Very Brief Guide to Islamic Schools of Law
I hold strongly that if you don't know anything about Islamic Law (Shari'ah), you cannot hope to understand Islam or even know much about it. Herewith, the four schools of Sunni Islam:
Hanafi: Founded by Abu Hanifa (c.700-767) who was born in Kufa, Iraq and died in Baghdad. The mosque in which he is buried, the Imam Al-Adham ("the greatest Imam") in Baghdad, was recently the site of a battle between Iraqi troops and US soldiers (I wonder if he was turning over in his grave at that one!). His school is the most widespread. The Turks adopted it, so now it is found everywhere formerly under the Ottoman Empire (Egypt, the Levant, Turkey, Iraq). In addition, it was adopted by the Muslim rulers of India, so subcontinental Islam (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) is almost totally Hanafi. It is considered to be the most liberal. It uses the Qur'an and Hadiths, but also relies on ra'y (personal opinion) if there is no precedent.
Maliki: Founded by Malik Ibn Anas (c.715-795) who was born and died in Medina, where he is buried. He wrote the book al-Muwatta ("the approved"), which contains sayings of Muhammad, his companinons, and their descendants. His school is mainly followed in the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia) and northern Africa, and it was also followed in Spain when it was under Islamic rule. It is considered to be rather moderate. It stressed local Medina sunnah (community tradition), as Medina was, after all, where the Prophet and his companions had lived, also making use of ra'y (personal opinion) and qiyas (reasoning by analogy), as opposed to a heavy use of Hadiths.
Shafi'i: Founded by Muhammad Ibn Idris ash-Shafi'i (767-820), who studied under Malik ibn Anas and came up with the extremely important rule that Islamic law should be based on the words and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad. Previously, any of the Companions of the Prophet or their descendants were considered acceptable sources of Islamic law; Shafi'i insisted it had to go back to the Prophet himself. He was born somewhere in Arabia, related to the Prophet, studied in Medina and Baghdad, and died in what is now Cairo, where he is buried in the Mausoleum of al-Shafi'i. His school was popular in Egypt, the Levant, Iraq and Arabia before the Ottomans, and sizeable populations there still follow it. In addition, Muslim traders carried it to the East African coast as well as what is now Malaysia and Indonesia, where it is the dominant school. It is generally considered a moderate-to-conservative school, basing itself on unquestioning acceptance of Hadiths and on qiyas (analogical reasoning) if no precedent chould be found.
Hanbali: Founded by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (780-855), who was born in Baghdad. He defied the Abbasid caliphs, especially al-Ma'mun, who had adopted the Mu'tazilite idea that the Qur'an was created by Allah and not co-eternal with him, and who had forced all the scholars to swear their agreement with this idea. Ibn Hanbal held to the belief in the "uncreated Qur'an" which was very popular with the masses, and got into some hot water with the caliphs, even being jailed, before being exonerated and honored by the caliph al-Mutawakkil in 847, who rejected the Mu'tazilite ideas and began going after their followers. Ibn Hanbal believed in a very literal reading of the Qur'an, and made his own collection of hadiths, numbering more than 30,000. He died in Baghdad, and is buried there. His teachings were revived by Ibn Taymiya in the 14th century. Ibn Taymiya's works, as well as the Hanbali school of law, were the basis of Muhammad Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab's (1703-1792) puritan/fundamentalist teachings, Wahhabism, which was adopted by the Saudi family (the current rulers of Saudi Arabia) in 1744. The Hanbali school is now found mostly in Saudi Arabia, as well as wherever Saudi influence is found, and, as might be guessed, it is considered the most conservative school. It relies on a literal reading of Qur'an and Hadiths, rejecting ra'y (personal opinion) and qiyas (reasoning by analogy).
All these schools are considered to be "correct": each is based on the opinions of the scholars who founded it and expanded it, and so all are considered valid. It must be noted that these schools differ mostly in small points, such as whether to hold the hands clasped above the waist while reciting the Fatihah during prayer, or to have them hanging at one's side, or whether the zakat given at the end of Ramadan should be given in food or money, or the precise time each prayer begins. The stuff that is not-so-pleasant is there in all four schools, such as: condoning of slavery and concubinage, cutting off of hands for stealing, stoning for adultery, flogging for illegal sexual intercourse, offensive jihad, the third-class status of non-Muslims under Muslim law (dhimmis), the poor status of women, and so on. Hanafi law allows ALL unbelievers to live in an Islamic state, as long as they pay the jizya (tax on non-Muslims), while the other three schools say that this only extends to People of the Book, who are Jews, Christians and the mysterious Sabians (and sometimes Zoroastrians); all others (such as Hindus, Buddhists and atheist) are to be given the choice between conversion and death. (This is what is meant by "liberal.") If you read through the law books of any one school, you will find far more similiarities than differences (Reliance of the Traveler, a compendium of Shafi'i law, is probably the easiest to acquire (here it ison Amazon.com), although it is also possible to get Malik's Muwatta (here on Amazon.com and here online--and other works in English, especially at Islamic bookstores like IslamicBookstore.com, Astrolabe, and so on).
Perhaps a new maddhab (the Arabic term for a school of law) is needed. If I, Fatimah al-Amrikiyya, (Fatimah the American) were to draw up from the Qur'an and Hadiths a new Islamic law, throwing out all the medieval stuff, I could start a new school, the Amriki (;-P). Unfortunately, since Sunni Islam focuses so much on tradition (it takes its name from the "sunnah" or tradition of Muhammad), this means that critiques of the tradition are apt to land one in hot water. For example, while apostasy from Islam would not be punished by death in the (theoretical) Amriki school, it sure is in the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali schools! More conservative scholars could claim that anyone promoting such a revision of Islamic Law is an "apostate" and should be killed. So you can see the problems here! (If such a revision did happen, it would probably be a reinterpretation of one of the existing schools of law, probably the Hanafi, the most liberal--the Amriki revision of the Hanafi school.)
I don't know very much abou the Ja'fari school (the one followed by most Shi'ites, mostly in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, and so on), founded by the 6th Imam Ja'far ibn Muhammad al-Siddiq ("the truthful") (702-765) who was well-known for his piety and learning, but it should be noted that most of Shi'a law is very similar to Sunni law (one large exception being the allowing of "temporary marriage," which is banned by Sunnis). It differs mostly on 1) where the authority should come from in the Islamic community (Sunnis believe that the caliph should rule, Shi'ites the imam, the descendant of Muhammad) and 2) who has the right to interpret Islamic law (Sunnis think the ulama--religious scholars--should, Shi'ites the imam or his representatives). Interestingly, it is possible for Shi'ite law to be more liberal, because the imam or his representative (ever since the twelfth and last, al-Mahdi, went into occultation--disappeared from human view--in 874, to return at the end of the world) is invested with a great deal of power to interpret Islamic law, whereas with Sunni law, it is the tradition that is considered the ultimate authority and as such makes it that much harder to change.
Tuesday, April 29, 2003
Monday, April 28, 2003
Random Scattershot Thoughts about Women Slaves in "That Most-Respectful-To-Women Faith," Islam
After reading The Adventures of Ibn Battuta by Ross E. Dunn, I was rather jealous of the legendary traveler's travels...and ready to wring his neck for his shabby treatment of women! Even for the time, he seems a real prick, marrying women and divorcing them without a second thought, divorcing and abandoning pregnant wives (at least twice), leaving them not even the Qur'anic requirement of payment after divorce to support the child, as well as having numerous slavegirls (whose prime purpose in Islamic countries was being used for sex and bearing children for their masters). It has been said that in Ibn Battuta's case, the wives came and went, while the slavegirls were his real female companions. Freeborn wives weren't really prepared for the rigors of the road (instead usually being secluded at home), while slaves were simply dragged along regardless of the hazards. And if they died, oh well--there were plenty more where they came from. I guess I object most to the "women as sex objects" attitude, which was quite literal in the case of slaves, who were simply property, like one's clothes or cattle.
This leads to another topic that probably bothers me more than any other about the way Islam treats women--the permission given by the Qur'an, and therefore Allah Himself, to "enjoy" your "right-hand possession" (slavegirl), permitted in numerous Qur'anic verses (4:3, 4:25, 23:6, 33:50, 70:30). A city would be taken by the Muslims, the men would be slaughtered, and the women and children sold into slavery, or else women captives would be taken during raids. According to the hadiths, Muhammad declared that the marriages of the captured women were null and void, so they could be "enjoyed" by their new Muslim masters without fear of committing adultery. What a strange set of values! Adultery is evil, but raping slave women who have just had their families slaughtered is not! And it must be noted that nowhere in Qur'an, Hadiths, Sunna or Shari'ah is it a requirement that the woman's permission be given--after all, she's just a slave, your possession to do with as you please, with no rights of her own. Best of all, there was no limit given to the number of slavegirls a man could have (a man could only have four legal wives at a time), leading to spectacles such as the Sultan of Turkey's harem with hundreds of slavegirls.
Muslims could not be made slaves, only infidels (generally those who had been captured in jihad), although some converted to Islam afterwards. The women and girls captured and purchased for the Turkish sultan's harem, for example, were converted to Islam, whether they liked it or not! Nevertheless, just because a slave accepted Islam didn't mean he/she would be set free--that was up to the master. Masters could free their slave women and marry them, but this was rare. And why should they, when they could enjoy all the benefits of concubinage without the annoyances of marriage? It should be noted that there was no "marriage" between the master and his slave, only an owner taking pleasure in his own property, attempts to portray it as some kind of marriage notwithstanding. Muhammad himself had slave concubines, although the number varies according to the source. One of them, Mary the Copt, a beautiful Egyptian, gave birth to his son Ibrahim, who died as an infant. It should be noted that while Safiyah, a 17-year-old Jewish girl captured by the Muslims during the sack against the Jewish town of Khaibar, in which her father and husband were killed, accepted Islam and was then freed and married by Muhammad ("her dowry (bridal gift) was her manumission"), Rayhana, another Jewish girl, refused to convert and remained a slave concubine of Muhammad.
According to Shari'ah, a child born of a slave mother had exactly the same rights as one born of a legal wife--that is, he/she was free and considered completely legitimate, despite the fact that the parents were not legally married. They could be of any race or color, depending on the source of slaves, from black Africans to Indians to Greeks to Slavs to blonde-haired and blue-eyed Circassians. However, the mother's lineage didn't count, so children born of Arab/slave unions were considered to be Arab--hence the enormous racial differences subsumed under the term "Arab." Almost all of the Abbasid caliphs (750-1258) were born of slave mothers, and the Turkish sultans didn't even bother to have actual wives, having nothing but slave concubines who had been torn from their families and converted to Islam, which really cut down on those annoying problems with the in-laws!
Shari'ah also held that a slave who bore her master a child became free upon the said master's death (the umm walad, "mother of the child"). She also had the right to minimal food, clothing and shelter from her master (as an animal would). Her punishment for sexual crimes was less--she would only be beaten or sold instead of stoned for illegal sexual intercourse, for example. But she had no other rights--she was only a possession, there to gratify the sexual desires of her master whenever he chose. She could be sold at any time, or forced on perilous journeys (Ibn Battuta). She might or might not be forced to bear a child, or many, for her master (some rather putrid hadiths about 'azl--coitus interruptus, and slavegirls follows at the end, along with many others on the topic of slavegirls).
It is true that most ancient cultures had slavery, but the Islamic conception of it pretty much guaranteed that it would be ongoing (too much in it for the men!) Unfortunately, while other cultures have ended slavery for over a century, the Muslim world did so only reluctantly, Saudi Arabia doing so only in 1962 (and who knows how many are still there). Slavery in the Sudan and Mauritania are particularly wretched examples of this kind of thing going on today.
The most offensive part, though, is that even today plenty of Muslims are more than happy to defend slavery and concubinage under Islamic law, insisting on how "humane" it was. You can read unbelievably offensive articles about how Muslim slavery was and is "progressive," "kindly," and in tune with modern international treaties concerning humane treatment of POWs. You can read either (or sometimes both): 1) that Muslims did their best to abolish the scourge of slavery, or alternately 2) that since slavery is divinely sanctioned in Qur'an, Sunna and Shari'ah, it is just fine today, regardless of what the "ungodly" infidels think (here's a wretched fatwa from an Islamic Q&A site about how mating with slavegirls today is just fine and dandy, and here's more on the subject, and here from another site, saying that although it might sound repulsive, Shari'ah allows it and so what's wrong is our attitudes towards it, because Shari'ah can never be wrong!).
Many Muslims, male and female, complain that in the West, women are seen as sex objects, while Islam "honors" and "protects" them. Well, frankly, I can't think of a more perfect example of viewing women as purely sex objects and pieces of meat than the time-honored Islamic practice of slave concubinage, with the attendant slave auctions where women were bought and sold. (This is of course just another thing that you are unlikely to hear about in articles proclaiming "The Liberation of Women Through Islam." Maybe it only applies to Muslim women.)
If I sound bitter about this, it's because I am. I am upset that there are young Muslim men out there on Islamist jihadi talkboards just salivating for the chance to get their hands on a "right-hand possession" after the glorious global jihad, when they will have their pick of the infidel women of all nations. I am upset that Muslims totally deny their part in the slave trade (Arabs were particularly active merchants of African slaves) while defending the institution of slavery as necessary to deal with the problem of prisoners of war. I am upset that Muslim men think that Western women can be treated as whores and pieces of meat, indulging in molestation, harrassment and even rape, apparently without a twinge of conscience. I am upset that Saudi Arabian men see female servants from the Philippines and elsewhere as their own personal sex slaves. I am upset at the slavery still going on in the world, legal and illegal, much of it in Muslim countries. And I am really upset that Muslim women don't give any of this a second thought when claiming how wonderful Islam is to women. True, much of this is not exactly in tune with the teachings of Islam, which prohibit screwing around, but there is far too much of this kind of crap going on, much of it defended by Muslim women (such as the Muslim mothers insisting that their sons shoudn't be punished for raping Australian girls).
Non-Muslim women must be treated by Muslim men with as much respect as Muslim women (admittedly, that might not be much better, but it's a start). Unfortunately the arrogant attitudes often displayed by Muslims towards non-Muslims (as discussed in the "Ugly Muslim" post below), as well as widespread misogynistic feelings among Muslim men, and finally the perception of all Western/infidel women as cheap whores, all militate against a change of attitude. I don't know what is to be done, but I implore all Western and non-Muslim women to not put up with this crap, regardless of worries about seeming culturally "insensitive." Let them know you won't put up with their crap! Let them know that this behavior will not be tolerated, and (perhaps) they will get the message.
Hadiths and Rulings About Slavegirls:
Umm Walad
Malik's Muwatta (Book of Maliki Law), Book 38, Number 38.5.6:
Malik related to me from Nafi from Abdullah ibn Umar that Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "If a slave-girl gives birth to a child by her master, he must not sell her, give her away, or bequeath her. He enjoys her and when he dies she is free ."
Slavegirls And Coitus Interruptus
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 506:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relations with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interruptus. The Prophet said, "It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection." Qaza'a said, "I heard Abu Sa'id saying that the Prophet said, 'No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."
Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3383:
Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported that a man came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: I have a slave-girl who is our servant and she carries water for us and I have intercourse with her, but I do not want her to conceive. He said: Practise 'azl, if you so like, but what is decreed for her will come to her. The person stayed back (for some time) and then came and said: The girl has become pregnant, whereupon he said: I told you what was decreed for her would come to her.
Malik's Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.100:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself."
Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."
Malik's Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.99:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Damra ibn Said al-Mazini from al-Hajjaj ibn Amr ibn Ghaziya that he was sitting with Zayd ibn Thabit when Ibn Fahd came to him. He was from the Yemen. He said, "Abu Said! I have slave-girls. None of the wives in my keep are more pleasing to me than them, and not all of them please me so much that I want a child by them, shall I then practise coitus interruptus?" Zayd ibn Thabit said, "Give an opinion, Hajjaj!" "I said, 'May Allah forgive you! We sit with you in order to learn from you!' He said, 'Give an opinion! 'I said, 'She is your field, if you wish, water it, and if you wish, leave it thirsty. I heard that from Zayd.' Zayd said, 'He has spoken the truth.' "
Don't Worry If The Slave Women You Captured Are Married Or Not
Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3432:
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i.e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end) [which is about a month --ed. note].
What To Do With A Slavegirl Who Keeps Screwing Around
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 731:
Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid:
The Prophet said, "If a slave-girl (Ama) commits illegal sexual intercourse, scourge her; if she does it again, scourge her again; if she repeats it, scourge her again." The narrator added that on the third or the fourth offence, the Prophet said, "Sell her even for a hair rope."
The Exemplary Example of 'Ali, The Prophet's Cousin and Son-In-Law
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 637:
Narrated Buraida:
The Prophet sent 'Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and 'Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumlus."
Slaves As Possessions
Malik's Muwatta, Book 31, Number 31.5.6:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar would say, "A man should not have intercourse with a slave girl except one whom, if he wished, he could sell, if he wished, he could give away, if he wished, he could keep, if he wished, he could do with her what he wanted ."
Malik said that a man who bought a slave-girl on condition that he did not sell her, give her away, or do something of that nature, was not to have intercourse with her. That was because he was not permitted to sell her or to give her away, so if he did not own that from her, he did not have complete ownership of her because an exception had been made concerning her by the hand of someone else. If that sort of condition entered into it, it was a messy situation, and the sale was not recommended.
Women Not Treated As Sex Objects In Islam, My A**!
Book 31, Number 31.4.4:
...
Malik said, "The generally agreed upon way of doing things among us is that if a man returns a slave girl in whom he has found a defect and he has already had intercourse with her, he must pay what he has reduced of her price if she was a virgin. If she was not a virgin, there is nothing against his having had intercourse with her because he had charge of her."
...
Malik spoke about a situation where a slave-girl was bartered for two other slave-girls and then one of the slave-girls was found to have a defect for which she could be returned. He said, "The slave-girl worth two other slave-girls is valued for her price. Then the other two slave-girls are valued, ignoring the defect which the one of them has. Then the price of the slave-girl sold for two slave-girls is divided between them according to their prices so that the proportion of each of them in her price is arrived at - to the higher priced one according to her higher price, and to the other according to her value. Then one looks at the one with the defect, and the buyer is refunded according to the amount her share is affected by the defect, be it little or great. The price of the two slave-girls is based on their market value on the day that they were bought."
Such A Happy Family
Malik's Muwatta, Book 41, Number 41.6.20:
Malik related to me from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman that Umar ibn al-Khattab spoke about a man who went out with his wife's slave-girl on a journey and had intercourse with her and then the wife became jealous and mentioned that to Umar ibn al-Khattab. Umar questioned him about it. He said, "She gave her to me." Umar said, "Bring me a clear proof or I will stone you." Rabia added, "The wife confessed that she had given her to him."
Malik's Muwatta, Book 30, Number 30.2.13: (note: according to Shari'ah, babies who suckle from the same woman are considered to be related and thus not suitable marriage partners):
Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "A man came to Abdullah ibn Umar when I was with him at the place where judgments were given and asked him about the suckling of an older person. Abdullah ibn Umar replied, 'A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, 'I have a slave-girl and I used to have intercourse with her. My wife went to her and suckled her. When I went to the girl, my wife told me to watch out, because she had suckled her!' Umar told him to beat his wife and to go to his slave-girl because kinship by suckling was only by the suckling of the young.' "
Anyway, I think this is more than enough to get the gist...
After reading The Adventures of Ibn Battuta by Ross E. Dunn, I was rather jealous of the legendary traveler's travels...and ready to wring his neck for his shabby treatment of women! Even for the time, he seems a real prick, marrying women and divorcing them without a second thought, divorcing and abandoning pregnant wives (at least twice), leaving them not even the Qur'anic requirement of payment after divorce to support the child, as well as having numerous slavegirls (whose prime purpose in Islamic countries was being used for sex and bearing children for their masters). It has been said that in Ibn Battuta's case, the wives came and went, while the slavegirls were his real female companions. Freeborn wives weren't really prepared for the rigors of the road (instead usually being secluded at home), while slaves were simply dragged along regardless of the hazards. And if they died, oh well--there were plenty more where they came from. I guess I object most to the "women as sex objects" attitude, which was quite literal in the case of slaves, who were simply property, like one's clothes or cattle.
This leads to another topic that probably bothers me more than any other about the way Islam treats women--the permission given by the Qur'an, and therefore Allah Himself, to "enjoy" your "right-hand possession" (slavegirl), permitted in numerous Qur'anic verses (4:3, 4:25, 23:6, 33:50, 70:30). A city would be taken by the Muslims, the men would be slaughtered, and the women and children sold into slavery, or else women captives would be taken during raids. According to the hadiths, Muhammad declared that the marriages of the captured women were null and void, so they could be "enjoyed" by their new Muslim masters without fear of committing adultery. What a strange set of values! Adultery is evil, but raping slave women who have just had their families slaughtered is not! And it must be noted that nowhere in Qur'an, Hadiths, Sunna or Shari'ah is it a requirement that the woman's permission be given--after all, she's just a slave, your possession to do with as you please, with no rights of her own. Best of all, there was no limit given to the number of slavegirls a man could have (a man could only have four legal wives at a time), leading to spectacles such as the Sultan of Turkey's harem with hundreds of slavegirls.
Muslims could not be made slaves, only infidels (generally those who had been captured in jihad), although some converted to Islam afterwards. The women and girls captured and purchased for the Turkish sultan's harem, for example, were converted to Islam, whether they liked it or not! Nevertheless, just because a slave accepted Islam didn't mean he/she would be set free--that was up to the master. Masters could free their slave women and marry them, but this was rare. And why should they, when they could enjoy all the benefits of concubinage without the annoyances of marriage? It should be noted that there was no "marriage" between the master and his slave, only an owner taking pleasure in his own property, attempts to portray it as some kind of marriage notwithstanding. Muhammad himself had slave concubines, although the number varies according to the source. One of them, Mary the Copt, a beautiful Egyptian, gave birth to his son Ibrahim, who died as an infant. It should be noted that while Safiyah, a 17-year-old Jewish girl captured by the Muslims during the sack against the Jewish town of Khaibar, in which her father and husband were killed, accepted Islam and was then freed and married by Muhammad ("her dowry (bridal gift) was her manumission"), Rayhana, another Jewish girl, refused to convert and remained a slave concubine of Muhammad.
According to Shari'ah, a child born of a slave mother had exactly the same rights as one born of a legal wife--that is, he/she was free and considered completely legitimate, despite the fact that the parents were not legally married. They could be of any race or color, depending on the source of slaves, from black Africans to Indians to Greeks to Slavs to blonde-haired and blue-eyed Circassians. However, the mother's lineage didn't count, so children born of Arab/slave unions were considered to be Arab--hence the enormous racial differences subsumed under the term "Arab." Almost all of the Abbasid caliphs (750-1258) were born of slave mothers, and the Turkish sultans didn't even bother to have actual wives, having nothing but slave concubines who had been torn from their families and converted to Islam, which really cut down on those annoying problems with the in-laws!
Shari'ah also held that a slave who bore her master a child became free upon the said master's death (the umm walad, "mother of the child"). She also had the right to minimal food, clothing and shelter from her master (as an animal would). Her punishment for sexual crimes was less--she would only be beaten or sold instead of stoned for illegal sexual intercourse, for example. But she had no other rights--she was only a possession, there to gratify the sexual desires of her master whenever he chose. She could be sold at any time, or forced on perilous journeys (Ibn Battuta). She might or might not be forced to bear a child, or many, for her master (some rather putrid hadiths about 'azl--coitus interruptus, and slavegirls follows at the end, along with many others on the topic of slavegirls).
It is true that most ancient cultures had slavery, but the Islamic conception of it pretty much guaranteed that it would be ongoing (too much in it for the men!) Unfortunately, while other cultures have ended slavery for over a century, the Muslim world did so only reluctantly, Saudi Arabia doing so only in 1962 (and who knows how many are still there). Slavery in the Sudan and Mauritania are particularly wretched examples of this kind of thing going on today.
The most offensive part, though, is that even today plenty of Muslims are more than happy to defend slavery and concubinage under Islamic law, insisting on how "humane" it was. You can read unbelievably offensive articles about how Muslim slavery was and is "progressive," "kindly," and in tune with modern international treaties concerning humane treatment of POWs. You can read either (or sometimes both): 1) that Muslims did their best to abolish the scourge of slavery, or alternately 2) that since slavery is divinely sanctioned in Qur'an, Sunna and Shari'ah, it is just fine today, regardless of what the "ungodly" infidels think (here's a wretched fatwa from an Islamic Q&A site about how mating with slavegirls today is just fine and dandy, and here's more on the subject, and here from another site, saying that although it might sound repulsive, Shari'ah allows it and so what's wrong is our attitudes towards it, because Shari'ah can never be wrong!).
Many Muslims, male and female, complain that in the West, women are seen as sex objects, while Islam "honors" and "protects" them. Well, frankly, I can't think of a more perfect example of viewing women as purely sex objects and pieces of meat than the time-honored Islamic practice of slave concubinage, with the attendant slave auctions where women were bought and sold. (This is of course just another thing that you are unlikely to hear about in articles proclaiming "The Liberation of Women Through Islam." Maybe it only applies to Muslim women.)
If I sound bitter about this, it's because I am. I am upset that there are young Muslim men out there on Islamist jihadi talkboards just salivating for the chance to get their hands on a "right-hand possession" after the glorious global jihad, when they will have their pick of the infidel women of all nations. I am upset that Muslims totally deny their part in the slave trade (Arabs were particularly active merchants of African slaves) while defending the institution of slavery as necessary to deal with the problem of prisoners of war. I am upset that Muslim men think that Western women can be treated as whores and pieces of meat, indulging in molestation, harrassment and even rape, apparently without a twinge of conscience. I am upset that Saudi Arabian men see female servants from the Philippines and elsewhere as their own personal sex slaves. I am upset at the slavery still going on in the world, legal and illegal, much of it in Muslim countries. And I am really upset that Muslim women don't give any of this a second thought when claiming how wonderful Islam is to women. True, much of this is not exactly in tune with the teachings of Islam, which prohibit screwing around, but there is far too much of this kind of crap going on, much of it defended by Muslim women (such as the Muslim mothers insisting that their sons shoudn't be punished for raping Australian girls).
Non-Muslim women must be treated by Muslim men with as much respect as Muslim women (admittedly, that might not be much better, but it's a start). Unfortunately the arrogant attitudes often displayed by Muslims towards non-Muslims (as discussed in the "Ugly Muslim" post below), as well as widespread misogynistic feelings among Muslim men, and finally the perception of all Western/infidel women as cheap whores, all militate against a change of attitude. I don't know what is to be done, but I implore all Western and non-Muslim women to not put up with this crap, regardless of worries about seeming culturally "insensitive." Let them know you won't put up with their crap! Let them know that this behavior will not be tolerated, and (perhaps) they will get the message.
Hadiths and Rulings About Slavegirls:
Umm Walad
Malik's Muwatta (Book of Maliki Law), Book 38, Number 38.5.6:
Malik related to me from Nafi from Abdullah ibn Umar that Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "If a slave-girl gives birth to a child by her master, he must not sell her, give her away, or bequeath her. He enjoys her and when he dies she is free ."
Slavegirls And Coitus Interruptus
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 506:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relations with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interruptus. The Prophet said, "It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection." Qaza'a said, "I heard Abu Sa'id saying that the Prophet said, 'No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."
Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3383:
Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported that a man came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: I have a slave-girl who is our servant and she carries water for us and I have intercourse with her, but I do not want her to conceive. He said: Practise 'azl, if you so like, but what is decreed for her will come to her. The person stayed back (for some time) and then came and said: The girl has become pregnant, whereupon he said: I told you what was decreed for her would come to her.
Malik's Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.100:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself."
Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."
Malik's Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.99:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Damra ibn Said al-Mazini from al-Hajjaj ibn Amr ibn Ghaziya that he was sitting with Zayd ibn Thabit when Ibn Fahd came to him. He was from the Yemen. He said, "Abu Said! I have slave-girls. None of the wives in my keep are more pleasing to me than them, and not all of them please me so much that I want a child by them, shall I then practise coitus interruptus?" Zayd ibn Thabit said, "Give an opinion, Hajjaj!" "I said, 'May Allah forgive you! We sit with you in order to learn from you!' He said, 'Give an opinion! 'I said, 'She is your field, if you wish, water it, and if you wish, leave it thirsty. I heard that from Zayd.' Zayd said, 'He has spoken the truth.' "
Don't Worry If The Slave Women You Captured Are Married Or Not
Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3432:
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i.e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end) [which is about a month --ed. note].
What To Do With A Slavegirl Who Keeps Screwing Around
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 731:
Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid:
The Prophet said, "If a slave-girl (Ama) commits illegal sexual intercourse, scourge her; if she does it again, scourge her again; if she repeats it, scourge her again." The narrator added that on the third or the fourth offence, the Prophet said, "Sell her even for a hair rope."
The Exemplary Example of 'Ali, The Prophet's Cousin and Son-In-Law
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 637:
Narrated Buraida:
The Prophet sent 'Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and 'Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumlus."
Slaves As Possessions
Malik's Muwatta, Book 31, Number 31.5.6:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar would say, "A man should not have intercourse with a slave girl except one whom, if he wished, he could sell, if he wished, he could give away, if he wished, he could keep, if he wished, he could do with her what he wanted ."
Malik said that a man who bought a slave-girl on condition that he did not sell her, give her away, or do something of that nature, was not to have intercourse with her. That was because he was not permitted to sell her or to give her away, so if he did not own that from her, he did not have complete ownership of her because an exception had been made concerning her by the hand of someone else. If that sort of condition entered into it, it was a messy situation, and the sale was not recommended.
Women Not Treated As Sex Objects In Islam, My A**!
Book 31, Number 31.4.4:
...
Malik said, "The generally agreed upon way of doing things among us is that if a man returns a slave girl in whom he has found a defect and he has already had intercourse with her, he must pay what he has reduced of her price if she was a virgin. If she was not a virgin, there is nothing against his having had intercourse with her because he had charge of her."
...
Malik spoke about a situation where a slave-girl was bartered for two other slave-girls and then one of the slave-girls was found to have a defect for which she could be returned. He said, "The slave-girl worth two other slave-girls is valued for her price. Then the other two slave-girls are valued, ignoring the defect which the one of them has. Then the price of the slave-girl sold for two slave-girls is divided between them according to their prices so that the proportion of each of them in her price is arrived at - to the higher priced one according to her higher price, and to the other according to her value. Then one looks at the one with the defect, and the buyer is refunded according to the amount her share is affected by the defect, be it little or great. The price of the two slave-girls is based on their market value on the day that they were bought."
Such A Happy Family
Malik's Muwatta, Book 41, Number 41.6.20:
Malik related to me from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman that Umar ibn al-Khattab spoke about a man who went out with his wife's slave-girl on a journey and had intercourse with her and then the wife became jealous and mentioned that to Umar ibn al-Khattab. Umar questioned him about it. He said, "She gave her to me." Umar said, "Bring me a clear proof or I will stone you." Rabia added, "The wife confessed that she had given her to him."
Malik's Muwatta, Book 30, Number 30.2.13: (note: according to Shari'ah, babies who suckle from the same woman are considered to be related and thus not suitable marriage partners):
Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "A man came to Abdullah ibn Umar when I was with him at the place where judgments were given and asked him about the suckling of an older person. Abdullah ibn Umar replied, 'A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, 'I have a slave-girl and I used to have intercourse with her. My wife went to her and suckled her. When I went to the girl, my wife told me to watch out, because she had suckled her!' Umar told him to beat his wife and to go to his slave-girl because kinship by suckling was only by the suckling of the young.' "
Anyway, I think this is more than enough to get the gist...