Critical Podium Dewanand Islam
Slavery in Islam
Sacrifice code wfor0230
Sacrifice date 25 march 2009
Slavery in Islam
All the ancient as well as the contemporary scholars acknowledge the
fact of slavery in Islam and clarify the status of slaves. I have chosen
the opinions of the most famous scholars to shed light on their position.
The Scholars of al-Azhar in Egypt
In his book, "You Ask and Islam Answers", Dr. 'Abdul-Latif
Mushtahari, the general supervisor and director of homiletics and guidance
at the Azhar University, says (pp. 51,52),
"Islam does not prohibit slavery but retains it for two reasons.
The first reason is war (whether it is a civil war or a foreign war in
which the captive is either killed or enslaved) provided that the war
is not between Muslims against each other - it is not acceptable to enslave
the violators, or the offenders, if they are Muslims. Only non-Muslim
captives may be enslaved or killed. The second reason is the sexual propagation
of slaves which would generate more slaves for their owner."
The text is plain that all prisoners of war must either be killed or
become slaves. The ancient scholars are in full agreement over this issue,
such as Ibn Timiyya, Ibn Hisham, Malik etc. Ibn Timiyya says (Vol. 32,
"The root of the beginning of slavery is prisoners of war; the bounties
have become lawful to the nation of Muhammad."
Then (Vol. 31, p. 380), he indicates clearly and without shame,
"Slavery is justified because of the war itself; however, it is
not permissible to enslave a free Muslim. It is lawful to kill the infidel
or to enslave him, and it also makes it lawful to take his offspring into
In Part 4, p. 177 of the "Prophet Biography" (Al-Road Al-Anf'),
Ibn Hisham says,
"According to Islamic law concerning prisoners of war, the decision
is left to the Muslim Imam. He has the choice either to kill them or to
exchange them for Muslim captives, or to enslave them. This is in regard
to men, but women and children are not permitted to be killed, but must
be exchanged (to redeem Muslim captives) or enslaved - take them as slaves
This is the statement of Ibn Hisham, on whom all Muslims and students
of Muhammad's biography rely. Of course, these matters which Ibn Hisham
recorded used to take place continuously in all of Muhammad's wars and
invasions. All of Muhammad's people (his wives, and Muhammad himself)
owned many slaves - males and females. In his campaign against the children
of Qurayza (the Jewish tribe), Muhammad killed all the males (700-900)
in one day. Then, he divided the women and the children among his people.
The Caliphs across the ages followed Muhammad's footsteps and enslaved
(by hundreds and thousands) men and women who were captured in wars. Many
of them were Persians and Byzantines. All the Islamic Chroniclers without
exception have recorded these facts. The way Arab Muslims invaded Africa
and killed and enslaved Africans is a well-known, historical fact.
In Vol. 2, Part 3, p. 13, Malik Ibn Anas repeated the same text as did
Ibn Hisham who is also quoted by Ibn Timiyya, and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya
in his book, "Zad al-Ma'ad" (part 3, p. 486). All of them taught
the same principle and said the same words.
This question was delivered to Ibn Timiyya who was Mufti of Islam (Vol.
31, pp. 376, 377),
"A man married a maid-slave who bore him a child. Would that child
be free or would he be an owned slave?"
Ibn Timiyya says emphatically,
"Her child whom she bore from him would be the property of her master
according to all the Imams (heads of the four Islamic schools of law)
because the child follows the (status) of his mother in freedom or slavery.
If the child is not of the race of Arabs, then he is definitely an owned
slave according to the scholars, but the scholars disputed (his status)
among themselves if he was from the Arabs - whether he must be enslaved
or not because when A'isha (Muhammad's wife) had a maid-slave who was
an Arab, Muhammad said to A'isha, `Set this maid free because she is from
the children of Ishmael.'"
Then Ibn Timiyya states (Vol. 31, p. 380) that the legist Abu Hanifa
says, "Muhammad is an Arab; thus it is not admissible to enslave
Arabs because of the nobility of this race since Muhammad is from them."
Yet other scholars disagree with him, emphasizing that Muhammad (in one
of his campaigns) enslaved Arabs, too. However, it is evident from Muhammad's
traditions that he regarded Arabs to be the most noble race, especially
the Quraysh, his tribe. His famous saying (that the caliphs must be elected
from the Quraysh tribe) is acknowledged by all translators of the tradition
He should have told A'isha, "Set her free because she is a human
being like you. It is not important whether she is a descendant of Ishmael
or of Isaac!"
Islam Encourages Muslims to Keep Slaves - No Liberation
All Muslim scholars acknowledge that Islam has retained the principle
of slavery, though some of them claim that Islam encourages the liberation
of slaves. Maybe some of Muhammad's sayings and a few Qur'anic verses
indicate so, yet from a practical point of view, we realize that the liberation
of slaves was a rare occurrence. The reason is well known. Neither Muhammad
nor his wives or companions were a good example in this regard. Sometimes,
Muhammad used to talk about the merits of liberating a slave, yet he himself
owned dozens of slaves and maid-slaves. However, we encounter a strange
opinion spelled out by Muhammad's wives and his friends in which he encourages
them to retain their slaves. In Vol. 33, p. 61 Ibn Timiyya says,
"Anyone who says, `If I do so (such a thing), every slave I own
will become free' is not obligated by his oath and he can redeem his oath
by any means and retain his slaves. (He can do that) by fasting a few
days or by feeding some hungry people."
On the same page Ibn Timiyya stresses that this is what all Muhammad's
friends said (such as Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn 'Umar) as well as his wives (such
as Zaynab, A'isha, and Um Salama).
Is the liberation of slaves a bad thing so that it is possible for a
man who swears he will liberate his slaves to renounce his oath and retain
them? It should be said that whoever takes an oath to free his slaves
if so and so happens, is obliged to fulfill his oath and liberate his
slaves, but we see that Muhammad's wives, his great companions and his
relatives say something different according to the testimony of Ibn Timiyya.
The Qur'an itself (in several places) approves of slavery and assures
the Muslim the right to own dozens of male and female slaves either by
purchasing them or as bounty of war. The Qur'an talks about the possession
of slaves as "the possession of their necks" (Chapter 58:3,
Slaves of Muhammad - Prophet of Freedom and Equality!
Muhammad himself owned numerous slaves after he proclaimed himself to
be a prophet. I would like here to quote Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya who is
one of the greatest scholars and chroniclers of Islam. In his book, "Zad
al-Ma'ad" (Part I, p. 160), he says,
"Muhammad had many male and female slaves. He used to buy and sell
them, but he purchased (more slaves) than he sold, especially after God
empowered him by His message, as well as after his immigration from Mecca.
He (once) sold one black slave for two. His name was Jacob al-Mudbir.
His purchases of slaves were more (than he sold). He was used to renting
out and hiring many slaves, but he hired more slaves than he rented out.
This trading used to take place in the slave market in the Arab Peninsula
and in Mecca. Muhammad was accustomed to sell, purchase, hire, rent, and
to exchange one slave for two. Thus, he had an increasing number of slaves,
especially after he claimed to be a prophet, and after his immigration
from Mecca to escape death at the hand of his tribe Quraysh. Also, the
slaves of Muhammad and his followers were constantly increasing as the
result of those who were captured in wars and not only by purchase. This
should alert those who have accepted Islam - the Muslims of New York,
Chicago, Georgia, Detroit, Los Angeles as well as all the Africans and
all Muslims of the world. Even among the Arabs are Muslims who are not
aware of these facts concerning Muhammad. Sadly, this is only a small
part of the facts of which they are unaware concerning Muhammad.
The Names of Muhammad's Slaves
A) Male Slaves:
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya relies always on the prophet's biographies written
by great ancient scholars. Therefore, he is regarded by Muslims as an
authority, a primary source and a leader among the students of the Islamic
religion. This scholar tells us in his book, "Zad al-Ma'ad"
(part 1, pp. 114, 115, and 116), the following,
"These are the names of Muhammad's male slaves: Yakan Abu Sharh,
Aflah, 'Ubayd, Dhakwan, Tahman, Mirwan, Hunayn, Sanad, Fadala Yamamin,
Anjasha al-Hadi, Mad'am, Karkara, Abu Rafi', Thawban, Ab Kabsha, Salih,
Rabah, Yara Nubyan, Fadila, Waqid, Mabur, Abu Waqid, Kasam, Abu 'Ayb,
Abu Muwayhiba, Zayd Ibn Haritha, and also a black slave called Mahran,
who was re-named (by Muhammad) Safina (`ship').
He himself relates his own story; he says:
"The apostle of God and his companions went on a trip. (When) their
belongings became too heavy for them to carry, Muhammad told me, `Spread
your garment.' They filled it with their belongings, then they put it
on me. The apostle of God told me, `Carry (it), for you are a ship.' Even
if I was carrying the load of six or seven donkeys while we were on a
journey, anyone who felt weak would throw his clothes or his shield or
his sword on me so I would carry that, a heavy load. The prophet told
me, `You are a ship"' (refer to Ibn Qayyim, pp. 115-116; al-Hulya,
Vol. 1, p. 369, quoted from Ahmad 5:222).
The story shows their ruthlessness and does not need explanation or clarification.
The ill treatment Muhammad and his companions made of Mahran is very repulsive.
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya is not the only one who recorded this episode and
the list of names of Muhammad's slaves. The Tabari also (in his Chronicles,
Volume 2 p. 216, 217, 218) presents us with these accounts. No one among
the contemporary Muslim leaders denies these matters, especially if he
is faced with the Tabari's and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya's records.
Still, in regard to Muhammad's slave Zayd Ibn Haritha, Muhammad set him
free and adopted him, then he married him to his (Muhammad's) cousin Zaynab.
Later Zayd divorced her after he realized that Muhammad was captivated
by her. The scandalous story is documented by verses in the Qur'an, and
Muslim scholars admit it.
B) Maid Slaves:
In this same Section (One, p. 116), Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya as well as
other Muslim authors of chronicles recorded the list of names of Muhammad's
maid-slaves. They are Salma Um Rafi', Maymuna daughter of Abu Asib, Maymuna
daughter of Sa'd, Khadra, Radwa, Razina, Um Damira, Rayhana, Mary the
Coptic, in addition to two other maid-slaves, one of them given to him
as a present by his cousin, Zaynab, and the other one captured in a war.
The Status of the Slave Under Islam's Unjust Laws
Let us survey together some strange things embraced by Muhammad and Islam
pertaining to slaves. Then let us shed some light on the attitude of Christianity
towards this issue.
The Freeman Should Not Be Killed For A Slave
The Qur'an as well as Muslim scholars are explicit in this regard The
Qur'an (the Chapter of the Cow:178) shamelessly says,
"O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter
of the murdered - the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave,
and the female for the female."
The reader does not need the interpretations of the scholars to understand
these explicit words which indicate that the freeman should be killed
only for another freeman, a slave for a slave, and a female for a female.
Still, I promised to stick to the interpretations of the great expositors
of these Qur'anic verses from among the Muslim scholars because they are
more knowledgeable of their Book and its verses. We rely on their interpretations
and not on our own. In the commentary of the Jalalan (p. 24), we read
the following regarding the above mentioned verse,
"The same punishment was imposed on believers and what is similar
to the act of the crime in the case of a homicide, by virtue of description
or actuality. A freeman should be killed for another freeman but not for
a slave, a female for a female, but a Muslim (even if he is a slave) must
not be killed for an infidel, even if that infidel is a freeman."
What kind of equality is this between human beings!
To explain the aforementioned verse (2:178), the Baydawi relates what
really happened with the prophet Muhammad, Abu Bakr and 'Umar. This is
recorded in his book entitled, "The Commentary of al-Baydawi".
On p. 36, we read,
"The Shafi'i and Malik prohibit the killing of a freeman if he slays
his slave or other men's slaves. This is because 'Ali Ibn Abi-Talib mentioned
that a man had killed his slave and Muhammad scourged him only; he did
not kill him. It was related on the authority of Muhammad that he said
a Muslim should not be killed for a non-Muslim, nor a freeman for a slave;
also because Abu Bakr and 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab did not kill a freeman
for a slave. (This was said) in the presence of all Muhammad's companions,
and no one disapproved or objected to it."
These are the verses of the Qur'an and this is the attitude of Muhammad
himself as well as Abu Bakr and 'Umar after him.
The Muslim legists
The Shafi'i, Malik and Ibn Timiyya, pronounce the same principle as in
the Qur'an (2:187).
The Imam Shafi'i tells us plainly and decisively in Part I of his book,
"Ahkam al-Qur'an" ("The Ordinances of the Qur'an",
"A man is not to be killed for his slave nor the freeman for a slave."
On the same page he adds,
"A believer is not to be killed for a non-believer, nor a man for
his son, or a man for his slave or for a woman."
What justice! What equality! Then he adds,
"The freeman is not to be killed for a slave according to the scholars."
Malik Ibn Anas was asked: "What is the punishment of a master who
beats his slave to death?" He answered: "Nothing!" (Vol.
6, Part 15, p 164).
In Vol. 28, p. 378, Ibn Timiyya also says:
"What we mentioned in regard to the believers whose blood is treated
equally is restricted to the free Muslim against another free Muslim."
I do not have better witnesses in this regard than these scholars: Abu
Bakr, 'Umar, 'Ali and Muhammad's deeds, and all great, popular Muslim
A Slave Is Not Entitled To Property Or Money
Ibn Hazm says in Vol. 6, Part 9,
"The slave is not permitted to write a will when he dies, nor can
he bequeath (anything) because his entire possessions belong to his master."
In part I, p. 180 of his book, "The Ordinances of the Qur'an",
the Shafi'i also says,
"The Qur'anic verse; `Marry of the women who seem good to you, two
or three or four are meant for the freeman only and not for the slaves
because he says in it that the one who acts fairly is the person who owns
money and slaves do not own money."'
He also indicates in Part II, p. 21, "The owned one does not have
money." Besides, according to the Islamic law, all Muslims receive
portions of war bounty except slaves and women. Malik Ibn Anas says (Vol.
2, Part 3, pp. 33,34),
"Slaves and women do not have any portion in the
This is true even if they have been fighting with the rest of the Muslims.
In Part III of the "Prophetic Biography" (p. 386), Ibn Kathir
"The slave does not get anything from the bounty whether the bounty
is money or women."
The Testimony Of The Slave Is Not Admissible
In Vol. 35, p. 409 Ibn Timiyya remarks,
"The Shafi'i, Malik, and Abu Hanifa, who are the legists of Islam,
assert that the testimony of the slave is not acceptable."
If we also turn the pages of the "Ordinances of the Qur'an"
by the Shafi'i (part II, p. 142), he determines,
"The witnesses must be from among our freeman, not from our slaves,
but from freeman who belong to our religion! "
The testimony of a Jew or a Christian is not acceptable, as we have mentioned
before, even if justice would be hindered for lack of their witness. This
is not important. In his "Sahih" (Part III, p. 223), Al-Bukhari
"The testimony of a slave is not acceptable in marriages."
What is the meaning of the Shafi'i's statement,
"A witness should not be from our possessed slaves."
Does not Mr. Shafi'i know that God only is the One who owns people? How
dare he utter the phrase, "our possessed slaves."
There Is No Punishment For One Who Makes False Accusation
It is well known that if a Muslim falsely accuses another free Muslim
and slanders his honor, he will be punished by being flogged with eighty
lashes. This is what happened when some of Muhammad's companions and relatives
accused A'isha, his wife, of adultery with one of the young men because
they stayed behind after the departure of the caravan, then later in the
morning they arrived together. Muhammad ordered each one of them flogged
with eighty lashes. But if a Muslim calumniates a slave, he would not
This is the opinion of all the scholars.
For instance (Vol. 8, Part II, p. 27 1), Ibn Hazm asserts that this is
the opinion of Abu Hanifa, Shafi'i, Malik, and Sufyan al-Thawri and not
only his own opinion. This is what the Sharawi shamelessly remarks,
"Female slaves are deprived of dignity and subject to abuse because
they are not `an honor' to anyone (that is, they are not free, respectable
women who belong to a free man). These arc the same words reiterated by
the Shafi'i (Part I, p. 307) in his book, `Ahkam of the Qur'an'; thus
a female slave must not be veiled. When- ever Muhammad took a woman as
a captive, if he imposed the veil on her, Muslims would say he took her
as a wife, but if he left her unveiled they would say, `He owned her as
a slave'; that is, she became a property of his right hand."
A good example is the incident of Safiyya, daughter of Hay, who was taken
as a bounty in the war of Khaybar. All the chronicles (as well as the
biographies without exception) have recorded, "We wonder why it is
said about women and girls that they are of `shed dignity'." The
Shafi'i and the Sharawi state this word for word. Is it necessary for
us to repeat that Islam sheds the dignity of man under the pretense that
he is a slave, that she is a woman, or that he is a non-Muslim?
On Matters Of Sex And Marriage - and About Black Slaves
1. The Slave cannot choose for himself.
This was confirmed by all the Muslim scholars on the authority of Muhammad.
In Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 467, Ibn Hazm said,
"If a slave gets married without the permission of his master, his
marriage will be invalid and he must be whipped because he has committed
adultery. He must be separated from his wife. She is also regarded as
an adulteress because Muhammad said, `Any slave who gets married without
the approval of his master is a prostitute.'"
The same text is quoted by Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (Part 5, p. 117 of
"Zad al-Maad"), as well as Ibn Timiyya (Vol. 32, p. 201). Malik
Ibn Anas relates (Vol. 2, Part 4) more than that. He says (pp. 199, 201,
"The slave does not get married without the approval of his master.
If he is a slave to two masters, he has to obtain the approval of both
2. The male slave and the female slave are forced to
Malik Ibn Anas says explicitly,
"The master has the right to force his male or female slave to marry
without obtaining their approval" (Vol. 2, p. 155).
Ibn Hazm says that Sufyan al-Thawri, too, has said that the master has
the right to force his male or female slave to marry without securing
their approval (Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 469). Ibn Timiyya is of the same opinion.
I must not fail in this regard to mention that Malik Ibn Ons, who (after
agreeing with the other scholars that the master has the right to force
his male or female slave to get married) added,
"The master does not have the right to force the female slave to
wed to an ugly black slave if she is beautiful and agile unless in case
of utmost necessity" (refer to Ibn Hazm, Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 469).
We wonder here, what did Malik Ibn Anas mean when he said, "An ugly
black slave"? Is a man valued on the basis of the color of his skin?
Do you say that, O Malik Ibn Anas, and you are one of the great four legists?
Or is a man valued on the basis of his personality, reasoning, and heart?
We also have the right to wonder why Mihran, the black slave, suffered
the humiliation afflicted on him by Muhammad and his companions when they
made him carry their belongings in the burning desert while Muhammad was
saying to him, "Carry them, for you are a ship." Thus he became
known by that surname. Did they not have dozens of other slaves?
Muhammad even discriminated (in Islam) between a black dog and a white
dog! Yet, what concerns us here is what I pointed out about slaves in
general, their masters treat them as if they are not human beings who
have feelings, desires and self-will.
Let us continue our discussion in order to have a more complete picture
about how the Islamic religion abuses the dignity of men and women under
the pretense that they are slaves and not free human beings.
3. The Arab freeman does not marry a slave unless it
In Vol. 31, p. 383, Ibn Timiyya says,
"It is not permissible for the Arab freeman to marry an owned slave
unless it is inevitable, such as being unable to get married to a free
woman. If it happened and he were wed to a slave, her children would be
slaves, too, because they follow (the status) of the mother in slavery."
Malik Ibn Anas notes,
"It is not allowable for a man to wed a slave besides his freewoman
wife. In this case, his wife has the right to divorce him. Likewise, if
he marries a freewoman while he is already married to a slave and he fails
to tell her so, the freewoman has the right to leave him" (Malik,
Vol. 2, p. 204).
I do not have any comment on these strange principles, yet I wonder why
an Arab freeman cannot marry a slave. Is not he a man and she a woman?
And why (if it is inevitable that he should marry her) should all her
descendants be slaves? These are iniquitous and ruthless ordinances. It
is obvious that Muhammad failed to change the traditions of the tribal
society of the pre-Islamic period. Most Arab Muslims had slaves. His companions,
wives and he himself owned and retained dozens of them. He bought more
after he claimed his prophethood and declared his message - the message
or equality, and freedom, and human rights!
What Would Happen If A Freewoman Married Her Slave?
She might be an open-minded woman who did not discriminate between one
man and another. Thus she might have fallen in love with her slave who
also loved her and they intended, officially, to get married. What is
the attitude of Islam in this case? If something like that took place
in Islamic society, it would be a disaster! Let us see the reaction of
Umar Ibn Khattab in these situations. In Vol. 8, Part 11, pp. 248, 249,
Ibn Hazm remarks,
"A woman was wed to her male slave. Umar intended to stone her,
but instead he made them separate and sent the slave to exile. He told
the woman, `It is unlawful for you to get married to your owned slave!'
Another woman got married to her slave. Umar scourged her with a whip
and forbade any man to marry her. Another time, a freewoman came to Umar
and told him, `I am not a pretty woman and I have a slave to whom I would
like to get married.' Umar refused to do so. He whipped the slave and
ordered him to be sold in a foreign country. He told the woman, `It is
unlawful for you to get married to what your right hand owns. Only men
have the right to get wed to what their right hand owns. Even if you set
him free in order to marry him and he becomes a freeman, the manumission
will be invalid and the marriage is not valid."'
Is there any comment on the ruthlessness of this second caliph who was
Muhammad's father-in-law and one of the ten to whom Muhammad promised
paradise? He is one of the two whom Muhammad requested the people to follow
as a model when he declared, "Emulate Abu Bakr and Umar." Yet
Umar was a tyrant, a ruthless man without a heart who attempted to stone
a woman for no reason except she married a man who was her slave. He also
scourged another woman, forbidding any other man to marry her, and beat
and exiled a slave. And when a third woman wanted to free her slave in
order to marry him and live happily together, especially after she lost
hope in getting married to a freeman, Islam and Umar intervened and said,
"No, this is not permissible." He scourged the slave and sold
him into a foreign country. By that, he became an example of relentlessness,
a hard heart, and detestable oppression.
In matters of sex and marriage, Ibn Timiyya states:
"The one who owns the mother also owns her children. Being the master
of the mother makes him the owner of her children whether they were born
to a husband or they were illegitimate children. Therefore, the master
has the right to have sexual intercourse with the daughters of his maid-slave
because they are his property, provided he does not sleep with the mother
at the same time" (Vol. 35, p. 54).
The Value Of The Slave - What Is His Price In Dinars?
"If an owned slave assaults somebody and damages his property, his
crime will be tied to his neck. It will be said to his master, `If you
wish, you can pay the fine for the damages done by your slave or deliver
him to be sentenced to death.' His master has to choose one of the two
options - either the value of the slave and his price or the damage the
slave has caused" (Vol. 32, p. 202, Ibn Timiyya).
Is this how the value of a man is calculated? If the loss amounted, for
example, to 600 dinars and the value of the slave in the estimation of
the master did not exceed more than 400 dinars because he was sick or
weak, his master would, in this case, deliver him to be killed!
We have looked at six points concerning the status of slaves in the Islamic
religion. Actually, any one point, if we ponder it, is sufficient to clarify
the truth. It reveals to us how human dignity is crushed in the practice
of slavery. From the very beginning, we referred to the principle of slavery
as it is manifested in this religion, and we have listed the names of
Muhammad's slaves, the master and the "apostle of God!"
The Position of Christianity - the Teaching of the Gospel
Christianity is very decisive in this matter. The words and the spirit
of the Gospel are very clear. From the very beginning, we have used a
fundamental principle in this study and research; namely, the comparison
must always be between the Gospel and the Qur'an - Christianity as religion
and teachings and Islam as religion, in order to see which one of the
two reveals the thoughts of the true, living God. Also, the comparison
should be between Muhammad, his life and his sayings on the one hand,
and Christ, His life and teachings on the other.
If we were to find (for example) some Europeans or Americans who allowed
themselves to acquire slaves, we should not blame Christianity for that
because we must realize that the Gospel teaches something different. We
see that Jesus and His disciples did not possess slaves.
We do blame Islam in this regard because Muhammad himself acquired male
and female slaves by dozens. All his friends, his wives and most Muslims
of his time and after owned slaves. The Qur'an encourages that and the
scholars do not negate it. We blame Islamic thought and the behavior of
Muhammad in regard to this matter and other issues recorded in the most
authentic Islamic sources.
We should not, in any subject, dwell on the behavior of some Christians
or some Muslims but rather try to examine the attitude of Islamic thought
(or Christian thought) toward the issues under discussion. Some people,
for instance, believe that a man like Khomeini is an extremist because
of Islam, the religion of tolerance, love, and reason. We, for our part,
feel surprised to hear that, because who says that this statement is true?
Islam is not the religion of tolerance, love, or reason. Not at all! Islam
is the exact opposite of this claim.
Did we not see that this religion humiliates and persecutes women and
non-Muslims as well as waging offensive wars and encouraging Muslims to
kill apostates? Is Muhammad, who ordered the killing of a woman who insulted
him, the prophet of tolerance? Why should we blame Khomeini when he issued
an order to kill Rushdie? Does not Rushdie (according to the law of Islam
and Muhammad, not the law of the United Nations) deserve death for attacking
the Qur'an, Muhammad and his wives? Khomeini was never radical; he was
always a true student of Muhammad. He intended to enforce the Islamic
laws and to fight nations which do not comply with them - such as Iraq
(even though Islam is its official religion).
When Muslims kill one another, it is because Muhammad's friends and disciples
did so immediately after his death, each one of them trying to force his
friend to go in the right way. Khomeini is a true Muslim who follows Muhammad
and his friends. Thus, we hear about "exporting the Islamic revolution"
to other countries. All these things are compatible with the views of
Muhammad and the rightly guided Caliphs who succeeded him such as Abu
Bakr, Umar and Ali. When Khomeini slaughtered his opponents, he was following
the footsteps of Ali who killed the dissenters, like Talha, Al Zubair
and Al Khwareg, even though they were faithful Muslims.
Now, what does the New Testament say about slaves? If
we turn in the pages of the New Testament we read these verses:
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free,
there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus"
Christ was always warning his disciples and all believers from calling
themselves masters. He said to them:
"But you, do not be called `Rabbi' [master]; for One is your Teacher
[master], the Christ, and you are all brethren" (Matt. 23:8).
"But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever
exalts himself will be abased (humbled); and he who humbles himself will
be exalted" (Matt. 23:12).
By these last words Christ has turned over all the feeble human standards
- The "... greatest among you shall be your servant." How profound
and deep are these wonderful words!
This truth is clearly taught in the New Testament by the guidance of
the Holy Spirit. It happened that there was a slave called Onesimus who
ran away from his master, Philemon. Onesimus met the apostle Paul in Rome
and was converted to Christianity. Paul sent him back to Philemon with
a very impressive letter which is included in the New Testament and in
which we read these shining words,
"I am sending him back. You therefore receive him, that is, my own
heart. Receive him ... no longer as a slave but ... as a beloved brother,
..., both in the flesh and in the Lord" (Chapter 1).
Paul, Peter and the rest of the disciples did not have the authority
to abolish slavery within the Roman Empire. Paul was not one of the Roman
governors, but a fugitive and a persecuted man. Later he and most of the
disciples were killed at the hands of the Romans along with thousands
of their Christian brothers. Muhammad and his successors were rulers and
could have outlawed slavery. Instead, they retained it and kept their
In another letter, Paul urged the Christians to "give your servants
what is just and fair" (Col. 4:1). The text emphasizes these two
words - brotherhood and justice - because there is neither slave nor freeman,
but all arc one in Christ.
Egyptian history relates a story about a courageous man who stood in
front of his tyrannical rulers who mistreated people and wondered in agony,
"Why have you enslaved people whose mothers gave birth to them as
free persons?" This brave man did not know that he was addressing
multitudes of people across the ages, whether ruthless Westerners in Europe
and America or the prophet of Islam himself who failed to liberate the
slaves because he himself had acquired dozens of them.
Christian religious leaders such as John Wesley boldly condemned slavery
in Europe and sent strong messages to the rulers of Europe and America.
They led the movement of slaves' liberation during the day of Abraham
Lincoln. Now there are multiplied black men who hold various positions
of honor and respect in America. They teach in colleges and universities.
They sit on the bench of the courts of the land-even the Supreme Court.
They are freely elected to local, county, state and federal positions.
They hold high military offices. They build their own fortunes with which
they do as they wish. They freely marry and raise their families without
This is what Jesus taught - "There is no difference
Critical Podium Dewanand Islam
All rights reserved.