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

11 minutes ago, iCenozoic said:

But I will say that the idea of trading a sin for a slave seems odd.

My point here was slightly misunderstood, as this was not the only incentive to free a slave, for example during a joyous occasion, or as a form of zakat freeing a slave can also be applicable.

Slavery existed at the time of Jesus, so yes like the Prophet they both flipped the tables when it comes to gambling, however, in issues that are much more complex since they (slavery) were ingrained within humanity since the beginning of time and occupied a necessary importance within society as opposed to gambling. You can give up gambling and go on about your life just fine. Flipping the table on slavery isn't as easy, because the economics of the society and many other factors, as well as factions operated through the framework of slavery. There was a need to disrupt it in a manner which is very considerate of the intricacies that would follow its abolition.

I am also still learning about the subject, but it is clear that we can't just pull out our rifles or unsheath our swords and put an end to a system that has been going on for centuries. 

Share this post


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

My point here was slightly misunderstood, as this was not the only incentive to free a slave, for example during a joyous occasion, or as a form of zakat freeing a slave can also be applicable.

Slavery existed at the time of Jesus, so yes like the Prophet they both flipped the tables when it comes to gambling, however, in issues that are much more complex since they (slavery) were ingrained within humanity since the beginning of time and occupied a necessary importance within society as opposed to gambling. You can give up gambling and go on about your life just fine. Flipping the table on slavery isn't as easy, because the economics of the society and many other factors, as well as factions operated through the framework of slavery. There was a need to disrupt it in a manner which is very considerate of the intricacies that would follow its abolition.

I am also still learning about the subject, but it is clear that we can't just pull out our rifles or unsheath our swords and put an end to a system that has been going on for centuries. 

You say that we can't just pull out rifles and end the system of slavery, but this is exactly what the north did.

Sure, we still had laws of segregation, but you can't get to laws of segregation without first breaking down ownership of other human beings.

You can't get to systemic racism and police reform without first abolishing human ownership.

In regards to Christianity on slavery, I won't try to justify historic Christians slave ownership. They were sinners. Even the ones who may have treated some slaves nicely (like Thomas Jefferson) were sinners too. They bought and sold human beings like cattle. It's wrong no matter how you shake it.

Jesus hardly owned the clothes on his own back so it's difficult to say much about his views with respect to slavery. But in cases where Christians owned slaves and if Jesus were to have condoned slavery (even if in just a subtle way to keep from upsetting society), I would have to be disappointed. 

Thankfully, I am accepting of the fact that people historically have been and still are, sinners. And it's ok to admit that Thomas Jefferson did some bad things. It's ok to admit that Christians did some bad things. 

But the question is, can you admit that certain historical Muslims, who owned slaves, also were doing bad things? Or must you believe that some form of human ownership must be morally good under certain circumstances?

The Prophet Muhammad, from my understanding, was a powerful man. Probably a lot more powerful than President Lincoln and the Union. The man conducted miracles and wielded the power of holy prophecy (as it is said). 

There is a hole in this story in a question of why slavery was not heavily contested. But we have to be honest with ourselves. Making slavery out to be morally correct "under certain circumstances" is not the solution to this hole. It's just a delay and dilemma that will never be resolved in the heart.

Because the moment we start trying to justify "some forms" of slavery, or slavery "in some instances", this is the moment those instances become reality, and the monster of sin involving buying and selling and breeding and whipping and controlling (in excessive ways) human beings, returns. As an African American, that's a place I don't want to be. So I won't play with that fire.

I'm going to call a sin a sin. No matter who practiced it.

 

 

Edited by iCenozoic

Share this post


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

end the system of slavery, but this is exactly what the north did.

This is where most of the misunderstanding is being established, plantation slavery was ended, sure. Slavery did not end, and this is not looking at the slavery which pertained to racism and or classism, the issue of slavery is very convoluted. 

13 minutes ago, iCenozoic said:

but you can't get to laws of segregation without first breaking down ownership of other human beings.

This is what I have been essentially alluding to, the breaking down of slavery. 

 

14 minutes ago, iCenozoic said:

if Jesus were to have condoned slavery (even if in just a subtle way to keep from upsetting society), I would have to be disappointed. 

A more Christian or Muslim approach would be to seek to understand why our Prophet(s) condoned slavery, and not simply wave our hands with dismay, because we cannot conceptualize the intricate process of truly abolishing it.

17 minutes ago, iCenozoic said:

Because the moment we start trying to justify "some forms" of slavery, or slavery "in some instances", is the moment those instances become reality, and the monster of sin involving buying and selling and breeding and whipping and controlling (in excessive ways) human beings, returns.

We are living in separate times where it is quite clear that any form of slavery is unjustifiable at face value, however, fear of its return is quite intriguing since essentially slavery has departed from the form of shackling ones hands to entrapment of one's mind, and the creation of illusions of so called 'freedom', slavery is very much alive and existing to this day in its archaic and modern forms. 

I just feel that many are being very inconsiderate, due to an understandable zeal to end any form of oppression, but really you cannot just throw the entirety of the crux of human history without a God given system that is very decisive in the ways in which it untangles the shackles of slavery. Decisive to an extent in which it gives kudos to the one who frees a slaves or absolves them from their sins. 

An individual who has slavery engraved within their heads needs these types of measures within a system to get them functioning as a conscious and unconscious cog that moves together within this great clock or system, that not only eliminates slavery but does so without tantamount repercussions. 

I reiterate to this day we have issues of poverty, homelessness, violence, systemic racism, and I can go on and on. 

We need to also consider that those freed slaves, or even slaves who were similar to indentured slaves were able to occupy heightened degrees of educational accomplishment and serve as great catalysts within Islamic society, and I don't want to pull the Bilal card.

 

Share this post


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

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).

Hi ISIS  doesn't represent whole of Muslims & Islam also they had same plan for shia muslim women & concept of slavery in shia Islam is completely from sunni definition of it that although Shia Imams had slaves but they were treating them with high moral that some of slave men like Qambar (رضي الله عنه)the servant of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was allowed to judge between muslims & he is a great shia personalities and mothers of our Imams like mother 4th Imam & majority of their mothers after 6th Imams were from slave woman that whole of these women were in charge of shia community whn Imams were in prison or exile.

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2020 at 10:15 PM, Ali_Hussain said:

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.

With your last statement you just proved there were not always middle men in european slave trade, these pirates litterally conqured these towns and inslaved the natives, pirates and horrible armies are known to do this, just look at what the vikings did in the past.

The markets these slaves were sold in were controlled by these pirates, these guys litterally controlled 3 kingdoms in tunis, algeria and moroco region , so it's basically the same thing as isis who had a full state to them selves.

Edited by HusseinAbbas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Hi ISIS  doesn't represent whole of Muslims & Islam also they had same plan for shia muslim women & concept of slavery in shia Islam is completely from sunni definition of it that although Shia Imams had slaves but they were treating them with high moral that some of slave men like Qambar (رضي الله عنه)the servant of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was allowed to judge between muslims & he is a great shia personalities and mothers of our Imams like mother 4th Imam & majority of their mothers after 6th Imams were from slave woman that whole of these women were in charge of shia community whn Imams were in prison or exiled

The point of my post wasn't to suggest that all muslims believe or have believed in slavery. The point was just to demonstrate that whatever plan prehistoric Muslims might have had back 12-1300 years ago to end slavery, such a plan has had questionable success over time (assuming such a plan ever truly existed at all).

Share this post


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

such a plan has had questionable success over time (assuming such a plan ever truly existed at all).

The Prophet introduced the plan and implemented it within society, the later caliphs within the Umayyad, Abbasid, and even Ottoman empire deviated from this plan and practiced slavery in a manner which was antithetical to the teachings of the Prophet, that is where the issues began to resurge. There wasn't much progress really after Imam Ali, since their leadership was usurped.

Share this post


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

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.

Perhaps I should take back what I said because it is a generalization on his manners when I only had a some specific things in mind. What I was referring to is this sort of language: https://www.facebook.com/mufti.abulayth/posts/1508745019213645?comment_id=1508760109212136

I remember him using distasteful language in other posts that I have seen. However since memory can be faulty and I haven't provided any evidence (it's hard to search Facebook posts) it's better for people to not give importance to what I said. Even if what I said is true, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't learn from him. It would just mean that we shouldn't think of him as a traditional Islamic teacher.

I will look into was work on slavery, God willing. I remember him being promoted by some members on here a number of years ago and I got the impression that his views disagreed with the concerns of Muslims that were troubled by some narrations. Maybe he has become a bit more 'liberal' over the years or always was.

Edited by Muhammed Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Are you sure you linked to the correct page? Unless I missed something that seemed more to do with Mufti Abu Layth.
 
With regards to Brown, he does unfortunately use some language that although relatively mild by secular standards, is not the kind of language we would expect from a Muslim in the public eye. I don’t think that has any bearing on his academic output though, which is of higher quality than most with regards to what is in the English language at least.
 
With regards to him becoming more liberal, I don’t think that is the case (although don’t get me wrong, he is certainly on the liberal end of orthodoxy). The book isn’t really an apologetic one, and the reason he ended up writing it was because he got into a lot of trouble in the media for responding to a question about concerns around slavery in Islam with ‘Are you more morally mature than the Prophet?’. Previously when someone had asked about the age of Aisha being 9 he responded with ‘Why does that bother you?’
 
His experiences may have made him more aware of the sensitivities surrounding certain topics, especially for women, but I doubt his views have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  

11 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

sunni definition 

You can find Sunni ahadith which also speak of treating slaves in a better way than what people normally think about slavery. Just read this chapter of Bukhari to get an idea: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/49

A few examples:

Quote

Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid:

I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he complained of me to the Prophet (ﷺ) . The Prophet (ﷺ) asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job).

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari:

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "He who has a slave-girl and teaches her good manners and improves her education and then manumits and marries her, will get a double reward; and any slave who observes Allah's right and his master's right will get a double reward."

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "When your servant brings your meals to you then if he does not let him sit and share the meals, then he should at least give him a mouthful or two mouthfuls of that meal or a meal or two meals, as he has prepared it."

 

 

Quote

and mothers of our Imams like mother 4th Imam & majority of their mothers after 6th Imams were from slave woman

Some of the Sunni khulafa had slave mothers. https://www.al-islam.org/slavery-allamah-sayyid-saeed-akhtar-rizvi/slaves-history-islam#x-slaves-children-imams-and-caliphs

From an Encyclopedia of Islam:

Quote

In fact, slaves sometimes rose to positions of extensive authority. In slave dynasties, such as the medieval Egyptian Mamluks, soldiers originally from the slave class actually oversaw governments.

Page 630: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jc7AA-q6aErvmx6HznVdgSYjhniZ4QPP/view 

The whole entry on slavery may be worth reading.

Edited by Muhammed Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:
 
Are you sure you linked to the correct page? Unless I missed something that seemed more to do with Mufti Abu Layth.

Have a look at the 2nd comment in that thread. Although I don't like his Brown's language, I can't agree with Abu Layth on this matter. BTW I think Abu Layth is very knowledgeable person compared to most of the speakers out there. He may be an oddball but his knowledge can't be denied.

Quote

Previously when someone had asked about the age of Aisha being 9 he responded with ‘Why does that bother you?’

And that is what I had in mind. I saw a few of his videos from that time. I personally have no reason to agree with him about issue of the age.

Share this post


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

Have a look at the 2nd comment in that thread. Although I don't like his Brown's language, I can't agree with Abu Layth on this matter.

Sorry, I don't know how I missed that comment! Yes, not the best language at all, and I've seen other things that are just as bad if not worse.

2 minutes ago, Muhammed Ali said:

BTW I think Abu Layth is very knowledgeable person compared to most of the speakers out there. He may be an oddball but his knowledge can't be denied.

I don't disagree with you on that at all. Even though I think that his biases sometimes cause him to make severe blunders that someone of his level of knowledge shouldn't be making.

2 minutes ago, Muhammed Ali said:

And that is what I had in mind. I saw a few of his videos from that time. I personally have no reason to agree with him about issue of the age.

As a Shia it's easier to be a bit more agnostic on the matter, but as a Sunni and a historian, I don't think there is no real room for debate, so he might as well just own it. There isn't much point in being intellectually dishonest and going down the apologetic route.

Even as Shias, it's not like we have hadiths that contradict Aisha's claims, and from the point of view of the narrations of the Imams (عليه السلام), we can't say there is anything problematic in it. Even if we tried to say Aisha wasn't 9, for which we have no evidence, we would still need to defend ourselves against all the narrations that indicate that a girl reaches maturity at 9. And I actually think some of these are more 'problematic' than the case of Aisha, because they make it a general rule, whereas Aisha is just a single case.

Share this post


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

This is where most of the misunderstanding is being established, plantation slavery was ended, sure. Slavery did not end, and this is not looking at the slavery which pertained to racism and or classism, the issue of slavery is very convoluted. 

This is what I have been essentially alluding to, the breaking down of slavery. 

 

A more Christian or Muslim approach would be to seek to understand why our Prophet(s) condoned slavery, and not simply wave our hands with dismay, because we cannot conceptualize the intricate process of truly abolishing it.

We are living in separate times where it is quite clear that any form of slavery is unjustifiable at face value, however, fear of its return is quite intriguing since essentially slavery has departed from the form of shackling ones hands to entrapment of one's mind, and the creation of illusions of so called 'freedom', slavery is very much alive and existing to this day in its archaic and modern forms. 

I just feel that many are being very inconsiderate, due to an understandable zeal to end any form of oppression, but really you cannot just throw the entirety of the crux of human history without a God given system that is very decisive in the ways in which it untangles the shackles of slavery. Decisive to an extent in which it gives kudos to the one who frees a slaves or absolves them from their sins. 

An individual who has slavery engraved within their heads needs these types of measures within a system to get them functioning as a conscious and unconscious cog that moves together within this great clock or system, that not only eliminates slavery but does so without tantamount repercussions. 

I reiterate to this day we have issues of poverty, homelessness, violence, systemic racism, and I can go on and on. 

We need to also consider that those freed slaves, or even slaves who were similar to indentured slaves were able to occupy heightened degrees of educational accomplishment and serve as great catalysts within Islamic society, and I don't want to pull the Bilal card.

 

These are all just attempts to rationalize the irrational.

Buying and selling people as a commodity had always been, and will forever be, a sin. No matter who has done it, no matter who does it now and no matter who will do it in years to come.

And until people can come to terms with this reality, this terrible sin will forever be a threat to these people.

Think ISIS was immoral? Until a community can take a firm stance against slavery, this community will forever be plagued.

What you choose to believe beyond this point in time is your choice. Personally, I will continue to call a sin a sin. As it has always been, and forever will be, in all circumstances, an immoral act.

You're free to disagree and you're free to continue your efforts in trying to make buying and selling people, not a sin (in all circumstances). 

We would have to agree to disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a large part of the lecture of Dr Brown that was posted above and also a recent podcast that he did. There were two things stood out to me personally:

1, He said that the only allowable way to enslave someone was via war - all other ways were prohibited. Although a lot of people say this, what is interesting for me is that he said there is no textual evidence for this, but there was a consensus about this in the early Muslim community. The only proposed textual evidence that I have seen (with my tiny amount of knowledge) is Shaykh Muhammad Asad's interpretation of verse 8:67. At first glance it seems like very strong evidence but it's possibly a verdict that can't be applied outside of the given context.

We may not need any direct textual evidence for this prohibition if we are willing to take the sunnah as an example. I.e. the only reports that we have of the prophet {s} overseeing the taking of 'slaves' are POWs, and since there was nothing stopping him taking other types of slaves, we could assume that he considered it prohibited. 

I can see some people disagreeing with that style of reasoning but I have no qualms with it - especially given the greater context of the subject. 

2, Dr Brown seems to have much more 'progressive' views than I expected, after listening to him years ago. He suggests that the changes in society could change the permissibility of a thing. He suggests that abolition was not feasible because of economic reasons (i.e. humans were used instead of modern machinery)* even though slavery in itself is not a good thing in general. He says perhaps in the future we may look at some low paid employment in the same way we look at slavery today. I.e. it could be prohibited. The implications of this on Islamic law are interesting ....

* I can't agree with this view.

Share this post


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

He suggests that the changes in society could change the permissibility of a thing.

I believe this is something Sayed Kamal Al-Haydari also believes/suggests.

 

11 minutes ago, Muhammed Ali said:

Dr Brown seems to have much more 'progressive' views

Yes he tends to sway away from Orthodox standpoints at time, him and Daniel Haqiqatjou have been quarreling for a couple of weeks now, due to his article on the lgbt. Dr. Brown advocating for the more progressive view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Muhammed Ali said:

1, He said that the only allowable way to enslave someone was via war - all other ways were prohibited. Although a lot of people say this, what is interesting for me is that he said there is no textual evidence for this, but there was a consensus about this in the early Muslim community. The only proposed textual evidence that I have seen (with my tiny amount of knowledge) is Shaykh Muhammad Asad's interpretation of verse 8:67. At first glance it seems like very strong evidence but it's possibly a verdict that can't be applied outside of the given context.

We may not need any direct textual evidence for this prohibition if we are willing to take the sunnah as an example. I.e. the only reports that we have of the prophet {s} overseeing the taking of 'slaves' are POWs, and since there was nothing stopping him taking other types of slaves, we could assume that he considered it prohibited. 

True, but it was also allowed to buy slaves who were enslaved by someone else, regardless of the method. So in effect all this really means is you can’t go around kidnapping free people and making them slaves.

Share this post


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

it was also allowed to buy slaves who were enslaved by someone else

Yes, so they can enter the Islamic system of being educated and freed, within a just Islamic society.

Share this post


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

Yes, so they can enter the Islamic system of being educated and freed, within a just Islamic society.

I think that this is might be an overly idealistic interpretation. Would you also say that Muslims took slaves as war booty for the same purpose?

Slavery was a fact of life at the time, so of course Islam brought laws to deal with it, which when implemented correctly were far more humane than any other form of slavery in history, and in fact more humane than many of the exploitative forms of employment we see today. A slave in Islam for the most part should be treated better than the average ‘servant’ in many parts of the world (although of course the servant is not a slave and is technically free), or wage slave that we see in many of the factories that supply Western companies.

Despite that, there is simply no way of making any form of slavery palatable to the modern secular mind (and I include religious believers in this category). It is simply axiomatic that any form of slavery is evil, full stop. Now, since pretty much everyone in the world, and certainly in the Western world, has been affected by humanism and secularism, Muslims don’t actually see this issue much differently to non-Muslims. It’s just one of those issues we don’t want to be there, but we know we have to deal with somehow (leaving aside the hopelessly deluded that try to claim there is no such thing as slavery in Islam). So there is a temptation to find a relatively benign interpretation to make ourselves feel better about it. But in reality we are just temporarily plastering over the cracks. Ultimately the only way to find peace with a topic like this is to do a thorough examination of our own world view, and try to unpick how much of our thought process and ideas of morality (that we naively take to be our ‘fitra’) is actually governed by non-Islamic principles. Now, it may be impossible to do this fully because many of these things have been instilled almost since birth, but at the very least it would provide a basis for being able to deal with this issue in an intellectually honest way without being on the verge of apostasy.

There are issues that could be brought up about slavery in Islam that honestly speaking this utopian vision of slavery being primarily a means of bringing people to Islam would simply not be able to adequately explain. The only way to deal with this would then be to engage in intellectually dishonest picking and choosing of the sources in order to preserve the perfect picture we had in our minds. Of course, it would be claimed that in fact we are rejecting what contradicts ‘the justice of Allah’, without really acknowledging that our concept of what Allah’s justice should be is profoundly influenced by non-Islamic ideas.

Share this post


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

Would you also say that Muslims took slaves as war booty for the same purpose?

Think of it in terms of mutilated bodies, shell shocked soldiers, treasonous captives, schizophrenics, as opposed to being taken by in by Muslims, due to these individuals forfeiting certain rights that may have due to engaging in warfare. And then being benefited from for the sake of mankind.

For example the Prophet would allow freedom to those war captives who were literate after they taught ten Muslims how to read and write, many preferred to remain a part of that Islamic society even after gaining freedom.

7 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Despite that, there is simply no way of making any form of slavery palatable to the modern secular mind (and I include religious believers in this category). It is simply axiomatic that any form of slavery is evil, full stop. Now, since pretty much everyone in the world, and certainly in the Western world, has been affected by humanism and secularism, Muslims don’t actually see this issue much differently to non-Muslims. It’s just one of those issues we don’t want to be there, but we know we have to deal with somehow (leaving aside the hopelessly deluded that try to claim there is no such thing as slavery in Islam). So there is a temptation to find a relatively benign interpretation to make ourselves feel better about it. But in reality we are just temporarily plastering over the cracks.

There is no need to make it palatable, they don't need to tread on those grounds anyway, their utilitarian beliefs and concepts will never allow them to understand such a complex system, and the irony of all ironies is the modern day slavery that is being promoted through their own ideologies. Like Daniel Haqiqatjou is doing we need to stop being on the defense and begin to attack the shallow grounds on which these secularists are standing on. As for those 'Modern Muslims' they need to be educated and more firmly acquainted with the Quran and the teachings of the Ahlulbayt. If Muslims become overwhelmed when it comes to the principals of the religion, then they should simply spend more time focusing on the fundamentals (Usool) of the religion.

 

13 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

But in reality we are just temporarily plastering over the cracks. Ultimately the only way to find peace with a topic like this is to do a thorough examination of our own world view, and try to unpick how much of our thought process and ideas of morality (that we naively take to be our ‘fitra’) is actually governed by non-Islamic principles. Now, it may be impossible to do this fully because many of these things have been instilled almost since birth, but at the very least it would provide a basis for being able to deal with this issue in an intellectually honest way without being on the verge of apostasy.

There are no cracks in God given instructions, the cracks are as you alluded to within our own thinking that has been programmed to cater to the modern liberal ideology. We need to define our terms very clearly and maintain an in-depth consistency, we will see the disastrous contradictions with those who oppose Islam and the consistencies of the fundamental Islamic position when it comes to slavery and the eventual rehabilitation of society and its reconciliation with morality. Islam came to solve a problem providing an impeccable blueprint for the issue of slavery, it is not our fault and certainly not the fault of Islam for those who have deviated from the guidelines prescribed in regards to slavery, as emphasized through the Ahlulbayt.

 

17 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

There are issues that could be brought up about slavery in Islam that honestly speaking this utopian vision of slavery being primarily a means of bringing people to Islam would simply not be able to adequately explain

What are those issues/ideas?

 

18 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

we are rejecting what contradicts ‘the justice of Allah’, without really acknowledging that our concept of what Allah’s justice should be is profoundly influenced by non-Islamic ideas.

Agreed.

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...