The qur'an

[England my lionheart]

As stated before, capturing a free Muslim as a slave is illegal in Islam. Yet in Mauritania, this is exactly what they do. Is there any form of Sharia in which this can be considered legal? I doubt it. So why does slavery persist? Because it is deeply entrenched in Mauritanian society, and the government refuses to face this fact, instead pretending slavery no longer exists.

I've heard the cultural excuse many times,there are entire Families of non Muslim Slaves bred for the purpose,like it or not the justification is there,many Muslims do not practice Slavery but never the less its right there in the Qur'an.

 

[croak]

I've heard the cultural excuse many times,there are entire Families of non Muslim Slaves bred for the purpose,like it or not the justification is there,many Muslims do not practice Slavery but never the less its right there in the Qur'an.

In Mauritania? Can I have sources? From what I've read, nearly 100% of Mauritania's population is Muslim, save for a tiny Catholic minority.

 

[England my lionheart]

In Mauritania? Can I have sources? From what I've read, nearly 100% of Mauritania's population is Muslim, save for a tiny Catholic minority.

There are Christans and Jews there but how much choice would a Slave have in choosing anything,99% is said to be Muslim which you can Google easily,but hey whats 1% matter.

 

[croak]

There are Christans and Jews there but how much choice would a Slave have in choosing anything,99% is said to be Muslim which you can Google easily,but hey whats 1% matter.

I don't know about Jews; that 1% appears to be made up of Christians and followers of ethnic religions. Also, it's estimated 20% of the population is enslaved. According to these statistics, at the very least, 19% of slaves would be Muslim.

Which returns to what I said about this being illegal in Islam, not to mention Mauritania is not at war with its minorities.

 

[England my lionheart]

I don't know about Jews; that 1% appears to be made up of Christians and followers of ethnic religions. Also, it's estimated 20% of the population is enslaved. According to these statistics, at the very least, 19% of slaves would be Muslim.

Which returns to what I said about this being illegal in Islam, not to mention Mauritania is not at war with its minorities.

So does that mean its legal to have Slaves as long as they aren't Muslim

 

[Autodidact]

As stated before, capturing a free Muslim as a slave is illegal in Islam. Yet in Mauritania, this is exactly what they do. Is there any form of Sharia in which this can be considered legal? I doubt it. So why does slavery persist? Because it is deeply entrenched in Mauritanian society, and the government refuses to face this fact, instead pretending slavery no longer exists.

Why is it more moral to enslave a non-Muslim than a Muslim?

 

[croak]

So does that mean its illegal to have Slaves as long as they aren't Muslim

In Mauritania, by law, all slavery is illegal. As for Islam, I'll quote the source I used earlier.

Is slavery still legal in Islam?

The answer is that slavery is legal under Islamic law but only in theory. Slavery is illegal under the state law of all Muslim countries.
Theoretically Islamic law lays down that if a person was captured in a lawful jihad or was the descendent of an unbroken chain of people who had been lawfully enslaved, then it might be legal to enslave them.

....

In practice, it seems virtually impossible that there will ever again be a jihad that is lawfully declared according to the strict letter of the law, and there are no living descendants of lawful slaves, which means that legal enslavement is unthinkable.

Who can be enslaved

Under Islamic law people can only be legally enslaved in two circumstances:

• as the result of being defeated in a war that was legal according to sharia
• if they are born as the child of two slave parents

Other legal systems of the time allowed people to be enslaved in a far wider range of circumstances.
The sharia limits were often either ignored or evaded, and many instances of slave trading by Muslims were in fact illegal, but tolerated.
The following groups of people cannot be made slaves:

• Free Muslims, but note that:
  • Slaves who convert to Islam are not automatically freed
  • Children born to legally enslaved Muslims are also slaves
• Dhimmis

BBC - Religions - Islam: Slavery in Islam

 

[croak]

Why is it more moral to enslave a non-Muslim than a Muslim?

I am assuming the idea was that Muslims were united, and it would be unthinkable to make war with each other. I am not sure whether war between Muslims is justified. However, a descendant of slaves can be Muslim and still be a slave, due to circumstance.

 

[Autodidact]

I am assuming the idea was that Muslims were united, and it would be unthinkable to make war with each other. I am not sure whether war between Muslims is justified. However, a descendant of slaves can be Muslim and still be a slave, due to circumstance.

I'm not asking you what the idea was. I'm asking you why, in your view, it is moral to enslave a non-Muslim, but not a Muslim.

 

[croak]

I'm not asking you what the idea was. I'm asking you why, in your view, it is moral to enslave a non-Muslim, but not a Muslim.

Okay. Define morality.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Well what is the intention? I can't reasonably answer that because it is hidden from me in the heart of the individual. But I might think that one demonstrates a bit of arrogance. They assert they have the ability to decern the truth strictly through intellect. God say you have to use faith. So the option of seeking God through faith isn't even attempted while living. If someone sincerely tried to invoke faith and was only able to muster the smallest amount, in all sincerity, the are promised the reward as well. I think it is a matter of "don't knock it till you try it"
Judgment according to what one did: If you could use those good things as a means to attempt to muster even a little faith I think it would garner a sympathetic judgment.

First: the Qur'an does not say that Allah will judge disbelievers based on their hearts and their intentions. It says if a person dies a disbeliever, s/he will be thrown in fire with shackles. No judgment based on intentions. So the question is not "Does TJ73 have the ability to judge people's intentions" the question is, is it merciful to throw someone in fire and shackles without even considering their intentions?

Second: you think that all disbelievers are arrogant? Many Christians, Jews, etc. agree with you that we cannot discern the truth strictly through intellect. They seek God through faith. They simply have faith in a different religion than Islam. Or they have faith in Buddhism, or a philosophy, but not God. For picking the wrong religion to have faith in, they deserve shackles and fire and no forgiveness? You have faith in Allah, and another person has faith in Buddha, and you are therefore modest and innocent, and they are arrogant and deserve eternal fire? I'm an atheist, but that doesn't mean I believe I can discern the entire truth. It simply means I do not believe Islam is the entire truth. Just as you may read my favorite book of philosophy (say) and find it unconvincing, I read the Qur'an, and find it unconvincing. I would never accuse you of being arrogant simply because my arguments and my books do not convince you. But simply because I am not convinced by your arguments, and your books, I am arrogant?

Third: Even if disbelievers were a little arrogant, so what? Are there no arrogant Muslims? And is eternal fire a "merciful" punishment for the crime of arrogance? Is it even a "reasonable" punishment? According to most human laws, even murderers are not subjected to such inhumane and cruel torture, which is totally disproportionate to the crime committed. Imagine the police having an old woman shackled and burned with fire for days and days on end, because on her 80th birthday she was "arrogant". How could you possibly say this is merciful? And yet if the old woman died instead of turning 80, and if the torturer was Allah instead of the police, and the torture lasted for eternity instead of only a few days .... then you would call this sadistic cruelty "merciful"?? How does an act, considered barbaric when it is performed by humans, become "merciful" when described by the Qur'an and amplified to an infinite degree?

It's evident that human beings, at their best, have the capacity to be far, far more merciful, and far more reasonable, than Allah as described by the Qur'an.

If someone sincerely tried to invoke faith and was only able to muster the smallest amount, in all sincerity, the are promised the reward as well. I think it is a matter of "don't knock it till you try it" Judgment according to what one did: If you could use those good things as a means to attempt to muster even a little faith I think it would garner a sympathetic judgment.

But that's not what the Qur'an says. The Qur'an says if a person is a disbeliever when they die, they will burn in fire forever, with no forgiveness. It does not say people who "tried to invoke faith... in all sincerity.." are promised the reward. Correct me if I'm wrong:

[3.91] Surely, those who disbelieve and die while they are unbelievers, the earth full of gold shall not be accepted from one of them, though he should offer to ransom himself with it, these it is who shall have a painful chastisement, and they shall have no helpers.
​

[2.161] Surely those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these it is on whom is the curse of Allah and the angels and men all;

[ 18.102] ... Surely We have prepared hell for the entertainment of the unbelievers.

[ 76.4] Surely We have prepared for the unbelievers chains and shackles and a burning fire.

[ 35.34] And (as for) those who disbelieve, for them is the fire of hell; it shall not be finished with them entirely so that they should die, nor shall the chastisement thereof be lightened to them: even thus do We retribute every ungrateful one.

[ 46.34] And on the day when those who disbelieve shall be brought before the fire: Is it not true? They shall say: Aye! by our Lord! He will say: Then taste the punishment, because you disbelieved.

[ 74.31] And We have not made the wardens of the fire others than angels, and We have not made their number but as a trial for those who disbelieve, that those who have been given the book may be certain and those who believe may increase in faith, and those who have been given the book and the believers may not doubt, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the unbelievers may say: What does Allah mean by this parable? Thus does Allah make err whom He pleases, and He guides whom He pleases, and none knows the hosts of your Lord but He Himself; and this is naught but a reminder to the mortals.
​

Again, it does not say "Surely we have prepared hell for the entertainment of the insincere people". Allah will not say "Taste the punishment, because you were a bad person." It just says disbelievers, i.e. people who believe in books other than the Qur'an.

Merciful? Hardly. These passages are not even as sensible or merciful as imperfect human beings can be, so they cannot be describing a perfect, merciful, wise Creator.

 

[Autodidact]

Okay. Define morality.

Because you don't know what "morality" means?! Uh, o.k., morality "is a system of conduct and ethics that is virtuous."'concern with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong; right or good conduct" In other words, in your view, why is it right to enslave a non-Muslim, but wrong to enslave a Muslim?

 

[A-ManESL]

Are you arguing that the qur'an, hadith and life of the prophet do NOT authorize Muslims to capture, own, buy and sell slaves, including sex slaves?

Yes (presently). Although I wouldnt say I am arguing this, rather that I hold this view.

 

[Autodidact]

Yes (presently). Although I wouldnt say I am arguing this, rather that I hold this view.

O.K., please cite the verses of the qur'an, the hadith, and the life of a prophet who did not own slaves to support your assertion that Islam prohibits slavery.

So I guess according to you Muslims are the least Islamic people in the world? Because while their religion outlawed slavery, the created the largest and most successful slave trading operation the world has ever seen?

 

[kai]

It seems to me that out right prohibition wasnt made because it was the social norm. that God didnt feel able to banish slavery outright for some reason.

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.


I take that doesnt mean God couldnt imagine a civilised society without slaves? or maybe its not outrageous enough for an outright ban? or maybe he didn't feel muslims could do it? and he of course would have been right because those humanitarian interpretations of how to treat slaves only lasted a few decades in practise.


Read more: Status of Slave Women in Islam - IslamonLine.net - Ask The Scholar

 

[YmirGF]

It seems to me that out right prohibition wasnt made because it was the social norm. that God didnt feel able to banish slavery outright for some reason.

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.


I take that doesnt mean God couldnt imagine a civilised society without slaves? or maybe its not outrageous enough for an outright ban? or maybe he didn't feel muslims could do it? and he of course would have been right because those humanitarian interpretations of how to treat slaves only lasted a few decades in practise.


Read more: Status of Slave Women in Islam - IslamonLine.net - Ask The Scholar

That much, in my opinion is fairly obvious. Where I think this ultimately fails is that the message of Muhammad was supposedly the Final message from god to mankind. Likewise the very concept of SUBMISSION clearly supports the moral perspective that slavery is all well and good. Just as Muslims see submission to a higher power as being the ultimate goal of life, it would follow that having non-believers be submissive to the will of the rightly-guided is also a noble thing.

Allah knows what is best for you, even if you do not like it. If slaves are good enough for Allah, why would silly little humans ever think otherwise?

 

[A-ManESL]

O.K., please cite the verses of the qur'an, the hadith, and the life of a prophet who did not own slaves to support your assertion that Islam prohibits slavery.

So I guess according to you Muslims are the least Islamic people in the world? Because while their religion outlawed slavery, the created the largest and most successful slave trading operation the world has ever seen?

Did I say Islam prohibits slavery? If you understand Islam fully, you will see that in the absolute sense it is moot on validating or opposing slavery. The verses regarding slavery are in context of time. The absolute idea is that equality and justice must be maintained, both in the absolute sense (in relation to man and God) and in the relative sense (in context of time, society).

 

[Autodidact]

It seems to me that out right prohibition wasnt made because it was the social norm. that God didnt feel able to banish slavery outright for some reason.

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.


I take that doesnt mean God couldnt imagine a civilised society without slaves? or maybe its not outrageous enough for an outright ban? or maybe he didn't feel muslims could do it? and he of course would have been right because those humanitarian interpretations of how to treat slaves only lasted a few decades in practise.


Read more: Status of Slave Women in Islam - IslamonLine.net - Ask The Scholar

Or maybe there is no God, and Muhammad set out the social norms of his time. I've noticed that God's behavior always coincides perfectly with failing to exist.

 

[Autodidact]

Did I say Islam prohibits slavery? If you understand Islam fully, you will see that in the absolute sense it is moot on validating or opposing slavery. The verses regarding slavery are in context of time. The absolute idea is that equality and justice must be maintained, both in the absolute sense (in relation to man and God) and in the relative sense (in context of time, society).

I thought so:

Are you arguing that the qur'an, hadith and life of the prophet do NOT authorize Muslims to capture, own, buy and sell slaves, including sex slaves?

Yes (presently). Although I wouldnt say I am arguing this, rather that I hold this view.

I thought you just said that your position is that Islam does not authorize slavery. Now you're saying it doesn't prohibit it. I'm confused. Is it nuetral on the subject?

I don't see how slavery = equality or justice. Can you explain to me how slavery and equality can be reconciled? Does Islamic equality include some people owning other people? Is that Islamic justice?

 

[A-ManESL]

I do not understand why you are confused. Let me repeat: If you understand Islam fully, you will see that in the absolute sense it is moot on validating or opposing slavery.