398
edits
Slavery in Islamic Law: Difference between revisions
m
→External Links: Added a great article series from atheism Vs islam.com on this topic - which covers a lot of original Islamic sources not mentioned on Wikiislam, as well as responding to counter-claims. Would recommend reading!
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) (Added new sections and removed for brevity some sections that had been duplicated from another article.) |
m (→External Links: Added a great article series from atheism Vs islam.com on this topic - which covers a lot of original Islamic sources not mentioned on Wikiislam, as well as responding to counter-claims. Would recommend reading!) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
{{Quote|{{Quran|24|32}}|And marry the unmarried among you and the righteous among your male slaves and female slaves. If they should be poor, Allah will enrich them from His bounty, and Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.}} | {{Quote|{{Quran|24|32}}|And marry the unmarried among you and the righteous among your male slaves and female slaves. If they should be poor, Allah will enrich them from His bounty, and Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.}} | ||
One verse allows believers to marry captives who already have husbands. Traditionally, this was revealed after a battle following which Muhammad's men were uncertain whether or not they could have sexual relations with the female captives who had mushrik husbands (see {{Muslim|8|3432}}). | One verse allows believers to marry captives who already have husbands. Traditionally, this was revealed after a battle following which Muhammad's men were uncertain whether or not they could have sexual relations with the female captives who had mushrik husbands (see {{Muslim|8|3432}}). The mushrikun were those who associated partners with Allah (often translated as "pagans" or "polytheists"). | ||
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|4|22|24}}|And do not marry those [women] whom your fathers married, except what has already occurred. Indeed, it was an immorality and hateful [to Allah] and was evil as a way. Prohibited to you (For marriage) are:- Your mothers, daughters, sisters; father's sisters, Mother's sisters; brother's daughters, sister's daughters; foster-mothers (Who gave you suck), foster-sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in,- no prohibition if ye have not gone in;- (Those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful;-'''Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess''': Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.}} | {{Quote|{{Quran-range|4|22|24}}|And do not marry those [women] whom your fathers married, except what has already occurred. Indeed, it was an immorality and hateful [to Allah] and was evil as a way. Prohibited to you (For marriage) are:- Your mothers, daughters, sisters; father's sisters, Mother's sisters; brother's daughters, sister's daughters; foster-mothers (Who gave you suck), foster-sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in,- no prohibition if ye have not gone in;- (Those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful;-'''Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess''': Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.}} | ||
| Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
===In Islamic law=== | ===In Islamic law=== | ||
In Islam, the consent of a slave girl for sex, for withdrawal before ejaculation ([[azl]]) or to marry her off to someone else was not considered necessary, historically, according to Professor Kecia Ali.<ref>{{Cite web|first=Kecia |last=Ali | publication-date=January 20, 2017 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-middle-east-studies/article/concubinage-and-consent/F8E807073C33F403A91C1ACA0CFA47FD | title=Concubinage and Consent|publisher=Cambridge University Press|access-date=October 20, 2021}}</ref> | In Islam, the consent of a slave girl for sex, for withdrawal before ejaculation ([[azl]]) or to marry her off to someone else was not considered necessary, historically, according to Professor Kecia Ali.<ref>{{Cite web|first=Kecia |last=Ali | publication-date=January 20, 2017 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-middle-east-studies/article/concubinage-and-consent/F8E807073C33F403A91C1ACA0CFA47FD | title=Concubinage and Consent|publisher=Cambridge University Press|access-date=October 20, 2021}}</ref> Early legal hadiths and jurist opinions include punishments for the rape of slave women, but these are explicitly referring to situations where someone other than the slave woman's owner forces her into intercourse, which is treated as a property crime for which compensation is due to the owner for the depreciation in her value and the perpetrator would face the hadd punishment (see [[Rape in Islamic Law]]). | ||
Professor Jonathan A. C. Brown has written extensively on this topic: | |||
{{Quote|Jonathan A. C. Brown (2019) ''Slavery & Islam'', pp. 281-282<ref>Jonathan A.C. Brown (2019) ''Slavery & Islam'', London: Oneworld Publications, Chapter 7, pp. 281-282, ISBN 978-1-78607-635-9</ref>|As noted earlier, marriage and a male's ownership of a female slave were the two relationships in which sex could licitly occur according to the Shariah. In marriage, the consent of the wife to sex was assumed by virtue of the marriage contract itself. In the case of the slave-concubine, consent was irrelevant because of the master's ownership of the woman in question. As Kecia Ali has noted, there is no evidence for any requirement for consent from slave women in books of Islamic law in the formative centuries of Islam.<BR /> | |||
[...]<BR /> | |||
In the Shariah, consent was crucial if you belonged to a class of individuals whose consent mattered: free women and men who were adults (even male slaves could not be married off against their will according to the Hanbali and Shafiʿi schools, and this extended to slaves with ''mukataba'' arrangements in the Hanafi school). Consent did not matter for minors. And it did not matter for female slaves, who could be married off by their master or whose master could have a sexual relationship with them if he wanted (provided the woman was not married or under a contract to buy her own freedom).}} | |||
Like wives, a slave woman had a right to complain in court if intercourse with her owner caused her physical harm (see [[Rape in Islamic Law]] for details). However, on this point Brown notes that "Both wives and slaves had the same recourse to courts or members of the community. Unlike wives, however, slaves were almost by definition cut off from support networks other than their owners".<ref>Ibid. p. 132</ref> | |||
Regarding slave marriages, Joseph Schacht wrote in his textbook on Islamic law, "The marriage of the slave requires the permission of the owner; he can also give the slave in marriage against his or her will. [...] The unmarried female slave is at the disposal of her male owner as a concubine, but no similar provision applies between a male slave and his female owner."<ref>Joseph Schact, [https://archive.org/details/INTRODUCTIONISLAMICLAWSchacht/page/n133/mode/2up An Introduction to Islamic Law], Oxford University Press, 1982 (first published 1964), p. 127</ref> | |||
In her book ''Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam'', Kecia Ali explains that there was consensus that slave women could be compelled by their owners into marrying whosoever their owner wished (except that he could not himself marry her while she was a slave, though she could become an ''umm walad'', as discussed above). As for male slaves, the Maliki school held that owners could marry off their own male slaves without their consent, as did most Hanafis. The Shafi'i school in contrast held that this could not be done without the male slave's consent.<ref>Kecia Ali, "Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam", Massachussets: Harvard University Press, 2010, pp. 39-40</ref> A master could annul the marriage of his female slave and contract her divorce without her permission, whereas from the 9th century CE jurists decided that a male slave's marriage could not be dissolved by his owner without his permission (though all jurists agreed that his owner's permission was required for him to marry in the first place).<ref>Ibid. p. 153-5</ref> | In her book ''Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam'', Kecia Ali explains that there was consensus that slave women could be compelled by their owners into marrying whosoever their owner wished (except that he could not himself marry her while she was a slave, though she could become an ''umm walad'', as discussed above). As for male slaves, the Maliki school held that owners could marry off their own male slaves without their consent, as did most Hanafis. The Shafi'i school in contrast held that this could not be done without the male slave's consent.<ref>Kecia Ali, "Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam", Massachussets: Harvard University Press, 2010, pp. 39-40</ref> A master could annul the marriage of his female slave and contract her divorce without her permission, whereas from the 9th century CE jurists decided that a male slave's marriage could not be dissolved by his owner without his permission (though all jurists agreed that his owner's permission was required for him to marry in the first place).<ref>Ibid. p. 153-5</ref> | ||
| Line 117: | Line 127: | ||
Although Muhammad's men seem to have had intercourse with captive mushrik women whom they had captured during the expedition to Awtas/Autas ({{Muslim|8|3432}}), most jurists later ruled that this was later forbidden by {{Quran|2|221}} (the verse only forbids marriage to mushrik women, but scholars inferred that this also applied to intercourse with slaves). Intercourse with Muslim, Christian, or Jewish slaves was not affected by this restriction.<ref>{{Citation|url=https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/272452/|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227215257/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/272452/|title=Ruling on sexual intercourse with one's polytheistic slave-woman|date=November 14, 2014|publisher=Islamweb.net}}</ref> | Although Muhammad's men seem to have had intercourse with captive mushrik women whom they had captured during the expedition to Awtas/Autas ({{Muslim|8|3432}}), most jurists later ruled that this was later forbidden by {{Quran|2|221}} (the verse only forbids marriage to mushrik women, but scholars inferred that this also applied to intercourse with slaves). Intercourse with Muslim, Christian, or Jewish slaves was not affected by this restriction.<ref>{{Citation|url=https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/272452/|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227215257/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/272452/|title=Ruling on sexual intercourse with one's polytheistic slave-woman|date=November 14, 2014|publisher=Islamweb.net}}</ref> | ||
Early scholars of fiqh devised a workaround for this restriction, including the allowance of raping younger captives who were mushrik: | Early scholars of fiqh devised a workaround for this restriction, including the allowance of raping younger captives who were Zoroastrian or mushrik: | ||
{{Quote|{{citation| last=Friedmann | first=Yohanan| title=Tolerance and Coercion in Islam: Interfaith Relations in the Muslim Tradition|publisher=Cambridge University Press|ISBN=9780511497568|pages=107-108|date=August 2009|series=Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/tolerance-and-coercion-in-islam/603974A9EFEDC7FBD00B38D0845AECAA|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20180614220208/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/tolerance-and-coercion-in-islam/603974A9EFEDC7FBD00B38D0845AECAA}}|According to a report included in the ''Jāmi‘'' of al-Khallāl (d. 311 A.H. / 923 A.D.), '''Ibn Hanbal maintained that | {{Quote|{{citation| last=Friedmann | first=Yohanan| title=Tolerance and Coercion in Islam: Interfaith Relations in the Muslim Tradition|publisher=Cambridge University Press|ISBN=9780511497568|pages=107-108|date=August 2009|series=Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/tolerance-and-coercion-in-islam/603974A9EFEDC7FBD00B38D0845AECAA|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20180614220208/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/tolerance-and-coercion-in-islam/603974A9EFEDC7FBD00B38D0845AECAA}}|According to a report included in the ''Jāmi‘'' of al-Khallāl (d. 311 A.H. / 923 A.D.), '''Ibn Hanbal maintained that | ||
| Line 131: | Line 141: | ||
A number of hadiths relate anecdotes about Umar (the second caliph) and his son Ibn Umar, who was likewise a companion of the prophet, in relation to slave women and slave markets. Umar reportedly struck a slave woman for wearing a jilbab over her head because this was only to be worn by free believing women. Ibn Umar is reported to have routinely touched the breasts and buttocks of slave girls in the market when he wished to buy them. Imam Malik (d. 795 CE) reportedly complained of the slave-women of Medina going about with uncovered breasts. See [[Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Slavery]] for the relevant hadith reports which have been graded sahih by various scholars. | A number of hadiths relate anecdotes about Umar (the second caliph) and his son Ibn Umar, who was likewise a companion of the prophet, in relation to slave women and slave markets. Umar reportedly struck a slave woman for wearing a jilbab over her head because this was only to be worn by free believing women. Ibn Umar is reported to have routinely touched the breasts and buttocks of slave girls in the market when he wished to buy them. Imam Malik (d. 795 CE) reportedly complained of the slave-women of Medina going about with uncovered breasts. See [[Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Slavery]] for the relevant hadith reports which have been graded sahih by various scholars. | ||
In his book ''Slavery & Islam'', Jonathan Brown writes, "Despite the objection of some Muslim scholars like Shayrazi (d. 1193-4), it seems to have been routine in Islamic civilization for buyers at slave markets to press on the buttocks and breasts of potential ''jariyas'' [slave girls]. Sometimes buyers even examined the genitals of male or | In his book ''Slavery & Islam'', Jonathan Brown writes, "Despite the objection of some Muslim scholars like Shayrazi (d. 1193-4), it seems to have been routine in Islamic civilization for buyers at slave markets to press on the buttocks and breasts of potential ''jariyas'' [slave girls]. Sometimes buyers even examined the genitals of male or female slaves, though papyri of sale contracts from the 800s to 900s frequently include boiler-plate language suggesting they were not. Ultimately, slave women were sexually vulnerable and at the mercy of their masters."<ref>Jonathan Brown, ''Slavery & Islam'', Oneworld publications, 2019, p. 132</ref> | ||
In Islamic law, the 'awrah of a woman are the areas of her body which must be covered in the presence of non-mahrams (men other than close relatives). Jurists did not require slave-women to be covered like free Muslim women based on their interpretation of {{Quran|33|59}}, allowing a slave's hair, arms and part of her legs to be uncovered. Many even considered a slave woman's 'awrah to be only from her navel to her knees. Khaled Abou El Fadl covers the detailed opinions in his book, ''Speaking in God's Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women''.<ref>Khaled Abou el Fadl, ''Speaking in God's Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women'', 2001, pp. 525-526 and endnotes 123-129</ref> Oliver Leaman and Kecia Ali summarise the situation: "Khaled Abou El Fadl points out that jurists disagreed as to whether enslaved women's breasts constituted ''awrah'' and had to be covered in public."<ref>Oliver Leaman and Kecia Ali, ''Islam: The Key Concepts", 2010, London: Routledge, p. 14</ref> | In Islamic law, the 'awrah of a woman are the areas of her body which must be covered in the presence of non-mahrams (men other than close relatives). Jurists did not require slave-women to be covered like free Muslim women based on their interpretation of {{Quran|33|59}}, allowing a slave's hair, arms and part of her legs to be uncovered. Many even considered a slave woman's 'awrah to be only from her navel to her knees. Khaled Abou El Fadl covers the detailed opinions in his book, ''Speaking in God's Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women''.<ref>Khaled Abou el Fadl, ''Speaking in God's Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women'', 2001, pp. 525-526 and endnotes 123-129</ref> Oliver Leaman and Kecia Ali summarise the situation: "Khaled Abou El Fadl points out that jurists disagreed as to whether enslaved women's breasts constituted ''awrah'' and had to be covered in public."<ref>Oliver Leaman and Kecia Ali, ''Islam: The Key Concepts", 2010, London: Routledge, p. 14</ref> | ||
| Line 166: | Line 176: | ||
==Treatment of slaves in practice== | ==Treatment of slaves in practice== | ||
A number of myths about the historical facts of slavery under Islamic rule are commonly propogated in Islamic apologetics discourse as well as by some credulous Western academic authors. These tend to be misplaced theoretical assumptions based on rules for the treatment of slaves in Islamic texts, or because various travellers observed that slaves serving as domestic servants were generally loyal and treated well. Others point to the potential for slaves to advance to positions of military, political and even economic power. However, Azumah points out that unlike the Mamluks (a dynasty established by slave-generals which ruled Egypt and Syria from 1250-1517 CE), being a eunuch was "virtually the only route by which a black could attain high office’ of any kind within the Muslim world outside black Africa." Moreover, while most slaves in Muslim lands were destined to be domestic servants, many female slaves were used as concubines ( | A number of myths about the historical facts of slavery under Islamic rule are commonly propogated in Islamic apologetics discourse as well as by some credulous Western academic authors. These tend to be misplaced theoretical assumptions based on rules for the treatment of slaves in Islamic texts, or because various travellers observed that slaves serving as domestic servants were generally loyal and treated well. Others point to the potential for slaves to advance to positions of military, political and even economic power. However, Azumah points out that unlike the Mamluks (a dynasty established by slave-generals which ruled Egypt and Syria from 1250-1517 CE), being a eunuch was "virtually the only route by which a black could attain high office’ of any kind within the Muslim world outside black Africa." Moreover, while most slaves in Muslim lands were destined to be domestic servants, many female slaves were used as concubines (in the harems of rulers as well as in private settings), and significant percentages of slaves were put to work on plantations, as infantry, or were castrated to serve as eunuchs.<ref>John Alembillah Azumah, ''The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa'', pp. 175-180</ref> Slaves put to work on plantations were treated with harshness and cruelty: | ||
{{Quote|John Alembillah Azumah, ''The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa'', pp. 181-182|As early as the ninth century, the Zanj, according to the great Arab historian al-Tabari, were employed in gangs of between 500 and 5000 in the salt marshes of southern Iraq. Al-Tabari observes that their condition was ‘extremely bad’ and that they were literally pinned down there, hopeless and homeless’. Their reward consisted of ‘a few handfuls of meal’. Their miserable condition led to several rebellions, the fiercest of which lasted for fifteen years from 868 to 883 CE. | {{Quote|John Alembillah Azumah, ''The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa'', pp. 181-182|As early as the ninth century, the Zanj, according to the great Arab historian al-Tabari, were employed in gangs of between 500 and 5000 in the salt marshes of southern Iraq. Al-Tabari observes that their condition was ‘extremely bad’ and that they were literally pinned down there, hopeless and homeless’. Their reward consisted of ‘a few handfuls of meal’. Their miserable condition led to several rebellions, the fiercest of which lasted for fifteen years from 868 to 883 CE. | ||
| Line 187: | Line 197: | ||
==External Links== | ==External Links== | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHm9F1G5IRE What does Islam say about slavery - Part I Theology] and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkMcUKRNssY Part II History] - Salsalah - Youtube.com | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHm9F1G5IRE What does Islam say about slavery - Part I Theology] and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkMcUKRNssY Part II History] - Salsalah - ''Youtube video'' | ||
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zexn9IrMmNI HarrisSultanAthiest - Islam and Slavery] - How Islam Enslaved Africa - ''YouTube Video'' | |||
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-BRkNwpczg Friendly Exmuslim - Hijab's Dishonesty about Slavery in Islam] - ''YouTube Video'' | |||
* [https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/islamic-slavery/47-part-1-crimes-of-islamic-slavery-against-humanity Part 1: The Crimes of Islamic Slavery against Humanity], [https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/islamic-slavery/46-part-2-allah-muhammad-forced-the-poor-slave-women-to-move-with-naked-breasts-in-public Part 2: Allah/Muhammad Forced Poor Slave Women to Move with Naked Breasts in Public], [https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/islamic-slavery/45-part-3-muslim-excuses-deceptions-regarding-islamic-slavery Part 3: Islamic Excuses and Deceptions Regarding Islamic Slavery] - ''Atheism vs Islam.com articles on this topic'' | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||