Does Islam Like Black People?

[Abdisamadi]

Ibn Kathir said:

“Here Allah forbids the believers to marry a mushrik woman who worships idols, and if this were general in meaning, it would include every mushrik woman, whether she is of the people of the Book or is an idol worshipper, but the women of the people of the Book are excluded from that in the verse (interpretation of the meaning):

{(Lawful to you in marriage) are chaste women from the believers and chaste women from those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) before your time when you have given their due Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), desiring chastity (i.e. taking them in legal wedlock) not committing illegal sexual intercourse, nor taking them as girlfriends} [Al-Ma'idah 5:5]

‘Ali ibn Abi Talhah said, narrating from Ibn ‘Abbas concerning the words {And do not marry Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses) till they believe (worship Allah Alone)}: Allah excludes from that the women of the people of the Book. This was also the view of Mujahid, ‘Ikrimah, Sa`id ibn Jubayr, Makhul, Al-Hasan, Ad-Dahhauak, Zayd ibn Aslam, Ar-Rabi` ibn Anas and others. And it was said that what is meant is the mushrikun who worship idols, and it does not mean the people of the Book at all. This meaning is close to the first meaning. And Allah knows best.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 1/474)

Lawful in marriage, intercourse in Islamic law is via lawful marriage or “ what the right hand possess”

 

[Daydreamer]

Lawful in marriage, intercourse in Islamic law is via lawful marriage or “ what the right hand possess”

What the right hand posses means slave, which means that a Muslim cannot have sex with a non person of the book

 

[Abdisamadi]

What the right hand posses means slave, which means that a Muslim cannot have sex with a non person of the book

Again, there is nothing stating a slave has to be a person of the book

 

[Daydreamer]

I find it disguising some here would try to make the act of sex slavery something moral in any way, if you want to think about it logically the closest example to it in earlier times was how migrant women are treated now, those from 3rd world nations and such.

Once again I will post quotes and people can make their own judgments, I feel it’s a more appropriate way of doing things opposed to mindless rambling and conjecture





I wanted to highlight this because I find it hard to believe someone actually thinks people who are owned by another have the means of stopping someone else from abusing them, let’s continue with an opinion of a classical scholar




This is by a well respected scholar at the time whose works were used well into the future. Point being if this was scholarly opinion at the time you can put two and two together on how slave women were treated in the “Golden Age”

It only says that the man can do coitus interruptus with the concubine without her consent as a means of contraception, why are you taking this out of context, you’ve literally disregarded everything everyone said in this thread

 

[attash]

Where is the source for slave women having to be “people of the book”?

It is haram to have sexual relations with non-monotheists under any circumstance:

وَلَا تَنۡكِحُوا الۡمُشۡرِكٰتِ حَتّٰى يُؤۡمِنَّؕ وَلَاَمَةٌ مُّؤۡمِنَةٌ خَيۡرٌ مِّنۡ مُّشۡرِكَةٍ وَّلَوۡ اَعۡجَبَتۡكُمۡۚ وَلَا تُنۡكِحُوا الۡمُشۡرِكِيۡنَ حَتّٰى يُؤۡمِنُوۡا ؕ وَلَعَبۡدٌ مُّؤۡمِنٌ خَيۡرٌ مِّنۡ مُّشۡرِكٍ وَّلَوۡ اَعۡجَبَكُمۡؕ اُولٰٓـئِكَ يَدۡعُوۡنَ اِلَى النَّارِ  ۖۚ وَاللّٰهُ يَدۡعُوۡٓا اِلَى الۡجَـنَّةِ وَالۡمَغۡفِرَةِ بِاِذۡنِهٖۚ وَيُبَيِّنُ اٰيٰتِهٖ لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمۡ يَتَذَكَّرُوۡنَ ‏ ﴿2:221﴾

(2:221) Marry not the women who associate others with Allah in His Divinity until they believe; for a believing slave-girl is better than a (free, respectable) woman who associates others with Allah in His Divinity, even though she might please you. Likewise, do not give your women in marriage to men who associate others with Allah in His Divinity until they believe; for a believing slave is better than a (free, respectable) man who associates others with Allah in His Divinity, even though he might please you. Such people call you towards the Fire,237 and Allah calls you, by His leave, towards Paradise and forgiveness; and He makes His injunctions clear to people so that they may take heed.

The word used here is nikāḥ, which in the Arabic language does not just describe marriage, but all sexual relationships.

This is ayah is the reason why scholars have historically forbade have intercourse with pagans, even if the pagans were your slaves.

 

[attash]

Speaking on Slavery is throwing stones from a glass house, Slavery wasn’t even illegal in the Muslim world till the 60’s and in many ways the Arab Slave trade was as brutal and race based as the Europeans

Islam does have a sense of lineage superiority

It is pretty disingenuous to pose those two hadiths as proof of Islam somehow having lineage superiority. The first hadith merely described the process that Allah went through to choose the final Prophet. He chose Kinanah from the children of Ismail, Quraysh from the children of Kinanah, Hashim from the children of Quraysh, and the Prophet (SAWS) from the children of Hashim. No mention of lineage superiority here.

The second hadith is a descriptive statement, not a prescriptive statement. That is, the Prophet (SAWS) was merely describing the state of affairs in Arabia during his time where the Quraysh were given precedence in leadership matters. This hadith does not obligate that people choose their leaders from the Quraysh, nor does it say anything about the Quraysh being superior.

 

[Abdisamadi]

It only says that the man can do coitus interruptus with the concubine without her consent as a means of contraception, why are you taking this out of context, you’ve literally disregarded everything everyone said in this thread

Because you’re all saying things to make yourselves feel good without any scholarly backing, this is not out of context and we aren’t talking about consent, I am of the opinion when you own someone you can’t really consent to anything, just like children can’t consent

 

[Abdisamadi]

It is haram to have sexual relations with non-monotheists under any circumstance:

وَلَا تَنۡكِحُوا الۡمُشۡرِكٰتِ حَتّٰى يُؤۡمِنَّؕ وَلَاَمَةٌ مُّؤۡمِنَةٌ خَيۡرٌ مِّنۡ مُّشۡرِكَةٍ وَّلَوۡ اَعۡجَبَتۡكُمۡۚ وَلَا تُنۡكِحُوا الۡمُشۡرِكِيۡنَ حَتّٰى يُؤۡمِنُوۡا ؕ وَلَعَبۡدٌ مُّؤۡمِنٌ خَيۡرٌ مِّنۡ مُّشۡرِكٍ وَّلَوۡ اَعۡجَبَكُمۡؕ اُولٰٓـئِكَ يَدۡعُوۡنَ اِلَى النَّارِ  ۖۚ وَاللّٰهُ يَدۡعُوۡٓا اِلَى الۡجَـنَّةِ وَالۡمَغۡفِرَةِ بِاِذۡنِهٖۚ وَيُبَيِّنُ اٰيٰتِهٖ لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمۡ يَتَذَكَّرُوۡنَ ‏ ﴿2:221﴾

(2:221) Marry not the women who associate others with Allah in His Divinity until they believe; for a believing slave-girl is better than a (free, respectable) woman who associates others with Allah in His Divinity, even though she might please you. Likewise, do not give your women in marriage to men who associate others with Allah in His Divinity until they believe; for a believing slave is better than a (free, respectable) man who associates others with Allah in His Divinity, even though he might please you. Such people call you towards the Fire,237 and Allah calls you, by His leave, towards Paradise and forgiveness; and He makes His injunctions clear to people so that they may take heed.

The word used here is nikāḥ, which in the Arabic language does not just describe marriage, but all sexual relationships.

View attachment 320943

This is ayah is the reason why scholars have historically forbade have intercourse with pagans, even if the pagans were your slaves.

Wrong, The companions literally had sexual relations with the pagan women of Arabia which they captured in their expansion. It was literally posted in this thread so I don’t know how you can say it’s haram.

Most of the slave women owned by the Companions were from the polytheist Arabs and it is known that they were idol-worshippers; they did not hold that it was impermissible for them to be intimate with them. It has not been reported that the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, deemed it unlawful and he, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, never forbade any of the Companions from being intimate with their polytheistic slave women.

 

[Daydreamer]

Wrong, The companions literally had sexual relations with the pagan women of Arabia which they captured in their expansion. It was literally posted in this thread so I don’t know how you can say it’s haram.

Can you source the Hadith? Whose to say they didn’t convert to Islam first

 

[attash]

Wrong, The companions literally had sexual relations with the pagan women of Arabia which they captured in their expansion. It was literally posted in this thread so I don’t know how you can say it’s haram.

You can't just post quotes without showing us a source. When it comes to sources, there are levels of reliability. The most reliable source of all is the Quran, which the supreme authoritative text in Islamic law. If the Quran forbids something, then it is simply forbidden Islam and there is nothing you can show me that can refute that.

Now that I have shown you clear evidence from the single most authoritative text in Islamic law, it is your job to show me this at least:
- a clear sahih account that references to the sahabah or the Prophet (SAWS) having intercourse with people that were explicitly stated to be pagan, AFTER the ruling in the ayah was revealed WHILE they knew of this ruling.

As for the account you showed me, even if was authentic, it could simply mean that they were ignorant of the ruling or they were having intercourse with the pagan slaves before the ruling was sent down.

 

[Abdisamadi]

It is pretty disingenuous to pose those two hadiths as proof of Islam somehow having lineage superiority. The first hadith merely described the process that Allah went through to choose the final Prophet. He chose Kinanah from the children of Ismail, Quraysh from the children of Kinanah, Hashim from the children of Quraysh, and the Prophet (SAWS) from the children of Hashim. No mention of lineage superiority here.

The second hadith is a descriptive statement, not a prescriptive statement. That is, the Prophet (SAWS) was merely describing the state of affairs in Arabia during his time where the Quraysh were given precedence in leadership matters. This hadith does not obligate that people choose their leaders from the Quraysh, nor does it say anything about the Quraysh being superior.

The majority of scholars are of the opinion that the Khalifah of the Muslims must be from Quraysh. Rather, more than one of the people of knowledge reported consensus on that, because he (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "The leaders are from Quraysh." Narrated by Ahmad. And his saying (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "People follow the Quraysh in this matter, their Muslims follows their Muslims, and their disbelievers follows their disbelievers." Agreed upon.

An-Nawawi said in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim regarding this hadith: "This hadith and its likes are an apparent evidence that the Khalifah is specific to the Quraysh, and it is not permissible to be held by anyone other than them. On this basis, consensus was reached during the time of the Sahaabah, and so it was thereafter." End quote.

Al-Mardawi said in [الأحكام السلطانية] regarding the conditions of the Khalifah: (The seventh condition): Lineage, meaning that he should be from Quraysh due to the text's stipulation and the consensus on it. There is no consideration for harm when when he deviated, , so it is permissible for all people, because Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq (may Allah be pleased with him) protested on the day of Saqeefah against the Ansar in their prevention from the Khalifah when they pledged allegiance to Sa'd ibn 'Ubaadah for it, by the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "The leaders are from Quraysh." So they gave up on being alone with it and turned back from participating in it when they said, "ameer from us and ameer from you," conceding to his narration and affirming his news, and they were satisfied with his saying: "We are the commanders, and you are the ministers." And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah upon him) said: "Give precedence to Quraysh, and do not precede it." And there is no doubt with this text, the Muslim has no dispute about it and no saying to oppose it. End quote.

As for the Muslim leaders who deputize for the Khalifah, this requirement does not apply to them. Indeed, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the Sahaabah after him, employed leaders who were not Qurayshi, as is well known. The Uthmaaniyyah did not sin by not appointing a non-Qurayshi Khalifah if they were prevented from doing so by a legitimate impediment, such as fear of sedition and fighting among Muslims due to the dissatisfaction of a group of them with it. Perhaps it is appropriate here to seek the wisdom in the requirement that the Khalifah be from Quraysh. The wisdom in this, as mentioned by Dr. 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn Sulayman ad-Dameeji in his book [الإمامة العظمى عند أهل السنة والجماعة] where he said:

The wisdom - as I see it, and Allah knows best - is that Quraysh is the best of the Arab tribes by the text of the hadith from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Waathilah ibn al-Asqa' said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Indeed, Allah chose Quraysh from Kinaanah, and chose Bani Haashim from Quraysh, and chose me from Bani Haashim." Narrated by Muslim.

The Arabs among the races, and the Quraysh among the Arabs are likely to have the most khayr among them than what is found in others. For this reason, from them came the most honorable of Allah's creation (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who has no equal in Quraysh, let alone in the rest of the Arabs and non-Arabs. From them came the Khulafaa' and the rightly guided, and the rest of the ten who were given the glad tidings of Paradise (may Allah be pleased with them) and others who have no equal among the Arabs and non-Arabs. Among the Arabs were the first and foremost who have no equal among all other races. There must be in the best category something that is not found in the preferred ones. Therefore, it is more likely for the virtuous to be found in Quraysh than in others. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not specify Bani Haashim over other Quraysh clans, even though they are the best clans of Quraysh, because they are a clan from a tribe, and their number is limited and small, so it is not necessary that the virtuous be among them. The best people after the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) were not among them. Rather, they were in Bani Taym, which is Abu Bakr, then Umar from Bani 'Adee, then Uthman from Bani Umayyah, then Ali from Bani Haashim.

One of the indications of the superiority of the Arabs over others is the saying of imam Ahmad in the narration of al-Istakhri when mentioning his 'aqeedah: "Arabs should be recognized for their rights, their superiority, their precedence, and they should be loved for the hadith: 'Loving them is faith, and hating them is hypocrisy.' One should not follow the saying of the populists [الشعوبية] and the lowly masters who do not love the Arabs nor acknowledge their superiority, for they have innovations, hypocrisy, and disagreement." (Tabaqaat al-Hanaabilah by ibn Abi Ya'la 1/30). [Translators note: shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraheem Aal ash-Shaykh said about الشعوبية: "The masses (الشعوب) among non-Arabs have no lineage, and there are people who prefer them over the Arabs, which is the view of the Populists (الشعوبية), and this is incorrect. Arabs are superior, but the real superiority is in piety."]

Also, part of the wisdom is that Allah, glorified and exalted, has distinguished them from all other tribes with the strength of nobility and sound judgment, which are two significant and necessary qualities for a leader. This is indicated by the hadith narrated by Ahmad through his chain from Jubayr ibn Mut'im (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "A Qurayshi has twice the strength of a man from another tribe." It was said to az-Zuhri: "What did he mean by that?" He said: "The nobility of opinion." Ahmad narrated it in his Musnad, and as-Subki said about it: "Its chain is authentic." as in Tabaqaat ash-Shaafi'iyyah al-Kubra (1/191).

The hadith was also reported by al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak and he authenticated it according to the condition of al-Bukhaari and Muslim, and adh-Dhahabi agreed. This may be the reason for specifying Quraysh for leadership, or there may be another reason. However, our lack of knowing the wisdom behind this does not affect the general ruling and acting upon it, which is the requirement of Qurayshi descent in the candidate for leadership.

 

[Angelina]

@Abdisamadi

Are you Muslim? As for the idea that Arabs are superior, there are differences of opinions but most of us here don’t ascribe to that view, nor Is it a mainstream view. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong but there isn’t an actual Hadith in which the Prophet s.a.w says they are superior.

 

[Abdisamadi]

Can you source the Hadith? Whose to say they didn’t convert to Islam first

they were captured after being defeated in battle, there is nothing that said they were converted to Islam like explicitly stated with other Pagans.

The source is: https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-8/Book-77/Hadith-600/

 

[Abdisamadi]

You can't just post quotes without showing us a source. When it comes to sources, there are levels of reliability. The most reliable source of all is the Quran, which the supreme authoritative text in Islamic law. If the Quran forbids something, then it is simply forbidden Islam and there is nothing you can show me that can refute that.

Now that I have shown you clear evidence from the single most authoritative text in Islamic law, it is your job to show me this at least:
- a clear sahih account that references to the sahabah or the Prophet (SAWS) having intercourse with people that were explicitly stated to be pagan, AFTER the ruling in the ayah was revealed WHILE they knew of this ruling.

As for the account you showed me, even if was authentic, it could simply mean that they were ignorant of the ruling or they were having intercourse with the pagan slaves before the ruling was sent down.

The ‘prophet’ received the message about “the right hand posses” during a war with the pagan tribes, they were wary not because they were slaves but because they had pagan husband. How can a prophet receive a message and then change it later? There is nothing in the hadeeth about a conversion to Islam

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger 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 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 (Quran 4:. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).

Source: https://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/USC-MSA/Book-8/Hadith-3432/

 

[attash]

@Abdisamadi

The matter of the the khilafah being restricted to the Quraysh has been disputed by prominent scholars such as Abu Hanifa and Abu Bakr Al Baqllani. However, the majority of the scholars support this ruling:

Is it true that the Khalifa should be a Qureshi based on a Hadith? -

Respected Mufti SahabAssalam-o-Alai-KumIs it true that one of our Believes is that the Khalifa should be a Qureshi based on a Hadith of the Prophet?If true, wts the Hikmah behind this. And how can it

islamqa.org

Is it a condition for the Imam to be from Quraysh?

Translated by Zameelur Rahman 'Abdullah ibn Maslamah ibn Qa'nab and Qutaybah ibn Sa'd narrated to us, they said: al-Mughirah (al-Khizami) narrated to us. Zuhayr ibn Harb and 'Amr al-Naqid narrated to us, they said: Sufyan ibn 'Uyaynah narrated to us. Both of them from ibn al-Zinad: from...

www.deoband.org

However, this still does not prove that the Quraysh are superior in Islam. Scholars have explained that this ruling by saying that this ruling is a practical one: that is, due to the Quraysh's social pre-eminence amongst the Arabs, the Arabs (who formed the bulk of the early Islamic community) would not accept any other leader other than the Qurayshis.

As for you trying to show that Islam says Arabs are superior, this is so disingenuous that it is not even deserving of a response. Suffice it to say that there are zero ayaat or ahaadith that state that any race or lineage is superior to other and there in fact several ayaat and ahaadith that completely reject this notion in no uncertain terms.

 

[Abdisamadi]

@Abdisamadi

Are you Muslim? As for the idea that Arabs are superior, there are differences of opinions but most of us here don’t ascribe to that view, nor Is it a mainstream view. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong but there isn’t an actual Hadith in which the Prophet s.a.w says they are superior.

I accept the role Islam has in Somali society as a tool of power, just like Christianity with the Habesh, but the ideology is incredibly flawed

 

[attash]

The ‘prophet’ received the message about “the right hand posses” during a war with the pagan tribes, they were wary not because they were slaves but because they had pagan husband. How can a prophet receive a message and then change it later? There is nothing in the hadeeth about a conversion to Islam


Source: https://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/USC-MSA/Book-8/Hadith-3432/

Yes, there is nothing in that hadith about conversion to Islam. Now who says this short hadith describes everything the Prophet (SAWS) said and did at the moment?

Like I said, I have already shown you a clear verse or hadith that explicitly abrogates the ayah that I have already shown you. That is, it needs to explicitly say that intercourse with pagans is permitted. Otherwise, you have no case.

 

[Abdisamadi]

@Abdisamadi

The matter of the the khilafah being restricted to the Quraysh has been disputed by prominent scholars such as Abu Hanifa and Abu Bakr Al Baqllani. However, the majority of the scholars support this ruling:

Is it true that the Khalifa should be a Qureshi based on a Hadith? -

Respected Mufti SahabAssalam-o-Alai-KumIs it true that one of our Believes is that the Khalifa should be a Qureshi based on a Hadith of the Prophet?If true, wts the Hikmah behind this. And how can it

islamqa.org

Is it a condition for the Imam to be from Quraysh?

Translated by Zameelur Rahman 'Abdullah ibn Maslamah ibn Qa'nab and Qutaybah ibn Sa'd narrated to us, they said: al-Mughirah (al-Khizami) narrated to us. Zuhayr ibn Harb and 'Amr al-Naqid narrated to us, they said: Sufyan ibn 'Uyaynah narrated to us. Both of them from ibn al-Zinad: from...

www.deoband.org

However, this still does not prove that the Quraysh are superior in Islam. Scholars have explained that this ruling by saying that this ruling is a practical one: that is, due to the Quraysh's social pre-eminence amongst the Arabs, the Arabs (who formed the bulk of the early Islamic community) would not accept any other leader other than the Qurayshis.

As for you trying to show that Islam says Arabs are superior, this is so disingenuous that it is not even deserving of a response. Suffice it to say that there are zero ayaat or ahaadith that state that any race or lineage is superior to other and there in fact several ayaat and ahaadith that completely reject this notion in no uncertain terms.

@The alchemist initially said no role was given due to lineage and it was only due to Iman. I have now with the proof that the Caliphate was supposed to be the Arabs have shown how that is not the case

Take it as you will, if you want to believe it’s someone’s god given right to rule over you be my guest

 

[Daydreamer]

I

they were captured after being defeated in battle, there is nothing that said they were converted to Islam like explicitly stated with other Pagans.

The source is: https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-8/Book-77/Hadith-600/

it also isn’t explicitly stated if they were pagans either.

 

[Abdisamadi]

Yes, there is nothing in that hadith about conversion to Islam. Now who says this short hadith describes everything the Prophet (SAWS) said and did at the moment?

Like I said, I have already shown you a clear verse or hadith that explicitly abrogates the ayah that I have already shown you. That is, it needs to explicitly say that intercourse with pagans is permitted. Otherwise, you have no case.

It’s a contradiction is what it is, and this is why there is a disagreement between scholars. Because you can’t say you got a message that says you can have relations with a pagan tribe then say it’s haram later, this ayat was literally revealed due to their pagans being husbands

Unless it’s made up, but that’s not the discussion