead of committing zina (fornication) go marry a free woman, if you can’t do this then marry a Muslim slave. If it was a general command why would Allah say:
“… This ˹rule˺ is for those of you who fear the great harm of a sin coming your way, however, it’s better for you to be patient …”
Yes, that what struck me upon reading this ayah, this too must apply to Mariya situation because it was decreed by God.
“… This ˹rule˺ is for those of you who fear the great harm of a sin coming your way, however, it’s better for you to be patient …”
To me it seems quite straight forward as a command that a man must fully marry a slave woman if he was unable to marry a free believing woman for lack of financial means. The marriage to slave woman must be done properly with procedures asking permission from her family and give dowry.
@ Eric
Forgive me Eric but I’m having a hard time understanding your position. Are you saying that concubines are the same as wives and that this ayah is about them?
My apologies for not making myself clear..
My position is (as Q 4:25 is about) that a slave woman is not automatically halal for sexual intercourse for her master. So it has to be made lawful through a proper marriage (nikah) procedure.
Now the question after such procedure whether the status of the woman is still slave-concubine or she fall in the category of wifehood (sawja)?… I posit that after such procedure, the status are the same as a free wife.
@ Eric
I got you now. While I agree they are a “lesser wife”, I’m going to have to respectfully disagree on several grounds:
1. This ayah is referring to Muslim slave women, not general concubines (who will the majority of the time be non-Muslim). The ayah imo appears to basically be stating if you can’t marry a Muslim free woman, take a Muslim slave woman and marry her (remember many Muslims especially women were still slaves at this time (and everyone forgets many of these women pre Islam were prostitutes) for example, Surah Noor:
“24:32. Marry off whoever is single among you as well as those who are capable among your male and female slaves. If they’re poor, God will provide for them from His riches because God’s riches are infinite and He is All-Knowing.
24:33. Those who are unable to find any financial means to marry should remain abstinent until God gives them enough out of His riches… Do not force your slave-girls into prostitution, when they themselves wish to remain honorable, in order to make a short-term gain of the worldly life. But if someone still forces them, God will be forgiving and merciful on ˹her˺.’
So by marrying them and which would result in them becoming pregnant, they would be free and this also explains why the Prophet (saw) encouraged educating and marrying concubines:
Narrated Abu Musa:
Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “He who has a slave-girl and educates and treats her nicely and then manumits and marries her, will get a double reward.”
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/49/28
This also explains this hadith:
Narrated Maimuna, the wife of the Prophet (ﷺ) that she manumitted her slave-girl and the Prophet (ﷺ) said to her, “You would have got more reward if you had given the slave-girl to one of your maternal uncles.”
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/51/28
Why would he(saw) say this? Because she came from a prominent family and the concubine (who would have still had the “stigma” of being a slave and potentially former prostitute) would have eventually been married by one the Meccan royalties and lived a good life.
2. This interpretation is further problematic when the reason for the ayah is brought into play:
Abu Sa’id Al Khudri said “The Apostle of Allaah(ﷺ) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of Apostle of Allaah (ﷺ) were reluctant to have relations with the female captives because of their pagan husbands. So, Allaah the exalted sent down the Qur’anic verse “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hand posses.” This is to say that they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.
https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/110
Essentially their previous contract results in a divorce, and they make a new contract with a new man, and all they have to do is wait out their iddah (waiting period). If all they had to do was set up a marriage contract why would they be hesitant as they had to do was just “divorce” their former husbands and set u a new marriage contract.
Let us keep in mind that Maria was send by the leader of Egypt as a gift.
Thus, she did not even know any Arabic.
In some situations in 7th century Western Arabia, freeing someone and having them leave your house is detrimental to them.
How will they even survive?
Any objective and fair analysis will reveal very clearly how no person in history had more impact in ending slavery and ending concubinage than the Prophet Muhammad because of the clear Islamic teachings to free slaves.
The Qur’an is unambiguously clear in this.
Prophet Muhammad had massive more impact than Prophet Jesus, Prophet Moses, or any other man or woman.
May mankind from both Muslims and Non-Muslims supplicate to God for God to bless Prophet Muhammad for this.
If the Prophet did not free and marry Maria, let us also realize that at least some of the Prophet’s wives would have been very upset if the Prophet had freed Maria to be equal to their level as a full wife.
The Prophet was so kind and generous but he had marital problems with the level of kindness and generosity he was engaged. At least some of his wives gave resistance to him (pbuh) for his kindness and generosity.
This is evident in Surah 33 (Surah Al-Ahzab) of the Qur’an and in some of the hadith.
@ Brotheromer
I see no reason to make something nicer. He(saw) enjoyed a standard relationship with a woman of the time. Yes, we limited slavery to basically a punishment for nations that fight against us (and realistically with zakat and the number of expiations that require freeing them it was eventually going to be very limited) But at the end of the day so what? Why do we need to defend anything?
@stewjo004,
I agree that since he (pbuh) enjoyed a standard relationship with a women at the time and that this therefore does not and should not discredit him as a trustworthy person.
However, the Qur’an asserts that the Prophet was on a standard of tremendous character (Surah Qalam)
We believe that the Prophet met and exceeded the standard of someone with tremendous character.
So that’s why I thought it was worth pointing out the points above.
@ Brother Omer
Yes, he did but their standards are based on whims and desires. For example, some of them state because he fought wars he doesn’t have good character. Or because he had multiple wives he doesn’t have good character. Or because he spoke out against Quaish’s idols he doesn’t have good character. It is simply impossible to being a universal standard of good character across all cultures. Allah is the one who states what good character is (which is why he commended him) and this was in order to comfort him from their personal attacks.
Sometimes you don’t need to say anything because at the end of the day, so what? If he is a messenger of God anything they say is irrelevant. These are simply distractions to get away from tawheed which is irrefutable. We don’t always have to sugar coat things. Yeah, this went down, there is a practical reason for it, and? Let’s get back to you being a kaffir who disbelieves in his Lord and why.
Stewjo004: Let’s get back to you being a kaffir who disbelieves in his Lord and why,
Brotheromer was just adding a few observations. This has absolutely nothing to do with kufr.
@ Hamid
The only person who will bring this up is a kaffir. My point is this is simply a distraction. You do what is called A.I.M:
A- Acknowledge
I- Inform
M- Move on
@stewjo004,
You make a good point.
A lot of rejectors of God or religion or so on go off on tangents and distractions. They don’t want to deal with the elephant in the room which is their ego which does not want to submit to God or a higher power that they can’t manipulate and they don’t want to be accountable.
You put the nail in the spot. Thank you.
Still, I think there is a place to talk about morality.
I think some Muslims have this notion that their standards are based on whims and desires.
Which is true and is connected well to the point you made on their distractions.
I think on the other hand, some of the Muslims who make this accusation have an issue of their own which is circular reasoning in that if it is in the Qur’an or the hadith deemed authentic, then it is true.
What these Muslims often miss is that the whole basis of the truth of the Qur’an is based on rationality and morality.
That is the ultimate bedrock. The bedrock is not the Qur’an or the Prophet and definitely not a vague definition of Sahaba or so on. No, it’s what demonstrates the Qur’an to be true after all. It is the burhan.
So when someone impinges on something dealing with morality or rationality, I think it calls for a response from time to time.
But I agree that the deepest truth on which all come out is recognition of the One who is the source or all existence and Who gave us our morality and thus is the most Moral of all—God….and thus the consstruct of Tawhid.
@ brother Omar
I’ll show why I find this approach problematic from 3 fronts.
1. If we drop Allah from the conversation and are just speaking on humans ALL morality is subjective. For example, most people say murder is bad but tell that to the Tatars, the Scythians or Aztecs who are a-okay with it. What basis do you have to argue about their personal feelings and opinion? There’s no basis other than the social conditioning and environmental factors which is why you need an outside force.
2. “the whole basis of the truth of the Qur’an is based on rationality and morality.”
Uhhh I might need you to define this a bit more. While Allah does command just and generally speaking we can see hikmah to His commands that is not always the case. For example, what rationality and morality is there in commanding Ibrahim (as) to murder his son?
3. Muslims have the need to always try to defend things. At the end of the day, the Prophet(saw) is a man, and he had a permissible relationship as bestowed by the Creator. No character defect here. Simply acknowledge, inform and move on. This is why you NEVER hear these people criticize Ibrahim(as) for example. It’s basically:
“He had a wife named Sarah(rh). He then took the concubine Hagar(rh) she made him happy… the end.”
Same thing here. lets for argument sake say the Hafsa(ra) story is true (though I highly favor no):
“He had a wife named Hafsa(ra). He then took a concubine name Maria she made him happy…the end.”
Not everything has got to be sugar-coated:
“Oh he(saw) was marrying widows and that’s why polygyny was legislated blah, blah, blah…”
No. While true he(saw) did marry majority widows, he married them because he found them attractive (like Juwwariyyah(ra) for example). Instead of doing all that, just state:
“Men generally speaking want to have sex with more than one woman. Allah out of mercy put that into us to continue the human race. The end.”
THIS is how he becomes relatable and thus an example. Oh wow, he (saw) had urges and he acted on them in a permissible manner. THIS is someone I can relate to. Hypothetically, if I became a Christian and followed their theology Jesus(as) is a god so there is no way I can relate to this as the divine realm is completely separate from the human one. There’s no example to emulate as it is impossible because i am not divine.
How come the Meccans didn’t make a big deal about the Prophet(saw) having a concubine?
@ Kmak
I know you don’t get this a lot, but your common sense points are most appreciated.
Stewjo: The only person who will bring this up is a kaffir.
You have a one track mind!
@ Lmdh1@ikn01.com
No, I’m just not stupid.
I dont know why you all very much obsessed with the prophet Muhammad PBUH having sex with his woman slave, Marya. You even accusing the prophet raped his woman slave.
Maria was a king Najashi’s slave and she was given to the prophet as his slave.
We were created by same god i.e Allah. Quran is 100% still as its original until now whereas the bible only being too many alteration ( addition and omission) only 20% of verses can be taken come from Allah. I mentioning this I to quote you bible to support prophet relationship with his woman slave.
Read this :
16 Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian slave named Hagar;
2 so she said to Abram, “The Lord has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.”
Abram agreed to what Sarai said.
3 So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife.
4 He slept with Hagar, and she conceived.
When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress.
5 Then Sarai said to Abram, “You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my slave in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the Lord judge between you and me.”
6 “Your slave is in your hands,” Abram said. “Do with her whatever you think best.” Then Sarai mistreated Hagar; so she fled from her.
Who is Hagar? Was she officially married to prophet Abraham PBUH?
Hargar was a egytianslave woman given by the king of egypt to Sarai and Abraham. Then Sarai gave Hagar ( not to marry him ) but to make her pregnant. When prophet have sex with Hagar, she still a slave.
So nothing wrong for prophet to have a mutual relationship with Marya, his slave woman, as this allowed in the bible and Quran.
@ Ali
1. No one has an issue here.
2. Already established in the Abrahamic faiths its a legit relationship
3. 20% that’s VERY generous.
20% is a totally figure arbitrary surely.
Read carefully dear
ya vol mein herr