I know Yahya Khan had many sex slaves. Not just Yahya Khan but many caliphs also had sex slaves.
I am not sure of Yahya having sex slaves (
kaneez) or
harem, though he is blamed of indulging into inappropriate acts. To be honest with you, this is something very common among the ruling elites, condemnable yes, unique to Yahya, no.
I am a Muslim but I am slowly turning into agnostic due to such special permission given to men to own sex slaves. I just don't get why Allah permitted sex without marriage. It is Zina to have sex without marriage but with female slaves its permitted. Strange.
This is a very good question. My knowledge is limited, but would like to share with you what I understand about this particular issue.
To understand such things, you have to go 1500 years back. Slaves were
commodities, and were bought and sold as
articles or
goods. When one buys something, it essentially becomes a
belonging to its buyer. When you
own something, you are '
technically' allowed to
'use' it as you like. Islam did not prohibit slavery because it was not practical 1500 years ago. Buying and selling slaves was a cultural norm, not only in Arabia, but throughout the world. However, it is definitely not uplifted by Islam, and the Prophet (PBUH) highly encouraged Muslims to free up slaves. It is like
divorce, which is permissible, but discouraged in Islam. Why is that? because prohibiting divorce was not practical and would result in more social ills.
Now those Sultans/Caliphs/Kings/ruling elites, who had harems and used them to quell their sexual desires may have misused a concession of Islam, but did not really violate the religion. It was a moral deficiency, but not an illegal act. Harems and
zina are two very different things.
Kaneez (by the way, sex slave is not a good translation) are in one's possession, who feeds them, cloths them, and provides them with shelter.
Zina on the other hand, is an act which is committed without getting into or accepting any social responsibility. I hope this clears up things.
