Slavery In Quran

[saludada]

There is a general consensus in the Muslim world that Slavery is allowed though not encouraged in Islam.

Slavery is seen and you too would agree is unjust and a gross voilation of human Rights!! But Islam allows it. How do you deal with this moral dilemma.

Opinions are welcomed but if you are thinking of copy pasting something from some webpage - PLEASE DONT - just post the links.

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


check this link out insha'Allaah:

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...AskAboutIslamE



:wasalamex

[Mohsin]

Theres also a good thread here http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...ave-girls.html

[Salah ad-din]

It depends on what type of slavery you are talking about. If it is the slavery that occured in America against Blacks, that is not allowed. If it is normal slavery where you a person or persons to work for you because of some kind of mutual deal then it is permitted as far as I know.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Fishman]

:sl:
Non-Muslims often criticise Muhammad for owning slaves, which is true. However, when westerners think of slavery, they think of people shackled and chained, being beaten by their master if they did anything against his will. Muhammad's slaves were not treated like this, but like ordinary sevants that lived with him.
:w:

[Woodrow]

The slavery of old would correspond more closely with what is considered minimum wage employment today. There were many restrictions placed on how a slave had to be treated and the slave also had opportunity to move out of slavery. Sadly, our current language has few words that correspond to the accurate meanings used in the past.

However, some words that we do have would are more accurate then the word "slave" for what was meant by the original word such as:

Laborer
Intern
serf
Share Holder
student


And many others, depending on the specific task the slave's services were for.

It is nearly impossible to convey yesterdays meanings into the terms of today's connontations.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:

From Shaykh Abdullah Al-Faqîh's fatwa on IslamWeb:

From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man. (SOURCE)

From Dr. Habib Siddiqui:

The ancient world was deeply entrenched into slavery, and the Arab society in Muhammad’s (S) time was no exception. The pagan aristocracy in Makkah, Jewish landowners and merchants in Madinah and many wealthy Christian Arabs were slave owners.[17] Most of the early believers in Muhammad’s (S) message of pure monotheism, on the other hand, were slaves, who were brutally tortured for their faith by their non-Muslim slavers. It became, thus, incumbent upon the Prophet (S) and his Companions (notably Abu Bakr and Uthman – may Allah be pleased with them) to free those slaves. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.[18] It was no wonder that some of the best-known Muslims and soldiers in the defense of Islam were these former slaves and their children.[19]

The Qur'an unequivocally makes it clear that no man, irrespective of his status (including a prophet), can enslave any other human being: "It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given him the Scripture and wisdom and 'Nabuwah' (Prophethood) that he should afterwards have said unto mankind: Be slaves of me instead of Allah …" [3:79]

Thus, Islam’s credit lies in being the only major religion to curtailing slavery and encouraging emancipation of slaves. (See the Qur’an for many such references, e.g., 4:92, 5:89, 58:3, 90:13, 24:33, 9:60, 2:177, 2:221, 4:25, 4:36.) Following the dictates of the Qur’an, personal and public wealth from zakat fund and the Baitul-Mal was used for manumitting slaves.20 Here are some relevant Traditions (ahadith) encouraging emancipation of slaves, Muslims and non-Muslims alike:

"A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave, even his private organs for the sake of the freed slave's organs." - Muhammad (S) [Bukhari and Muslim: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

“The atonement for beating or slapping a slave (Muslim or non-Muslim) on the face, for no fault of his, is that he should be set free.” - Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Ibn Umar (RA)]

"Give food to the hungry, pay a visit to the sick and release (set free) the one in captivity (by paying his ransom)." - Muhammad (S) [Bukhari: Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (RA)]

“Allah the Most High said, I will be the opponent of three persons on the Day of Resurrection. They are the one who makes a covenant in My name and then prove treacherous. Or the one who sells a free person (Muslim or non-Muslim) as a slave and appropriates his price for himself. And the one who hires a laborer and having taken full work from him, fails to pay him his wages." - Muhammad (S) [Hadith Qudsi, Bukhari: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

"There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person (Rajulun iitabada muharraran)." – Muhammad (S) [Abu Dawud]

"No son can repay his father unless he finds him as a slave and purchases him and sets him free.” – Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

As hinted earlier, many of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (S) were freed slaves who went on to become great leaders of the Islamic community. Bilal the Abyssinian became the first caller to Islam [note: the position of mu’addhin is next to the imam]. Ammar ibn Yathir was from Yemen, Salman al-Farsi was from Persia, Suhayb al-Rumi was from Byzantium. Many of the rulers in Muslim territories were freed slaves and their descendants.
__________________
[17]A study of the lives of many former slaves who became the Companions of the Prophet (S) is sufficient to prove this. For instance, Salman al-Farisi’s (RA) slave master was a wealthy Jew from Banu Qurayza. (See also Maulana Rumi’s masterpiece - Mathnabi.) [back]
[18]Human Rights in Islam by Abul ‘Ala Mawdudi. [back]
[19]Read this author’s The Book of Devotional Stories (in print) for stories of some of these early Muslims. [back]
[20]See Fethullah Gulen’s article: How is it that Islam, a religion inspired by God for the good of humanity, allows slavery? - Islam Herald.

Malise Ruthven writes:

Restrictions were placed on enslavement. It was forbidden to enslave free members of Islamic society, including dhimmis (nonMuslims) residing in dar al-Islam.

Marjorie Kelly writes in Islam: The Religious and Political Life of a World Community:

Because of socioeconomic considerations, however, slavery was not abolished.

John L. Esposito writes in Islam and Politics:

Slavery had long existed among the Arabs. Although the Quran commanded the just and humane treatment of slaves ( 4:40, 16:73) and regarded their emancipation as a meritorious act, the system of slavery was adopted in modified form. Only captives in battle could be taken as slaves. Neither Muslims nor Jews and Christians could be enslaved in early Islam.

Kenneth W. Morgan writes in Islam- The Straight Path: Islam Interpreted by Muslims

Slavery was customary at the time that Islam was revealed, but Islam prepared the grounds for its elimination. It encourages the emancipation of slaves by giving them the possibility of purchasing their freedom, it urges that part of zakat be given to slaves to help them free themselves, and it offers the possibility of atonement for certain sins, such as having sexual intercourse during fasting days, by releasing slaves.

Edward Blyden, on of the most important Pan-Africanist thinkers of the 19th century, points out that Islam is what saved much of Africa from slavery:

The introduction of Islam into Central and West Africa has been the most important, if not the sole, preservative against the desolations of the slave trade. Islam furnished a protection to the tribes who embraced it by effectively binding them together in one strong fraternity and enabling them by their united efforts to baffle the attempts of powerful pagan slave hunters. (Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race, p. 215)

At the end of the 18th century, Mouradgea d'Ohsson (a main source of information for the Western writers on the Ottoman empire) declared:

"There is perhaps no nation where the captives, the slaves, the very toilers in the galleys are better provided for or treated with more kindness than among the Muhammedans." (As quoted in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol.I, p. 35.)

Napoleon Bonaparte is recorded as saying about the condition of slaves in Muslim countries:

"The slave inherits his master's property and marries his daughter. The majority of the Pashas had been slaves. Many of the grand viziers, all the Mamelukes, Ali Ben Mourad Beg, had been slaves. They began their lives by performing the most menial services in the houses of their masters and were subsequently raised in status for their merit or by favour. In the West, on the contrary, the slave has always been below the position of the domestic servants; he occupies the lowest rug. The Romans emancipated their slaves, but the emancipated were never considered as equal to the free-born. The ideas of the East and West are so different that it took a long time to make the Egyptians understand that all the army was not composed of slaves belonging to the Sultan al-Kabir." (Cherfils, Bonaparte et l'Islam (Paris, 1914))

Annemarie Schimmel writes:

"The entire history of Islam proves that slaves could occupy any office, and many former military slaves, usually recruited from among the Central Asian Turks, became military leaders and often even rulers as in eastern Iran, India (the Slave Dynasty of Delhi), and medieval Egypt (the Mamluks). “ (Islam: An Introduction", p. 67)

:w:

[Hijrah]

:sl:

From Shaykh Abdullah Al-Faqîh's fatwa on IslamWeb:

From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man. (SOURCE)

From Dr. Habib Siddiqui:

The ancient world was deeply entrenched into slavery, and the Arab society in Muhammad’s (S) time was no exception. The pagan aristocracy in Makkah, Jewish landowners and merchants in Madinah and many wealthy Christian Arabs were slave owners.[17] Most of the early believers in Muhammad’s (S) message of pure monotheism, on the other hand, were slaves, who were brutally tortured for their faith by their non-Muslim slavers. It became, thus, incumbent upon the Prophet (S) and his Companions (notably Abu Bakr and Uthman – may Allah be pleased with them) to free those slaves. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.[18] It was no wonder that some of the best-known Muslims and soldiers in the defense of Islam were these former slaves and their children.[19]

The Qur'an unequivocally makes it clear that no man, irrespective of his status (including a prophet), can enslave any other human being: "It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given him the Scripture and wisdom and 'Nabuwah' (Prophethood) that he should afterwards have said unto mankind: Be slaves of me instead of Allah …" [3:79]

Thus, Islam’s credit lies in being the only major religion to curtailing slavery and encouraging emancipation of slaves. (See the Qur’an for many such references, e.g., 4:92, 5:89, 58:3, 90:13, 24:33, 9:60, 2:177, 2:221, 4:25, 4:36.) Following the dictates of the Qur’an, personal and public wealth from zakat fund and the Baitul-Mal was used for manumitting slaves.20 Here are some relevant Traditions (ahadith) encouraging emancipation of slaves, Muslims and non-Muslims alike:

"A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave, even his private organs for the sake of the freed slave's organs." - Muhammad (S) [Bukhari and Muslim: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

“The atonement for beating or slapping a slave (Muslim or non-Muslim) on the face, for no fault of his, is that he should be set free.” - Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Ibn Umar (RA)]

"Give food to the hungry, pay a visit to the sick and release (set free) the one in captivity (by paying his ransom)." - Muhammad (S) [Bukhari: Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (RA)]

“Allah the Most High said, I will be the opponent of three persons on the Day of Resurrection. They are the one who makes a covenant in My name and then prove treacherous. Or the one who sells a free person (Muslim or non-Muslim) as a slave and appropriates his price for himself. And the one who hires a laborer and having taken full work from him, fails to pay him his wages." - Muhammad (S) [Hadith Qudsi, Bukhari: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

"There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person (Rajulun iitabada muharraran)." – Muhammad (S) [Abu Dawud]

"No son can repay his father unless he finds him as a slave and purchases him and sets him free.” – Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Abu Hurayrah (RA)]

As hinted earlier, many of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (S) were freed slaves who went on to become great leaders of the Islamic community. Bilal the Abyssinian became the first caller to Islam [note: the position of mu’addhin is next to the imam]. Ammar ibn Yathir was from Yemen, Salman al-Farsi was from Persia, Suhayb al-Rumi was from Byzantium. Many of the rulers in Muslim territories were freed slaves and their descendants.
__________________
[17]A study of the lives of many former slaves who became the Companions of the Prophet (S) is sufficient to prove this. For instance, Salman al-Farisi’s (RA) slave master was a wealthy Jew from Banu Qurayza. (See also Maulana Rumi’s masterpiece - Mathnabi.) [back]
[18]Human Rights in Islam by Abul ‘Ala Mawdudi. [back]
[19]Read this author’s The Book of Devotional Stories (in print) for stories of some of these early Muslims. [back]
[20]See Fethullah Gulen’s article: How is it that Islam, a religion inspired by God for the good of humanity, allows slavery? - Islam Herald.

Malise Ruthven writes:

Restrictions were placed on enslavement. It was forbidden to enslave free members of Islamic society, including dhimmis (nonMuslims) residing in dar al-Islam.

Marjorie Kelly writes in Islam: The Religious and Political Life of a World Community:

Because of socioeconomic considerations, however, slavery was not abolished.

John L. Esposito writes in Islam and Politics:

Slavery had long existed among the Arabs. Although the Quran commanded the just and humane treatment of slaves ( 4:40, 16:73) and regarded their emancipation as a meritorious act, the system of slavery was adopted in modified form. Only captives in battle could be taken as slaves. Neither Muslims nor Jews and Christians could be enslaved in early Islam.

Kenneth W. Morgan writes in Islam- The Straight Path: Islam Interpreted by Muslims

Slavery was customary at the time that Islam was revealed, but Islam prepared the grounds for its elimination. It encourages the emancipation of slaves by giving them the possibility of purchasing their freedom, it urges that part of zakat be given to slaves to help them free themselves, and it offers the possibility of atonement for certain sins, such as having sexual intercourse during fasting days, by releasing slaves.

Edward Blyden, on of the most important Pan-Africanist thinkers of the 19th century, points out that Islam is what saved much of Africa from slavery:

The introduction of Islam into Central and West Africa has been the most important, if not the sole, preservative against the desolations of the slave trade. Islam furnished a protection to the tribes who embraced it by effectively binding them together in one strong fraternity and enabling them by their united efforts to baffle the attempts of powerful pagan slave hunters. (Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race, p. 215)

At the end of the 18th century, Mouradgea d'Ohsson (a main source of information for the Western writers on the Ottoman empire) declared:

"There is perhaps no nation where the captives, the slaves, the very toilers in the galleys are better provided for or treated with more kindness than among the Muhammedans." (As quoted in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol.I, p. 35.)

Napoleon Bonaparte is recorded as saying about the condition of slaves in Muslim countries:

"The slave inherits his master's property and marries his daughter. The majority of the Pashas had been slaves. Many of the grand viziers, all the Mamelukes, Ali Ben Mourad Beg, had been slaves. They began their lives by performing the most menial services in the houses of their masters and were subsequently raised in status for their merit or by favour. In the West, on the contrary, the slave has always been below the position of the domestic servants; he occupies the lowest rug. The Romans emancipated their slaves, but the emancipated were never considered as equal to the free-born. The ideas of the East and West are so different that it took a long time to make the Egyptians understand that all the army was not composed of slaves belonging to the Sultan al-Kabir." (Cherfils, Bonaparte et l'Islam (Paris, 1914))

Annemarie Schimmel writes:

"The entire history of Islam proves that slaves could occupy any office, and many former military slaves, usually recruited from among the Central Asian Turks, became military leaders and often even rulers as in eastern Iran, India (the Slave Dynasty of Delhi), and medieval Egypt (the Mamluks). “ (Islam: An Introduction", p. 67)

:w:

My views exactly jazakullah

[saludada]

@Salah ad-din
"If it is normal slavery where you a person or persons to work for you because of some kind of mutual deal then it is permitted as far as I know."
What In world is normal slavery!!??

There is nothing right about slavery! Do you know what being a slave implies. It implies that you cannot do what you want but you do what your owner wants

"If it is the slavery that occured in America against Blacks"
That was slavery no different from arab Slavery.
Slavery is not about how well you are treated or if you are paid. Its about being forced into labour. Forced labour was exactly what the ARAB slaves were living with!!


@Fishman
"but like ordinary sevants that lived with him."
Servants and slaves are TOTALLY different. There can be no comparison. Arabs didnt have servants they had slaves. Servant can choose not to obey a slave cant. How can anyone justify the taking away of freedom of anyman & NO I am not a westerner!! Dont confuse me with one.

@WoodRow
"slave also had opportunity to move out of slavery."
Pay for his freedom that is!! That is not exactly an "opportunity". By all accounts Islamic injunction regarding slavery where lightyears ahead of their times. But recognising slavery is NOT justifiable.

[saludada]

@Ansar
"From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man."

Slavery is ALLOWED nonetheless!!
A man CAN be forced against his will!?!?

Regarding the ayat. [3:79]
That is a horrendous and abhorrent interpretation

The actual verse
"yaqoola lilnnasi koonoo AAibadan lee min dooni Allahi"
Yusuf Ali translates it as: say to people: "Be ye my worshippers rather than Allah's"
M Asad as : said unto people, "Worship me beside God"
Shakir as: say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah's
but shakir goes on & as we read on the verse and the implications of the word abd are made clear!!
"rather (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord"

This verse does not speak of slavery or its abolishment as slavery is understood ( forced labour )

[saludada]

Continuing
@Ansar

"Thus, Islam’s credit lies in being the only major religion to curtailing slavery and encouraging emancipation of slaves."
True - that does go very well for Islam. But why is a man allowed to keep as a slave another man in the first place? What right does one man have of keeping as a slave another man? NONE!!

[Mohsin]

Continuing
@Ansar

"Thus, Islam’s credit lies in being the only major religion to curtailing slavery and encouraging emancipation of slaves."
True - that does go very well for Islam. But why is a man allowed to keep as a slave another man in the first place? What right does one man have of keeping as a slave another man? NONE!!

:uhwhat Did you go on the thread i recommended where your questions have been answered?

Theres also a good thread here http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...ave-girls.html

[saludada]

Which particular Question would that be?

I reject out of hand the "economic" argument. That is both incorrect and not a Moral justification!!

[saludada]

Again there is talk of abolishment of slavery ( in the thread ) which ofcourse nothing more than a logical fallacy because slavery was never abolished by Islam. Slavery was only discouraged ( as is divorce ) but allowed just the same!!

[saludada]

That thread doesnt answer my questions ( raises quite a few questions though )

Quoting from the thread - Quoting Ansar
"slavery wasn't prohibited by Islam, but steps were put in place to see that the practice was eradicated."

Islam allowed slavery!! Or Didnt it.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

@Ansar
"From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man."

Slavery is ALLOWED nonetheless!!

I think if you bothered to read my post carefully you would find that this was answered; Islam does not give an endorsement or even plain license of slavery as you are implying. Islam came at a time when slavery was deeply entrenched in the society, so Islam worked towards the gradual elimination of slavery.

• Islam encouraged the emanciplating of slaves; The Qur'an does so in many places:
  
  4:92, 5:89, 58:3, 90:13, 24:33, 9:60, 2:177, 2:221, 4:25, 4:36.
  The Prophet said:
  
  "A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave (Sahîh Bukhârî, and Sahîh Muslim)
  Shaykh Abu Bakr Al-Jazâ'iry writes:
  
  Islam orders making an agreement to facilitate a slave in buying back his freedom if he requests such an agreement, and it encourages helping him in that with shares or wealth. Allah the Almighty said:
  And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation) give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allah which He has bestowed upon you. (Qur'an 24:33)
  (Al-Jaza'iry, Minhaj Al-Muslim, vol. 2, p.551)
  The Prophet said: "If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward. " (Sahîh Bukhari)
• Islam eliminated and restricted the sources of slavery, prohibiting the enslavement of free people, the Prophet said:
  
  The Prophet said, "Allah says, 'I will be against three persons on the Day of Resurrection: [...] One who sells a free person (as a slave) and eats the price[/b] (Sahîh Bukhari)
  "There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person (Rajulun iitabada muharraran)" (Sunan Abî Dawûd)
• Islam obligated freeing slaves in many circumstances as expiation. Expiation for breaking an oath is freeing a slave (2:221), unintentionally causing a Muslim's death is freeing a slave (4:221), expiation for Zihâr is freeing a slave (4:221), breaking one's fast in ramadan is freeing a slave (Sahîh Muslim), etc.
• Islam elevated the status of slaves and promoted universal human equality; the Prophet said:
  
  "Yield obedience to my succesors, even if he is a black ethiopian slave" (Mishkat al-Masaabih, At-Tabreezee)
  "No one should say, "my slave" as all of you are slaves of Allah." (Bukhari, Muslim, An-Nasaa'ee and Ibn Hibban)
• Islam prohibited the poor treatment of slaves; the Prophet said:
  
  "Whoever strikes his slave or beats him, then his expiation is to free him." (Sahîh Muslim)
  They are your brothers; give them to eat what you eat; give them to wear what you wear. (Sunan At-Tirmidhi)
  "He who treats his slave badly will not enter Paradise". (Musnad Ahmad)
  "You are to honor them and to treat them like your children, and feed them from what you eat" (Musnad Ahmad)

So your claim that Islam simply allowed slavery is not true at all. Islam was actually instrumental in the gradual elimination of slavery for the reasons listed above. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.

Regarding the ayat. [3:79]
That is a horrendous and abhorrent interpretation

If you know arabic, you know that the word 'abd means slave, so there is nothing 'horrendous'' or 'abhorrent' here.

Islam allowed slavery!! Or Didnt it.

You can obsinately continue to deny the fact that Islam did NOT leave slavery as it was, allowing it to continue unfettered. Islam placed steps in place (which I have outlined for you in a very basic fashion) for the elimination of slavery. What Islam did was the best thing that could be done in that era, as historians have testified, both Muslims and Non-muslims. You initially pretended you were just interested in an answer to your question but it seems quite evident that you are locked in bigoted denial of reality and do not seek any answer.

:w:

[saludada]

@Ansar
"Islam encouraged the emanciplating of slaves; The Qur'an does so in many places"

No doubt!! Emancipation implies that slavery was allowed!! ( discouraged sure ) but allowed!! ( Do you disagree?? )

"There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person"
See NOW we are getting somewhere!!
Enslaving a free person is obviously through this hadith known to be dissallowed ( I would like to know the book no and hadith number if you would be so kind )
The whole portion about treating slaves nicely et al irrelevant to me. My question is keeping slaves. Do you imply that by the above quoted hadith the taking of slaves has been prohibited?? That seems so to me.
By what I understand of this hadith & the implication that since no slaves can be taken that Islam effectively abolished slavery!! But if a man born to a slave is a slave then Slavery was not abolished by Islam!!

So now if you would be so kind could you guide me here. How ( if at all ) can a slave be taken. I believe captives of war are taken as slaves untill they pay their ransom which gives them their freedom as Muslims are under orders from ALLAH to free them. Is there any other way of acquiring slaves.

p.s I will look into it myself and would be very dissappointed if there were any way to take a slave and you wouldnt mention it if you knew!!

[Fishman]

@Fishman
"but like ordinary sevants that lived with him."
Servants and slaves are TOTALLY different. There can be no comparison. Arabs didnt have servants they had slaves. Servant can choose not to obey a slave cant. How can anyone justify the taking away of freedom of anyman & NO I am not a westerner!! Dont confuse me with one.

:sl:
I am not trying to justify taking away the freedom of anybody! I am saying that the conditions that the slaves of the early Muslims lived in were not as bad as westerners are made to think.
:w:

[Hijrah]

:sl:
I am not trying to justify taking away the freedom of anybody! I am saying that the conditions that the slaves of the early Muslims lived in were not as bad as westerners are made to think.
:w:

:sl:
ummm...they were good on the most part, slaves were freed for simple reasons, masters weren't allowed to beat the slaves and masters were to feed and dress the slaves as they dressed themselves so I don't see what the West has on that kind of slavery compared to other kinds in history....
:w:

[Fishman]

:sl:
ummm...they were good on the most part, slaves were freed for simple reasons, masters weren't allowed to beat the slaves and masters were to feed and dress the slaves as they dressed themselves so I don't see what the West has on that kind of slavery compared to other kinds in history....
:w:

:sl:
When westerners think of slavery they think of people shacked in chains, doing forced labour.
:w:

[Hijrah]

:sl:
When westerners think of slavery they think of people shacked in chains, doing forced labour.
:w:

which ain't in Islam=no chains and a far as labour, no overburdening

[Mohsin]

@Ansar
"Islam encouraged the emanciplating of slaves; The Qur'an does so in many places"

No doubt!! Emancipation implies that slavery was allowed!! ( discouraged sure ) but allowed!! ( Do you disagree?? )

"There are three people whose prayers are not accepted. And one of these three is a man who enslaves a free person"
See NOW we are getting somewhere!!
Enslaving a free person is obviously through this hadith known to be dissallowed ( I would like to know the book no and hadith number if you would be so kind )
The whole portion about treating slaves nicely et al irrelevant to me. My question is keeping slaves. Do you imply that by the above quoted hadith the taking of slaves has been prohibited?? That seems so to me.
By what I understand of this hadith & the implication that since no slaves can be taken that Islam effectively abolished slavery!! But if a man born to a slave is a slave then Slavery was not abolished by Islam!!

So now if you would be so kind could you guide me here. How ( if at all ) can a slave be taken. I believe captives of war are taken as slaves untill they pay their ransom which gives them their freedom as Muslims are under orders from ALLAH to free them. Is there any other way of acquiring slaves.

p.s I will look into it myself and would be very dissappointed if there were any way to take a slave and you wouldnt mention it if you knew!!

I think what you are asking is why wasn't slavery completely abolsihed. the problem was it was everywhere, slaves were in every household. A lot of these were uneducated unskilled slaves, who couldn't live independantly. if you look at when all the black slaves in America got freed, they had nowhere to go, nowhere to stay, no qualifications to work and earn money, so instead some of these were forced into crime to make a living.

So since the laws of islam come from God, God knows all, he knows what would happen if he commanded every muslim to free his slaves, they would become a burden on the community as they would have nowhere to go, and couldn't work. So instead it was abolshed gradually. the fact that islam didn't permit any free person to become enslaved proved it saw slavery as evil, however it abolsihed slavery gradually with the steps Bro. Ansar Al Adl mentioned earlier. So yes slavery was allowed, but only so that to help them.

Remember the status of slaves were elevated. If you made a slave do work you had to help him, you had to clothe him, you had to feed him. When the leader of the believers, the Caliph 'Umar bin Khattab RA went to Jerusalem, the people thought Umar Bin Khattab, the leader of all these muslims, would be coming with these huge army. But they were shocked to see he was coming on just a camel, and only accompanied by his slave. And they were taking turns on riding on the camels. Imagine that! The leader of the muslim empire would be walking in the sun in the desert, and his slave would be riding on the camel. this is how islam treated the slaves

[saludada]

@FISHMAN

I am saying that the conditions that the slaves of the early Muslims lived in were not as bad as westerners are made to think.

Oh OK [:)]

@Mohsin
That is exactly the kind of economic argument that I reject as unfounded, simplistic & naive.

A lot of these were uneducated unskilled slaves, who couldn't live independantly.

They could have worked for the same people but as free men. Come ON!!
This wasnt an employment opportunity!! The role that slaves used to have in society they could have continued as free men - servents of their previous masters only being paid for their services & able to decide by themselves what they want to do with their lives as as all men should be able to.

they would become a burden on the community as they would have nowhere to go and couldn't work.

NO THEY DEFINITELY WOULD NOT!! How can you assume they would have no where to go!?!? They could have very well played the same role in society as they did previously. Freedom only now would have meant that they could do better - they would have been free to make lives better for themselves. Their masters werent keeping them for their good company. They had purpose for them. Even if the slaves had been free the purpose would still be there and the slave could very well serve it and the master would pay the former slave as he would pay any free man for any service!!!

So instead it was abolshed gradually.

There is one major problem with that!! Slavery was NOT abolished for centuries after the revelation of Islam. The concept of slavery existed till very recently. :|

[Hijrah]

@FISHMAN

Oh OK [:)]

@Mohsin
That is exactly the kind of economic argument that I reject as unfounded, simplistic & naive.


They could have worked for the same people but as free men. Come ON!!
This wasnt an employment opportunity!! The role that slaves used to have in society they could have continued as free men - servents of their previous masters only being paid for their services & able to decide by themselves what they want to do with their lives as as all men should be able to.


NO THEY DEFINITELY WOULD NOT!! How can you assume they would have no where to go!?!? They could have very well played the same role in society as they did previously. Freedom only now would have meant that they could do better - they would have been free to make lives better for themselves. Their masters werent keeping them for their good company. They had purpose for them. Even if the slaves had been free the purpose would still be there and the slave could very well serve it and the master would pay the former slave as he would pay any free man for any service!!!


There is one major problem with that!! Slavery was NOT abolished for centuries after the revelation of Islam. The concept of slavery existed till very recently. :|

You put up a great argument indeed but even after all that there is no denying that if slaves were freed all together it wuld have been a huge blow economically, as far as slavery not being abolished until recently, that's a matter of individualism, I don't see how Islam can be taken to account with that one.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

No doubt!! Emancipation implies that slavery was allowed!! ( discouraged sure ) but allowed!! ( Do you disagree?? )

I answered this in my last post (I take it you have run out of useful comments since you are repeating the ones that have been debunked). Islam did not simply leave slavery to be as you imply when you say it allowed it, instead Islam did the best thing possible in working towards the removal of slavery and the elimination of any associated injustices. The fantasy of someone simply snapping their fingers and declaring the immediate abolishment of slavery in the 7th century is a nice idea, but unfortunately unrealistic and impossible. Slavery was deeply entrenched in the society and consequently could not be eliminated immediately. Islam took several steps to eliminate the injustices of slavery and drive humanity in the direction of its gradual elimination. As for what those steps were, I have outlined them clearly in my previous post.

The whole portion about treating slaves nicely et al irrelevant to me.

No it is not irrelevant. The abuse of slaves was rampant in those times and was a severe injustice that had to be removed. It is to the credit of Islam that it was able to not only remove such injustices, but elevate the status of slaves to the same level as everyone else. Once this was done, the institution of slavery began to naturally dissolve. It is certainly convenient for you to label all the monumental achievements of Islam in the way of removing injustices associated with slavery as 'irrelevant', and then complain about all the injustices associated with slavery and why Islam did not place an immediate prohibition on slavery.

See NOW we are getting somewhere!!

No need to embarrass yourself - this exact quote was in my last post!! And yet, it is only after I pasted it for you a SECOND time, that you read it and said "now we're getting somewhere!!" YES. We are getting somewhere because you have only begun to read the information that was repeatedly posted in this thread AND in the thread that members referred you to earlier! I think it is only fair that we expect you to read the responses on this forum rather than needing to be spoon-fed these quotes over and over again in the hopes of generating a response.

My question is keeping slaves. Do you imply that by the above quoted hadith the taking of slaves has been prohibited??

No free person can be taken as a slave.

By what I understand of this hadith & the implication that since no slaves can be taken that Islam effectively abolished slavery!!

Welcome to the thread. By eliminating and restricting the sources of slavery, Islam effectively drove humanity towards its gradual elimination. After that, slaves only resulted from war captives and existing slaves. And when a slave-girl gives birth to her master's child, the child is not a slave, and when the master dies the child's mother automatically becomes free as well.

Is there any other way of acquiring slaves.

Outside of war-captives, there is no other way of acquiring more slaves.

That is exactly the kind of economic argument that I reject as unfounded, simplistic & naive.

I would prefer the researched conclusions of historians, sociologists and economists over your ill-informed conjecture, any day. Roger Du Pasquier, Edward Blyden, Mouradgea d'Ohsson, Napoleon Bonaparte, Annemarie Schimmel, P. L Riviere, Leeder, etc. This was discussed in great detail in the other thread. Some excerpts:

Think what would have happened if Muslims have freed all the slaves? How these slaves would have earned a living if all of them were freed at once? In my opinion, the economy would have collapsed, which would have hurt all people including the freed slaves. The case for slavery is not like the case of alcohol. Slavery, depending on the socio-economic conditions of a society, is not a bad thing if it is done within the bounds of human rights. In another words, if paying for domestic work is not affordable by socio-economic situations of a society, then a person would work happily if you provide him/her food, shelter, clothing, and treat him/her with respect. It doesn't matter if you call this person slave, servant, or anything else – these are only the names for which people tend to confuse themselves – the important thing is the treatment of the person.

Then clearly you're not well acquainted with the econimcal condition in Middle Ages. Back then, the gap for economic opportunies was very narrow for freedslaves as was independency for a freedslave who didn't posses any property nor was educated. This in turn leads the freedslave going back to his former master and sell his labour in return for economical dependancy. This is also from the Islamic POV as I haven't mentioned the economical disasters in Americas slavery but then again, I wouldn't justify the slavery in Americas and the cruel treatment that they had to endure. I hope such part of history never repeats itself.

Your definition of slaves is what any historian refers to as western definition. The Islamic definition is the same as the definition of a servant. I suppose the humane treatment, the ability to achieve great ranks, etc, has been already mentioned.
[...] I disagree with you strongly on that issue. Can you provide [any] evidence that freed slaves had personal, psychological or economic resources to secure themselves a dignified independence. I assume you are aware of the past consequence that was heaped on the freed slaves after the civil war.

Frederick Douglas said, regarding the ex-slaves after the civil war:

"free, without roofs to cover them, or bread to eat, or land to cultivate, and as a consequence died in such numbers as to awaken the hope of their enemies that they would soon disappear."

Islaam aimed at abolishing slavery gradually without introducing any negative consequences on the stability neither of the community nor in the economical status. This is because slaves represented a big economic power before the advent of Islaam. Another additional reason was that during that period, nations were lacking a solid system to exchange POWS. The only options that they enforced was either by putting the POWS to sword, keep them as captives, allow them to return to their people or distribute them as part of the spoils of war.

And the oft-used option was the last one. But Islaam replaced the cruel inhumane treatment that captives used to receive with compassion and justice.

Let me cite an example of a captive named Emmanuel d'Aranda, a student from Flanders who was caught at sea in 1640, and remained captive in the Regency of Algiers for two years (1640-2), narrated his experience. His first master was Cataborne Mostafa, who shared his meals with him, and his company. Then at some point his master, as a punishment following a quarrel with an army officer, was sent away for military duty for six months. Here is what d’Aranda has to say:

"I was sad about my master, who told me: `henceforth you will go and live at Mahomet Celibi Oiga; I hope with God’s help, before my return you will be free, and if I had money I will share it with you.’’ I answered: `Master, I know about your good will and your poverty; I kiss your hands, thanking you as much as I can for the good treatment I received in your house.’ He said "When you are back in Flanders, give my greetings to your parents."
Found in Emmanuel d’Aranda: Relation; op cit; In Denise Brahimi: Opinions et regards; op cit; pp. 45-6.

Labat (Priest) addresses the misconception that the slaves were treated inhumane by their Muslim captors. He wrote in his memoir:

"We imagine that the Christians who have the misfortune to be slaves in Barbary, are tortured in a very cruel manner and the most in-humane treatment inflicted on them. There are people who in order to stir the charity of the faithful pour with great assurance these lies: their intention, although good, is still always a lie. They forget that in this instance that it is not right to cause harm so as to derive good. I, too, have been in this situation like many others…. But what I saw in Tunis has convinced me these people are full of humanity, as I witnessed that our slaves on the boats waiting to sail were fed every day (fruit, meat, bread…)… and some of these slaves demanded that they stayed with their masters until the day they left for home; and I agreed. Their masters shared their meals with them, gave them tobacco, and looked after them as if they were their own children. They kissed them on the day of parting, and assured them, that if business or misfortune brought them back to the country, they could freely live with them, and they will be more than welcome."

Not only would there have been a collapse of the economy from the sudden generation of independent economic entities causing the suffering of ex-slaves and ex-masters alike, but it also would have been the cause of much injustice. Let's consider an analogy. If a billion dollars of counterfeit money is introduced secretly into a city over an extended period of time until it was sufficiently distributed, then imagine the case if it was suddenly identified and people were ordered to dispense of it immediately. Some people would lose very little, but there would be many who would lose almost all their wealth, their property, their life's work and be thrown into poverty. It would be more appropriate to introduce a system to gradually filter out the counterfeit money in a way that would not reap injustice on any members of society.

This is what Islam did with slavery - it introduced a system to eliminate any injustices and allow for the gradual removal of the practice without causing injustice to any members of society.

[saludada]

@Hijrah
"I don't see how Islam can be taken to account with that one."
Well if our argument is that Islam slowly abolished slavery its rather necessary for the said argument that slavery actually did get abolished. ( it didnt though )

@Ansar
"The abuse of slaves was rampant in those times and was a severe injustice that had to be removed."
That all nice and dandy irrelevant to me because that was not my question.

"The fantasy of someone simply snapping their fingers and declaring the immediate abolishment of slavery in the 7th century is a nice idea, but unfortunately unrealistic and impossible."
Was that the only radical change Islam brought. How about equality of the genders. Islam proclaimed the women to be equal how do you think that would have rested with the misogynic society of the time. No misogyny was not slowly abolished. Be reasonable. The Arabs of the time could hardly adjust to anything Islam brought. But yes Islamic injunction as radical as any were revealed to the ARABS.

this exact quote was in my last post!!
I was reffered to a very large thread. How do you suppose that I could without missing anything go through it all.

Would be coming back to the economics of it in a moment. But let me clear things up for myself.

The second ( most certainly by the third ) generation of Muslims from arab would have had no slaves except captives of war. Which in the absence of Geneva conventions serves to protect prisoners of war!! So that is the abolishment of slavery right there!!

[saludada]

Also captives of war were to be freed if they paid their ransom. That is fundamentally different from a free man for no justifiable reason being made a slave and having to purchase his freedom. Captives of war were prisoners who could pay with service or money to secure their freedom and as long as they were prisoners labour being extorted through them!

Than you again.

[saludada]

I'll get back to the economic fallacy later!! But now it is pointless - I will however persue it as an intellectual excercise.

[saludada]

Sunan abu dawood which book - I need to look up that hadith

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

@Ansar
"The abuse of slaves was rampant in those times and was a severe injustice that had to be removed."
That all nice and dandy irrelevant to me because that was not my question.

It is not irrelevant; slave abuse is one of the major injustices associated with slavery and the fact that Islam eradicated it entirely is not smething to be overlooked when evaluating Islam's role in the gradual removal of slavery.

"The fantasy of someone simply snapping their fingers and declaring the immediate abolishment of slavery in the 7th century is a nice idea, but unfortunately unrealistic and impossible."
Was that the only radical change Islam brought. How about equality of the genders. Islam proclaimed the women to be equal how do you think that would have rested with the misogynic society of the time. No misogyny was not slowly abolished. Be reasonable. The Arabs of the time could hardly adjust to anything Islam brought. But yes Islamic injunction as radical as any were revealed to the ARABS.

Yes, Islam brought radical change in terms of beliefs and views. It immediately promoted gender equity and declared racial and social equality. But these are beliefs and values. You can declare that the slave and the master are equal, but until you have developed a system of viable alternatives you cannot effect economic and societal change in this manner. So your mistake is in comparing Islam's immediate changes to the value/belief system with its gradual changes to the economic/societal system. As I indicated earlier a more fitting example would be the introduction of counterfeit money into an economy.

this exact quote was in my last post!!
I was reffered to a very large thread. How do you suppose that I could without missing anything go through it all.

I'm not talking about the other thread. I'm talking about my first post IN THIS THREAD.

The second ( most certainly by the third ) generation of Muslims from arab would have had no slaves except captives of war.

No there were all the existing slaves as well. They didn't magically disappear.

Sunan abu dawood which book - I need to look up that hadith

I don't have the reference for the book, but the arabic phrase in the hadith was mentioned so you can search for it if you need it.

[searchingsoul]

It depends on what type of slavery you are talking about. If it is the slavery that occured in America against Blacks, that is not allowed. If it is normal slavery where you a person or persons to work for you because of some kind of mutual deal then it is permitted as far as I know.

It's sometimes called being a wife.:giggling:

[saludada]

They didn't magically disappear.

Come on - by the third generation the existing slaves would have died - how long do you want them to live? Their offspring would be free men. So there you go. Slavery abolished. :D

[saludada]

I searched the entire Sunan Abu dawood. That was alot of work!!
CTRL+F looked through all mentions of slaves through the entire Sunan Abu Dawood. I couldnt find it. I could have very well made a mistake - but its too much trouble to do that again. Could you please find out which book.

[Hijrah]

@Hijrah
"I don't see how Islam can be taken to account with that one."
Well if our argument is that Islam slowly abolished slavery its rather necessary for the said argument that slavery actually did get abolished. ( it didnt though )

even so, Islam can't be taken to account for certain individuals...

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Come on - by the third generation the existing slaves would have died - how long do you want them to live? Their offspring would be free men.

Yes the offspring of the master and slave would, but otherwise not.

So there you go. Slavery abolished. :D

Eventually yes you are right that the sources became quite depleted but here is the fundamental problem you're forgetting - ISLAM SPREAD. So in the third generation there were many people who had just become Muslims in many newly conquered lands. The Muslims population expanded tremendously in a very short period of time. If Islam had remained confined to a few tribes in the Arabian desert, then we would expect it to have depleted as quickly as you suggest.

I searched the entire Sunan Abu dawood.

Arabic or english? If it was the latter then you should know that only a partial translation is available for Sunan Abi Dawud on the net.

Regards

[Hijrah]

Are u sure u searched the entire sunan abu dawood

http://searchtruth.com/searchHadith....&book=&start=0

[saludada]

Yeah - I know - I searched on MSA - its not complete. :(
I will have no peace till I find it.

Hajirah - the result does not contain the said hadith.

p.s Ansar
Your point being The spread of Islam created new slave?

[searchingsoul]

The slavery of old would correspond more closely with what is considered minimum wage employment today. There were many restrictions placed on how a slave had to be treated and the slave also had opportunity to move out of slavery. Sadly, our current language has few words that correspond to the accurate meanings used in the past.

However, some words that we do have would are more accurate then the word "slave" for what was meant by the original word such as:

Laborer
Intern
serf
Share Holder
student


And many others, depending on the specific task the slave's services were for.

It is nearly impossible to convey yesterdays meanings into the terms of today's connontations.

That's an interesting way of looking at it. Thanks

[searchingsoul]

:sl:
ummm...they were good on the most part, slaves were freed for simple reasons, masters weren't allowed to beat the slaves and masters were to feed and dress the slaves as they dressed themselves so I don't see what the West has on that kind of slavery compared to other kinds in history....
:w:

Weren't they allowed to castrate them and turn them into eunichs? ouch!

[searchingsoul]

I need something clarified. Slavery was abolished in Islam as society changed. Is this correct?

Are other aspects of Islam allowed the same progression? If so, which aspects are allowed to change and who decides that they may change?

[Hijrah]

Weren't they allowed to castrate them and turn them into eunichs? ouch!

I searched the Hadith and I found that there was one eunuch but I don't think he was allowed to be castrated, perhaps itwas just the way he was from the days of ignorance, it obviousy wasn't too clear about it...

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

p.s Ansar
Your point being The spread of Islam created new slave?

No. In the first generation of Muslims, when Islam was only in Hijaz, there would be a certain amount of domestic slaves. By the time of the second generation, Islam would have spread past Syria, Persia, and Africa, so all those slaves in those countries would have come under Muslim rule. No new slaves were created, but existing slaves in other countries came under the Islamic state. Your claim was that if there were X number of slaves in the first generation, then by the 4th generation, if no slaves were taken from the war captives, then those X slaves should have all died out and slavery would be gone. But I pointed out that that wasn't correct because while there initially may have been only X slaves, the Y number of existing slaves in Syria would be added to that, plus the Z number in persia, plus the W number in africa, and so on. So you thought that by the time the 4th generation had come, all slaves in the state had been living under 4 generations of Islamic rule, which is not true for anyone except the slaves of Hijaz in the arabian peninsula.

I need something clarified. Slavery was abolished in Islam as society changed. Is this correct?

The Islamic ruling and laws pertaining to slavery never changed. But once they were enforced in the society, the practice of slavery was gradually being removed, as its sources were restricted and slaves were continually freed.

[Hijrah]

No. In the first generation of Muslims, when Islam was only in Hijaz, there would be a certain amount of domestic slaves. By the time of the second generation, Islam would have spread past Syria, Persia, and Africa, so all those slaves in those countries would have come under Muslim rule. No new slaves were created, but existing slaves in other countries came under the Islamic state. Your claim was that if there were X number of slaves in the first generation, then by the 4th generation, if no slaves were taken from the war captives, then those X slaves should have all died out and slavery would be gone. But I pointed out that that wasn't correct because while there initially may have been only X slaves, the Y number of existing slaves in Syria would be added to that, plus the Z number in persia, plus the W number in africa, and so on. So you thought that by the time the 4th generation had come, all slaves in the state had been living under 4 generations of Islamic rule, which is not true for anyone except the slaves of Hijaz in the arabian peninsula.


The Islamic ruling and laws pertaining to slavery never changed. But once they were enforced in the society, the practice of slavery was gradually being removed, as its sources were restricted and slaves were continually freed.

What do you have to say about the castrating and turning into eunuchs, I don't really know how that conclusion comes to be from such a smal Hadith but what do you have to say about it? Just curious.:sl:

[duskiness]

The Islamic ruling and laws pertaining to slavery never changed.

i'm not sure i get it...today, Islamic law doesn't allow slavery? Right?
Can someone give me time when slavery was abolished is Muslim countries? Some at least....

This is not about Islam but about slavery. Sad to see it;s still there

[Hijrah]

i'm not sure i get it...today, Islamic law doesn't allow slavery? Right?
Can someone give me time when slavery was abolished is Muslim countries? Some at least....

This is not about Islam but about slavery. Sad to see it;s still there

I've known about this and it pisses and saddens me when people say it is abolished

[Dawud_uk]

There is a general consensus in the Muslim world that Slavery is allowed though not encouraged in Islam.

Slavery is seen and you too would agree is unjust and a gross voilation of human Rights!! But Islam allows it. How do you deal with this moral dilemma.

assalaamu alaykum,

Allah and his messenger (saws) says slavery is allowed, not only that but Muhammad (saws) owned slaves, took slaves in battle and war and this was the practice of all the early muslims.

now where you get the idea that slavery is discouraged in islam?

dont know if you read a different seerah to the one i did but slavery is permissable in islam and it is quite allowable for the mujahadeen to take slaves after a battle or during war and i do not see any discouragement in that and plenty of good in it as it is a sunnah of our beloved prophet Muhammad (saws).

good enough for him then good enough for me, you get me?

what we can say is catagorically not allowed is the mistreatement of slaves and this is also clearly seen from the sunnah of the prophet Muhammad (saws) where he orders a slave girl be freed just because her master slaps her.

the slaves at that time would also be fed the same food, wear the same clothes and live in simular conditions to their master so when we have this vision of slavery and imagine it to be something akin to the worst types of slavery such as that seen in the caribbean and the americas then this is not the slavery from the sunnah and this is gross oppression that as muslims we would need to help free such people.

but if it is the slavery as seen in the prophet's (saws) times then such things are allowed and is a sunnah also.

if i ever went in the path of Allah and the Amir of that expedition gave out slaves as part of the booty then i would have no problems with that and i have no problems with other muslims practicing the limited form of slavery with rights for the slaves as seen in the example of the prophet Muhammad (saws) and the righteous generations.

assalaamu alaykum,
Daw'ud

[Hijrah]

assalaamu alaykum,

Allah and his messenger (saws) says slavery is allowed, not only that but Muhammad (saws) owned slaves, took slaves in battle and war and this was the practice of all the early muslims.

now where you get the idea that slavery is discouraged in islam?

dont know if you read a different seerah to the one i did but slavery is permissable in islam and it is quite allowable for the mujahadeen to take slaves after a battle or during war and i do not see any discouragement in that and plenty of good in it as it is a sunnah of our beloved prophet Muhammad (saws).

good enough for him then good enough for me, you get me?

what we can say is catagorically not allowed is the mistreatement of slaves and this is also clearly seen from the sunnah of the prophet Muhammad (saws) where he orders a slave girl be freed just because her master slaps her.

the slaves at that time would also be fed the same food, wear the same clothes and live in simular conditions to their master so when we have this vision of slavery and imagine it to be something akin to the worst types of slavery such as that seen in the caribbean and the americas then this is not the slavery from the sunnah and this is gross oppression that as muslims we would need to help free such people.

but if it is the slavery as seen in the prophet's (saws) times then such things are allowed and is a sunnah also.

if i ever went in the path of Allah and the Amir of that expedition gave out slaves as part of the booty then i would have no problems with that and i have no problems with other muslims practicing the limited form of slavery with rights for the slaves as seen in the example of the prophet Muhammad (saws) and the righteous generations.

assalaamu alaykum,
Daw'ud

Your Right, Slavery is not discouraged but u have to realize that it is right in the Quran that freeing the slaves is extremely encouraged and even an order,...read this if u dont believe me

http://answering-christianity.com/ac18.htm#links

[Dawud_uk]

Your Right, Slavery is not discouraged but u have to realize that it is right in the Quran that freeing the slaves is extremely encouraged and even an order,...read this if u dont believe me

http://answering-christianity.com/ac18.htm#links

assalaamu alaykum,

i dont doubt that freeing slaves is encouraged but that does not mean slavery itself is discouraged and the sunnah is to take slaves in war, this sunnah was followed by the righteous generations and best of the muslims.

we shouldnt be apologetic towards the kuffar on this issue, it is allowed by Allah and his messenger (saws) have clearly ruled it is allowed.

it is up to the amir in the war what is done with adult male captives, whether they are freed as a mercy, randsomed, enslaved or killed. as for female and child captives they cannot be killed but can be freed, randsomed or enslaved.

this was the sunnah so why do muslims say otherwise now?
why do they say wrong when Allah and his messenger have said right?

as for the person who asked what are the permissable sources of slaves,

it is only those taken whilst the muslims are in the path of Allah and the children of such people. even a women who has a slave by her master is freed on his death as a children cannot own his own mother! such a women also cannot be sold, only freed.
but the children of two slaves are also the property of their master.

our criterion of right and wrong is the Quran, the literal word of Allah and the example set to us by the prophet Muhammad (saws), then the sahabah and then the next two generations and then the pious and learned in each generation and those who travel in the path of Allah.

all such people owned and traded in slaves, took them captive during war and never said such things as have been said here about it being discouraged and their understanding is the best and purest not our own.

assalaamu alaykum,
Daw'ud

[Hijrah]

assalaamu alaykum,

i dont doubt that freeing slaves is encouraged but that does not mean slavery itself is discouraged and the sunnah is to take slaves in war, this sunnah was followed by the righteous generations and best of the muslims.

we shouldnt be apologetic towards the kuffar on this issue, it is allowed by Allah and his messenger (saws) have clearly ruled it is allowed.

it is up to the amir in the war what is done with adult male captives, whether they are freed as a mercy, randsomed, enslaved or killed. as for female and child captives they cannot be killed but can be freed, randsomed or enslaved.

this was the sunnah so why do muslims say otherwise now?
why do they say wrong when Allah and his messenger have said right?

as for the person who asked what are the permissable sources of slaves,

it is only those taken whilst the muslims are in the path of Allah and the children of such people. even a women who has a slave by her master is freed on his death as a children cannot own his own mother! such a women also cannot be sold, only freed.
but the children of two slaves are also the property of their master.

our criterion of right and wrong is the Quran, the literal word of Allah and the example set to us by the prophet Muhammad (saws), then the sahabah and then the next two generations and then the pious and learned in each generation and those who travel in the path of Allah.

all such people owned and traded in slaves, took them captive during war and never said such things as have been said here about it being discouraged and their understanding is the best and purest not our own.

assalaamu alaykum,
Daw'ud

O trust me, I despise muslims who are apologetic in matters such as slavery and apostasy or when similar things are in their own religion or apologetic at ALL but it is also Sunnah to free a slave and in certain situations itis an obligation...

[Hijrah]

assalaamu alaykum,

i dont doubt that freeing slaves is encouraged but that does not mean slavery itself is discouraged and the sunnah is to take slaves in war, this sunnah was followed by the righteous generations and best of the muslims.

we shouldnt be apologetic towards the kuffar on this issue, it is allowed by Allah and his messenger (saws) have clearly ruled it is allowed.

it is up to the amir in the war what is done with adult male captives, whether they are freed as a mercy, randsomed, enslaved or killed. as for female and child captives they cannot be killed but can be freed, randsomed or enslaved.

this was the sunnah so why do muslims say otherwise now?
why do they say wrong when Allah and his messenger have said right?

as for the person who asked what are the permissable sources of slaves,

it is only those taken whilst the muslims are in the path of Allah and the children of such people. even a women who has a slave by her master is freed on his death as a children cannot own his own mother! such a women also cannot be sold, only freed.
but the children of two slaves are also the property of their master.

our criterion of right and wrong is the Quran, the literal word of Allah and the example set to us by the prophet Muhammad (saws), then the sahabah and then the next two generations and then the pious and learned in each generation and those who travel in the path of Allah.

all such people owned and traded in slaves, took them captive during war and never said such things as have been said here about it being discouraged and their understanding is the best and purest not our own.

assalaamu alaykum,
Daw'ud

I also asked this previously in the thread

What do you have to say about the castrating and turning into eunuchs of slaves, I don't really know how that conclusion comes to be from such a smal Hadith but what do you have to say about it? Just curious

Since u are in domination of this thread coud u give me the answer, u or ansar...

[searchingsoul]

The Islamic ruling and laws pertaining to slavery never changed. But once they were enforced in the society, the practice of slavery was gradually being removed, as its sources were restricted and slaves were continually freed.

Does this mean that slavery currently existing in Sudan and Mauritania is acceptable according to Islam?

[Hijrah]

assalaamu alaykum,

i dont doubt that freeing slaves is encouraged but that does not mean slavery itself is discouraged and the sunnah is to take slaves in war, this sunnah was followed by the righteous generations and best of the muslims.

we shouldnt be apologetic towards the kuffar on this issue, it is allowed by Allah and his messenger (saws) have clearly ruled it is allowed.

it is up to the amir in the war what is done with adult male captives, whether they are freed as a mercy, randsomed, enslaved or killed. as for female and child captives they cannot be killed but can be freed, randsomed or enslaved.

this was the sunnah so why do muslims say otherwise now?
why do they say wrong when Allah and his messenger have said right?

as for the person who asked what are the permissable sources of slaves,

it is only those taken whilst the muslims are in the path of Allah and the children of such people. even a women who has a slave by her master is freed on his death as a children cannot own his own mother! such a women also cannot be sold, only freed.
but the children of two slaves are also the property of their master.

our criterion of right and wrong is the Quran, the literal word of Allah and the example set to us by the prophet Muhammad (saws), then the sahabah and then the next two generations and then the pious and learned in each generation and those who travel in the path of Allah.

all such people owned and traded in slaves, took them captive during war and never said such things as have been said here about it being discouraged and their understanding is the best and purest not our own.

assalaamu alaykum,
Daw'ud

And also, if you compare what it says in the Qur'aan and Hadith the way it so vigorously describes the virtues of freeing slaves, it is blatantly obvious that the keeping of slaves is nothing compared to the freedom of slaves, I'm not an "apologetic" muslim but if u look at how the Qur'an puts freeing slaves along with prayer and charity in the Quran and when examining the Hadith u can tell that Muhammad (SAW) preferred their freedom, it's like this slaves were good and it was OK to have them, I read the Hadith and I know that the type of slavery that was practiced by the muslims is perfectly All right nd that it was bd for slavesto run away and all but if you also take not of how much treating them harshly was repudiated u know it was Ok...This is what I always say

It isn't an Un-Islamic Thing to Have Slaves but it is Very Islamic to free them.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

What do you have to say about the castrating and turning into eunuchs, I don't really know how that conclusion comes to be from such a smal Hadith but what do you have to say about it? Just curious.:sl:

:sl:
No, castration is forbidden in Islam.

i'm not sure i get it...today, Islamic law doesn't allow slavery? Right?

No, the law hasn't changed at all. The situation has changed thanks to the implementation of the law. So it is not that slavery itself has become prohibited in Islam but that the implementation of the Islamic laws have alleviated the injustices associated with slavery, restricted the sources, and encouraged and mandated the release of slaves, so that today the re-implementation of slavery is no longer feasible.

From this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/215351-post124.html

The Lajna ad-Daa'imah (Permanent Committee for Islamic Research) issued a Fatwaa wherein they were asked about the issue of slavery and why does not Islaam outlaw slavery, from their reply:

"By this it is known that the basis of slavery is only through prisoners-of-war or captives obtained when fighting Jihad against the disbelievers. Its purpose is to reform those enslaved by removing them from an evil environment and allowing them to live in a Muslim society, who will guide them to the path of goodness, save them from the clutches of evil, purify them from the filth of disbelief and misguidance, and
make them deserving of a life of freedom in which they enjoy security and peace."

They furthered stated:

"And if there are no lawful Islamic wars, then it is not permissible to establish or institute slavery."

The fatwaa team headed by Shaykh Abdullah Al-Fakeeh and Shaykh Hassan Al-Ahameed (from islamweb.net) were also asked similiar question to which they replied:

After this introduction we dare saying that Islam is the freer of slaves and the equitable with human beings. We are very proud of this. So, if the world now gets together and forbids slavery, Islam will welcome such an initiative as it fits into its aims and objectives. It is lawful for the Muslim leader to sign a convention forbidding slavery.

But this does not mean that slavery was abrogated definitely and has become legally inexistent. If the world returns back to enslaving prisoners of war, Muslims will treat their enemies equally.
Full version

And in other fatwaa:

From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man.
Full version

:w:

Does this mean that slavery currently existing in Sudan and Mauritania is acceptable according to Islam?

I'm not familiar with the situation in Sudan or Mauritania, but if Islam is to be followed there then it means that injustices associated with slavery are to be eliminated, no free persons are to be enslaved, and the freeing of slaves should be done in accordance with Islamic law. If it is economically possible and will not cause harm then it is also Islamically permissable to place an immediate ban on slavery there and mandate the freedom of all the slaves.

Regards

[muslimdude89]

ya about castration. there is a hadith (ill find it later) where it says (im paraphrasing) that if a master kills a slave, he will be killed and if a master castrates his slave then he will be castrated as well.

[Looking4Peace]

its bad, but so is minimum wage, where i live half the jobs pay dont pay enough (minimum wage or maybe a dollar more)yet to live here is expensive and this is why nyc is known for having 10 people in a 2 bedroom apartment, i think i rather be a slave in a castle, then live like that lol.

[Dawud_uk]

i'm not sure i get it...today, Islamic law doesn't allow slavery? Right?
Can someone give me time when slavery was abolished is Muslim countries? Some at least....

This is not about Islam but about slavery. Sad to see it;s still there

peace duskiness,

slavery as part of the islamic shariah has never been banned, freeing a slave is virtuous act and mistreating a slave could well result in that slave being freed also but slavery as part of shariah was never banned and it could well come about again.

slavery in the stictest islamic sense is nothing like the western concept of slavery, however muslims are not perfect and some have mistreated slaves in the past.

but generally in islam the slave actually has many of the rights of the family members and cannot be overworked or worked more than the owner.

i.e if i lived in an islamic land and had been given slaves as part of the war booty or had bought some then i could not work them on the land harder than i worked myself, i would feed them the same food as i ate, cloth them in the same type of clothes and see to their general welfare, i.e seeing that their spiritual and material needs were met.

even if a slave wishes to marry then the owner should help them in that also, as you can see quite a different picture to the cotton fields of alabama.

peace be upon those who follow righteous guidence,

Daw'ud

[duskiness]

slavery in the stictest islamic sense is nothing like the western concept of slavery

it is. Slavery is when one human being is owner of the other human being. You may treat them bad or good. But still you are the owner (in western or Islamic pov)
But i'm glad to hear that there are no chances now for Muslim to own slaves.
That's what i wanted to hear :happy:
n.

[muslimdude89]

AA,

well im not sure if Islam intended to completely abolish slavery, but i think we could all agree that Islam greatly limited and reformed slavery. It began to be used as a way to accomodate captives of war who were not ransomed, or exchanged for other POWs.

About the economic argument. I certainly dont think that its a fallacy. Just look at the reconstruction period (i think), when all slaves in the south were freed. What happened to the slaves after they were freed? they had no place to work, so they ended up going back to working for their former masters as sharecroppers. their condition was pretty much the same as before when they were slaves. It wasnt untill the 1960s that African Americans were able to gain equal rights. Also the south's economy was devistated, because they had no one to replace all the slaves that used to work for them. Hopefully now its clear that the wholesale freeing of slaves would have been devistating for the early muslim community, for both the masters and the slaves.

[muslimdude89]

AA,

Also, please dont argue that people own other people, therefor slavery is completely wrong. You cant think that way, because slavery is not the same in any two places. If you asked anyone in the 7th century, even slaves, they wouldnt have seen anything strange about it, it was a completely natural part of life. The slaves in Rome viewed slavery more as a misfortune, by the will of the gods rather than as an evil.
As you hopefully have already read, slaves were treated as any other humans. Muhammad pbuh said that you should not call your slave "slave", but rather "son", "daughter", "brother or "sister". Umar (r) would take turns with his slave riding the same camel. Slavery was usually only temporary and slaves and ex-slaves would often go on to achieve great things. I think this is a much better way to accomodate captives of war compared to what other nations have done and still do today.

[InToTheRain]

:w:

If there are any brothers or sisters that are confused about this matter, they should just read the examples of our prophet(saw). After all he is the instructions of the Noble Qur'an personified. enough said.

[luvziran]

A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave (Sahîh Bukhârî, and Sahîh Muslim)

Only Muslim slaves ?


The pagan aristocracy in Makkah, Jewish landowners and merchants in Madinah and many wealthy Christian Arabs were slave owners


Here we go, Jews and Christians again...


“The atonement for beating or slapping a slave (Muslim or non-Muslim) on the face, for no fault of his, is that he should be set free.” - Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Ibn Umar (RA)]



So does this imply that if you treat your slave 'right', you can keep them ?



Restrictions were placed on enslavement. It was forbidden to enslave free members of Islamic society, including dhimmis (nonMuslims) residing in dar al-Islam.


So as long as the slave was the 'right' type of slave, it was O.K. ? WOW !!

[Kswiss]

:sl:

Personally I don’t agree with slavery. Slavery does exist In the muslim world, particularly in Arab countries such as Sudan, Mauritania, and the gulf countries. I read an article about modern day ‘slavery’ in Dubai. Poor Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Indian families sell their sons to become camel jockeys. These kids are treated inhumanly. They are physically and mentally abused and her kept underweight and malnourished so that the camels run faster. Slavery in Mauritania is sick. The ruling class in Mauritania is made up of Bidanes (white) Arabs and Herantines ( Black and White) Arabs, while the pure black Africans are treated with distain. What really pisses me off is that these people are using Islam to enslave the black Africans who are also Muslim. They tell the slaves that the only way that they will get to heaven is at the feet of their masters +o(

[Hijrah]

A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave (Sahîh Bukhârî, and Sahîh Muslim)

Only Muslim slaves ?


The pagan aristocracy in Makkah, Jewish landowners and merchants in Madinah and many wealthy Christian Arabs were slave owners


Here we go, Jews and Christians again...


“The atonement for beating or slapping a slave (Muslim or non-Muslim) on the face, for no fault of his, is that he should be set free.” - Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Ibn Umar (RA)]



So does this imply that if you treat your slave 'right', you can keep them ?



Restrictions were placed on enslavement. It was forbidden to enslave free members of Islamic society, including dhimmis (nonMuslims) residing in dar al-Islam.


So as long as the slave was the 'right' type of slave, it was O.K. ? WOW !!

Here we go, same old lame criticisms again, so you find it wrong that free members of society can't randomly become slaves, what are you talking about, right type of slave? If you treat your slave right, yes keeping them is allowed but it seems you just want to look at the aspects that seem negative to you other than for example the fact that freeing them is encouraged.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

To the skepticism of luzviran...

A person who frees a Muslim slave, Allah will deliver every one of his limbs from the fire of Hell in return for each of the limbs of the slave (Sahîh Bukhârî, and Sahîh Muslim)

Only Muslim slaves ?

The ruling of kind treatment and encouragement for freeing slaves applies to muslims and non-muslims, as another hadith in Sahîh Muslim (2776) says:
عن رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏من أعتق رقبة أعتق الله بكل عضو منها عضوا من أعضائه من النار حتى فرجه بفرجه
The Messenger of Allah said: He who emancipates a slave, Allah will set free from Hell every limb (of his body) for every limb of his (slave's) body, even his private parts.

And here it does not specify the condition of 'believing'. And Imam An-Nawawî notes in his commentary the virtues of freeing both muslim and non-muslim.

The pagan aristocracy in Makkah, Jewish landowners and merchants in Madinah and many wealthy Christian Arabs were slave owners

Here we go, Jews and Christians again...

Was this intended to be a coherent response or just a collection of musings? Reading in context, we're talking about how slavery was embedded in that historical time and was not restricted to any religious group but was practiced almost universally, despite the injustices associated with it.

“The atonement for beating or slapping a slave (Muslim or non-Muslim) on the face, for no fault of his, is that he should be set free.” - Muhammad (S) [Muslim: Ibn Umar (RA)]

So does this imply that if you treat your slave 'right', you can keep them ?

It implies that it is forbidden to abuse your slave. You have to treat them well. And if you intend by this that Islam is complicit in slavery, then again you have not been paying attention:

So the claim that Islam simply allowed slavery is not true at all. Islam was actually instrumental in the gradual elimination of slavery for the reasons listed above. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.

Islam did the best thing possible in working towards the removal of slavery and the elimination of any associated injustices. The fantasy of someone simply snapping their fingers and declaring the immediate abolishment of slavery in the 7th century is a nice idea, but unfortunately unrealistic and impossible. Slavery was deeply entrenched in the society and consequently could not be eliminated immediately. Islam took several steps to eliminate the injustices of slavery and drive humanity in the direction of its gradual elimination.

Restrictions were placed on enslavement. It was forbidden to enslave free members of Islamic society, including dhimmis (nonMuslims) residing in dar al-Islam.

So as long as the slave was the 'right' type of slave, it was O.K. ? WOW !!

As above.

Regards

[Hijrah]

If a person is a slave, how are they a 'free member of society' ? It is impossible to 'treat a slave right'. A slave is a slave is a slave ! And EVERY ASPECT of keeping slaves is NEGATIVE ! I CAN'T BELEIVE YOU ARE EVEN DEFENDING SLAVERY !!! Your defense of slavery is right out of the Middle Ages. I find it sickening !!! :vomit: +o(

I recommend you see, the thread slavery in the Qur'aan, Ansar refuted your points in there more thoroughly, if my points are str8 out of the middle ages, so is the Bible's view on slavery. Of course you can only think of the slavery that ameriKKKa breeds which is not allowed in Islam, which wasn't in the middle ages, haha...

[luvziran]

Ansar refuted your points in there more thoroughly...

Ansar refuted NOTHING !!! Slavery is WRONG in any form !!! :vomit:

[Abu Ibraheem]

Slavery has changed name in the west. its called employment! Thats if you are not confused by the stigma of arfrican slavery where they did not get paid. Islamic slaves had to get paid before their sweat dried!

[Abu Ibraheem]

Actually yes they could! - slaves could request their freedom and on top of that they was entitled to charity!

1. slaves can request their freedom 24:33
2. they can be given zakat to purchase their freedom ibn kathir vol one p59
3. they are not allowed to be abused or beaten sahih Muslim volume 3a p100 up until 102 see this hadith Bukhari vol one hadith 29
4. they must not be burdened page 103 sm vol 3a 1661
5. you must pay them before their sweat drys ibn majah vol 3 2443
6. equal share 16:71

WHY DID MUSLIMS KEEP SLAVES

After battles the Muslims would take slaves , women and children from the families of those who were killed on the battlefield because the muslims knew they had nobody to support them so the muslims took them in as slaves at this stage in Islamic history there was no Islamic gorverment so the muslims had to take care of them from their own means. Prophet Muhammad [s] commanded the muslims to be very kind to their slaves and not to mistreat them , children to be fed and clothed as they were their own children , and no violence and aggression be shown towards the slaves Prophet Muhammad [s] also encouraged strongly that wealthy muslims buy slaves from the pagans and then liberate them

[abdullahi]

:sl:
Luvziran, please calm down a little. We can see that this topic is upsetting to you, but if you want to get your point across, please do so calmly and with sound arguments.
Also, please go back and at least read what Brother Ansar wrote regarding this issue. You may not agree with anything but I think that is the least you could do.
Thanks and have a great day.
:w:

[Abu Ibraheem]

The Prophet had a slave woman that refused to become a Muslim, did you know he left her alone to be a Jew and that he gave her religious freedom?
And also if you would have studied a bit more, if somebody didnt have the money to free themselves then they had to be given money to free themselves and even when they were liberated they would have been given a grant. by the way , Blah blah was refering to your style of argumentation which stands to be poor considering that you havent presented a valid reason for your opinions. I think you owe it to yourself to at least gain some level of respect by answering peoples questions without avoiding the issue.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Why not? The black slaves who were brought to the Americas by FORCE and SOLD were forced to change their faith. They were MUSLIM! If you were to capture a slave, you MUST treat them with respect and give them their rights. Since when do prisoners of war get equal treatment? Tell me of any other religion or people who treated them with respect? By the way, we are talking about prisoners of war, not just capturing a slave because they feel like it(Like the US did).

Islam advocates clemency with captives. History has never known warriors so merciful to their captives as the early Muslims who followed the teachings of their religion. Numerous religious texts demand clemency with captives.

Prisoners are usually taken when a battle is at its height and there is danger that rage may lead the victorious warriors to harm those who have been defeated in order to take revenge. The Prophet, however, urged his followers to treat their captives with clemency. He said to them “You have to treat your captives kindly.” He also urged his Companions on the day of Badr to be kind to their captives. Accordingly, the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) gave their captive preference over themselves in matters of food. This is the tolerance of Islam and its respect for the human dignity.

In this way Muslims learned two kinds of Jihad. The first is Jihad in the battlefield where people give themselves to the cause of Allah and the second one is Jihad against one’s desires that restrains man’s rage and allows him to fight his foes with clemency and not in accordance with the laws of the jungle.

What are the teachings of Islam as regards the prisoners of war? Does Islam grant them freedom, ransom or enslave them to the Muslims? Here, we should again refer to the religious texts and the example given by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). The most direct of these texts is Allah’s saying: [So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates] (Muhammad 47: 4).

The Qur’anic verse thus provides alternatives: either the Muslim commander should free those captives who cannot offer ransom either in the form of money or an equivalent number of Muslim captives, or he should ransom his captives for money or for a similar number of Muslim captives. This is what is now known as an exchange of prisoners.

The religion of freedom, therefore, esteems the freedom of those who do not follow it as much as it does that regarding its followers, for if the advocate of freedom is himself free, he will not make any discrimination on regional, racial or religious grounds, because freedom is a natural right to every human being.

The Qur’anic verse does not mention a third choice, namely the enslavement of captives; the Qur’anic text explicitly forbids it by limiting the choice to only two alternatives – free dismissal or ransoming – without referring to enslavement. Thus enslavement is not involved in the choice.

[Abu Ibraheem]

No slave was held against their wil , you will find that if you studied, the ransom was paid for them if they couldnt pay it so whats the problem? Islam set free the captives ... dont you know?

[Woodrow]

This thread is rapidly going no place. The main Questions have been answered several times. But, either the answers were not understood or the asker is trying to get the answers changed to something he/she believes.

Originally Posted by luvziran
I offered many, many reasons for my opinion. I'll give them to you one more time. Try to focus.

1) One human owning another human is wrong.
2) No one should have to pay another for their freedom.

1) One human owning another human is wrong.

On the surface that sounds right and most people will immediatly agree with that. Sadly in real life that is not true. Most people have to work for a living. During their working hours they are "owned" by their employers. The "slaves" during the early period after the revelation of the Noble Qur'an were much less slaves than todays minimum wage employee. What is commenly referred to as "Slaves" were more like respected family members. I'm not going to waste my time repeating the many posts that discussed the treatment of "Slaves".


2) No one should have to pay another for their freedom.

Again that sounds very agreeable. Please tell that to the judge when he is sentencing you to 90 days in jail because you refuse to pay the ransom to keep out of jail because of a driving violation.

Your claims are honestly useless right now, because the kind of slavery your thinking of isnt the slavery known to Islam. Actually slavery isnt even the right word! That kind of slavery is NOT, i repeat, NOT allowed.
Either read my post or stop posting your ignorance.
You obviously have no feel to learn whatsoever. Your only "refutation" is that its wrong, and little do u realize that the slavery your thinking of is not the same to whats known to Islam. That word isnt even the right word to use.

That seems to sum it up quite well. There is no real need to offer further explanations.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Fascinating... the user 'luzviran' spammed the thread with over 50 posts and not a single one responded to my refutation in my last post. In fact, the only one that even referred to my post said:

Ansar refuted NOTHING !!! Slavery is WRONG in any form !!! :vomit:

That's the only response? Clearly we can expect no intellectual contribution from this member. No one here denied that there is injustice associated with slavery, but what she completely ignored was the fatwa posted earlier from Shaykh Abdullah Al-Faqîh's on IslamWeb:

From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man. (SOURCE)

And as I said before:

So the claim that Islam simply allowed slavery is not true at all. Islam was actually instrumental in the gradual elimination of slavery for the reasons listed above. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A’isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000.

Islam did the best thing possible in working towards the removal of slavery and the elimination of any associated injustices. The fantasy of someone simply snapping their fingers and declaring the immediate abolishment of slavery in the 7th century is a nice idea, but unfortunately unrealistic and impossible. Slavery was deeply entrenched in the society and consequently could not be eliminated immediately. Islam took several steps to eliminate the injustices of slavery and drive humanity in the direction of its gradual elimination.

50+ posts from this member and not a single one could touch on this point.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

How, for one moment, can anyone defend SLAVERY ??

Shows you still were incapable of understanding the most simple points. No one is defending slavery. We are defending Islam's gradual elimination of deep-rooted slavery, which we confirmed is one of man's many inhumanities:

Shaykh Abdullah Al-Faqîh's on IslamWeb:

From this factual information it should be clear that slavery was to be eliminated in Islam. It is our view that when the Islaamic Shariah is practiced faithfully slavery will eventually be eliminated; we might add, so will all other acts of man's inhumanity to man. (SOURCE)

It's actually funny that even when you try to come back to the forum you don't go back and respond to my posts and the arguments you ignored the first time; instead you launch into an emotional outburst peppered with ad hominem attacks and repeating the same ignorant notion that people here are pro-slavery! We're not pro-slavery; we're pro-Islam's method of eliminating the injustices assocated with slavery.

I know it is difficult for you to appreciate such manifest distinctions but you'll have enough time to struggle with it.

Regards

[Hijrah]

The Prophet had a slave woman that refused to become a Muslim, did you know he left her alone to be a Jew and that he gave her religious freedom?
And also if you would have studied a bit more, if somebody didnt have the money to free themselves then they had to be given money to free themselves and even when they were liberated they would have been given a grant. by the way , Blah blah was refering to your style of argumentation which stands to be poor considering that you havent presented a valid reason for your opinions. I think you owe it to yourself to at least gain some level of respect by answering peoples questions without avoiding the issue.

yea, the woman from the bani quraiza

[Abu Ibraheem]

would you like the actual reference from Ibn Ihsaq's sirat ur Rasoolullah

[Hijrah]

would you like the actual reference from Ibn Ihsaq's sirat ur Rasoolullah

no, I've read that part

[Abu Ibraheem]

mashallah ... keep reading

[Muhammad]

Greetings and welcome to the forum,

It looks like you have misunderstood what brother Hijrah meant. When plucked out of context, it doesn't make a lot of sense, but if we go back to post #64, he is actually saying that it is wrong to randomly make free members of society slaves and that it is only acceptable to keep a slave if they are treated properly.

The brother can confirm Insha'Allaah.

[Hijrah]

You're kidding, right ?

Hi achnod,

I personally would never keep a slave, and Br. Muhammad explained it...

[Umar001]

This is crazy stuff you're talking about !! Makes me sick just thinking about it. I'm going to have to re-think staying on this site. This kind of talk makes me think if I should support a site like this. WOW !!! :vomit:

Hi Achnod,

May I just ask you something, now be patient with me.

List or tell me some of the things that you dislike about slavery.

Abu Ikhlas. :)

[achnod]

Hi Achnod,

May I just ask you something, now be patient with me.

List or tell me some of the things that you dislike about slavery.

Abu Ikhlas. :)

I'm not even going to entertain this thought. Bye.:vomit:

[Umar001]

I'm not even going to entertain this thought. Bye.:vomit:

No problem, totally your choice.

Take care and keep safe :)

[Hijrah]

I'm not even going to entertain this thought. Bye.:vomit:

your just like the other woman who came on here and got owned, just look at the previous thoughts...bye

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Your not going to entertain the thought, yet u bothered to come here, good one. That proves a persons ignorance, not willing to learn.

[Bittersteel]

couldn't slavery be banned in an Islamic country by the head of state?by some taazir ruling?

Bernard Lewis said it couldn't be so I am asking.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

The fatwaa team headed by Shaykh Abdullah Al-Fakeeh and Shaykh Hassan Al-Ahameed (from islamweb.net) were also asked similiar question to which they replied:

After this introduction we dare saying that Islam is the freer of slaves and the equitable with human beings. We are very proud of this. So, if the world now gets together and forbids slavery, Islam will welcome such an initiative as it fits into its aims and objectives. It is lawful for the Muslim leader to sign a convention forbidding slavery.

But this does not mean that slavery was abrogated definitely and has become legally inexistent. If the world returns back to enslaving prisoners of war, Muslims will treat their enemies equally.

Full version
:w: