Slavery in Islaam

[AbuMubarak]

By Ismail Adam Patel
The practice of slavery is co-eval with human existence. Historically its traces are visible in every age and in every nation. The Jews, the Greeks, Aristotle and Plato accepted the germ. The Romans, the Egyptians, the Germans and the British also have a long history going back to the bronze-age where each successive wave of invaders enslaved those they conquered, and the North Americans. These nations, whose legal and social institutes have affected modern manners and customs, all recognised and practised slavery.

Christianity as a religion and a creed raised no protest, enforced no rule and inculcated no principle for the mitigation of slavery.
Turning to Islaam we recognize in it the first religion that dealt a death blow to the very roots of this ignoble institute of slavery, which would have been completely abolished through its influences but for its being so deeply rooted in all nations including the pagan Arabs.
Islaam however laid down principles for an immediate improved state of affairs and a gradual but total eradication of the evil. A learned scholar Dr. Ghoraba states, 'Slavery before Islaam was like a river flowing from many sources into a reservoir which by constant supply grew bigger and bigger.
Islaam aims at drying this up and dispersing the water in the reservoir by opening up ways of escape. Although Islaam recognized slavery it aimed undoubtedly to abolish it, and the means by which this was brought about were many and wise.

The many and wise ways are aglow in the Qur'aan:

Have we not made for him a pair of eyes? - And a tongue, and a pair of lips? And shown him the two highways? But he hath made not haste on the path that is steep. And what will explain to thee the path that is steep? (It is:) freeing the slave;.....
(90 : 8-13)

.... And whoever kills a Believer by mistake it is ordained that he should free a believing slave. And pay blood - money to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a Believer, the freeing of a believing slave (is enough).
(4 : 92)

Zakaat (alms) are for the poor and the needy, and those employed to the management of its collection: for those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled to truth; and in freeing slaves......
(9 : 60)

And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (for emancipation) give them such a deed if you know any good in them; and give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you.
(24 : 33)

Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu, one of the earliest Muslims and the first and chief Mu'azzin of the Holy Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam presents the issue of slavery thus:

Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu was once asked why was slavery not banned in Islaam? Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu answered: 'The world is now based on the labour of the slaves. Should Islaam or any other system have sought to stop the institute of slavery all at once it would lead to universal anarchy and disturbance in which both masters and slaves would suffer. The masters' loss is clear, and as for the slaves they would find themselves without anyone to take care of their needs, unaccustomed to independence and self reliance they would in most cases seek to satisfy their needs through criminal assaults and extortions. Crimes of all sorts would spread widely, society would suffer incurably and there would be no more peace or security.'

'To help the slaves' Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu continued, 'Islaam has done what no other system or religion has done or could do. The Tawraat enjoined slavery and Christianity was silent about it. But Islaam has left no choice except that it urged the emancipation of slaves. It promises great rewards for emancipating a slave, and makes this emancipation one of the foremost duties incumbent upon a believer as a manifestation of his gratitude for the blessing of Allah'.

Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu added: 'Islaam does not deny a freed slave any high responsible position'. He quoted Zayd Ibne Haarithah who was installed by the Holy Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam commander of an army. His son Usaamah was granted the same distinction. Again the Holy Prophet's own female cousin was married to Zayd who was a freed man. Islaam broke the tribal pride and has fostered true human equality.

Freeing of slaves was almost mandatory. A Hadeeth shows:

Zazaan reported that Ibne Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him, I have caused you pain. He said, no. But Ibne Umar said, you are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said, there is no reward for me even to the weight equal to this. I heard Allah's Messenger sallallahu alayhi wasallam saying, He who beats a slave without recognizable offence of his or slaps him then expiation for it is that he should set him free.

The manumission of slaves was our Prophet's sallalahu alaihi wasallam final goal and he chose many a wise ways to achieve this as we have already read. The Prophet's sallallahu alayhi wasallam final sermon was a great charter of liberty...... 'As to your slaves, male and female feed them with what you eat yourself and clothe them with what you wear. If you cannot keep them or they commit any fault, discharge them. They are Allah's people like the rest of you and be kind to them'.

Surely the Holy Qur'aan and Ahaadeeth are a glow and radiant in its wise ways for the understanding man.

Riyaadhul Jannah
Volume: 2/Issue: 5


Fi Amanillah
W'ssalaamu'alaykum w rahmatullahi w barakatuh,
Ur Sister in Islaam bint Isma'il
http://yahoogroups.com/group/wisdom_4_u_and_me

[Rubber Ducky]

SLAVERY FOR CAPTURED WAR PRISONERS(NON MUSLIM)
NON MUSLIMS AS SLAVES FOR MUSLIMS
SLAVERY FOR WORKERS
SLAVERY IN GENERAL
OPINIONS PLEASE

JKK

[girl16]

aslaam

No i dont think slavery is allowed in islam at all. if it is please someone tell me about it and about how it is justified!

[[CHRiSTiAN]]

Actually, slavery is permitted in Islam.

[jamila]

It is not permitted to keep another Muslim as a slave. As for a non-muslim? ....what the right hand possesses, it possesses. Also, research the 'spoils of war'.

[girl16]

aslaam

thank u sister jamila!!!

[AbuMubarak]

Slavery in Modern America

by

Steven Malik Shelton

''Oh mankind! We created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other {not that you may despise each other}. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is {he who is most righteous of you}. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted {with all things}.'' Quran 49: 13



''It is not possible that a man, to whom is given the Book and Wisdom, and the Prophetic office, should say to people: ''You be my slaves other than Allah's; but rather {he would say}'' You be worshippers of Him Who is truly the Cherisher of all: for you have taught the Book and you have studied it earnestly.'' Quran 3: 79





The nefarious institution of slavery has existed since earliest times and has cast its shadow across the vast landscape of human history.



Even today, we are told by media outlets and periodicals, of the horrific practices of slavery in the Sudan, where it is reported that Arab Muslims in the North are enslaving multitudes of African Christians and animists in the South.



These are, of course, troubling allegations and a source of embarrassment and shame to many-pious and devout Muslims world wide. But are these allegations of slavery in the Sudan really true? Or are they yet another thrust in a propaganda assault aimed at disturbing confidence in Islam and frightening people away from the path of Light and Justice?



According to the Mcnair report on allegations of slavery in the Sudan, investigators could find no evidence of Muslims enslaving Africans [or anyone else] in the Sudan.



There was evidence, however, of The Sudan's People Liberation Army{S.P.L.A.} led by John Garang [and predominately Christian] abducting and enslaving African youngsters for the purposes of military duty and labor.



The dismal and often fatal plight of these children has been verified and documented by organizations such as Human Rights Watch/Africa and The Children's Rights Project.



In fact, Christian Solitary International, an organization which is largely responsible for reporting on ''Muslim enslavers in the Sudan'' would do better to use its resources and close connection to S.P.L.A. to persuade them to release the tens of thousands of African children that they have abducted and forced to fight, work, and live in squalid life threatening conditions.



The mainstream media seems ever anxious to flash Christian Solitary International film footage and photographs depicting [ what appears to be] Muslims selling Africans to benevolent Christians who have taken it upon themselves to facilitate the release of these ''enslaved'' people. However, a closer look will reveal that this is not the case at all.



The evidence shows that these were hostages taken in battles and local skirmishes fought over land and water rights disputes. And the abductions invariably took place in areas that were not controlled by Muslims, but controlled [at the time] by the S.P.L.A.



Alex de Waul, the co-director for African Rights, has reported: ''It is most probable that they were in fact paying a ransom to a go-between in a scheme whereby families pay, through a middleman, for their hostage children to be redeemed. They were not in a slave market.''



Anti-Slavery International has also reported on the allegations of Sudanese government involvement in slavery, revealing that: ''The charge that [Muslim] government troops engage in raids for the purpose of seizing slaves is not backed by the evidence.''



Let us now turn our attention to a land which has a verifiable tradition of imprisonment and slavery; both historically and in contemporary times.



Slavery in the American Prison System



Although most people believe that slavery is not only illegal in the United States but non-existent, in fact the institutions and the practices of human bondage in America are very much alive and well.



The same amendment to the United States constitution that appears to abolish slavery in America, also legalizes it.



The thirteenth amendment to the U.S. constitution clearly states that: ''Neither slavery nor involuntary solitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.''



This amendment is skillfully written to leave a window open for the continuation of legal slavery, thus the words ''except as a punishment for a crime''.



Imprisoning and enslaving a huge segment of the non-white, the poor, and the disenfranchised has a long history in America. It was a routine practice during the Reconstruction period into the 1950's and 1960's for poor people to be arrested on trumped up charges, ''dully convicted'' and remanded to prison labor camps, chain gangs, and sweathouses to work off their sentences.



Common charges used for this purpose were vagrancy, loitering, and drunk and disorderly. Poor women, walking home from their jobs or waiting for the bus, were habitually waylaid by police and sheriff's authorities and charged with ''solicitation for prostitution.''



Since the mid-1970's this trend of incarceration and the resulting enslavement, has reached epic proportions.



In 1975, local state, and federal government agencies spent 4 billion dollars on their prison infrastructure. By 1994 that figure had skyrocketed to $36 billion.



The federal government devotes a huge chunk of its budget to prison construction and maintenance and many states spend more money on their prison networks than they do on social programs and education combined.



Within the last ten to fifteen years, there is a concerted effort to harmonize and [in some instances] merge prison labor with the desires of business and the needs of production.

Currently prisoners turn out $10 billion worth of products, replacing over 500,000 workers from the main work force.



In some states, such as Oregon and California, prisoners are paid the minimum wage, but this is unusual, and even then, after taxes are taken and money for ''room and board'' deducted, they end up with less than 20% of their ''wages''.



Most prisoners in America, however, are paid a mere pittance, averaging only enough to buy a few toiletries and personal items from the prison canteen at the end of the month. While the fruits of their labor are sold in the open market, reaping huge profits for corporations and lucrative cutbacks for prison and government officials.





Captive Consumers



Inmates in American prisons and jails are also exploited as captive consumers. By existing within the fishbowl of confinement, they have little choice but to purchase the items selected for them at the prison store for the price designated.



A startling example of this is pay phones. It is reported that a prison pay phone can net 10 thousand dollars a year in profit. If you multiply that by 100 [i.e. a cool million in profit] we begin to get the picture.



The Media



The corporate controlled media does its part in facilitating the prison-industrial complex by sensationalizing crime and criminals; yet tactfully passing over both the causes and solutions. Thus the cry resounds through out the land of ''lock them up and throw away the key.'' And once locked away they can conveniently and legally become a source of slave labor to boost the manufacturing quotas and to increase profits.



Slave Import Business in U.S.



Yearly in the United States, as many as 50,000 people are brought to the country and enslaved. Most are forced to work as prostitutes [sex slaves] in private homes or public clubs, and laborers in sweat shops and on farms; or as servants in the homes of the affluent and the influential.



International Organizations report that over two million women and children are ensnared in a world wide slave trade, with many of the victims being imported to North America.



So vile and insidious is this practice, that young women and adolescent girls and boys are in constant danger [particularly in so-called third world countries] of being snatched up and shipped over seas to serve as sex toys for the rich and decadent in a litany of U.S. cities such as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco.



In fact, these unfortunate enslaved people are smuggled into the U.S. at every point; Asians through the West Coast, mainly through Seattle and Los Angeles. Those that are abducted in Mexico and South America come through Florida, Texas, and California; and Africans are smuggled via major cities on the eastern seaboard.



Jennifer Stango is co-founder of the Los Angeles based Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking, an organization which helps victims of the modern day slave trade. She mentions that slave traders prey on those who are considered most vulnerable. People who are young and poor, with little or no formal education; and who find themselves dis-oriented once they reach the United States.



Authorities predict that the trafficking of human beings, whether for sale in the labor market or to be utilizes in the sex industry, will soon exceed illicit drug trade as the world's most lucrative illegal enterprise.



According to Micheal Gennaco, who heads the civil rights section of the U.S. Attorney's Office: ''What we are experiencing in this country is a modern form of slavery. In many ways it parallels the same experience that victims felt in the antebellum days of the south. The people that are brought here are essentially not brought in chains, but they're brought accompanied by traffickers. They're made sure that as soon as they arrive at the point of destination, that they're whisked away to an unfamiliar situation in the same way that the slaves in the South were whisked away to the slave master or the slave trader to an unfamiliar location. And then, once the slaves are acculturated and the master starts feeling comfortable about their ablity to be trusted and not to run away, they were then released from their chains.''





Notes and References



The McNair Report on Allegations of Slavery and Slavery-like Practice in The Sudan.



Slavery in America; accessible online at:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june01/slavery_3-8.html



Slavery Reinstituted in America; accessible online at:

http://thewinds.arcsnet.net/archive/racial/a011297a.html





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


One Ummah Network
"And verily, this Ummah of yours is One Ummah, and I am your Lord; therefore fear only

[dour]

Slavery in America is illegal and is punishable Crime. Prisioners are in prision becuse they were found quilty of breaking the law, and are relesed when their time is done. What else should you do with people who break the law? Kill them?

Slavery is no longer accepted in our society. This however does not mean people don't break the law. There is no excuse for slavery, and everyone knows that. I never met one person who supported slavery in America.

[dour]

I am not trying to judge harshly the treatment of slavery in Muslim history. Slavery is also written in the bible, but that does not mean Christians continue to support slavery. While the treatment of slaves is in Muslim life, there is no law that said that man cannot make laws to outlaw slavery or state any reason why slavery should not end.

Society has gotten past the use of slavery, and it should never be supported in any shape or form.

[AbuMubarak]

yeah, just keep defying the bible

the bible says homos are an abomination, but society says they are cool

so who should we follow?

[dour]

different topic... but what two concenting adults do in their bedroom is none of my concern. That is between themselves. Bible also says don't judge others, and those without sin can throw the first stone. If no harm is being done, and it does not affect the freedoms or rights of others, it is not my concern.

If God is against homosexuals, he can judge them himself in his own time.

[dour]

You have every right to disagree with the gay and lesbian lifestyle. You can demenstrate, chant, pray, preach, against their lifestyle, but you cannot limit their Constitutional freedoms. That is your right in America as well.

[AbuMubarak]

so even when you are reminded of how disobeying the word of god is wrong, you still bring up the american constitution?

you invite me to wait till gods judgement, but what is your american constitution going to do for you on the day of judgement?

[dour]

It depends on which "Holly book" you follow for one thing. There are many religions in this world, and I am not going to say which one is right and which one is wrong. America is made up of people who follow just about every religion on earth; many don't even follow a religion. So how are you going to base a law on religion in America?

Is God so helpless he cannot make his own judgments? Like I said, what two consenting adults do in their bedroom is none of my concern. No one's rights are being violated so I will leave it up to God.

Like I also said, he who is without quilt can throw the first stone. (it is in the bible as well).


As for slavery, is there any Rule that says that people must own a slave? Is there any rule that said that man cannot take action and outlaw such treatment of people? Slavery is a different issue than homosexuality, and slavery harms the rights of others unlike homosexually.

[AbuMubarak]

you are skirting the issue

no matter what religion you follow, does it permit homosexuality, and if you are an adherent of that religion, are you supposed to accept it, even if your religion tells you its forbidden?

and lastly, not to stray too far from the original thread, if slavery is allowed in the bible and quran, who are we to abolish it?

[dour]

Some relegiouns don't even touch the question of homosexuality, and some relgiouns say it is fine.

You don't have to accept homosexuality, that is your right as well. You just cannot harm the freedoms of others.



Why keep slavery when it harms the freedom of the people who are slaves? Why abolish it? Well God gave you a brain and ability to think. Use it.

Is there any rule in any holly book that says man cannot take action to abolish slavery? Is there a law that said you must own a slave? Did God said you cannot outlaw slavery? Are you going to be punished if you do not own a slave? Are you going to be punished if a country you live in does not allow slavery?

[AbuMubarak]

dont make assumptions about slavery based upon the way the founding fathers of america exploited it

even after slavery was made illegal, the same lovers of freedom and liberty enslaved people with share cropping and jim crow

lets discuss slavery outside of what the founders of the declaration of independence thought it was

slavery in islam is much different, more like having butlers and waiters

and within islamic history, there have been children of slaves who became caliph

slaves within islam didnt rise up and revolt, so dont make broad generalizations of slavery because the west was the worst enslaver of people since pharoah

even india, with all of its democracy doesnt have slavery, but allows persecution of the untouchables, not to mention the street walking prostitutes of america, the working poor in america, even the illegal aliens that are allowed to work here, are they not slaves?

[dour]

Some slaves were treated quite nicely in America as well. Some slaves were educated and treated better than immigrate workers. Some were also given freedom after their master's death. But, no matter how a slave is treated I don't see anyone volunteering to be slaves. No matter how slavery is treated, a person has no right to own another.

Again I ask these questions.

Is a person going to be punished by God if does not own a slave? Is he going to be punished if he does not support slavery, or lives in a country that does not allow slavery? Did God say you cannot outlaw slavery? Is there any reason to keep a slave? If God in your religion smiles upon those who free slaves, does it not make sense to never owning a slave in the first place, or letting it happen at all? Why do people need slaves now days?

No, I don't support how India treats some of its people either.

[dour]

even india, with all of its democracy doesnt have slavery, but allows persecution of the untouchables, not to mention the street walking prostitutes of america, the working poor in america, even the illegal aliens that are allowed to work here, are they not slaves?
---------------------

India see above. Prostitutes don't have to be prostitutes, they can find a different job and go where they wish. Working poor, they are getting paid and they can move as they wish without permision. They can go back to school and find different jobs or even move to another town, city, state or even to another country. They can marry whoever they wish and do whatever they wish as long as it does not break the law. They might be limited of what they can do becuse they lack money, but they are not slaves, I know becuse I have been one of those poor (and still am to a point). No one owns them as property.

[Cinna]

Abu Mubarak
slavery in islam is much different, more like having butlers and waiters

and within islamic history, there have been children of slaves who became caliph

slaves within islam didnt rise up and revolt, so dont make broad generalizations of slavery because the west was the worst enslaver of people since pharoah


Why not hire a butler or waiter then, or are you such a bad employer they'd resign very quickly if they could? As for "slaves within islam", one of three greatest slave revolts in history was in Iraq in the 8th century CE.
Homosexuality: I've never come across homosexuals as persistently and boringly intent on persuading other people of the virtues of their tastes as religious people are. As to god, if the thing exists, I look forward to telling it where it went wrong.

[dour]

My point, which I have made in another place, is this....

If not owning slaves is not punished, freeing slaves is rewarded, and being better than what expected is not punished, why continue to support slavery? Making laws that makes slavery illegal is as rewarding as freeing slaves, if not more so. By making slavery illegal, everyone that lives within that land that upholds and supports such laws is in a sense freeing all slaves in the present, and freeing all slaves in the future as well.

Slavery belongs in the past. Be better than what is expected.

[AhmedSyed]

bump...could anyone add?

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Interestingly, slavery was banned in the Ottoman Caliphate much before the US!



See:
http://www.sunnipath.com/resources/Questions/qa00000711.aspx

and,

http://www.sunnipath.com/resources/Questions/qa00002047.aspx

[AhmedSyed]

Originally posted by dour
different topic... but what two concenting adults do in their bedroom is none of my concern. That is between themselves. Bible also says don't judge others, and those without sin can throw the first stone. If no harm is being done, and it does not affect the freedoms or rights of others, it is not my concern.

If God is against homosexuals, he can judge them himself in his own time.

So if I smoke a couple we-ds with my best buddy in my house, is that of no concern to you?

Homos, adultery, etc, all things that Allah has forbidden, and for good reason too.

Lets suppose that AIDS becomes rampant into future--1/10 people have it.

Will that affect you? How do you know that your husband/wife has abstained?

[AhmedSyed]

Originally posted by dour
My point, which I have made in another place, is this....

If not owning slaves is not punished, freeing slaves is rewarded, and being better than what expected is not punished, why continue to support slavery? Making laws that makes slavery illegal is as rewarding as freeing slaves, if not more so. By making slavery illegal, everyone that lives within that land that upholds and supports such laws is in a sense freeing all slaves in the present, and freeing all slaves in the future as well.

Slavery belongs in the past. Be better than what is expected.

Did you read what Hazrat Bilal had to say? (May Allah grant Him Jannah)


Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu was once asked why was slavery not banned in Islaam? Bilaal radhiyallahu anhu answered: 'The world is now based on the labour of the slaves. Should Islaam or any other system have sought to stop the institute of slavery all at once it would lead to universal anarchy and disturbance in which both masters and slaves would suffer. The masters' loss is clear, and as for the slaves they would find themselves without anyone to take care of their needs, unaccustomed to independence and self reliance they would in most cases seek to satisfy their needs through criminal assaults and extortions. Crimes of all sorts would spread widely, society would suffer incurably and there would be no more peace or security.'

[joeschmoe]

Should Islaam or any other system have sought to stop the institute of slavery all at once it would lead to universal anarchy and disturbance in which both masters and slaves would suffer. The masters' loss is clear, and as for the slaves they would find themselves without anyone to take care of their needs, unaccustomed to independence and self reliance they would in most cases seek to satisfy their needs through criminal assaults and extortions. Crimes of all sorts would spread widely, society would suffer incurably and there would be no more peace or security.
This is exactly the same line of reasoning that some Southern representatives to the Constitutional Convention used when arguing not to abolish slavery in 1787, i.e. it would have been too much of an upheaval, and the slaves wouldn't know what to do with their new freedom. I disagree with that reasoning now and I would have disagreed then. AbuM disagrees when the Americans say it, but I don't reckon he'll disagree with Mr. Bilaal.

Constitutional Topic: Slavery (http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_slav.html)

What the Founders Said About Slavery (http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/quotes/slavery.html)

[dour]

America used the same Arguments before the Civil War.

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Interestingly, slavery was banned in the Ottoman Caliphate much before the US!


Read the following links:

http://www.sunnipath.com/resources/Questions/qa00000711.aspx

and,

http://www.sunnipath.com/resources/Questions/qa00002047.aspx

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by Cinna
As to god, if the thing exists, I look forward to telling it where it went wrong. :banghead:

[abdulhakeem]

How is it that Islam, a religion inspired by God for the good of humanity, allows slavery?

There are historical, social and psychological dimensions to this question, which we must work through patiently, if we are to arrive at a satisfactory answer.

First of all, it is useful to recall why the institution of slavery is thought of or remembered with such revulsion. Images of the brutal treatment of slaves, especially in ancient Rome and Egypt, provokes sorrow and deep disgust. That is why even after so many centuries, our conception of slaves is of men and women carrying stones to the pyramids and being used up in the building process like mortar, or fighting wild animals in public arenas for the amusement of their owners. We picture slaves wearing shameful yokes and chains around their necks.

Nearer modern times there is the practice of slavery on an enormous scale by the Western European nations; the barbarity and bestiality of this trade beggars all description. The trade was principally in Africans who were transported across the oceans, packed in specially designed ships, thought of and treated exactly like livestock. These slaves were forced to change their names and abandon their religion and their language, were never entitled to hope for freedom, and were kept, again like livestock, for hard labouring or for breeding purposes-a birth among them was celebrated as if it were a death. It is difficult to understand how human beings could conceive of fellow human beings in such a light, still less treat them thus. But it certainly happened: there is much documentary evidence that shows, for example, how ship-masters would throw their human cargo overboard in order to claim compensation for their loss. Slaves had no rights in law, only obligations; their owners had absolute rights over them to dispose of them as they wished-brothers and sisters, parents and children, would be separated or allowed to stay together according to the owner’s mood or his economic convenience.

After centuries of this dreadful practice had made the West European nations rich from exploitation of such commodities as sugar, cotton, coffee, they abolished slavery-they abolished it, with much self-congratulation, first as a trade, then altogether. Yet the Muslim regions had also known considerable prosperity through the exploitation of sugar, cotton, coffee (these words in European languages are of Arabic origin), and achieved that prosperity without the use of slave labour. More important, let us also note, when the Europeans abolished slavery, it was the slave-owners who were compensated, not the slaves-in other words, the attitude to fellow human beings which allowed such treatment of them had not changed. It was not many years after the abolition of slavery that Africa was directly colonized by the Europeans with consequences for the Africans no less terrible than slavery itself. Further, because the attitude to non-Europeans has changed little, if at all, in modern times, their social and political condition remains, even where they live amid the Europeans and their descendants as fellow-citizens, that of despised inferiors. It is barely a couple of decades since the anthropological museums in the great capitals of the Western countries ceased to display, for public entertainment, the bones and stuffed bodies of their fellow human beings. And such displays were not organized by the worst among them, but by the best-the scientists, doctors, learned men, humanitarians.

In short, it is not only the institution of slavery that causes revulsion in the human heart, it is the attitudes of inhumanity which sustain it. And the truth is, if the institution no longer formally exists but the attitudes persist, then humanity has not gained much, if at all. That is why colonial exploitation replaced slavery, and why the chains of unbearable, unrepayable international debt have replaced colonial exploitation: only slavery has gone, its structures of inhumanity and barbarism are still securely in place. Before we turn to the Islamic perspective on slavery, let us recall a name famous even among Western Europeans, that of Harun al-Rashid, and let us recall that this man who enjoyed such authority and power over all Muslims was the son of a slave. Nor is he the only such example; slaves and their children enjoyed enormous prestige, authority, respect and (shall we say it) freedom, within the Islamic system, in all areas of life, cultural as well as political. How could this have come about?

Islam amended and educated the institution of slavery and the attitudes of masters to slaves. The Qur’an taught in many verses that all human beings are descended from a single ancestor, that none has an intrinsic right of superiority over another, whatever his race or his nation or his social standing. And from the Prophet’s teaching, upon him be peace, the Muslims learnt these principles, which they applied both as laws and as social norms:

Whosoever kills his slave: he shall be killed. Whosoever imprisons his slave and starves him, he shall be imprisoned and starved himself, and whosoever castrates his slave shall himself be castrated. (Abu Dawud, Diyat, 70; Tirmidhi, Diyat, 17; Al-Nasa’i, Qasama, 10, 16)

You are sons of Adam and Adam was created from clay. (Tirmidhi, Tafsir, 49; Manaqib, 73; Abu Dawud, Adab, 111)

You should know that no Arab is superior over a non-Arab and, no non-Arab is superior over any Arab, no white is superior over black and no black is superior over white. Superiority is by righteousness and God-fearing [alone]. (Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 411)

Because of this compassionate attitude, those who had lived their whole lives as slaves and who are described in ahadith as poor and lowly received respect from those who enjoyed high social status (Muslim, Birr, 138; Jannat, 48; Tirmidhi, Manaqib, 54, 65). ‘Umar was expressing his respect in this sense when he said: ‘Master Bilal whom Master Abu Bakr set free’ (Bukhari, Fada’il al-Sahaba, 23). Islam (unlike other civilizations) requires that slaves are thought of and treated as within the framework of universal human brotherhood, and not as outside it. The Prophet, upon him be peace, said:

Your servants and your slaves are your brothers. Anyone who has slaves should give them from what he eats and wears. He should not charge them with work beyond their capabilities. If you must set them to hard work, in any case I advise you to help them. (Bukhari, Iman, 22; Adab, 44; Muslim, Iman, 38–40; Abu Dawud, Adab, 124)

Not one of you should [when introducing someone] say ‘This is my slave’, ‘This is my concubine’. He should call them ‘my daughter’ or ‘my son’ or ‘my brother’.
(Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 2, 4)

For this reason ‘Umar and his servant took it in turns to ride on the camel from Madina to Jerusalem on their journey to take control of Masjid al-Aqsa. While he was the head of the state, ‘Uthman had his servant pull his own ears in front of the people since he had pulled his. Abu Dharr, applying the hadith literally, made his servant wear one half of his suit while he himself wore the other half. From these instances, it was being demonstrated to succeeding generations of Muslims, and a pattern of conduct established, that a slave is fully a human being, not different from other people in his need for respect and dignity and justice.

This constructive and positive treatment necessarily had a consequence on the attitudes of slaves to their masters. The slave as slave still retained his humanity and moral dignity and a place beside other members of his master’s family. When (we shall explain how below) he obtained his freedom, he did not necessarily want to leave his former master. Starting with Zaid bin Harith, this practice became quite common. Although our Prophet, upon him be peace, had given Zayd his freedom and left him a free choice, Zayd preferred to stay with him. Masters and slaves were able to regard each other as brothers because their faith enabled them to understand that the worldly differences between people are a transient situation-a situation justifying neither haughtiness on the part of some, nor rancour on the part of others. There were, in addition, strict principles enforced as law:

Whosoever kills his slave, he shall be killed, whosoever imprisons his slave and starves him, he shall be imprisoned and starved himself. (Tirmidhi, al-Ayman wa l-Nudhur, 13)

Beside such sanctions which made the master behave with care, the slave also enjoyed the legal right to earn money and hold property independently of his master, the right to keep his religion and to have a family and family life with the attendant rights and obligations. As well as personal dignity and a degree of material security, the Islamic laws and norms allowed the slave a still more precious opening-the hope and means of freedom.

Human freedom is by God, that is, it is the natural and proper condition which must be regarded as the norm. Thus, to restore a human life, wholly or partly, to this condition is one of the highest virtues. To set free half of a slave’s body has been considered equal to saving half of one’s own from wrath in the next world. In the same way to set free a slave’s whole body is considered equal to assurance of one’s whole body. Seeking freedom for enslaved people is one of the causes for which the banner of war may be raised in Islam. Muslims were encouraged by their faith to enter into agreements and contracts which enabled slaves to earn or be granted their freedom at the expiry of a certain term or, most typically, on the death of the owner. Unconditional emancipation was, naturally, regarded as the most meritorious kind, and worthiest of recognition in the life hereafter. There were occasions when whole groups of people, acting together, would buy and set free large numbers of slaves in order to obtain thereby the favour of God.

Emancipation of a slave was also the legally required expiation for certain sins or failures in religious duties, for example, the breaking of an oath or the breaking of a fast: a good deed to balance or wipe out a lapse. The Qur’an commands that he who has killed a believer by mistake must set free a believing slave and pay the blood-money to the family of the slain (al-Nisa’, 4.92). A killing has repercussions for both society and the victim’s family. The blood-money is a partial compensation to the family of the victim. Similarly, the emancipation of a slave is a bill paid to the community-from the point of view of gaining a free person for that community. To set free a living person in return for a death was considered like bringing someone back to life. Both personal and public wealth were expended to obtain the freedom of slaves: the examples of the Prophet, upon him be peace, and of Abu Bakr are well known; later, especially during the rule of ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-’Aziz, public zakat funds were used for this purpose.

Alas, there are, even among Muslims themselves, people who feel the need to somehow ‘disprove’ the worth of Islam, especially on socio-political issues. In reality they feel this need because they have been more or less seduced by Western values, even though these values are only formal, theoretical utterances of law and principle and not, not by any means, lived realities. Such people do not go among the wretched and poor of the so-called ‘third world’ and ask them about the merits of Western values as they are practised. Rather, they listen to an account such as we have given of the practised reality of Islamic values and claim, on purely theoretical grounds, that Islam is lacking in the best principles. This is what they say:

‘It is true that Islam has commended humanity in the treatment of slaves, and encouraged most forcefully their emancipation. We can see from the history of many different peoples in the Islamic world that slaves quickly integrated into the main society and achieved positions of great prestige and power, some even before they gained their freedom. And yet, if Islam regards slavery as a social evil, why did the Qur’an or the Prophet not ban it outright? There are, after all, other social evils which pre-existed Islam, and which Islam sought to abolish altogether-for example, the consumption of alcohol, or gambling, or usury, or prostitution. Why does Islam, by not abolishing slavery, appear to condone it?’

Until the evil of the European trade in black slaves, slavery was largely a by-product of wars between nations, the conquered peoples becoming the slaves of their conquerors. In the formative years of Islam, no reliable system existed of exchanging prisoners of war. The available means of dealing with them were either (i) to put them all to the sword; or (ii) to hold them and attend to their care in prison; or (iii) to allow them to return to their own people; or (iv) to distribute them among the Muslims as part of the spoils of war.

The first option must be ruled out on the grounds of its barbarity. The second is practicable only for small numbers for a limited period of time if resources permit-and it was, of course, practised-prisoners being held in this way against ransom, many so content with their treatment that they became Muslims and changed sides in the fighting. The third option is imprudent in time of war. This leaves, as a rule for general practice, only the fourth option, whence followed the humane laws and norms instituted by Islam for what is, in effect, the rehabilitation of prisoners of war.

The slave in every Muslim house had the opportunity to see at close quarters the truth of Islam in practice. His heart would be won over by kind treatment and the humanity of Islam in general, especially by the access the slave had to many of the legal rights enjoyed by Muslims, and, ultimately, by getting his freedom. In this way, many thousands of the very best people have swelled the numbers of the great and famous in Islam, whose own example has then become a sunna, a norm, for the Muslims who succeeded them-imams such as Nafi’, Imam Malik’s sheikh, and Tawus bin Qaisan, to name only two.

The reality is that in Islam it is overwhelmingly the case that being a slave was a temporary condition. Unlike Western civilisation, whose values are so much in fashion, slavery was not passed down, generation after generation in a deepening spiral of degradation and despair, with no hope for the slaves to escape their condition or their status. On the contrary, regarded as fundamentally equal, the slaves in Muslim society could and did live in secure possession of their dignity as creatures of the same Creator, and had steady access to the mainstream of Islamic culture and civilisation-to which, as we have noted, they contributed greatly. In the Western societies where slavery was widespread, particularly in North and South America, the children of the slaves, generations after their formal emancipation, remain for the most part on the fringes of society, as a sub-culture or anti-culture-which is only sometimes tolerated, and mostly despised, by the still dominant community.

But why, our critics will ask, when the Muslims were secure in their conquests did they not grant emancipation wholesale to former captives or slaves? The answer has, again, to do with realities not theories. Those former captives or slaves would not have either the personal, psychological resources or the economic resources needed to establish a secure, dignified independence. Those who doubt this would do well to examine the consequences upon the slaves in the former European or American colonies of their sudden emancipation-many were abruptly reduced to destitution, rendered homeless and resourceless by owners who (themselves compensated for their loss of property) no longer accepted any kind of responsibility for their former slaves. We have already noted the failure of these ex-slaves to enter upon or make a mark in the wider society from which they had been so long excluded by law.

By contrast, every good Muslim who embraced his slave as a brother, encouraged him to work for his freedom, observed all his rights, helped him to support a family, to find a place in the society before emancipating him, might well be pleased with an institution that opened to him a means of pleasing God. The example that comes first to mind: Zayd bin Harith who was brought up in the Prophet’s own household and set free, who married a noblewoman, who was appointed as the commander of a Muslim army which included many of noble birth. But one might swell the list of examples to many thousands if one had the space.

Ah yes, our critics will say, it may be so, but now there are exchanges of prisoners if there are wars, now the institution of slavery does not exist, so are not the Islamic injunctions, however good, an irrelevance? No, indeed. There is nothing in Islam whose origin is in the commands and guidance of the Qur’an which can ever become irrelevant. Rather, we would say to these critics: open your eyes, study by what subtle means wars are now conducted, by what cunning devices whole nations are now conquered; how they are reduced to a state of absolute slavery (which is yet not called slavery) and made to devote their whole energies, indeed to dedicate the lives of their children for generations to come, to sustain their masters (who are yet not called masters) in a lifestyle of unbelievable affluence. We say, study how national currencies are bought and sold, how impossible sums of money are lent on terms of extraordinary brutality, not in order to help the poor nations, but in order to permanently entrap them in a state of dependence. To those who say, now there is no slavery, we say look into the faces of the earth’s poor peasants, striving to grow (in an increasingly barren soil) commodities which are not food for themselves but luxuries for the rich, and only if they have grown enough of these, have they some hope of buying something to eat-but there are still millions of others too poor to be poor peasants, who live upon mountains of urban rubbish, earn from it, eat from it. If you study the expressions of such people, locked in endless, fruitless toil, you will understand that slavery is not an evil that Western civilisation has eradicated, rather one which Western civilization has ably disguised and distanced from itself.

Let no person, at least let no Muslim, claim that mankind has nothing now to learn from Islamic values about how to deal with the problem of slavery. On the contrary, we have everything to learn. How urgent, then, is our need to pray for guidance of God lest we persist in error, for His forbearance lest we persist in arrogance, for His help in finding a sure way to end the domination of those who do not know compassion except as a fine-sounding word.

http://www.fethullahgulen.org/questions/questions30.html

[outlandish]

Please could you define the term 'concubine' from an Islamic perspective? Is it permissible to have a concubine in today's society?

Assalamu Alaikum Mufti Sahib, The question that I would like to ask has been asked once before but unfortunately the answer was not very clear so I am still confused with regard to the topic - that of concubines in Islam. Firstly, please could you define the term 'concubine' from an Islamic perspective? I am aware that the Prophet (saw) had a concubine. Was this just a special gift from allah (SWT) for the Prophet (saw) or are the rest of his ummah allowed to have a concubine. Please explain in detail with references. Jazakallah. May Allah (SWT) reward you for your great work.

QUESTION: What is the Islamic law with regard to slave-women? Was It permissible to have relations with these slave-women without a formal marriage ceremony?

ANSWER: Firstly, it should be borne in mind that slavery was not something that was introduced by Islam; on the contrary, it was something that had its roots planted long before the advent of Islam. It would not be an exaggeration to state that slavery is probably as old as war itself, because it is one of the consequences of war. Thus, slavery apparently first reared its head with the first wars that took place an the face of earth. War is a factor that makes soft men stern, kind men harsh and delicate men rugged. A man who cannot bear to see the sight of blood under normal circumstances becomes capable of shedding the blood of hundreds under the pressure of war. Those who were not killed in warfare, used to be taken as prisoners of war. The pages of history will show that many alternative, expedient methods were used through the ages to deal with prisoners of war. Some used to be executed while others would be set free, with or without a ransom. Then, there were others who were neither executed nor set free. These were enslaved.

When Islam came and prospered, its power was challenged by the enemies of Islam and the need to go to war arose. By that time, slavery had virtually become an international custom. It was also rife among the Arabs from the days of darkness and ignorance. Thus, abolishing it instantateously would have caused chaos and pandemonium among the Arab people. Hence, a process of gradual extirpation had to be implemented. Moreover, if the Muslims would set all their enemy-prisoners free and tolerate their fellow Muslims being captured and enslaved by the enemies, it would have lead to a sharp decrease in the Muslim military force and given a great advantage to the enemy forces which was something that the Muslims could not afford. Furthermore, it is a well known fact that warfare tactics used by one side are often countered by the opposing side in order to maintain a balance of power. Hence, wartime diplomacy necessitated the enslaving of prisoners.

In the “Jihaads” (Islamic wars) that took place, women were also, at times, taken as prisoners of war by the Muslim warriors. These women captives used to be distributed as part of the booty among the soldiers, after their return to Islamic territory. Each soldier was then entitled to have relations ONLY with the slave girl over which he was given the RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP and NOT with those slave girls that were not in his possession. This RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP was given to him by the “Ameerul-Mu'mineen” (Head of the Islamic state.) Due to this right of ownership, It became lawful for the owner of a slave girl to have intercourse with her.

It may, superficially, appear distasteful to copulate with a woman who is not a man's legal wife, but once Shariat makes something lawful, we have to accept it as lawful, whether it appeals to our taste, or not; and whether we know its underlying wisdom or not. It is necessary for a Muslim to be acquainted with the laws of Shariat, but it is not necessary for him to delve into each law in order to find the underlying wisdom of these laws because knowledge of the wisdom of some of the laws may be beyond his puny comprehension. Allah Ta'ala has said in the Holy Quran: “Wa maa ooteetum min al-ilm illaa qaleelan” which means, more or less, that, "You have been given a very small portion of knowledge”. Hence, if a person fails to comprehend the underlying wisdom of any law of Shariat, he cannot regard it as a fault of Shariat (Allah forbid), on the contrary, it is the fault of his own perception and lack of understanding, because no law of Shariat is contradictory to wisdom.

Nevertheless, the wisdom underlying the permission granted by Shariat to copulate with a slave woman is as follows: The LEGAL possession that a Muslim receives over a slave woman from the “Ameerul-Mu'mineen” (the Islamic Head of State) gives him legal credence to have coition with the slave woman in his possession, just as the marriage ceremony gives him legal credence to have coition with his wife. In other words, this LEGAL POSSESSION is, in effect, a SUBSTITUTE of the MARRIAGE CEREMONY. A free woman cannot be 'possessed', bought or sold like other possessions; therefore Shariat instituted a 'marriage ceremony' in which affirmation and consent takes place, which gives a man the right to copulate with her. On the other hand, a slave girl can be possessed and even bought and sold, thus, this right of possession, substituting as a marriage ceremony, entitles the owner to copulate with her. A similar example can be found in the slaughtering of animals; that after a formal slaughtering process, in which the words, “Bismillahi Allahu Akbar” are recited, goats, cows, etc.; become “Halaal” and lawful for consumption, whereas fish becomes “Halaal” merely through 'possession' which substitutes for the slaughtering.

In other words, just as legal possession of a fish that has been fished out of the water, makes it Halaal for human consumption without the initiation of a formal slaughtering process; similarly legal possession of a slave woman made her Halaal for the purpose of coition with her owner without the initiation of a formal marriage ceremony.

In short, permission to have intercourse with a slave woman was not something barbaric or uncivilised; on the contrary, it was almost as good as a marriage ceremony. In fact, possession of a slave woman resembles a marriage ceremony in many ways and both have a lot in common with each other. One similarity is this that just as a free woman cannot have two husbands simultaneously, a slave woman cannot be used for intercourse by two owners. Another similarity is that a free woman whose marriage is on the rocks, cannot marry another man until her previous marriage is nullified through divorce, etc. Due to the discrepancies between husband and wife, the marriage sometimes reaches a stage where it becomes virtually impossible for the couple to live as man and wife with the result that divorce is brought into force to nullify marriage ties. Similarly, if a slave woman was married previously in enemy territory to a non-Muslim, and is then captured alone, i.e. without her husband, it is not permissible for any Muslim to have relations with her until her previous marriage is nullified, and that is done by bringing her to an Islamic country and making her the legal possession of a Muslim. Bringing her into Islamic territory necessitates the rendering of her previous marriage as null and void by Islamic law because with her husband in enemy territory and she in Islamic territory, it becomes virtually impossible for them to meet and live as man and wife. That is why it is not permissible to have intercourse with a woman whose husband is also taken into captivity and put into slavery with her. Another resemblance between the two is that, just as a divorcee has to spend a period called "Iddat" before another man is allowed to marry her, similarly, a slave woman has to spend a period called "Istibraa" before her owner can have coition with her.

Another similarity between marriage and possession of a slave woman is that just as the wife becomes a dependant of the husband and he has to provide a home, food and clothing for her, a slave woman also becomes a dependant of her owner and he has to provide a home, food and clothing for her. Yet another similarity is this that just as marriage makes the close relatives of the wife Haraam upon the husband; i.e. he cannot get married to his wife's mother, grandmother, sister, etc., similarly if a man has copulated with a slave woman the slave woman's close relatives also become Haraam upon the owner. With all these similarities it does not make sense to regard copulation with a slave woman distasteful whilst copulation with one's wife is not regarded as distasteful.

A question that may still arise is that why does the owner of a slave woman not marry her before having relations with her? Well, this is impracticable because of a few intricate technicalities. Firstly, we know that a man has to give “Mahr” (dower-money) to his bride. The Holy Quran says:-

[ A r a b i c ]
Trans: "And allowed unto you is whatsoever is beyond that, so that ye may seek them with your substance (i.e. with your dower-money). " - (4:24).

Thus, “Mahr” is a conditional prerequisite of Nikah. If a man has to marry his slave woman, it would not be possible for him to abide by this condition of 'Mahr' because by Islamic law, a slave does not have rights over any property, i.e. she cannot own anything. In fact, whatever she has with her too, i.e. her clothing, etc., is all regarded as the property of her owner. Therefore, If he gets married to his slave girl and gives her the 'Mahr' she cannot become the owner of it because she has no right of ownership. The 'Mahr' would bounce back to the owner of the slave girl and it would tantamount to giving the 'mahr' to himself. Hence, the owner would become the payer as well as the PAYEE of the 'mahr' which would only result in the mockery of the whole system of 'mahr'. It would be absolutely superflous to have such a marriage ceremony performed that makes a mockery of the 'mahr' system. Hence, the owner cannot get married to her while she remains a slave girl. However, if he sets her free, then he can get married to her on the basis of her having become a liberated woman.

Although the owner himself cannot get married to his slave woman, without giving her freedom, he can get her married to someone else. If he gets her married to someone else, then only her husband can now have intercourse with her and the owner's right of having intercourse with her comes to an end. All these facts prove that the slave girl does not become an instrument of sex; on the contrary, her honour is upheld, in that only one man is allowed to have intercourse with her JUST AS only one man (the husband) is allowed to have intercourse with his lawfully wedded wife.

Islam ensured that the slave girl's duties were not restricted merely to domestic chores but also gave her master permission to copulate with her. This concession created an atmosphere of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master. Islam thereby raised the status of the war captive-maidens close to that of wives. It was a psychological cure to her grief-stricken heart, being deprived of her family and thrown into the hands of a strange society.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) enjoined his followers to treat the slaves kindly, gently, and, above all, to regard them as members of the family. In this way, they were made to feel wanted; which was far better than treating them as outcasts and leaving them to wander the streets of a strange society in a peniless, destitute condition. Such treatment would have ultimately forced them to take up evil occupations such as prostitution in the case of slave woman in order to fill their hungry stomachs. The First World War in 1914 was a clear reflection of the evils involved in setting captive women free to roars about in a strange society with strange surroundings. During that war, German and English women prisoners on either side were set free to roam the streets with no-one to feed them. The result was obvious that they resorted to other unrefined and uncivilised methods of income on the streets. Thus, it is evident that the Islamic treatment of women prisoners of war was conducive towards better social relations and led to the refinement of their overall social lives.

Over and above all this, History will show that Islam did not encourage slavery but rather encouraged moves towards the extirpation of slavery. Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam has said something to this effect in a Hadith, that: "Whosoever freed a Muslim slave, the Lord would redeem all his limbs - in compensation for each limb of the slave, so much so that the private parts for the private parts - from the Fire of Hell.

"If a slave woman becomes pregnant from her owner, and delivers his child, she automatically gets her freedom after the death of her master whose child she gave birth to.

Moreover, there are many wrongs and sins for which the liberation of a slave serves as a compensation and atonement. This was a further incentive for the extirpation of slavery. Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam also taught that whosoever teaches good manners to his slave girl, adorns her with politeness and good education, then frees her and gets married to her, for him there is double recompense and reward. These encouraging teachings served as incentives towards the emancipation of slaves and slaves were liberated by the thousands. Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam himself freed 63 slaves, Hazrat Abu Bakr Radhiallahu Anhu freed 63, Hazrat Abdur-Rahman bin Auf Radhiallahu Anhu 30,000; Hazrat Hakim bin Huzam Radhiallahu Anhu 100; Hazrat Abbas Radhiallahu Anhu 70; Hazrat Ayesha Radhiallahu Anha 69; Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar Radhiallahu Anhu 100; Hazrat Uthman Radhiallahu Anhu used to free one slave every Friday and he would say that he would tree any slave who performed his prayers with humility. Hazrat Zul-Kilah Radhiallahu Anhu freed 8,000 slaves in a single day.

Hazrat Umar Radhiallahu Anhu passed certain laws during his Khilafat which led to the emancipation of thousands of slaves, and to the prevention of certain specific forms of slavery. Some of the edicts that he issued:
1. All the apostate tribes that were enslaved during the Khilaafat of Hazrat Abu Bakr Radhiallahu Anhu were to be freed.
2. A Zimmi (protected non-Muslim subject of an Islamic state) should not be enslaved.
3. Arabs will not be enslaved.
4. Those who had been enslaved during the days of ignorance (prior to the advent of Islam) and had lived to witness the Islamic era, should redeem themselves from slavery by paying their costs (their value) to their owners whether they were willing or not.

As a result of all these laws, there came a time when slavery was totally extirpated. But of course, this extirpation came about after a gradual process because that was the only safe and expedient way of tackling the problem.

Because of the prevalence of slavery in the initial stages of Islam the necessity of educating the people about the treatment of slaves also arose. Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam taught his followers how the slaves should be treated with kindness, etc. In fact, Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam himself possessed slave girls. In this way, he was able to demonstrate practically how kindly and politely the slave should be treated. Because it is relevant to the topic, it would be appropriate to mention here that Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam also had four slave girls. One was Hazrat Maria Qibtiyya Radhiallahu Anha who was the mother of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam's son, Ibrahim Alayhis Salaam who passed away in infanthood. The others were, Hazrat Rayhaan binte Samoon; Hazrat Nafisa and a fourth, whose name has not been recorded in History.

One question that still remains is whether slavery still legally prevails anywhere in the Islamic world and whether it can be successfully implemented in this age. Well, there is no prevalence of lawful slavery in the Islamic world today and it would be difficult to implement it because of the stringent conditions attached to it. Firstly, the prisoners have to be captured in 'Jihaad' in the true sense of the word. Then again, If true 'Jihaad' did break out somewhere, there are still a number of other laws and conditions to abide by which are far too stringent for any Islamic country in the world to abide by in this time and age when people's personal gains and whims and desire are being given preference to over Islamic Law. According to Islamic Law, captive female prisoners are also part and parcel of the booty. One fifth of the booty has to be first distributed to the needy, orphans, etc. The remaining four-fifths should then be distributed among the soldiers who participated in the war. The distribution can only take effect after the booty is brought into Islamic territory. The Ameerul-Mu'mineen (Head of the Islamic State) remains the guardian of the female prisoners until he allocates them to the soldiers. Only after a soldier has been allotted a slave girl, and made the owner of her, will she become his lawful possession. After she spends a period called 'Istibraa', which is the elapse of one menstrual period, It becomes permissible for her owner to have relations with her. After possession of the slave too there are a number of other laws that affect the master and slave. There is hardly any Islamic country today that can abide to all these conditions, with the result that it is quite difficult to implement slavery in this time and age.

The subject of slavery in Islam is quite comprehensive and there are many laws that pertain to slaves which the Jurisprudents of Islam have outlined. It is, however, hoped that the above mentioned facts will be adequate enough to answer your question.

from askimam.com

[Mahdi]

If you take a female slave in the battle, then it is your duty to take of her.
Just like it is your duty to take care of your wife.
And if you don't tread them good(right) you will be punished for your acts on the Doomdays.

Peace

[dour]

A world without slaves is the only way to go. Glad most countries outlaw such practice, including most Islamic nations.

[Lando]

Blasphemy Before God: The Darkness of Racism In Muslim Culture (http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/2003/12/000477print.php)

By Adam Misbah al-Haqq

Islam is often spoken of as a universal faith that transcends culture and ethnicity. Imams will often sermonize on how Islam dispelled the darkness of racism and created a pluralistic and just society. However, beneath this carefully constructed cosmetic, beneath the layers of rhetoric, the Muslim community includes just as much bigotry and racism against people of African descent as in Western society itself.

It is the duty of all conscientious Muslims to speak out against the hypocrisies and contradictions that exist, especially when the integrity of one’s religious tradition is at stake. Legions of Muslims attack the contradictions of Western society with no mind to looking in their own backyard to realize that it is probably even more disorderly and messy. Needless to say, there are no sacred cows here; we must be honest and sincere with ourselves about our very real problems.

The roots of racism supported by religious doctrine in Islam can be found in a crucial feature of classic Muslim thought and the ideologies which resulted from it. Slavery in classic Muslim thought maintained that blacks became legitimate slaves by virtue of the color of their skin.

The justification of the early Muslim equation of blackness with servitude was found in the Genesis story so popularly called “the curse of Ham,” in reference to one of Noah’s sons. The biblical version depicts Noah getting drunk and lying uncovered in his tent. His younger son, Ham, saw his father’s nakedness and informed his other two brothers Shem and Japheth. These two walked backwards into their father’s tent, as to not see his nakedness and covered him with a garment. Noah awoke and upon hearing what had happened he cursed the descendants of Ham beginning with Ham’s son Canaan to be the slaves of the descendants of Shem and Japheth.

In this version of the myth, the curse fell upon Canaan, not any of Ham’s other sons. It is also important to note that Kush, one of Ham’s other sons, is projected by Jewish sources as being the ancestor of blacks. This story found its way into Arab-Muslim historiography and ethnology in a somewhat distorted manner that reflected the rise of racism in the new empire. All Arab-Muslim versions of the story portray Arabs as the descendants of Shem, the blacks (sometimes including the Copts, Berbers and the Sindh of India, or basically anyone they didn’t like) as the descendants of Ham, with most assigning the Turks and Slavs to Noah’s other son Japheth. In the Arab-Muslim version, blacks are cursed to be slaves and menials, Arabs are blessed to be prophets and nobles, while Turks and Slavs are destined to be kings and tyrants.

Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al-Kisa’i’s book ‘Tales of the Prophets’ (Qisas al-anbiyâ), written in the 6th century AH, is a collection of mythological narratives based on prophetic reports (hadîth) of various levels of authenticity and on Arabian and Hebrew folklore which sought to elaborate on the stories of the Prophets mentioned in passing in the Qur’an. Al-Kisa’i was not the first to write a book about the stories of the Prophets. In fact there were many which preceded him, but al-Kisa’i’s work is the most known and most cited of this genre, and his entire manuscript is intact, whereas only copies or fragments remain of other. Al-Kisa’i’s book is a collection of mythologies based largely upon the narrations of two individuals who were converts from Judaism, ‘Abdullah ibn Salâm (d. 663 AH) and Ka’b al-Ahbâr (d. 652 AH). They provide the link to the biblical tale of Noah, his sons and the curse of Ham entering into the collectivity of Muslim thought and doctrine.

Al-Kisa’i writes in his chapter on Noah:

It is said that one day Noah came to his son and said, “My son, I have not slept since I boarded the ark, and now I desire to sleep my fill.” So saying, he put his head on Shem’s lap and went to sleep. Suddenly a gust of wind uncovered Noah’s genitals; Ham laughed, but Shem jumped up and covered him. When Noah awoke he said, “What was that laughter?” Shem told him what had happened, and Noah grew angry with Ham. “Do you laugh at your father’s genitals?” he said. “May God change your complexion and may your face turn black!” And that very instant his face did turn black. Turning to Shem, he said, “You covered your father: may God shield you from harm in this world and have mercy upon you in the next! May He make prophets and nobles of your progeny! May He make bondswomen and slaves of Ham’s progeny until the Day of Resurrection! May He make tyrants, kings and emperors of Japheth’s progeny!” And God knows best.

This provides the theological justification for racism in early Muslim society. It is commonly assumed that the genre of “stories of the prophets” didn’t have much of an effect on scholars and jurists. However, the famous Al-Tabari, for example, cites no less than six Prophetic traditions which seek to support this story. One tradition reads:

Ham begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth begat those who are full faced with small eyes, and Shem begat everyone who is handsome of face [Arabs of course] with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow past their ears, and wherever his descendants met the children of Shem, the latter would enslave them.

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal reported a saying attributed to the Prophet which in effect states that God created the white race (dhurriyyah baydâ) from the right shoulder of Adam and created the black race (dhurriyyah sawdâ) from Adam’s left shoulder. Those of Adam’s right shoulder would enter Paradise and those of the left, Perdition. Other equally racist sayings have been attributed to the Prophet in the traditions. Contradicintg this spirit, there are the sayings of the Prophet which equate the value of a person to his God-consciousness (taqwa), and to their piety without any regard to the tribal or ethnocentric concerns of a racist purport.

The content of such reports, like similar reports degrading women, must be examined and exposed for what they are, but these reports indicate to the mentality which sought to overthrow the seemingly egalitarian nature of the early Muslim community in exchange for the more deeply rooted tradition of tribal affinities, patriarchy and racial bigotry.


The Story of Ham as a Basis for a New Empire’s Racism

The fabled curse of Ham emerged at an opportune moment for the new empire, for it facilitated cheap labor and the famous Arab raiding parties who tore through the African country with fierceness and terror that would cause even the hardest of stomachs to turn. We have in various historical reports instances of villages being attacked at night, the “non-believing” blacks being rounded up and enslaved, forced marches which claimed millions of lives due to malnourishment and the abuses of the captors. Slaves were forced to carry heavy ivory, and women were saddled with children and other goods, all of which belonged to their Muslim captors. We will return to the slave trade itself, but we must put a historical context on why the “curse of Ham” was so important to the early ethnology and religious doctrine of the Arab-Muslims and their imperial power grab.

In 889 AH, Ibn Qutaybah wrote that “Ham, son of Noah, was light-skinned and handsome. Then God Most High changed his complexion and that of his progeny [into black] because of the curse [invoked by] his father.” Elsewhere, he states, “They are ugly and misshapen, because they live in a hot country. The heat overcooks them in the womb, and curls their hair.” Thus the biblical curse that originally fell on Canaan, the youngest son of Ham, in the Arab-Muslim version of the myth, falls on Ham himself, whose descendants are not only cursed with servitude but also with the change of their color from light-skinned to black. We find many similar comments and statements in early and medieval Muslim sources which link the curse of Ham and the servile condition. It didn’t take long for the African to be reduced to a simile for slave labor, decreed by God, due to the anger of Noah and the curse he invoked.

As the empire grew so did the resentment for those of African descent in Arab society. Before and during the life of the Prophet, the Habashi or Abyssinians were looked upon favorably, and the Prophet even sent a caravan of his followers to Abyssinia for refuge from persecution. This favorable light didn’t last long after Abyssinia fell to the Muslims and the roles of empire and subject were reversed. Within 100 years of empire, the Muslim elite became increasingly arrogant and exclusivist toward non-Muslims and the ‘other’ in general. From racist Arab poetry and proverbs to spurious sayings attributed to the Prophet himself, racist tendencies became more and more common and eventually made their way into the social doctrines of Muslim societies to justify and legitimize religiously the idea that blacks and slaves were interchangeable words.

African Muslim jurists dealt with racist traditions and the attitudes which created and were supported by them by questioning their authenticity and insisting that they do not represent the teachings of the Prophet. The famous jurist Al-Jahiz, in his book, The Boast of the Blacks over the Whites, employs the same ethnocentric premises employed by the very racists he was addressing. Most African Muslims however rejected their black heritage altogether and adopted the seemingly superior Arab customs and attitudes characterized in Arab-Islamic tradition. In so doing, they also neglected their own wisdom traditions, deeming their history to be that of a cursed people. African Muslims sought to distance themselves from their pre-Islamic heritage by drawing sharp distinctions between themselves and their non-Muslim fellow Africans. The African jurist Ahmed Baba, for example, defends the chattel slavery by stating, “The Sudanese non-believers are like other non-believers whether they are Christians, Jews, Persians, Berbers, or any others who stick to non-belief and do not embrace Islam... there is no difference between all the non-believers in this respect. Whoever is captured in the condition of non-belief, it is legal to enslave him, whoever he might be, but not he who has converted to Islam voluntarily, from the beginning.”

Some of this can be attributed to Muslim geographers and travelers who ventured into Africa for various reasons and wrote about what they experienced. They emphasized nudity, paganism, cannibalism, and the primitive life of the black peoples in their writings to the extent that those who read them could not be blamed for fearing and loathing them. As Maqdisi wrote, “There is no marriage among them [genealogy or nasab being an issue of incredible importance to Arab-Muslims in particular]; the child does not know his father, and they eat human flesh--but God knows best. As for the Zanji, they are people of black color, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence.”

Similarly, studies on the image of blacks in medieval Persian literature reveal that in both Arab and Persian writings, blacks are depicted as stupid, untruthful, vicious, sexually unbridled, ugly and distorted, excessively merry, and easily affected by music or drink. Nasir al-Din Tusi (d.1274 CE), a famous Iranian philosopher, wrote: “If various kinds of men are taken and one placed after another, like the Negro from Zanzibar, in the South-most countries, the Negro does not differ from the animal in anything except the fact that his hands have been lifted from the earth, except for what God wishes. Many have seen that the ape is more capable of being trained than the Negro, and more intelligent.”

Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406CE) added that blacks are “only humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings.” The reason for their characteristic “levity, excitability, and great emotionalism,” according to Ibn Khaldun, is “due to the expansion and diffusion of the animal spirit” in them. Ibn Khaldun disagrees with the mythological curse of Ham and attributes their “deficiencies” to the climate of Africa and their being “overcooked in the womb.” Other renowned Muslim thinkers, such as Sa’id al-Andalusi (d. 1070CE) wrote that blacks are “More like animals than men,” and that “the rule of virtue and stability in judgment” is lacking amongst them, such noble qualities being replaced by “foolishness and ignorance.” Even such luminaries as Ibn Sina considered blacks to be “people who are by their very nature slaves.”

In time, certain conventional descriptions emerged which became general stereotypes for all of the various ethnic groups that Muslims encountered. For instance, the Arabs had generosity and courage; Persians, statecraft and civility; Greeks, philosophers and artists; Indians, magicians and conjurers; while the Chinese were the makers of furniture and gadgets. Blacks were hardworking and somewhat simple but gifted with exuberance and a sense of rhythm. Turks were impetuous fighting men. With only minor changes to these categorizations these became standard in the discussions of the various ethnic groups both within and without the polity of Islam.

The African Slave Trade in the Muslim World

To further understand how racist philosophy made its way into the thinking of Muslims right up to today, we need to examine the African slave trade as it took place in the Muslim world. It is important to note that in classic Sunni thought, kufr was, according to the doctrine of jihad as it was codified and crystallized under the expanding empire of Islam, synonymous with servitude. After all the traditional Muslim ideology of slavery is closely linked to the doctrine of military jihad. The creation or resurgence of the mythology of Ham also made dark-skinned people synonymous with servitude in light-skinned Muslim thinking. This went so far that eventually the term abd (slave) went through a semantic development and came to specifically refer to “black slave” while light-skinned slaves were referred to as mamluks. And further on in later usage, the Arabic word abd came to mean ‘black man’ of whatever status.

The African slave trade in the Muslim world may be compared with that of the West only to the extent that Muslims gave it scriptural legitimacy. The comparison fades when measured against the brutality of Western, particularly American, slavery.

Yet, even the scriptural legitimacy is limited. In classic Islamic interpretations, it is common for the interpreter to divorce the Qur’an from its social-historical context and to interpret it according to contemporary social and linguistic developments.

It is important to distinguish between two forms of slavery: the one mentioned in the Qur’an, defined as domestic or economic slavery, and chattel slavery. The distinction is critical since slavery takes on many guises depending upon the extent of the development, infrastructure and the political clout of a particular nation has.

Whether it be sweatshops in China, or wage slavery in Mexico or elsewhere, slavery is something that human beings have never been able to avoid. Even the United States, which held one of the most abusive slave institutions in recent history, continues to profit heavily from slave labor in various countries. The Qur’an deals with its own form of slavery--a form based upon the system of guardianship whereby an individual who has no tribe to protect them and provide for them will enter into a contract of slavery to a particular master in exchange for upkeep and provisions.

Although the Qur’an doesn’t prohibit slavery, it does make it clear that slavery is not the ideal relationship between people of higher and lower economic standing and that the moral trajectory would ultimately result in its abolition.

Many of the Muslims who followed the first generation, however, did not see it this way, and before long the institution was transformed to what can be termed as pure chattel slavery, where the slave was owned without any concern for their own autonomy or rights. The emergence of the four ‘orthodox’ schools of law in Islam further crystallized this relationship between slave and master by giving the master certain rights which would even allow them to circumvent limitations imposed upon them by the Prophet himself. Having transformed the very definition of slavery, and backed by the shari’a which permitted the taking of free men as slaves, provided they were non-Muslims, allowed for some of the most brutal conquests of Africa that land has ever known. Because Muslims were unable to see any qualitative value in African culture, expression and society and because they couldn’t contend with alternative forms of religion and their own superficial claims to having exclusive possession of the truth (a claim which the Qur’an itself quite astonishingly refutes), the pillaging and exploitation of African people continued for centuries.

No one knows how many Africans were sold into slavery throughout the Middle East, but it is fair to put it at a level higher than that of the Americas because of the length of time during which it was practiced. Islam is certainly tainted with over a millennium of illegal slave trade. Illegal because it was made “legal” only by the redefining of slavery as it existed and was tolerated during the life of the Prophet, and because the doctrine which serviced the ideology of slavery in Muslim thought is a blasphemy before God, who defines Himself as the Just.

One of the most tragic facts is that Mecca, the geographic heart of the Muslim community, was one of the largest slave markets in the Muslim world all the way up until the Twentieth Century when the standards of the international community, championed by the West, came to inform Muslims that chattel slavery is a violation against dignity, humanity and their own standing in global affairs. We find in historical sources that slaves were being captured in East Africa and being taken to Mecca for sale during the pilgrimage. From there they were distributed all over the world. It was a custom for pilgrims to buy, sell and trade slaves while fulfilling their fifth pillar and this went on to the extent that the term “slave market” and the name of the city of Mecca became synonymous. Many unsuspecting free people were taken on the pilgrimage by high-ranking Muslims and sold or arrested on trumped up charges, ultimately ending up as victims of the notorious Meccan slave trade. In fact, slaves have been reported as being sold as late as 1960 in Saudi Arabia, and many more cases are reported in Sudan.

Sudan is of particular interest because the Muslim North and the non-Muslim South have been engaged in civil war for 20 years as a direct result of the dark-skinned Arabs of Northern Sudan and their long history of enslaving and displacing their non-Muslim brothers to the South and selling them in the Middle Eastern slave markets. Here Arabs don’t deserve all the blame, since there are plenty of studies which prove that African themselves were also engaging is slave raids and that after the conversion of some powerful African tribes to Islam they carried out ‘jihads’ against their former tribal enemies, this time backed by religious legitimacy.


Breaking the Curse of Ham

Racism remains a powerful force in both the East, Mid-East and the West, and this history is intended to shed light on the origins of racist philosophy as it is hard-wired in the psychology of those who inherit this evil from their parents and society. I have personally been in gatherings where immigrant Muslims glowing with supposed piety and reserve feel that they can relate to me by slandering blacks, either because I myself am white or because it distances them from the immigrant experience of inferiority. It is best not to be the lowest man on the totem pole.

After the events of 9/11 and the Islamophobia which is now taking the West by storm, many formerly racist Arabs or Indo-Pakistanis have gotten a good dose of what it is like to be persecuted because of one’s ethnicity. In today’s America, as defined by the corporate media and popular culture, people of African descent are even more trusted than those of Middle Eastern descent.

It is tragic that Muslims entertain these racist and ethnocentric ideas to begin with. The cultural barriers between Africans, Arabs, Europeans, Indians, Chinese, whatever are real, and we sometimes have conflicting needs and goals in life. The problem here is that we are not taking Islam seriously enough to break with clearly evil traditions of regarding each other.

Do we really want an “Islam” which is divided into inferior and superior races based upon the irrelevancy of where the Prophet came from? Granted, the Prophet was an Arab, but an argument could be constructed, if ethnocentrism was our goal, to say that God sent the Prophet amongst the Arabs because they were the most barbarous and ignorant of people. Anyway we construct the discourse, when we allow ethnocentric tones to dilute it we do violence to the message and we neglect our dignity and humanity as God’s vicegerents.

To break traditions which contradict a normative reading of the Qur’an is certainly meritorious if not obligatory. To break this supposed Curse of Ham is a jihad worth engaging because Islam, in its global sense, needs to regain some moral high ground in an era of suicide bombings, terrorism, authoritarianism, despotism, and retrogression.

If this embattled and fractured global community we call the umma is to command any moral or ethical standard at all, then it must begin with the essentials of equality. Unity is essential to a worldview based on the Qur’anic doctrine of Divine Unity (tawhîd), and unity must begin with the recognition of equality and the emphasis on similarities as opposed to differences. We must not allow our different guises, needs and expressions to become differences between each other. The failure of our community to lead the world in moral standards can be linked to the decree of God that we, as Muslims, have failed to maintain egalitarian standards of equality. This may be the reason why we are reviled and hated, attacked and scorned, all over the world.

If some Muslims think this means we are on the right track and that our religion requires us to be fought and hated, they are following a different religion than that taught by our Prophet and that which is mentioned in the Qur’an. It is true that the wicked will fight against Truth, but what happens when we become the wicked, still believing that we carry Truth? Or does the fact that we carry Truth remove from us the liabilities of our actions?

The Qur’an maintains that humans bring upon themselves their own suffering. Nothing has brought on the suffering of the umma more than our lack of unity, which is a result of our inequality and our lack of appreciation for our differences.

As the Qur’an maintains: “O People! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and female, and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.” (Qur'an 49:13)

Copyright 2003 Muslim WakeUp!
The World's Most Popular Muslim Online Magazine
http://muslimwakeup.com
Email: info@muslimwakeup.com

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Perhaps our reference or understanding of slavery is based upon the Western concept as opposed to Slavery in Islaam.

See, for example, the following q and a session from sunnipath.......


Sex with slaves and women's rights

www.sunnipath.com



Wa `alaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh:



The following is a response on the issues of female slaves

in Islam in reply to two sets of questions.





THE FIRST SET OF QUESTIONS



I came across tafseer of the beginning verses of Surat-Al-Mu'minoon (Al-Mawdudi),



[The Yusuf Ali translation reads, "who abstain

from sex, except with those joined in the marriage

bond [spouses], or (the captives) whom their right

hands possess,-for (in their case) they are free of

blame."]


and I was kind of shocked and surprised that he states it is permissable for a man to have sexual intercourse with female slaves in his possession, in addition to his legal wives (v.5-6).






ANSWER:




WAS.


Slavery is unlawful (1) in the absence of the Caliph of the Muslims

AND

(2) unless it results from captives following a lawful war.



Even so,

there was always the alternative to

{let the captives go free, either with or without any ransom}

(Quran 47:4).



Furthermore,


the Ottoman Caliphate had declared - LONG before the

US Abolition - that it prohibited slavery in its realm.






Further preliminary remarks before addressing the questions:



It should be clear that Islam raised the status of slaves

higher than that of free men in unislamic societies

even by modern standards. The author of _The House of

Saud_, an American journalist, recounts how the staff

and management of the New York Waldorf-Astoria hotel

were horrified that King Faysal in an early US visit

had not only allowed his black servant into the state

dining room but had seated him at his very table - a

"white-only" table in a "white-only" room! They had no

idea that even slaves in Islam had to be FED and CLOTHED

with the same food and clothing as their owner as the

Prophet, upon him peace, had stipulated in his "last

pilgrimage" speech:



"And your slaves! see that you feed them such

food as you eat yourselves and dress them with

what you yourself wear. And if they commit a

mistake which you are not inclined to forgive

then sell them, for they are the servants of

Allah and are not to be tormented!"



In another hadith he said, upon him blessings and peace:



"Be kind to slaves as to your own children...and

those that say their prayers are your brethren."





A contemporary commentator said:



"The masters were obliged not to put slaves under

hardship; slaves were not to be tortured, abused or

treated unjustly. They could marry among themselves

- with their master's permission - or with free men

or women! They could appear as witnesses and participate

with free men in all affairs. Many of them were appointed

as governors, commanders of army and administrators. In

the eyes of Islam, a pious slave has precedence over an

impious free man." Al-Tabataba'i, Tafsir (16:338-358).



What ignorant times we live in, in which a nation that

used a legally-enforceable concept of "white-only"

since its inception and then went on to use it for two

centuries, now crusades against Islam and the rest of

the world over self-proclaimed civilizational values.



Islam restored dignity to slaves and enhanced their

social status both by ancient and modern standards.

Islam made no distinction between a slave or a free

man, all were treated with equality. It was this fact

that attracted non-Muslim slaves to Islam in droves.



As someone said, it is sad to see that those who never

cease to be vociferous in their unjust criticism of

Islam remain blind to this principle of equality when

even in this age there are countries where laws are

made that discriminate against the vast majority of

population to keep them in practical servitude.



As for the allegations of slavery made by the US and UK

against Islamic Sudan they are part of a joint missionary

and government rogue propaganda campaign against an

Islamic government which has always condemned and

actively repressed instances of abuse in inter-tribal

warfare, while there has never been anything remotely

near a full-fledged slave trade, cf. the Sudan Foundation

papers by David Hoile posted in full:



http://www.sufo.demon.co.uk/politics.htm





------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What follows concerns the Fiqhi rulings pertaining to

the slave period EVEN IF THE PRESENT TENSE IS USED.





QUESTIONS CONTINUED


I'm far too ignorant to make judgments about the verse and that hukum taken from it, so I wanted to ask if you could explain the verse, if that opinion is generally accepted and why. Do these verses refer solely to men, or women Believers also?




ANSWER (continued):


These verses refer to the permissibility of a man

for intercourse with his unmarried female slaves

without having to marry them. Such an option was not

available to women owners of male slaves nor to men

owners of married female slaves.




QUESTION CONTINUED

Is it in order to fulfill his desires and avoid any unlawful fitna? (this is hard for me to understand, seeing as how taqwa, self-restraint, and other things are so emphasized in Islam)




ANSWER CONTINUED



His and her desires, yes, but within certain parameters

including rights. This will be detailed insha Allah.



However, it seems that intercourse with slaves was

probably considered a method of contraceptive sexual

enjoyment through coitus interruptus (`azl), since

the slave owner could practice `azl without prior

permission from his slave mate while he could not do

so with his free wife without prior permission from her.

And if the contraception intended by this `azl failed

and the slave woman still bore a child from her master,

her child was automatically freed and obtained a son or

daughter's rights including inheritance. In addition,

the mother herself could no longer be sold and was freed

upon the owner's death.



From the slave's perspective, the above scenario could

have formed an accepted kind of lawful gamble from which

she stood to gain much more than to lose. This could

be problematized with the claim that "the cost of freedom

is therefore rape" but such is just an inflammatory

rephrasing of the truism that the cost of a war captive's

life is her imprisonment; emancipation from which is a

dramatically enhanced possibility in the above scenario.



Consider some more the dynamic of manumission in Islam.

It took the French until the 1780's and 1790's through

their "Revolution" and "Terror" to finally decide that

any slave that steps into French territory automatically

becomes free; but Islam had already said, 11 centuries

earlier: a free parent's newborn from a slave is free

and that newborn inherits from his or her free parent.



In addition, Islam gave all slaves the inalienable right to

buy themselves out, either on payment of an agreed sum or on

completion of service for an agreed period. The legal term

for this is mukataba and the slave party to such a written

contract was called a mukatab or mukataba.



{And those of your slaves that seek a writing (of

emancipation), write it for them if you are aware of any

goodness in them, and bestow upon them of the wealth of

Allah that He has bestowed upon you} (Quran 24:33).



{Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who

collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled,

and to *free the captives and the debtors,* and for the

cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarers; a duty imposed

by Allah. Allah is knower, Wise} (Quran 9:60).



{Righteous is he who believes in Allah and the Last Day

and the angels and the Scripture and the Prophets; and

gives his wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to

orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who

ask, and to set slaves free} (Quran 2:177).



Note that the above verses stipulate that when a slave wants

emancipation the master not only has to agree to it but is

also directed to help the slave from his own wealth and from

alms, which includes the public treasury (bayt al-mal), the

only provision being the satisfaction that the slave would

live a respectable life after earning his or her freedom!



In addition, if a non-Muslim slave accepted Islam before

their masters, they would become free automatically. If the

slave became blind or handicapped he would also become free.



In addition to these compulsory ways of emancipation, voluntary

emancipation of slaves was declared as the purest form of

charity and included providing the freedmen with sufficient

means to earn their livelihood respectably. Thus, Islam is the

first and only religion that has prescribed liberation of

slaves as a virtue and a condition of genuine faith.





QUESTION CONTINUED

>How is intercourse permissable without a marriage

>contract binding them?




ANSWER CONTINUED


Because the contract in place is that of property

which includes the right to sexual enjoyment but

excludes the abuses used under all other historical

forms of slavery such as mutilation, inhumane labor,

or killing as was the rule in Egyptian, Greek, and Roman

times, and the cruelest of all forms, unparalleled in

human history, the United States Transatlantic slave trade.(*)



(*) Incidentally, many scholars estimate that over

20 percent of Africans brought in bondage to both

American continents and the Caribbean were Muslim.




QUESTION CONTINUED


If the man then later frees the slave-woman, and perhaps she has a child, would the man need to marry her? Is he still liable for child-support? Does he still raise his children as a father? Is the man allowed to do this with slaves that are not Muslim? (if so, under what conditions?) and is this woman entitled to any inheritance from him? I was under the impression that a person can only inherit by either marriage or blood-ties. wouldn't she be considered a "concubine"?



ANSWER CONTINUED


Yes, the word concubine literally means bed-mate and

applies to any female slave that shares the bed of

her master. The man is liable to support any child

of his and whatever need of its mother that is related

to that liability. He is not obliged to marry her but is

definitelly held to the responsibilities of a father

including inheritability whether the mother is a Muslim

or not, her child being Muslim. Nor is she entitled

to any inheritance unless he decides to marry her AND

she is Muslim. Allah knows best.

[abaleada]

Slavery still exists today in the US. http://www.ciw-online.org Salaries of a few pennies for a tonne of tomatoes (used by Taco Bell in its food) is slave wages. The indentured servant system contrived by the coyotes on the border between Mexico and Occupied Atzlan is slavery. Our sweatshops and forced prostitutes are slaves.

Our prisons are slave shops.
http://www.prisonactivist.org/crisis/evans-goldberg.html
http://www.thetalkingdrum.com/prison.html
http://www.aclu.org/Prisons/Prisonslist.cfm?c=126

The most recent case of down-to-earth real live actual Harriet Tubman Sojourner Truth slavery was discovered in the early- to mid-1900's when a household was discovered to be holding slaves and forcing them to do errands, household service, agricultural work, etc. for free. They werefound in the 1930's and freed in the 1960's; and Emma Clark (one of the freed slaves) just died last year. This all happened in Louisiana. The landowner was a KKK klansman who was in good with the sherrif and the rest of the wealthy elite in the area. http://www.kpftarchive.org click here for november - it is the African Journal programme toward the end of the month.
-Abbie

Originally posted by dour
Slavery in America is illegal and is punishable Crime. Prisioners are in prision becuse they were found quilty of breaking the law, and are relesed when their time is done. What else should you do with people who break the law? Kill them?

Slavery is no longer accepted in our society. This however does not mean people don't break the law. There is no excuse for slavery, and everyone knows that. I never met one person who supported slavery in America.

[alam_biwi]

As salam aleikum,

I just read a thread in current events about it and also read in our daily newspaper that this Sadr said "keep female soldiers als slaves". To me it sounds scary.
know that slavery is allowed in Islam...somewhere I read something about it but cant remember.
Under which circumstances is it practised? What does it mean to this women? Are there still countries where slavery is normal?
I personally dont believe that slavery is a good thing. But does it mean that I doubt in Islam when I dont believe in this slavery thing?
Please only serious and honest answeres!

wa salam Amina

[ClashCityRocker]

salaams

I know that during the Prophet Muhammad's time, peace be upon him, he always encouraged Arabs and Muslims to FREE SLAVES.

I am against slavery of women, since we all know that they are used as sex toys.

it's disgusting and pathetic.

I hope all people, whoever they are, who keep female slaves and treat them like sex toys, go to Hell, rot and burn in the Hellfire.

[marjan]

they will, don't worry about that.

[Ebony]

alam_biwi

if u hve access to the Muslim forum, you should be able to find a thread there on this issue.

It caused quite a commotion!

Ws

[ClashCityRocker]

Bilal is probably the most famous slave of all in Islamic history. the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, set him free and adopted him as a son. not as a son, but like a son.

i am against slavery.

why keep slaves, when you can just hire people to work for you? slavery is cheap and tacky. hired help is not.

[marjan]

Some people who are being paid a pittance are in fact the slaves of Capitalism!

[ClashCityRocker]

i agree

[Bilal]

I am not slave :mad: :badguy:

Originally posted by ClashCityRocker
Bilal is probably the most famous slave of all in Islamic history.

[Ebony]

she didnt mean u
she meant Bilal (ra) :p

[JiHaD_JoE]

Originally posted by Bilal
I am not slave :mad: :badguy:

the original Bilal ;)

[frank chu]

originally posted by marjan
Some people who are being paid a pittance are in fact the slaves of Capitalism!
Please define "slaves" and "Capitalism".

[dhakiyya]

Aren't we all slaves of Allah though?
or at least trying to be?

I thought the only reason slavery wasn't banned outright in the Qur'an was because all the slaves at the time would have had no support at all. Instead people were encouraged to free slaves, and also to treat them kindly and ensure their welfare. Correct me if I'm wrong. Also the hadith mentioned earlier shows Muhammad doing just that.

[ClashCityRocker]

we are not talking about being slaves of Allah, we are talking about MATERIALISTIC SLAVERY, where humans are snapped up by other humans, and forced to be slaves.

its disgusting.

[Peace]

see previous discussion here:

http://wwww.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=21730&perpage=20

[reachin'out]

Originally posted by alam_biwi
As salam aleikum,

I just read a thread in current events about it and also read in our daily newspaper that this Sadr said "keep female soldiers als slaves". To me it sounds scary.
know that slavery is allowed in Islam...somewhere I read something about it but cant remember.
Under which circumstances is it practised? What does it mean to this women? Are there still countries where slavery is normal?
I personally dont believe that slavery is a good thing. But does it mean that I doubt in Islam when I dont believe in this slavery thing?
Please only serious and honest answeres!

wa salam Amina

Slavery in Islaam (http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5973&highlight=Slavery+AND+Islam+OR+Islaam) (see second page).

[Peace]

Originally posted by AbuMubarak
Islaam however laid down principles for an immediate improved state of affairs and a gradual but total eradication of the evil...

Although Islaam recognized slavery it aimed undoubtedly to abolish it

So why don't our scholars now make Slavery 'explicitly' illegal in the Shari'ah - in the true spirit of Islam?

If this isn't done then it leaves the door open for some misguided Muslims to take slaves (as happened in Afghansitan and Sudan)

Hassan

[Peace]

Originally posted by reachin'out
Slavery in Islaam (http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5973&highlight=Slavery+AND+Islam+OR+Islaam) (see second page).

From that thread:

Originally posted by AbuMubarak
By Ismail Adam Patel
The practice of slavery is co-eval with human existence... Islaam however laid down principles for an immediate improved state of affairs and a gradual but total eradication of the evil... Although Islaam recognized slavery it aimed undoubtedly to abolish it

Which is what I have been saying for a long time!

The fact that Islam allowed it at the time doesn't mean that Islam sought to maintain it for all time, but only to deal with the reality at the time and pave the way for it's eventual abolition. Something we must now make EXPLICIT in Shari'ah - otherwise the door will be open for some to justify slavery (as happened in Afghansitan and Sudan to name two fairly recent examples).

Hassan

[shamsery]

“Of course Islam permits you to keep a female hostage as a slave and have free sex with her.”

Key word: “have free sex with her”

My question, does Islam allow to have free sex with sex with the hostages with out marriage?

[alam_biwi]

As salam aleikum :)

thank you very much for your posts. I already read the link. It was very helpful. You all are too nice here. Im glad that I found this site.
And Im glad that slavery is not encouraged in Islam.

wa salam Amina

[Qassami]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
(as happened in Afghansitan and Sudan to name two fairly recent examples).

Hassan

There you go again, spoiling what you said, with sheer Western slander :rolleyes:

[caliph]

Care to provide any evidence of slavery in Afghanistan Hassan?

Salvery in Islam is not to be mistaken with slavery as practiced in early America. Think of it more as hired help.

Of course, the fact that you can take slaves as the spoils of war can never be over-turned or abolished but since you are under an obligation to be fair and encouraged to free your slaves, I don't see what the problem is.

[reachin'out]

Originally posted by shamsery
“Of course Islam permits you to keep a female hostage as a slave and have free sex with her.”

Key word: “have free sex with her”

My question, does Islam allow to have free sex with sex with the hostages with out marriage?

I don't understand the question. Do you mean

Does Islam allow Muslim men to have free sex with female hostages without formal ties of marriage?

The men have to own the hostages before having sex with them. That is, the captured women have to be assigned to them as booty, and thereafter they are responsible for them as if they were married to them. Read through the thread again concerning the similarity of owning a concubine with the institution of marriage. The first type of partnership is one of possession, whereas the second kind is between two free people. Only in the latter partnership is a man limited to contracting with four free women. He can contract to have as many concubines as he wishes, by right of ownership.

If he doesn't own the captive/hostage, he can't have sex with her.

Jamilah

[Qassami]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
So why don't our scholars now make Slavery 'explicitly' illegal in the Shari'ah - in the true spirit of Islam?

If this isn't done then it leaves the door open for some misguided Muslims to take slaves (as happened in Afghansitan and Sudan)

Hassan

Read this,

Originally posted by Sunni
As for the allegations of slavery made by the US and UK against Islamic Sudan they are part of a joint missionary and government rogue propaganda campaign against an Islamic government which has always condemned and actively repressed instances of abuse in inter-tribal warfare, while there has never been anything remotely near a full-fledged slave trade, cf. the Sudan Foundation papers by David Hoile posted in full:

http://www.sufo.demon.co.uk/politics.htm

And may Allah ta'ala guide us away from self-imposed misguidance and ignorance!

[shamsery]

Originally posted by reachin'out


Does Islam allow Muslim men to have free sex with female hostages without formal ties of marriage?

The men have to own the hostages before having sex with them.
Jamilah


Yeas I mean that please.
If it is even own as booty.
Marriage established relation in between the persons for Body and soul.
I may be wrong but I think in that way, relation of body and soul.

[Peace]

Originally posted by caliph
Care to provide any evidence of slavery in Afghanistan Hassan?

Salvery in Islam is not to be mistaken with slavery as practiced in early America. Think of it more as hired help.

Of course, the fact that you can take slaves as the spoils of war can never be over-turned or abolished but since you are under an obligati