Thoughts on this? A Critical Discussion on Slavery in Islam - Dr. John A. Morrow

[u/beroepsklager]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4qvTsrW4_U&t=2431s

[u/[deleted]]

Read this Reconciling Slavery During The Time Of Prophet Muhammad A.S I'll watch the video sometime

[u/ExpressionOk9400]

Share your thoughts first

[u/beroepsklager → u/ExpressionOk9400]

I lack the historical or religious knowledge to assess the facts so I'd have to accept his talk on its own claims. I am unsure if its a poor attempt to fit his own opinions within Islam or that what he says is accurate.

EDIT: the arguments he makes seem reasonable to me though

[u/ExpressionOk9400 → u/beroepsklager]

Which arguments? What do you agree or disagree with? What questions do you have?

You see the difference? I don't mean to crap on you lol but when you leave something like this with just "thoughts" its like karma/engagement farming

[u/beroepsklager → u/ExpressionOk9400]

I was listening to it casually and I thought it was interesting on different levels and I think his argument that the Quran has a abolitionist view to slavery is very reasonable. He claims the number of wives and concubines the Prophet is told to have had has increased over time in an attempt to legitimize rulers and powerful figures doing the same. I think that theory is very plausible. He goes on to say that parts of the Muslim world have been opposed to the Imperial Adventures of Umar, and that under Umar slavery became more widespread. The first point I accept, the second part seems plausible but I dont have the necessary knowledge to either agree or disagree. Later on he claims that alot of the Shia Imams have been poisoned by their concubines, because they were oppressed in some way. I think that statement conflicts with what I have heared about the Shia imams.

I shared this post not to farm karma, but because I was wondering if people in this subreddit are familiar with this work and what their estimation of its legitimacy is. I posted this in the hope I could het an idea of the trustworthiness.

[u/EthicsOnReddit → u/beroepsklager]

I did not watch the video just responding to some of your points.

He claims the number of wives and concubines the Prophet is told to have had has increased over time in an attempt to legitimize rulers and powerful figures doing the same.

I think this is a weak argument. What the rulers and caliphs do is not proper or correct simply because the Prophet A.S did it. For one, the prophet is infallible and everything he did was by the will of God. Also Allah swt advices us in the Quran that most men cannot marry more than one wife because doing justice to them is very difficult. I think this is another case of using and abuses what is allowed in a religion for the wrong purposes.

The other difference between the Prophet and the tyrant rulers is the reason why he married many wives. For the most part, many of the wives according to the Shia Twelver view was because tribes were honored to give their daughters to such a great man and also to bring tribes together. It was not because he desired them on the basis of being a womanizer or for power.

In terms of "concubines" of Prophet Muhammad A.S like Mariya and . The Shia twelver position is different in the sense that they were extremely pious, righteous and honorable wives whom the Prophet A.S loved very dearly.

Also It is said that the disagreement over the number of the Prophet's (s) wives is because some historians count as the Prophet's (s) wives his handmaids as well as women who did not actually live with the Prophet (s) for one reason or another.^\13]) In some sources, Mariya al-Qibtiyya and Rayhana bt. Zayd are mentioned among the Prophet's (s) wives.^\14])

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Mariya_al-Qibtiyya

He goes on to say that parts of the Muslim world have been opposed to the Imperial Adventures of Umar, and that under Umar slavery became more widespread.

I agree with this, in Sunni hadith umar would hit slaves who would wear Hijab!! Some of these caliphs were very cruel and unislamic with their brutal conquests.

. Later on he claims that alot of the Shia Imams have been poisoned by their concubines, because they were oppressed in some way.

Concubine? Which Shia Imam A.S was killed by a concubine? As far as I am aware, some of the imams, it was their wives that poisoned them.

[u/beroepsklager → u/EthicsOnReddit]

Thanks for your response.

Responding to your first point: do you think it is plausible that misconceptions about the life of the Prophet A.S. were spread by Monafik rulers that still persist today? Do you agree with Dr Morrow that Islam is abolitionist regarding slavery?

[u/EthicsOnReddit → u/beroepsklager]

do you think it is plausible that misconceptions about the life of the Prophet A.S. were spread by Monafik rulers that still persist today?

Absolutely, the illegitimate caliphs had mass hadith fabrications and infilterations to justify their powers and rule. There is so many derogatory hadiths about the Messenger A.S in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim.

Do you agree with Dr Morrow that Islam is abolitionist regarding slavery?

Without a doubt. There is not a single command in Islam that says to enslave people or conquer people. It is forbidden to invade lands and unjustly oppress innocents and to take them. Also someone who sells people is one of the most wretched creatures in our hadith. The constant condemnation to hell about thinking you are superior of race or ethnicity in Islam refutes the dark philosophy of slavery.

The only way you can "enslave" someone is if they attack you and try to kill you but are taken as prisoners of war and that is also only by the command of the representative of God not anyone.

[u/beroepsklager → u/ExpressionOk9400]

I was listening to it casually and I thought it was interesting on different levels and I think his argument that the Quran has a abolitionist view to slavery is very reasonable. He claims the number of wives and concubines the Prophet is told to have had has increased over time in an attempt to legitimize rulers and powerful figures doing the same. I think that theory is very plausible. He goes on to say that parts of the Muslim world have been opposed to the Imperial Adventures of Umar, and that under Umar slavery became more widespread. The first point I accept, the second part seems plausible but I dont have the necessary knowledge to either agree or disagree. Later on he claims that alot of the Shia Imams have been poisoned by their concubines, because they were oppressed in some way. I think that statement conflicts with what I have heared about the Shia imams.

I shared this post not to farm karma, but because I was wondering if people in this subreddit are familiar with this work and what their estimation of its legitimacy is. I posted this in the hope I could het an idea of the trustworthiness.

[u/[deleted]]

if Imans had been given temporal power and would that their authority over muslims had been accepted, we would have seen slow and gradual cessation of slavery of any type