Should Somalia adopt an Islamic Judiciary System?

[Carafaat]

Slavery doesn't even exist anymore. This is a non-issue.

[Hobbesian_Brute]

Carafaat;973425 wrote:

Slavery doesn't even exist anymore. This is a non-issue.

Slavery exists today in many Muslim countries if your not aware. in places like Mauritania slavery still flourishes. Muslims are agitating for sharia law today, tomorrow they will demand the return of slavery. its not an academic question at all.

[Haatu]

Hobbesian, please source your quote from Sh Saleh Al Fowzaan. I would like to read it.

[Hobbesian_Brute]

http://www.thenoblequran.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=NDV01&articleID=NDV010010&articlePages=1

[Carafaat]

Hobbesian_Brute;973427 wrote:

Slavery exists today in many Muslim countries if your not aware. in places like Mauritania slavery still flourishes. Muslims are agitating for sharia law today, tomorrow they will demand the return of slavery. its not an academic question at all.

 

Your fear for muslims is quite irrational and ungrounded.

[Allyourbase]

DoctorKenney;973400 wrote:

Slavery in Islam only exists in the context of Jihaad and acquiring prisoners of war. So if the Muslim State wages war, then the POW's (prisoners of war) are then acquired as slaves. So Islam reformed society in the sense that there were multiple avenues to acquire slaves in ancient society.... But Islam reduced the avenues to acquire slaves to just one; having Prisoners of War after the battle is finished.

 

Either way, this is a complex issue, but Islam certainly doesn't advocate going to random villages, capturing men, women and children, and then selling their price, which is what the American slave trade was infamous for.

 

This Hadith by the Prophet says this:

 

Sahih Bukhari Book 2 Number 29

 

"Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them."

 

The Quran repeatedly tells the Believers to free their slaves, and it is also commanded to free your slaves if they request it, and write a contract guaranteeing their freedom (Surah 24:33)

 

Either way, this is a detailed issue and is already addressed by numerous English-speaking Islamic scholars (Bilal Phillips) and others. Don't turn this forum into some Islamic Debate forum. Because every single post you made here is related to Islam and criticizing it thereof. Nothing else

Historically the practice of chattel slavery flourished under Islamic states that adopted raids and ghazwat as means of survival and economic stimulation. Read with me:

 

Some lesser Islamic slave societies are also of interest. One is the Baghdad caliphate founded in the 7th and lasting through the 10th century. Many tens of thousands of military captives were imported from Sogdiana, Khazaria, and other Central Asian locales. In the 9th and 10th centuries several tens of thousands of black Zanj slaves were imported from Zanzibar to Lower Iraq, where they constituted more than half the total population and were put to work to clear saline lands for irrigation and to cultivate sugar.

 

Also:

 

It is probable that the Ottoman Empire, and especially its centre in Turkey, should be termed a slave society. Slaves from both the white Slavic north and the black African south flowed into Turkish cities for half a millennium after the Turks seized control of much of the Balkans in the 14th century. The proportion of the population that was slave ranged from about one-fifth in Istanbul, the capital, to much less in remoter provincial areas.

[Safferz]

Hobbesian_Brute;973421 wrote:

don't think its complex at all, slavery is evil, islam should reject it unequivocally for all time. Islam provides an overarching justification -- waging jihad against infidels; where slaves are captured. do you know that

Muslims were overwhelmingly responsible for collecting the blacks destined for the Atlantic slave trade from the interiors of Africa and selling them to the Europeans. and that the atlantic slave trade itself pales in comparison to the far more evil and cruel but less infamous African trade perpetrated by the Arabs mainly from East Africa.

Bits and pieces from history indicate that Muslims enslaved over

150

million African people

.

I don't really want to get into this debate, but I feel compelled to point out that none of that is historically accurate and your figures are baseless. Historians of Africa agree that the trans-Atlantic slave trade was far more brutal in scope and impact -- an easy way to see that is to look at the numbers enslaved (~13 million, an estimate similar to that for the numbers enslaved in the so-called "Arab slave trade," except the trans-Atlantic slave trade happened within a much smaller time frame, ~400 compared to over 1000 years for trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean slave trades). It also set the socioeconomic and political landscape for later European colonial rule, which continues to have an effect on contemporary Africa and its relationship with the global north. There's also no evidence to support your claim that "Muslims were overwhelmingly responsible" as slavers during the trans-Atlantic slave trade. And the binary you've constructed between "Muslim" and "African" ("African" did not exist as an identity then either) is obfuscating and lazy; the two categories can and do exist in the same person, and millions of Muslims were enslaved as well.

[DoctorKenney]

These aren't real rebuttals. Your examples of mass-slavery occurring in some parts of Africa, are just examples of Arab Slave Traders looking to make a profit by imprisoning men, women and children and selling their price.

 

When people think of slavery they picture the American Slave Trade where millions of Africans were kidnapped, Islam paints an entirely different picture and Islam links slavery ONLY to the acquirement of Prisoners of War after the battle is completed, similar to how the Americans and virtually every modern nation deals with war-prisoners.

 

How in the hell did this discussion go from Somalias judicial system to slavery in Islam? And why are Hobbesian Brute and Allyourbases posts dedicated to bashing Islam? This is ridiculous and the Moderators shouldn't allow this constant derailing of threads to bashing Islam. All of your objections are responded to in numerous Muslim websites

[DoctorKenney]

They would have us believe that Slavery in Islam means the kidnapping of millions of people and forcing them to work in awful conditions where they are abused and also forbidding them from seeking freedom. Islam definitely does not condone such practices and there are numerous sources from Islamic law which outline the treatment of "slaves" in Islam.

 

The posts by Hobbes and AllYourBase paint a misleading picture.

 

In Islam you are even commanded to free your slaves if they request to be freed. And the Prophet said in the Hadith's that your slaves should be treated as your brothers and deal with them on an equal basis.

 

This is a detailed issue and there are volumes of books written on such a subject

[Hobbesian_Brute]

Let's start with the figures, the 150 million Africans was over 1400 years of Islamic rule, its actually a conservative estimate and most probably that figure is much higher, we would never know precisely because unlike the Western slave trade it was not recorded, but historians have fairly good estimate in that range. We have not even mentioned other nationalities and races which are put in the order ~ 50 Million slaves. Look it up if you don't believe me.

 

"...the worst, most inhumane and most diabolical institution of the black African slave trade was initiated, refined, perpetrated and implemented by the Mohammedan Arabs and later aided and abetted by the black converts to Mohammedan Islam."

 

John Alembillah Azumah, Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa

 

" A comparison of the Islamic slave trade to the American slave trade reveals some interesting contrasts. While two out of every three slaves shipped across the Atlantic were men, the proportions were reversed in the Islamic slave trade. Two women for every man were enslaved by the Muslims.

 

While the mortality rate for slaves being transported across the Atlantic was as high as 10%, the percentage of slaves dying in transit in the Trans Sahara and East African slave trade was between 80 and 90%!

 

While almost all the slaves shipped across the Atlantic were for agricultural work, most of the slaves destined for the Muslim Middle East were for sexual exploitation as concubines, in harems, and for military service.

 

While many children were born to slaves in the Americas, and millions of their descendants are citizens in Brazil and the USA to this day, very few descendants of the slaves that ended up in the Middle East survive.

 

While most slaves who went to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male slaves destined for the Middle East were castrated, and most of the children born to the women were killed at birth."

 

Why the so called Arab slave trade ? The Atlantic slave trade happened in much shorter time frame, that is undisputed. i think it down to superior technology bigger, faster ships and better organization not kindness or humanity on the part of the Arab slavers.

 

" it also set the socioeconomic and political landscape for later European colonial rule, which continues to have an effect on contemporary Africa and its relationship with the global north ".

 

Undoubtedly, but don't generalize, the vast majority of the continent wasn't touched at all by the Atlantic slave trade, it was concentrated on the West Coast of Africa.

 

Africans, blacks, indigenous people of the continent call them what you want. were not into word games here. Black Muslims are victims even though they participated in the slaving of their fellow blacks during the Atlantic slave trade.

 

"They also converted Africans into Islam, causing a complete social and financial collapse of the entire African continent apart from wealth attributed to a few regional African kings who became wealthy on the trade and encouraged it."

 

[Carafaat]

So basicly, you oppose an Islamic Justice system just because there was slavery in some Arabs countries centuries ago. But then I wonder why you dont oppose the western system, havent they enslaved dozens of millions, used nuclear bombs against innocent civilians, colonized and robbed hundreds of countries, killed 6 million jews, started 2 world wars, etc, etc.

 

Your argument is baseless.

[kickz]

Anyways it was the Catholic church that turned slavery into enslaving people based on color, before then it was not only blacks who were enslaved.

[Allyourbase]

DoctorKenney;973460 wrote:

These aren't real rebuttals. Your examples of mass-slavery occurring in some parts of Africa, are just examples of Arab Slave Traders looking to make a profit by imprisoning men, women and children and selling their price.

Stating the extent to which the business of slavery had become a vital part of Islamic states isn't a rebuttal? This has very little to do with greedy slave traders and much more to do with a system that endorses the enslaving of humans and under which such practices flourishes to the point of having slaves constitute more than half of the population in certain regions.

 

There is the famous hadith whereby Maimuna bint al Harith, the prophet's wife freed her slave, the prophet here clearly states that she would have gotten extra rewards had she given her slave to her uncle, effectively encouraging her to keep the slave in bondage:

 

Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles."

[Haatu]

Hobbesian_Brute;973392

"Slavery is a part of Islam... Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam... [Those who argue that slavery has been abolished are wrote:

ignorant, not scholars. They are merely writers. Whoever says such things is an infidel."

 

Sheikh Saleh Al-Fawzan, member of Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabia's highest religious body (2003)

Here is what the scholar said in full for those who are interested in the unedited copy & paste version:

 

1. Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan

 

Sayyid Qutb said concerning slavery, "And concerning the slaves, that was when slavery was a world-wide structure and which was conducted amongst the Muslims and their enemies in the form of enslaving of prisoners of war. And it was necessary for Islam to adopt a similar line of practise until the world devised a new code of practise, other than enslavement." [in ‘az-Zilal’, Surah Tawbah (3/1669), found also in tafsir of Surah Baqarah (/230), tafsir of Surah Mu’minoon (4/2455), tafsir of Surah Muhammad (6/3285)]

 

Questioner: "O respected Shaikh, one of the contemporary writers is of the view that this religion, at its inception, was compelled to accept the institution of slavery of the days of ignorance."

 

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan: "I seek refuge in Allaah"

 

Questioner: [Completing his question] "However, he has come from the angle that the doors to the various expiations and other matters which involve the liberation of slaves should be opened (i.e. that these affairs should be encouraged) gradually, until slavery finally ends. And following on from this, that the intent of the Legislator is to gradually end this institution of slavery. So what is your view on this?"

 

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan: "These are words of falsehood (baatil) – and refuge is from Allaah – despite the fact that many of the writers and thinkers – and we do not say scholars - repeat these words. Rather we say that they are thinkers (mufakkireen), just as they call them. And it is unfortunate, that they also call them ‘Du’at’ (callers). And this (type of statement) is found in the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb in Dhilaal ul-Qura’aan. He says, "Islaam does not affirm slavery, but it only allowed it to remain out of fear that the people may turn to despotism, that they may disapprove of it’s abolition since they had been accustomed to it. Hence Islaam has allowed it to continue out of courtesy to the people" Meaning, as if Allaah was being courteous to the people, and then he alluded to its gradual removal until it is completely finished.

 

These words are falsehood and (constitute) deviation (ilhaad) – and refuge is from Allaah. This is deviation and a false accusation against Islaam. And if it had not been for the excuse of ignorance [because] we excuse them on account of (their) ignorance, so we do not say that they are Unbelievers because they are ignorant and are blind followers who have merely quoted this saying without reflecting upon it, hence we excuse them on account of ignorance. Otherwise, these statements are very dangerous and if a person said them deliberately he would become apostate and leave Islaam. However, we say that they are ignorant people because they are but literary writers who have not learnt the knowledge. So they found this statement and rejoiced on account of it and then refuted the Unbelievers by it. Since the Unbelievers say that Islaam empowers some people (over others) and that it enslaves the people and that it… and that it… So they intended to refute them with this ignorance. And when the ignoramus refutes the enemy then he only increases the enemy in evil and hence the enemy holds more tightly to his falsehood. Refutation occurs by way of knowledge. It does no occur by way of sentiments or by ignorance. Rather it occurs by knowledge and evidence. Otherwise, it is obligatory for a person to remain quiet and not to speak in dangerous matters about which he has no knowledge.

 

So these words are falsehood and whoever says them deliberately then he is an Unbeliever. As for the one who says them out of ignorance or due to blind following (of others), then he is to be excused due to his ignorance. And ignorance is a killing catastrophe – and refuge is from Allaah. Islaam has affirmed slavery and slavery is ancient and existed prior to Islaam and was present in the revealed religions prior to it. And it will continue so long as Jihaad in the path of Allaah exists."

 

Source:

 

Cassette Recording dated 4/8/1416 and subsequently verified by the Shaikh himself with a few minor alterations to the wording.

[Hobbesian_Brute]

Carafaat;973471 wrote:

So basicly, you oppose an Islamic Justice system just because there was slavery in some Arabs countries centuries ago

. But then I wonder why you dont oppose the western system, havent they enslaved dozens of millions, used nuclear bombs against innocent civilians, colonized and robbed hundreds of countries, killed 6 million jews, started 2 world wars, etc, etc.

 

Your argument is baseless.

Are you playing dumb ? centuries ago kulaha.....it is happening as we speak in Muslims countries, don't be lazy and look up the evidence i have provided. i was just showing the practice of your so called " Islamic Justice system " put in to action by giving this historical details.If not for the western rise and dominance, slavery would have continued till today.There is nothing in sharia that forbids it, neither have Islamic scholars forbidden it, in fact they have reaffirmed the legality of it to the present day. There no Muslim abolitionists at all, all Muslims do is dance around the question but none ( including you ) will condemn slavery, in fact its Xaraam to say slavery is forbidden according to Islam, for its a grave sin to forbid what Allah has made Xalaal.

 

I don't oppose the western system because it doesn't condone war on unbelievers just because their religion is different unlike Islam, that is why you ( Muslims ) can build mosques and practice Islam freely in their lands, but a christian can't build a church and pray as he likes in any Muslim country. Islam orders followers to be intolerant.