Anal and Oral Pegging in Islam A Very Detailed Thread 🧵

Anal and Oral Pegging in Islam A Very Detailed Thread 🧵

In The Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Compassionate

Table of Contents:

Reason for Writing this So many people have been asking me about this topic if pegging is permissible or not so i decided to make this thread to make everything clear as this issue is not that simple its much more comlpex i will also include the earliest known pegging cases

The Narrow question is not merely whether anal pegging is forbidden but the narrower question is what happens when the male sexual organ is replaced with an artificial phallus and if oral is permissble with it can a wife do that with her husband? A note on Language:

II. The Quranic Condemnation and the People of Lut The Quranic verses are very clear in condemning the act of the peolpe of Lut and warns those who approach men in the back and scholars of tafsir explained the intercourse mentioned in the Quranic verses was about approaching men

A Punishment described in the Quran itself: The Quran does not present the conduct merely as an abstract breach of etiquette. Their rejection of Lot's warning culminated in a destruction that the Quran repeatedly associates with the people of Lut

What the consensus does not automatically establish The modern act substitues an object for the male sexual organ and changes the recipient from female to male. Accordingly, a rigorous statement must be: The role of takhrij in this is important because no one discussed it.

IV. The Hanafi School Foreign insertion and the absence of canonical coitus: Hanafis discussed inserting finger and similar object made from mood in the context of ritual purity "The finger is not an instrument of intercourse, it is therefore treated like wood." Ibn Nujaym:

"There is disagreement concerning the obligation of ghusl when a finger is inserted into the anus and on this basis, the orgon of other than a human being, the orgoan of a dead person are treated accordingly." The Hanafi school does not allow such an act.

V. The Maliki School Internal Anal insertion: "It is not permissible for him to undertake that by inserting his finger into his anus because, on the part of a man, it is like sodomy." The context is istinja' but the principle is stated here that it's not permissible to insert

Anything in the anus. "As for the enjoyment of the exterior of that place the basis of it in my view, is that it is like the rest of the woman's body, all of which is permissible unlike its interior." As per Malikis Outside of the Anus is fine to enjoy you can even kiss it

VI. The Shafi'i School The Shafis are careful about distinguishing bodily insertion from canonical intercourse. "If he wraps a piece of cloth around his organ and inserts it into a woman's sexual opening there are three views concerning it and if a woman inserts the organ of —

an animal then ghusl is obligatory upon her" This passage is important because it also shows that as per the shaf'i scholars its the same thing inserting anything like an animals organ inside a woman if she inserts it then ghusl is obligatory so these insertions are also impure

VII. The Hanbali School: The hanbalis are the most explicit when it comes to the treatment of artificial phalli (Dildo) "The woman is like the man, so she may use something resembling the male-organ." This is about a fake penis which is also known as dildo in our age

"If an unmarried women fears zina she may use something that resembles a male organ to fulfill her desire." Hanbali conclusion:

VIII. Foreign Objects and the Exact Modern Question: The crucial legal distinction: The modern practice is not indetical in legal form to penile anal intercourse. The Male organ is absent: a foreign object is subsituted and the recipent is male. These differences matter

When discussing the technical consequences. The classical sources nevertheless provide several reasons for prohibition of sexualized internal anal insertion: The Quranic condemnation of the sexual conduct the later juristic identification of male anal penetration as liwat.

IX. Auto-Reoticism and Artificial Phalli The modern question of pegging often generates a second question if the classical jurists discussed artifical phalli, did they permit their use generally? The answer is no but the hanbali material is helpful it contains two things:

Ibn Qayyim said: "Some of our companions said if a woman has no husband and her desire becomes intense then it is permissible for her to obtain to an ukrunbuj which is something made from the hides in the shape of a male organ and the woman inserts it." Broader Hanbali doctrine

Sexual foreplay with her lawful husband? Unlike anal penetration this does not involve the anatomical site that the preceding sections identified as restricted. Does the Use of a dildo Implement Constitute Imitation of Men? The hanbalis said a women may use it.

The main principle: "Among the legal consequences of a valid marriage is the permissibility of looking at and each other from head to feet during life because intercourse is superior to looking and touching." Abu Hanifa on mutual sexual stimulation:

Even mastrubation with your wife's hand is permissible and this principle is general and applies to both of them. Maliki and Shaf'i evidence for oral pegging "A Husband may even suck the clitoris of his wife." This is not direct but the principle is what we need.

This Tashabbuh objection won't stand for this because the Prophetic prohibition of women resembleing men was different as per scholars and this is different its between a husband and his wife their private thing. And Scholars called that artificial phalli fine. Final result:

As i promised to show the earliest known Pegging cases in Islamic Sources: This was recorded around 850 CE "A Woman in Medina was caught with an effeminate man and she was penetrating him and was punished later by the governor and then paraded on a camel and someone asked her..

What is this? She replied: "By Allah be quiet. There is nothing more unjust than men in this world you penetrate (have sex) with us all the time but when we do it to you once, you kill us!""

What this report actually establishes: The Punishment Element: The word "Kayranj" is aactually like a dildo (artificial phalli) Why this is historically valuable:

XII. What the Classical Corpus Establishes: Oral Pegging is a seperate issue and there is nothing in the sources to call it haram because there is no impurity or any issue and the hanbalis are clear about artificial phalli.

XIII. Final Comparative Table: Evidence classification:

XIV. Conclusion: Penile-anal intercourse is prohibited as per the madhabs. Oral pegging is different when the act occurs within a lawful marriage, involves the mouth rather than the prohibited anal site then no source calls it haram.

Primary Sources Cited: End of Thread.

@I2ationaL Bro is never getting married again