Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I have seen many attacking Islam and the Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), due to the Arab/Muslim slave trade and in a way seeking to defame Islam and the Prophet. I do not know much about this slave trade and for the benefit of us all, as well as the sake of defending the honor of our prophet and Islam, how can we as Muslims approach the matter of this Arab/Muslim slave trade and give our input in its regard.

I would highly appreciate any books, articles, and whatever material or sources that can help me in understanding the concept of slavery and Islam. I have heard of Jonathan A C Brown's book and hope to purchase it soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

I have seen many attacking Islam and the Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), due to the Arab/Muslim slave trade and in a way seeking to defame Islam and the Prophet. I do not know much about this slave trade and for the benefit of us all, as well as the sake of defending the honor of our prophet and Islam, how can we as Muslims approach the matter of this Arab/Muslim slave trade and give our input in its regard.

I would highly appreciate any books, articles, and whatever material or sources that can help me in understanding the concept of slavery and Islam. I have heard of Jonathan A C Brown's book and hope to purchase it soon.

He has multiple lectures about slavery as well, I've watched a couple, they are on YouTube. I think that Daniel Haqiqatjou has also dealt with the issue.

One thing that you should avoid is the hypocrisy of many of the liberal Muslims who think that Westerners today should be held accountable for the slave trade, but that we in the Muslims community for some reason should not. Even though being a slave in the Muslim world was often no joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ali_Hussain said:

being a slave in the Muslim world was often no joke.

Can you elaborate brother

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mohammad313Ali said:

Can you elaborate brother

From what I understand in many cases the men were castrated (or sent to mines or used to row the ships) and the women were used as sex slaves. People can argue the extent of it, I would hope that it wasn't the majority of cases but based on a couple of lectures that I've seen, that is the claim. 

The issue that I raised about Muslims pointing the finger at Westerners is that the Barbary slave trade involved Moorish pirates raiding towns as far away as Britain and Iceland and the numbers may have reached the millions who were sold into slavery in Africa (and the Middle East)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ali_Hussain said:

From what I understand in many cases the men were castrated (or sent to mines or used to row the ships) and the women were used as sex slaves. People can argue the extent of it, I would hope that it wasn't the majority of cases but based on a couple of lectures that I've seen, that is the claim. 

The issue that I raised about Muslims pointing the finger at Westerners is that the Barbary slave trade involved Moorish pirates raiding towns as far away as Britain and Iceland and the numbers may have reached the millions who were sold into slavery in Africa (and the Middle East)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade

The one million figure has been mentionned to br abused, but again these people were litteral pirates, so them having slavery is not suprising, pirates are litterally terrorists in waters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, HusseinAbbas said:

The one million figure has been mentionned to br abused, but again these people were litteral pirates, so them having slavery is not suprising, pirates are litterally terrorists in waters.

Yeah but their slaves still reached the slave markets of the Muslim countries.

Even in the case of European slave trading, there were always middle men as well, it wasn't the case that the British or the Spanish monarchies were directly responsible for capturing the slaves. Unless I suppose they conquered a country and enslaved the natives as the Belgians did in the Congo.

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ali_Hussain So brother in regards to these slaves, Muslims were not acting in accordance with Islam and the teachings of the Prophet, correct? And instead implemented these trades, due to their corrupt caliphs at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

@Ali_Hussain So brother in regards to these slaves, Muslims were not acting in accordance with Islam and the teachings of the Prophet, correct? And instead implemented these trades, due to their corrupt caliphs at the time.

I don't know, I wouldn't go down that road of argumentation, I would try to establish the fact that slavery has been the norm among humans since the dawn of time and normalise it. 

To be honest looking into this subject requires a strong stomach because we have been influenced into thinking it is the worst thing in the world, and many people do loose their faith when confronted by the reality of slavery in Islamic history.

With regards to the argument that you are suggesting, the issue is that it is a bit dishonest because the slaves that the imams owned obviously came from the same system that you would be arguing is not in accordance with Islam. So if someone brought that up to you, you couldn't get away with the usual copout line of 'one rule for them, one for us' 

What you should do is watch one or two of the videos by Dr Jonathan Brown, and then once you are more accepting of the concept, read this article (it can be a bit of a difficult read) 

https://www.iqraonline.net/the-issue-of-slavery-in-contemporary-islam/

Check in the shiachat search engine for previous discussions on the topic, it has been discussed in some depth in the past.

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I meant was that the manner in which slavery was being practiced by those 'Muslims' was not in accordance to the way in which the Prophet and Imams advised and dealt with slaves.

I will share with you an insight from what a sister had shared with me in regards to slavery, the discussion also revolved around how a scholar said Jefferson was a white supremacist, because he was a slave owner, but she argued that Jefferson actually sought to implement a method similar to that taught by Islam.

''I want to start off by saying that obviously that anything that hurts someone’s free-will is strongly opposed and extremely wrong. In terms of US history though, all of ‘slavery’ was painted with one brush—being that it was against people’s freewill and so it was wrong. thus being anyone who owned a slave was wrong as well. I think people like Jefferson who feverishly advocated for human rights as a whole would not even fall close to this category. In fact, Jefferson was extremely close to Islam and took several concepts from Islam in establishing a nation. He was a believer in the oneness of God and understood the role of the government was to not undermine people’s freewill—in fact it should protect it.

This concept in Islam is most popularly seen in Imam Ali’s letter to Malik al-Ashtar. Jefferson also advocated that the government can’t truly be just if it is disconnected from the true source of Justice itself—being Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). John Adams (Jefferson’s rival) said "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

John Adams was a clear rival of Jefferson, advocating for a secular system. So now that we have established a history and understanding of Jefferson, I cannot think why Jefferson would be in the ownership of slaves who are there against their free will. I see it as two scenarios, 1) they were indentured slaves or 2) they allowed themselves to be the ‘slaves’ of Jefferson. Slaves those days, even when given freedom, were often captured again and then resold. Very few truly escaped the realm of slavery. Even accounts show freed black slaves were even forced back into slavery. If I was a Muslim in those days or even just a believer in God seeing those atrocities would actually make me want to exercise the Islamic allowance of slaves and require them if applicable to prevent their own human rights from being violated by others.

(For reference please look up the Reverse Underground railroads...where people kidnapped freed black slaves and brought them back down South). I think establishing and keeping the slaves actually could have saved the slaves themselves.

As for indentured servants/‘slaves’, these are people who live with the household and in return would do simple tasks such as cleaning dishes, cooking, etc. Or, they were given something and thus are indebted to that person and had a contract to work until the cost of the debt was equal. This a concept that is widely spread throughout cultures and nations. I actually think it could help the homeless problem in America—as those who are permanently homeless suffer from low IQ or mental illness/disability, making it almost impossible to comply with normal society. With indentured servants, they could live in your house and do tasks that are easier for them than obtaining a ‘real’ job, for example.

The 13th Amendment outlawed both slavery and indentured servants. This is actually when things start to become complicated and convoluted, attributing even indentured servants as permissible only when a crime has taken place. This actually didn’t free the slaves but instead forced them to assimilate into a society that were often mistreating them. Thus becomes the long struggle of the fight for not freedom, but anti-racism. This is also when the terms basically become interchangeable in US history—even though ‘slaves’ was a much more extreme especially in the hands of those people who wished ill.''

 --Hudan_Ahlulbayt (Instagram)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what sister @habib e najjaar also had to say in a separate thread on the topic of slavery and the Imams

Quote
We must know that this was an economic system that existed at the time all over the world. Islam did not forbid slavery, but regulated it so perfectly and seamlessly that it got phased out without the slaves in Islamic history ending up like the slaves in the americas: suddenly thrown out of a system with no support systems in place, thereby condemning them for eternity to be the downtrodden in society. On the other hand, where are the slaves of the Arab peninsula? They are not a distinct group that stick out like a sore thumb meaning they got fully amalgamated and absorbed into the societies they were formerly slaves of.

That's Islam for you, a religion of practicality, mercy and wisdom
 
In order for the Ahlul Bayt to be lessons in how to treat slaves and how not to, they would need to "own" some, otherwise they would look like people who are preaching an impracticality, something incapable of being achieved.

In my society, until quite recently we had slaves and can still "point out" some of our former slaves or their descendants. I know of living examples of slaves who refused to be freed and chose to remain with the families that owned them. If they could do this with ordinary families, think of how impossible it would be for one to want to leave the company of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) and get out of the maqaam ash-shareef of serving the best of creating. Rouhi wa nafsi lahum fidaa

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest No Slavery

Check out:

The Sale of Slaves in the Ottoman Empire: Markets and State Taxes on Slave Sales, Some Preliminary Considerations -- by Alan W. Fisher 

Download link: http://www.dlir.org/archive/orc-exhibit/items/show/collection/4/id/2713

It includes many descriptions of slave markets in Turkey by travelers and gives a good idea of how they were operating in the Muslim world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah sure, highlighting the Islamic recommendations on how slaves should be treated isn't a bad idea, but the kind of person who is debating this with you will be going off the principle that ownership of a human being is always bad, no matter how well they are treated.

Also I'm pretty sure slavery didn't get phased out due to Islamic regulations, the Europeans put pressure on the Arabs to stop doing it.

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

This is what sister @habib e najjaar also had to say in a separate thread on the topic of slavery and the Imams

 

Muslims didn't phase out slavery. The West made Muslims end it. On the other hand, it's true that Muslim societies were incredibly good at incorporating former slaves and children of slaves into society. Several Caliphs (and Imams) were sons of slave women, and freed slaves also rose to high positions.

But generally I would stay away from overly apologetic approaches like this if the goal is to 'defend' Islam against non-believers. This approach only works amongst Muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

I would stay away from overly apologetic approaches like this

What approach do you recommend brother

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ali_Hussain said:

ownership of a human being is always bad, no matter how well their are treated.

You could argue that slavery simply evolved into corporations? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vague Universals
21 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

''I want to start off by saying that obviously that anything that hurts someone’s free-will is strongly opposed and extremely wrong.

This is where the problem starts. These type of absolute vague statements are only made by people who haven't thought about these issues much. It only takes a moment to point out all the aspects of human life where "free-will" is "opposed" and "hurt" (what does that mean? she probably means restricted. you can't "hurt" free will literally, its not something that physically exists) or where different types of "human ownership" exist. Once you start pointing these areas out, then their inconsistencies begin to show, and they themselves start putting all sorts of conditions and restraints on their initial absolute-universal claims and then when you begin questioning them as to to moral justifications for why certain conditions are ok but not others, it eventually turns into a mess and it is more of an emotional argument than anything worthy of being called philosophical at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

You could argue that slavery simply evolved into corporations? 

Yes or that it is out and out still present, I believe that Apple use slave labour, Nike too maybe. 

Loads of prostitutes are people trafficked from Eastern Europe.

Chocolate is picked by children for next to nothing in Africa, slavery is obviously still present and we are all benefiting from it. Although the counter argument would be that in most of those cases, the people being exploited are probably glad to have the little salary that they receive, although in some cases they aren't allowed to leave their place of work, which is obviously worse than just being exploited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Guest Vague Universals said:

it eventually turns into a mess and it is more of an emotional argument than anything worthy of being called philosophical at that point.

How would you approach the matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am. not saying that I agree with everything in the following link (it was a long time ago that I last read it). The link also takes you to a pdf which is a full-blown text. Anyway when someone says the following about slavery I tend to think they are heading in the right direction:

Quote

If we are searching for the phenomenon of slavery, what are we really looking for? Is it the label ‘slave’ that matters? Or is it the reality of the condition behind it? The soldiers and administrators of China’s Manchu Qing dynasty (1644-1912) were technically slaves (aha) of the dynasty and proudly referred to themselves as such. The title of slave was later applied to anyone of Manchu descent in Qing China. But the word had no link to the reality of any servile condition.[2] Up through the 1800s, the upper administration of the Ottoman Empire was in the hands of people technically classified as kul (privileged sultanic slaves) who had more power and esteem than their free counterparts.[3]

https://yaqeeninstitute.org/jonathan-brown/slavery-and-islam-what-is-slavery/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

What I meant was that the manner in which slavery was being practiced by those 'Muslims' was not in accordance to the way in which the Prophet and Imams advised and dealt with slaves.

I will share with you an insight from what a sister had shared with me in regards to slavery, the discussion also revolved around how a scholar said Jefferson was a white supremacist, because he was a slave owner, but she argued that Jefferson actually sought to implement a method similar to that taught by Islam.

''I want to start off by saying that obviously that anything that hurts someone’s free-will is strongly opposed and extremely wrong. In terms of US history though, all of ‘slavery’ was painted with one brush—being that it was against people’s freewill and so it was wrong. thus being anyone who owned a slave was wrong as well. I think people like Jefferson who feverishly advocated for human rights as a whole would not even fall close to this category. In fact, Jefferson was extremely close to Islam and took several concepts from Islam in establishing a nation. He was a believer in the oneness of God and understood the role of the government was to not undermine people’s freewill—in fact it should protect it.

This concept in Islam is most popularly seen in Imam Ali’s letter to Malik al-Ashtar. Jefferson also advocated that the government can’t truly be just if it is disconnected from the true source of Justice itself—being Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). John Adams (Jefferson’s rival) said "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

John Adams was a clear rival of Jefferson, advocating for a secular system. So now that we have established a history and understanding of Jefferson, I cannot think why Jefferson would be in the ownership of slaves who are there against their free will. I see it as two scenarios, 1) they were indentured slaves or 2) they allowed themselves to be the ‘slaves’ of Jefferson. Slaves those days, even when given freedom, were often captured again and then resold. Very few truly escaped the realm of slavery. Even accounts show freed black slaves were even forced back into slavery. If I was a Muslim in those days or even just a believer in God seeing those atrocities would actually make me want to exercise the Islamic allowance of slaves and require them if applicable to prevent their own human rights from being violated by others.

(For reference please look up the Reverse Underground railroads...where people kidnapped freed black slaves and brought them back down South). I think establishing and keeping the slaves actually could have saved the slaves themselves.

As for indentured servants/‘slaves’, these are people who live with the household and in return would do simple tasks such as cleaning dishes, cooking, etc. Or, they were given something and thus are indebted to that person and had a contract to work until the cost of the debt was equal. This a concept that is widely spread throughout cultures and nations. I actually think it could help the homeless problem in America—as those who are permanently homeless suffer from low IQ or mental illness/disability, making it almost impossible to comply with normal society. With indentured servants, they could live in your house and do tasks that are easier for them than obtaining a ‘real’ job, for example.

The 13th Amendment outlawed both slavery and indentured servants. This is actually when things start to become complicated and convoluted, attributing even indentured servants as permissible only when a crime has taken place. This actually didn’t free the slaves but instead forced them to assimilate into a society that were often mistreating them. Thus becomes the long struggle of the fight for not freedom, but anti-racism. This is also when the terms basically become interchangeable in US history—even though ‘slaves’ was a much more extreme especially in the hands of those people who wished ill.''

 --Hudan_Ahlulbayt (Instagram)

 

It's disappointing to see someone trying to put a spin on slavery to make it seem as if it could somehow be a moral option versus freedom.

Thomas Jefferson had hundreds of slaves, even some just children. And they didn't just hop in their boats at free will and show up at the plantation in the morning ready to work their normal 9-5. They were captured, beaten and purchased by the white man. And that purchase plays into the system and fuels the capture of even more slaves.

He was a 40 year old white man, who, rather than turn to a wife, had extramarital sex with a teenage slave (which of course she would be in no position to say yes or no, and for all practical purposes, rapes his slave (or slaves).

Jefferson of course was running a business, a plantation. His slaves weren't free to pick and choose what jobs they wanted. They didn't have freedom to leave the plantation to go to their own property on their own land. They didn't have vacation or sick days, Jefferson wasn't giving them a pension at age 65. Slaves couldn't start their own business or their own plantation. 

And if they didn't like it, they would be whipped. Some most likely were killed, tortured. Treated like animals, treated like an inferior species that was only good to serve their white masters. Slaves were literally bred like cattle, picking the strongest slave to have sex for offspring of greater value. Sometimes even subjected to fighting one another for entertainment.

And Jefferson had these same views. They were viewed as inferior, biologically. As a commodity, to be bred, to make more money for the plantation. 

Jefferson wasn't out there running long days in the tobacco fields. He had slaves do it.

Slavery was simply immoral, and yes maybe some slaves had higher ranks than others. Some slaves were house-slaves, that may have slept in beds. Some slaves were managers of lesser slaves.

But ultimately, they were all slaves, encompassed in the same abusive and racist system. 

The founding fathers of America where a part of this system who acted in a sinful manner and it just is what it is.

And thankfully, people eventually came to terms with this reality and abolished slavery. As they became more aware of the humanity of these negros, they made the choice to stop and to fight and to die for freedom of the black man. Countless people literally have their lives so that blacks could be free.

But Jefferson wasn't one of those people. He played into this same sinful system.

Early Americans also massacred native Americans. It's sad, but just because it upsets us, doesn't mean we need to make up stories about how Jefferson was a hero and how all his slaves in reality loved him and didn't want freedom. This is all just some nonsense narrative from people who sympathize with the founding fathers. Some people try to paint Robert e Lee and Stonewall Jackson in a positive light (like Donald Trump), but sometimes you just have to let sin be sin.

Edited by iCenozoic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we try to paint slavery in a positive light and try to find ways to make it out to be something morally righteous, what we are really doing is we are cracking open the door for it's return.

We are slowly opening the door, to let slavery back into our lives. But we don't want to open the door too quickly, because in truth, we all know the monster that resides on the other side.

ISIS had some kind of view of a morally righteous slavery. They took a chance and they opened that door. And what we saw was an utter abomination, as ISIS fighters took yazidi women as war-time sex slaves while the men were slaughtered.

We should stop trying to play mental gymnastics and word games to justify something that is so clearly immoral, else we will suffer from the same sinful acts, as those before us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, iCenozoic said:

we are cracking open the door for it's return.

When we enter into the very nuanced discussion of slavery and dissect the definitions which revolve around slavery we are able to realize that not only has slavery remained, but that we are also benefiting from it in one way or another. Not saying it is a justification, but again some form of modern day slavery differ from others and being a 'slave' in some instances is far greater than living under a bridge begging for change, and suffering. Whereas you can essentially enter a contract that helps you in getting on your feet and making your way towards freedom, the problems of homelessness and poverty are a crisis of 'freedom'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2020 at 9:08 AM, iCenozoic said:

And thankfully, people eventually came to terms with this reality and abolished slavery. As they became more aware of the humanity of these negros, they made the choice to stop and to fight and to die for freedom of the black man. Countless people literally have their lives so that blacks could be free.

I'm thankful that we came to this reality, living in the US myself.

On 7/11/2020 at 10:27 AM, iCenozoic said:

We should stop trying to play mental gymnastics and word games to justify something that is so clearly immoral, else we will suffer from the same sinful acts, as those before us.

Slavery is still alive and well in many parts of the world. Both legal and illegal. Selling children is the worst of all. If we see it, we need to speak out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan Brown has got to be the most overrated Muslim Western scholar out there. In his essays he just rambles on all kinds of tangents, offering very little of substance. Unfortunately he comes off quite arrogant as well.  It's sad that the Muslim community lacks quality scholarship in the West. 

Edited by King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, King said:

Jonathan Brown has got to be the most overrated Muslim Western scholar out there. In his essays he just rambles on all kinds of tangents, offering very little of substance. Unfortunately he comes off quite arrogant as well.  It's sad that the Muslim community lacks quality scholarship in the West. 

His manners are really bad. 

I don't know anything about his views on slavery.

Edited by Muhammed Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Muhammed Ali said:

His manners are really bad. 

Brother could you elaborate? JazakAllah

 

9 minutes ago, Muhammed Ali said:

I don't know anything about his views on slavery.

 He authored a book about slavery which was actually reviewed by brother @Ibn al-Hussain And he spoke very highly of the scholarship that went into it and recommended it, his review can be found on his Instagram page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

When we enter into the very nuanced discussion of slavery and dissect the definitions which revolve around slavery we are able to realize that not only has slavery remained, but that we are also benefiting from it in one way or another. Not saying it is a justification, but again some form of modern day slavery differ from others and being a 'slave' in some instances is far greater than living under a bridge begging for change, and suffering. Whereas you can essentially enter a contract that helps you in getting on your feet and making your way towards freedom, the problems of homelessness and poverty are a crisis of 'freedom'.

I agree that a well treated slave would likely have a better quality life than a homeless starving begger.

But no slave, well treated or tortured, would have a quality of life as the masters of said slaves.

As said before. Slaves cannot have land, cannot go work another job, cannot choose their job, cannot choose where they live. They were bred like cattle, sold as a commodity. They were objects, not people. Treated as subordinate, and inferior species.

And every owner of slaves paid money for them, paid slavers for them. The slavers used that money to go capture and sell even more slaves.

Thomas Jefferson owned hundreds of slaves over multiple generations, and if they refused to act as a commodity, they'd be wipped and tortured, if not worse.

There is no silver lining here. And the sooner we all own up to this, the sooner we can move on to more productive discussions about how to respond to the unfortunate sinful past of our ancestors.

Americans in the south, Texas, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida etc. They still don't want to accept the sinful past of the confederates. Some want the south to rise again, because they don't want to admit that the honorable generals and heroes of the Confederacy, were actually immoral people fighting in favor of using human beings as a product to be bought and sold.

And this is a shameful position to hold.

Now I know it's a sensitive subject in Islam. Quite frankly, I don't really know much about Islams history with slave trade. But people worldwide need to accept that the past isn't always a bright place. And rather than trying to twist history in an effort perhaps to revive the past or revive the south, we need to move forward. And perhaps Islam should consider moving forward from challenges of it's past too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Muhammed Ali said:

His manners are really bad. 

He has been heavily criticized by Daniel Haqiqatjou, due to the article he published on Yaqeen in regards to the LGBT, however, in matters pertaining to his mannerisms I do not question your judgement as I have a great deal of respect for you sir and I am sure you would never say something about someone, especially a scholar unless there was a great degree of evidence alluding to that. All I can say is based on some of the lectures or discussions I have seen which he speaks, it is perhaps the American background that he has which at times can cause him to be a bit open or abrupt when cracking jokes or sharing examples, other then that I await for your input on the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, iCenozoic said:

I agree that a well treated slave would likely have a better quality life than a homeless starving begger.

But no slave, well treated or tortured, would have a quality of life as the masters of said slaves.

As said before. Slaves cannot have land, cannot go work another job, cannot choose their job, cannot choose where they live. They were bred like cattle, sold as a commodity. They were objects, not people. Treated as subordinate, and inferior species.

And every owner of slaves paid money for them, paid slavers for them. The slavers used that money to go capture and sell even more slaves.

Thomas Jefferson owned hundreds of slaves over multiple generations, and if they refused to act as a commodity, they'd be wipped and tortured, if not worse.

There is no silver lining here. And the sooner we all own up to this, the sooner we can move on to more productive discussions about how to respond to the unfortunate sinful past of our ancestors.

Americans in the south, Texas, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida etc. They still don't want to accept the sinful past of the confederates. Some want the south to rise again, because they don't want to admit that the honorable generals and heroes of the Confederacy, were actually immoral people fighting in favor of using human beings as a product to be bought and sold.

And this is a shameful position to hold.

Now I know it's a sensitive subject in Islam. Quite frankly, I don't really know much about Islams history with slave trade. But people worldwide need to accept that the past isn't always a bright place. And rather than trying to twist history in an effort perhaps to revive the past or revive the south, we need to move forward. And perhaps Islam should consider moving forward from challenges of it's past too.

I understand where you’re coming from brother, however, it is critical to note that you can’t just suddenly come into a society, especially at a time when slavery was practiced globally and was seen as the norm unlike today and do away with it.

The Prophet implemented many great efforts in taking the backward Arabian society (in terms of morality and religion) through a gradual process, you know how at first alcohol was banned during prayer, then gradually it was completely outlawed. 

The gradual process was great, because the community was able to give it up naturally by simply dumping all their alcohol into the streets and implement a lifestyle that divorced alcohol, unlike the U.S. where we saw the outlawing of alcohol triggered the society and introduced mafias, etc.

likewise, the U.S. decided to simply abolish slavery, which to this day has resulted in heavy repercussions where we see systemic racisms, and only a few decades ago we had Jim Crow Laws, segregation, and really a cesspool of hatred and injustice towards the black race, even though slavery was “abolished”.

Whereas in Islam it was again another gradual process where the Prophet and Allah within the Quran would sow the seeds of abolitionism, by decreeing that a certain sin required one to free a slave, or for example during a certain festivity one would need to free a salve, etc. A lengthy, yet effective gradual process that would move society from not just have slaves who were similar to indentured servants, but also condition the society to the normality of a free slave while also preaching the equality of the black and white in the white eyes of Allah.

Simply abolishing slavery would have led to disasters that the U.S. has clearly suffered from and continues to do so to this day, as for the topic of slave girls, etc that is for another discussion, but inshallah this very brief and concise answer can give a slither of insight to the reformation of Islam the prophet had introduced.

As for later “Islamic Caliphs” and Caliphates it is not the fault of Islam, nor the Prophet that they chose to divert away from this reformation process and follow other forms of practicing slavery, which only served to exacerbate the problem, not hinder it. We need to be very pragmatic when it comes to a reality in a world which slavery has been practiced since its clear history, and Islam give the most practical and effective approach. 

Keep in mind that no ideology, nor society can claim to not have had a form of slavery, until the early 1600s and that’s just the generic understanding of slavery, if we go deeper into the definitions, we will be able to see that as I said earlier, slavery simply going through an evolution. And once again Islam advocating for a greater solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, iCenozoic said:

Thomas Jefferson

I don’t know much about Thomas Jefferson, let alone his history with slaves, I’ll bring this up with the sister inshallah and if she shares anything of benefit I will convey it to the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

I understand where you’re coming from brother, however, it is critical to note that you can’t just suddenly come into a society, especially at a time when slavery was practiced globally and was seen as the norm unlike today and do away with it.

The Prophet implemented many great efforts in taking the backward Arabian society (in terms of morality and religion) through a gradual process, you know how at first alcohol was banned during prayer, then gradually it was completely outlawed. 

The gradual process was great, because the community was able to give it up naturally by simply dumping all their alcohol into the streets and implement a lifestyle that divorced alcohol, unlike the U.S. where we saw the outlawing of alcohol triggered the society and introduced mafias, etc.

likewise, the U.S. decided to simply abolish slavery, which to this day has resulted in heavy repercussions where we see systemic racisms, and only a few decades ago we had Jim Crow Laws, segregation, and really a cesspool of hatred and injustice towards the black race, even though slavery was “abolished”.

Whereas in Islam it was again another gradual process where the Prophet and Allah within the Quran would sow the seeds of abolitionism, by decreeing that a certain sin required one to free a slave, or for example during a certain festivity one would need to free a salve, etc. A lengthy, yet effective gradual process that would move society from not just have slaves who were similar to indentured servants, but also condition the society to the normality of a free slave while also preaching the equality of the black and white in the white eyes of Allah.

Simply abolishing slavery would have led to disasters that the U.S. has clearly suffered from and continues to do so to this day, as for the topic of slave girls, etc that is for another discussion, but inshallah this very brief and concise answer can give a slither of insight to the reformation of Islam the prophet had introduced.

As for later “Islamic Caliphs” and Caliphates it is not the fault of Islam, nor the Prophet that they chose to divert away from this reformation process and follow other forms of practicing slavery, which only served to exacerbate the problem, not hinder it. We need to be very pragmatic when it comes to a reality in a world which slavery has been practiced since its clear history, and Islam give the most practical and effective approach. 

Keep in mind that no ideology, nor society can claim to not have had a form of slavery, until the early 1600s and that’s just the generic understanding of slavery, if we go deeper into the definitions, we will be able to see that as I said earlier, slavery simply going through an evolution. And once again Islam advocating for a greater solution.

The US has been far better off since it's abolition of slavery. I wouldn't bother trying to downplay the effectiveness of the civil war in forwarding black rights. Yes, we had laws of segregation thereafter, of course equality is a process, but the civil war was a huge leap in black rights in the US and quite frankly, if it hadn't occurred, there is really no telling where we would be today. Perhaps the south would still remain in control. I'm a college educated African American who owns his own land, has a pension, can change his employer, among a whole host of things that would not have been possible without the abolition of slavery by Lincoln and his army.

And that's enough for me to be proud of that event.

And to be honest, since ISIS' capture of yazidi women, Im not sure that we can call Islams history a success story in comparison. The US has nothing to prove, as it's far ahead of many nation's with it's efforts for equality, including ahead of some Islamic nation's as well (to put it kindly).

At the time, many in the US depended on slaves. And sometimes there is no truly "good timing" for a civil war. Sometimes you just have to get dirty, whether society is "ready" or not. Justice is justice. Jesus didn't say "well let's just decrease the number of gamblers each day until they all leave". No, he went in, flipped the table and called them all snakes. Sometimes you just have to get down to business rather than embracing a watered down sin over an extended period of time so you don't hurt people's feelings.

Option 1: Well let's just let this race of people get abused a little bit less and less each day, that way nobody's feelings get hurt, even if it might take countless generations to reach freedom.

Option 2: Or, you can pick up your musket and go kick some southern tail.

As an African american, I'd go with the latter any day of the week.

But also know that fighters of the north were mere men. They didn't wield prophetic messages. They didn't conduct miracles that could otherwise convince the masses. But they stood up for what was right none the less. And America is only 2-300 years old.  Mere men got the job done at a relatively rapid pace by picking up arms, over something that other societies had perhaps thousands of years to pull off.

If 1300 years had passed and the muskets hadn't been picked up by Arabs, how much more time would have passed?

And none of this has anything to do with alcohol consumption, so I won't bother trying to draw an analogy. Americans typically don't consider alcohol consumption a sin, and so consumption therefore never went away, as opposed to in KSA where one could be imprisoned for distributing beer.

Anyway, You're free to rationalize Islamic history however you please. I'm just not familiar enough with it to really speak much on it.

But I will say that the idea of trading a sin for a slave seems odd. It makes it sound as though people had incentive to not sin, in order to keep slaves (because if they sinned then they, unfortunate to them, had to free a slave).  Like taking a child's toy away if he doesn't do his chores. Be a good boy and you get to keep your toy.

Surely there is a better way to incentivize good deeds other than to tell people that they get to keep slaves, and surely the true sin was already conducted in ownership of human lives as a commodity to begin with.

But we all knew this conversation would go in this direction. I digress.

Edited by iCenozoic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...