DID ISLAM STARTED SLAVERY COMPREHENSIVE ANSWER

 

Did Islam invent slavery?
Islam is the religion of freedom. When it dawned on this world, it found in it a great number of male and female slaves. Islam did not invent slavery, but rather found it to be a universal matter upon which the foundations of life are based throughout the earth.
Islam came when slavery had spread in society, so it addressed this matter from several aspects, and promised those who freed slaves a great reward from God Almighty, and legislated many means to limit the phenomenon of slavery, such as expiations, oaths, and others. It also forbade the sale of free people, whether they were sons or otherwise.

What is Islam’s view of man?
Man is honored in Islam as a human being. Allah the Almighty said:
{ And We have certainly honored the children of Adam …} [Surat Al-Isra, verse 7] and granted him complete freedom in all his voluntary actions, the most important of which is: belief or disbelief. Allah the Almighty said:
{And say, “The truth is from your Lord. So whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve…} [Surat Al-Kahf, verse 26] and asked him to be a slave to Allah alone. Allah the Almighty said:
{And worship Allah and associate nothing with Him…} [Surat An-Nisa, verse 36]. Therefore, the enslavement of one human being by another cannot be acceptable in Islam, which does not accept that a human being be a slave to anyone except his Creator, the Almighty.


How does Islam address the issue of slavery then?
When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was sent, slavery was a system in effect in all parts of the earth, so he dealt with it as a reality, but he sought to free people from it with a large group of legal rulings:
1- Allah Almighty made one of the expenses of zakat to free slaves . He legislated the contract of mukataba between the slave and his master, whereby the slave buys himself from his master for a sum of money, then goes to work to collect this sum, and the Muslims help him from the zakat of their money - until when he pays the sum he obtains his freedom. This matter was not known in that era.
2- He legislated for the Muslim the expiation of freeing a slave (i.e. freeing a slave), if he took an oath and wanted to break it, and if he pronounces zihar (i.e. he says to her: you are to me like the back of my mother, meaning that he will not come near her, then he wants to go back on his word, it is not permissible for him to do so except after paying the expiation ), and if he kills a Muslim by mistake, and if he intentionally breaks the fast one day of Ramadan by having sexual intercourse, he must also pay the expiation.
3- Encouraging Muslims to free slaves as a door to goodness that Allah Almighty loves, and He has made it a reason to overcome the obstacle of Hell on the Day of Resurrection and enter Paradise. Allah the Almighty said:
{So do not attempt the steep path - and what can make you know what the steep path is? Free a slave..} [Surat Al-Balad, verses 11-12-13] Freeing a slave: meaning freeing a slave.
4- Imposing punishment on the master, which is the obligation to free his slave if he beats him severely. However, if the beating was not severe, it is recommended for him to free him.As Abu Ubaidah did when he was beating his slave, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said to him: (Allah has more power over you than you have over him). Abu Ubaidah realized his mistake and immediately said: O Messenger of Allah, he is free for the sake of Allah. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: (If you had not done so, the Fire would have burned you). Narrated by Muslim.

Slavery in language: is a delicate thing, the opposite of thick and coarse.
Technically: it is ownership and servitude, i.e. the opposite of manumission and freedom.
The slave in the sense of a servant is applied to the singular and the plural, and to the male and female. As for the slave, it is: the male slave,
and its opposite is: the female slave. Among the terms that refer to the male slave are the terms: boy or young man.. and for the female are the terms:
girl and maid. As for the serf, he is more specific than the slave, as he is the one who is owned along with his parents.
The owner of the slave is: the master, or the lord.
Slavery is an old system that has preceded injustice, slavery, classism and exploitation in human history, and the
Holy Quran referred to it in the story of Joseph, peace be upon him. And a caravan came, so they sent their water-drawer, and he let down his bucket. He said, "Good tidings! This is
a boy!" And they captured him as merchandise, and Allah is Knowing of what they do. And they sold him for a cheap price, a few dirhams, and they were among those who were ascetics about him.
And he who bought him from Egypt said to his wife, “Make his stay honorable; perhaps he may be of use to us, or we may adopt him as a son.” (1) Slavery was one
of the punishments for theft among the ancient Hebrews. When Joseph’s brothers were asked about the punishment for stealing the king’s cup, they said, “
His punishment is that whoever is found in his bag will be punished.” (2)
In ancient civilizations, slavery was the mainstay of the production and exploitation system. In some of these civilizations, such as the
Egyptian Pharaonic and Persian Khosrau civilizations, the closed class system prevented the liberation of slaves, no matter how much
desire or ability any of them had. In some of these civilizations, such as the Roman civilization, the masters were the Roman minority
, and the majority in the empire were barbarians who were slaves, or were considered slaves. Slaves in these civilizations had
revolutions, the most famous of which was the “Spartacus” revolution [7371 BC].
When Islam appeared, social injustices, racial and class discrimination had many sources and tributaries that fed the “
river of slavery” every day with more slaves. Such as:
1- War, regardless of its legitimacy and legality, as prisoners became slaves, and women
became captives and maids.
2- Kidnapping, which turned the kidnapped into slaves.
3- Committing serious crimes such as murder, theft and adultery, the perpetrators of which were sentenced to slavery.
4- Inability to pay debts, which turned poor debtors into slaves for rich creditors.
5- The father’s authority over his children allowed him to sell these children, so they moved from freedom to slavery.
6- And the authority of man over himself allowed him to sell his freedom, and thus become a slave..
7- Likewise, the offspring born from all these slaves became slaves, even if his father was free..
And with the multitude and expansion of these tributaries that supply the river of slavery at all times with more and more slaves,
the doors of emancipation and freedom were either completely closed, or narrow and difficult to enter..
In the face of this reality, Islam, upon its emergence, took the path of reform that sought to liberate slaves, abolish
the system of slavery, and turn its page from existence, but in a “revolutionary realism” if I may say so.. It did not ignore
reality or jump over it.. And also did not acknowledge it in a way that would preserve and consecrate it..
Islam began by closing, abolishing and prohibiting most of the tributaries that used to supply the slave river with more slaves.. Nothing
remained of them except the prisoners of war that were legitimate and lawful, and the offspring if their parents were slaves.. And even the prisoners of war
that were legitimate, Islam opened the door of emancipation and freedom for them by grace or ransom: (So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks
until, when you have inflicted slaughter on them, then secure their bonds. Then either by grace afterwards or by ransom until the war lays down its burdens..) (3) So when
the war lays down its burdens, the prisoners are freed, either by grace of freedom upon them or by exchanging them for Muslim prisoners
held by the enemy..
With the closing of the tributaries and sources of slavery, Islam turned to the “mass” of the reality of slaves, and sought to
eliminate them by liberation, and that was when it enumerated and expanded the affliction of the slave river.. And Islam followed the path of the Islamic value system and the path of Islamic social justice to that goal
. The Muslims loved to free slaves voluntarily,
because in freeing each limb of the slave, a limb of his master is freed from the fire. Freeing slaves is a way
to free man from the torment of the fire on the Day of Resurrection. Islam also made freeing slaves an expiation for many sins and transgressions.
It gave the state and public order a role in freeing slaves when it made this freeing one of the eight categories
of the obligatory zakat, as it is part of one of the pillars of Islam (Zakat is only for the poor and the needy and those employed to collect it and those
whose hearts are to be reconciled and to free slaves and those in debt and in the cause of Allah and the wayfarer - an obligation imposed by Allah. And Allah is Knowing and Wise) (4). He also
made freedom the origin upon which people are born, and slavery the exception that requires proof
. Those whose ruling is unknown are free, and the one who claims their slavery must provide evidence. The children of a female slave from a free father are free,
and “When did you enslave people while their mothers gave birth to them free?!”
Likewise, Islam made the slave and the free equal in all religious rights, and in most civil rights.
The only distinction, in most cases, was due to easing the burden on slaves, taking into account the weakness and restrictions that
slavery imposes on the will and action. Equality is complete in religious duties, and in accountability and punishment. The testimony
of a slave is considered in some Islamic schools of thought among the Hanbalis, and he has the right to ownership of his own money, and helping him
to buy his freedom through the system of correspondence and management is religiously desirable (And those who seek a contract from among those whom your right hands possess,
then make a contract with them if you know any good in them, and give them from the wealth of Allah which He has given you) (6). And blood is equal in retaliation..
After slavery was one of the greatest sources of exploitation and wealth for slave owners, Islam transformed it with a system of values ​​that
almost equated the slave with his master into something like a financial burden on slave owners.. The slave owner is required
to feed him from what he eats and dress him from what he wears and not burden him with work that he cannot bear. Rather, he is also required to abolish the words
“slave” and “maid” and replace them with the words “boy” and “girl.”
Indeed, Islam went on this path to what is beyond the liberation of slaves, and did not leave them in the maze of the world.
The new freedom without fanaticism, power and affiliation, but rather sought to integrate them into the tribes, clans and fanaticisms
in which they were slaves, so he gained for them its pride, honor, status, strength and its potentials, and thus he accomplished
a great accomplishment beyond and above liberation when he established a new social fabric in which the former slaves were united with the free
, so they became related to their tribes through “loyalty”, about which the Messenger (peace be upon him) said: [Loyalty is a bond like the bond of lineage
] narrated by Al-Darimi. Until the slaves of yesterday became “masters” among their people, after they had been “slaves” among them.
Omar bin Al-Khattab, who is who he is in lineage and ancestry, said about Bilal Al-Habashi, whom Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq bought
and freed: “Our master freed our master”! Omar also wished that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfah, was alive so that he could choose him for the position
of the caliphate. The freed slave, who grew up a slave, was freed by Islam, so he was… An imam in prayer and a worthy successor to the Muslims.
This integration into the Arab fabric, as well as the Islamic one, was aided by the criterion that Islam set
for Arabism, which is the criterion of language alone. By excluding “race… and blood,” the linguistic and cultural bond became a
single affiliation for all, regardless of the past of slavery. The Prophet spoke about this criterion of Arabism (in the context of
criticism and rejection of those who wanted to exclude the clients, of non-Arab ethnic origins, from the framework of Arabism, saying:
[O people, the Lord is one, and the father is one… and Arabic is not from any of you from a father or mother, but rather it is the language
, so whoever speaks Arabic is an Arab…].
Thus, Islam was a revival and liberation of man, the absolute man, removing from people their burden and the shackles that
were upon them, and freeing slaves, because slavery in his view is “death,” and freedom is “life and revival.” Imam al-Nasafi [710 AH/1310 AD] saw
this Islamic wisdom when he explained why Islam made the expiation for accidental killing
the freeing of a slave: (And whoever kills a believer by mistake, the freeing of a slave is…) (6) He said: The killer “when he removed a believing soul
from the group of the living, it is necessary for him to include a soul like it in the group of the free, because releasing it from the bonds of slavery is like bringing it back to life,
because the slave is attached to the dead, since slavery is an effect of disbelief, and disbelief is death by law..” (7) Islam
inherited the system of slavery from the disbelieving societies, so it is an effect of disbelief, and because it is the death of the soul and faculties of the slaves,
and Islam sought to abolish it, and to liberate, or revive, the dead of these slaves, as part of the general Islamic revival
(O you who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life) (8).
Although the objectives of Islam in purifying the river of slavery by closing its tributaries, drying up its sources, and expanding its outlets did not
reach their full horizons, since the “historical reality” of Islamic civilization relapsed after the era of conquests, and the control of
the Mamluk army over the Islamic state.. However, The status of slaves in Islamic civilization has remained incomparably lighter
and more just than its counterparts outside Islamic civilization, including Western civilization, which
in the modern era has led the call to free slaves.
The European Renaissance was coupled with its colonial advance on the Old and New Worlds. After
the Spanish, Portuguese, English and French colonists enslaved the indigenous people of America and forced them to work in
search of gold and establish farms, they committed the greatest acts of piracy and kidnapping in history, which claimed
the lives of more than forty million African blacks, who were chained in iron and shipped on animal ships,
to build on their blood and bones the farms, factories and mines that created the luxury of the white man in America
and Europe. Their descendants still suffer from racial discrimination in the West to this day.
When Europe sought in the nineteenth century to abolish the system of slavery and prohibit its trade, its motives were not
mostly spiritual, moral, or humane, but were basically material motives, because its capitalist system
saw in the liberation of slaves a way to make them more skilled workers, and more capable of meeting the needs of
technical work in the industries established by the capitalist system. Slavery, by the standards of economic feasibility, became a burden
on the surplus capital, which is the idol of material capitalist civilization, and the freedom of the working class became more helpful
in developing its initiatives and skills in the production process.
The same century in which Europe called for the liberation of slaves was the century in which it colonized the world, and
through this colonization it enslaved nations and peoples with a new enslavement, from which humanity still suffers to this day.

(1) Yusuf: 1921.
(2) Yusuf: 75.
(3) Muhammad: 4.
(4) At-Tawbah: 60.
(5) An-Nur: 33.
(6) An-Nisa: 92.
(7) [An-Nasafi’s Interpretation] Cairo Edition, First Edition.
(8) Al-Anfal: 24

Here is a detailed response from the book "Doubts about Islam" by Muhammad Qutb

Islam.. and slavery

is perhaps the most malicious thing that the communists play with to shake the beliefs of the youth! .. If Islam was suitable for every age - as its advocates say - it would not have permitted slavery.. And its permitting of slavery.. And its permitting of slavery is conclusive evidence that Islam came for a limited period, and that it fulfilled its mission and became a part of history!
And the believing youth themselves have some doubts! How did Islam permit slavery? This religion, which there is no doubt that it came from God, and there is no doubt in its truth, and that it came for the good of all humanity in all its generations.. How did it permit slavery? The religion that was built on complete equality. Which returned all people to one origin, and treated them on the basis of this equality in the common origin.. How did it make slavery a part of its system and legislate for it? Does God want people to be forever divided into masters and slaves? Is that His will on earth? Would God be pleased for the creature He honored when He said: “And We have certainly honored the children of Adam” that a group of them should become a commodity that is bought and sold, as was the case with slaves? And if God is not pleased with that, then why did His Holy Book not explicitly state the abolition of slavery, as it stated the prohibition of alcohol, gambling, usury, and other things that Islam hates?
And the believing youth know that Islam is the religion of truth, but they are like Abraham: “He said, ‘Do you not believe?’ He said, ‘Yes, but [O Muhammad], [so] that my heart may be reassured.’”

As for the youth whose minds and beliefs have been corrupted by colonialism, they do not wait until they discover the truth of the matter, but their whims sway them and they decide without discussion that Islam is an outdated system that has exhausted its purposes!

As for the communists in particular, they are the owners of false "scientific" claims, which they receive from their masters there, and they are amazed by them, and they think that they have stumbled upon the eternal, immortal truth that is beyond doubt and debate, which is dialectical materialism, which divides human life into certain economic stages from which there is no escape or escape. These are the first communism, slavery, feudalism, capitalism, and the second communism (which is the end of the world!) and that all the beliefs, systems, and ideas that humanity has known were only a reflection of the economic situation, or the economic stage that existed at that time, and that they were suitable for it, compatible with its circumstances, but they are not suitable for the next stage that is based on a new economic foundation. And that - therefore - there is no single system that can be suitable for all generations. And if Islam came while the world was at the end of the period of slavery and the principles of the period of feudalism, then its laws, beliefs, and systems came to suit this degree of development, so it recognized slavery and permitted feudalism! Islam was not able to anticipate economic development, or herald a new system whose economic capabilities were not yet ready! Because Karl Marx said that this was impossible!

Here we want to put the issue in its historical, social and psychological reality, far from the dust stirred up by these and those. If we obtain an objective truth, then we will not have to worry about the claims of the deviants and fake “scholars”!
Today we look at slavery in the circumstances of the twentieth century, and we look at God in the light of the atrocities committed in the world of slave trade, and the brutal and hideous treatment recorded by history in the Roman world in particular, so we find slavery horrific, and our feelings cannot bear that this type of treatment is a legitimate matter approved by a religion or a system. Then the emotions of horrific and denunciation overcome us, and we marvel at how Islam permitted slavery, and all its directives and legislations were aimed at liberating people from slavery in all its forms and shapes, and we wish in the heat of emotion that Islam had comforted our hearts and minds by explicitly stating its prohibition.

Here we pause to consider the facts of history. The atrocities of Roman slavery in the ancient world were never known in the history of Islam, and a simple review of the conditions in which slaves lived in the Roman Empire is enough to show us the tremendous transformation that Islam brought to the slave, even if it did not work to liberate him - and this is not true!

In the Roman view, the slave was a "thing" and not a human being. Something that has no rights at all, even if it has all the heavy duties upon it. Let us first know where this slave came from. He came through conquest. This conquest was not for an idea or a principle.
Rather, its sole reason was the desire to enslave others and exploit them for the benefit of the Romans.

In order for the Roman to live a life of luxury and extravagance, enjoying hot and cold baths, luxurious clothes, and delicious food of all kinds, and scooping up the licentious pleasures of wine, women, dancing, parties, and festivals, all of this required the enslavement of other peoples and the sucking of their blood. Egypt is an example of this when it was in the grip of the Romans, before Islam freed it from their yoke. It was a wheat field for the empire, and a source of money.

For the sake of this licentious desire was Roman colonialism, and slavery that arose from that colonialism. As for the slaves, they were - as we mentioned - things that did not have the entity of humans or the rights of humans. They worked in the fields while shackled in heavy chains that were enough to prevent them from escaping. They were fed only to keep them working, not because they had the right - even like animals and trees - to take their food needs. While working, they were whipped, for no reason other than the wicked pleasure that the master or his agent felt in torturing these creatures. Then they slept in dark, foul-smelling "cells" infested with insects and rats, and they were thrown into them by the dozens, perhaps fifty in each cell - with their chains - and they were not even given the space that is available between cows in an animal pen.
But the greatest atrocity was something more horrible than all of that, and more indicative of the savage nature that the ancient Roman contained, which the modern European inherited from him in the means of colonization and exploitation.

These were the sword and spear duels, and they were one of their favorite festivals. The masters would gather there, sometimes headed by the emperor, to watch the slaves duel in a real duel, in which sword and spear thrusts would be directed to any part of the body without any caution or precaution against killing. Rather, the fun would reach its peak, throats would rise in cheers and hands would clap, and deep, pure, happy laughter would erupt when one of the duelists would completely defeat his colleague, throwing him to the ground, lifeless!

That was the slave in the Roman world. We do not need to say anything about the legal status of the slave at that time, and about the absolute right of the master to kill him, torture him and exploit him without him having the right to complain, and without there being a body to consider this complaint or recognize it, for that is meaningless after all that we have mentioned.

The treatment of slaves in Persia, India and elsewhere was not much different from what we have mentioned in terms of completely wasting the slave’s humanity, and burdening him with the heaviest duties without giving him any right in return, even if they differed slightly or greatly in the extent of their cruelty and ugliness.

Then came Islam…

It came to restore the humanity of these people. It came to say to the masters about the slaves:

“You are from one another” (1). It came to say: “Whoever kills his slave, we will kill him, and whoever mutilates his slave, we will mutilate him, and whoever castrates his slave, we will castrate him” (2). It came to establish the unity of origin, source and destiny: “You are the children of Adam, and Adam was from dust” (3), and that a master has no superiority over a slave simply because this one is a master and that one is a slave. Rather, the superiority is due to piety: “There is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab, nor for a non-Arab over an Arab, nor for a black over a red, nor for a red over a black, except by piety” (4).

He came to command masters to treat slaves well: “And to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor and the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like anyone who is arrogant and boastful” (5). And to establish that the relationship between masters and slaves is not one of superiority and servitude, or of subjugation or contempt, but rather it is a relationship of kinship and brotherhood. The masters, the “family” of the slave girl, are asked permission to marry her: “From among those whom your right hands possess of your believing girls - and God knows best about your faith. You are of one another. So marry them with the permission of their people and give them their due compensation in a just manner” (6). They are brothers to the masters: “Your brothers are your servants. So whoever has his “brother” under his hand, let him feed him from what he eats, and let him clothe him from what he wears, and do not burden them with what they cannot bear. But if you burden them, then help them” (7). To further care for the feelings of the slave, the noble Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, says: “Let none of you say: This is my slave and this is my female slave, but let him say: My boy and my girl” (8). Abu Hurairah relies on this when he says to a man who was riding while his slave was running behind him: “Carry him behind you, for he is your brother, and his soul is like your soul.”

And that was not all. But before we move on to the next step, we must record the enormous leap that Islam took with the slaves at this stage.

The slave was no longer a "thing". He became a human being with a soul like the soul of the masters. All other nations considered the slave to be a different race from the race of the masters, created to be enslaved and humiliated, and hence their consciences did not feel guilty about killing him, torturing him, branding him with fire, and enslaving him to dirty and hard work (9). From there, Islam raised him to the level of noble brotherhood, not in the world of ideals and dreams, but in the world of reality. History bears witness - which no one has denied, even the fanatics among the writers of Europe - that the treatment of slaves in the early days of Islam reached a level of sublime humanity that was not reached anywhere else. A level that made freed slaves refuse to leave their former masters - even though they had the right to do so after they were economically liberated and accustomed to bearing the consequences of themselves - because they considered them their people, connected to them by what resembled blood ties! The slave became a human being with a dignity protected by the law, and it is not permissible to attack it by word or deed. As for the statement, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade masters from reminding their slaves that they were slaves. He ordered them to address them in a way that would make them feel the affection of family and deny them the attribute of slavery. He said to them in the context of this guidance: “Allah has made them your masters, and if He had willed, He would have made them your masters.” (10) So these are merely incidental circumstances that made these people slaves, and it was possible for them to be masters of those who are masters today! Thus, he diminishes the pride of these people, and returns them to the human bond that connects them all, and the affection that should prevail in their relationships with one another. As for physical assault, its explicit punishment is reciprocity: “And whoever kills his slave, we will kill him…” This is a principle that clearly indicates human equality between slaves and masters, and is clear in stating the guarantees that surround the life of this group of people - whose temporary situation does not remove them from their original human nature - and they are complete and adequate guarantees, reaching an amazing level that no other legislation regarding slaves in all of history has reached, neither before nor after Islam, as it made the mere slapping of a slave without discipline (and discipline has defined limits that it does not exceed and in no case does it exceed what a master disciplines his sons with) a legitimate justification for freeing a slave.

-----
Footnotes:


( 1) Surat An-Nisa [25].
(2) Hadith narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim, Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa’i.
(3) Hadith narrated by Muslim and Abu Dawud…
(4) It was included by At-Tabari in the book “Adab An-Nufus” “with his chain of transmission on the authority of someone who heard the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, in Mina.”
(5) Surah An-Nisa’ 36 [.
(6) Surah An-Nisa’ 25 [.
(7) Hadith narrated by Al-Bukhari.
(8) Narrated by Abu Hurairah.
(9) The Indians believe that slaves (outcasts) were created from the foot of God, and therefore they are by their creation contemptible and humiliated, and they cannot rise above this status allotted to them except by enduring humiliation and torment, so that their souls may be copied after death into better creatures! Thus, another spiritual curse is added to the curse of the bad situation in which they live, which forces them to accept humiliation and not resist it.
(10) Imam Al-Ghazali mentioned it in Ihya’ ‘Ulum Al-Din when discussing the rights of the slave, in a long hadith that he said was the last thing the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, recommended.

Then we move to the next stage, the stage of actual liberation.

The previous step was in fact a spiritual liberation of the slave, by returning him to humanity and treating him as a noble human being who is no different from his masters in origin. Rather, they were temporary circumstances that limited the external freedom of the slave in direct dealings with society. Except for this point, the slave had all the rights of human beings.

But Islam was not satisfied with this, because its great fundamental rule is complete equality among human beings, which is the complete liberation of all human beings. Therefore, it actually worked to liberate slaves, through two major means: manumission and correspondence.

As for manumission, it is the voluntary liberation of the slaves in their possession by the masters, and Islam encouraged this greatly, and the noble Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, was the first example in this, as he freed the slaves he had, and his companions followed him in this. Abu Bakr spent huge sums of money buying slaves from the infidel masters of Quraysh, to free them and grant them freedom. The treasury used to buy slaves from their owners and free them whenever it had any money left. Yahya bin Saeed said: “Umar bin Abdul Aziz sent me to collect the alms of Africa. I collected it and then asked for the poor to give it to. We did not find any poor people and we did not find anyone to take it from us. Umar bin Abdul Aziz had enriched the people, so I bought slaves with it and freed them.”

The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, would free slaves who taught ten Muslims to read and write, or provided a similar service to Muslims. The Holy Quran states that the expiation for some sins is the freeing of slaves. The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, also urged people to free slaves as an expiation for any sin a person commits, in order to free the largest possible number of them, for sins are endless, and every son of Adam is prone to error, as the Messenger says. Here it is appropriate to make a special reference to one of these expiations for its special significance in Islam’s view of slavery. It made the expiation for accidental killing a blood money paid to the family of the victim and the freeing of a slave: “And whoever kills a believer by mistake, the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation paid to his family” (11). The victim who was killed by mistake is a human soul that its family has lost, as has society, without any right. Therefore, Islam decides to compensate for it from two aspects: compensation for its family with the blood money paid to them, and compensation for society by freeing a believing slave! It is as if freeing a slave is the revival of a human soul that replaces the soul that was lost by accidental killing. Slavery, according to this, is death or something like death in Islam’s view, despite all the guarantees that surrounded slavery. Therefore, it seizes every opportunity to “revive” slaves by freeing them from slavery (12)!

History mentions that a huge number of slaves were freed through emancipation, and that this huge number is unparalleled in the history of other nations, neither before Islam nor after it for several centuries until the beginning of the modern era. The factors for their emancipation were purely humanitarian, stemming from people’s consciences seeking to please God, and nothing but God.

As for the contract of manumission, it is granting freedom to the slave whenever he requests it himself, in exchange for a sum of money agreed upon by the master and the slave. Manumission here is compulsory and the master has no right to refuse it or postpone it after paying the agreed upon sum. Otherwise, the state (judge or ruler) would intervene to enforce the manumission by force and grant freedom to the one requesting it.

By establishing the contract of manumission, the door of manumission was in fact opened in Islam for those who felt within themselves the desire for liberation and did not wait for their master to volunteer to free them at an opportunity that may or may not arise over the course of time.

From the first moment he requests the contract of manumission - and the master has no right to refuse the contract of manumission if the slave requests it, and his liberation does not pose a threat to the security of the Islamic state - his work for his master becomes for a wage, or he is allowed - if he wishes - to work abroad for a wage, until he collects the agreed upon amount.

The same thing happened in Europe in the fourteenth century - that is, seven centuries after Islam established it - with a major difference that did not exist in any other country, which is the state’s guarantee of the slaves who have been manumitted - and this is in addition to Islam’s huge effort in freeing slaves voluntarily without compensation, drawing closer to God and fulfilling his worship.

The verse that explains the expenditures of zakat says: “Zakat is only for the poor and the needy and those employed to collect it ... and for freeing slaves ...” (13) It is established that zakat is spent from the treasury - which is the public treasury in modern custom - to help the slaves who have been manumitted from the manumission to pay the price of manumission, if they are unable to pay it through their own earnings.

With this and that, Islam has taken broad, effective steps towards the liberation of slaves, and has preceded all historical development by at least seven centuries, and has added to this development elements - such as state care - that the world did not come to except at the beginning of its modern history. And other elements that it never came to, whether in the good treatment of slaves, or in their voluntary emancipation, without pressure from economic or political developments that forced the West to liberate slaves, as will come.

With this and that, the cleverness of the Communists and their false "scientific" claims fall, which claim that Islam is a link in the chain of economic development that came at its natural time according to the law of dialectical materialism - for here it is, it has preceded its time by seven centuries - and which claim that every system - including Islam - is nothing but a reflection of the economic development existing at the time of its emergence, and that all its beliefs and ideas are compatible with this development and respond to it, but they do not precede it, and cannot precede it, as the mind that does not err and to which falsehood does not come from above or from below, the mind of Karl Marx, may his memory be sanctified, has decided! Here is Islam, which did not act on the inspiration of the economic systems that existed at that time in the Arabian Peninsula and the whole world, neither in the matter of slavery, nor in the distribution of wealth, nor in the relationship between the ruler and the ruled, or the owner and the employee (14), but rather it established its social and economic systems voluntarily and by creation in an unprecedented manner, and it remains unique in many of its aspects in history.
Here the question that bewilders thoughts and consciences comes to mind: If Islam took all these steps towards the liberation of slaves, and preceded the whole world with them voluntarily, without being forced or pressured, then why did it not take the decisive remaining step, and declare in complete frankness the abolition of slavery in principle?

To answer this question, we must realize the social, psychological, and political facts that surrounded the subject of slavery, and made Islam establish the principles that would guarantee the liberation of slaves, and let them work in the long term.

We must first remember that freedom is not granted, but rather taken. And the liberation of slaves by issuing a decree, as some imagine, would not have liberated the slave! The American experience of freeing slaves with the stroke of a pen by Abraham Lincoln is the best witness to what we are saying. The slaves whom Lincoln freed - from the outside - through legislation, could not bear freedom, and returned to their masters, begging them to accept them as slaves as they were, because - from the inside - they had not yet been freed.

The issue, despite its strangeness, is not strange when viewed in the light of psychological facts. Life is a habit. The circumstances in which a person lives are what shape his feelings and formulate his sensations and psychological apparatus (15). The psychological entity of the slave differs from the psychological entity of the free man, not because he is of another species as the ancients thought, but because his life in the shadow of permanent slavery made his psychological apparatus adapt to these circumstances, so the apparatus of obedience grows to the maximum extent, and the apparatus of responsibility and tolerance of consequences shrinks to the maximum extent.

The slave is good at doing many things when his master orders him to do them, so he has nothing to do but obey and implement. But he is not good at anything for which he is responsible, even if it is the simplest of things, not because his body is incapable of doing it, nor because his mind - in all cases - is incapable of understanding it; but because his soul cannot bear to bear its consequences, so he imagines imaginary dangers and problems with no solution, so he flees from them to protect himself from the dangers!

Perhaps those who look closely at Egyptian and Eastern life in recent times will realize the impact of this hidden slavery that the malicious colonialism has placed in the souls of Easterners to enslave them to the West. They realize it in the stalled projects that are often stalled only by cowardice in facing their consequences! And the well-studied projects that governments do not implement until they bring in an English or American expert (16) etc. to take responsibility for the project and issue the permit for implementation! And the terrifying paralysis that looms over employees in the bureaucracies and restricts their production with rigid routine, because none of the employees can do anything except what the "master" the senior employee orders him to do, and this in turn has no choice but to obey the "master" the minister, not because all of these are incapable of working, but because their system of responsibilities is stalled and their system of obedience is bloated, so they are more like slaves, even if they are officially free!

It is this psychological adaptation of the slave that enslaves him. It naturally arises from external circumstances, but it becomes independent of them and becomes something in itself, like a tree branch that hangs down to the ground, then extends its own roots and becomes independent of the origin. This psychological adaptation is not eliminated by a state announcement to abolish slavery. Rather, it should be changed from within, by establishing new circumstances that adapt feelings in a different way, develop the atrophied systems in the slave’s soul, and create a normal human entity from his distorted and deformed entity.

This is what Islam did

, as it began first with good treatment of the slave. Nothing restores the balance of the deviant soul and restores its dignity like good treatment, so it feels its human entity and its innate dignity, and then it senses the taste of freedom and savors it, and does not reject it as the freed slaves of America rejected it.

Islam has reached an amazing level in good treatment and restoring human dignity to the slave, examples of which we have given before in the verses of the Qur’an and the hadiths of the Messenger, and here we will list other examples in practical application.

The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, used to establish brotherhood between some of his clients and some of the free Arab leaders. He established brotherhood between Bilal ibn Rabah and Khalid ibn Ruwaiha al-Khathami, between his client Zaid and his uncle Hamza, and between Kharijah ibn Zaid and Abu Bakr. This brotherhood was a true bond that was equal to the blood bond and reached the level of sharing in the inheritance!

He did not stop at this level…

He married his cousin Zaynab bint Jahsh to his freed slave Zayd. Marriage is a very sensitive issue, especially on the part of a woman. She would accept to marry someone who was better than her in status, but she refused to have a husband who was lower than her in lineage, ancestry, and wealth. She felt that this would demean her and diminish her pride. However, the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, was aiming for a higher meaning than all of that, which was to raise the slave from the abyss into which unjust humanity had pushed him to the level of the greatest Arab masters from Quraysh.
He did not stop at this point.

He sent his freed slave Zayd at the head of an army that included the Ansar and Muhajireen from the Arab masters. When he was killed, he appointed his son Usama bin Zayd to command the army, which included Abu Bakr and Umar, the Messenger’s ministers and his two successors after him. Thus, the freed slave was not given mere human equality, but rather the right to leadership and presidency over the “free people.” He went so far as to say: “Listen and obey, even if an Ethiopian slave whose head is like a raisin is appointed over you, he will not establish the Book of Allah, the Blessed and Exalted (17).” Thus, he gave the Mawali the right to the highest positions in the state, which is the leadership of the Muslims. Omar said when he was caliph: “If Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfah, were alive, I would appoint him.” He followed the same principle that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, established. Omar gave another wonderful example of respecting the Mawali; when Bilal ibn Rabah opposed him on the issue of the spoils of war, he became very vehement in his opposition, and he found no way to respond except to say: “O Allah, spare me from Bilal and his companions!” This was while he was the caliph who had the power, if he wanted, to give orders and be obeyed!

These models that Islam established were intended to liberate the slaves from within, as we said at the beginning of this chapter, so that he would feel his own entity and seek freedom, and this is the true guarantee of liberation.

It is true that he encouraged and urged emancipation by all means, but this itself was part of the psychological education of slaves, so that they would feel that they could obtain freedom and enjoy all the rights enjoyed by masters, so their desire for freedom would increase and they would accept the consequences for its sake, and here he would hasten to grant it to them, because then they would deserve it and be able to maintain it.

There is a big difference between a system that encourages people to seek freedom and prepares the means for it, then gives it to them the moment they themselves seek it, and systems that let matters become complicated and awkward, until economic and social revolutions occur and hundreds and thousands of lives are lost, and then freedom is only granted to those seeking it reluctantly and unwillingly.

One of the great virtues of Islam in the issue of slaves was that it was keen on the true liberation of slaves from within and without, so it did not suffice with good intentions as Lincoln did by issuing legislation that had no basis in people’s hearts; which proves the depth of Islam’s understanding of human nature, and its intelligence about the best means to treat it. This is in addition to his volunteering to give rights to their owners, while raising them to adhere to them and bear their consequences - on the basis of love and affection between all groups of society - before they fight for these rights, as happened in Europe, that hateful conflict that dries up feelings and breeds grudges. It spoils all the good that humanity can attain along the way.

Now we will talk about the greatest factor that made Islam lay the foundation for the liberation of slaves and then let it do its work through the generations.

Islam dried up all the ancient sources of slavery, except for one source that it could not dry up, which is war slavery. Let us go into some detail.

The prevailing custom at that time was to enslave or kill prisoners of war (18). This custom was very old, deeply rooted in the darkness of history, almost dating back to the first man, but it remained a constant companion of humanity in all its stages.

Islam came while people were in this state. Wars broke out between it and its enemies, so Muslim prisoners were enslaved by the enemies of Islam, their freedoms were taken away, and the men among them were treated with the oppression and injustice that was done to slaves at that time, and the honor of women was violated by every seeker, and the man, his children, and his friends would share one woman with whoever they wanted to enjoy, without any control or order, and without respect for the humanity of those women, whether they were virgins or not. As for the children - if they were taken prisoner - they would grow up in the abhorrent humiliation of slavery.

At that time, it was not appropriate for the Muslims to release any enemy prisoners who fell into their hands. It is not good policy to encourage your enemy to release his prisoners, while your family, clan, and followers of your religion are treated with contempt and torment by these enemies. Reciprocity here is the most just law you can use, or it is the only law. However, we should note the profound differences between Islam and other systems regarding war and prisoners of war.

Wars were - and still are - in the non-Islamic world for the sole purpose of conquest, slaughter, and enslavement. They were based on the desire of a nation to subjugate other nations and expand its territory at their expense, or to exploit their resources and deprive its people of them; or for a personal lust that arises in the soul of a king or war leader, to satisfy his personal vanity and swell with pride and arrogance, or for the lust for revenge... or other lowly earthly goals. The prisoners who were enslaved were not enslaved because of a difference in belief, or because they were lower in moral, psychological, or intellectual level than their captors, but only because they were defeated in the war.

This war also had no traditions that prevented the violation of honor or the destruction of peaceful cities, or the killing of women, children and the elderly. This is logical, since it was waged without a belief, principle or lofty goal.

When Islam came, it nullified all of that and prohibited all wars, except for jihad in the way of Allah... jihad to repel aggression against Muslims, or to destroy the oppressive forces that tempt people away from their religion through coercion and violence. Or to remove the deviant forces that stand in the way of the call and its communication to the people so that they may see and hear the truth.

(And fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors) (19). (And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is all for Allah) (20).

It is a peaceful call that does not force anyone: “There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the right way has become distinct from the wrong.” (21) The fact that Jews and Christians in the Islamic world have remained faithful to their religion until this moment is conclusive proof that does not accept debate or argument, proving that Islam did not force others to embrace it by force of the sword. (22)

If people accept Islam and are guided to the religion of truth, there will be no war, no hostility, no submission from one nation to another, no discrimination between one Muslim and another on the face of the earth, and no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab except by piety.

Whoever rejects Islam and wants to maintain his belief under the Islamic system - with Islam's belief that it is better than this belief and the most correct path - may do so without coercion or pressure, provided that he pays the jizya in exchange for Islam's protection of him, such that the jizya is dropped or returned if the Muslims are unable to protect him (23). If they reject Islam and the jizya, then they are stubborn and arrogant, not wanting the peaceful call to take its path, but rather wanting to stand with material force in the path of the new light, blocking it from the eyes of a people who might have been guided if they were left to the light.

Only then will fighting begin, but it will not begin without a warning or announcement, to give a last chance to stop the bloodshed and spread peace throughout the land: (And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and rely upon Allah) (24).

This is the Islamic war, it is not based on the desire for conquest or the desire for exploitation, and there is no involvement in it for the arrogance of a warlord or a despotic king, for it is a war in the way of Allah and in the way of guiding humanity, when all peaceful means fail to guide people.

However, it has traditions; The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said in his will: “Fight in the name of God, for the sake of God. Fight those who disbelieve in God. Fight, but do not betray, do not mutilate, and do not kill a child” (25).
There is no killing of anyone other than the warrior who stands with weapons fighting the Muslims, no destruction, devastation, or violation of honor, and no unleashing of the desire for evil and corruption: “God does not love corruptors.”
The Muslims observed these noble traditions in all their wars, even in the treacherous Crusades, when they were victorious over their enemy who, in a previous round, had violated the sanctities and attacked the Al-Aqsa Mosque, attacking those who had taken refuge in it under the protection of God – the Lord of all – and their blood flowed in it like rivers. They did not take revenge for themselves when victory came to them, and they had permission from the religion itself to treat them in kind: “So whoever attacks you, attack him in proportion to his attack on you” (26). But they set the highest example that non-Muslims in all the world are unable to achieve, even in the modern era.

This is a fundamental difference in the aims and traditions of war between Muslims and non-Muslims. Islam, if it had wanted to, and truth supports it in this, could have considered those prisoners who fell into its hands - those who defy guidance and insist on their base idolatry and senile polytheism - as people lacking in humanity, and enslaved them in this sense alone. No human being would insist on this superstition - after seeing the light - unless he has a decline in his soul or a deviation in his mind. He is lacking in his human being, unworthy of the dignity of human beings and the freedom of free people among mankind.

However, Islam did not enslave prisoners simply because it considered them lacking in humanity, but because - and this was their case - they came to attack the sanctity of Islam, or stood with armed force to prevent divine guidance from the hearts of people.
Even so, the permanent tradition of Islam was not to enslave prisoners. The Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, released some of the prisoners of Badr from the polytheists as a favor without ransom, and he released some of them in exchange for ransom, and he took a tribute from the Christians of Najran and returned their prisoners to them, thus setting an example for what he wanted humanity to be guided to in its future.

It is worth noting here that the only verse that deals with prisoners of war: (Then either a favor from us afterwards or ransom until the war lays down its burdens) (27) does not mention enslavement of prisoners, but rather mentions ransom and release without compensation, so that slavery is not a permanent legislation for humanity or a permanent blow, but rather it is something that the Islamic army resorts to when circumstances and conditions require it.

In addition to that, the prisoners who fell into the hands of Islam were treated with the honorable treatment that we described before, and they were not subjected to humiliation and torture, and the door of liberation was opened before them when their souls sought it and endured its consequences, even though most of them were not in reality free before their capture, but were slaves whom the Persians and Romans enslaved and pushed to fight the Muslims.

So it is as if the matter in reality was not slavery for the sake of slavery, nor was slavery a permanent principle that Islam aimed to preserve, so Islam’s tendency towards the liberation of slaves is the prominent tendency that all evidence points to.
Rather, it is a temporary situation that ultimately leads to liberation.

War breaks out between Muslims and the enemies of Islam, and some of the infidel prisoners fall into the hands of Muslims, and they become - in some cases, not in all cases and not necessarily - slaves of war, and they live for a period of time in the atmosphere of Islamic society, seeing closely the image of divine justice applied in the reality of the earth, and the merciful spirit of Islam encompasses them with its good treatment and humane considerations, so their souls are imbued with the radiance of Islam, and their insights are opened to the light. Then Islam liberates them by emancipation in some cases, or by correspondence if their souls yearn for freedom and strive for it.

Thus, the period they spend in slavery becomes in reality a period of psychological and spiritual treatment, based on treating them kindly, making them feel their wasted humanity, and directing their souls to the divine light without coercion. Then in the end comes liberation.
All of this is in the case of slavery. It is not the only path that Islam takes, as is clear from the verse of legislation, and from the practical conduct of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, in the various battles.

As for women, He honored them - even in their slavery - from what they were subjected to in non-Islamic countries. Their honor was no longer a permissible prey for any seeker in the manner of prostitution (and this was the fate of female prisoners of war in most cases), but rather He made them the property of their master alone, and no one else could enter upon them. He made it their right to gain freedom by writing, just as a woman who bore a child to her master was freed and her child was freed with her, and they were treated well as Islam recommended.

-----
Footnotes:

(11 ) Surat An-Nisa [92].
(12) From “Social Justice in Islam”.
(13) Surat At-Tawbah [60].
(14) See the following chapters.
(15) The advocates of the materialist school say that external circumstances are what “create” feelings. We do not believe in that because it is a blatant fallacy. There is a psychological balance that precedes the existence of these circumstances, and the circumstances (adapt) this balance, but they do not create it from nothing.
(16) Or Russian in some countries now!
(17) Narrated by Al-Bukhari.
(18) The historical encyclopedia called “Universal History of the World” on page 2273 states the following: “In the year 599, the (Roman) Emperor Maurice refused - due to his desire for economy - to ransom several thousand prisoners who fell into the hands of the Avars, so the Khan of the Avars killed them all.”
(19) Surat Al-Baqarah [190].
(20) Surat Al-Anfal [39].
(21) Surat Al-Baqarah [256].
(22) This was witnessed by a European Christian, Sir W. Arnold, in his book (The Call to Islam).
(23) There are many examples of this, including two examples mentioned in the book (The Call to Islam):
He said on page 58: “And it also happened that it was recorded in the treaty that he concluded with some of the people of the cities neighboring Al-Hirah: If we prevent you, then we will pay the jizya, otherwise no.” And he said: “When Abu Ubaidah, the leader of the Arabs, learned of this (of Heraclius preparing to attack him), he wrote to the workers of the conquered cities in the Levant, ordering them to return to them what had been collected from the jizya from these cities. And he wrote to the people saying: “We only returned your money to you because we were informed of what had been gathered for us from the crowds. And you had stipulated that we would protect you, and we are not able to do that. And we have returned to you what we took from you, and we are yours according to the stipulation and what we wrote between us if God grants us victory over them.”
(24) Surat Al-Anfal [61].
(25) Narrated by Muslim, Abu Dawud, and Al-Tirmidhi
(26) Surat Al-Baqarah [194].

(27) Surat Muhammad [4] .

This is the story of slavery in Islam: a glorious page in the history of humanity. Islam did not make slavery one of its origins, as evidenced by the fact that it sought to liberate it by all means, and dried up all its sources so that it would not be renewed, except for the one source that we mentioned, which is the slavery of war declared for the sake of Allah. We have seen that slavery in it is not a permanent blow, and that - if it did happen - it would be for a temporary period that would eventually lead to liberation.
As for what happened in some Islamic eras of slavery other than prisoners of religious wars, and of slave trade, kidnapping and buying of Muslims who were not permitted to be enslaved at all, attributing it to Islam is neither more truthful nor more just than attributing the rulers of Muslims today to Islam with the heinous crimes and sins they commit!
We should pay attention to several matters in this matter.
The first: is the multiplicity of sources of slavery in other countries without any compelling necessity other than the desire for enslavement, from the enslavement of one nation to another, and one race to another, and enslavement due to poverty. Slavery by inheritance from birth in a certain class, slavery due to working on the land, etc., and the abolition of all these sources in Islam, except for the single source whose circumstances we explained before.
The second: Europe, despite the multiplicity of sources of slavery in it without necessity, did not abolish slavery when it abolished it voluntarily, and their writers admit that slavery was abolished when the slaves’ production weakened – due to their poor living conditions and the loss of the desire or ability to work – such that the slave’s costs of living and guarding became more than his production!! It is then an economic calculation and nothing more, in which gain and loss are calculated, and there is no shadow in it of any of the human meanings that give a sense of the dignity of the human race, so that the slave is granted his freedom for it! This is in addition to the successive revolutions carried out by the slave, which made it impossible for him to continue his slavery.
Despite that, Europe did not grant him freedom at that time. But it transformed him from a slave to a slave to the land, bought and sold with it, and served in it, and he was not allowed to leave it, otherwise he would be considered a fugitive and returned to it by force of law, chained and branded with fire. This type of slavery is what remained until the French Revolution prohibited it in the eighteenth century, that is, after Islam decided on the principle of liberation more than eleven hundred years ago.
The third matter: We must not be deceived by names. The French Revolution abolished slavery in Europe, and Lincoln abolished slavery in America, and then the world agreed to abolish slavery... All of that is from the surface. Otherwise, where is the slavery that was abolished? And what is the name of what is happening today in all parts of the world? And what is the name of what France was doing in the Islamic Maghreb? And what is the name of what America is doing to the Negroes, and England to the colored people in South Africa?
Isn't slavery in reality the subordination of one people to another, and the deprivation of a group of people from the rights permitted to others? Or is it something else? And what does it mean that this is under the title of slavery, or under the title of freedom, brotherhood, and equality? What good are flashy headlines if the facts behind them are the most evil facts known to humanity in its long history?
Islam was frank with itself and with the people and said: This is slavery, and its only cause is such and such, and the path to liberation from it is open.
The false civilization in which we live today does not find this frankness in itself, as it uses its skill in falsifying facts and painting shiny banners. Hundreds of thousands were killed in Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco for no reason other than that they were demanding freedom and human dignity: their freedom to live in their country without an intruder, to speak their language, to believe their faith, and to serve no one but themselves. And their freedom to deal directly with the world in politics and economics... The killing of these innocent people and their imprisonment in filthy prisons without food or water, the violation of their honor and the robbery of their women, their killing without justification and their bellies being cut open to bet on the gender of the fetus... This is called civilization and urbanity in the twentieth century and the dissemination of the principles of freedom, brotherhood and equality. As for the ideal and generous treatment that Islam granted to slaves thirteen centuries ago, voluntarily and out of respect for the human race in all its states, with its practical declaration that slavery is a temporary situation and not a permanent condition, this is called backwardness, decadence and barbarism.
When Americans put signs on their hotels and clubs that say: "For whites only" or say in disgusting impudence: "No blacks or dogs allowed", and when a group of "civilized" whites assault a colored person, throw him to the ground and beat him with their shoes until he dies, and the policeman stands by, not moving or intervening, and does not care to help his brother in the homeland, religion, or language
, let alone brotherhood in humanity, all of this because he - a colored person - dared to walk beside a white American girl who has no honor - and with her permission, not against her will - this is the highest level of civilization and advancement that the twentieth century has reached.
But when the Zoroastrian slave threatens Omar with death, and Omar understands that, then does not imprison him or banish him from the earth, let alone kill him, and he is a truly incomplete creature because he worships fire and insists on worshipping it out of his fanaticism for falsehood after having seen the truth with his own eyes, how great is Omar's barbarism, and how great is his contempt for the dignity of the human race because he said: "The slave threatens me"! Then he left him free until he committed his crime, killing the Caliph of the Muslims, because he had no authority over him before he committed the crime.

The story of the colored people in Africa, and their deprivation of their human rights and their killing or "hunting" them, as the impudent English newspapers put it, because they dared to feel their dignity and demanded their freedom, this is British justice at its peak, human civilization at its peak, and the lofty principles that allow Europe to be guardians of the world. As for Islam, it is very barbaric because it has not learned to "hunt" people and amuse itself by killing them because they are black-skinned. Rather, its depth of backwardness and decadence has reached the point of saying: "Listen and obey, even if an Ethiopian slave is appointed over you, as if his head were a raisin..."\

Islam had permitted the master to have a number of female slaves from the spoils of war (28) to enjoy them alone and marry them. Europe today denounces this and refrains from this hideous animalism that considers female slaves to be permissible goods, and bodies without sanctity or dignity, whose only mission in life is to satisfy the abhorrent bestial pleasure of a man who does not rise above the level of an animal.

The real crime of Islam in this matter is that it does not permit prostitution! Female prisoners of war in other countries were drawn to the mire of vice because they had no breadwinner, and because their masters did not feel any protection for their honor, so they employed them in this abhorrent task and profited from this dirty trade: the trade of honor. But Islam - the late one - did not accept prostitution, and was keen to keep society clean from crime, so it restricted these slave girls to their master, who had to feed them, clothe them, and protect them from crime, and satisfy their sexual needs - incidentally - while he relieved himself.

As for Europe's conscience, it could not stand this animalism... Therefore, it permitted prostitution and granted it the care and protection of the law! And it deliberately began to spread it in every country it colonized. So what changed in slavery when its title changed? And where is the dignity of the prostitute when she does not have the ability to respond to a seeker - and no one seeks her except for the filthiest meaning to which humanity can descend: the pure physical impulse that is not softened by emotion, nor elevated by the spirit? And where is this sensual and moral filth that existed between masters and slave girls in Islam?

Islam was frank with itself and with people, and said: This is slavery. And these are slave girls. And the limits of their work are such and such. But the fake civilization does not find this frankness in itself, it does not call prostitution slavery, but rather says about it that it is a "social necessity"!

And why is it a necessity?

Because the civilized European man does not want to support anyone: neither a wife nor children. He wants to enjoy himself without bearing the consequences. He wants a woman's body in which to discharge his sexual charge. He does not care who this woman is, nor does her feelings towards him or his feelings towards her. He is a body that lusts like an animal, and she is a body that receives this lust without choice, and receives it not from a specific person, but from any passerby.

This is the social "necessity" that permits the enslavement of women in the West in the modern era. It would not be a necessity if the European man rose to the level of "humanity" and did not give his selfishness all this power over him.

The countries that abolished prostitution in the civilized West did not abolish it because their dignity hurt them, or because their moral, psychological and spiritual level had risen above crime. No! But because amateurs have made professionals richer. And the state no longer needs to intervene!

After that, the West finds in its boasting what it finds fault with the system of concubines in Islam, that system which 1,300 years ago - although it was a system that was not required to last - was much more generous and much cleaner than the system that exists today in the twentieth century, and civilization considers it a natural system, which no one denounces, no one seeks to change, and no one objects to it remaining until the end of life!

And no one should say that these "amateurs" volunteer without being coerced by anyone and they are the owners of their complete freedom. The point is in the system that pushes people with its economic, social, political, intellectual and spiritual conditions to accept slavery or fall into it.There is no doubt that European “civilization” is what encourages and approves prostitution, whether it is official prostitution or the prostitution of amateur volunteers!

This is the story of slavery in Europe until the twentieth century: the slavery of men, women, nations and races. Slavery with multiple sources and renewable resources, without any pressing necessity, except for the baseness of the West and its decline from the level appropriate for human beings.

Forget about the enslavement of the communist state of its people so that none of them has the freedom to choose the work they want, nor the place in which they work, and the enslavement of workers by the owners of capital in the capitalist West so that none of them has the ability to do anything except choose the master who enslaves them.

Forget this and that, you may find those who argue about it and defend it. It is enough what we have listed of the blatant and explicit forms of slavery, which take place in the name of civilization and in the name of social progress! Then look, has humanity progressed in fourteen centuries, far from the revelation of Islam, or has it continued to decline and fall behind, to the point that it needs today a ray of Islamic guidance to pull it out of the darkness it is in?!

Q: What is the meaning of defending the superiority of the free human being over the slave without condemning slavery or eliminating it?

Delving into the subject of slavery and raising questions about it by the advocates of Christianization and those who turn away from the religion of Islam provokes the ire of the rational person and points the finger of accusation at the hidden purposes behind these questions.

This is because slavery in Judaism and Christianity is established and established in unjust forms, and their books are full of details discussing it and approving of it. Accordingly, the first thing that attracts attention is: How do the ecclesiastics seek to call for Christianization, while Christianity speaks of slavery and its legitimacy?
In other words: How do they raise a matter in which they are immersed up to their chins?

As for the matter of slavery in Islam, it is completely different if the two views are compared and if it is also compared to the state of slavery when Islam came.

The researcher cannot help but consider such questions, as the advocates of Christianization have extended their tongues in them to attack Islam as much as they can. I say that he can only simplify the discussion on this subject, referring to what Judaism, Christianity and contemporary civilization have, and then we will mention what is in Islam.

Islam has been exposed to many slanders in this regard, while deep-rooted criminals have escaped, and unfortunately, no fingers have pointed to them.

Islam and slavery: Islam states that God Almighty created man with full responsibility and charged him with legal duties and arranged reward and punishment for them on the basis of his will and choice.
No human being has the right to restrict this will or deprive that choice unjustly, and whoever dares to do so is an unjust oppressor.

This is an apparent principle of Islam in this regard, and when the question is raised,

how did Islam permit slavery? We say with all strength and without shame that slavery is permissible in Islam, but a fair and impartial view and the intention of the truth requires looking into the details of the rulings on slavery in Islam in terms of its source and causes, then how to treat slavery and its equality in rights and duties with the free, and the ways to gain freedom and the many chapters of it in the Sharia, especially when compared to others, taking into consideration the new type of slavery in this world covered with the cloak of civilization, modernity and progress. The reader will notice that I will use many texts of the Qur’an and the sayings and directives of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, on this subject due to the importance of that and the emphasis that deceptive practices may not be attributed to Islam.

In this regard, we say: Islam takes a position on slavery that no other religion or sect has taken. If things had proceeded in accordance with that approach, those problems would not have existed, most notably the enslavement of free people by means of kidnapping, rape and seizure by force or deception in the past and present, which has led to slavery spreading in a shameful and ugly manner. Slavery did not spread that horribly in the continents of the world except through this kidnapping, but it was the greatest source in Europe and America in recent centuries.

Islam takes a firm and decisive stance on this, as stated in a holy hadith: [ There are three with whom I will be an opponent on the Day of Resurrection, and whoever I am an opponent to, I will be an opponent to him: a man who made a pledge in My Name and then betrayed it, a man who sold a free man and consumed his price, and a man who hired a worker and completed the work from him but did not give him his wages ] Narrated by Al-Bukhari.
And the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, says: ((Three people whose prayer is not accepted by Allah: he who leads a people who are reluctant to him, a man who comes to prayer after its time has passed, and a man who enslaves a freedman . Narrated by Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah, both from the narration of Abd al-Rahman Ziyad al-Ifriqi.

It is interesting that you do not find in the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah a single text that orders slavery, while the verses of the Qur’an and the hadiths of the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, are full of hundreds of texts calling for emancipation and liberation.

The sources and origins of slavery were many at the advent of Islam, while the methods and means of emancipation were almost non-existent. Islam in its legislations reversed the view, increased the means of freedom and liberation, blocked the paths of slavery, and laid down commandments to block those paths.

Captivity in wars was one of the most obvious manifestations of slavery, and in every war there must be prisoners. The prevailing custom at that time was that prisoners had no sanctity or rights and were between two options: either killing or enslavement.

However, Islam urged a third way of treating prisoners well and releasing them.

In the Holy Quran: { And they give food, in spite of their love for it, to the poor, the orphan, and the captive, [saying], “We feed you only for the countenance of Allah. We desire from you neither reward nor thanks. ”} [Surat Al-Insan, verses 8-9].
The verse, in its tenderness and urging, does not need any comment, and the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him, in the field of noble morals
says: ((Visit the sick, feed the hungry, and free the captive.)) Narrated by Al-Bukhari.

In the first confrontation between the Muslims and their enemies in the Battle of Badr, the Muslims were victorious and some of the great Arabs were taken prisoner. They were taken prisoner just as the great and nobles of the great powers, the Caesars and the Chosroes, were taken prisoner. If they had been severely punished, they would have deserved it. They had harmed the Muslims severely at the beginning of the Islamic call. However, the Holy Qur’an directs the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions, saying: “O Prophet, say to those in your hands of captives, ‘If God knows any good in your hearts, He will give you something better than what was taken from you and forgive you. And God is Forgiving and Merciful.’” {And if they intend to betray you, they have betrayed Allah before, and He gave them power over you. And Allah is Knowing and Wise.} [Surat Al-Anfal, verses 70-71].

These prisoners, before this battle and from the beginning of the mission, had been inflicting disastrous injustices on the Muslim community, wanting to annihilate or occupy them. So, is it good policy to release the prisoners immediately???

It is known that this is related to the supreme general interests of the state, and for this reason you find that the Muslims accepted ransom in Badr, and in the conquest the people of Mecca were told: Go, you are free, and in the Battle of Banu al-Mustaliq the Messenger married a female prisoner from the defeated tribe to raise her status, as she was the daughter of one of its leaders, so the Muslims had no choice but to release all of these prisoners.

From this we realize the limited image and narrow paths to which he resorts in slavery, and he did not abolish it completely because this infidel prisoner who is hostile to truth and justice was unjust or helped in injustice or a tool in its implementation or approval. His freedom was an opportunity for the spread of tyranny and arrogance over others.
Despite all this, the opportunity to restore freedom for this and his likes in Islam is many and wide.
Also, the rules for treating slaves in Islam combine justice and mercy.

Among the means of liberation are:: A share of zakat was imposed to free slaves and to atone for accidental killing, zihar, oaths, and breaking the fast in Ramadan, in addition to a general appeal to stir up emotions for emancipation and liberation for the sake of Allah.

These are brief indications of some of the rules of treatment required in justice and kindness for these people:
1- Guaranteeing food and clothing like their guardians :
Abu Dawud narrated on the authority of Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid who said: We entered upon Abu Dharr in Ar-Rabadha and he was wearing a cloak and his slave was wearing a similar one. He said: O Abu Dharr, why don't you take your slave's cloak with your cloak and it would be a robe, and clothe him in another garment? He said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say: (( They are your brothers whom Allah has placed under your control. So whoever has his brother under his control, let him feed him from what he eats and clothe him from what he wears and do not burden him with what is beyond his capacity. But if he burdens him with what is beyond his capacity, let him help him. )) Al-Bukhari.
2- Preserving their dignity: Abu Hurairah narrated that Abu Al-Qasim, the Prophet of Repentance, said: “Whoever accuses his slave of being innocent of what he said, the prescribed punishment will be carried out on him on the Day of Resurrection, unless it is as he said .” Al-Bukhari.
Ibn Omar freed a slave of his, then took a stick or something from the ground and said: I have no reward for it that is equal to this. I heard the Messenger of Allah say: “ Whoever slaps or beats his slave, his expiation is his freedom .” Abu Dawood and Muslim.
3- The slave has precedence over the free:
in matters of religion and worldly affairs. His leadership in prayer has been proven, and Aisha, the Mother of the Believers, had a slave who would lead her in prayer. Indeed, Muslims were ordered to listen and obey if a slave takes charge of their affairs as long as he is more capable than others.

Freedom is a fundamental human right, and a person cannot be deprived of this right except for a reason that befalls him. When Islam accepted slavery within the limits we have explained, it restricted a person who exploited his freedom in the worst way. If he fell as a prisoner as a result of an aggressive war in which he was defeated, then keeping him in good condition for the duration of his captivity is a sound action.

If for some reason he was enslaved and then it became apparent that he had abandoned others, forgotten his past and became a person far from evil and close to goodness, should his request to be released be granted? Islam sees that his request to be released is granted, and some jurists require this and some recommend it!!!
The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, recommended slaves a lot. It has been proven that when he distributed the prisoners of Badr among the companions, he said to them: [ Treat the prisoners well ].
It was narrated that Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him) pinched the ear of his slave for a sin he had committed, then he said to him: Go forward and pinch my ear. The slave refused, so he insisted. He started pinching lightly, but the slave said to him: Pinch well, for I cannot bear the punishment of the Day of Resurrection. The slave said: And so, my master: the day you fear, I also fear.
When Abdurrahman ibn Awf (may Allah be pleased with him) walked among the Ubaydah, none of them could distinguish him - because he did not go ahead of them, and he did not wear anything but their clothing.
One day, Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) passed by and saw the slaves standing and not eating with their masters. He became angry and said to their masters: What is wrong with people who monopolize their servants? Then he called the servants and they ate with them.
A man entered upon Salman (may Allah be pleased with him) and found him kneading dough, so he said to him: O Abu Abdullah, what is this? He said: We sent the servant on some business and we did not want to combine two jobs with him.
This is one of the favors that Islam has bestowed upon the slave!

The Jewish position on slavery

Among the Jews, people are divided into two groups: the Children of Israel, and the rest of humanity.
As for the Children of Israel, some of them may be enslaved according to certain teachings stipulated in the Old Testament.
As for others, they are degraded races, who can be enslaved through domination and oppression, because they are races that were written in the name of heaven from ancient times. It is stated in the twenty-first chapter of the Book of Exodus
(2-12):
(( If you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he comes in alone, he shall go out alone. If he is the husband of a wife, his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall be the master’s, and he shall go out alone. But if the slave says, ‘I love my master and my wife and my children, I will not go out free,’ then his master shall bring him to God, and bring him to the door or to the doorpost, and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl, and he shall serve him forever. And if a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as slaves go out. If she displeases her master who has betrothed her to himself, he shall let her be redeemed, and he has no right to sell her to a foreign people because of his treachery toward her. And if he betroths her to his son, he shall do to her according to the right of daughters. If he takes another for himself, he shall not go out. As for the enslavement of non - Hebrews, it is by way of captivity and domination

because they believe that their race is superior to the race of others, and they seek support for this enslavement from their Torah, saying: Ham, the son of Noah - who is the father of Canaan - had angered his father, because Noah got drunk one day and then stripped himself while sleeping in his tent, and Ham saw him like that, and when Noah learned of this after he woke up, he became angry, and cursed his descendants who are Canaan, and said - as in the Torah in the Book of Genesis, Chapter 9 / 25-26 - Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants to his brothers, and he said: Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem, and let Canaan be their servant. And in the same chapter / 27 /: (( May God expand Japheth, that he may dwell in the dwellings of Shem, and let Canaan be their servant .))
Queen Elizabeth I used this text as a justification for her slave trade, in which she had a large share, as will soon become clear.

Christianity's position on slavery

Christianity came and approved slavery, which the Jews had approved before, as there is no text in the Bible that forbids or denounces it.
It is strange that the historian William Muir criticizes our Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, for not abolishing slavery immediately, while ignoring the position of the Bible on slavery, as it did not transmit anything from Christ, nor from the apostles, nor from the churches in this regard.

Rather, Paul recommended in his letters the loyalty of slaves in serving their masters, as he said in his letter to the Ephesians.

The philosopher Saint Thomas Aquinas added the opinion of philosophy to the opinion of the religious leaders, as he did not object to slavery but rather approved of it, because according to his teacher Aristotle, it is a state of the states in which some people were created by nature.
The saints acknowledged that nature made some people slaves.

In the great dictionary of the nineteenth century, Larousse, it says: “One should not be surprised by the survival and continuation of slavery among Christians to this day, as the official representatives of religion acknowledge its validity and accept its legitimacy.”

And in it: ((The conclusion is that the Christian religion has completely accepted slavery, to this day, and it is difficult for a person to prove that it sought to abolish it .))

And it is stated in the Dictionary of the Holy Book by Dr. ((George Youssef)): ((Christianity did not object to slavery from its political or economic aspects, and did not incite believers to oppose their generation in their morals regarding slavery, or even discuss it, and did not say anything against the rights of slave owners, nor did it move slaves to seek independence, nor did it research the harms of slavery, nor its cruelty, and did not order the immediate release of slaves, and by consensus it did not change the legal relationship between the master and the slave in any way, but on the contrary, it established the rights and duties of each of the two parties.))

We call upon all white Christian fathers and the honorable reader to compare the teachings of Islam with these teachings.

Contemporary Europe and Slavery

The reader has the right to ask, in the ages of renaissance and progress, about the pioneer of progress in these ages.
Apart from those who died because of these fishing methods and on the way to the shores where the ships of the English Company and others docked, a third of the rest died because of weather changes, 5.4% died during shipping, and 12% during the voyage, in addition to those who died in the colonies.

The slave trade remained in the hands of English companies that obtained the right to monopolize it with a license from the British government, then they gave free rein to all British subjects in slavery. Some experts estimate that the total number of slaves that the British captured and enslaved in the colonies from 1680/1786 AD was about 2,130,000 people.

Among their black laws in this regard: whoever assaulted his master was killed, and whoever escaped had his hand and feet cut off and branded with hot iron, and if he escaped a second time, he was killed. I do not know, as they say, what did you do with the slaves??

When Europe contacted black Africa, this contact was a human tragedy in which the Negroes of this continent were subjected to a great affliction for five centuries. The European countries organized and their minds came up with malicious ways to kidnap these people and bring them to their countries to be the fuel of their renaissance and to assign them tasks they could not bear. When America was discovered, the calamity increased so that they would bear the burden of service in two continents instead of one.

The Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 2, p. (779), Slavery, says: (( The hunting of slaves from their villages surrounded by jungles was done by lighting fires in the straw from which the pens surrounding the village were made. When the villagers fled to the open, the English would hunt them down with the means they had prepared for them.)) How would he escape after he was tortured and his legs were cut off??
But it seems that the hell he was living in was more severe for him than having his hands and feet cut off, which prompted him to try to escape again.

Among their laws, education is forbidden for black men and jobs for whites are forbidden for colored people.

According to American laws: If seven slaves gather, it is considered a crime and a white person may spit on them and flog them twenty times if he passes by.

Another law stated: Slaves have no soul or spirit, no intelligence, no intelligence, no will, and life exists only in their arms.
The bottom line is that the slave, in terms of duties, service, and use, is a rational, responsible person who is punished for negligence, but in terms of rights, he is something without a soul or entity, but only arms.

Thus, their consciences did not awaken until this last century, and any fair-minded person who compares this with the teachings of the religion of Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, which has been around for more than 14 centuries, would see that involving Islam in this matter is more deserving of the popular proverb: ((She threw her disease at me and slipped away...))