Quran Fails to Ban Slavery
-
379 (M. Pickthall ) It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given the Scripture and wisdom and the Prophethood that he should afterwards have said unto mankind Be slaves of me instead of Allah; but (what he said was) Be ye faithful servants of the Lord by virtue of your constant teaching of the Scripture and of your constant study thereof.
It is not allowed for any human being (even if he is a prophet) even to mention enslavig other people.
-
Ask yourselves one question why would it be good (birr) to free (tahreer) a slave if the slave-master relationship was good to begin with? Why would it be a good thing to free them if there's nothing wrong the institution? It's a classic double standard of morality.
Nice attempt at building a straw man argument. Please tell us where we're literally told that it's 'good' to 'free' an ABD. Thanks.
You still haven't proven that abd= slave. The clock is ticking.
492
So, free a believing slave.Where is ABD in this verse? Please point it out to us. You keep equating slave with the quranic usage of ABD, which you still have yet to provide ANY evidence for. This is a forced interpretation of yours, to appease to some hippie sense of morality.
No, Translations aren't 'evidence', nor are Pharaoh's actions. He is not an example to follow, in any way. You're welcome to "enslave" people like he did though, If it really appeals to you that much.Lest we forget that EVERYONE in the heavens/earth is an 'abdan' to God (1993).
Do you want to define 3abd honestly? Okay. Marry an 3abd vs. free an 3abd
Either/or logical fallacy. How deep does your dungeon really go?
-
peace David A,
It's a little disappointing you did not address the points brought up.
We are also asked to atone/expiate by way of fasting, thus by your reasoning, is eating/drinking also bad?
But I do understand your reasoning. Let's say, for sake of argument, prior to AQ, there is an 3BD who wilfully agrees to serve his master, for whatever reason (e.g. paying off a debt, tribal law, poverty, admiration etc) then why would AQ say it's wrong and immediately ban it? That would be akin to saying "whatever you mutually agreed upon, even if it involved no wrongful act" is wrong. Sorry, but that's not logical.
If you disagree with AQ in terms of not immediately banning it and releasing all 3BD/RQB, then that's a valid position to take. I disagree however. For me, AQ is for all people at all times, and it aims to balance practicality and idealism, in a sustainable/building way. I would think it is very rare for any individual or society in any sphere to implement the peak of something immediately, rather than building up to it.
-
Peace,
Respectfully.Chapter 90
In the name of God, the Almighty, the Merciful.
901 I do swear by this land.
902 And you are a dweller in this land.
903 And a father and what he begets.
904 We have created man in struggle.
905 Does he think that no one is able to best him?
906 He says I spent so much money!
907 Does he think that no one saw him?
908 Did We not make for him two eyes?
909 And a tongue and two lips?
9010 And We guided him to both paths?
9011 He should choose the better path.
9012 Do you know which is the better path?
9013 The freeing of slaves.
9014 Or the feeding on a day of great hardship.
9015 An orphan of relation.
9016 Or a poor person in need.
9017 Then he has become one of those who have believed, and exhort one another to patience, and exhort one another to kindness.
9018 Those are the people of the right.
9019 As for those who rejected Our revelations, they are the people of misery.
9020 Upon them is a Fire closed over.Read The Quran carefully and ponder over the verses, amigo.
God bless you all.
Peace. -
But I do understand your reasoning. Let's say, for sake of argument, prior to AQ, there is an 3BD who wilfully agrees to serve his master, for whatever reason (e.g. paying off a debt, tribal law, poverty, admiration etc) then why would AQ say it's wrong and immediately ban it? That would be akin to saying "whatever you mutually agreed upon, even if it involved no wrongful act" is wrong. Sorry, but that's not logical.
Mutual agreement is PRECISELY the crux of the matter. Thanks for putting it so well, Wakas. Ibada is something mutual on the part of the rabb/lord/master AND the 3abd. It's when it's NOT mutually agreed upon that the 3abd becomes something else and THAT Quran does not accept.
-
Background info
Taken from Mustansir Mir's "Dictionary of Quranic Terms and Concepts"
NB 3 = Arabic letter Ayn
3BD
In its literal sense of "slave, bondsman" 3bd (pl. ibad, 3bid) occurs in such verses as 2176, 221 and 1675. But its typical Quranic meaning is "servant-worshipper." 3bd in this sense is essentially a statement of man's proper role - man ought to serve and worship God, his Creator and Lord - whether or not that role is actually performed. This explains the usage in a verse like 3413 ("Only a few of My ibad are the grateful ones", where ibad includes those who perform the stated role and those who do not. It is only when he actually performs that role that man becomes an 3bd in the true sense, as in 1765 "Indeed you shall have no power over My ibad" (also 1542). David is called a "good 3bd" in 3817, and so, in 3830, is Solomon (see also 192 and 3841).
Insofar as it is man's duty to serve God, 3bd carries ethical connotations. Occasionally, however, it is used as a value-free term. In 175, which alludes to Nebuchadnezar's attack on Jerusalem (586 B.C.), the invading troops are called "Our ibad" not because they were particularly righteous, but simply because they served as an instrument for executing a certain divine scheme.The book is rare, about 23 years old, but it is quite good sometimes.
-
Thanks Wakas, it certainly 'feels' like Mustansir's work.
-
If you disagree with AQ in terms of not immediately banning it and releasing all 3BD/RQB, then that's a valid position to take.
What do you mean by not "immediately" banning it? It doesn't ban it at all.
I disagree however. For me, AQ is for all people at all times, and it aims to balance practicality and idealism, in a sustainable/building way. I would think it is very rare for any individual or society in any sphere to implement the peak of something immediately, rather than building up to it.
We are talking about the book of almighty Allah here not the manifesto of some political party containing a list of "things we'd like to do when 'practicality' allows". Allah didn't provide a "build-up" period for banning usury. He just said "stop usury or you'll get a nasty punishment". Whether it was "practical" or not did not come into it. If he meant slavery to completely disappear he'd have issued a similar command banning it. There are a number of Qur'anic verses the fulfilment of which the existence of slavery is a prerequisite for
And it is not for a believer to kill another believer except by accident. And whoever kills a believer by accident, then he shall free a believing slave(492)
How can a believer free a slave as a penance if they have no slaves to free?
-
What do you mean by not "immediately" banning it? It doesn't ban it at all.
If we?re talking about FORCED slavery (chains and whips on cotton plantation style), then it?s absolutely banned for believers. The Quran says there is no compulsion IN ad-deen and ad-deen is the all-encompassing system of belief. Giving service to a lord is something else. The Quran doesn?t authorise believers to force others to leave the service of their lords and masters.
We are talking about the book of almighty Allah here not the manifesto of some political party containing a list of "things we'd like to do when 'practicality' allows". Allah didn't provide a "build-up" period for banning usury. He just said "stop usury or you'll get a nasty punishment". Whether it was "practical" or not did not come into it. If he meant slavery to completely disappear he'd have issued a similar command banning it.
And he did, please refer above. There is no compulsion in ad-deen.
There are a number of Qur'anic verses the fulfilment of which the existence of slavery is a prerequisite for
And it is not for a believer to kill another believer except by accident. And whoever kills a believer by accident, then he shall free a believing slave(492)
How can a believer free a slave as a penance if they have no slaves to free?
Perhaps it would do you well to read the verse in full. You will see other options there (it actually says if you don?t FIND any, hehe).
-
Background info
Taken from Mustansir Mir's "Dictionary of Quranic Terms and Concepts"
NB 3 = Arabic letter Ayn
3BD
In its literal sense of "slave, bondsman" 3bd (pl. ibad, 3bid) occurs in such verses as 2176, 221 and 1675. But its typical Quranic meaning is "servant-worshipper." 3bd in this sense is essentially a statement of man's proper role - man ought to serve and worship God, his Creator and Lord - whether or not that role is actually performed. This explains the usage in a verse like 3413 ("Only a few of My ibad are the grateful ones", where ibad includes those who perform the stated role and those who do not. It is only when he actually performs that role that man becomes an 3bd in the true sense, as in 1765 "Indeed you shall have no power over My ibad" (also 1542). David is called a "good 3bd" in 3817, and so, in 3830, is Solomon (see also 192 and 3841).
Insofar as it is man's duty to serve God, 3bd carries ethical connotations. Occasionally, however, it is used as a value-free term. In 175, which alludes to Nebuchadnezar's attack on Jerusalem (586 B.C.), the invading troops are called "Our ibad" not because they were particularly righteous, but simply because they served as an instrument for executing a certain divine scheme.The book is rare, about 23 years old, but it is quite good sometimes.
Just food for thought... This is where the names Abdul and Abdullah are from.
-
If we?re talking about FORCED slavery (chains and whips on cotton plantation style), then it?s absolutely banned for believers. The Quran says there is no compulsion IN ad-deen and ad-deen is the all-encompassing system of belief. Giving service to a lord is something else.
How do you define "right hand possession"?
-
If you're referring to 'ma malakat ayman' , it refers to people who live in the same domain (mulk, hence the word 'malakat' in a righteous manner (ayman, hence the word 'ayman'. This word 'righteous' is particularly pertinent because this word is used to contrast with wrongful behaviour (especially in chapter 56). The word 'maa' in the beginning of the phrase shows that it refers to rights of the domain, not to the person (which would then make it 'man', not 'maa'.
-
I've been researching about slavery in the quran (thanks to Jack, Wakas, abdalquran and CD for the help/discussion) and it's not done yet and I've yet to go through MMA but I'm posting what I've researched/got so far in response to what has been raised in the thread
3BD refers to serving, service, servants etc. Please see PRL for the overwhelming usage of 3BD referring to such.
When we check the occurrences for personal servants we come across 2221, 2432 for female servants and 2178, 2221, 2432 and 1675 for male servants. Household servants is in verse 2431 but mentioned as or male attendants. There is no oppression or force being alluded to in all these occurrences until we come to 1675.
1675 God propounds the parable of a man enslaved, unable to do anything of his own accord, and a man upon whom We have bestowed goodly sustenance from Ourselves, so that he can spend thereof secretly and openly. Can these be deemed equal? All praise is due to God but most of them do not understand it.
Here we have a servant who is . This term refers to owned/enslaved as is commonly understood. Given the root MLK and the fact that it is in passive form, it means that the subject (3BD) receives the action expressed in the verb MLK which can be translated as controlled/having dominion or authority over. We have the example/parable of a controlled servant contrasted with a man who can do as he chooses due to resources/provisions granted by God. The emphasis on and the inclusion of resources/provisions as the reason he is able to choose freely is revealing. The controlled servant on the other hand, has little choice as to a direction of his own choosing. He is under the authority/control of another due to his lack of resources/provisions.
God gives to whom he chooses (1671), but this example should show that it is not because the servant is controlled/under someone else?s authority, but the lack of resources that the contrast highlights as the difference. The servant has little choice but to enter into an arrangement that may not be to his liking because of lack of resources. We can see this even today in the form of people entering into jobs that they do not particularly wish to do but do so out of necessity, for adequate survival, under someone else's authority/control. Compared to people that can take the direction that they want/choose in life due to these resources/provisions and do not need to be under the authority/control of someone else.
Even if, for a moment, we take the conventional understanding of the verse as ?slave? it still does not mean that believers have the right to own slaves from this verse alone.
Additionally, the next verse we will see is the only one in Al Qur?an using verb form 2 of 3BD in 2622. Verb form 2 is generally intensive and causative in meaning, i.e. Pharaoh is the agent/cause of the effect, implying he made them serve intensely. This can only refer to forced servitude by Pharaoh. This we are told is wrong based on general principle (We are told that oppression is worse than killing (2191, 2217). We are told not to transgress our bounds/aggress or use undue force (2190, 2260) etc). Pharaoh is not a poster boy for the believers.
So who are these ?slaves? we are told to free as an act of righteousness (2177), the better path ( 9012, 9013), to atone (492, 589, 583) and as charity (960)? Surprisingly, the term used for them in all occurrences dealing with such is RQB not 3BD.
RQB
Taken as ?tied by the neck? or bound/constrained.
Can these be referring to war captives taken in battle? According to 867 the term used for captives taken as such is Al Asra, further confirmed in 870.We can set them free or ransom/exchange them for our own until the war ends. There is no reason to suppose that they can be forced into servitude whilst captive, firstly on the general principle against such in the quran along with no references to 3BD as being forced by believers into anything and secondly, because we are told what to do with them as per the instructions given in 474. They must be dealt with as soon as the war is over.
This brings us back to what RQB is. Forced servitude is eliminated by general principle as well as the fact that none of the personal 3BD are termed as RQB.
In my opinion till now, RQB is pointing to a set of bound believing/unbelieving people (not war OR debt 492, 960) whether justly or unjustly but never unjustly by believers. This binding if just, is dealing with felons/etc who have to go through community service/working for the people whom they stole from or something and maybe after a certain time/term by paying off/compensating what they stole is an act of charity/freeing them and if unjust can be bound slaves (as is traditionally understood) by unbelievers/whatever which is unequivocally wrong and must be freed. Slavery as it is understood commonly (unjust forced labour etc) is out on general principle as it is in the quran, thus one cannot find any reference to such in all occurrences by believers in their 3bd. RQB is not mentioned as 3bd. So in summary, RQB can mean those bound by community service, thieves for example. Setting them free after a term or whatever would be an act of charity as is done even today.
Very good effort.
I wish a little more effort is put in and refining touches are given whereby I hope we will have an excellent sutdy available on this forum.
-
Thank you bro. It is a work in progress and I hope to further include more terms, refine it and to bring it together in an easier to read form soon. I'd appreciate any feedback (general/specific).
-
peace abdalquran, all,
Mustansir Mir's "Dictionary of Quranic Terms and Concepts" is simply not available anymore, it seems. It can be found here however
http//islam-and-muslims.com/Dictionary-Quranic-Terms-Concepts-Mir.pdfIt's not perfect, but worthy of reading. Enjoy.
-
Hey, thanks a lot for this, Wakas. Really appreciate it.
-
It depends on context. For 24/58, it refers to people living one's house.
-
Alright all my bros n sistas here..
cool it.. wierd how so many of u are so ignorant abt basic issues before u start blaming the Quran and even God... yeesh!
So u guys feel the Quran has done nothing to ban SLAVERY??Heyyy before u start accusing, understand something... this so called "slaves" in the Quran (and for tat matter even the Bible) refers to the working class of the day... u know the labourers and workers? im sure everybody knows tat those days there were no employment-contracts, no offices and no salaries ryt... so naturally they had workers for life who lived and worked with the family in their homes, their whole lives till death... tat was the only possibility then...... So rather than treating such workers like animals, the Quran taught the landlord-class to be kind and compassionate to their slaves (worker)..
Ofcourse wen we hear abt slaves today, we get a picture of some naked guy tied up in big chains..... (well blame the disbelievers for such treatments of their workers)
hope tat answers the qstn of this gr8 debate, dudes...... sun
-Harris O0
