Grounds for the Prohibition of Slavery and Concubinage

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

Select Ethical Evidence from the Qur’an

The Qur’an calls for justice. “Stand firmly for justice” (4:135); “Do not exceed
the limits” (2:190); “Upon you is [responsibility] for yourselves” (5:105);
“Do not incline to those who do injustice” (11:113). Slavery and concubinage
are unjust. Opposing them is just.
The Qur’an condemns sin. “Do not cooperate in sin” (5:2). Slavery and
concubinage are sins against God and crimes against humanity.
The Qur’an condemns aggression: “Do not cooperate in… aggression” (5:2).
The slave trade was an act of global aggression. Sexual relations with
enslaved girls and women is a form of sexual aggression.
The Qur’an condemns transgressors. “God loves not transgressors” (2:190;
7:55). Enslavers, slave traders, and slave owners are transgressors.
The Qur’an condemns oppression (2:217). It states that oppression is worse
than slaughter (2:217). There is no question that slavery and concubinage are oppressive and murderous.
The Qur’an condemns excess. “God loves not those given to excess” (5:90).
The harem culture is one of excess. The men involved in such practices hoard human beings; thereby depriving them from others or depriving such people of their inherent right to freedom.
The Qur’an condemns trespassers. “God loves not those who trespass bounds” (7:55). Enslaving human people, trafficking, and exploiting them is to trespass the bounds of human dignity.
The Qur’an condemns corruption. “God loves not corruption” (2:205; 5:67;
28:77). Slavery and concubinage are the pinnacles of personal and societal
corruption.
The Qur’an condemns wrongdoers. “God loves not the wrongdoers” (3:57;
3:140; 42:40). Those who participate in the slave and sex trade are
wrongdoers.
The Qur’an condemns waste. “God loves not the wasters” (6:141; 7:31). The
slave trade cost millions of human lives. During slave raids, thousands would
be slaughtered, including men and elderly people, only to take hundreds of
boys, girls, and women as captives. Eighty to ninety percent of enslaved black Africans died before reaching the slave markets in the Middle East. In
addition, the production of eunuchs on an industrial scale resulted in death
rates as high as ninety percent. Slave traders showed a callous contempt for
human life.
The Qur’an condemns materialism. “God loves not those who exult in riches” (28:76). The slave economy and the harem culture, in which ownership of men and women are signs of wealth and power, is the peak of materialism.
The Qur’an condemns treachery. “God loves not the treacherous” (8:58). The
slave trade is the peak of treachery. The same goes for the sex trade.
The Qur’an condemns perfidy and criminality. “God loves not one given to
perfidy and crime” (4:107). All those involved in the slave trade and
concubinage were thieves, robbers, and criminals, from the enslavers to the
traders and purchasers.
The Qur’an condemns evil. “God loves not that evil be noised about in public” (4:148). For those of understanding, slavery is an inherent evil, and God loves not evil.
The Qur’an calls for equality. It states that “We created you from a single
(pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye
may know other” (49:13). Enslaving one another and sexually conquering
women of other races, religions, or sects is not a way to know one another.
Nobody is superior based on color, language, race, and religion. The more
pious one is, the better one is. As Fatima Mernissi (d. 2015) asserted, “The
principle of equality … was set forth by the Prophet and regulated by the
Koran, which condemned slavery. Whether the Muslims obeyed the orders
of God and his Prophet regarding slavery is another story” (148).
The Qur’an observes that “among His signs is… the diversity… of … your
colors” (30:22). Conquering other human beings, slaughtering their men and
elderly women, and taking their girls and young women as concubines, is
hardly a celebration of diversity. Despite dubious traditions to the contrary,
the Qur’an, the Prophet, and Islam are opposed to racism and religious
bigotry. Except for defensive battles, the wars, invasions, conquests, and
slave raids conducted by Muslims throughout history targeted human beings due to their race, religion, or gender. The Qur’an, however, insists that human beings are “all one from another” (4:26). There was no imperialism in the Islam of the Prophet Muhammad.
The Qur’an calls for freedom (2:117; 2:178; 2:221: 4:3; 4:24; 4:25; 4:36; 4:92;
5:89; 9:60; 23:6; 24:31: 24:32: 24:33; 24:58: 24:58; 30:28; 33:50; 33:52;
33:55; 70:30). Muslims must stand on the side of freedom, defend freedom,
and fight those who wish to deprive human beings of freedom.
The Qur’an calls on people to promote the good and forbid the wrong (3:104;
3:110; 9:71; 9:112; 31:17; 5:105). Freedom is good. Slavery and concubinage
are wrong. Promoting abolition is good, while defending and justifying
slavery and concubinage is wrong.
The Qur’an encourages Muslims to forgive others as they would like God to
forgive them (24: 22).
The Qur’an opposes sexual immorality (24:19). Slavery and concubinage are
immoral.
The Qur’an requires that punishment be just and proportionate (16:126).
Condemning specific races and religions to slavery and concubinage is
fundamentally unfair.
The Qur’an states that believers should not sit in the company of those who
mock religion (4:140). Supporting slavery and concubinage insults the
Prophet Muhammad, Islam, and God.
The Qur’an prohibits Muslims from entering homes without permission
(24:27-28). What are we to make of entering people’s nations and homes,
without permission, to murder, rape, rob, kidnap, traffic, and exploit human
beings?
The Qur’an says that Muslims should care for the less fortunate (24:22).
Would that not include the welfare of the enslaved?
The Qur’an says that Muslims should verify information from dubious sources before acting upon it (49:6). They should never accept that slavery and concubinage are permissible when the human conscience, intellect, and
primordial nature object to them in principle.
The Qur’an prohibits lying (22:30). It is a lie to claim that God and His Prophet gave slavery and concubinage their blessings. When they hear such rumors, they should say: “This is an obvious falsehood” (24:12).
The Qur’an prohibits deriding and insulting other human beings (49:11). To
justify enslaving blacks and other populations, Muslims slandered and
stereotyped them to dehumanize them and justify their enslavement. They
were supposed to turn away from ill speech (23:3).
The Qur’an commands Muslims to be humble and to spread peace (25:63). To
conquer and enslave others embodies arrogance and warmongering.
The Qur’an commands Muslims to respond to evil with good (41:34).
The Qur’an prohibits Muslims from deceiving people in trade (6:152).
However, deceit was central to the sale of enslaved human beings.
The Qur’an commands Muslims to honor their treaties (9:4). They were
supposed to keep their trusts and promises (23:8). The Prophet Muhammad
concluded covenants of protection with the Christians of the World. Waging
war against peaceful Christians, and enslaving them, was prohibited. He
warned that a terrible punishment would befall Muslims if they violated the
pledges he had given to Christians.
The Qur’an commands Muslims to be peacemakers (49:9), not warmongers
and slavers.
The Qur’an states that Muslims are “compassionate amongst each other”
(48:29). Slavery is not compassion. Hence, one cannot enslave Muslims and
their progeny.
The Qur’an commands Muslims to restrain their anger (3:134). The rage and
hatred against non-Arabs and non-Muslims that motivated wars of conquest
and slavery were un-Islamic. The Qur’an warns Muslims against letting
hatred lead them to injustice (6:108).
Slavery and concubinage are not consistent with the Qur’anic concept of ethics such as khayr (goodness), maslahah (public interest), birr (righteousness), qist (equity), ‘adl (equilibrium and justice), haqq (truth and right), ma‘ruf (known and approved), nahi ‘an al-munkar (prohibiting wrong), and taqwah (piety).
Select Legal Evidence from the Qur’an
The Qur’an does not command slavery and concubinage.
The edicts that support slavery and concubinage rely upon Qur’anic passages that are implicit, as opposed to explicit, and descriptive as opposed to prescriptive.
Slavery and concubinage are not obligatory. One cannot permit what is
prohibited nor prohibit what is obligatory.
The Qur’an presents slavery is a negative light. The Pharoah is presented as a sinful tyrant for having enslaved and subjugated the Israelites (26:2; 7:127;
23:47). It intimates that the Egyptians used Israelite women as concubines
(7:127). The Qur’an criticizes later Israelites for doing to others what was
done to them: “If they come to you as captives, you ransom them, although
their eviction was forbidden to you” (2:85). As God asks in the Qur’an: “Do
you believe in part of the scripture and disbelieve in part?” (2:85). This same
critique could apply to Muslims who would purchase, and in some cases free, slaves they had no right to enslave in the first place, as was with the case with black African Muslims. Rather than “follow what God has revealed,” they answer that “we will follow that which we found our fathers doing” (2:170). Instead of following the emancipatory passages of the Qur’an, the Arabs preferred to maintain the pre-Islamic slave culture of their forefathers.
The Qur’an does not present slavery as divinely ordained. It does not claim
that slaves are getting their just dues. The Qur’an presents enslaved human
beings as powerless and pitiful to evoke human compassion and mercy. As
we read in the Qur’an, “God coineth a similitude: (on the one hand) a (mere) chattel slave, who hath control of nothing, and (on the other hand) one on whom We have bestowed a fair provision from Us, and he spendeth thereof secretly and openly. Are they equal? Praise be to God! But most of them know not” (16:75).
The Qur’an asserts that Muslims have duties and obligations toward “the
captive” (76:8). That includes defending their rights, feeding, clothing, and
emancipating them.
The Qur’an aims at emancipating those deprived of liberty (2:117; 4:25; 4:92;
5:89; 14:31; 24:33: 58:3; 90:1-20).
The Qur’an commands Muslims to “Write out a deed of manumission for such of your slaves that desire their freedom in lieu of payment — if you see any good in them — and give them out of the wealth that God has given you”
(24:33). Most Sunni schools of jurisprudence viewed this as recommended,
but not mandatory. Zahiri jurists believed that it was obligatory. Relying on
a hadith from Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Twelver Shiite jurists also placed a maximum
seven-year limit to slavery; thereby providing a path to emancipation.
According to the Qur’an, prisoners of wars are to be held for ransom. Since
there were no camps to detain prisoners, they were paroled and placed under the supervision of families, until they were freed, ransomed, or earned their freedom through work. “When ye have thoroughly subdued them,” states the Qur’an, “thereafter (it is time for) either generosity or ransom” (47:4).
The Qur’an encourages Muslims to free enslaved people. “It is righteousness,” states the Qur’an, “to… spend of your substance… for the ransom of slaves” (2:1777).
The Qur’an orders Muslims to “Marry women of your choice… or (a captive)
that your right hands possess” (4:3). The Qur’an does not command men to
capture or purchase enslaved women and exploit them sexually.
The Qur’an commands Muslims to “Marry those among you who are single,
or the virtuous ones among your slaves, male or female” (24:32). If a man
had the right to have sex with his female slave, then this verse would
effectively be granting the same privilege to women. If women should not
have sex with their male slaves, it goes without saying that men should not
be entitled to have sex with their female ones.
Verse 4:24 should not read as “[Prohibited to you in marriage are] married
women, except those whom your right hands possess” but “the chaste ones
from among the women, but not your female slaves.” The verse allowed men
to contract a lower type of marriage with former slave girls, one in which
both parties could terminate at any time, in which any child was legitimate
and entitled to provision, and one in which there was no inheritance due to
the wife. In ancient Rome, there were two types of marriage, cum manu or “in hand” and sine manu or “out of hand.” In this first marriage, the wife was released from her family’s control and fell under that of her husband. All her property, including her dowry, was passed to her husband. In return, however, she could inherit from her husband. The “in hand” marriage was for life. The husband was the provider. The wife was the custodian of the home. The husband had the right to divorce in cases of serious moral infractions, such as adultery. He also had the right to punish her physically. It was a patriarchal autocratic marriage.
In the second type, the “out of hand” marriage, the wife remained under
the legal control of her father. This was the most common type of marriage
among the Romans. The property rights of the wife did not change. She
remained a free woman who was not under the control of her husband. She
did not inherit from her husband or her children. The man maintained his
property, and the woman maintained hers. Both the husband and the woman had the right to file for divorce. No cause was required. Upon the death of her father, she became sui iuris, namely, “of one’s own rights.” It was a “free marriage” that was more egalitarian. It protected the property of women. Unlike the “in hand” marriage, which excluded women from the public sphere of males, the “out of hand” marriage granted women greater freedom and social power.
When the Qur’an states, “If any of you have not the means wherewith to
wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those
whom your right hands possess” (4:25), it is not permitting sex outside of
marriage with slave girls or concubinage. Rather, it is referring to the
precursor of mut‘ah marriage, namely, temporary, or fixed-term marriages
which, in its origin, was simply the “out of hand” marriage of the ancient
Romans. S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali appears to have perceived this distinction when
he commented that the Qur’an called for Muslims take enslaved women as
regular wives and not as concubines. As he explained, “such women are drawn from the lowest levels of society whence their morals are also very low. However, to treat alike a woman from a respectable family of high moral degree of conduct, character, and dignity, and the one from the slums without any morals or modesty or any regard to self-respect, will never be justice. Justice will be to treat each kind with full regard to its personal standard” (365).
The Qur’anic verse distinguishes between women who are muhsanat,
namely, free Muslim women who are virtuous and of noble birth, and malakat aymanukum, “possessed by the right hand,” which is identical to the Latin expression secundum manus sue potentiam, and which refers to wives who came from military conquests (Hanne 274).
Due to the disruption that foreign women could cause in terms of
inheritance, as well as family and tribal alliances and dynamics, the Qur’an,
to accommodate this reality, distinguishes between free, Arab, women, who
could inherit in return for restrictions on their rights and freedoms, and former female captives, who were given greater freedom, the right to divorce, and leniency in matters of sexual indiscretions, in return for lack of inheritance.
The Qur’an prohibits unlawful sexual intercourse. “Do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an immorality and evil as a way” (17:32). While the Qur’an may speak of “those who guard their chastity, except with their wives/husbands and those whom their right hands possess” (70:29-30), the ones possessed by the right hand must be married to them according to 4:25. It positively states: “marry them” (4:25). Having sex with slave girls, without emancipating and marrying them, is an act or fornication, adultery, and rape. As the Qur’anic Path explains, “this Qur’anic law is ignored by … so-called Muslims when it is clearly there… In the name of God and Islam, they fornicate and commit adultery!” As the Qur’an describes, “When they commit an indecent act, they say ‘We found our fathers doing it and God commanded us to do it too.’ Say: ‘God does not command indecency, or do you say things about God you do not know’” (7:28).
As the Qur’an warns, “There is a sort of person who pays for distracting hadith intending, without knowledge, to lead others away from God’s way, and to make a mockery of it. These will have a humiliating punishment! And when Our Verses are recited to such a person, he turns away arrogantly, as if he had not heard them! as if there were heaviness in his ears! Give him good news of a painful punishment!” (31:6-7).
Rather than follow the clear Qur’an, “when he learns something from our
verses, he scorns them! Such people will have a humiliating punishment!”
(45:9). As the Qur’anic Path describes, “To this day in the so-called ‘Muslim’ world, men have sexual relations with many slaves or servants despite being married. As with many so-called ‘authentic’ Islamic teachings, this is another innovation that violates Qur’anic teachings. In the Qur’an, marriage is continuously stressed as the only way for men and women to come together and form a relationship and where sexual activity can take place. This concept is so important, that a worldly punishment for anyone having sex with any other than his or her married spouse is deserving of one-hundred lashes (24:2).”
“Coerce not your maidens [fatayat] into whoredom,” warns the Qur’an, “if they happen to be desirous of marriage” (24:33). The term bigha’ refers not only to prostitution but to libertinism, sexual inhibition, lewdness, lasciviousness, sexual immorality, sexual intercourse, fornication, adultery, whoredom, harlotry, and concubinage. It prohibits the sexual use, abuse, and exploitation of slave girls.
The Qur’an asserts that “it is not lawful for you to become heirs to women
against their will” (4:19). Consequently, one cannot purchase a woman, loan
a woman, trade a woman, exchange a woman, or pass down a woman by
inheritance. People are not property. They cannot be taken by force.
When it comes to treating women, the Qur’an advises men to “live with them honorably” (4:19).
The Qur’an warns against harming and oppressing women (65:6).
The Qur’an calls upon men and women, and husbands and wives, to be
soulmates (4:1). Unless a woman suffers from Stockholm syndrome, she will
not fall madly in love with her captor and rapist.
The Qur’an states that “your spouses are a garment [of comfort, chastity, and protection] for you as you are for them” (2:187).
The Qur’an treats marriage, not solely as a contract, but also as a sign of God: “And among His Signs is this that He created for you mates from among
yourselves that ye may dwell in tranquility with them and He has put love
and mercy between your (hearts); verily in that are Signs for those who
reflect” (30:21).
God places the burden on human beings to eradicate slavery and concubinage. “God changes not what is in a people until they change what is in themselves” (13:11). People need to reform themselves, their laws, and even their religions.
The Qur’an calls upon people to think, reason, and reflect over seven hundred times (30:8, 2:170; 16:44; 13:3; 10:24; 6:50; 12:111; 3:190-191; 36:46;
16:79; 29:20…). “Surely the worst of living creatures in the sight of God are
the deaf and dumb who do not use reason” (8:22); “He lays abomination upon those who do not reason” (10:100). It calls upon Muslims to be “people of understanding” (39:18) and to make decisions based on proof and evidence (2:111). People devoid of critical thinking are described as having eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear (7:179). They are more heedless and astray than livestock (7:179).
The Qur’an says: “He did create in pairs, male and female” (53:45). The
Qur’anic ideal is the union of a male and a female; not a male, and four
females, and a hundred and one sex slaves.
The Qur’an says: “Women impure for men impure, and men impure for
women impure, and women of purity for men of purity, and men of purity for women of purity” (24:26). Sexually assaulting female captives, and having harems full of sex slaves, is not purity: it is impurity.
Select Evidence from Reason
Human beings own themselves. They have autonomy and agency.
Slavery is racist.
Concubinage is racist and sexist.
Slavery and concubinage are unjust.
Slavery is immoral.
Slavery is unethical.
Slavery is inhumane and cruel.
Slaves are not property. They are people.
Slaves were denied full rights.
Slaves were denied human dignity.
Slaves were not provided for properly. Their food, clothing, and medical care were inadequate.
Slaves were routinely mistreated, abused, and brutalized.
Male slaves were routinely castrated.
Female slaves were sexually abused.
Slaves were worked to death.
Slaves were psychologically and emotionally traumatized.
Islamic laws regarding slavery were repressive.
Islamic laws aimed to moderate the abuses inherent to slavery were rarely
applied.
Rather than phase slavery out, Islamic laws entrenched, institutionalized, and expanded it.
The descendants of slaves suffer from generational trauma.
The slave trade devastated families, political structures, and societies.
Slavery is against the will of God. No good God, who is worthy of worship,
would condone slavery and concubinage.
If human beings are made in the image of God, no human being should enslave another.
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam teach that human beings are equal in the sight of God. Slavery entrenches inequality.
Slavery promotes hatred rather than love. It opposes the Golden Rule, shared by most world religions, to love their neighbor.
Societies in which slavery flourishes are sick. They concentrate wealth in the hands of elites while masses of slaves suffer and languish in poverty and
misery.
Slavery fosters fear and insecurity in society.
Slave societies are socially restrictive.
The traditions in which the Prophet Muhammad and the twelve Imams
supported slavery and concubinage are forgeries as they contradict the
Qur’an. The traditions in which the Prophet Muhammad and the twelve Imams opposed slavery and concubinage are authentic and, even if they are not, they still agree with the Qur’an.
The arguments used by Muslims who support slavery and concubinage are the same as those advanced by white Protestant Christian advocates of slavery. They lost the debate. Some Muslims, however, wish to keep it alive and revive obsolete and debunked arguments.
Select Evidence from the Example of the Prophet Muhammad
The Prophet Muhammad freed Zinnirah al-Rumiyyah from sexual slavery.
She was a concubine who was owned collectively by a clan from the tribe of
Quraysh. The Messenger of God liberated her from a life of hell as a
communal whore. She became a close companion and a scribe of revelation.
He set the following precedent: free sex slaves and concubines, give them
honor, dignity, and respect; educate them and raise their status in society.
When the Prophet Muhammad was at war with a people, he would free the
slaves who came to him (Ahmad).
The Prophet Muhammad freed and married Safiyyah and Juwayriyyah. As
Bukhari reported, “The Prophet… set free Sayiyyah and made her
emancipation as her dowry.” If Mariya the Copt ever existed, and the
evidence suggests that she did not, then he freed and married her, as it is
inconceivable that he would act against the command of the Qur’an to marry the enslaved women that one possessed (2:222). After all, he said “A man who owns a servant girl and mentors her, teaches her beautiful manners, educates her in the best way, then emancipates and marries her will have a double reward” (Bukhari). Why would he marry her if he was already having sex with her? Why buy the cow when he could get the milk for free?
Selective Evidence from the Sayings of the Prophet Muhammad
“I have forbidden injustice for Myself, and I have forbidden it among you, so
do not oppress one another” said God in a sacred saying (Muslim).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “Protect yourselves from doing injustice”
(Muslim).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “A Muslim should not oppress or be oppressed” (Bukhari and Muslim).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “Support the oppressed” (Bukhari).
The Prophet Muhammad cited God as saying: “Do not oppress one another”
(Shirazi).
Slavery and concubinage damage the image of Islam, the Qur’an, the
Prophet, the Imams, and Muslims.
In many traditions, the Prophet Muhammad condemned racism and insisted
upon human equality (Kulayni, Ahmad, Khattabi, Majlisi).
The Prophet Muhammad said he would testify against those who sold free
human beings on the Day of Judgment (Bukhari and Muslim).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “God will oppose a man who sells a free
person” (Bukhari).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “God will forgive every sin except… selling
a free person” (Majlisi).
The Prophet Muhammad and Khadijah freed all their slaves and encouraged
others to do the same. The Messenger of God said, “Whoever frees a Muslim
slave, then God will free every limb of his body from the Hellfire” (Bukhari).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “Do not cause harm or return harm,” whoever harms others, God will harm him,” and “Do not torture the creation of God.”
The Prophet Muhammad said that “There is no nikah [sexual intercourse or
marriage] without consent” (Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud,
Nasa’i, Hakim). As concubinage consists of coerced sexual relations, it
cannot be said to be consensual. Promiscuous women might embrace it.
Others might resign themselves to it. And yet others view it as sexual assault.
The Prophet Muhammad said: “If someone of good character and conduct
proposes to your daughters, marry them. If you do not, there will be mischief and great corruption on Earth.” (Kulayni and Tirmidhi). A man of good character does not enslave and sexually exploit women.
The Prophet Muhammad said: “Whoever wants to follow my Tradition, then
marriage is my Tradition.” (‘Amili and Kulayni). It is the sunnah to marry;
not to have sex with slave girls outside of marriage.
The Prophet Muhammad prohibited the castration and emasculation of
enslaved boys and men (Abu Dawud, Nasa’i, Hakim). Since slavery and the
creation of eunuchs is synonymous, the prohibition of the latter requires the prohibition of the former.
The Angel Gabriel told the Prophet Muhammad: “Verily, the worst of your
ummah are those who sell human beings” (Saduq).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “The worst of people is the one who sells
people” (Kulayni, Tusi, ‘Amili, Saduq).
The Prophet Muhammad said: “Set the captives free” (Bukhari).
The last words of the Prophet Muhammad were: “fear God about those whom your right hands possess” (Ibn Majah).
Evidence from Imam ‘Ali
Imam ‘Ali said, “All people are born.” “Do not be slaves for others,” he
stated, “since God has established you to be free.”
Imam ‘Ali banned the enslavement of the womenfolk of defeated foes,
except for slaves captured in the enemy camp. He prohibited his fighters from offending the honor, modesty, and chastity of women (Morrow 2012: 329; Sistani 2015).
Evidence from Muslim Sects and Scholars
The Kharijites reportedly prohibited concubinage in general, or, at the very
least, without the approval of the wife of the husband.
Atah ibn Abi Rahah (d. 732), an early Medinan scholar, believed that the
jihad verses only applied to the wars waged by the Prophet Muhammad
during his rule. He asserted that the universal rule was that it was only
permitted to fight defensive wars.
Abu ‘Ubayd (d. 838) noted in his Kitab al-amwal that the Prophet provided
leaders with three options concerning captives of just jihads: pardon, ransom, or death. Slavery was not an option.
The Mutazilites opposed slavery and concubinage. ‘Abd al-Jabbar, for
example, viewed it as “inherently immoral and unbefitting of the loftiness of
moral values.”
Zaydi jurisprudence treats slavery as makruh or detestable. Jurists have the
right to review all evidence and adjust shari‘ah designations. Something
mustahab or encouraged can be raised to the level of wajib or fard and vice
versa. Likewise, something that is detestable, hateful, or reprehensible can be upgraded to haram or prohibited. The gentle, family-centered, temporary
indentured servitude of prisoners of war that was practiced during the Prophet Muhammad’s time might have been makruh; however, the brutal, inhumane, and dehumanizing type of slavery and concubinage that prevailed after his death and until the demise of the Ottoman Empire was most certainly haram.
‘Ali ibn Muhammad, the leader of the Zanj or Black Rebellion in Iraq (869-
883), promised freedom, justice, and prosperity to tens of thousands of
enslaved black Africans who were being worked to death in the marshes of
the region. He freed slaves at every opportunity (Fahes 21). Due to a lack of
doctrinal and intellectual depth, and no program for social reform, the leaders who followed him gave up on the ideals of the revolt and started to acquire slaves of their own (21). ‘Ali ibn Muhammad, a self-proclaimed descendant of ‘Ali and Fatimah, rose up against slavery. His aim was to apply the principles of Islam: justice, tolerance, and equality (21). The enslaved black African Muslims of Iraq simply wanted their freedom and to improve their socio-economic situation (21). Why take slave masters as religious and
spiritual authorities? Why side with despotic and oppressive caliphs, imams,
and sultans? Why not follow the example of abolitionist Muslim leaders?
The Qarmatians opposed slavery and concubinage. They abolished serfdom
and paid wages to black African agricultural workers (Fahes 41-42). Widely
viewed as heretics by other Muslim groups, they viewed the dominant forms
of Islam as downright deviant when it came to slavery and concubinage.
Nobody holds a monopoly on truth. On the issue of slavery and concubinage,
they appear to have been in the right.
The Epistles of the Brethren of Purity, believed by some to be the
philosophical foundation of the Qarmatians, contains “The Animals’ Lawsuit
Against Humanity,” a fable that provides powerful arguments against
slavery. Rather than attack the state religion directly, and risk obliteration,
Fadi A. Fahes noted that groups like the Ismailis “resorted to an enigmatic
dissemination of ideas” that “slowly cracked the halo of fear and the sanctity of applied Islamic practices” (47). It is not true that Muslim scholars did not oppose slavery. Due to the dangerous circumstances, they had to do so indirectly.
The legitimacy of aggressive as opposed to defensive jihad has been
questioned by scholars since the early days of Islam. Some scholars suggested that the only legitimate jihads were those directed by the Prophet
Muhammad. Others included the first four caliphs. For Shiites, only their
Imams had the right to declare jihad and all other wars were illegitimate. If
such wars were Islamically illegal, so was the taking of slaves and
concubines. As Sachiko Murata (b. 1943) and William C. Chittick (b. 1943)
argue, “From the point of view of the strict application of Islamic teachings, most so-called jihads have not deserved the name. Any king (or dictator…)
can declare a jihad. There were always a few of the religious authorities
who would lend support to the king — such as the scholar whom the king
had appointed to be a chief preacher at the royal mosque. But there have
usually been a good body of ‘ulama’ who have not supported wars
simply because kings declared them. Rather, they would only support
those that followed the strict application of Islamic teachings. By these
standards, it is probably safe to say that there have been few if any valid
jihads in the past century, and perhaps not for the past several hundred
years” (21-22). Defensive wars were legitimate. And the most valid war of all was the jihad against slavery.
The ‘Alawi-Nusayris, the Alevis, and the Bektashis, among other so-called
Ghulat or semi-Ghulat groups, oppose polygyny and practice monogamy.
Having sex slaves would not be countenanced in their communities.
Although they are viewed as heretics by Sunnis and Twelver Shiites, these
groups viewed their detractors as deviants who follow a corrupted form of
Umayyad, ‘Abbasid, Ottoman, or Safavid Islam. Truth is in the eye of the
beholder.
Twelver Shiite jurisprudence views slave trading as a makruh occupation.
After examining the evidence on the subject, jurists have the right to raise
their standards and treat it as haram. Although there are traditions that claim that the twelfth Imam will reintroduce slavery and concubinage, there are others that insist that he will liberate all slaves. If Twelver Shiites were truly followers of the abolitionist Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi, they should have been the foremost in freeing the enslaved. Most of their jurists, with a few exceptions in our time, embraced the belief that the Mahdi was coming to kill, convert, and enslave.
Al-Hakim bi Amrillah (d. 1021), the Shiite Ismaili caliph of the Fatimids,
prohibited slavery and concubinage, and emancipated all slaves for all times
to come in the early eleventh century. While one may disagree with some of
his other rulings and actions, and view the Ismaili faith in poor light, in
matters of laws and morals, questions of creed are irrelevant and immaterial. The legal arguments made by al-Hakim were legitimate, and his abolition of slavery and liberation of enslaved people were historically unprecedented and worthy of praise and acclaim. He was a man ahead of his time.
Although the edict of al-Hakim had little impact in the Muslim world, the
Druze, namely, the Muwahhidun or Unitarians, an off-shoot of Sevener
Shiism, and the followers of caliph al-Hakim, outlawed slavery and
concubinage in their communities in the tenth century. They may be
considered by mainstream Muslims to be outside the fold of Islam, and to
belong to an entirely different religion; however, that being said, their
prohibition of slavery and concubinage, which are supported by Qur’anic
verses, is to be commended.
According to numerous sources, ‘Abd al-Qadir Kan (d. 1806), a religious
leader from what is now Senegal, was the first person in modern times to
abolish slavery and the slave trade in his Muslim state (Ware 116). Speaking
of the slave trade, the British governor of Senegal in 1811 noted that it was
“a commerce which the Prince [‘Abd al-Qadir] always opposed as being
contrary to the laws of his religion” (Ware 143). Not only did he free every
hafiz or Walking Qur’an, but he extended this freedom to anyone who could
read a single verse of the scripture (Ware 117).
The Ahmadiyyah, a revivalist Muslim movement, which is subject to
irrational, unreasonable, and unconscionable hatred and violence from
Sunnis and Shiites in Pakistan and beyond, have prohibited slavery and
concubinage since their foundation. This fact should earn them accolades.
In 1841, the exportation of slaves out of Tunisia was outlawed.
In 1846, “the Sultan [of the Ottoman Empire] abolished the Istanbul slave
market because it was contrary to the shari‘ah and humanitarian principles”
(Freamon 1998: 58).
In 1846, the Bey of Tunisia issued a new decree, freeing all slaves and
definitively banning slavery. It stated that from that day forward, the children of slaves would be born free.
Tunisia was the first Muslim nation to abolish slavery. It did so before
Denmark and France.
In 1847, an Ottoman firman abolished slavery in the Persian Gulf.
In 1851, the slave trade was outlawed in Iran. Mirza Ali Mohamed (1820-
1850), the Persian founder of Babism, prohibited slavery in the strongest
terms.
In 1854, an Ottoman decree proclaimed that, “man is the most noble of
creatures God has formed, in making him free; selling people as animals, or
articles of furniture, is contrary to the will of the Sovereign Creator”
(Freamon 1998: 58).
In 1857, Sultan Abdulmejid I (1823-1861) issued a decree abolishing slavery
throughout the Ottoman Empire, except for the Hijaz.
In 1875, the Bey of Tunisia reiterated the ban on slavery in an Anglo-Tunisian treaty.
In 1895, ‘Abd al-Rahman Khan (d. 1901), the king of Afghanistan between
1880 and 1901, passed a law prohibiting slavery, trafficking, and castration.
In 1882, Hasan I Morocco (d, 1894), declared that reducing free people to
slavery, without legal right, was an impious act that would be neither ignored nor tolerated.
Alexander Russell Webb (1846-1916), who was appointed as the honorary
consul of Turkey in the United States by Sultan Abdul Hamid II (1842-1918),
decreed that “Slavery and concubinage are not allowed by the Koran” (51).
Ahmad ibn Khalid al-Nasiri (1835/1836-1897), a Moroccan abolitionist,
insisted that the Qur’an prohibited slavery and that all human beings were
born free. He denounced the traffic in black Muslim slaves.
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi (c. 1854-c. 1902), the Syrian intellectual,
argued that slavery could and should be abolished.
‘Ali Shah, a Twelver Shiite Sufi, and leader of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order of
Iran, issued an edict in 1912 stating that “the purchase and sale of human
beings are contrary to the dictates of religion and the practice of civilization.”
In 1923, trafficking of slaves was officially abolished in Morocco (El Hamel
264). However, the ownership of slaves was not criminalized and the country never abolished slavery (264-265) In fact, “slavery in Morocco was never abolished by any decree from the royal authority” (306).
In 1923, all forms of slavery are outlawed in Ethiopia and Afghanistan.
In 1929, the Iranian Parliament passed the Slavery Abolition Act which
declared that “no one shall be recognized as slave and every slave will be
emancipated upon arrival at Iran’s territorial soil or waters.” It was Reza Shah Pahlavi (1878-1944), not the “grand ayatollahs,” who prohibited slavery. Most of the mullahs were opposed to abolition.
In 1935, Mirza Bashir Ahmad, an Ahmadi scholar, published a treatise titled
Islam and Slavery. He asserted that the teachings of Islam regarding slaves
fell into two categories: 1) “the betterment of the condition of the existing
slaves and measures for their gradual emancipation;” and 2) “steps for the
permanent abolition of slavery” (4). Islam’s emancipation program was
“carried into effect under State supervision so that there could be no laxity or negligence in this respect” (74). Bashir Ahmad also insisted that “emancipation through mukatabat did not depend upon the sweet will of the master; it was obligatory” 19). He notes that there was a massive attempt to emancipate slaves. According to his sources, the Prophet, ‘A’ishah, ‘Abbas, Hakim, ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf, ‘Uthman, and Dhu al-Kala al-Himyari alone liberated 32,320 enslaved human beings (25).
Islam, during the life of the Prophet, emancipated, as opposed to enslave,
people. Had this example been emulated, millions of slaves would have been
liberated. Alas, what followed was a “misguided age” which explains why
slavery survived and even expanded in the Muslim world (41-42). Ignorant
and worldly people “distorted and disfigured the noble teachings of Islam”
(42). Not only did they follow the example of other nations, but “Muslims
also abandoned the injunctions of Islam,” reverting to the cruel ways of
enslavement (42). Consequently, “It is… the imperative duty of Muslim governments and Muslim societies to devote themselves strenuously and whole-heartedly to the practical abolition of slavery and bring the world once more to that blessed goal to which the Holy Prophet of Islam and his companions desired to lead the world — a goal of true freedom and true equality in the world” (42).
As Bashir Ahmad established, “Islam is strongly opposed to all forms of
tyranny and transgression and is a powerful champion of the liberty and
equality of man” (43). He also emphasized the fact that “nowhere in Islamic
literature has it been laid down that it is permissible to enslave a free man”
(44). And while prisoners could temporarily be deprived of their liberty, their condition, and that of their descendants was never permanent (47-60). As for masters, he argued that they could enter into common-law marriages with their female slaves without the performance of a formal ceremony (67).
In 1952, the shaykh of Kuwait expressed his desire to prohibit slavery.
In 1962, slavery is prohibited in Yemen.
In 1963, Malcolm X (d. 1965) delivered his famous speech on “The House
Negro and the Field Negro.” As he explained, the former looked out for the
master. He kept the Field Negros in check. He received financial incentives
from the slave master. He spoke like the master. He loved the master more
than the master loved himself. If the master’s house caught on fire, he would risk his life to put it out. Unlike the House Negro, who loved his master, the Field Negro hated the master. If he got sick, he would pray that he died. If his house caught on fire, he would pray for wind. Just as there were House Negros and Field Negros in Malcolm’s time, there are plenty today. They are the Black Americans Muslims — Sunnis, Shiites, and Sufis — who are apologists for “Islamic” slavery. Give them some handouts, and some scholarships to study Islam, and they submissively surrender to those who enslaved their ancestors and their people. Some even insist that slavery is permitted by God for all times and places and cannot be prohibited. Some
even defend its revival. And there are White House Slaves and Wannabe
Masters egging them on.
In 1967, Mahmoud Mohamed Taha published al-Risalah al-thaniyyah min
al-Islam, which would be translated as The Second Message of Islam in 1987,
in which he argued that “slavery is not an original precept of Islam” since
“Islam’s original principle is freedom” (137). In his view, “It was neither possible, nor desirable, at that point, for the law to abolish slavery by a stroke of the pen. The needs of the enslaved individuals, as well as the social and economic needs of the community, necessitated the maintenance of the system, while developing it continuously, until every enslaved person would be emancipated” (138).
In 1981, slavery was outlawed in Mauritania.
In 1990, the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam asserted in article
11 that “Human beings are born free, and no one has the right to enslave,
humiliate, oppress, or exploit them, and there can be no subjugation but to
Allah, the Almighty” (Organization of the Islamic Conference 8).
In 1992, slavery was prohibited in Pakistan.
In 2007, in response to the continued existence of up to a million and a half
black Muslim slaves in the nation, owned by Arab and Berber Muslims,
Mauritania reiterated its abolition of slavery on Islamic grounds. As
Boubacar Ould Messaoud (b. 1945), the leader of SOS Esclaves, commented,
Mauritania is an Islamic republic — but Islam is not slavery. It was
absolutely necessary to enshrine in law the condemnation of slavery by
Islam. Respecting shari‘ah would involve treating your slave as yourself,
but that is impossible otherwise he would lose all usefulness. Therefore,
the practice is not compatible with religious precepts. (Clémençot)
The deeply ingrained practice of slavery, however, has persisted in
Mauritania, as it does in the Sudan, its last strongholds.
Rather than follow the illustrious example of caliph al-Hakim, the Nizari
Ismailis only came out against slavery and concubinage in the twentieth
century when their leader, Agha Khan III (r. 1885-1957), expressed his
support for abolition.
The Nation of Islam, founded by Master W.D. Fard, on July 4, 1930, was
vehemently opposed to slavery and concubinage. Whether he is viewed as a
Prophet or God in Person, his views have divine weight in the eyes, minds,
and hearts of the faithful who follow him. Elijah Muhammad was always
adamantly against slavery, whether committed by Christians or Muslims.
This is the only reasonable position that any black African, African
American, or Afro descendant in the Americas can take.
According to the teachings of W.D. Fard, by embracing Slave Master Islam,
black people have replaced one set of devils for another. They no longer
belong to the 5% of “poor, righteous teachers.” They are now followers of
the 10%, “the rich; the slave-makers of the poor; who teach the poor lies…
the Blood-Suckers of the Poor.” They are followers of the Caucasian slave
master, the Devil, and the Skunk of the Earth who is “One Hundred Percent
Wicked.” The Caucasoid category includes those who are Aryan, Semitic,
and Hamitic. Europeans, Arabs, Imazighen, Persians, Turks, and others are
considered to be “whites,” or Caucasians.
As Master Fard taught, the Devil keeps blacks blind and ignorant so that he
can master them. He desires “to make slaves out of all he can so that he can
rob them and live in luxury.” They have gone from life to mental death. True Islam, taught Fard, was based on “FREEDOM, JUSTICE and EQUALITY.”
He was emphatic that the Caucasian or Colored Devil could not be reformed.
If that is the case, than neither can his Fake and Fraudulent Islam.
Muhammad Abu Zahra (1898-1974), the Egyptian authority on Islamic law,
asserted that there was not a single verse of the Qur’an or a rigorously
authenticated tradition of the Prophet Muhammad that mandated slavery
(ElGendy). In the words of Brown, “Muhammad Abu Zahra summed it up:
Islam would welcome a day when slavery was banned” (2017).
As ‘Abbas al-‘Aqqad (1889-1964), the Egyptian author asserted, “the Qur’an
legitimizes emancipation and does not legitimize slavery” (ElGendy).
Ghulam Ahmed Perwez (1903-1985), a giant of a scholar, believed that
slavery and concubinage were devoid of any Qur’anic basis.
Twelver Shiite scholarslike Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr (d. 1980) and Morteza
Muttahari (d. 1979) opposed slavery in their writings.
Ahmad Ghabal (d. 2012), the Iranian mujtahid believed that the abolition of
slavery was consonant with the shar‘iat-i ‘aqlani or rule of reason (Ridgeon
176).
Mohammad-Hadi Ma‘rifat (1931-2007), the Twelver Shiite Qur’anic
commentator, advocated the idea of naskh-i tamhidi or preparatory
abrogation (Ridgeon 35). As Ridgeon notes, “He believed that some verses of the Qur’an (such as those related to the permissibility of slavery and the mistreatment of women) were incompatible with certain ethical goals. Therefore, although such institutions and practices were not abolished in the Qur’an, the ground was prepared by limiting their harm or practice, and so the eventual abrogation of these verses at a later stage (either by the Prophet himself of by the imams) was made much easier” (35-36).
Twelver Shiite scholars, and sources of emulation, including Muhammad
Husayn Fadlullah (d. 2010) and Mostafa Mohaghegh-Damad (b. 1945) ruled
that slavery and concubinage were prohibited. Yasser Awde, a Lebanese
cleric, and student of Fadlullah, has also asserted that the claim that the
Prophet took women as captives was a lie. However, he succumbs to the
antisemitic trope that it was fabricated by Jews to corrupt the Islamic religion.
Twelver Shiite mujtahids, like Mohsen Kadivar (b. 1959), and Sunni jurists,
like Bernard Freamon (b. 1947), have all published sophisticated scholarly
refutations of slavery and concubinage. Kadivar relied on naskh ‘aqli,
abrogation by reason, to conclude that slavery is no longer legally authorized in Islam.
Sunni scholars, like Muhammad Yaqoubi (b. 1963), and the signatories to
the Open Letter to Baghdadi have prohibited slavery and concubinage.
Modernist, reformist, progressive, and secular Muslim scholars all prohibit
slavery and concubinage.
In 2012, Biram Dah Abeid (b. 1965), the leader of the Initiative for the
Resurgence of the Abolitionist Movement, organized a protest in Nouakchott, the capital of Mauritania. After years of asking the government and the Supreme Council for Fatwa and Grievances to prohibit slavery, this freedom fighter would ask no more. The IRA would take matters into their own hands and free slaves without the support of the so-called scholars of Islam. He showed some books of “Islamic” jurisprudence that legalize slavery and concubinage and declared: “Start your campaign against me. Say that I am against religion. Give money to your slaves and send them to say that everywhere — that will not help you. We don’t have to explain ourselves to them. We are not afraid and we don’t need their money. Sometimes we have nothing but water for dinner. But we are not afraid. They are false Muslims, so they cannot evaluate our Islam. No one can have more conviction than us because we have the truth. If we die, it will be from the front, not the back. We will not run away… These books justify selling people, they justify raping people. We will purify the religion, the faith, and the hearts of the Mauritanians. What the Prophet says was hidden by these books, which are not real words from God. These old books give a bad image of Islam. We have no choice but to take this step.” His bodyguard dropped the books into a box doused with lighter fluid and Abeid set them afire (Okeowo).
On December 2, 2014, at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and Social
Sciences at Vatican City, Mohammed Taqi al-Modaressi (b. 1945), an Iraqi
Twelver Shiite source of emulation, signed the Joint Declaration of Religious
Leaders against Slavery, along with Catholic, Anglican, Muslim, Hindu,
Buddhist, Jewish, and Orthodox Christian leaders. He stated: “No one must
take others as slaves, nor transgress their rights, be it in part or in whole, big or small” (End Slavery). He called for the creation of a permanent body, akin to UNICEF, that would devote itself to uprooting “the evil of slavery on a cultural level, and see criminals prosecuted and punished for forced labor and slavery” (End Slavery).
Although not absolute, as ijma‘ rarely is, there has been a large enough
number of Muslim scholars who have opposed slavery and concubinage over
the past century and a half to assert that there is a scholarly consensus against such practices. The problem at the present, writes Freamon, is that “There is little awareness, among jurists and among ordinary believers, of the legal history of slavery and trafficking in Muslim communities, and still less awareness that Islamic law principles are available to them in crafting an effort to end these practices” (2016: 305).
There has never been a time, since the dawn of Islam to its dusk, in which
there were no Muslim abolitionists. There have always been Muslims who
opposed and abhorred slavery and concubinage. Slavery was not synonymous with the Qur’an and true Islam. The institution did not go unchallenged. In fact, it was an inversion of Islamic principles. It took time for the moral minority to become the majority.
Scholarly consensus aside, the vast majority of Muslims worldwide are
reportedly opposed to slavery and concubinage and find them to be morally
abhorrent. The beliefs and practices of the majority of believers have an
authoritative status. The consensus of the worldwide Muslim community
condemns slavery and concubinage. As Shafi‘i noted in his Risalah, the only
true ijma‘ is that of the entire community, which includes scholars and lay
people (Freamon 1998: 24). According to Freamon, “this new ijma‘ will
recognize that the Qur’an and sunnah are, in fact, abolitionist texts in spirit
and substance” (1998: 61). Although it is Johnny come lately, it is a tune all
moral, freedom-loving, Muslims must sing. While it helps, a consensus
against slavery does not suffice. Slavery, in all its dimensions, is complex,
and its opposition requires a multi-pronged approach. What is more, a
consensus against slavery is not a solution in and of itself as it was Islamic
jurisprudence that produced the problem in the first place by permitting and regulating it. As the Sufi sages say, “If you want to go to hell, become a
jurist.” Rather than reflect the Qur’an, observes Cyrille Moreno al-‘Ajami,
Islamic law reflects the socio-political realities of its period (2020: 49).
In 2004, Muhammad Diakho, a black African Muslim jurist, published
L’esclavage en Islam [Slavery in Islam], a powerful and persuasive
jurisprudential treatise that provides a traditional Islamic rationale for the
abolition and prohibition of slavery and concubinage.
In 2008, Malek Chebel (d. 2016) noted that Prophet Muhammad strongly
opposed slavery. People, however, did not listen. As a result, Chebel
estimates that Muslims enslaved twenty one to twenty two million human
beings over the past fourteen hundred years and that there were
approximately 2.5 million slaves across the Islamic world.
It is a disgrace that, as late as 2010, Chebel had to issue an “Appeal to
the Conscience of Current Muslim Governments,” urging them to view
slavery, not as a taboo, but as a crime (491). He called upon them to take legal and theological action against slavery, noting that “universal principles must never be hindered by ethnic, ideological, or religious considerations (491). He asked them to take concrete political action against modern forms of slavery (491). He encouraged them to use the media to sensitize populations regularly regarding the reality of modern-day slavery and to help enslaved people escape from the vicious circle of misery (492). Finally, he urged that current slaves, and the descendants of slaves in the Muslim world, receive reparations to help them break from their ancestral chains and to integrate them fully integrate into society (492).
In Ahmad Qabel (1954-2012), the Iranian mujtahid, and advocate of rational
shari‘ah, emphasized “the impermissibility of a return to the practice of
slavery and the religious unlawfulness of violations of the human right to
freedom” (52; Jahanbakhsh n. page).
In 2010, ‘Ali al-Sistani, the Twelver Shiite religious authority was asked: “Is
it permissible to enslave women belonging to infidels who make war [against us] without the permission of the legitimate ruler? Is it permissible to have sex with them before they surrender? And if someone bought or came to own a non-Muslim concubine, may he have sex with her?” He answered: “No, it is not allowed.”
In 2014, Mohamed El Sadi, the spiritual leader of the Muslims in Malta,
strongly condemned slavery. In his words, “Slavery used to be allowed in
olden times, a long time ago; however, Islam moved away from this and
wants to liberate all slaves and completely eliminate slavery. This is the goal
of Islam” (Orland).
In 2015, Ajmal Masroor, a Bangladeshi-born British imam, broadcaster and
politician, declared that “In Islam taking anyone as captive, mistreating them using them as sex slaves, torturing them and killing them is totally
prohibited.”
Writing in 2016, Abdullah Saeed, Rowan Gould, and Adis Duderija, asserted
that, “The Qur’an commands us to end slavery, not increase it. Slavery has now been ended in Islam by consensus, in accordance with the will of God
and His Prophet. The historical conditions that produced and sustained it
should not be reproduced today. To do so is not to follow the example of
the Prophet but to disobey it” (133).
In 2019, ‘Ali al-Sistani, the Twelver Shiite religious authority, issued
“Advice and Guidance to the Fighters on the Battlefield” in which he
explicitly prohibited them from offending the honor and virtue of Muslim and non-Muslim women.
In 2016, Ahmed Subhy Mansour (b. 1949), the Qur’anist scholar, historian,
and shaykh who received his doctorate from al-Azhar University, published
Slavery: A Fundamental Historical Overview which provides a persuasive
case against human bondage and concubinage. In 2018, he ruled that
“Enslavement and slavery are prohibited in the Qur’an.”
In 2016, Khaled Esseissah, the US-educated Mauritanian historian, argued
that “Arab-Berber religious scholars have developed twisted interpretations
of Islam, to justify the legality of the enslavement” of black people.
In 2019, Bernard K. Freamon, an African American Muslim jurist, published
Possessed by the Right Hand, the first comprehensive legal history of slavery in Islam, providing a thorough case for prohibiting slavery and concubinage. In 2020, he published “Toward the Abolition of Slavery Under the Aegis of Islamic Law,” in which he finds that “the emancipation of slaves is one of the highest priorities of the Islamic religion.” Hence, “application of a robust prioritarian interpretation” of the Qur’an and sunnah “lead to the conclusion that abolition is the best way to accomplish the emancipatory result demanded by the text.”
In 2020, Cyrille Moreno al-‘Ajami, an Arabist who specializes in Qur’anic
exegesis, published Que dit vraiment le Coran? [What Does the Qur’an
Really Say?]. He stresses that the Qur’an approaches the abolition of slavery
in a rational way. It reminded people that human beings were equal. It
emphasized the inhumanity of subjecting human beings to slavery. It
introduced measures to encourage manumission. It also prohibited the
enslavement of prisoners of war. He insists that the Qur’an never mandated
slavery. On the contrary, it established an emancipatory trajectory that was
progressive and depended on the development of human consciousness. As
he repeats, there is no humanity in inhumanity. It is therefore a dishonor and a disgrace to claim that the revealed message reflected the darkness of souls from the dark ages. Although he believes that the Qur’an provided a program for the abolition of slavery, he refuses to believe that it tolerated the sexual abuse of female slaves by sexual predators. If the Qur’anic prohibition against concubinage was disregarded, it was through exegetical ruses. As he explains, macho, misogynistic, and sexist slavers misinterpreted the verses of the Qur’an to give themselves the right to preserve a degenerate and degrading practice that is an affront to human dignity. For al-‘Ajami, “the Qur’an is not to blame; it is held hostage.” If Muslims were the last to abolish slavery, it was due to their failure to respect the reforms instituted by the Qur’an (2020: 98-104)
In 202l, Liyakat Ali Takim, a Twelver Shiite academic, asserted that “the
selling and purchase of humans is unethical and an affront to human values” (211).
In June of 2023, Reza Hosseini Nasab, an Iranian Twelver Shiite marja or
source of emulation based in the Greater Toronto Area in Canada, was asked
whether slavery and concubinage were permitted in Islam. He ruled that they were both prohibited.
In 2023, Biram Dah Abeid (b. 1965), the Mauritanian politician, advocate
for the abolition of slavery, the recipient of the United Nations Prize in the
Field of Human Rights, and one of the one hundred most influential people
in the world according to Time magazine, expressed his unconditional
support for my efforts to provide an Islamic basis for the abolition of slavery.
Slavery and concubinage oppose Natural Law or fitrah, which is the law of
God within each and every one of us.
Slavery and sexual slavery and bondage violate three of the Ten
Commandments: “Thou shalt not steal,” “Thou shalt not commit adultery,”
and “Thou shalt not covet they neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his
maidservant.”
The aforementioned evidence supporting the abolition of slavery and
concubinage in Islam barely scratches the surface. While there are traditions
that can be used to support slavery and concubinage, there are just as many
that can be used to oppose them. Citing them all would take volumes. Most,
however, would be rejected by jurists as they insist that one cannot legislate
ethics. Rather than hurl hadith back and forth in a futile battle, and argue
about authenticity, which is not even the issue, as the real issue is the authorial enterprise, what is called for is a return to revelation, justice, and reason.
Some Muslims have been so wrong for far too long. The ahl al-qur’an
followed the Qur’an and the Qur’an alone. The ahl al-hadith or ahl al-sunnah
placed the hadith above the Qur’an and rejected reason. Their Shiite
equivalent, the ahl al-akhbar, did the same. The ahl al-bayt insisted upon the Qur’an, the sunnah transmitted by the Imams, and reason. The ahl al-kalam placed reason above all else. The ahl al-kalam, ahl al-ra’y, ahl al-‘adl wa al-tawhid, and ahl al-istiqamah focus on reason, divine unity, and divine justice.
When deriving rules and regulations, the best approach is one that relies on
‘aql, reason; al-fitrah, Natural Law; ‘adl, justice; akhlaq, ethics; maqasid;
higher objectives; tawhid, divine unity; maslahah, the greater good; ‘urf,
common practice; zaman wa makan, time and place; la haraj, avoiding
difficulty; la darar, avoiding harm; wahy, revelation; and hadith or sunnah,
so long as it agrees with all of the former.
It is an embarrassment to Islam that there are still Muslims who support the
mass slavery and concubinage practiced by their predecessors and, in some
cases, even their contemporaries. It is even more perplexing when black
Muslim Uncle Toms, who descend from victims of the trans-Atlantic slave
trade, do so themselves, coming to the defense of Muslims whose forefathers
enslaved people in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, keeping millions for
themselves and selling millions of others to the merchant ships in an alliance that brought the worst of Muslims into an infernal alliance with the worst of Christians.
The Islamic legal and ethical ecosystem has always provided numerous
instruments to abolish slavery and concubinage. In fact, it could be argued
that the Qur’an and Islam offer more resources for emancipation and
abolition than the Bible and Christianity.
Neither God, the Prophet, the Imams, nor Islam should be blamed for the
sins and shortcomings of so-called Muslims who remained wide awake to
wickedness or snoozed in the slumber of sin.
“Sleepers, wake up!” Truth is transcendent. Morals are absolute. Natural law
is eternal, unchanging, and eternally valid. Muslims must break out of their
boxes. They must burst the bubble of the universe. They must free their minds and souls from the shackles of man-made religion. They must stop taking their scholars as lords and gods. They should be slaves to God and God alone (3:79).
It is our divine and human duty to oppose any interpretation of Islam that
violates its principles of egalitarianism. Not only is another reading of the
Qur’an possible, but it is also required. As Cyrille Moreno al-‘Ajami argues,
Islam, as a historical religion developed by men, has very little to do with the Qur’an as an original and primary source (2019).
In the final words of Muhammad, the Messenger of God: “The prayer, the
prayer! And fear God with regard to those whom your right hands possess”
(Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Nas’ai, Ahmad; Ahmad 74). He spoke these words
in the presence of his wives, his daughter Fatimah, her children, Hasan and
Husayn, the faithful Muhajirin, the loyal Ansar. However, his final thoughts
and concerns were with the downtrodden slaves. They were the weightiest of words he ever uttered (Ahmad 74-75).
In the name of God and His Prophet: Emancipate the slaves! Free the slaves!
Freedom, Justice, and Equality for all! After all, “Righteous is he who … set
slaves free” (Qur’an 2:177).
The Punishment for Slavery and Concubinage
During the rule of ‘Ali, the first Imam, a group of men brought a man who
had sold a free woman into slavery. The Imam cut off his hand (Kulayni, vol. 7, Book of Legal Penalties). During the Imamate of Ja‘far al-Sadiq, the sixth Imam was asked about a man who stole a free woman and sold her into slavery. He responded: “Four penalties (are applicable) — as for the first one, so he is a thief, his hand would be cut; and the second if he had copulated with her, he would be whipped the penalty (hadd), and (a penalty) (hadd) upon the one who bought, if he had knowingly copulated with her, if he was married, stoning, and if he was not married, the penalty (hadd) of whipping; and if he had not known, then there is nothing upon him; and upon her, if she was coerced (forced), so there is nothing upon her, and if she had obeyed him, she would be whipped the penalty (hadd).” (Kulayni, vol. 7, Book of Legal Penalties). For ‘Ali and Ja‘far al-Sadiq, enslaving free human beings, which is precisely what was done by Muslim states and slavers throughout history, was an act of theft. Anyone who enslaves a person is to have a hand cut off according to Islamic law. According to the sixth Imam, anyone who has sexual intercourse with an enslaved female is to be whipped, if he is single, or stoned to death if he is married. Females who are forced to have sex are not to be punished. However, those who refuse to resist are to be punished. This tradition clearly establishes that sexual intercourse with enslaved women falls in the category of fornication or adultery. In subsequent traditions, however, the sixth Imam stresses, in no uncertain terms, that the punishment for forced intercourse, rape, and sexual assault, is death. Hence, men who have sex with enslaved, trafficked, and exploited females, be they slaves or prostitutes, should be condemned to death, life in prison, or severe punishment according to Islamic law.

These traditions stand in sharp contrast to those in which the Imams permitted Muslim men to purchase and sexually exploit free females who had been enslaved, and those that claim that they did so themselves.
“Woe to every sinful liar” (45:7); “Cursed be the liars” (51:10); “Aye! We
have brought them the truth and verily they are the liars” (23:90); “Lo! Ye verily are liars!” (16:86); “It is only those who believe not in the signs of God who fabricate lies, and those! They are the liars” (16:105); “God guides not the liar” (39:3; 40:28). Truly, “God guides whom He pleases” (28:56).
Finally, in light of the carnage, suffering, and injustice they cause, slavery
and concubinage are the very manifestation of “spreading corruption on earth” (2:11). In the words of the Qur’an, “The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and strive to spread corruption through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter” (5:33). So let the punishment fit the crime. And “God is not unjust in the least” (8:51)

Source: Morrow, John Andrew. Islam & Slavery. Washington, DC, and London: Academica Press, 2024. Buy the book.