for all those who claim that islam had no hand in black people slavery
Posts
Total:
21
-->
@Lunar108
Out of curiosity, why do you focus on black people in particular?
-->
@Lemming
since yassine claims that muslims had only slav (white) and turk (turkish) slaves only
-->
@Lunar108
Where'd he claim that?
-->
@Lemming
- Wrong! I said, Islam had no hand in Slavery, period. Here is what I said:
There was no slavery in Islamic Caliphate! We just concede calling it that because of convention. There is nothing in common between Western chattel slavery & Islamic slave except the name. The worst slave status in Islam (Qin) was far better than the best serf in Europe, in terms of rights & social standing & opportunity. They had the right to own property, marry, practice their own faith, & participate in all aspects of social & political life, as long as they fulfill their duties to their masters, wether be it at home or plantation or factory or regiment or elsewhere -unlike serfs & peasants, who had no such opportunities. Historically, some Qins even rose to the highest level of government, such as Abu Misk Kafur as a ruler of Egypt in the 10th century, or Mudhafar Qutuz, the mighty conqueror & founder of the Mamluk dynasty. The former, a Black slave from Nubia, & the latter a Circassian slave from the Caucasus. Qins also constituted the small minority of slaves in the Muslim world, the majority were Mawali. The other types of slaves (namely: Mudabbar, Mukatab, Um-Walad, & Mawla) could not be sold or bought, & were essential freeman, except in allegiance & indemnity to the master. In case you did not know, 3 fo the 4 rulings factions in the Ottoman Empire were made up of slaves. The Court (Divan) led by the Grand Vizier (generally a slave), the Harem led by the Sultanah (generally a slave), & the Military (Janissaries) led by slave generals.
Most slaves taken by Muslims were either Whites or Turks. Black slaves were rarely a thing, for a good reason. The only source of slaves in Islam is POWs (prisoners of war); since much of Black Africa joined the faith through trade & preaching (by Sufis), there was little chance to acquire such slaves. That said, some important Black slave communities in the MENA region (Middle East North Africa) were: the Ikhshidi slaves from Nubia (from early conquests into Abyssinia) – among them the famous ruler of Egypt Abu Misk Kafus who ruled Egypt during the 10th century (YES, he was a Black slave) – The Bukhari slaves (from the conquest of Saadi dynasty of the Songhai empire & later), they constituted the noble class in Morrocan Alawi dynasty under the Sultan, & the officers of the Royal Guards (they still do) – The Black eunuchs of Arabia who generally managed the holy mosques.... etc.
-->
@Lunar108
Mm,
I see he makes claims that the status of an Islamic slave, is not the same as western chattel slavery, #8
"There is nothing in common between Western chattel slavery & Islamic slave except the name. The worst slave status in Islam (Qin) was far better than the best serf in Europe, in terms of rights & social standing & opportunity." - Yassine
"Drivel! Most slaves in Islamic history were Muslim!!! Slavery, as in chattel slavery, is categorically prohibited in Sharia. What we call slavery in Sharia is analogous to indefinite contract in Western Law." - Yassine
'Does claim most slaves taken by Muslims were either Whites or Turks, but 'does acknowledge some conquests that resulted in black slaves. #8
"Most slaves taken by Muslims were either Whites or Turks. Black slaves were rarely a thing, for a good reason. The only source of slaves in Islam is POWs (prisoners of war); since much of Black Africa joined the faith through trade & preaching (by Sufis), there was little chance to acquire such slaves. That said, some important Black slave communities in the MENA region (Middle East North Africa) were: the Ikhshidi slaves from Nubia (from early conquests into Abyssinia)" - - Yassine
Provides sources and argument, against Islam being for chattel slavery. #16
"- POW, by Sharia, are to be released is by grace or ransom: "bind captives [of war] firmly, then release them later either by grace or by ransom –until the toils of war have ended." (47:4). The Prophet (pbuh) has also exercised a third option: turning POW to bondage -based on the principle of reciprocity (i.e. if the enemy takes Muslim POW as slaves, Muslims reciprocate). However, this reciprocation only extends in name; in practice Muslims must treat slaves effectively as family -with all rights that entails (i.e. take them in & guarantee financial & social security for them, as they would their children). POW who convert to Islam before bondage are automatically free. Those among the POW who do not wish to stay in bondage must seek Mukataba (contract of emancipation): "If any of your slaves wish to pay for their freedom, make a contract with them accordingly" (24:33), upon signing such contract the slave becomes a mukatab -a freedom- until they fulfill their installments (or ransom themselves). In effect, Islamic bondage is release from internment into social guardianship." - Yassine
Makes argument against, your sources, and one of your examples. #20
"- Let's see... 'Sources: The Legacy of Arab-Islam In Africa by Azumah John Alembillah & Race and Slavery in the Middle East by Bernard Lewis' – one is a some random Islamophobic pastor, the other is a Jewish critic of Islam. The guy couldn't find a single academic or reliable source to resort to these? LOL!
. Literally 90% of the video is fake news from the very start: "In 1842, the British Consul General in Morocco wrote a letter to the Sultan to ask him if he had taken any measures to stop slavery or at least, slave trade. The sultan replied that he will not do anything about it because it has been the norm since the time of the sons of Adam and no sects of Islam are against it. Hence, he will not permit anything the Qur’an forbids and will not make unlawful anything that the Qur’an has allowed". – First of all, this is coming from a nation which is known to have enslaved & massacred more people than any other in Human History! LOL! Second of all, the missing factor here is that Back slaves in Morocco (called 'Abid Bukhari') constituted the backbone of the Sultan's military power, hence Europe's interest in the matter – analogous to Slavic slaves in the Ottoman Empire. Black slaves in Morocco made up the officers, royal guards, generals, & sometimes even most court officials. This is unlike the status of Black slaves in Europe (or the US). Third of all, same as in the Ottoman Empire, a slave under Alawit Morocco could seek emancipation in court, either by Zakat or by ransoming his freedom; though that rarely happened. You know why? No slave is dumb enough to lose his post of authority & privilege just to be a free man with none." - Yassine
. . .
Well, I don't think he argues that there were 'no black slaves,
Though he does make argument that slavery in Islam is different than western slavery.
And it 'is true I suppose, that much like forms of government, there are many forms of slavery, still I'm not a fan of slavery.
I think he has 'some points when he makes arguments against western policy, 'some, though not all, maybe not even a majority, but I just skimmed those parts.
-->
@Lemming
17 million black slave are few ?
-->
@Lunar108
Eh, my post was more for acknowledging that he made arguments against blacks being prime slaves in Islam.
Or in my reading post #6
"I said, Islam had no hand in Slavery, period" - Yassine
I don't know much of history in Africa or the Middle East, so I've not much to say.
I 'would argue a distinction between government and religion, though.
Though religion has often given laws,
Many times in history, one see's countries act 'not according to their religions laws,
Or twist them to suit their needs.
I'd also argue against religion being the same 'everywhere.
In both place and time, they see great variation.
-->
@Lemming
I'd love to see the sources of his claims that black slaves were a rarity under islam
I've provided mine and he claim that both are inadequate but he made many claims and provided no evidence whatsoever
while mamluke (slav/white) slaves did have an islamic dynasty there were no black slaves dynasty , I can't help but wonder why ? I mean even the turk got the ottoman empire
I searched and found nothing supporting his claims
also black slaves are called abd which translate into -slave-
while white slaves are called mamluk which translate into -owned-
just wanted to mention this trivia
The Prophet Muhammad did not try to abolish slavery, and bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves himself. But he insisted that slave owners treat their slaves well and stressed the virtue of freeing slaves.
-->
@FLRW
The Prophet Muhammad did not try to abolish slavery, and bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves himself. But he insisted that slave owners treat their slaves well and stressed the virtue of freeing slaves.
virtue of freeing muslim slaves
-->
@Lunar108
Yes, the world has witnessed horrific accounts of the enslavement of thousands of innocent Yazidis and other religious minorities by ISIS partisans in Iraq and Syria.
In a recent article in its online English-language magazine, ISIS ideologues offered legal justifications for the enslavement of these non-Muslim non-combatants, stating that “enslaving the families of the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Shariah or Islamic law.”
In a recent article in its online English-language magazine, ISIS ideologues offered legal justifications for the enslavement of these non-Muslim non-combatants, stating that “enslaving the families of the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Shariah or Islamic law.”
-->
@FLRW
Yes, the world has witnessed horrific accounts of the enslavement of thousands of innocent Yazidis and other religious minorities by ISIS partisans in Iraq and Syria.In a recent article in its online English-language magazine, ISIS ideologues offered legal justifications for the enslavement of these non-Muslim non-combatants, stating that “enslaving the families of the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Shariah or Islamic law.”
ISIS are largely Salafist Islam. It's a fringe school that used to be relegated to one tiny backwater of Arabia and for much of Islamic history was not very influential or mainstream. It was the school adopted by the house of Saud in the Najd. When the British put the house of Saud in power (hence Saudi Arabia) this school of Islam also came to power, and the royal family of Saudi Arabia has been using their vast oil incomes to finance its promulgation throughout the Middle East and beyond ever since. They view other Muslims as infidels, which is a pretty unique understanding in the Islamic world, and leads to a lot higher levels of inter-religious violence. Groups like ISIS are often even more extreme than mainsteam Salafist thinkers, so using what they say about slavery as some sort of example of Islamic thought at large, or especially historically, is not advised.
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
ISIS are largely Salafist Islam. It's a fringe school that used to be relegated to one tiny backwater of Arabia and for much of Islamic history was not very influential or mainstream. It was the school adopted by the house of Saud in the Najd. When the British put the house of Saud in power (hence Saudi Arabia) this school of Islam also came to power, and the royal family of Saudi Arabia has been using their vast oil incomes to finance its promulgation throughout the Middle East and beyond ever since. They view other Muslims as infidels, which is a pretty unique understanding in the Islamic world, and leads to a lot higher levels of inter-religious violence. Groups like ISIS are often even more extreme than mainsteam Salafist thinkers, so using what they say about slavery as some sort of example of Islamic thought at large, or especially historically, is not advised.
- Wow! This is extremely well informed. I missed this in this lost Forum. To be more specific, in case others are interested. Salafis are the followers of Muhammed Ibn Abd Wahab, a rebel against his clan & the Ottomans, who taught the following:
1. Visiting tombs, & seeking blessings from the beloved Prophet (pbuh) or saints is Shirk (polytheism).
2. Anyone who does the above is Kafir (which is literally the entire Muslim world), & anyone who denies this is also Kafir.
3. God is a body, in space & time, albeit a very very very big body.
4. Al-Hussein, grandson of the Prophet (pbuh), deserved to be killed.
5. The world is eternal in the past.
- Despite failed attempts for 150 years, the Wahabis were successful in building their state with the help of the British early 20th century, to remove the Ottomans from Arabia. Which they achieved by massacring entire towns, such as Taif & Hail, men, women & children...
- Fast-forward to the present, Salafis eventually divided between 4 major groups & other countless local groups:
1. Jamis, including the Madkhalis, the mainstream in Saudi, loyal to the Saudi government.
2. Sururis, calling to follow the founder, anti-Saudi government, such as al-Qaeda.
3. Jihadis, like sururis, but believe in war & terrorism to achieve their goals, such as ISIS.
4. Daawis, they infiltrate other groups & schools to spread their virus.
-->
@FLRW
The Prophet Muhammad did not try to abolish slavery, and bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves himself.
- In name, yes he did not. But in practice, he completely abolished it. There is no chattel slavery in Islam. In fact, some of the most severe punishments are prescribed in Sharia for those who enslave people in chattel slavery, ranging from severing one hand, to one hand & one foot, to execution, to crucifixion. The beloved Prophet (pbuh) turned the Slavery Institution into a welfare program to deal with prisoners of war, in a way to integrate them into Muslim society, in loyalty & productivity. A slave in Islam may effectively own property, participate in literally all aspects of social & political life, practice their own faith. A slave may also be elected as head of state, in accordance to Muhammed's (pbuh) command: "be dutiful to your ruler, even if he is a handicapped Black slave". In fact, this happened few times in Islamic History. The Mamluk Dynasty (literally 'slave') ruled the Middle East for 250 years, despite being slaves. Because they were elected by the people to lead the country, they had to be bought by the state to perform their duties. They were slaves owned by the state to rule the state. That's the legacy of our beloved Prophet (pbuh).
But he insisted that slave owners treat their slaves well and stressed the virtue of freeing slaves.
- He commanded they be treated as family, meaning, it is an obligation on the master to feed, shelter & care for his slave as he would his own son, else punishable by law.
@ Lunar108
I'd love to see the sources of his claims that black slaves were a rarity under islam
- I mentioned the specific names & locations of the destinations of these Black slaves...
I've provided mine and he claim that both are inadequate but he made many claims and provided no evidence whatsoever
- A Christian pastor is not a source...
while mamluke (slav/white) slaves did have an islamic dynasty there were no black slaves dynasty
- Already mentioned, the second Akhshidit dynasty, founded by Kafur, the Nubian slave – or the Black slave king Ambar in India...
, I can't help but wonder why ?
- Show me the FREE Arab or Turkic or Indian or whatever dynasty in Christian Europe, or Secular West.
I mean even the turk got the ottoman empire
- The Ottomans were not slaves, albeit slaves run their empire. Examples of Turkic slave dynasties are the Ghaznavids, the Ghurids, the Delhi Mamluks... As for Black dynasties, there are plenty of them.
I searched and found nothing supporting his claims
- Which claim...? Everything I say is FACT.
also black slaves are called abd which translate into -slave-while white slaves are called mamluk which translate into -owned-
- LMAO! That's the eastern (Middle East) vs. western (Maghreb) terminology. Black slaves in the Middle East are called mamluk too. Regardless, a Muslim can not call a slave 'Abdi or Mamluki (my slave), that's categorically prohibited in Islam, for the beloved Prophet (pbuh) said: "do not call who is under you 'my slave', call them 'my brother' or 'my friend'", we are all only slaves to God.
just wanted to mention this trivia
- Stupid* trivia.
17 million black slave are few ?
- Try 170 million or 17 billion, or better 17 trillion... stop lying. The entire North African population was half that.
-->
@Yassine
@Lunar108
Would love to see a debate between you two.
-->
@Bones
Would love to see a debate between you two.
- Amen to that.
227 days later
-->
@Lunar108
For all those who claim that Islam had no hand in black people slavery
The fact Africans have embraced both Islam and Christianity proves they appreciated the Arab Slave Trade and the European/American/Christianity role in African Slavery.
The question is, now that Africa is no longer a British colony will the Africans revive black slavery in Africa having the blueprints of slavery left behind by Arabs and Christians?
The demand for slaves outside Africa has greatly diminished. But slavery in Africa can greatly boost its economy by providing free and cheap labour when the rest of the world are struggling with the high cost of labour.
Black discrimination will end. Blacks will now be the slave masters of black slaves and remain in Africa.
BLM may become irrelevant. It will strictly become a black issue as blacks try to put a value to black slaves.