Slavery: A Fundamental Historical Overview

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

CHAPTER I: Slavery in the Islamic Quranic Sharia:

Why We Are Writing this Book – COMMENTS – Terminology of Male and Female Slaves between God's Sharia Laws and Legislations of Muslims – COMMENTS – General Replies to Comments of our Fellow Quranists on the Last Article – COMMENTS – More Detailed Replies to Other Questions – COMMENTS.

CHAPTER II: An Overview of Slavery in the History of Muslims:

Slavery during the Reign of the Pre-Umayyad Caliphs and Arab Conquests – COMMENTS – Enslavement and Forced Military Service – The Power and Authority of Castrated Slaves in Palaces of the Ottomans – COMMENTS – The Eunuch Kafur Al-Ikhshidi Is One of the Best Sultans of Egypt and the Levant – COMMENTS – Between the Moralistic Genius of Kafur and the Immoral Genius of Al-Mutanabbi: Between Kafur the Noble Eunuch Former Slave and Al-Mutanabbi the Mean Free Man – COMMENTS – A Female Slave Appointed as the Supreme Judge – Female Slaves in Rule: Al-Khayzuran: the Matriarch and Mother of Many Abbasid Caliphs – COMMENTS – Female Slaves in Rule: Qabeeha: the Mother of the Abbasid Caliph Al-Moataz – COMMENTS – Female Slaves in Rule: Shaghab: the Ruler of the Abbasid Caliphate for Twenty Five Years – COMMENTS – Female Slaves in Rule: Shagaret Al-Dor the Sultana of Egypt – COMMENTS. 

CHAPTER III: Slaves in the Sunnite Religion:

Slaves at the Early Beginnings of the Sunnite Legislation: Anas Ibn Malik – COMMENTS – Enslavement within Falsehoods of the Biography Written by Ibn Ishaq – COMMENTS – Malik in his Book Does Not Consider Slaves as Human Beings! – COMMENTS – Contradictions in the Legislations Related to Enslaved Female Singers.

CHAPTER IV: Some Types of Slavery in the Middle Ages:

Enslaved Female Singers – COMMENTS – Female Slaves in Bedchambers of Sultans – COMMENTS – Types of Enslavement: Forced Labor and Impalement – COMMENTS – Types of Enslavement: Forced Labor in Egyptian History – COMMENTS – Types of Enslavement: Forced Labor during the Digging of the Suez Canal – COMMENTS – Types of Enslavement: An Overview of Eunuchs – COMMENTS.

CONCLUSION:

Freeing of Slaves between the Quranic Sharia and the Laws of Europe and the USA – Firstly: Europe Has Abolished Ancient Slavery that Has Been Replaced with a More Cruel Widespread Type of Slavery – Secondly: The USA and Slavery – Thirdly: The Genius of the Quranic Solution – COMMENTS – Slaves in Our Modern Age – Firstly: The Last Countries to Formally Abolish Slavery while Retaining the Culture of Slavery – Secondly: Reports on Contemporary Slavery – Lastly: To Accuse the Great Religion of Islam of Endorsing and Justifying Enslavement Is Utter and Adamant Stupidity – COMMENTS.

CHAPTER I: Slavery in Islamic Quranic Sharia:

Why We Are Writing this Book:

Introduction:

1- We have written extensively before about the topic of slaves in many of our articles and sections of previous books. Male and female slaves are mentioned many times in the Quranic text chiefly in the phrase that literally goes like this: "those that your right hand owns", among other terms; but the words ''slaves'' and ''slavery'' are not mentioned exactly in the Quran. On the YouTube website, an uploaded video has been watched so many times about a European man who claims to have converted to Islam (but, in fact, converted to the Wahabi Sunnite religion) and then to leave it later on because of the Quranic notion of "those that your right hand owns", especially in this verse about types of females that a Muslim man cannot marry: "And all married women, except those that your right hand possess…" (4:24). Of course, this European man has understood this verse and other Quranic verses within Sunnite interpretation books and within the so-called hadiths (i.e., sayings, deeds, and traditions attributed falsely to Prophet Muhammad a century after his death) that urge the false notion or claim that Islam allows the enslavement of women for the sexual purposes of male captors, even if such women were married before being enslaved, unlike free married women whom no man can marry as per the Quranic Chapter Four. We have received a message from one of our fellow Quranists with a question regarding this European man; here is part of the message below:

  (… This video is being watched a lot on the YouTube website, urging watchers to leave and forsake Islam:

Why I left Islam:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR7_YQ53lfI  

Of course, Dr. Mansour, this European man is an ex-Sunnite, as his speech is derived from sources and books of Sunnite scholars. The question raised now is as follows: what is the real, true meaning of 4:24 and other related verses discussed by this European man in his video? Could you refute him, Dr. Mansour? …).

2- Here is our reply below.

Firstly: we never care about those who convert to Islam or reject it after conversion.

1- Guidance or misguidance is based on the willingness of each human being as a personal individual responsibility that every person will face it as per their religious choices, or lack of them, in the Day of Judgment in the Hereafter. "Whoever is guided-is guided for his own good. And whoever goes astray-goes astray to his detriment…" (17:15).

2- Guidance in matters of Islam is exclusively attained by the Quran alone, and this guidance submits first to the human will; those who seek Quranic guidance will be guided to their own good eventually, and those who discard the Quranic guidance will be misguiding themselves. Even prophet Muhammad was never responsible for guiding others; as God has said the following to him: "Say, "O people, the truth has come to you from your Lord. Whoever accepts guidance is guided for his own soul; and whoever strays only strays to its detriment. I am not a guardian over you."" (10:108). "We sent down upon you the Book for mankind in truth. He who follows guidance does so for the good of his soul. And he who strays in error does so to its detriment. You are not their overseer." (39:41). Thus, Muhammad was merely a warner only, who conveyed the Quran to warn others: "And to recite the Quran, whoever is guided - is guided to his own advantage. And whoever goes astray, then say, "I am one of the warners."" (27:92). God has also said the following to Muhammad: "You cannot guide whom you love, but God guides whom He wills, and He knows best those who are guided." (28:56). This indicates that individuals who seek guidance will be guided by God; they are willing first to guide themselves and then God's will asserts this individual choice of guidance, or misguidance, to increase the guidance of the guided ones and the misguidance of the misguided ones, as per personal choice first.

3- Those who choose guidance will be rewarded by more guidance from God, and as for those choosing misguidance, God will increase their misguidance: "As for those who are guided, He increases them in guidance, and He has granted them their righteousness." (47:17). "As for those who strive for Us-We will guide them in Our ways. God is with the doers of good." (29:69). "In their hearts is sickness, and God has increased their sickness…" (2:10). "Say, "Whoever is in error, the Dominant will lead him on."...God increases in guidance those who accept guidance…" (19:75-76).

Secondly: we agree to the fact that this European man was a former Sunnite, and not a former Muslim.

1- Accordingly, this European man has never converted to Islam in the first place; rather, he has converted to the Sunnite religion and rejected it later on soon enough. The problem lies in the fact that followers of the earthly, man-made, fabricated religions (i.e., the Sunnite, Shiite, and Sufi ones as well as their sub-creeds, sects, denominations, and doctrines) claim that their religions is 'Islam', making it bearing responsible for faults and falsehoods of such religions, especially the Sunnite Wahabi religion widespread now and posing as if it were Islam. 

2- Past and present clergymen, scholars, and imams of the earthly, man-made, fabricated religions of the Muhammadans have read the Quran while following their whims and caprices; they have intentionally  overlooked, changed, and distorted the laws, meanings, and concepts of the Quranic verses on the pretext of their being replaced by the so-called hadiths. Hence, the fabricated hadiths have been placed by them as higher above the Quran and overruling it! This led to countless differences as per whims and desires, and clergymen propagated the falsehood that the Quran bears contradictory layers or aspects of meanings. Such falsehood contradicts God's words about the Quran itself: "…A Scripture whose Verses were perfected, then elaborated, from One who is Wise and Informed." (11:1), "Praise be to God, who revealed the Book to His servant, and allowed in it no distortion." (18:1), and "An Arabic Quran, without any defect, so they may become righteous." (39:28).    

3- Hence, those clergymen and scholars and their likes have kept on the shelves the Quran that is preserved in its entirety by God Himself, as they have discarded it and distorted its meanings to serve their purposes, thus they were misguided; the Quran is regarded as a source of guidance only by those who seek to be guided, and as a source of misguidance to those who opted for being misled and misguided further: "We send down in the Quran healing and mercy for the believers, but it increases the wrongdoers only in loss." (17:82).

4- We have written a lot about pondering and contemplating the Quran without prejudice or prior views or notions; readers are to reflect upon verses in search for guidance and the Truth, by defining the Quranic terminology using the Quranic meanings in the text itself via searching the topic/term in the local context of the Quranic verse in a given Quranic Chapter and then in the larger context of the whole text within the verses in which the topic/term occurs. Thus, we are to group, study, and examine carefully all verses related directly and indirectly to the topic/term we are searching. This way, this search will show to us the ''definitive verses'' that express the meanings directly and briefly and the ''similar verses'' that further explain in detail the ''definitive verses''. Hence, we learn this way the legislative purpose and the legislative law and rule in the Quran, bearing in mind that the legislative purpose is higher than the law and rule; we refer readers to several article of ours for more details, especially articles that refute the so-called intercession of Muhammad, or any other mortals, in the Last Day and the ones that refute the Salafist claims that one can see God in this life or in the Hereafter.  

Thirdly: legislation of self-defense fighting in Islam (i.e., the Quran alone) prohibits aggression, transgressions, committing violence, injustice, taking captives, and enslavement 

 Because the topic of slavery is linked closely to the crime of Arab conquests in the 7^th century practically and legislatively, we briefly mention an example covering the topic of self-defense fighting in Islam, and this example is based on our article titled "Islam Is the Religion of Peace". About the legislative rule and law and the legislative purpose in the Quran about fighting, one can discern the following points from the Quran.

1- God says in the Quran: "And fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression; God does not love the aggressors." (2:190). The legislative rule or law here (in the order or directive to fight) is governed by the legislative purpose of linking fighting for the sake of God only; i.e., in self-defense when people are religiously persecuted and being fought and aggressed against first by a warring enemy. Without such legislative purpose, fighting is NEVER for God's sake; rather, it becomes loathsome aggression and scramble for loot, wealth, dominance, power, and authority: this is fighting for the sake of devils, of course. This is understood from the following verse: "Those who believe fight in the cause of God, while those who disbelieve fight in the cause of tyrannical evil…" (4:76). Thus, such aggressors are disbelievers and polytheists in terms of their violent behavior and demeanor of transgressions; whereas Muslims/believers are the peaceful ones as per their peaceful non-aggressive demeanor and their behavior of non-violence.  

2- Self-defense fighting is for God's sake, and consequently, it aims solely to deter and to stop the aggression of the enemies. Hence, all verses tackling this fighting must submit to this legislative purpose. In this light, we understand the Quranic Chapter 9 verses revealed shortly before Muhammad's death as directly linked to the previous legislation in 2:190-194; see 9:1-15, 9:29, 9:36, 9:38, and 9:41.

2/1: Self-defense fighting is for God's sake, and consequently, it must end immediately once aggressors are deterred and would stop their attacks and violence: "But if they cease, then God is Forgiving and Merciful. " (2:192). "…But if they cease, then let there be no hostility except against the aggressors." (2:193). "Say to those who disbelieve: if they desist, their past will be forgiven…" (8:38).

2/2: Self-defense fighting is for God's sake, and consequently, it must be as a response for aggression of enemies who started transgression and revenge should never exceed its limits by those engaging in self-defensive war to deter the aggressive enemy: "The sacred month for the sacred month; and sacrilege calls for retaliation. Whoever commits aggression against you, retaliate against him in the same measure as he has committed against you. And be conscious of God, and know that God is with the righteous." (2:194). 

2/3: Self-defense fighting is for God's sake, and consequently, such military fighting must be for the sake of deterrence only and not to commit aggressions; hence, the peaceful Muslim country must always have strong and powerful military so as not to allow greedy aggressors to attack it. thus, peace must be protected with military power, but peace is the general original rule, as we understand the following two Quranic verses: "And prepare against them all the power you can muster, and all the cavalry you can mobilize, to terrify thereby God's enemies and your enemies… But if they incline towards peace, then incline towards it, and put your trust in God…" (8:60-61).  

2/4: Self-defense fighting is for God's sake, and consequently, real believers in God never commit aggressions against others as God does not like transgressors: "And fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression; God does not love the aggressors." (2:190).

2/5: Self-defense fighting is for God's sake, and consequently, when believers are being attacked by enemies/aggressors, they invoke God who does not like aggressors to appeal to Him to grant them victory over the disbelievers/aggressors: "…You are our Lord and Master, so help us against the disbelieving people." (2:286).

3- We see now from the above points that the Quranic legislative command or law to fight in self-defense must submit to the Quranic legislative purpose to confine such self-defense fighting to God's sake and never to commit aggressions; thus, such fighting is to impose religious freedom and to stop religious persecution, as one's faith is judged by God alone in the Hereafter, and hence, people must be free in their religious preferences and choices upon which God's judgment of people will be based. This idea is repeated in the Quran. "And fight them until there is no persecution, and worship becomes devoted to God alone…" (2:193). "Fight them until there is no more persecution, and religion becomes exclusively for God…" (8:39). In the very first Quranic permission to early believers to engage in self-defense fighting, we find the legislative purpose of protecting all houses of worship for everyone and every creed: "Permission is given to those who are fought against, and God is Able to give them victory. Those who were unjustly evicted from their homes, merely for saying, "Our Lord is God." Were it not that God repels people by means of others: monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques-where the name of God is mentioned much-would have been demolished. God supports whoever supports Him. God is Strong and Mighty." (22:39-40). 

4- Of course, Prophet Muhammad adhered to these Quranic legislations. Within the Quranic text, we see how God has rebuked Muhammad on certain occasions, but such occasions NEVER include that he fought aggressive wars or led a military aggression against anyone. Some blame and rebuke are linked to his tolerating some hypocrites in Yathreb who were reluctant to participate in self-defense endeavors, and some Quranic commands have been addressed to Muhammad to make him urge true believers to engage in self-defense endeavors so as not to allow aggressors to annihilate the dwellers of Yathreb at the time; see 8:65-84. 

5- After Muhammad's death, the Qorayish tribe committed the crime of Arab conquests in Egypt, Iraq, the Levant, etc., and such aggressive fights were for the sake of the devils as Arabs scrambled for loot and invasions to settle elsewhere away from Arabian deserts, as they coveted riches of other neighboring countries. Thus, the Qorayish tribesmen established a vast empire that they called 'caliphate'. Such terrible error led most Arabs to reject the Quran (the only and true celestial source of Islam) and its legislations, to eventually establish the earthly, man-made, fabricated religions to replace Islam. Such man-made creeds had ample room to express and realize whims and desires of people inside the so-called caliphate. Such devilish, aggressive Arab conquests included many features of grave injustice, including enslavement. This led to the fact that Arabs at the time and in later eras overlooked the Quranic legislations to alleviate, remedy, and solve the problem of slavery, as these Quranic legislations were replaced by the Sunnite legislations that endorse and allow enslavement by virtue of fabricated oral hadiths traditions ascribed wrongly and falsely to Muhammad decades after his death and written down later on in the Abbasid Era, more than one century after his decease. Among such falsehoods ascribed to Muhammad, there is a biography of lies that portrays and sketches his character in a corrupt, distorted way that contradict his character features mentioned in the Quran. Consequently, enslavement is a legacy, imposed on Islam that has been confiscated and distorted by Arab conquerors, bequeathed to us within conquests and caliphate ruling system. Such legacy of enslavement derived from Sunnite religion has been revived recently in our modern age by the Wahabi-Sunnite terrorists of ISIS.         

6- Wahabism, as a religion posing as if it were Islam, has been widely spread and propagated all over the globe, especially among the Muslim population on Earth, using the Saudi oil revenues. Wahabism is an extremist branch of the Sunnite religion causing bloodshed all over the world, and since it hoists the banner of 'Islam' falsely and wrongly, the image of Islam is now tarnished as non-Muslims accuse Islam of being the source of terrorism and enslavement of people.  

7- In the West, any people have converted to the KSA-propagated Wahabism, wrongly thinking that it represents Islam, and they have suffered confusion as they most probably have misunderstood the Quran as they have read its verses through the eyes of dead and alive imams of the Sunnite Wahabi religion. Such devilish imams have distorted meanings of the Quranic verses and they have misguided people away from God's pathway: the Quran. This is predicted by God in the Quran, as we read in the following verses: "But those who strive against Our revealed verses - these are the dwellers of Hell." (22:51). "As for those who strive against Our revealed verses, seeking to undermine them - for them is a punishment of a painful torment in Hell." (34:5). "But those who work against Our revealed verses, seeking to undermine them - those will be summoned to the Hell punishment." (34:38). The KSA regime has spent more than 100 billion $ to spread and propagate Wahabism to mislead people from the pathway of God: the Quran, and this emergence of such evil sinners who commit this unpardonable crime is predicted in the Quran as well: "Those who disbelieve spend their wealth to repel from God's path. They will spend it, then it will become a source of sorrow for them, and then they will be defeated. Those who disbelieve will be herded into Hell." (8:38). Islam is based on peace and justice; "We did not send you except as mercy to humankind. " (21:107). Thus, God has sent Muhammad to convey the Quran as mercy to the humankind NOT to terrorize, fight, enslave, or commit injustices against the humankind. Yet, caliphs/rulers committed crimes of aggressions, violence, terror, grave injustices, and enslavement, and imams and scholars of the Muhammadans created and forged legislations for such crimes, based on the Arab conquests that were fighting for the sake of devils, a topic which is tackled exhaustively in our book (published in Arabic and in English on our website) titled "The Unspoken-of History of the Pre-Umayyad 'Righteous' Caliphs".  We are in the book you are reading now will discuss at length the topic of slaves in the Quranic sharia legislations deliberately ignored and overlooked by imams and scholars of the Sunnite religion and its Sunnite sharia legislations.      

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: I agree to the views expressed in this article but I have a comment and a question: about 9:5, you have mentioned before in other articles that polytheists used to perform prayers but did not observe piety entailed by it, as would do any devout pious righteous Muslim, but in 9:11, we read that if polytheists stop aggression and pay zakat and perform prayers faithfully, they would be brethren in faith, despite their being polytheists, when they adhere to peace. We know that the Quranic Chapter 9 is titled ''Repentance'' and that it was revealed as per traditional views of order as no. 113 and was followed by the Quranic Chapter 110, titled "Victory", ordered in revelation as no. 114, with 110:2, predicting victory upon entering Mecca. I think that such verses might indicate Islamization by force! I am presupposing that the Quranic Chapter 9 was revealed before entering Mecca. What do you personally think, Dr. Mansour? Now, as for my comment on slaves owned by one's right hand, I have read once in previous articles and comments on this website that ''owned'' is a verb in the past form in the Quranic text, indicating something in the past before the Quranic revelation, and hence, some people think that this is an indication that the Quran urges believers to stop owning slaves to prepare for abolishment of such practice of slavery; such view is supported by 8:67 and 47:4, which are verses that indicate no permission of capturing or keeping POWs, as enslavement is rendered impossible when believers were not allowed to capture captives or POWs; what do you think, Dr. Mansour?         

2- Dalya Samy: I think that that the topic of slaves in the Quranic text is misunderstood by most Muslims and non-Muslims alike because or terrorist actions, past and present, as terrorists committed the crimes of enslavement, violence, and rape. I hope God will help you, Dr. Mansour, to explain to us the Quranic Truth concerning this thorny issue of slaves, and we are waiting for the rest of articles on that subject.  

3- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all of you, our beloved fellow Quranists, and we implore God to aid us to continue our intellectual endeavors. As for the question related to the verses 9:5 and 9:11, we have answered it a lot in previous articles and in a televised program episode, but we will write about it a separate coming article. Briefly, we stress here that in Islam (the Quran alone), there is no such notion as killing POWs, as we will discuss in detail in a coming research that will criticize the false biography of Ibn Ishaq about Prophet Muhammad and refuting its falsehood of Muhammad's murdering POWs. Usually, in Arab conquests and in wars following that era even when 'Muslims' fought one another, ordinary POWs and captives were killed, while sparing captured leaders to gain ransom money or to make them cards to negotiate anything. As for captured civilians like women and children, they were enslaved and sold or distributed as slaves in most cases. Likewise, such enslavement of civilians was a custom in raids in the pre-Islamic period in Arabia, a custom stopped by the advent of Islam that urged peaceful behavior and people complied to demeanor of non-violence. But once Prophet Muhammad died, enslavement of captured women and children retuned with a vengeance in the wars of caliph Abou Bakr, as per historical accounts. Within the crime of Arab conquests, enslavement gained momentums, as one of the targets of conquerors was to capture beautiful women as part of spoils of wars. Naturally, we gain much benefit from all your questions and comments that enrich our topic here; as usually, we begin an article that will turn into a series of article grouped in a book form later on because of questions we receive that urge us to explore the topic further within many angles. This is a result of your following an questions; many God reward all of you. We note here that what we are writing chiefly expresses our points of view of which we bear responsibility before Almighty God; He knows we are trying hard to verify the truth as much as we can; and if sometimes we err, we ask His pardon and mercy.       

4- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I thank Dr. Mansour for showing us how God in the Quran is willfully and misunderstood when His verses are viewed unfairly. We know from 4:11-112 that God will punish sinners and criminals who frame innocent ones by blaming them for sins and crimes they never did, then what about criminals who spread corruption on earth, raid, steal, rob, murder, and enslave using God's religion as a cover for such heinous acts by ascribing to God sharia legislations fabricated by men and are never part of the Quran! This is grave injustice against God, prophets, and all human beings! God is the Just One who will make the unjust ones suffer in the Hereafter, when in the Last Day their apologies will be of no avail to them. All Quranists must side with God the Dominant and the Just; for His Mercy is powerful and his Power is merciful, and we must not side with the unjust, powerful people as God is more Powerful and Just. All criminals and sinners will realize in vain after it is too late that they were wrong; see 26:97-101 , and remember that God says nothing but the Truth.   

5- Muhammad Al-Sharbaty: I have pondered and reflected a lot upon the verse 9:5, and I would like to share my impressions with readers and I hope Dr. Mansour will correct me if I get this wrong. I am inclined to think that the intended meaning of 9:5 is that if captives repented and resorted to peace and listened to God's word, they must be set free, as POWs remained in captivity until wars came to an end as per 47:4, a verse indicating that captives must be released as an act of goodness or to be exchanged with captives taken by the enemies, after wars would end to avoid further aggressions. Hence, Muslims  can make an exception in case a captive resorted to peace and surrendered, and this captive will remain loyal and grateful to Muslims who released him before wars would end.      

6- Shorouk Al-Rakhawy: I tend to think that of course, we are never to care who converts or gets out of the belief in the Quran; but we must care to defend the image of Islam and to correct views of non-Muslims regarding it. This ex-Sunnite European man is deceiving viewers by stressing the falsehood that sources of Islam is books authored by ancient and contemporary Sunnite scholars. This falsehood must be refuted as the only source of Islam is the Quran alone, and not any other books authored by persons who claim to talk in the name of Islam. This European man viewed the Quran within books of interpretations that contain faulty views regarding all verses, and the ancient interpretations have little reference to the real meanings of the Quranic verses, especially the verse in question about slaves. We, Quranists, must at least explain and elucidate the right ideas, notions, and interpretations of Quranic verses to restore the rightful images of the great Islam; yet, Quranism does not spread, whereas Sunnite and Shiite views on the Quran spread and dominate, causing people to forsake Islam or to convert to Wahabism, which is disguised as Islam. I am waiting impatiently for the rest of the series of articles as it will surely contain pieces of information on that important subject that every Muslim should know.  

Terminology of Male and Female Slaves between God's Sharia Laws and Legislations of Muslims

  The crime of Arab conquests resulted in many negative things that included enslavement, and at that time, the earthly, man-made, fabricated religions of 'Muslims', whom we call the Muhammadans instead, began to be take form. Of course, the Sunnite religion of injustice and tyranny has specialized in creating legislations to justify what occurred in real-life within the caliphate empire headed by the Qorayish tribesmen: the pre-Umayyad caliphs, the Umayyad caliphs, and then the Abbasid caliphs. The Sunnite legislations, past and present, overlook and reject the Quran entirely, and they have their own coined terminology instead. Hence, we must differentiate between Quranic sharia terminology regarding male and female slaves and the terminology of the Sunnite sharia that has nothing to do with the Quran at all. To make this differentiation clear, we note these points below.

1- The Quranic text never mentions the terms ''slaves'' and ''enslavement''; rather, such terms dominate the culture, writings, and the historical accounts of the Muhammadans in many eras as well as their books of theology and ''fiqh'' (i.e., religious jurisprudence).

2- The Muhammadans have used Quranic terminologies by ascribing to them different meanings which have nothing to do with the real Quranic meanings or semantic levels. A flagrant example is the terms ''jariya'' and ''jawary", which means in the books of the Sunnite Muhammadans ''a female slave'' and ''female slaves'', respectively. Both terms denote different meanings in the Quran: both are derived from the Arabic verb "jara", which means: to run, to move fast. The terms derived from this Arabic verb in the Quranic text mean different things. One level of meaning is ships moving in the sea (the Arabic term is between brackets in the following verses): "And of His signs are the ships (i.e., jawary) sailing the sea like flags." (42:32). "His are the ships(i.e., jawary), raised above the sea like landmarks." (55:24). "When the waters overflowed, We carried you in the ship (i.e., jariya)." (69:11). Another level of meaning is running water, in describing water springs in Paradise: "In it is a flowing (i.e., jariya) spring" (88:12).  Another level of meaning is a type of stars sweeping and moving in outer space that are probably black holes vacuuming and engulfing other stars and space bodies: "We swear by the stars that are running (i.e., jawary) and sweeping." (81:15-16). This is a great major scientific fact which is mentioned in the Quran, revealed to Muhammad 14 centuries ago.     

3- It is noteworthy that the ancient imams, theologians, and scholars of the Muhammadans deliberately overlooked and ignored the Quranic term for female slaves: "fatayat", to whom men can get married if they cannot marry free women: "If any of you lack the means to marry free believing women, he may marry one of the believing female slaves(i.e., fatayat)…" (4:25). God says the following verse about not punishing female slaves "fatayat" when they were forced to be sex workers: "…And do not compel your slave-girls (i.e., fatayat) to prostitution, seeking the materials of this life, if they desire to remain chaste. Should anyone compel them - after their compulsion, God is Forgiving and Merciful." (24:33). The term ''fatayat'' in the sense of female slaves is never used at all in all Arabic literature or books of fiqh in all eras.

4- The ancient imams, theologians, and scholars of the Muhammadans have used the Quranic terms ''abd'' and its plural form ''abeed" to denote slave and slaves, but in the Quran, both terms have some additional very different meanings; we note the following points below.

4/1: One of the meanings of the term ''abd'' in the Quran is ''a male slave'' in the following verse: "O you who believe! Retaliation for the murdered is ordained upon you: the free for the free, the slave (i.e., abd) for the slave…" (2:178). In the following verse, the term ''abd'' means ''a male slave'' and the term "amah" means ''a female slave": "Do not marry female polytheists unless they have believed. A believing female slave (i.e., amah) is better than a polytheistic one, even if you like her. And do not marry male polytheists, unless they have believed. A believing male slave is better than a polytheistic one, even if you like him…" (2:221).

4/2: God uses in the Quran the term ''abd'' in the sense of "the obedient servant of God" to praise some prophets. "The descendants of those We carried with Noah. He was an appreciative servant (i.e., abd)." (17:3). "And We have given Solomon to David, an excellent servant (i.e., abd)." (38:30).

4/3: God uses the plural terms ''abeed'' (its literal meaning is 'slaves') and its synonymous variant ''ibad'' to denote all humanity at large. "…God wants no injustice for the servants (i.e., ibad)." (40:31)."…and We are not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (50:29)."…Your Lord is not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (41:46)."…and because God is not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (22:10). "…and because God is not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (8:51). "…and because God is not unjust towards the servants (i.e., abeed)." (3:182). We have mentioned these verses to assert another fact as well: In God's religion, all types of injustices are prohibited, and since enslavement is one of the worst types of injustices committed by human beings to other inflicted human beings, it is prohibited in Islam; we are never to forget that God is Kind toward His human creatures: "…God is kind towards the servants (i.e., ibad)." (2:207). "…God is Kind towards the servants (i.e., ibad)." (3:30).

4/4: The difference between the above terms is the ownership type; the terms ''abd'' and ''amah'' to mean male slave and female slave, respectively, come in the Quranic text with possessive pronouns that refer to human owners. Let us quote this verse to exemplify this: "And wed the singles among you, and those who are fit among your servants and maids…" (24:32). As for the terms ''ibad'' and ''abeed'', referring to humans in general or prophets in particular, we see them as owned by God himself; this indicates  complete equality among human beings (free male and female persons, male and female slaves, and all prophets) as being owned by God. The true believers are the servants of the Dominant God must obey His Word: the Quran, and to worship Him alone. In obeying God's Word and in acts of worship, there is no difference between free persons and slaves; all believers must perform prayers, fast during Ramadan, pay zakat alms, perform pilgrimage, and remain pious as per divine sharia laws in the Quran. All human beings will be brought to the Last Day individually, each like an obedient servant or ''abd'', with absolute equality, without differences among any creature, angel Gabriel, Jesus, Muhammad, Moses, Moses' Pharaoh, or even Spartacus: "There is none in the heavens and the earth but will come to God the Dominant as a servant (i.e., abd). He has enumerated them and counted them one by one, and each one of them will come to Him on the Day of Resurrection alone." (19:93-95).    

4/5: God asserts His ownership of prophets by using the term ''abd'' often along with possessive pronouns. "Before them the people of Noah disbelieved. They rejected Our servant (i.e., abd)…" (54:9). "And mention Our servant (i.e., abd) Job, when he called out to his Lord…" (38:41). "…We found him patient. What an excellent servant! (i.e., abd)…" (38:44). "A mention of the mercy of your Lord towards His servant (i.e., abd) Zechariah." (19:2). "Glory to Him who journeyed His servant (i.e., abd) by night…" (17:1). "…and mention Our servant (i.e., abd) David…" (38:17). "…provided you believe in God and in what We revealed to Our servant (i.e., abd)…" (6:41). "And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a chapter like these…" (2:23).

4/6: God asserts His ownership of all humanity, free ones and slaves, by the term ''ibad'' (i.e., literally, slaves) in addition to the possessive pronouns. "And when My servants (i.e., ibad) ask you about Us, We are near…" (2:186). "Say, "Who forbade God's finery which He has produced for His servants (i.e., ibad)…" (7:32). "Do they not know that God accepts the repentance of His servants (i.e., ibad)…" (9:104). "…And if He wants good for you, none can repel His grace. He makes it reach whomever He wills of His servants (i.e., ibad)…"  (10:107).

5- Having shown the discrepancy in terminologies of the Sunnite legislation/sharia and the Quranic sharia/legislation terminology, we show in the next section the differences between the legislations of the Muhammadans regarding slaves and the Quranic legislations concerning the same issue.

Slaves in the Islamic Quranic sharia legislations:

 Of course, we mean one thing by the term ''Islamic legislation or sharia'': the Quranic one as the divine revelation and only source of Islam. This is to be distinguished from legislations of the Muhammadans in their earthly, man-made, fabricated religions. The Sunnite legislation differs totally from the Quranic one, and the same applies to legislative purposes, rules, laws, prohibitions, and other details wen the Sunnite creed is compared to Islam: the Quran alone. We remind readers here that the legislative purposes in the Quran is more important than the legislative rules, which in their turn control Quranic prohibitions, commands, and other details, as definitive verses and similar verses assert one another in a harmonious way.

The Quranic legislative purpose within the issue of slaves:

1- Justice is one of the higher values and the supreme legislative purposes in the Islamic/Quranic sharia. All celestial messages are sent by God to establish justice: "We sent Our messengers with the clear proofs, and We sent down with them the Book and the Balance, that humanity may uphold justice…" (57:25), and charity is placed above justice in the Quran: "God commands justice, charity, and goodness as well as generosity towards relatives. And He forbids immorality, and injustice, and oppression. He advises you, so that you may take heed." (16:90).

2- All legislative rules, commands, and details in the Quran submits to the higher value of justice, especially when we consider that God in the Quran stresses the prohibition of injustice and that injustice is linked in the Quranic text to disbelief within hundreds of verses.

3- Concerning the topic of slaves, we discern that justice and charity together are the legislative purposes, and consequently, we conclude that enslavement is prohibited in the first place and is to be nipped in the bud from the very beginning, because it is a grave injustice. We remind readers of the following verses: "…God wants no injustice for the servants (i.e., ibad)." (40:31)."…and We are not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (50:29)."…Your Lord is not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (41:46)."…and because God is not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (22:10)."…and because God is not unjust to the servants (i.e., abeed)." (8:51). "…and because God is not unjust towards the servants (i.e., abeed)." (3:182).  

4- Consequently, the peaceful Islamic country must stop slavery and enslavement in the first place, as such a country must be based on justice and human rights; we do believe that enslavement is surely prohibited in Islam. Yet, as such a country that applies Quranism cannot possibly impose its Quranic sharia on other countries that have male and female slaves, it is expected that this Islamic country might witness brought slaves into it by buying or granting them to citizens. We know quite well that buying and selling is based on mutual consent in Islam. Thus, it is not prohibited to buy slaves who are already enslaved, and it is not prohibited to bring bought slaves into such Islamic country. The reason: being brought to it will actually help to free them and to give them their rights, when Quranic sharia laws are applied in dealing with such slaves brought from outside the Islamic country.    

The Quranic legislative purpose within the issue of freeing brought slaves:  

  There are varied cases imposed by God to free brought male and female slaves bought by male and female believers. These cases are detailed below.

Atonement for sins:

1- Within crimes of manslaughter, a believer who accidentally cause the death of another believer must free a believer slave, among other atonement acts: "Never should a believer kill another believer, unless by error. Anyone who kills a believer by error must set free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the victim's family, unless they remit it as charity. If the victim belonged to a people who are hostile to you, but is a believer, then the compensation is to free a believing slave. If he belonged to a people with whom you have a treaty, then compensation should be handed over to his family, and a believing slave set free. Anyone who lacks the means must fast for two consecutive months, by way of repentance to God. God is All-Knowing, Most Wise." (2:92). 

2- Within reneging on one's oaths done by swearing to God to do a certain act, which is a mistake that hardly anyone avoids, one is encouraged to free a slave as an act of atonement, among other options: "God does not hold you accountable for your unintended oaths, but He holds you accountable for your binding oaths. The atonement for it is by feeding ten needy people from the average of what you feed your families, or by clothing them, or by freeing a slave. Anyone who lacks the means shall fast for three days. That is the atonement for breaking your oaths when you have sworn them. So keep your oaths. Thus God makes clear His Revelations to you, that you may be grateful." (5:89).

3- Freeing a slave is an act of atonement for estranging one's wife, i.e., by declaring solemnly that one's wife is no longer as such, which is an act akin to divorce "Those who estrange their wives by equating them with their mothers, then go back on what they said, must set free a slave before they may touch one another. To this you are exhorted, and God is well aware of what you do. But whoever cannot find the means must fast for two consecutive months before they may touch one another. And if he is unable, then the feeding of sixty needy people. This, in order that you affirm your faith in God and His Messenger. These are the ordinances of God. The unbelievers will have a painful punishment." (58:3-4)

Freeing slaves as a good deed rewarded by God:

1- True pious and righteous believers are urged in the Quran to free slaves: "the freeing of a slave, or feeding on a day of hunger an orphan or  near kin or a destitute in distress" (90:13-16). "Righteousness does not consist of turning your faces towards the East and the West. But righteous is he who believes in God, and the Last Day, and the angels, and the Scripture, and the prophets. Who gives money, though dear, to near relatives, and orphans, and the needy, and the homeless, and the beggars, and for the freeing of slaves; those who perform the prayers, and pay the obligatory charity, and fulfill their promise when they promise, and patiently persevere in the face of persecution, hardship, and in the time of conflict. These are the sincere; these are the pious." (2:177).

2- Freeing of slaves is part of expenditures of charity/zakat money within an Islamic country that applies Quran: "Charities are for the poor, and the destitute, and those who administer them, and for reconciling hearts, and for freeing slaves, and for those in debt, and in the path of God, and for the traveler in need-an obligation from God. God is All-Knowing, Most Wise." (9:60).

3- Believers are urged in the Quran to draw contracts with their slaves to free them in return for money or works done within a certain period, and in that case, the believers must help slaves to free themselves and fulfill the conditions stipulated in the contract: "…If any of your slaves wish to be freed, grant them their wish upon a contract, if you recognize some good in them. And give them of God's wealth which he has given you…" (24:33).

The Quranic legislative rule in dealing charitably with brought slaves:

1- Acting generously, charitably, and kindly toward slaves is among Quranic commands to act in the same way toward relatives, parents, etc. "…and be good to the parents, and the relatives, and the orphans, and the poor, and the neighbor next door, and the distant neighbor, and the close associate, and the traveler, and your slaves…" (4:36).

2-Being chartable and kind toward one's slaves in one's household include treating them like members of the household as they are to be provided for by the owners in every respect, and despite the fact that God made earnings of people differ from one person to the other, but owners of slaves must spend money on them as they spend on any other household members of the family; otherwise, not spending enough on slaves is a grave sin: "God has favored some of you over others in livelihood. Those who are favored should share their earnings with their slaves, to the extent of making them partners in it. If otherwise, will they then renounce God's blessings?" (16:71).

3- Within social legislations of etiquette and social mores, within  households, slaves are treated as equal household members; see 24:32 and 24:58.

Getting married to one's slave:

1- When a female owner marries her male slave and when  male owner marries his female slave, this is another Quranic way to free slaves urged in the Quranic text, with God's promise to reward such couple, within Quranic encouragement to marry the poor, the widows, the divorced ones, and slaves: "And wed the widows among you, and those who are fit among your slaves and maids. If they are poor, God will enrich them from His bounty. God is All-Encompassing, All-Knowing." (24:32)

2- Hence, a woman can get married to her male slave and a man can get married to his female slave/maid. God says the following about features and traits of real pious believers: "Those who safeguard their chastity, except from their spouses and their slaves…" (23:5-6). These verses refer to the fact that one can get married to one's slave, of the opposite sex, and NOT to have sex with slaves without marriage as others presume when reading these verses. This meaning is repeated in 70:29-30. 

3- When a man desires to marry his female slave/maid, she has to receive her dowry as in the case of marrying free women, as justice requires and so do social mores about fairness and equality. The Quran entails this as we read in the following verse: "If any of you lack the means to marry free believing women, he may marry one of the believing maids. God is well aware of your faith. You are from one another. Marry them with the permission of their guardians, and give them their dowry fairly…" (4:25). The Quran has allowed an exception once to Prophet Muhammad to marry without paying a dowry, but his was a special legislation for him that ended soon enough in the same following verse, as we understand that paying a dowry is a must by men to women, free ones or maids/female slaves, before getting married to them: "O Prophet! We have permitted to you your wives to whom you have given their dowries…and a believing woman who has offered herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desires to marry her, exclusively for you, and not for the believers…" (33:50).

4- The Quran mentions clearly that if one' wife who was a former female slave committed adultery, she will be inflicted with half of the punishment of flogging: "…When they are married, if they commit adultery, their punishment shall be half that of free women…" (4:25). But this punishment is not applied when this woman, who was a former slave, is forced into prostitution; see 24:33.   

5- A female slave who is brought into an Islamic country might have been married in her former life and such marriage is dissolved by separation indeed; Muslims within her new location bear no guilt in this, of course, but in such cases as these,  such a female slave can remarry in her new society that ensures her rights within justice and fairness, if she is not freed by act of goodness by individuals or by the country or government itself. In that context, we understand God's orders in the Quran in urging male Muslims marrying their female slaves.

6- This female slave when becomes one's wife, she has all rights of free married women: justice, fairness, equality, charity, being spent on, housing, rights and dues after divorce, etc. except in dividing a man's time between his free wife and his former slave wife, while the Quran positively asserting the impossibility of achieving complete injustice in cases of polygamy; see 4:3, 4:19, and 4:129-130.

COMMENTS:

1- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I want to be permitted to object, Dear Dr. Mansour, to the point No. 4 in the section titled "The Quranic legislative purpose within the issue of slaves". I have learned from you, Dr. Mansour, that the great Islamic Quranic sharia fits all eras and locations, but as regarding point No. 4, slavery and enslavement are out of the question; they are not to exist as the UN considers trading in humans and enslavement as crimes, which are committed by ISIS terrorists in Iraq. I have learned from you, Dr. Mansour, that as per the Quran, no one is to prohibit anything unless its prohibition is mentioned in the Quran; hence, I see your point in the fact that any Islamic country should not prohibit buying slaves or impose abolishment of slavery on other countries. Yet, as for applying this, such a scenario is impossible to be enacted due to many obstacles. I have learned from you, Dr. Mansour, that the first-world countries are nearer to Islam in their application of justice, but let us take the USA as an example. If the USA would buy slaves from ISIS to free them, this will certainly encourage ISIS terrorists to enslave more women to engage in a lucrative business. This is unthinkable in the age of human rights and UN international charters and agreements that are against trading in human beings. Hence, how come an Islamic country would buy slaves to free them?! This is akin to opening markets for enslavers to commit their crime more and more. Of course, one can hardly expect ISIS to free slaves by giving them for free to the USA or any other country! Hence, your proposed view to buy slaves to free them is impossible to apply in our age. Such lucrative business will encourage more enslavement of innocent ones to get more money! Such money will make ISIS terrorists buy more weapons and arms to massacre and terrorize people. No respectable country and a UN member would agree to buy slaves captured by ISIS. Of course, I agree to the fact that the Quranic legislation regarding slaves solve a problem found in the 7^th century and beyond, but there should be no slavery and enslavement in the 21^st century! Only the criminal ISIS terrorists alone enslave women and children now. Please accept my regards, Dr. Mansour.          

2- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I would like to be permitted to add a final point here to the above comment of mine, dear Dr. Mansour.  To prove that your proposed view is non-applicable in our modern age, I remind you that you have written here in the above section that freeing slaves is a good deed to attain piety and get nearer to God and to atone and expatiate sins, but you forget that there are no slaves market now! This legislation cannot be applied in our modern era! Slaves in the proper sense of the term are not found except with ISIS terrorists. We are to apply laws of human beings and the constitutions endorsed by direct democracy as you, Dr. Mansour, have told us, as this is the essence of Islam as per the Yathreb city-state ruled by Prophet Muhammad. At that time in the 7^th century, slavery was there, but now, in the 21^st century, if one buys a slave from ISIS in Syria or Iraq and returns home, this person will be arrested, accused of trading in human beings. Hence, freeing slaves cannot be applied as expatiation of sins in the 21^st century. Would anyone dare to seek to buy a slave from ISIS to atone for one's sins?! I have the gravest doubts on that subject! Sorry for taking much of your time, Dr. Mansour, and God bless you! 

3- Nihad Haddad: I have a question that I pose before you, Dr. Mansour. I appreciate your kindness and your love for our religion, but I want to be permitted to object to the above section! I am never convinced with the notion of marrying a female slave who are married before being enslaved! If anyone has enslaved the beautiful wife of your son, Dr. Mansour, would you accept her being married to someone else because she is separated by force from your son?! This is very humiliating to any respectable women! I cannot believe that you have suggested such a notion! Is this notion part of our sharia?! But I wholeheartedly agree on prohibiting all types of slavery that exist now, of course. What about if the enslaved woman loves her husband and hates her male owner that wants to marry her?! Is there any logic in forcing her to re-marry?! This has nothing to do with justice and human dignity as well as human rights and women's rights!  Please accept my regards for your person.

4- Ben Levante: I was shocked, Dr. Mansour, when I read your views of bringing slaves into one's country by buying them since buying and selling is based on mutual consent in Islam. I can hardly imagine that there is a difference between enslavement and buying slaves, unless one intends to free them. I understand that there must have been a need to abolish enslavement gradually so as not to allow of the injustice of owners losing their money when they bought slaves when that was permissible in the 7^th century, and thus gradual abolishment of certain laws is required. I deduce from 33:50 and 2:194 that if an enemy allows itself to enslave Muslims, Muslims would have the right to enslave persons of that enemy; is this right? Thank you!  

5- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We urge our beloved fellow Quranists to have patience; more articles on the subject are on the way to see how our modern age can apply sharia legislations regarding slaves. We remind you that marriage is based on mutual consent between adults; in the case of a female slave who are married, her marriage comes to an end because she is forcibly separated from her husband, and she has of course the right to change her status into ''single'' or to remain declaring herself as a married woman. Of course, she would remarry only if she desires to, and her consent is a must. All rules and legislations, when applied, must submit to the higher value in Islam: justice and the prohibition of injustice. God never wants injustice to human beings. 

6- Muhammad Al-Sharbaty: I thank Dr. Mansour for this article, but I also have some questions. In 23:6, why is there a differentiation or a distinction between wives and former-slaves wives? The latter have become free wives as well, right? Can a man marry a free woman and a female slave simultaneously? As for POWs, in defensive wars of course, how they are to be treated if they include slaves and free men of the enemy's side? Are captured slaves to be returned to their owners/masters and to suffer the hell/yoke of slavery?! Are they to be freed? Are they to be considered like spoils of war?! 

7- Ahmed Drami: Dr. Mansour, I appreciate your excellent analysis here, and I think that God's sharia laws have not been applied in the 7^th century retroactively, as we deduce from matters worse than owning slaves like marrying one's father's widow or marrying two sisters simultaneously; see 4:22-23. Hence, the same applies to owning slaves; we may safely say that God prohibits procuring and owning new slaves from now on (during Muhammad's lifetime) and not retroactively before the advent of Islam, and this is why God has urged people to marry their slaves to restore their lost dignity. But this applies to slaves owned by Arabs before the revelation of the Quran, while they were not to enslave or buy more slaves unless to free them or to marry them. Marrying them is like freeing them, in my opinion, as steps to abolish slavery. But not to be fair in dividing one's time among wives who were former slaves and confining the notion to free women/wives is bewildering me; please, Dr. Mansour, this needs more explanation. How do we find proof of such view in the Quran? Thank you!   

8- Othman Ali: This is indeed an important topic about slaves that provokes important comments from readers among our fellow Quranists. We have the right to take pride in Dr. Mansour, the great Islamic thinker, and we can take pride in the fact that we live in the same era with him, discuss his ideas, and pose questions to him about them within elevated calm discussion. This proves that Quranists are not a group of blind followers to a leader and they are not a Sufi order with adepts and a sheikh who dominates their minds and they have no right to question such Sufi sheikh. Indeed, this Quranism website is a refined, unique school of thought centered around the Noble Quran, with researchers, writers, and commenters who think innovatively to understand and deduce Quranic facts and tenets and share their ideas with one another. As regarding the topic of slaves itself, I have understood from the above section/article that these are the views of Dr. Mansour in case slavery is returned in our contemporary age. Dr. Mansour wants to hammer two ideas home, in my opinion: 1) enslavement and slavery are prohibited now in what should be an Islamic country, and 2) if female and male persons were enslaved elsewhere, what would be better for them? To remain slaves who are denied justice, rights, and charity or to be brought in an Islamic country to enjoy justice, rights, and charity until freed one day? Hence, this is clearly not a call for enslavement or a revival of Middle-Ages slavery; rather, this is a call urging to buy slaves to free them (in case there are slaves in our modern world) and to bring them from non-Islamic countries to free them, until the globe is free from the crime of slavery. Of course, slavery and enslavement are prohibited in the truly Islamic country, and I think Islam urges the prohibition of enslavement centuries before Abraham Lincoln. As slavery is sadly revived by ISIS terrorists, Islamic governments and military armies must fight such terrorists to stop their menace and to free enslaved people who are sold by ISIS terrorists. All Muslim rich persons, especially presidents, kings, businessmen, billionaires, etc., must raise a fund to ransom such captives or POWs from their oppressors, tyrants, and terrorists. Such freed captives were not slaves in the first place, of course; they were victims of the worst crime ever, and these ransoms are by no means an enticement to encourage ISIS terrorists and other criminals to enslave other women to sell them! Military operations must be done to fight ISIS and to stop such a threat.  

9- Othman Ali: To continue my point, I think that ransoming hostages, POWs, or slaves to free them is an Islamic duty applied and performed by the international community in case this is required; I heard about a Jewish Iraqi billionaire who bought Iraqi women from ISIS and helped them to immigrate to a European country. This is an Islamic great deed. I want to sum up my viewpoints in the following brief points: 1) enslavement is, or should be, prohibited in a given Islamic country, 2) ISIS terrorists and their likes must be fought militarily to free captives, 3) a fund must be raised to ransom such captives when necessary, 4) once freed, they are no longer treated as female and male slaves, but as free persons as they used to be before being captured, 5) the Islamic country must care and provide for them and return them to their homelands once liberated from ISIS terrorists or to allow them to work and live in safety, 6) no freed female captives are to marry except by her own free will, treated within laws as free women and not as former slaves, especially if their former husbands are lost, and 7) a given Islamic country must act charitably toward freed captives and not to treat them as former slaves.  

10- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I feel bound to express my admiration of the comment written by Ahmed Drami, and I feel he expresses my own views as well; the Yathreb city-state had to deal with the problem of slavery within the conditions prevalent at the time, as sudden abolishment was not possible; if it had not been for the crime of Arab conquests, slavery would have been abolished centuries ago in Arabia and the Middle East due to the Quranic teachings. Of course, it was a good example to strike as related to 4:22-23, as Islam in the Quran tackles the prohibition of bad habits prevalent in former centuries before the advent of Islam. Sadly, if the early Muslims would have adhered to the Quranic teachings about slaves, enslavement would have been abolished by now, and we would not have to face ISIS terrorists and criminals who revived such grave injustice of enslavement. Thank you all!

11- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I wholeheartedly agree with the comment by Othman Ali; his words sound like the ones of a perfect legislator and his jargon. I like your summing up the whole matter in such brief, neat points. Such points fit for the UN and other bodies. I feel that we are not to encourage ISIS terrorists to enslave more people if we would buy captives to free them. I agree that we are very lucky to be contemporary with the erudite, knowledgeable Dr. Mansour and discuss religion with him, to disagree or to agree with some of his views, and he is patient enough and welcoming all of us and our different views. Other scholars would readily admonish me to stop discussion and questioning as if I committed a sin by posing a question or raising a query! 

12- Othman Ali: I thank Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti, the respectable man, for his compliments to me. God bless him.

13- Dalya Samy: Thank you, Dr. Mansour, for your exhaustive explanations and thought-provoking thoughts drawn from the Quranic verses. But I feel bound to say that I agree with Nihad Haddad that it is strange that a married female captive would re-marry even if she loves her husband whom she knows nothing of his whereabouts. But I do agree with Dr. Mansour that of course, marriage is based on mutual consent of both parties. I thank Othman Ali and Ahmed Drami very much for their valuable comments. Finally, I agree that enslavement and slavery are prohibited now as per the higher Quranic legislative purpose and value: justice. My question is as follows: would a female captive agree to marry her captor, regardless of his religion?! Or her capture is an aggressor to whom she must not get married at all?  

14- Othman Ali: I thank Dalya Samy for her comment and valuable question. God bless her.

15- Ahmed Drami: I thank Dr. Mansour very much for his great analysis of the topic. I stress that as in the cases of prohibition of marrying one's father's widow and the sister of one's wife, as long as one's wife is alive, in 4:22-23 except for cases in the past before the advent of Islam, in owning slaves, one is not to own and buy them unless to free or to marry them. I feel that the Quranic verses do not urge the 7^th century Muslims to free all their slaves at once, but prohibit them to own and buy more unless to free or marry them legally. But I would like that Dr. Mansour would explain further about justice among one's wives as different from justice among one's former female slaves married to one along with his wives. I find this hard to understand.

16- Mehdi Malik: I want to express my deep admiration of the above article and its author, Dr. Mansour, who always raises thought-provoking controversial issues to discuss with readers. Quranists are the only people who actually can clear the name of Islam and to clean its tarnished image from centuries-old falsehoods of Salafists and their likes. Of course, I agree that the 7^th century Arab conquests were a crime that has nothing to do with Islam, as Arabs betrayed Prophet Muhammad after his death and forsook Islam by committing such crime, in order to establish an Arab empire headed by the Qorayish tribesmen. They had to justify their crimes in their tomes, volumes, and books of fiqh scribed falsely and forcibly to Islam. When we compare immorality and moral degeneration of the West now to the Arab Middle East immorality and moral degeneration now, we see that the West is better as Western people have for centuries worked on liberation and freeing both people and religions as well from all sorts of exploitation, while history of the Muhammadans reflect a very bad distorted image about Islam.       

17- Maktab Hasoob: The problem of slavery and enslavement before the industrial revolution went on within cheap hands or working force that receive little wages; slavery ended actually when the age of the machine began, and Prophet Muhammad could not possibly have ended slavery at once in his era of pre-industrialization; alternatives were not available at the time to abolish slavery once and for all. After the industrial revolution, all countries prohibit enslavement and slavery in their laws; ISIS terrorists must be punished for holding captives. I feel bound to say that slavery in the full historical sense of the word had ended forever, but it has taken other forms that persist until now all over the world within varying degrees.

18- Maktab Hasoob: Of course, slavery is disgusting today as in ancient times, and it has been shrouded in shame and guilt, as the Middle Ages lacked notions of human rights and human dignity and the best means to protect people, but we have to bear in mind that attempts to abolish slavery in India and China in ancient times failed because there were no alternatives to replace slavery.

19- Maktab Hasoob: Another point is that it is NOT  a matter of mottoes like ''tit for tat'' and ''eye for an eye'' in wars that imposed on Muslims and non-Muslims to enslave others; rather, it is the need for slaves to use them in work and building civilizations that entailed wars and enslavement in ancient times. Thus, in modern times, people refuse enslavement and slavery in their old meaning as human values have changed.

20- Maktab Hasoob: I pose this question to Dr. Mansour: what is the difference in a man getting married to free women and in his marrying former female slaves owned by him or by other men?! What about the cases of a woman marrying her male slave?! Thank you in advance.

21- Ahmed Drami: I thank Dr. Mansour for his encouraging words to me. May God protect and preserve him, and we implore the Almighty to help all of us to show real Islam to the whole world and to aid us to live piously and die as true Muslims in terms of faith and behavior. 

22- Ahmed Drami: I thank Dalya Samy for her encouraging words to me. May God protect and preserve her, and we implore the Almighty to help all of us to show real Islam to the whole world and to aid us to live piously and die as true Muslims in terms of faith and behavior.

General Replies to Comments of our Fellow Quranists on the Last Article

Introduction:

1- We take pride, in the first place, in our fellow Quranists on our Quranism website, as they enrich what we write with their comments, discussions, and criticisms, and we feel very grateful to them too; they are applying one of the main rules of Islam: no mortal can ever claim to have the absolute truth, as all views of human beings are points of view that might be right or wrong. It is likely that when one adopts a certain view, one might change one's mind later on for one reason or the other. The opposite stance occurs in the case of the imams and clergymen of the earthly, man-made, fabricated religions who monopolize religious views and edicts and allow no one to contradict, discuss, or criticize them. In contrast, our fatwas (i.e., religious edicts) on our website of Quranism are open to question and comment. We hope by this that one day, all religious clergymen hierarchy or any ecclesiastical system be abolished within the Sunnites, Sufis, and Shiites. Within our very first article in the Cairo-based Egyptian newspaper Al-Akhbar , we called for our generation to be one of dialogue to allow our progeny to be the generation of choice. This article has been written more than 25 years ago, and we have re-published it here on our website – this call is still valid and continues to be applied on our website here. 

2- We take pride, in the second place, in the Quranist school of thought on our website; we do not remember all names of our fellow Quranists who are active commenters, but we note in particular: Othman Ali, Dalya Samy, Nihad Haddad, Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti, Saeed Ali, Osama Qifeisha, Muhammad Shaalan, Ben Levante, Aisha Hussein, Reda Amer, Shukry Al-Saki, Abdel-Rahman Ismael, Donya Al-Forat, Maktab Hasoob, Abdullah Amin, Marwa Ahmed Mustafa, Salah Eddine Karfa, Salah Amer Al-Najjar, Murad Al-Khouly, and Mehdi Malik, and this fine group is joined recently by Ahmed Drami, and we implore the Almighty to reward all of them for their contributions to the Quranism website.

3- We give in this section general replies to the comments under the last section, and more detailed replies will be followed in the coming section.

4- Actually, we have a personal story to share here about the topic of slaves; when we were  preparatory and secondary student in Azharite schools, we used to peruse fiqh books that contain too many details about slaves and enslavement. As an adolescent, we used to feel repulsed by what we read in such books, but our bewilderment would increase as such authors of books would quote the Quran. We used to feel that if slavery were endorsed and allowed in Islam, we would reject this faith (just as this ex-Sunnite European man of the YouTube video). But our deep faith in God, and in the fact that He sent His messenger Muhammad as a mercy to the humankind and the fact that God does not want injustices to the humankind, has driven us at the time to search for the truth in the Quran, a journey that has taken decades now in our endeavor to seek guidance until we reached the theory of Quranism as the true Islam. We remember that at the time, as an adolescent student, we felt indignant at this verse: "O Prophet! We have permitted to you your wives to whom you have given their dowries, and those female slaves you already have, as granted to you by God…" (33:50), as we used to consider it as clear evidence that Muhammad had female slaves of his own. Years later, we calmed down and searched more closely, scrutinizing and poring through history books, to discover that Muhammad did not own female slaves as spoils of any battle; rather, they were given to him as gifts. This means that the Islamic Yathreb city-state had no enslavement of any type, but this enslavement was practiced by others outside it. Cyrus, the roman governor of Egypt at the 7^th century, had sent an Egyptian female slave called Maria to Muhammad, who got married to her. There was nothing wrong in that, we suppose. She was a female slave in Egypt and her status changed into a free wife of a great prophet. We have pondered the following verse later on: "If you fear you cannot act fairly towards the orphans-then marry the women you like-two, or three, or four. But if you fear you will not be fair, then one, or female slaves you already have in your right hand. That makes it more likely that you avoid bias." (4:3). We have discerned that this verse allows polygamy, which was prevalent even before the advent of Islam, but the Quran restricts polygamy to make it confined to caring for orphans, to allow them to be brought up within a family; that is why the Quran urges getting married to widows, while stipulating fairness in dealing with one's wives and notifying us that total fairness is very hard to achieve: "You will not be able to treat women with equal fairness, no matter how much you desire it. But do not be so biased as to leave another suspended. If you make amends, and act righteously-God is Forgiving and Merciful.And if they separate, God will enrich each from His abundance. God is Bounteous and Wise." (4:129-130). This shows that the solution lies in men getting married to their female slaves; 3:4 asserts that men are to pay dowries to women they are going to marry, whether these women are free ones or slaves: "Give women their dowries graciously. But if they willingly forego some of it, then consume it with enjoyment and pleasure." (3:4). We began in 1977 to read the Quran in an objective, researching, scientific method, and we have ended up being accused of proselytizing a new religion in Egypt! In fact, we have been announcing the often-forgotten Quranic facts and tenets as the true Islam, as we have discovered that the Quran has been rejected and forsaken for 14 centuries! 

5- In the 1980s, we have written two articles about slaves in Islam, and we have begun an arduous task of poring through countless fiqh and hadiths books, copying endless lines with our pen – before the age of the internet – and such sheets written by us wait to be used in a book project like so many other book projects of ours. In 1995, the Cairo-based independent Rose Al-Youssef Magazine, in which we used to write weekly articles, commissioned us to write an article about ''what your right hand owned'', and we wrote it, and it was published on 6^th of March, 1995, titled "What Does the Expression ''What Your Right Hand Owned'' Mean? An Overview of Islam and Enslavement". This article was published on our website later on in two parts titled "Islam and Enslavement: An Introduction: What Your Right Hand Owned''. We have been distracted by other topics and had to stop momentarily exploring the subject further. Years later, we have received an avalanche of questions about slaves, and the series of articles on that topic are transformed into a full-fledged book, as usual, as you are reading it now. 

Firstly: an additional section about Islamic/Quranic sharia legislation about slaves:

 Of course, many Quranic verses we quote here are not analyzed by  us in detail, as we have given such analyses in other previous articles and books. The problem of some readers in our writings is that when we write, we build upon our accumulated previous writings, hoping our dear fellow Quranists have read our previous writings carefully, especially that Quranist topics are intertwined an interlaced. We feel sad that sometimes we have to repeat what we have written as a reminder to readers to read our previous writings that cover extensively the topic in question. For instance, we remind readers of our book titled "Judicial Courts between Islam and Muslims", especially CHAPTER III of PART I about legislations used by judges, which must include the right of a given Islamic country to write new laws like explanatory memos within the higher values and purposes of Quranic sharia legislation: justice, freedom, human dignity, and human rights. We remind readers of our book titled "The Seven Principles of the Real Islamic Sharia and How to Apply Them". Hence, the scope of innovative views and thinking is wide open for us and all of our fellow Quranists regarding slaves, and we give examples below.

1- We read in the Quran the following verse: "Charities are for the poor, and the destitute, and those who administer them, and for reconciling hearts, and for freeing slaves, and for those in debt, and in the path of God, and for the traveler in need-an obligation from God. God is All-Knowing, Most Wise." (9:60). This means that a given Islamic country is the one collecting charities, donations, or alms money by its employees who receive a salary for their efforts, and we know from 9:60 the categories that deserve such charity, as a religious duty ordained by God, that include freeing slaves. Of course, the application of this religious duty entails laws enacted to define poverty (the impoverished needy ones who lack food, medical treatment, housing, and clothes) as well as levels and categories of the impoverished ones in order to decide amounts and varieties of aid, as done by organizations of charity in the West countries and as done by some Islamic countries to spread peace. Hence, laws are made to specify quantities and qualities of needed aid and the channels and regulations to grant aid to those in need. Accordingly, we think that the responsibility of a given Islamic country in freeing slaves in 9:60 does NOT include waging wars against countries that allows slavery and enslavement  as a source of trade and money; the reason for that is simple: fighting in Islam is permissible ONLY in cases of self-defense, when an Islamic country is being militarily attacked. Hence, the application of 9:60 regarding freeing slaves means – in our opinion – to bring/buy slaves to free them. This entails laws applied within certain priorities: who is given the priority to be freed? The vital importance to free whole families to reunite their members, and the care for children and the ill ones after bringing them into the Islamic country. We must point out a number of important items regarding this issue:          

1/1: This is complete freeing of slaves.

1/2: Categories of those deserving charity in 9:60 do not include the specification of the religious affiliations; hence, these categories include Muslims and non-Muslims. This applies to freeing slaves as well. 

1/3: Of course, such legislations are made within a given democratic Islamic country within its parliament that issue laws for the benefit of people and for the general good.

2- Hence, it is possible within a given democratic Islamic country to issue laws and legislations based on justice and charity, which include freeing of slaves as means of atonement or penalties exacted on convicts. There are many crimes with unspecified worldly penalties in the Quran: like drinking wine, drug addictions, monopoly of goods, cheating in weighing goods, cheating in goods in terms of quality or quantity, forgery, fraud, swindling, confiscating money of orphans, etc., and a given democratic Islamic country has the right to issue laws to specify penalties (below the capital punishment) for such offenses. This is apart from crimes with specified penalties in the Quran: adultery, fornication, sexual slander, theft, attacking highways to rob travellers, and murder. In all cases, there is room for atonement and repentance; the repentance within one's heart is judged only by God, as He is the one to deem it sincere or not, to put the sinner in Hell or Paradise accordingly. What should be our concern here is the declared repentance before all society to stop punishment to be exacted on criminals. Thus, in that case, freeing slaves would be among the means of atonement and repentance.

3- Hence, a given Islamic country should issue laws based on charity and justice to encourage individuals to free slaves, based on 2:177, 24:33, and 90:13-16.

4- Accordingly, a given Islamic country bears responsibility toward the female slaves that must be freed, and caring for them includes marrying them to men, with their prior consent of course; let us ponder upon the following verse: "If any of you lack the means to marry free believing women, he may marry one of the believing female slaves that your right hand possesses. God is well aware of your faith. You are from one another. Marry them with the permission of their guardians…" (4:25). The word ''guardians" means either the relatives and family of the female slaves (if present) or the Islamic country that protects and cares for such female slaves after being freed, and such a country will deal with such former slaves fairly within the values of justice and charity.    

5- Hence, applying the Quranic sharia in 4:25 entails that this given Islamic country must be the guardian of such freed female slaves who lost their families and/or husbands by separation. Of course, the Islamic country must try first to reunite them with their families and/or husbands . Yet, sometimes this is not possible for various reasons. Freed female slaves might choose an be willing to marry a men who are to pay dowries, whether these men are former owners/masters of the freed female slaves or not, and the Islamic society must be their guardian and protector. This is expected and required from real believers who adhere to the following verse: "God commands justice, and goodness, and generosity towards relatives. And He forbids immorality, and injustice, and oppression. He advises you, so that you may take heed." (16:90).

Lastly:

1- Jesus was betrayed, denied, and forsaken by some of his companions, and he lived in a society that submitted to the Roman authorities. Muhammad lived in warring society of belligerent tribes that live off looting and raiding, having no qualms and sense of shame to raid and rob others or to be attacked and robbed by other raiders or to engage into years of war over silly, trivial reasons. Likewise, such Arabs at the time considered women as goods or spoils of war to be enslaved as tools of sexual gratification. The advent of Islam was amidst such dominant culture, which included the fact that the Qorayish tribe as the leader of all Arabia as it controls clergymen  around Kaaba Mosque overseeing pilgrimage. Thus, if disciples of Jesus betrayed turned against him after his death as per their dominant culture without raising arms or weapons, the Arabs betrayed Muhammad after his death as well, and betrayed Islam, but this time using their armies and weapons as per their dominant culture of belligerence as well; Arabs knew nothing but the word to settle all disputes. The Yathreb city-state was a utopia amidst Arabian deserts. The Quran attracted Arabs to convert to Islam because of its eloquent style, and entered into peace in groups, and Peace is one of the Holy Epithets of God. Since Qorayish fought Islam to preserve its leadership, it had to feign conversion to it shortly before the death of Muhammad to ensure protection of its leadership as well. Once Muhammad died, peace that reigned supreme in Arabia due to Islam came to an end abruptly, and Arabs returned to their old ways of raiding, looting, massacring, and enslaving. To make matters worse, Qorayish gave to Arabs religious justifications to such crimes; all non-Muslims must be fought, massacred, robbed, enslaved, etc. as per leaders of Qorayish as per their twisting of the meaning of Islam.      

2- Only in daydreaming, it was expected that companions of Muhammad would care for the burgeoning Islamic Yathreb city-state to preserve it with all their might, especially by issuing new laws; yet, the exact opposite happened, when the crime of Arab conquests was committed by Arabs led by caliphs/rulers and then imams/scholars of fiqh (e.g., Malik in Yathreb and Al-Shafei of Qorayish, among others) created the fabricated, man-made, earthly Sunnite religion that opposes real Islam (i.e., the Quran) in order to offer religious justifications and pretexts of crimes of caliphs. The same devilish route of spreading falsehoods to tarnish Islam has been followed by other imams/scholars of non-Arab origin from conquered nations in the Abbasid Era (e.g., Ibn Hanbal, Al-Bokhary, etc.).       

3- In our age of misery, Wahabism has emerged and revived the worst branch of the Sunnite religion: the Ibn Hanbal doctrine, spread by petro-dollars in the name of Wahabism as if it were the only form of 'true' Islam, while in fact it has nothing to do with Islam at all. Wahabism has countless overt and covert organizations, including ISIS terrorists that managed recently to establish a mobile political state based on Sunnite religious terror, reviving historical episodes of terrorism made by caliphs Abou Bakr, Omar, Othman, and Ali as well as their successors, especially in terms of massacres and enslavement, among other heinous crimes.    

4- Within all this, the Quran has been discarded and rejected by all. When Quranists led by us returned to the Quran alone as the only source of Islam, we were accused of proselytizing a new creed that has nothing to do with their Islam (i.e., their Wahabi Sunnite religion), as Islam for them is 'Islamists' like the terrorist ISIS organization, the terrorist MB organization, Al-Qaeda, Al-Azhar, and all Wahabi sheikhs and scholars.

5- We finally assert that all human beings will convene in the Last Day, and God will judge our differences in faith. 

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: All Quranists have learned from you, dear Dr. Mansour the great thinker, to wait for God's judgment to settle differences in faith between Quranists and their detractors. Our hearts are pained as the Truth is not known to most people yet, but still, we remember God's reward for the ones observing patience. Dear Dr. Mansour, you have remained patient like all great thinkers of our world, and you have raised the awareness of thousands of people about real Islam: Quranism. May God reward and protect you, for you are such a great man!  

2- Ben Levante: Peace be upon all of you. I see that how the topic of slavery is being tackled here and how various comments on it reflect that confusion remains surrounding such a topic. Needless to say, slavery pertaining to the ancient world is no longer there, but the main issue is how to show the clarity of the Quran toward this subject. We, Quranists, must have a clear-cut notion about this topic, and this applies to all sensitive issues that seem to contradict modern age cherished values, as this is the moot point in the Western hostility toward Islam. Hence, I see that Quranists must have a definitive view on such topics, in a crystalized way that would not stir more debates. Let me assert the following points: 1) Islam came in the 7^th century when slavery was ordinary and lawful, 2) slavery went on for centuries after the completeness of the Quranic revelation, 3) enslavement is the source of owning female and male slaves, even when Maria was given as a gift to Muhammad, she was a female slave formerly, 4) the Quranic text is filled with urging commands to free slaves, 5) 24:33 is a verse urging believers directly to free slaves in return for money, as the best way to free slaves is to make them earn their freedom and paying for it any sum of money, while the USA abolishment of slavery did not end the problem of slaves who could not adapt to their new conditions, 6) there are two reason why the Quran does not abolish slavery directly: A it would be unjust to those who bought slaves at the time in the 7^th century and lose money that way, and B) it would be unrealistic to command Arabs of the 7^th century to free their slaves at once; the focus was on to stop polytheism and disbelief within hearts of people willingly and to apply justice and other higher values of Islam, 7) the bad legacy of slavery is alleviated in the Quran to be removed gradually with the passage of time, and 8) the final question remains to be posed to all of you: as per 2:194, if some Muslims were enslaved by their enemies, would Muslims have the same right to retaliate by doing the same by enslaving persons from the enemy.   

3- Dalya Samy: I feel bound to stress the fact that owning slaves was an issue of the social aspect and it did not pertain to the religious domain; Islam in the Quran tries to make some measure of control over slavery, leaving its total abolishment to occur as human societies would develop. Thus, Islam does not prohibit slavery directly and also is does not support it, but urging liberation of slaves is a definite indication that God does not favor slavery. I agree that slaves in former times in many cases received kind treatment as members of households and had the same duties and rights of free people in marriage and in other cases in the Quranic sharia legislation. I understand why a former female slave would have reduced penalty for adultery if she would cheat her husband who freed and married her, as she is not educated and bred in manners of free women at the time. But I have a question: why there is distinction in status and naming of free women wives and former female slaves wives in 23:6. Thank you, Dr. Mansour.    

4- Yehya Fawzy Nachachbi: I thank Dalya Samy, as her question is very important and I was about to pose it myself. We need further explanation for 23:6 from Dr. Mansour.

5- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: With respects to the last two commenters, there is no distinction here; the Noble Quran tries to alleviate the injustices committed by human beings to one another in cases of slavery and enslavement, and it addresses believers in the 7^th century that differentiated between free women and female slaves; the Quran uses unique terminology as all of us have learned from our dear Dr. Mansour, and it is most likely that if in 23:6, God would have mentioned wives alone, this might contradict the Quranic commands urging men to marry their female slaves. Before the Quran, female slaves were used sexually by men without marriage, as we know from history. Hence, Quranic sharia urges getting married to one's female slave instead of committing fornication. Hence, free women and former female slaves would be equal in the status of being wives. Hence, God asserts the right of female slaves to be freed and to get married to free men. This solution would be effective within a dominant culture of enslavement in the 7^th century. We might feel it strange in our modern age of human rights; but this was an ideal solution in the past. In addition, some free men were too poor to marry free women with huge dowry; instead, they are urged I the Quran to free a female slave and to marry her. Of course, likewise, a free woman might free her male slave to marry him if she liked. In 23:6, let us not forget that God is addressing believers in all eras, not only in the 7^th century; God knows that slavery would be abolished in the later eras, and that sadly, some forms of slavery might persist and be revived at times, as we see now. Hence, female slaves are made equal to free women in matters of marriage. I would like Dr. Mansour to support or to refute my views here. Thank all of you!    

6- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We are impressed by the useful comments made here by our fellow Quranists. We greet all of you and may God reward you in Heaven. We will include an article later on about the USA freeing of slaves and later on abolishment of slavery and how we compare it to the Islamic/Quranic solution to the problem. We are glad that many comments predict what we are going to write about; this indicates how much all Quranist share the same way of thinking concerning seeking guidance solely from the Quran. We immensely admire and appreciate all the above comments and questions; our writings and comments will be a great legacy to the coming generations not born yet. This first generation of Quranists will be deemed as the one to discover true Islam discarded, distorted, and rejected since the times of the crime of the Arab conquests. We will answer all queries posed in the next article. My regards and affection to all of you! God bless you all!   

7- Maktab Hasoob: I personally think that the topic is not that complicated, provided that one is not using our modern-age cultural criteria to judge the culture that dominated the 7^th century Arabia and most of the Ancient World at the time. In the Middle Ages, slaves and free persons existed as 'normal' social spheres, with certain distinctions to the latter and certain duties and rights expected from both the former and the latter. If such a vision is clear about this past, the topic will be clearer in our minds. Hence, there were two types of marriages for men at the time: to marry a free woman or to marry a freed female slave, and in both cases, duties and rights and dowries are pretty much the same; yet, it is understandable that when a former-slave-turned-wife would cheat her husband by committing adultery, she would be punished by half the penalty exacted from free women/wives, as there were distinctions in classes, social spheres, economical levels, morals, education, etc. between free women and female slaves at the time. Such distinctions existed before the advent of Islam because of inequality and the changing legal status of persons after Islam as the Quran allowed slaves to be freed and to get marry to free persons. Hence, we discern that that Quran  urges that both spheres of free persons and slaves to mingle and intermarry as a step to make human beings abolish slavery in later eras, especially in the ancient world when enslaved women/men had no high social status, rank, position, money, papers, documents, families, etc., as a vulnerable class.

8- Maktab Hasoob: I do not think that there is any link between enslavement and retribution exacted on warring aggressive enemies who captured Muslims as POWs or slaves, as enslavement was dominant even without wars in the past to sell captives into slavery for money. In most cases, progeny of slaves were also treated as slaves, inheriting their parents' social status. Hence, the Quran could not abolish slavery altogether because of economic reasons and working classes that would affect Arabs in the 7^th century, but we are to assert that the Quran allows gradual freeing of slaves and that the machines in factories helped humanity to grow up and abolish slavery. Of course, admittedly, slavery still persists in other forms, from China to the West to the Middle East. This is a separate problem we need to tackle here, on our website.

9- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: With due respects to both Ben Levante and Maktab Hasoob, the thinker Adnan Al-Rifaei have answered your questions in his videos and lectures, especially about 2:194 and about the fact that there is no enslavement of others in Islam. Please see the following link of Mr. Al-Rifaei:https://www.facebook.com/adnanrefaei/?fref=ts

10- Maktab Hasoob: I do not think that slavery as a topic could be compared to the issue of prohibiting incest; the Quran was revealed in Arabia that had both populations of Bedouins and cities dwellers, with the formers indulged in incestuous relations and the latter as more civilized who never did that. As for slavery, the opposite was true; slavery was dominant on all levels in Arabia and outside Arabia in the ancient world, in deserts, cities, villages, etc. the more civilized man has become, slavery diminished gradually, and we re-assert here that we should not compare the past and present as far as slavery is concerned; we are to focus on social and historical contexts of any issue at hand to understand the topic fully, without reference to our today's culture of human rights that will increase only the prejudice against the Quran by some others.  

11- Saeed Ali: I agree with the opinion of Nihad Haddad and her feminist attitude, and the views of Dr. Mansour on that subject covers the matter fully, but the issue entails further explanation from him, and we would like to urge him to author a scenario for TV or movies including a female slave captured and separated by force from her husband and family, and such a production will certainly be a wake-up call to the Arab mind and a means to clear the name of Islam tarnished and hijacked by Wahabis. Thank you!  

12- Marwa Ahmed Mustafa: I take pride in being a Quranist and in belonging to the Quranism school of thought. We have a great book of God, the Glorious Quran, that all Muslims need to re-read and ponder deeply to lead a better life and find solutions to contemporary social and religious problems in the Arab world. This is better than reading thousands of books on Muslim traditions accumulated through the centuries of Middle-Ages backwardness and its useless details. 

More Detailed Replies to Other Questions:

1- Ben Levante has mentioned in his comment that as far as the verse 2:190 is concerned, Muslims can capture/enslave persons among the warring foes who enslaved/captured Muslims. We beg to differ. If we examine the context of the verses 2:190-194 carefully, we are to discern that the verse 2:190 tackles self-defense fighting in facing aggressors' armies, and NOT to attack civilians to kill, rob, or enslave them. The verse 2:191 explains 2:190 further concerning how to deal justly with the aggressors' armies. The verse 2:192 determines that self-defense fighting must stop if aggression stops. The verse 2:193 shows the purpose of self-defense fighting: to stop religious persecution adopted by abusers of religion who oppress others and coerce them in matters of religion by fighting them militarily, a crime committed by the Qorayish tribesmen against Muhammad and early Muslims. The verse 2:194 is building on verses coming before it; i.e., it urges retaliation while bearing in mind piety and never to transgress so as not to resemble the aggressors who initiated aggression in the first place. Hence, according to all this, we assert that enslavement of civilians is never allowed at all, since the context of the verses 2:190-194 tackles a self-defending fighters who deter aggressors' armies. Even when a fighter/soldier in this aggressive armies utters the word of peace, he is not to be fought or killed, as he adhered to peace by uttering this word and is deemed a believer in terms of peaceful behavior: "Whoever kills a believer deliberately, the penalty for him is Hell, where he will remain forever. And God will be angry with him, and will curse him, and will prepare for him a terrible punishment. O you who believe! When you journey in the way of God, investigate, and do not say to him who offers you peace, "You are not a believer," aspiring for the goods of this world. With God are abundant riches. You yourselves were like this before, and God bestowed favor on you; so investigate. God is well aware of what you do." (2:93-94). Even this aggressor soldier, who is a polytheist in terms of aggressive behavior, must be helped and protected if he sought help in battlefield, to make him listen to the Quran: "And if anyone of the polytheists asks you for protection, give him protection so that he may hear the Word of God; then escort him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know." (9:6). This is applicable even if this soldier might have killed some of the self-defense fighters. Let alone civilians (males and females, children, and the elderly) who are peaceful but are resent in a given battlefield. This battle might occur within borders between an Islamic country and the country that attacked it, and Muslims soldiers are never to capture/enslave civilians as this is deemed an act of aggression prohibited by God. Hence, if an army of the enemies enslaved peaceful Muslims, Muslim self-defense fighters are NOT to retaliate by enslaving persons from the enemies; the reason is this Islamic/Quranic rule repeated in the Quranic text five times: "…no soul bears the burdens of another…" (see 6:164, 17:15, 35:18, 39:7, and 53:38). Accordingly, civilians are not guilty and they are not to be burdened with the sins of warring aggressors; thus, their being enslaved certainly contradicts the Quranic supreme value: justice. In a given Islamic country, its government must free those captured by the enemies by ransom or in return for releasing captured persons from the warring enemies' fighters/soldiers. If the enemies refused  to release the Muslim POWs, a given Islamic country must fight them to force them to return the captured ones, within above-mentioned war laws in 2:190-194. Hence experts in all fields in a given Islamic country must bear in mind to apply as much as possible the Quranic rules in applying or issuing laws related to such topics in this article/section and the previous one.           

2- Ben Levante has also asked about 70:29-30, wondering if free women have the right to enjoy sexual favors from their male slaves. We assert here that God addresses both male and female believers in His description of winners in Paradise in 23:1-11. Such descriptions can fit both male and female believers to apply and adhere to them to enter Paradise. Hence, 70:29-30 and 23:5-6 apply to both male and female believers. In our book titled "Women's Right to Aspire to the Presidency of Any Islamic State", we have asserted that the Quranic terms (zawj) ''spouse'' and (azwaj) ''spouses'' mean both a husband and a wife, unless the context of the verse refers to the gender of this spouse, especially that the Arabic modern word (zawja) "wife'' is never mentioned in the Quran at all. Without such reference or specification, we conclude that the Quranic command is addressed to all female and male believers, and hence, in 70:29-30 and 23:5-6, the term (azwaj) ''spouses'' refers to both men and women, and we can safely say that free women can free and marry their male slaves, NOT to have sex with them without marriage. The same goes for men; free men can free and marry their female slaves. Let us remember that the term ''man'' in 70:19-35 means all human beings, males and females.  

3- As for the question of Dalya Samy and Yehya Fawzy Nachachbi, they have asked about the Quranic distinction in the above-mentioned verses in the Quranic Chapters 23 and 70 between ''spouses'' and "those whom your right hand possess"à''i.e., slave". We repeat here that the articles ''or'' and ''and'' are sometimes used in the Quran for the sake of clarification and elucidation, and not to add a new item; thus, the article or in the above verses does not make distinction between slaves and spouses, but it shows their being on equal footing in that Quranic command; i.e., freed slaves who are getting married to their former masters are elevated in status to be their equals and peers.

4- As for the question of Ben Levante about  halving the flogging punishment for former female slaves who turned free wives and committed adultery, we agree that the Quranic justice does NOT mean absolute equality in every aspect; as in many cases, absolute equality in everything is akin to injustice. Of course, the term ''equality'' is not mentioned literally in the Quranic text; rather, its meaning is deduced from 49:13, in which God states that all humanity are brethren as they have descended from one parents. As for the word ''equal'', it is mentioned in the Quranic text to assert a negation of injustice resulting from deeming items as equal: "Is someone who is faithful like someone who is a sinner? They are not equal." (32:18). "…Not equal among you are those who contributed before the victory and fought…" (57:10). "Shall We make the Muslims (i.e., submitters to God) equal to the criminals?" (68:35). Accordingly, it is in the precise Quranic style that the terms ''justice'' and ''just'' are used in the contexts of legislative purposes and commands. 

5- We agree to the comments of Maktab Hasoob about the relation between the abolishment of slavery and the industrial revolution on one hand and the maturity of human beings within the building of civilizations. We will tackle such relation in a coming section/article of this book.

6- As for the question of Maktab Hasoob about getting married to one's freed/former slave or to others' freed slaves. We say that there is no difference at all, as a man is to pay a dowry to the betrothed woman (free or former slave) and to treat her kindly. As for female slaves freed by a given Islamic country, a man is to have the consent of the freed woman as well as the consent of the authorities of this given Islamic country, and this is applicable even if this man used to be the master/protector of this former female slave.

7- We thank Mehdi Malik for his comment that will be further explored in a coming article/section of this book.

8- As for the questions of Muhammad Al-Sharbaty about polygamy involving a free woman and a freed former female slave and about POWs who were originally slaves, would they be treated as spoils or as victims to be returned to their homelands, we assert here that a man can combine wives among free women and former female slaves within mutual consent of all parties concerned; both men and woman have the right of divorce and women have in Islam the right of self-repudiation (i.e., to divorce their husbands and return the paid dowry to them). Such Quranic laws applies to everyone. As for captives or POWs, we have tackled this topic in an article mentioned above. There is no difference between captives/POWs  who were formerly free men or slaves before being captured; both types must be freed and have the choice to remain in the Islamic country that will shelter, protect, and give rights to them or to ask to be returned to their homeland. In Islam (the Quran alone), there is no notion of considering POWs or captives as spoils of war.    

9- We thank Ahmed Drami for his comments, and we affirm here that in 4:22-23 the notion of ''except for cases in the past'' has occurred in the Quran ONLY in relation to two things: prohibition of marrying one's father's widow and marrying two sisters at the same time. As far as our Quranism school is concerned, we assert that one cannot apply Qiyas (i.e., deductive analogy) within matters related to Quranic prohibitions like prohibition of marrying one's father's widow and marrying two sisters at the same time, prohibitions in food items, and prohibition of murder/killing. As for the topic of slavery, remedy is embodied within the Quranic legislative purposes and rules and their details explained by us, within the framework of prohibiting injustices in general. Enslavement is among the worst types of grave injustices from a fellow human being to another. When the Quran was revealed, slavery and enslavement were dominant habits and among the social norms all over the ancient world in the Middle Ages. The Quranic remedy for enslavement and slavery is better and more elevated than the modern-times remedy provided by the Americans and the Europeans – or the West in general – as we will explain in a coming section/article of this book. Of course, the Quranic remedy is to be understood within the framework of the existence of a real Islamic country that would apply the Quranic sharia.   

10- We thank Othman Ali for his comment and agree to his summing up of the subject.

11- We thank Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti for his useful, insightful comment.

Lastly:

 We thank all our fellow Quranists and we feel very grateful to each of the commenters who have enriched the topic of this book; may God reward each one of you.

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: I thank Dr. Mansour for the answers and the praise of my humble self. I prefer not to mention my real name, and I have mentioned it once to Dr. Mansour in an email message along with reasons for not mentioning it. As for 70:29-30, I am satisfied with the answer provided, but another question remains: could a woman marry many men simultaneously even if such men were former slaves? I need an answer based on the Quran alone. I have another question regarding 4:3 about polygamy. Is polygamy allowed only in cases of men marrying widows with orphans?! I hope my many questions would not tire Dr. Mansour. My greetings to him from Stuttgart!

2- Khaled Saleh: I thank all of commenters for clarifying such important topic. I have a question, though. As for 24:31, is the phrase ''those which their right hands possess" referring to female slaves or non-adult servants or all slave of both genders? Thank you.

3- Othman Ali: I thank Dr. Mansour for his praise of me and for his answers for all questions posed in the previous comments. As for Ben Levante and his question about why there is no waiting period for divorced men or widowers, this is indeed a joke; men do not carry fetuses or give birth! That is why some Quranic rules are addressed to women exclusively and some to men exclusively concerning marriage, apart from other rules addressed to both sexes of believers. It is natural that each woman would have one husband at the time; polyandry is unthinkable now unlike the case in pre-historical times. Let us not forget that the Quran was revealed to correct things went wrong or were forgotten by others in previous celestial messages in the Abrahamic creed.

4- Saeed Ali: I hope all commenters will focus on the topic of slaves so as not to lose the focus of this series of articles, with due respects to all commenters and their useful comments.

5- Ahmed Drami: I tend to think that regarding flogging former female slaves as wives who cheated their husbands 50 times instead of 100 like free women/wives who are turned out to be adulteresses, this shows that former female slaves used to have sex with many masters formerly in the 7^th century Arabia, and they inherited slavery by birth and were brought up to gratify men sexually. The Quran wanted to change these bad habits. Yet, justice entailed that free women who received upbringing that included preserving chastity must not be punished in the same manner of former female slaves who used to have many lovers in illicit sex. We must bear in mind that justice does not mean equal treatment in all cases; rather, justice is to care for each individual case while putting into consideration the different contexts and circumstances. Hence, a hungry thief is not to be treated like rich man who stole. This is shown in dealing with orphans money in 4:6. We are to be conscious of the fact that God is the Omniscient who knows all about our sins; see 17:17. Finally, such former female slaves at the time were urged to have a period of upbringing and how to preserve chastity before they are freed and get married to free men, so as to forsake their old habits of forced polyandry as their masters offered them to guests! This was period of bad habits that entailed half the penalty of adulteresses among free women/wives to be exacted on wives/adulteresses who were former female slaves.  

6- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We feel bound to say to Ben Levante that we are grateful for his activity in writing useful comments. We were joking with you about your pen name; we know your real one, which is a pretty one, but we shall never understand the secret behind your choice of this strange pen name. as for women never allowed polyandry, Othman Ali has answered your question, we suppose, about the Quranic methodology of legislation; the Quran will not re-invent the wheel. The Quran has the main purpose of  correcting the Abrahamic creed (with its tenets, acts of worship, and legislations). Polygamy has existed before and after Islam, and the same goes for the fact that women are to be cared for by their husbands and that children carry names of their fathers. The USA knew women's rights that are stated in the Quran 14 centuries ago, as a woman is a presidential candidate in the USA. Egypt and Yemen knew women rulers centuries ago before the USA. A woman in Islam has to have one husband at a time, a free man or a freed male slave. In one of our articles, we have talked the story of an Abbasid Princess that got married to her freed male slave and servant. We do believe that as far as polygamy is concerned, a man can marry more than four wives, without certain limits, provided that mutual consent and prior knowledge of his wives are provided. Marriage institution is based on mutual consent of all parties concerned. We maintain that divorce and repudiation are rights of women and men. God urges polygamy to provide for widows, free female slaves, and orphans, while urging fairness and justice in such cases of polygamy, while expressing clearly the difficulty in dealing equally with one's wives. There are Quranic commands that are obligatory and rejecting them is deemed a sin, such as the ones in 6:151-153. On the other hand, there are Quranic commands that are used as guidelines and pieces of advice but NOT obligations, for those seeking more pious acts to gain favor of God: such as long additional night prayers and polygamy to provide for widows, etc. Hence, if a man desires not to get married and live as a pious celibate, he is not a sinner of course for not marrying widows. Would you like to be like this, dear Ben Levante?        

7- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We offer thanks to Othman Ali, Saeed Ali, and Ahmed Drami, as well as to all of our beloved Quranists who are pillars of our Quranism website at present and in the future. We sincerely hope that our website will continue to flourish by all of you as an Islamic lighthouse in the cyberspace to dispel the darkness of the earthly, man-made, fabricated creeds of the Muhammadans.

CHAPTER II: An Overview of Slavery in the History of Muslims

Slavery during the Reign of the Pre-Umayyad Caliphs and Arab Conquests:

Firstly: slavery in the Islamic Yathreb city-state:

1- The Islamic city-state of Yathreb established by Prophet Muhammad was based on the following principles. 

1/1: Peace with the outside world: we have explained in many of our previous writings that fighting or waging wars in Islam is ONLY for the sake of self-defense, especially to prevent religious persecution. Accordingly, there was no room in the city-state of Yathreb for aggression, injustice, enslavement, or looting. Peace with inside world: citizens of this city-state were those peaceful ones in general, regardless of their religious beliefs, even idol-worshippers who refused Islam; see 22:30 and 5:90-92, and even those who opposed city-state of Yathreb and Islam, as long as they did not hold arms and did not commit aggression, such as hypocrites of Yathreb at the time. 

1/2: Justice: this principle includes equality among all citizens regardless of social rank or status, economic status, and gender. Piety is not included as criterion to differentiate citizens, but it is included only as the criterion by God in the Judgment Day; see 49:13.

1/3: freedom (religious and political): the principle of freedom overlaps naturally with the concept of citizenship; citizens are to have absolute religious freedom (faith, beliefs, rituals, acts of worship, call and proselytization, houses of worship, etc.). Citizens are to have absolute political freedom; this means the right to form opposition movements, self-expression, participation within direct democracy, active participation in rule and government. The core Quranic principles support this; all citizens are servants/slaves to Almighty God alone and not to any mortals; they are not to have any master/deity except God, and they are not to obey mortal creatures in things that are deemed disobedience of God; see 4:59. Consequently, within Islam (the Quran alone, for Quranists), it is prohibited that one is to think herself/himself as superior over others as ruler of them; see 28:83. The reason: societies rule themselves by themselves within the mechanism of Shura (i.e., consultation) or better known in modern terms as direct democracy, explained in our previous writings in Arabic and in English.  

2- Within a really Islamic country that applies Quran, slaves of both genders, if present, enjoy all citizenry rights, religious freedom, and political freedom like the rest of all free citizens, and Quranic sharia laws about slaves had been revealed within such frame.

3- Of course, such Quranic sharia were ignored, overlooked, and discarded during the caliphate of Abou Bakr and his wars: the Arab conquests outside Arabia and the so-called renegades' wars before it.

Enslavement is linked to Arab wars within the renegades' wars and Arab conquests beginning during the reign of the caliph Abou Bakr

1- Self-defense fighting in Islamic sharia in the Quran entails setting free of POWs or captured ones in return to nothing at all as an act of charity or within a process of exchanging POWs with the other warring party: "… either release them by grace, or by exchange for others, until war lays down its burdens…" (47:4). See also 9:6, 8:68-71, and 4:94. Moreover, no Islamic teachings in the Quran urge killing of captured ones or POWs. A coming historical research of ours will be published about criticizing and refuting the narratives of killing captured ones, authored by Ibn Ishaq in his false biography of Muhammad.

2- It was typical during the crime called Arab conquests and during inter-Muslim civil wars that broke out decades later to kill off POWs among ordinary captured men or soldiers while keeping alive captured military leaders to get ransom money, or to use them as cards/pawns during negotiations. Of course, such was the case with warring captured persons; as for non-warring civilians like women and children, they were enslaved. Enslavement of civilians was typical during pre-Islamic era raids among Arabian tribes. Such a bad habit was stopped with the advent of Islam and its call for peaceful behavior, and when all Arabians entered into ''peace'' within that level of meaning of Islam (see 110:2), enslavement stopped. Yet, once Muhammad died, enslavement returned with a vengeance; especially during the so-called renegades' wars during the caliphate of Abou Bakr, as per historical accounts of that period. Sadly, enslavement spread the more during the crime of Arab conquests; Arab fighters of conquests felt the urge to capture as many pretty women as possible to have sex before they might possibly die in battlefields, and pretty enslaved women became part of ''spoils'' of wars, and it was a coveted target to achieve to enslave as many women as possible! In the coming paragraphs, let us quote some passages, with a focus on enslavement, from historical accounts written by the historian Ibn Al-Atheer, in his known book of accounts of history titled "Al-Kamel", about the year 12 A.H. during the caliphate/rule of Abou Bakr.       

3- (… About renegades from the people of Oman … historians held diverse views about the history of engaging into wars against those renegades, as Arabs conquered Bahrain, Yemen, Oman, and Al-Yamama territories, and Arab fighters were sent later on to the Levant in 12 A.H. … Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed knew that among the renegades was Rabeia, and he hunted him down to kill him along with his family and he confiscated his possessions and enslaved his family members and children … the daughter of the killed Rabeia was sent to the caliph, Abou Bakr, who sent her as a gift to Ali Ibn Abou Talib … she bore Ali Ibn Abou Talib a son, named Omar, and a daughter, named Roqayya …). We read here about enslavement of women and children. After the death of his wife who was Muhammad's daughter, Fatima, Ali Ibn Abou Talib used to seize any chance to get (by buying or given to him as gifts) as many pretty enslaved women as possible to enjoy them in bed, and he had several offspring born to him by these female slaves, and such offspring died in the battle of Karbala, in Iraq, later on. This is just an example from the incidents of the so-called renegades' wars; let us quote in the next paragraph a passage about the Arab conquest of Iraq, which was controlled at the time by Persians.

4- (… At least 30 thousands of Persians were killed in the battlefield, and countless ones were drowned … spoils were distributed within five equal portions, and large portions were sent to Yathreb … children and women of dead fighters were enslaved and sent to Yathreb, and Iraqi peasants were dhimmis who paid taxes and annual tributes and cultivated the lands for the caliph …). When we imagine the plight and suffering of countless children and women who walk in caravans from Iraq, the Levant, Egypt, and North Africa until they reach Yathreb, we can easily discern that such grave injustice was so pleasing to Satan as it was against God and His Quranic teachings; Arab conquests were for the sake of Satan and not God.  

5- (… Foreigners were vanquished by Arab armies, and Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed planned movements of his armies in a way to surround the enemies, killing most of them, and those who fled died of thirst and hunger … peasants were given peace on condition of becoming dhimmis who paid taxes and annual tributes and cultivated the lands for the caliph … all offspring and women of dead soldiers were enslaved and sent to Yathreb …).

6- (… As Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed conquered Al-Anbar region, in Iraq, he appointed an Arab governor over it, and he led his troops to a neighboring area … a huge Persian army was waiting for Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed and his army … Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed was shrewd enough to plan a plot to capture the Persian leaders of that army in an ambush … the rest of the Persian army lost its morale and many of its soldiers were captured … victory was achieved without much fighting … many Persian fighters were panicked and deserted their fortress to flee … some remained inside and tried to negotiate peace with Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed … he refused and killed all those inside the fortress, while enslaving their women and children … forty children inside a nearby monastery were learning the gospels, but Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed enslaved all such children and sent them to Yathreb to the caliph Abou Bakr …).

7- (… An Arab governor sent a letter to Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed  to ask him for troops to defeat infidels who deserted Islam after feigning conversion to it … Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed led such troops himself … after killing so many of the dwellers of the city, he killed the captured men as well … he enslaved all children and women present, and bought for himself from such enslaved women a pretty famous local beauty who was the daughter of one of the dead leaders of rebellion …).

8- (… Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed marched with his troops from Iraq to the Levant, as the Byzantines began to threaten the borders, and Muslims of the Levant asked for the help of Abou Bakr, the caliph, who in his turn sent an epistle to Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed to march along with his soldiers to the Levant to deter the Byzantines … Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed  fought and crushed all Byzantines and all Levantine rebels he found all his way, enslaving so many of their women and children, and hoarding countless spoils … a pretty women was sent to Ali Ibn Abou Talib as a gift, who bore him a son later on … all looted money were distributed among troops of Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed, while sending the usual share to the caliph in Yathreb … all those who tried to make peace an surrender were enslaved and sent to Yathreb … some men, women, and children took sanctuary in a church; the men were killed and the women and children were enslaved and sent to Yathreb …).

9- Ibn Al-Atheer wrote  shortened version of the history book authored by Al-Tabari which is filled by more details and accounts. Yet, lines written by Ibn Al-Atheer are also filled with incidents of murdering thousands of POWs and captured persons as well as enslavement of hundreds of thousands of women and children among families of fighters in nations conquered by Arabs; those fighters were true heroes who defended their respective countries and folks. Khaled Ibn Al-Waleed would to spare peasants from being killed in order to make them dhimmis (i.e., the lowered status of dhimmitude: non-Muslims second-  or third-class citizens) to plant and cultivate lands for the sake of the Qorayish tribe.

10- The Qorayish tribe was never contemporary alongside with Islam except for few years, and before its members converted OVERTLY and APPARENTLY to Islam, it had its black history of persecuting Muhammad and early Muslims, driving them out of Mecca and fighting them within borders of Yathreb. They feigned to convert to Islam as an afterthought shortly before Muhammad's death to protect their political and economic interests, especially as people converted by throngs (see Quranic Chapter 110) to Islam, on the level of peaceful behavior and not necessarily in terms of faith/belief in the Quran. Once Muhammad died, Qorayish retrieved its authority and power within the caliphate/rule of Abou Bakr, who insisted on Arabs paying zakat money for him (this is against the Quran, of course), and during the lifetime of Muhammad, zakat was voluntarily paid to Muhammad to be distributed to the poor, and even God commanded Muhammad not to accept money paid by hypocrites; see 9:53-54. Typically, tribes would gather donations, charity money, and zakat money to be distributed among the poor within these tribes, and Arabs had every right to revolt against Abou Bakr who insisted on collected such money himself. Hence, the first civil war fights began, known as the so-called renegades' wars. Qorayish leaders quelled revolts and rebels, and among the Qorayish tribesmen who fought alongside with Abou Bakr were those who never saw Muhammad before. Once the so-called renegades' wars ended, Qorayish felt obliged to direct and channel the force and momentum of Arab military fighters outside Arabia. Hence, the crime of Arab conquests of other countries began, led by Qorayish – without the participation of Yathreb dwellers at first – and Qorayish gained huge benefits, more than Arab fighters. Hence, another crime was perpetrated: the Arab civil war by Arabian Bedouins (or desert-Arabs) against Qorayish hegemony and confiscation of ill-gotten wealth from spoils of Arab conquests.        

11- This contradicted Islam and caused the discarding and overlooking of all Quranic teachings about self-defense fighting and about slaves, and even Quranic terminology about such topics, among other topics, had other different false meanings to Arabs at the time, in an intentional act of distortion of meanings of the Quranic teachings.

COMMENTS:

1- Dalya Samy: I have a question to put to you, dear Dr. Mansour, about your assertion above that slaves are to have the same equal citizenry rights in religious, intellectual, and political aspects: who exactly are to be considered as ''slaves'' in any given Islamic country?!  Slavery was allowed before the advent of Islam but I do believe it is prohibited by the Quran, right? And please, dear Dr. Mansour, I would like you to explain to me 8:67. Thank you in advance.

2- Ben Levante: I tend to think that before entering into the labyrinth of historical accounts, we must define some terms and answer some questions about slaves. How does the Quran define slaves? What were the sources of procuring slaves in Arabia before Islam and after it? Does the Quran endorse owning slaves? What about the Middle-Ages enslavement, captivity, piracy, etc.? Is slavery linked with 16:126 and 2:194? What about POWs?  

3- Dr. A. S. Mansour: May God bless all of you and reward you in Heaven for your help to our person. Most of the questions posed here will receive their answers in the next sections/articles. As for how to deal fairy and justly with POWs in Islam, we refer you to our article in Arabic titled "Proving that ISIS Terrorists Are Archenemies of Islam: Dealing Fairly with POWS in Islam", and here is its link: www.ahl-alquran.com/arabic/show_article.php?main_id=12939

4- Ahmed Drami: I thank our dear Dr. Mansour for his lucid articles. I am sure self-defense fighting in the Quran does not include capturing POWs or enslaving any civilians as ''spoils''; see 33:27 that assert my point here, and many other verses that urge believers to care for widows and orphans and to marry widows for that purpose, especially when circumstances of self-defense fighting lead to the killing of so many men.

Enslavement and forced military service:

Introduction:

1- Islam, the religion of peace, and its peaceful country that applies the Quran have no room for forced military service. Like all acts of worship, self-defense fighting must be done voluntarily as long as a believer physically have the ability, seeking to obey and please God. Hence. There is no penalty exacted in this life by a human being from another in case of not performing acts of worship and not to perform one's role and duty of self-defense fighting or jihad by money and otherwise. Let us remember that we know from the Quran that hypocrites used to be reluctant to participate in self-defense fighting in Yathreb; see 9:81-82,. God punished them only by not allowing them the honor of taking part in it in the future; see 2:83. 

2- During the Middle Ages, Arabs linked enslavement to military recruitment within tyranny rule and within forms of Arab aggressions, as some men voluntarily enslaved themselves by joining Arab armies in their aggressions. 

3- River-banks countries were usually stable ones in term of being unified strong political entities. Egypt, for instance, was ruled by Pharaonic despots and tyrants in ancient times, with their power consisting of huge armies, obsequious clergymen, government officials, cronies, viziers, henchmen, etc. and this retinue would think of itself as owning – or enslaving – the working force of the citizens in agriculture to serve the tyrant and his retinue. Moses' Pharaoh was an example of this; he thought he owned Egypt; see 43:51, and likewise, he thought he owned its people who cultivate its land. Hence, a nation would be slaves of Pharaoh. This was repeated in ancient times in Egypt, Persia, India, and China. Such agricultural civilizations were sometimes in times of weakness and degeneration raided by desert shepherding tribes who were assassins and thought of their tribe as a mobile homeland/nation/army or state, as the case with tribes of Arabia, Anatolia, and that of the Moghuls in the Far East. In some cases, like in Asia Minor, tribesmen would unite from all tribes, after decades of experience in daily raiding and fighting, to decide to form empires, which were temporary and vast in the Ancient World where rivers would be, as done by Arabs, the Moghuls, and the Ottomans. Yet, soon enough, such empires would lose so many skilled soldiers, and intrigues and conflicts to ascend to thrones would arise, and collapse would occur inevitably. On the margin of all this, enslavement occurred to fill in gaps and shortage of soldiers, within those who join armies voluntarily to seek treasures, adventure, or thrones as mercenaries, or those male slaves bought and trained to join the armies, and we give below a brief overview.

Firstly: slaves in service of tyrants and despots:

1- To avoid intertribal civil wars in Arabia, the Qorayish tribe had mobilized all Arabs to conquer river-side countries in Egypt, Iraq, Persia, and the Levant, under the motto of 'Islam' and 'jihad', and within one century, Arabs conquered all territories in the Ancient world between China and south of France. 

2- Arabs were the only race of soldiers before the emergence of the Umayyad caliphate, as later on, non-Arabs from conquered nations joined Arab armies as well as slaves bought by Arab masters. Within the Abbasid caliphate, more non-Arabs were recruited into Arab armies, especial Persians, and when rivalry between Arabs and Persians grew fiercer with the passage of time, Persians achieved a  decisive victory in controlling the Abbasid caliphate when Persians won victory for the caliph Al-Maamoun over his Arabs-backed brother/predecessor the caliph Al-Amin.  

3- The Abbasid caliph Al-Motassim who ruled between 218 and 227 A.H. introduced a new custom of buying Turkish slaves to recruit them into the army from Asia Minor, among other races as mercenaries from tribes in Egypt, Samarkand, etc. and hence, military recruitment of enslaved men began by the Abbasid caliphs. 

Secondly: slaves controlling the Abbasid caliph:

1- The Abbasid caliph Al-Motawakil who succeeded his father, Al-Motassim, relied on Turkish slaves in his personal guards, armies, and rule and appointed some of them as viziers. Hence, a new era began where Turkish political and military leaders, who were originally bought slaves, fully controlled the Abbasid caliphate to the extent that they would depose, dethrone, murder, and appoint caliphs. Some Turkish leaders actually managed to establish independent states within the Abbasid caliphate, like the Tulunids in Egypt and the Levant (256:292 A.H.) and the Ikhshidid State (323:358) in Egypt and the Levant.   

2- We of course focus here on the fact that those Turkish political and military leaders were originally bought male slaves who received military training. Some of them would voluntarily join the Abbasid armies without being a slave in the first place: this was enslaving oneself as per personal choice as mercenaries. Many of them were be promoted as leaders, as many Arab and Persian leaders and soldiers died and there were shortage. By the way, Asia Minor at the time suffered abject poverty and raids against it led by primitive tribes coming from the east, and the Turkish men found no alternative but to immigrate to Baghdad to join Abbasid armies seeking adventure, employment, and the chance to amass wealth and to get power and authority.   

Thirdly: succession of the rule of Asian tribes within the Abbasid caliphate:

1- Turkish leaders replaced Persian ones in controlling the Abbasid caliphate. Persian leaders had previously resorted to tribalism and Shiite and racial fanaticism to join forces and control Persia, Middle Asia and larger parts of Iraq, under the Shiite Buyyids dynasty, since 334 A.H., but they later on fought one another and grew weak before their inevitable collapse. Turkish tribalism and racial fanaticism began with the Sunnite extremists called the Seljuks, who emerged in 420 A.H., and began to establish their empire in 447 A.H. that controlled Middle Asia, Asia Minor, Iraq, and the Levant, and had to fight the crusaders. Later on, the Seljuks fought one another and grew weak before their inevitable collapse. Their previous territories in the Levant were inherited by the Zengid dynasty who later on took over Iraq, and the Zengid rulers Emad Eddine and Nor Eddine were famous in history because of their defeating the crusaders.   

2- The Zengid rulers grew weak once Nor Eddine died, and the Kurdish Ayyubids replaced them, who took over Egypt as well, and hence, the way was paved to allow male slaves to rule over nations of free people, as we will explain below.

Fourthly: the slaves (i.e., the Mamelukes) became sultans ruling over free people:

1- Ayyubids were not tribes; rather, they were one family or household of military leaders, like Najm Eddine Ayoub and his brother Assad Eddine Shirkoh, and the former was the father of Saladin (Salah Eddine in Arabic), who was in his turn the most powerful and prominent leader in the armies of the Zengid ruler Nor Eddine at one point.   

2- Each powerful leader and ruler had to buy as many slaves (i.e., literally in Arabic: Mamelukes) to train them militarily to increase one's power against one's rivals. Assad Eddine Shirkoh had his own Mamelukes to rule over Egypt on behalf of the sultan Nor Eddine the Zengid, and before that, he managed to oust the last Fatimid sultan in Egypt. The number of Mamelukes owned and trained by Assad Eddine Shirkoh increased and they were called Assadiyya Mamelukes, a name to signify their being owned by Assad Eddine Shirkoh. When he died, Saladin ruled over Egypt as he succeeded him and had his own Salahiyya Mamelukes, a name to signify their being owned by Salah Eddine (Saladin), and who were rivaled by Assadiyya Mamelukes. After Saladin's death, he was succeeded by his brother Al-Adil, who had his own Adileyyia Mamelukes, a name to signify their being owned by the sultan Al-Adil. When Al-Adil died, he was succeeded by his son, a sultan named Al-Kamel, who had his own Kameleyyia Mamelukes, a name to signify their being owned by the sultan Al-Kamel. Hence, each new sultan would have his own Mamelukes and the ancient ones would have less power and were often persecuted. Rivalries increased and loyalties would change by money. The last Ayyubid sultan, Al-Saleh Najm Eddine Ayoub, ruler of both Egypt and the Levant, had the largest number of Mamelukes; Cairo could not host all of them, and he had to build barracks for them overlooking the River Nile outside Cairo. They were called the Bahariyya Mamelukes (a name signifying their residence near the River Nile). Those Mamelukes hated the son of Al-Saleh, Turan Shah, as he persecuted them cruelly and was never thankful for them as they preserved his throne for him after his father's death during his absence and for their defeating the crusaders led by Louis IX of France who tried to occupy Egypt. Those Mamelukes had to kill him to end the Ayyubid dynasty and to establish their Mameluke State headed first by Shagaret Al-Dor, the Queen who was a former female slave an later wife of Al-Saleh, the dead sultan, and after her murder, Mameluke sultans succeeded to the throne of Egypt and the Levant, as slaves who ruled over free people.       

3- At the time when the very first male Mameluke became sultan, it was unprecedented that former slaves rule free nations, and the Egyptians revolted against this, though they rarely revolt at all. We quote here the words of Abou Al-Mahasin, the historian of that era: (… The Egyptians did not like to be ruled by a sultan who was formerly a bought slave, a Mameluke, and mocked the sultan whenever he would appear on horseback in the streets of Cairo …). When Egyptians revolted and demanded the ouster of such Mameluke sultan, the Mamelukes had no choice but to act cruelly against all revolting Egyptians and the masses. Abou Al-Mahasin and another historian of that period, Al-Makrizi, assert in their accounts that the cruelty of Mamelukes at the time against the Egyptians exceeded what to be expected if ever crusaders would have ruled Egypt! Egyptians had to be subjugated by military force to accept the new rule, however unwillingly. Yet, deep-seated hatred drove some Arabs in Egypt, who were Shiite Alawites, to lead another revolt under the claim that only people of Arab origin should rule over Egypt, and not non-Arab Mamelukes (i.e., slaves) whose origin was unknown. The leader of this revolt was Hisn Eddine Thaalab, who established a state of his own in Middle Egypt and the area near Nile Delta known today as Al-Sharqiyah Governorate in Egypt. Hisn Eddine Thaalab tried to contact Ayyubids ruling parts of the Levant and northern Iraq to seek their aid to defeat the Mamelukes, enemies of Ayyubids, but unfortunately, the Ayyubids ignored him and made pacts with the Mamelukes, and the latter vanquished Hisn Eddine Thaalab and killed off most of his men, thus bringing an end to revolts against the Mamelukes, as per words of Al-Makrizi.       

4- Hence, a new era began by the Mamelukes: former slaves became sultans and rulers, and being a former slave began to be among the qualifications required to be enthroned, as well as military prowess and skills that ensured more power, control, authority, and wealth. Thus, a sultan may have been a slave bought by a former master, militarily trained and cultured in Arabic literature and arts, as well as martial arts, and would be promoted to be a military leader and had access to palaces intrigues until he might reach the throne. Hence, on very rare occasions, a Mameluke sultan could leave the throne to his offspring after his death; other Mamelukes would deem themselves more worthy of the throne as they were military slaves with prowess and power, not inheritors of thrones by 'royal' birth. Hence, only one powerful Mameluke sultan, named Qalawun, managed to leave the throne to his descendants, by buying all military slaves and buying their loyalty, but such Mamelukes, who resided in castles and fortresses around Cairo, controlled for long decades sultans who were descendants of Qalawun the sultan, as they were sources of any sultan's power and authority.       

5- Regular enslavement (voluntarily by youths and forced kidnapping and buying of children) allowed the society of Mamelukes to renew itself continuously; each prince or leader had to have his own military group to increase his power. The most powerful Mamelukes were the ones bought and trained to be loyal only to the enthroned sultan. Such leaders would be promoted as per their skills and abilities, and both bribery and intrigues were thrive to allow one to be promoted to high-rank posts in the military and government. The over-ambitious ones would struggle to be enthroned as the sultan of Egypt and the Levant; some succeeded in achieving that goal and many lost their lives while endeavoring to achieve it. 

6- The Mamelukes ruled Egypt and the Levant, and their era witnessed the phenomenon of voluntary enslavement: youths of Europe and Asia saw that they would be enslaved into Egypt like those children kidnapped or bought into slavery from such areas – in order to have the chance to receive military training by Mameluke sultans and be promoted to high-rank posts to achieve wealth and power soon enough. The demand was high for such type of military recruitment as high-rank Mameluke princes each had to have his own army of mercenaries. Hence, brought Mamelukes increased from among non-Arab youths who were blond. They were evil embodied; they had no morals or creed, and they specialized in theft, raids, looting, rape of both women and children, and causing political and military unrest all over Egypt and the Levant. These atrocities were repeated by the Janissaries in the Ottoman era: they were youths trained properly to be fierce military leaders, but they were evil and  power- and wealth-hungry group that made use of the weakness of the Ottomans to form gangs of looting, rape, chaos, and corruption. Of course, when Muhammad Ali Pacha became the ruler of Egypt, he killed off and massacred such gangsters of Mamelukes and Janissaries to rid Egyptians of their evil corruption.    

Lastly: we have various cases:

1- A tyrannical Pharaoh, with armies of mercenaries, who was enslaving people in river areas.

2- An army which was the ruling tribe(s) that enslave men to recruit and train them into military armies.

3- A tyrannical despot or Pharaoh used to buy and train slaves (i.e., Mamelukes in Arabic) to use them to rule and control people, but soon enough, such military former slaves would control the despot and his dynasty or household: this occurred to the Abbasids by their Turkish leaders who were former slaves, and to the Ottomans by its their bought leaders the Janissaries.   

4- The Mamelukes bought by the Ayyubids managed later on to establish the Mamelukes caliphate, and they were fitter than their former masters the Ayyubids in terms of rule and military prowess. The Mamelukes set the new criterion of reaching the throne: a caliph must be  former military slave (i.e., a Mameluke) with military prowess and expertise as well wealth and authority over fierce military leaders. 

5- Anyway, such conditions increased the phenomenon of those who voluntarily join enslavement in order to achieve their ambition to reach the throne or to seek wealth and power, and this began within the Abbasid dynasty and reached a peak during the Mameluke era.

6- Finally, we feel bound to say that the role of slaves in that aspect is a topic rarely researched by historians.

7- We will give below some details from various historical accounts.

The power and authority of castrated slaves in palaces of the Ottomans:

Introduction:

 During the caliphate of Al-Maamoun, the Abbasid caliph, a leader named Abdullah Ibn Taher, died in 230 A.H., hated very much the phenomenon of castration and the presence of eunuchs, repeating his famous phrase: (… eunuchs are acting like men among gathered women and acting like women among gathered men …). This was despite the fact that the existence of eunuchs in the social Abbasid life was considered familiar an normal, and rarely anyone could hide sexual feelings of men who liked to have sex with eunuchs, as we read in books of Al-Jahiz, who died in 255 A.H. With the passage of centuries, presence of eunuchs increased and they were often prompted to high-rank posts in Ottoman palaces. We give below a brief overview about this phenomenon based on the encyclopedia titled "The Ottoman Empire: Tome One", authored by the late Dr. Abdel-Aziz Al-Shennawi, who used to teach us at Al-Azhar University decades ago. This will be followed by another brief overview about eunuchs and castration in Egypt, based on the book titled "Apercu general sur l'Egypte" (1840) (in English: A General Overview of Egypt) authored by the French physician Antoine Barthelemy Clot who resided for a while in Egypt, and was known there as Clot Bey.     

Firstly: eunuchs in palaces of the Ottomans:

 In general, eunuchs were too powerful in their posts in Ottoman palaces court. There was rivalry and competition between black and white eunuchs. In many cases, interests of eunuchs were the same as concubines in seraglios of sultans, as eunuchs were sexually used by sultans and the wealthy affluent men during the Ottoman era. Eunuchs used to receive certain education to be culturally fit, with proper training and etiquette, serve in palaces. The Ottoman Sultan Ahmed III abolished formally castration an eunuchs system in 1716; yet, he failed to stop this phenomena, as eunuchs were associated with the Ottomans and existed until the Ottoman caliphate was abolished in 1920s, and we give more details below.

1- Sources of eunuchs: governors of cities and countries throughout the Ottoman Empire used to choose the pretty male children to castrate them and send the surviving ones as gifts to the Ottoman caliph/sultan. Many agents under the Ottoman sultan used to procure such children by buying them from gangs specialized in kidnapping children from Middle Europe, and their captors castrated them before selling them. Many of the surviving eunuchs rejected by the Ottomans in Turkey would be sold as slaves in other Ottoman cities all over the empire. Sometimes, white-skinned military Mameluke soldiers would be punished, for one reason or the other, by being castrated, and they would leave the military service to join white eunuchs.      

2- Measures taken to receive and prepare eunuchs: once they reached Istanbul, eunuchs would convert to Islam and join groups of castrated ones to be trained and educated. They were presented to the head of black eunuchs and other high-rank eunuchs in the hierarchy, and their names would be written down. They would be subdivided into smaller groups to be trained and educated. They would learn Arabic, Turkish, Islamic teachings, etiquette, and the military training fit for the job of guarding seraglios.   

3- Two types of eunuchs: there were black-skinned and white-skinned ones. The black eunuchs used to serve concubines inside seraglios and serve and guard free women in general, with a hierarchy that allowed promotion in ranks and posts. The white eunuchs had the same jobs in seraglios and serving and guarding free women, but they had additional tasks of training and educating novices among castrated victims brought into Istanbul. Of course, such education included how to please men sexually in bed! 

4- Power and authority of eunuchs: during times of weakness of the Ottoman sultans, leaders of eunuchs had more power and authority. As per Ottoman sultans' protocol, the head of black eunuchs had the highest rank in the palace, preceded only by the grand vizier and the 'Islamic' judge/scholar. Powerful heads of eunuchs used to wield power just like some women of the seraglio, to the extent that a black head of eunuchs managed to convince Mehmet IV the Ottoman sultan to appoint a certain man as the grand vizier. Eunuchs in general used to convey messages and orders of the women in seraglios, to be done at once, whether they were personal requests or interference in political affairs of the empire. Hence, black eunuchs used to participate in palaces intrigues and gain wealth by bribes and the like.  

Secondly: eunuchs in Ottoman Egypt (tears of slaves):

 In the book titled "Apercu general sur l'Egypte"  (in English: A General Overview of Egypt) authored in 1840 by the French physician Antoine Barthelemy Clot who resided for a while in Egypt, and was known there as Clot Bey, we read about Egypt of the first half of the 19^th century. Clot Bey (1793:1868) was the Minister of Health during the reign of the king, Muhammad Ali Pacha, and a member of the royal medical academy in Paris. He dedicated his book to Muhammad Ali Pacha. This book was translated into Arabic by Muhammad Masood, who used to work in the Egyptian Foreign Office, and who died in 1940. Let us quote from this book passages linked to castration and eunuchs of that era in Egypt.      

1- Clot Bey writes the following about the habit of castration in Egypt that went on during the first half of the 19^th century: (…  Castration is being done exclusively in Egypt, as the country became the source of exporting eunuchs to all over the Arab world for palaces of the rich and affluent as well as governors and rulers … all enslaved children captured from all over the world are gathered in the cities of Asyut and Girga, in Upper Egypt, as Coptic clergy in two monasteries there would undertake committing the crime of castrating male children … I could not have imagined that such Christians would be engaged in such disgraceful act that is shameful to human dignity and to religion … residents of both cities despise such Coptic clergy for their deeds … this crime of castration is done to about 300 male children annually, within the age group 6-9 … black children are brought from Darfur, in Sudan … many of die as a result of such cruel, bloody act, and the miserable survived ones are sold in return for sums from 1500 up to 3000 piasters to palaces of the rich, the affluent, and the rulers …). Readers of the book authored by Clot Bey could discern easily the reformist tone and the ire against bad habits and practices, and that is why he criticized Coptic clergy in Upper Egypt at the time who deserted the uppermost value of Christianity, Love, to engage into mutilating male children in return for money, in an ongoing lucrative business.

2- Clot Bey writes the following about castration: (… Castration is usually done in the autumn/fall season, as it is considered the best time of year for such horrid inhuman process; as the number of survivors would increase … penises and testicles are removed totally, while adding boiled oil on the injury at once to stop blood from flowing, and a tube is installed in the urine passage … the injury is later on dressed in bandages soaked in henna powder, and the victims would be buried up to the waist for 24 hours in the soil … many castrated children die as a result, while survivors would be extracted from holes of soil and the injury is bandaged again with a mixture of oil and special mud … survivors will certainly spend their lives in severe pains and chronic state of weakness, apart from psychological pain …).

3- Clot Bey writes the following about the future of the surviving eunuchs after reaching the palace of the Ottoman sultan/caliph: (… These Muslims would treat them with due respect and care and would honor them … even the head of eunuchs in Istanbul is deemed to be a high-rank official in the retinue of the Sultan, with honorific titles … one of them once assumed the position of being the military leader of all Ottoman armies …).

4- Clot Bey writes the following about enslavement in that era: (… well-known philosopher and thinkers as well as some government officials in Europe led a successful campaign to abolish slavery, and steps to abolish it were taken indeed … what about the unnatural crime of castrating male children? It is an inhuman crime that no on stood against to abolish it and to prevent people from employing and buying eunuchs …). Clot Bey has called European powers to interfere in Istanbul to stop the crimes of slavery and castration, among other reforms for the sake of humanity: (… Europe today is interfering in the Ottoman affairs, with harmful results to the Ottoman Empire … I would rather have a useful interference for the sake of humanity to apply reforms that include abolishment of slavery and castration, in accordance with civility and modernity … apart from political gains and interests … this will glorify and dignify Europe and its honorable goals … Europe must seek to make the Ottoman Sultan and the King of Egypt to stop the crimes of castration and slavery, to perform its duty for the sake humanity … it is a pity that Egypt would be the scene of such inhuman crimes one generation after the other … this can no longer go on overlooked and condoned ….).

Lastly:

 We feel some comfort that some of the eunuchs, the victims of the crime castration, attained to some measure of authority and wealth in many instances, and they could never achieve this inside their native villages. It is ironic that 'free' peasants lived enslaved for a lifetime to the despot or tyrant ruler in Europe and elsewhere without hope for reform or amelioration of their despicable conditions, and yet, they were deemed free persons! In contrast, many male and female slaves reached power, wealth, and authority, even eunuchs, and got promoted in palaces and in high social ranks and stature, and some were enthroned, thus making up for their miserable past, while 'free' peasants had not comfort or compensation at all for centuries.  

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: I implore Almighty God to help our dear Dr. Mansour in his writing such painful articles that wring our hearts and his, of course. Such dreadful history would not have occurred if ancient ones would have adhered steadfastly to the Quran; hence, Prophet Muhammad will complain to God in the Last Day about their forsaking the Quran; see 25:30. I feel terrible about the enormity and amount of injustices committed past and present by human beings on their fellow human beings. The system of sponsors of foreign workers and employees in the Gulf monarchies is one of the masked slavery worst types of injustices that linger until the present day. Yet, in some of the Gulf monarchies, there are cases of treating employees and workers kindly and charitably. Piety is lost when one discards the Quran. May God make us always Quranists who stick to the Quranic teachings all our lives and may He preserve Dr. Mansour and his fellow Quranists all over the globe.  

2- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We say to our dear Saeed Ali that our reformist writings entails to expose ailments of the Muhammadans, which are so many and grievous, inherited via traditions of the forefathers. Sadly, Arabs glorify their history that they rarely read carefully in detail. Those few who read it focus on outlines that glorify and deify tyrant despotic rulers, sultans, and caliphs. For instance, some writers/journalists of our modern age would glorify the Ottoman caliphate as the one that fought Europe and spread Islam into it. this is wrong, of course; such writers would intentionally overlook corruption, profligacy, tyranny, heinous crimes, and grave injustices of the Ottomans who lived within immorality and affluence while committing massacres against people and even within the Ottoman Dynasty itself. No Ottomans cared to propagate Islam, and there is one simple reason for this: they never knew Islam. In fact, Ottomans embraced the Sunnite Sufism which was dominant at the time when the Ottoman Empire was established first in Asia Minor. Because most people hate reading, we ourselves have to write outlines that we hope that one day, after our passing away, our fellow Quranists will follow and add to them. The Muhammadans have inherited a huge mountain of traditions that maintain injustices, backwardness, falsehoods, tyranny, etc. and we hope Quranists will go on with the reform and enlightenment endeavors all their lives. May the Merciful God make all of us join one another in  Paradise in the Hereafter.  

3- Muhammad Shaalan: It is disgraceful that eras of slavery and prostitution are still there in the countries of the Muhammadans. I thank our dear Dr. Mansour for his intellectual endeavors to reform faiths of Arabs and Egyptians by using the Quran and less-known history. Modern, contemporary slavery still lingers when a female minor is forced to marry an old rich man who pays the victim's father a huge amount of cash, as we see happening in many Arab countries nowadays.  

4- Muhammad Shaalan: Modern, contemporary slavery still lingers when persons in the Gulf monarchies employ Muslim workers and employees, from poorer countries, in return for measly stipends and force them to work in inhuman despicable conditions, this is not to mention the masked slavery of the notion of the sponsor system. All such bad practices are akin to mental castration imposed by corrupt tyrant rulers to their citizens to serve the affluent classes of aristocrats and capitalists. Such cases are against the Quranic principles of true, real Islam. I hope one day that Arabs will wake up and return to the Quran alone to draw and apply real values before it is too late.   

The Eunuch Kafur Al-Ikhshidi Is One of the Best Sultans of Egypt and the Levant:

Introduction:

 Some eunuchs reached high-rank posts like Qaraqosh who served Saladin, the Ayyubid sultan, and we have tackled how the Egyptians at the time hated Qaraqosh for his forced-labor policies with them. On the contrary, the Egyptians loved a very good ruler who was enthroned despite being a black eunuch. His name was Kafur, and using his intelligence, he was made ruler of Egypt and the Levant during the decline of the Ikhshidid dynasty, as he ruled in its name. once Kafur died, the Ikhshidid caliphate came to an end and the Fatimid took over Egypt without exerting any efforts. We give more details below.

Firstly: a brief outline of the Ikhshidid caliphate before the advent of Kafur as a ruler:

1- Al-Ikhshid was the title of the military leader named Muhammad Ibn Taghag, who entered Egypt with his army and defeated its governor Ibn Keghlegh and arrested him and drove his supporters and men out of Egypt. The one who gave him his title was the Abbasid caliph Al-Radi who admired him immensely, and Al-Ikhshid ruled Egypt under the auspices and in the name of the Abbasid caliph, and he sent to Baghdad an annual large sum. Al-Radi ordered imams of mosques to pray for Al-Ikhshid in the weekly Friday congregational prayers. After his defeat, Ibn Keghlegh fled to Morocco to seek refuge within the court of the Fatimid ruler there, Al-Qa'im Biamrallah, and he urged him to conquer Egypt. This Fatimid ruler sent his troops and armies to Egypt, but he was defeated by the powerful Egyptian army of Al-Ikhshid. 

2- Al-Radi was a weak caliph, and some of his governors dared to stop sending annual money to Baghdad; simultaneously, the Buyids conquered Persia and threatened Iraq. Al-Radi brought a military leader, Ibn Ra'iq, to help him, but this leader ruled the caliphate instead! Governors in all regions of Persia and other parts of the Abbasid empire ruled separately away from the Abbasid influence, like Bani Hamadan in Mosul, and Egypt and the Levant were in their turn ruled by Al-Ikhshid away from the Abbasids.   

3- When Al-Radi headed his armies to engage into wars against Bani Hamadan in Mosul as they did not send the annual money, Ibn Ra'iq seized the chance to declare himself a caliph in Baghdad. Ibn Ra'iq and Al-Radi engaged into negotiations, and when Ibn Ra'iq found he lacked legitimacy and armies to defend himself, he agreed readily to the offer of Al-Radi to appoint him as the governor of the Levant. This led to fierce wars between Ibn Ra'iq and Al-Ikhshid.  

4- Ibn Ra'iq conquered cities of the Levant easily, and once he conquered Damascus, he drove out the governor appointed by Al-Ikhshid, and then he took over Palestine, and coveted to conquer Egypt. The troops of Ibn Ra'iq met that of Al-Ikhshid in the Egyptian city of Arish, in the Sinai peninsula, and this battle broke out in 318 A.H., and Al-Ikhshid was defeated at first rounds, and when Ibn Ra'iq was busy looting spoils, Al-Ikhshid defeated him in the next rounds. Ibn Ra'iq fled with only 70 men to Damascus, and Al-Ikhshid defeated him there as well. Ibn Ra'iq had to accept the peace treaty conditions imposed by the victorious Al-Ikhshid: Egypt and the southern region of the Levant were exclusively ruled by Al-Ikhshid, whereas the rest of the Levant regions ruled by Ibn Ra'iq, with clear-cut borders and treaty of mutual defense. Thus, Al-Ikhshid had the time to fight off the Fatimids coming from the west, as he could not fight on two fronts at the same time.      

5- Later on, Ibn Ra'iq was killed by the agents of Bani Hamadan in 330 A.H., and the armies of Al-Ikhshid conquered Damascus and Aleppo and fought off armies of Bani Hamadan. Al-Radi had to acknowledge the rule of Al-Ikhshid over the Levant. Eventually, Al-Ikhshid died in 334 A.H., and his successor was his young son Nujur, under the protection and tutelage of Kafur, the black eunuch.

Secondly: the role played by Kafur:

1- Kafur became the de facto ruler of Egypt, and he removed the adolescent son of Al-Ikhshid from the throne, and he ruled Egypt for 32 years (334:357 A.H.). Kafur managed to retrieve Damascus from Bani Hamadan as his Egyptian military armies defeated them.

2- The first sign that showed the political genius of Kafur was that after his defeating Seif Al-Dawla, the Bani Hamadan ruler, he made a peace treaty with him, as Kafur would pay a large annuity in return for keeping Damascus to secure east frontiers of Egypt in the southern region of the Levant. Kafur managed to deter the Fatimid threat as well as the Fatimid still coveted the rule of Egypt. Kafur managed to defeat the king of Nubia who raided the southern region of Egypt in 345, and he secured the southern borders of Egypt as a result. Kafur was wise enough to be gentle and pleasing to the Fatimids during negotiations; he managed to convince the Fatimids to spread their peaceful Shiite proselytizers into all Egyptian cities and villages without military campaigns that would stir and incite Egyptians against them. Kafur welcomed such Shiite proselytizers in his palace himself, as he did not care about who would rule Egypt after him, as he was a eunuch. Kafur realized that the Fatimids would conquer Egypt anyway after his death. Kafur died in 357 A.H., after 23 years of rule, after keeping Egyptian borders secure from Libya to Damascus and stopped bloodshed of Egyptians by foreign conquerors.  

Thirdly: words that have been said about Kafur (292:357):

1- Kafur was an ugly-looking black eunuch, with disfigured lowered lip, who talked slowly and walked sluggishly. He was oppressed and persecuted by his first owner/master, an oil merchant, until he was sold to a scribe who taught him to read and write. This scribe felt that Kafur was honest, efficient, and diligent, and he sold him to Al-Ikhshid, ruler of Egypt and the Levant, to be a private tutor to his son. In his turn, Al-Ikhshid felt that Kafur was loyal, intelligent, honest, efficient, and diligent, and he made him the military leader of one of his troops. Kafur was brilliant in his success in his new role, and was made a guardian of the son of Al-Ikhshid, Nujur, for his loyalty and perhaps for being a eunuch who would have no progeny to drive him to covet the throne. Yet, once Al-Ikhshid died, Kafur removed his ward, Nujur, from the throne and appointed himself as the sultan of Egypt. Nujur was incited by foes of Kafur in the palace to revolt against Kafur, but the mother of Nujur stopped her son and advised him never to revolt against his tutor and guardian. Thus, Nujur and his mother lived in the palace under the protection of Kafur. The Egyptians loved Kafur for his generosity and as he was a just judge within judicial courts.

2- Al-Zahaby, the historian, has written the following about Kafur in his book titled "A History of Islam": (… Kafur Al-Ikhshidi was a black eunuch who came from Abyssinia, bought by Al-Ikhshid, ruler of Egypt and the Levant, and was made tutor to his son, and he received titled like ''Abou Al-Misk'' and ''The Master'' … His bright mind and intelligence led Al-Ikhshid to appoint him as the military leader of the troops that defeated Seif Al-Dawla, leader of Bani Hamadan, in the Levant … When Al-Ikhshid died, Kafur set aside Nujur, his pupil, and became ruler instead … Kafur used to give money generously to poets who came to chant their verses in the palace, and he liked to hear daily the histories of late kings and rulers, especially the Umayyads and the Abbasids, and he had several female slave singers, plus a number of enslaved black and white children for his service … Kafur used to give lots of gifts from rich clothes and garments, and he had political acumen … Kafur would please the Fatimids and show them his support, and he would pretend to be obedient to Abbasids, while deceiving all parties until he secured Egyptian borders … Kafur loved poetry and literature, and made gifts to scribes, artists, musicians, and scientists … Kafur would judge justly in court and people felt his justice in their daily affairs and cases … Kafur used to pray a lot every night, imploring to God …).

3- Abou Al-Muzafar, the historian, has written the following about Kafur in his book titled "Miraat Al-Zaman": (… Kafur was a courageous leader and ruler, a wise eunuch better than males who were enthroned before him … Kafur was generous with all people … once Abou Jaffer, the Alawite, said that he once saw the gold, precious-stones-studded mace of Kafur fall from his hand during his march in a procession on horseback, and when he returned it to Kafur later on, Kafur rewarded his honesty and gave him precious gifts that cost more than 15 thousand dinars …).

4- Ibn Zoulaq, the historian, has written the following about Kafur in his historical accounts: (… Kafur was a pious, religious, generous, and just ruler, and he used to feed poor people in streets daily with tables filled with cooked 300 sheep, 250 geese, 500 chickens, 1000 pigeons, and 100 plates of desserts … Kafur died in 357 A.H., months before the Fatimids took over Egypt … Kafur ruled Egypt for about 23 years, and mosques of Egypt, the Levant, and Hejaz prayed for him … his coffin was carried to Jerusalem to be buried there as he wished in his written will, with these lines of poetry written on his epitaph as he wished:

The tomb of Kafur, is a reminder to all

That death is the inevitable end of all mortals

Even if they were military leaders and rulers

Kafur ended up in a tomb, stepped upon by the masses

And during his life, the most brave men feared him! ).

Fourthly: we assert the following about Kafur:

1- Let us imagine Kafur as a child: a disfigured black child was kidnapped from his folks in Abyssinia, and after a long tiring journey, slave-traders sold him in Upper Egypt, where he was castrated. Kafur survived and most of his companions died of such brutality. Carried off to Cairo, no one would buy him except an oil merchant, and he was later sold to a scribe who taught him to read and write. His genius would emerge and he was sold to the ruler of Egypt to tutor his son. Kafur was admired by all in the palace in an era when eunuchs and slaves in general were despised and persecuted, and the ruler gave him honorific titles. Later on, people accepted him as a ruler of Egypt and the Levant.   

2- Once enthroned and in power, Kafur never felt the desire to revenge for his misfortunes; he never vented his pain and ire for being castrated by acting harshly or cruelly toward anyone at all. He was esteemed as a just ruler loved by all people for his justice, wisdom, knowledge, acumen, generosity, piety, modesty, military prowess, and awe. Poets gathered in his palace to chant their verses and gain his gifts. Among such poets was Al-Mutanabbi, who praised Kafur in verse, and Kafur granted him many gifts, but the greedy poet wanted a political post, and Kafur denied him such wish. Al-Mutanabbi feared Kafur and fled Egypt, and eventually, he composed verses to satirize Kafur and to mock and abuse him verbally. Kafur never punished Al-Mutanabbi nor sent someone to murder him, though he might have done like despots and tyrants would do at the time. Kafur ignored Al-Mutanabbi totally, and Al-Mutanabbi flattered another ruler, Adad Al-Dawla, with hypocritical praise poems, but this ruler eventually sent assassins who managed to kill Al-Mutanabbi when he heard that this poet allegedly slandered him. this is the difference between the just Kafur and the tyrannical Adad Al-Dawla. We will discuss the difference between the genius and humanity of Kafur and the base, immoral nature of Al-Mutanabbi in the coming section.    

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: I am sad that Arabs used to deride and despise black people of African origin. It is disgraceful that such slanderous libelous poems of Al-Mutanabbi about Kafur are still taught in Arab schools and universities, within a corrupt culture that deify the mortal ''heroes'' of the past, starting from the killers among the so-called companions of Prophet Muhammad to other evil figures of history who emerged in later eras. Many people of African origin settled in Arabia (in Yemen, Oman, UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain), and some were slaves bought and brought there in ancient times. Later on since 1970, all of them were naturalized in Oman, my country, and are seen to be pious moralistic Muslims and law-abiding citizens. I myself used to kiss the forehead of a former black slave bought by my grandpa 70 years ago, and we treat him as an elderly family member and a close acquaintance now. He is now free and owns his house and lands, and my family members are his close relatives now. In rare cases, some Omanis do not like to deal with black former slaves, but they never verbally abuse them as this might make them punished for slander in accordance to Omani laws.

2- Shukry Al-Safy: It is a disgrace that in history school textbooks, no one taught us the genius, greatness, and morals of Kafur; rather, they taught us the immoral poems of Al-Mutanabbi. History must be from now on taught in a creative way to allow students to think critically to reach higher values and to prevent discrimination and bias against colored persons and against non-Arabs

3- Ben Levante: I sincerely hope that my comments are not so tiresome to our dear Dr. Mansour; I feel bound to say that the issues raised in the above article still boggle my head, especially regarding the contradictions within Muslims' history and their dominant culture at certain eras. I wonder why Arabs in the Abbasid era accepted enslavement and castration and the terrible class distinctions unknown in Arabia before. I tend to think that this was the influence of other neighboring cultures of conquered non-Arab nations like Kurds, Persians, Turks, etc. I thank Dr. Mansour for opening up such topics to discussion.   

4- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our dear fellow Quranists and we implore the Almighty to help us go on with this book. We assert here the above comments by affirming that Al-Mutanabbi was a poet and a historical figure who embodies all negative traits of Arabs at that era, while a great figure like Kafur was not heeded enough by historians at the time. Islam was applied properly for the very first and last time in the 11-year-old Yathreb city-state headed by Prophet Muhammad till his death, and Arabs of Qorayish in Mecca have risen in stature when they pretended to convert to Islam instead of fighting it militarily, shortly before Muhammad's death, to unify Arabs of Arabia within one goal: to conquer the ancient world to form an Arab Empire. Hence the Qorayish hegemony returned with a vengeance once the Quranic revelation that has exposed the hypocrites and conspirators stopped. When Qorayish tribesmen committed the crime of Arab conquests, the Quran was forsaken, but is still preserved in its entirety until now. On rare occasions, few rulers were just and fair and used the Quranic guidance in a good way, at varying degrees of success, hence the contradictions in the stances of those few rulers. As for the Quranic/Islamic solution of the problem of slavery, we will tackle it in a coming section/article of this book, indicating how West-countries solutions have been incomplete and caused more injustices.    

5- Muhammad Shaalan: I am glad that within writings of Dr. Mansour, history is never stories for amusement; rather, they are lessons to ponder upon for a long time. We miss fair, wise, and just rulers who in the Middle Ages defended and protected Egypt and Egyptians despite their being non-Egyptians: like Kafur, Beibars, and Qotoz. Kafur the eunuch was better than many rulers of those who came before and after him.

Between the Moralistic Genius of Kafur and the Immoral Genius of Al-Mutanabbi:

Between Kafur the Noble Eunuch Former Slave and Al-Mutanabbi the Mean Free Man:

Firstly: the moralistic genius of Kafur:

1- There are criteria to judge what is a great ruler in terms of humanistic and moralistic aspects: stopping wars, preventing bloodshed, and taking decisions to retain peace. Most rulers sacrifice blood of their nations and risk their lives for political ends or for ideologies; this is of course immoral. For instance, Hitler killed millions for the sake of Nazism.  Hence, Hitler was a bad ruler in terms of bloodshed caused by him. worse than Hitler were the immoral caliphs who for centuries raised the banner of Islam (religion of peace and safety: one of God's Holy Epithets is ''Peace'') to justify their massacring of millions of people in many regions. This applies to crimes committed by Europeans who colonized continents. Within margin of such grave injustices, enslavement spread and millions of free persons were practically enslaved one way or the other. Within such circumstances, castration was legalized socially and increased without any pangs of conscience!   

2- As for criteria in terms of humanistic and moralistic aspects to judge rulers, we personally could not find but three rulers who were just in the history of caliphate that lasted for centuries: 1) Mu'aweiya II, who decided to leave the throne voluntarily after the death of his father, the Umayyad caliph, Yazeed Ibn Mu'aweiya, so that he would not bear the burden of bloodshed committed by the Umayyad dynasty, and though he refused to be appointed as caliph, such embarrassment he caused to his household drove the Umayyad to assassinate him 2), Omar Abdul-Aziz, who tried to save as much as possible by imposing justice, peace, and fairness, but he was assassinated by poison after a brief caliphate period, and presumably he was poisoned by his household members, as we have written in our previous writings, and 3) Kafur, the often-ignored one by contemporary historians in the 20^th and 21^st centuries, despite his greatness; in our opinion, he was greater than the previous two rulers here in this list, as Kafur knew pain, injustice, and humiliation, whereas the other two were nearer to the era of Muhammad the Prophet and lived within a royal household.

3- Kafur lived within an era of local and regional wars within different fronts: the Ibn Hanbal doctrine extremists controlled Iraqi cities and terrorize people (by the way, this is going on in the 21^st century in many regions of the Arab world: ISIS terrorists for instance) wars between the Byzantines and the Bani Hamadan, massacres committed by the Qarmatians in Arabia, and the Buyyids poised to gain control in lieu of the Abbasid caliphate that was on the verge of collapse. The eunuch ruler Kafur never engaged into useless wars or battles despite this era of political upheavals, transitions, and transformations, especially that all warring parties coveted Egypt and felt the grudge against Kafur for his good fortune to appoint himself as ruler of Egypt and parts of the Levant, especially the Fatimids who were bent to conquer Egypt soon enough. 

4- Kafur avoided as much as possible, relying on 8:60; as Kafur used his military troops ONLY to deter foes. Peaceful countries must have military power to preserve peace and deter potential aggressors and thus preserve blood of people on both sides. Later on. When Kafur had to engage into war against Bani Hamadan, he defeated and vanquished them, and they had to agree to sign peace treaty with Kafur to secure Egyptian borders. Likewise, when Kafur defeated the troops of the Fatimids coming from the west borders, he convinced them to stop attacking Egypt and to send instead Shiite  missionaries all over Egyptian villages and cities to call for and propagate Shiite notions of the Fatimids, thus gaining the favor of Egyptians and to rule it peacefully without wars upon his death. Hence, the genius of Kafur prevented bloodshed of thousands of Egyptians and non-Egyptians. Hence, in our view, caliphate system never knew a more just and wiser ruler than Kafur the eunuch.    

Secondly: the immoral genius of Al-Mutanabbi:

1- Al-Mutanabbi had most of the weaknesses, defects, and shortcomings of Arab nature and characteristics, mainly the tendency to voice words/declarations and not to enact them, without accusations of telling lies, like most medieval poets. Such a defect has been persisting still as we had Arab leaders who told us nothing but lies in a vociferous outspoken manner and failed to enact their mottoes: Abdel-Nasser, Saddam Hussein, Kaddafi, etc. Hence, inveterate liars grew into fame within Arab societies; that was why Al-Mutanabbi was so famous and his immorally ingenious unique poems spread as they reflect Arab nature of talking and not doing anything at all, whereas the real moralistic and political genius of a ruler like Kafur was eclipsed, despite his great deeds; as he never left writings or poems at all. The acts of the eunuch ruler were great and so was his biography, as he rose from slavery and misery to power and the throne; yet, historians and literati never cared about Kafur except through the verses of Al-Mutanabbi slandering him. Such satirical verses of Al-Mutanabbi about Kafur are signs of the baseness, racism, and meanness of the poet, and the poet's different stances vis-à-vis Kafur and Seif Al-Dawla, the Bani Hamadan ruler, prove his mean, hypocritical nature.  

2- The analysis of the biography of Al-Mutanabbi shows that he had two main contradictory features: cowardice and ambition, and he tended to tell lies and falsehoods to combine and weave both feature. In an era troubled with turmoil, Al-Mutanabbi desired very much to rule, but using swords of others. Because of his cowardice and ambition, his carried his title ''Al-Mutanabbi'' all his life and after his death. This title means in Arabic: the one who is a self-proclaimed prophet.  

3- Al-Mutanabbi was born in 303 A.H. in the city of Kufa, Iraq, and his father was a very poor water-skins carrier who would supply water to houses and palaces in return for money, but Al-Mutanabbi lied to others around him by claiming he was a descended of Ali Ibn Abou Talib, the main figure/deity in the Shiite religion, in order to achieve his ambition one day and to hide his cowardice.

4- Al-Mutanabbi claimed that he was a prophet who received divine revelations shown in his poems and rhetoric as well as his erudition in mastering the Arabic tongue, and he used to flatter hypocritically all leaders of tribes and governors of cities, when he coveted their rich gifts or wanted to ward off their ire. He was once imprisoned for a long time because of the heresy of claiming himself a prophet, and he was made to repent and was declared a repentant to be set free later on. Beforehand, he used to compose verses and claim they were his 'Quran'! But when Seif Al-Dawla repeated such verses to him in court, Al-Mutanabbi refused to acknowledge the fact that he was their author, as he felt he would be put to death or imprisoned if he owned up to such verses.    

5- That was why the title Al-Mutanabbi stuck to him all his life and he never disowned such title; he took pride in it instead! His poetical genius made him gain money and fame, but one line of verse led to his being murdered:

Horses, nights, and deserts know me,

And so do battles, wars, papers, and pens

Of course, such a verse tells a lie about Al-Mutanabbi who claimed in it being so brave and so erudite, but in fact, he did not achieve his goal of being appointed as ruler or governor anywhere. When he met accidentally his assassins, who were desert-Arabs sent to murder him at night, he fled at once for his life, but his boy-servant reminded him of the above line of verse that became so famous about him. Thus, finally, Al-Mutanabbi hesitated and fought back his assassins reluctantly with his sword, while cursing the boy-servant, and he was killed by such assassins.

Thirdly: the meeting of the moralistic genius of Kafur and the immoral genius of Al-Mutanabbi:

1- As typical of poets of the period, Al-Mutanabbi would seek money gifts by means of praising wealthy men, leaders, and rulers to gain rich gifts and large sums of money from them, and their money was of course ill-gotten from toil and blood of the masses and injustices committed within countless forms of despotism and enslavement. Yet, Al-Mutanabbi could not curb his ambition; he wanted power and authority, not just wealth. That was why he would get into trouble with retinue of any sultan/ruler, when he would exceed the mark or transgress his limits as a beggar hypocritical poet. Once in deep trouble within political intrigues into which he stepped, he would flee as he was a coward. This occurred when Seif Al-Dawla, ruler of Bani Hamadan who was killed in 357 A.H., made Al-Mutanabbi one of his retinue for a while, but as on several occasions Al-Mutanabbi meddled into affairs that were not his own, he got into serious trouble and fled his court. He went to Egypt, to Kafur.    

2- Al-Mutanabbi went to the palace of Kafur, hoping that this eunuch ruler would appoint him as a governor of any Egyptian city or province. He praised Kafur in many poems, and Kafur gave him a lot of money in return for such poems, but Al-Mutanabbi despaired later on of being appointed in any post, and he had to hold close ties to one of the opponents of Kafur. Kafur knew of it and treated Al-Mutanabbi coldly, but never punished or even reproached him. feeling despaired the more, Al-Mutanabbi left Egypt by night, and composed satirical poems about Kafur.

Fourthly: the immoral genius of Al-Mutanabbi in verbally abusing Kafur in verse:

1- There are four fates in which humans could not interfere and are not to be judged through them: one's birth, one's death, one's calamities, and one's share in life. Such factors of fate are never within one's control; they are ordained by God. Hence, Kafur was not responsible for his skin-color, facial features calamities that he underwent: castration, enslavement, bondage, persecution, etc. sound minds must praise Kafur because despite the above, he managed to create what free rulers could not in Egypt. As for the immoral attitude and genius of Al-Mutanabbi, it led him to slander and verbally abuse Kafur, despite his merits.  

2- Al-Mutanabbi did not only contradicted moralistic attitudes or high morals, but also contradicted himself; he praised and flattered Kafur in many poems upon his arrival to Egypt in 347 A.H. after he fled the palace court of Seif Al-Dawla, until 349 A.H., and for another year, Al-Mutanabbi avoided Kafur so as not to arouse his fury, until he fled Egypt in 350 A.H. after gathering all his belongings, and chanted a poem to slander and satirize Kafur the night before his flight from Egypt. The following are examples of lines of poetry by Al-Mutanabbi in praise of Kafur:

Grand purposes of Kafur are avoided by other kings

His morals are too many to be praised in few verses

They will take long lines to enumerate

…

If one deserted his folks and resided with Kafur

One feels as if living among his dear family

…

Kafur is deemed the apple of one's eyes

For his generous, kind nature with all

And no barriers are between him and his people

And he won their love and respect forever

And these are some lines of satirical verse of Al-Mutanabbi about Kafur:

Who dared to tutor this black eunuch slave

Whose origins and parentage are entirely unknown

For he is envious of white men for their skin

And the slave-trade who brought the knave

And struck him many times on the ears

And disciplined him many times with the rod

Virile white-skinned men are sometimes ungrateful

Let alone black eunuchs who are naturally bad and evil

3- Such satirical poems of Al-Mutanabbi have been accepted and admired within the Arab culture, past and present, though they denote racist attitudes in despising dark-skinned persons, even great rulers like Kafur! Racist people liked such poems that vent their envy toward Kafur. We think that no Arab literary critic, past and present, attacked Al-Mutanabbi and exposed his immoral unethical attitude and cleared the name of Kafur, who was a great ruler of Egypt. Until now, verses of Al-Mutanabbi are being taught in Arabic literature departments at Arab universities, with no pangs of conscience regarding lines deriding the plight and misery of the childhood of Kafur as he was kidnapped and castrated to be sold into slavery. Here are some of such lines that satirize and deride Kafur:

How could a black eunuch be deemed generous

 He could never forget the whip lashes and chains

…

Never buy a slave unless along with a whip for him

Slaves are nothing but a punish of dirty knaves

I have never imagined myself living in an era

When a eunuch insults me while he is being praised

Or when people are so blind as to overlook white slaves

To buy instead black ones as dirty as dark as coal

And with cut lips to boot, as ugly as a devil

Yet obeyed by virile burly men of strength

Who dared to tutor this black eunuch slave

Whose origins and parentage are entirely unknown

For he is envious of white men for their skin

And the slave-trade who brought the knave

And struck him many times on the ears

And disciplined him many times with the rod

Virile white-skinned men are sometimes ungrateful

Let alone black eunuchs who are naturally bad and evil

4- Those who admire and like poems of Al-Mutanabbi rarely ask themselves the following question: why did Kafur ignored such satire and did not punish Al-Mutanabbi? Why did not Kafur have him murdered? Do such satirical lines agree with previous lines of praise? Who would deserve to be praised and immortalized in lines of history: Al-Mutanabbi or Kafur? It is shameful that Al-Mutanabbi accepted his title though it is insulting to Islam. Does that title show contempt of Islam? Is it not disgraceful to carry such title that denotes heresy and rejection of Islam?

COMMENTS:

1- Muhammad Shaalan: I feel bound to say that it is disgraceful that art critics judge decontextualized poems as per the artistic standards and schools, and not according to fairness, morals, principles, and truth. Hence, reforming societies was never a concept for such critics, past and present. 

2- Muhammad Shaalan: As for morals, values, and ethics, Al-Mutanabbi like those critics had none of them; they have cared only to make money by any means by their cheap goods. Thus, real genius and fair rulers, rare in Arab and Egyptian history, were ignored totally. I thank very much our dear Dr. Mansour for teaching us such often-forgotten lessons in history. We pray to the Almighty to allow Kafur into Paradise in the Hereafter.   

3- Saeed Ali: I discern here in the above section/article yet another proof signaling the slumber of the Arab collective mind. God has given us the Quran, the greatest gift ever, to address our minds to deduce what is right and good among values and to discard bad and destructive notions. Yet, the opposite has occurred; old negative habits, traditions, and mores have linger instead of freeing our mind by the Glorious Quran. The slumber of the Arab mind has begun centuries ago and continues until now, as Arabs has forsaken the Quran and resorted to other devilish books filled with lies and authored in the Middle Ages. Hence, instead of higher moralistic values, they admired immoral stances of the likes of Al-Mutanabbi and never took heed of the genius of a ruler like Kafur. I immensely encourage and thank Dr. Mansour for brushing dust from such great historical figures like Kafur to give them their due.  

4- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all of our beloved Quranists, and we implore the Almighty to help us in writing the rest of this book. We assert the following points. 1) No doubt that Al-Mutanabbi was  poetic genius, but such genius never excelled except in verbal slander and in the evil ways. This is shown in poems vilifying Kafur; such poems show the immorality and moral degeneration of this poet. Even in the earlier poems to praise Kafur, we perceive them to be lacking in sincerity of feeling and poetic vigor, and the opposite is true in his libel verses: vigor and genius would reach the zenith!  2) Kafur took over the rule of Egypt in troubled times; the young and vigorous Fatimids struggled against the old Abbasids, and Kafur pared thousands of persons in Egypt and outside it bloodshed and being killed in endless conflicts. It is wrong to suppose things to happen or not to have happened in historical research; yet, we are bound to say that rulers who came after the death of Kafur never learnt from his wisdom. Sadly, Kafur is not known unless within the satirical poems of Al-Mutanabbi the hypocrite that reflect he corrupt, negative side of the Arab culture at the time. 

A Female Slave Appointed as the Supreme Judge:

Introduction:

1- As far as we know, in Middle-Ages Europe – contemporary to the Abbasid caliphate – no female slave reached the throne to control and rule over people, let alone a female slave to be appointed a supreme judge. Well, both instances occurred within the Abbasid caliphate.

2- Female slaves exceeded skills and ambitions of free women and of princes of the Abbasid dynasty; a female slave was appointed a supreme judge, and several ones controlled fully the Abbasid throne. If we are to summarize the Abbasid caliphate in one line, we are to assert here that it was an era when female slaves and concubines of caliphs controlled the Abbasid throne, and many were wives and mothers of Abbasid caliphs as well: such as the famous concubine named Al-Khayzuran who controlled her lover (and later on husband) the Abbasid caliph named Al-Mahdi, and she controlled the affairs of the Abbasid rule well into the era of her son Harun Al-Rashid. After the death of Al-Khayzuran, the era of powerful concubines and female slaves went on; for instance, the concubine named Qabeeha controlled fully her lover (and later on husband) the Abbasid caliph named Al-Motawakil, and later on controlled her son the caliph named Al-Moataz. During the reign of the Abbasid caliph named Al-Mostakfi, the grand vizier of the Abbasid court was a former female slave named Alam Al-Shiraziyya, and she was the one who helped him to ascend to the throne, and he was grateful to her and to her wisdom, and he appointed her as the grand vizier who controlled everything in the affairs of the caliphate. When some other male notables and viziers protested against this, he told them his famous phrase, well-known in history and biographies: "We found all of you around us in times of prosperity, and we found her alone alongside us in times of adversity."

3- During this era of powerful female slaves, most of the grand imams of the Sunnite religion lived, especially those who specialized in fabricating hadiths such as Al-Bokhary, Moslem, Ibn Hanbal, Al-Shafei, Al-Tabari, etc. and some of them were notable historians, and no one of them wrote anything frankly about condemning the fact that concubines would control the 'Islamic' caliphate or the fact that caliphs (deemed at the time as the shadow of God on earth!) lived an affluent life of wine, fornication, homosexuality, etc. In fact, such Sunnite imams and scholars fabricated hadiths that vent their anger, frustration, and envy regarding powerful female slaves who control the caliphate. Of course, such hadiths are still spread today in the Arab world, tarnishing the reputation of the gender of women until now, especially the one about women supposedly lack religion and brains (!) and the one about women doomed to failure when they headed any groups of men. The Sunnite Muhammadan cattle still believe until now that such falsehoods are part of Islam, and they never know the historical circumstances that led to the fabrication of such hadiths during the Abbasid era. 

4- Let us summarize below the story of the female slave Thamal, who was appointed by Shaghab as the supreme judge to achieve justice within trials and cases of people.

Firstly: historical accounts about the female slave assuming the position of the supreme judge:

1- Ibn Al-Jawzy, the scholar and historian, has mentioned the following in his history book titled "Al-Muntazim": (… In 306 A.H., Shaghab, Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir (i.e., a title that meant: the lady-mother of the caliph Al- Moqtadir),  made her Qahramana (i.e., the head gentlewoman) named Thamal the Supreme Judge and she examined and judged on Fridays cases of people, and her court was attended by other male judges and scholars …). (Source: Al-Muntazim 13/180).

2- The previous historical account is asserted by another historian, Al-Siyouti, in his book titled "History of Caliphs": (… Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir decided to appoint Thamal, her main gentlewoman in her palace, as the Supreme Judge of Baghdad, and in her court, held on Fridays, people waited for her wise and just decrees and judgment, and the court sessions were attended by other male judges and scholars …).

3- We conclude from the above that during the Abbasid caliphate, this unprecedented event of appointing a female slave as the Supreme Judge was never condemned or disapproved by Arabs at the time; on the contrary, people were satisfied with Thamal. In addition, Abbasid scholars of fiqh never condemned or disapproved of Thamal and her post; they were under her command in her court, actually. 

Secondly: how did Thamal the female slave assume the position of the supreme judge?

 What did drive Shaghab to issue such a decree about Thamal? To understand this, we are to briefly mention the following details from the intrigues of the Abbasid palaces, and they will shock the silly dreamers among Arabs of today who wish the caliphate ruling system back, along with its side effects!

Shaghab the female slave and her master the Abbasid caliph Al-Mo'tadid:

1- The concubine Shaghab was owned by the Abbasid caliph Al-Mo'tadid, who had an eye for women and died of addiction to having sex, and she gave birth to the caliph Al-Moqtadir, who became caliph at the age of 13, and hence, Shaghab was the actual ruler of the caliphate, making her son under her full control for about 25 years until his assassination in 320 A.H. and her painful and sad downfall. the caliph Al-Mo'tadid saw, admired, and bought Shaghab, whose real name was Naeim (i.e., the soft-skinned one) as his concubine in his seraglio. She bore him a son, Al-Moqtadir, who was to become a caliph later on. Soon enough, the caliph favored other concubines, and Shaghab was thin and of yellowish skin, and she could not compete with other white blond, fat concubines of the seraglio.

2- She felt jealous of the 4000 concubines of the caliph. She entered into a series of endless conflicts with these concubines in the Abbasid seraglio. Shaghab engaged in endless quarrels and fights and intrigues.  She hated the fact that the caliph deserted her company and bed. Hence, the caliph punished, humiliated, and beat her, and he changed her name from Naeim to Shaghab (in Arabic, it means troubles!), and that name stuck to her ever since. The caliph decided, however, to confine her in a certain palace which became her prison for a while. She brought up her son and in her sorrowful nostalgia for her better days with the caliph. 

Shaghab the female slave and her friend the female slave Thamal: how did they kill Futna the pretty concubine of Al-Mo'tadid:

1- Shaghab never had any friends but one, a slave-girl named Thamal, who brought all news to her and helped her in her intrigues and conspiracies. Confined in her palace-prison, Shaghab planned to make her son the next caliph and relied on Thamal to get all news. When Shaghab knew that the caliph was in love with his new concubines, Futna and Jeejeik, Shaghab planned their deaths by poison, helped by Thamal. Futna, before her death, bore a son to the caliph, who was to be another caliph later on named Al-Qahir. Shaghab had to raise this son along with her own, by orders of the caliph. Al-Qahir never forgot to avenge his killed mother later on. The caliph at first never knew the secret behind the mysterious deaths of his concubines especially those who bore him male children. Later on, he suspected Shaghab, but found no evidence enough to punish her. At first, he decided to kill her himself, but he did not do that for her care of her son Al-Moqtadir and his son Al-Qahir. Shaghab killed the new wife of the caliph: the Egyptian princess Qatr Al-Nada (in Arabic, her name means: ''dew drops'') famous for her beauty, who was the daughter of the ruler of Egypt at the time Ahmed Ibn Tulun, of the Tulunids dynasty.   

2- The caliph Al-Mo'tadid saw nothing in Shaghab but a cow to breastfeed both his sons, Al-Qahir and Al-Moqtadir, and this fact infuriated Shaghab. At one time, Al-Mo'tadid was so furious at his son Al-Moqtadir, when he saw the child distributing his food in equal shares among his friends among children and servants. Such 'socialist' trend would prove dangerous to the caliph-to-be and crown-prince, and he decided to kill Al-Moqtadir. Shaghab implored him in tears to spare the life of her son, and she beseeched him repeatedly until he pardoned her son and advised her to change her  way of bringing him up. Of course, the hatred of Shaghab toward the caliph increased to a dangerous level. 

Durayrah in the pool:

1- Shaghab got the news from Thamal that the caliph was in love with his new concubine Durayrah, and he built her a special palace with and orchard and a piscine-like water pool, with total cost of 60 thousands dinars of gold, to live with her away from prying eyes. He sometimes would bring other singing slaves to entertain him and Durayrah. The poet Ibn Bassam, after being bribed by Shaghab and Thamal, of course, mocked and derided this caliph in these short lines of poetry:

He left all people astonished and bewildered

And he stayed away from them at the pool

To enjoy ramming into the vagina of Hurayrah!

2- The caliph feared that the awe of the Abbasid dynasty would be threatened by the verses of the poet Ibn Bassam, whose popularity made people memorize and repeat his verse. He had to demolish the pool, the orchard, and the special palace of Durayrah, and hence, the plot of Shaghab and Thamal succeeded to separate Durayrah from the caliph. Yet, the caliph kept Durayrah in his court and bed in the royal palace. Under orders of Shaghab, Thamal had to poison Durayrah, as typical of assassination during the Abbasid era. The caliph suspected Shaghab and found some evidence enough to prove his suspicions this time, and he was about to punish her by cutting off her nose to disfigure her face, but he did not; maybe he felt she might kill his son, Al-Qahir, who was being brought up by her in her palace.

The sudden deaths of Al-Mo'tadid and his son/heir Al-Moktafy: Al-Moqtadir, the son of Shaghab, became caliph:

1- Al-Mo'tadid was depressed after the death of Durayrah, and he composed verses and dirges to mourn her, and he found some consolation in having sex with as many concubines as possible every day and every night. Eventually, he got sick and died months after the death of Durayrah in 289 A.H. Did Shaghab kill him? No historian of the period was quite sure of that. Hence, his son/heir Al-Moktafy, who was 25 years old when his father died, became caliph and succeeded his father to the throne. Al-Moqtadir, the son of Shaghab, was 6 years old at the time, and Al-Qahir was two years old. 

2- When her arch-enemy Al-Mo'tadid died, Shaghab got out of her prison-palace, and became very close with her chief friend Thamal, and made her the head gentlewoman (Qahramana, in Arabic), and when Al-Moqtadir, the son of Shaghab, was old enough, Shaghab plotted the death of Al-Moktafy by poison in 295 A.H., with the help of Thamal of course, after his six years of rule. Al-Moqtadir, the son of Shaghab, was the eldest surviving heir, 13 years old at the time, and Shaghab claimed to retinue men of the palace and to judges and scholars that her son attained to puberty as a full-grown man. He was the youngest caliph ever in the Abbasid dynasty, and Shaghab ruled the caliphate in his name for 25 years.  

Shaghab fully controlled her son the caliph Al-Moqtadir:

1- Al-Moqtadir was raised as a child in the palace-prion of Shaghab, and therefore, he was so strongly attached to her, and he used to obey all her orders, and this led to her controlling rule and caliphate affairs.

2- The first decree of Shaghab was to ban others from calling her "Shaghab"; instead, she called herself in the formal title Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir (the great lady the mother of Al-Moqtadir).

3- Within such a title, she controlled the Abbasid caliphate for 25 years, until the death of her son in 320 A.H.

The power and influence of Thamal under the auspices of Shaghab:

1- Shaghab took violent revenge as usual from her foes when she became ruler: in 299 A.H., she confiscated the money of Fatima Al-Qahramana, whose drowned body was found in River Tigris. Other killed female slaves and concubines were the old ones who became gentlewomen (Qahramanas). Shaghab confiscated possessions of so many viziers and retinue men and dismissed them from their posts.

2- Moreover, the redoubtable Thamal had power to dismiss viziers and all men in the retinue of the caliphate from their posts. Shaghab changed the name of Thamal into Um Moussa Al-Qahramana.

3- The persecution done by Shaghab and Thamal drew near some viziers as well: the vizier Ibn Al-Jaraah did not show enough respect to Thamal, and his money and possessions were confiscated, and he got dismissed from his post. Shaghab confiscated money and possessions of so many notable and elite people in Baghdad as well (source: Al-Muntazim: 13/166, 304 A.H.)

Thamal became the supreme judge:

Shaghab confiscated all jewels of concubines to take revenge from them, and she granted treasures to all slave-girls who helped her before, and on top of all Thamal, who was granted the major part of the confiscated jewels and was made the Supreme Judge of Baghdad in 306 A.H. This was an unprecedented act in the history of caliphate. Thamal used to examine legal complains of people on Fridays, presiding over all religious scholars, theologians, commissionaires, clergymen, and judges, who wait for her orders and verdicts.

The plight of Thamal after assuming her position as supreme judge:

1- Thamal did not had time enough to enjoy her high-rank post; disputes occurred between her and Shaghab, as we read in writings of Ibn Al-Jawzy about the year 310 A.H.: (… Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir was furious at Um Moussa Al-Qahramana, and she had her arrested and had her possessions and money confiscated, and those of her in-laws and cronies, and a million dinar thus entered into the Abbasid Treasury  …).

2- Of course, Shaghab was not furious at money embezzlement or financial corruption, as such corruption was ordinarily done in the Abbasid caliphate by all notables, judges, scholars, viziers, etc., but Thamal was persecuted because of her political over-ambition that threatened Shaghab.

3- Thamal, in her heart, felt equal to Shaghab, as both were former female slaves and concubines brought to Baghdad together into the royal palace. The only difference was that Shaghab was desired in bed by Al-Mo'tadid and she bore him a son, and Thamal was not lucky enough in that respect. Thamal helped her best friend Shaghab in getting rid of her enemies, by poisoning them, until Al-Moqtadir became the caliph. Hence, of course, Thamal wanted to secure her gains, position, and stature by allowing some power and authority to her in-laws as she made an Abbasid prince her in-law, to make herself in the same stature like mistress Shaghab.

4- Such a vision is asserted by words of Ibn Al-Jawzy about the plight of Thamal: (… the reasons of her plight are not clear, but it is rumored that when Al-Moqtadir fell ill, Um Moussa seized the chance to send an Abbasid friend of hers to take charge of the palace on behalf of the caliph, thus ending the full control and power of Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir … It is certain that Um Moussa married off the daughter of her sister to an Abbasid prince, and her rivals aroused the suspicions of Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir that Um Moussa is planning to appoint this prince as the next caliph, and Al-Moqtadir and Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir had to get rid of Um Moussa …). (source: Al-Muntazim, about 310 A.H., 13/209). Hence, the political ambition of Thamal brought about her downfall.

Lastly:

 This unprecedented appointment of a female as supreme judge is an event we hope to see it occur one day in a real Islamic country that will apply Quranism.

Female Slaves in Rule: Al-Khayzuran: the Matriarch and Mother of Many Abbasid Caliphs

Introduction:

 She is the mother of all the progeny of Abbasid caliphs since her marriage to the third caliph, Al-Mahdi, until the last Abbasid caliph in Baghdad. Most of the Abbasid caliphs were sons of concubines and female slaves. In contrast, during the Umayyad caliphate, the ethnic prejudice against non-Arabs made the Umayyads feel the urge to avoid impregnating non-Arab concubines and female slaves, by practicing coitus interruptus. In fact, sons of concubines during the Umayyad caliphate lost their right to the throne, even if they were first-born sons. This changed during the Abbasid caliphate, of course, as female slaves wielded a great measure of power, authority, and control over the Abbasid palaces. We give below an overview of Al-Khayzuran, the most famous concubine that had the biggest influence and control over the Abbasid throne during the reign of her husband, Al-Mahdi, and her son, Harun Al-Rashid.   

1- She gave birth to two sons who became caliphs successively: Al-Hady and Harun Al-Rashid. The latter's progeny brought forth all the rest of the Abbasid caliphs, even the ones resided in Cairo until the Ottoman conquest of Egypt in 921 A.H./1517 A.D. That is why we assert here that Al-Khayzuran is the great mother of all caliphs of the Abbasid Dynasty. Her lover, the third Abbasid caliph Al-Mahdi (the son of the caliph Al-Mansour), freed her and got married to her after she bore him his two sons.

2- Al-Khayzuran was a mere bought slave-girl brought to the palace of Al-Mahdi. Usually, slave-girls would move from one household to another since their abduction by criminals and gangsters, and many men would have copulated with them. They were usually sold in slaves markets. Within such a horrid journey, slave-girls were taught how to please men and gratify them sexually, besides learning a measure of knowledge in fields of theology, literature, poetry, history, philosophy, etiquette, tidbits of wisdom, singing, dancing, and playing musical instruments as well as general knowledge of daily life and society on all its levels. Hence, slave-girls who were brought to palaces of caliphs were fully knowledgeable in feminine aspects, mental aspects, and human conditions. Besides the beauty of female slaves, their knowledge of etiquette and sex and culture and their having so many masters that enjoyed them in bed made them ambitious to reach the bed of the caliph and gain a measure of authority.  

3- Such was the case of Al-Khayzuran when she was probed semi-naked by the hands of Al-Mahdi, the then emir and heir to the throne, as usually done before buying slave-girls. The emir decided to buy her and said to her that her beauty is perfect, despite her legs that are rough to the touch of his hands, and she told him, to arouse him sexually, that he would need her much more when he would try her in bed, regardless of her legs that he would not see in the dark chamber! She became his favorite concubine in his seraglio, despite his wives among free women. Her two sons became caliphs and Harun Al-Rashid had his progeny that were caliphs; she was indeed the mother of the Abbasid caliphate.

4- Al-Mahdi loved Al-Khayzuran very much indeed, but when he became caliph, he got married to the daughter of his paternal uncle for political reasons in 159 A.H., and when Al-Khayzuran got angry and jealous, he freed her from slavery in the same year, and married her in 160 A.H., but in the same year, he performed pilgrimage and married in Yathreb one of the grand-daughters of Othman Ibn Affan, the third pre-Umayyad caliph.  

5- Hence, it was natural that troubles would often erupt between Al-Khayzuran and Al-Mahdi, as she dared to wreak havoc in the palace because she knew he favored her most and loved her above all women in his seraglio, free or enslaved. The famous historian, Al-Waqidi, was a friend of Al-Mahdi, and used to tell him accounts and histories of past kings. Once, Al-Mahdi complained to Al-Waqidi about the fact that Al-Khayzuran tearing his clothes when he was about to embrace her to make love to her, and she shouted at him to leave as she never felt his love. He complained to Al-Waqidi that she was his favorite woman and he made her two sons as crown-princes, and how she could have demanded more than that, and he asked his advice. Al-Waqidi was shrewd enough to gratify and pacify the sad caliph, and he praised Al-Khayzuran and her merits. Al-Waqidi knew that the caliph told her everything in his daily life, and he knew he must gain favor of Al-Khayzuran, the real queen and controller of the throne, and Al-Waqidi indeed gained favors and gifts of both Al-Khayzuran and Al-Mahdi.  

6- Indeed, Al-Khayzuran used all her feminine charm and her power over Al-Mahdi to make him prefer her progeny to his other offspring by his other wives and concubines. Eventually, he made his heir to the throne her two sons Al-Hady and then his successor would be Harun Al-Rashid. For a long period of time, she enjoyed full control authority over the Abbasid caliphate during its flourishing times of strength and power, during the reign of her husband Al-Mahdi. Yet, her son and crown-prince, Al-Hady, felt threatened and annoyed by such hegemony of his mother, and often expressed his ire at such state of affairs in public. Al-Khayzuran knew of course of such negative sentiments of her son Al-Hady, and she urged Al-Mahdi to make Harun Al-Rashid his successor instead of her first-born, Al-Hady. Al-Mahdi was about to grant her wish in 169 A.H., but before he would issue such decree, he died suddenly. Some historians suspected that Al-Hady had poisoned his father. When Al-Hady became enthroned as caliph, troubles ensued between him and his mother, Al-Khayzuran.  

7- Al-Hady never felt content regarding his mother's hegemony, full authority, and political power. He never looked with satisfaction to her meddling and interfering into the affairs of the caliphate. Al-Hady was a burly, strong youth with tempestuous temper as Ibn Tababa, the historian, writes about him, and he made sure his mother would lose all influence she used to have during his father's reign.

8- Conflicts arose between the new caliph and his mother, Al-Khayzuran. Al-Hady was an agile, strong-built, firm, violent and revengeful youth with alertness and brimming vitality, as per Al-Tabari, the historian. Yet, it seemed that he held a temporary truce with his mother; Al-Tabari mentions that Al-Hady allowed his mother only months to enjoy her power and authority, then to hand him full power over everything. He used to shout at her face to face, saying that women should never interfere in caliphate matters, this was not the fate allotted to them! He ordered his mother to keep to her chamber to spend time in prayers. Processions of those who sought the help, interference, aid, and intercession of Al-Khayzuran went on to her residential palace. Al-Khayzuran interceded on behalf of some wealthy man and asked her son the caliph to help him. He refused to oblige her request, threatening to kill the man who appealed to her and to confiscate his money. Al-Hady shouted his wonder about such processions, and he commanded his mother to keep herself secluded in affairs of her household and her acts of worship. He ordered her as well to never receive any visitor at all among Muslims or non-Muslims. She was so furious that she could hardly walk, but she never addressed Al-Hady, and vowed never to speak to him all her life.

9- Thus, Al-Khayzuran lost all her power during the rule of her son Al-Hady, who also planned to remove his brother, Harun Al-Rashid, from being the heir to the throne, putting his own son, Jaffer Ibn Al-Hady, in his place. To maintain her full hegemony and control, she did not hesitate to kill her son Al-Hady. Al-Khayzuran had to stop her son at any cost; she had to kill him! Harun Al-Rashid was her only hope to regain her former power and stature. Yet, this was not her only motive. Al-Hady tried to kill both Al-Khayzuran, his mother, and Harun Al-Rashid, his younger brother, using poison. Al-Hady sent her, as a token of love, a grilled goose filled with poison, and Al-Khayzuran was about to from it but her loyal woman-slave advised her to test it by throwing a piece of the goose to a hungry dog, who died instantly! Al-Khayzuran got wind of another conspiracy against her son Harun Al-Rashid. Attempt on the life of Al-Rashid was thwarted only by Al-Khayzuran, who sent some of her slave women to strangle Al-Hady in his sleep in 170 A.H., after 14 months of his caliphate. In the same night, she ordered Yahiya Ibn Khaled Al-Barmaky to make all men swear allegiance and fealty to the new caliph, her son Harun Al-Rashid. Al-Tabari asserts in his historical accounts that Al-Khayzuran was the actual behind-the-curtain ruler, not Harun Al-Rashid, with the aid of Yahiya Ibn Khaled Al-Barmaky, until her death in 173 A.H. in Mecca after she performed pilgrimage, and she was buried in Qorayish cemetery. Her son Harun Al-Rashid attended her funeral and walked in her burial procession full of tears and barefooted!

References: ( Al-Muntazim by Ibn Al-Jawzy 8/346, History of Baghdad 14/430, History of Al-Tabari 8/72, 121, 188, 205, 205, 210, 212, 223, 230, 238, and 252).

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: Within such periods of history, worship of money led one to commit crimes of murder, as people were away from the Quranic guidance. Mentalities of the period reflect the fact that people worshipped hadiths as their creed and never took care to ponder upon the Quranic verses at all, as such people were controlled by devils. Let us draw useful lessons from history and never to follow the example of such corrupt people.

2- Muhammad Shaalan: Such intrigues of palaces indicate corruption and decay in the caliphate, but could we trust narratives and historical accounts of historians of such a period?!

Female Slaves in Rule: Qabeeha: the Mother of the Abbasid Caliph Al-Moataz:

Introduction:

1- Arts of sex and carnal pleasures of concubines and female slaves during the Abbasid era brought an end to literary traditions of the Umayyad era and the pre-Islamic era of Platonic love, typical of literary verse and prose stories of Qais and Layla, and to the poems of platonic love as well that describe beauty of the beloved's eyes, eye-pupils, or eyelashes, in a chaste manner without sexual innuendos at all during the Umayyad era. During the Abbasid era, erotic literature and sexual love poems spread, and they have been copied in books authored by 'liberal' thinkers like al-Jahiz as well as 'conservative' religious Ibn-Hanbal-doctrine scholars and historians like Ibn Al-Jawzy. Abou Nawwas was very well-known at such liberal era because of his explicit erotic poems of heterosexual and homosexual love. Once even an anonymous concubine during the Abbasid era expressed in her poetical lines her view of love which was nothing for her but torrid sexual intercourse:

Love is nothing but hot hugging and kissing

With both bellies heaving one into the other

And entering penises into moist holes

So hard that tears pouting to drown the eyes

While clutching chests, shoulders, and heads

2- During such an era, Qabeeha was an outstanding example; Qabeeha was the most beautiful concubine among the 3000-concubine seraglio of the Abbasid caliph Al-Motawakil, who adored her immensely and could not bear to remain away from her. As she was so beautiful, and Arabs used to describe things by opposite epithets, the caliph called her Qabeeha (in Arabic, this word means the ugly one). This means that she was a sex expert in arts of carnal love, since she controlled the caliph and the political affairs of the Abbasid throne, and she made him forget the women of his seraglio. She became nearer to his heart when she gave birth to his son, Al-Moataz, who was known at the time by the title Al-Moataz son of Qabeeha. She made her son ascend to the throne as caliph and she controlled her son, as she was greedy for both power and money, and such greed brought about her tragic downfall, and we give more details below.

Qabeeha, the mother of the Abbasid caliph Al-Moataz

1- Al-Motawakil could never bear to be away from Qabeeha, his favorite concubine that won his heart, and his love to her increased when she bore him a son, Al-Moataz, who was known in his youth by his sharp intelligence, and hence, his mother Qabeeha urged Al-Motawakil to make Al-Moataz heir to his throne instead of his eldest son Al-Montasser. Al-Montasser conspired against his father's life using Turkish military leaders, who managed to assassinate Al-Motawakil, and later on Al-Montasser himself, the caliph Al-Mostaeen, and Al-Moataz and to subdue and humiliate Qabeeha herself.  

2- Qabeeha used to live her glory days of supreme power and authority I the caliphate of Al-Motawakil. She controlled the Abbasid dynasty and caliphate when her son, Al-Moataz, became the caliph. Her foolish unsound policies led to the downfall of her son, Al-Moataz, and to her humiliation in her last days. Between her periods as the favorite concubine of Al-Motawakil to her days of humiliation by the hands of the Turkish military leaders, she witnessed the greatness of the Abbasid caliphate during the reign of Al-Motawakil, and the degeneration period of this caliphate in her last days. Qabeeha was among the factors that led to the beginning of the degeneration of the Abbasid caliphate.

3- Historians tackled the unbridled passion of the power-hungry Qabeeha of supreme authority and hegemony. She urged Al-Motawakil to throw parties and lavish banquets filled with splendor and extravagance to celebrate her son when he finished memorization of the Quran by heart. Al-Moataz became caliph at the age of 19, in 251 A.H. He was the first Abbasid caliph to embroider his horses with gold jewelry. He fell totally under the control of Qabeeha, his mother.

4- Qabeeha enlisted the help of Turkish military leaders to assassinate the caliph Al-Mostaeen, deposed earlier by plans plotted Qabeeha. She plotted for her son in many ways to get rid of his foes and competitors within the Abbasid household. She controlled Turkish military leaders by making use of their rifts and inner quarrels. She used to confiscate huge quantities of money and jewels and to have them stored in hidden locations known only to her.

5- Qabeeha used to incite conflicts and competitions among military leaders and soldiers of Turkish, Moroccan, and Circassian origin, to use them to her advantage. The Moroccans accused the Turkish ones of assassinating and deposing caliphs, and the latter killed the leaders of the formers as a result of such insults. Skirmishes and inner fights ensued.

6- Qabeeha tried another method of control; she urged her son the caliph at one time to stop paying the annuities of the soldiers, which reached to about one million of dinars in 252 A.H., and to her satisfaction, Turkish soldiers revolted as a result against their leader, Wasif, and killed him in 253 A.H. Thus, Qabeeha and her son got rid of the alarming rising authority of Wasif that threatened her. At the same time, Al-Moataz gave the posts of the dead Wasif to another leader named Bagha, to incite enmity between this leader and Saleh Ibn Wasif.

7- As influence and authority of Bagha, the Turkish leader, increased, Qabeeha tried to repeat the same game with Bagha; she withheld the annuities of soldiers to incite them against Bagha, who understood the manipulation done, and attacked with his men a storehouse that contained some possession and money of Qabeeha, confiscating all of the loads on twenty mules, taking advantage of the temporary absence of the caliph in a brief journey away from Baghdad. Yet, some sentinels of the caliph ambushed and killed Bagha. The caliph ordered the burning of corpse of Bagha and the arrest of some of his soldiers in 254 A.H.   

8- Saleh Ibn Wasif was the only option remaining to Qabeeha and her son to be the leader of the Turkish soldiers. Yet, Qabeeha plotted against Saleh Ibn Wasif; she sent for Moussa Ibn Bagha to come to Baghdad to take the place of his father. At the same time, she made a deal with the vizier Ahmad Ibn Israel not to give any money to Saleh Ibn Wasif to pay the annuities of the soldiers, in order to create an opportunity for their revolting against him and kill him. Saleh Ibn Wasif understood the plot and entered with a military force into the palace of the caliph and the vizier to make his soldiers see that the vizier is behind their lack of money. The vizier was humiliated and beaten before the eyes of the caliph, and later on tortured to tell them by force the location of the due money. The caliph felt extremely afraid and could not protect his vizier.

9- Qabeeha sent her orders to Saleh Ibn Wasif to set the vizier free, but he ignored her. He managed to gather all soldiers of other origins around him, inciting them against Qabeeha and her son who withheld their annuities.

10- Saleh Ibn Wasif sent a delegation of soldiers to the caliph to ask for the annuities, knowing that the caliph was powerless and all money and possessions were in the hidden storehouse of Qabeeha. Qabeeha told her son she owned nothing, when he asked her to help him. She urged her son to wait for the arrival of Moussa Ibn Bagha to help in getting rid of Saleh Ibn Wasif. Yet, Saleh Ibn Wasif was faster; he arrested the caliph, and left him to the Turkish soldiers to torture him. They later on deposed him and appointed Al-Mohtadi as the new caliph in 255 A.H. Qabeeha ran away via a secret hidden passage from her chamber leading to outside of her palace.

11- Saleh Ibn Wasif looked for Qabeeha everywhere in Baghdad. He found her soon enough and confiscated all her countless treasures, jewels, money, and hidden possessions that were worth millions of dinars. He wondered at her greed and stinginess as she could not part with her money and possessions to save her own son; she sacrificed him and tried to get away with her wealth instead of saving Al-Moataz!

12- Apparently, Saleh Ibn Wasif  tortured and raped Qabeeha, and later on banished her to Mecca, and she was rumored to invoke God's wrath on him at the Sacred Kaaba Mosque, asserting to pilgrims that he raped her. She remained in her exile in Mecca in utter humiliation until the caliph Al-Mu'tamid allowed her to return to the city of Samraa, until her death in it in 264 A.H.

References: History of Tabari 9/175, 224, 349, 387, 388, 393, 395, 406, 441, 442, and 553, History of Al-Muntazim 12/251, and History of Ibn Katheer 11/11 and 160. 

COMMENTS:

1- Muhammad Shaalan: This scandal of Qabeeha makes readers discern useful lessons drawn from history: a pretty woman's self-worship led to her demise and humiliation, as her conspiracies led to bloodshed and utter destruction. Beauty must be in one's personality and character not in one's looks. 

Female Slaves in Rule: Shaghab: the Ruler of the Abbasid Caliphate for Twenty Five Years:

1- Al-Sayeda (i.e., the lady, or grand dame) was the formal title of the former female slave/concubine Shaghab, who was the mother of the Abbasid caliph Al-Moqtadir, who was made caliph by her upon reaching the age of 13, and he was controlled by his mother to the extent that she enjoyed controlling the caliphate for 25 years, until her son's murder in 320 A.H., followed by her tragic painful end. 

2- Al-Tabari historical accounts had many lines about Shaghab: she was a female slave named Naeim (the soft-skinned one) who was bought by the Abbasid caliph Al-Mo'tadid from her former owner, a lady called Um Al-Qassim Bint Muhammad Ibn Abdulla, and the caliph liked her a lot, but once she bore him his son, Al-Moqtadir, he deserted her for other new concubines. 

3- Shaghab was thin and of yellowish skin, and she could not compete with other white blond, fat concubines of the seraglio. She felt jealous of the 4000 concubines of the caliph. She entered into a series of endless conflicts with these concubines in the Abbasid seraglio. Shaghab engaged in endless quarrels and fights and intrigues.  She hated the fact that the caliph deserted her company and bed. Hence, the caliph punished, humiliated, and beat her, and he changed her name from Naeim to Shaghab (in Arabic: ''troubles''), and that name stuck to her ever since.

4- Shaghab lived a life filled with intrigues and plots, killing off by poisoning all new concubines that Al-Mo'tadid loved, such as: Futna, Jeejeik, and Durayrah, and his new pretty bride, the Egyptian princess Qatr Al-Nada, with the help of her close associate, the female slave Thamal. Al-Qahir was the son of the murdered concubine Futna, and Al-Mo'tadid forced Shaghab to breastfeed and bring him up with her own son, Al-Moqtadir, in her palace-prison. Shaghab dare not to refuse the request and never dared to kill Al-Qahir off, lest the caliph would kill her. Al-Qahir never forgot to avenge his dead mother; once enthroned as a caliph later on, he took revenge from Shaghab, as we will read below about her tragic end.  

5- In her palace-prison, Shaghab knew all news of the outside world and the Abbasid palace from Thamal who helped her in all her plots, and Al-Mo'tadid never dared to have Shaghab murdered so as to make her bring up his two sons and because he had no sufficient evidence that she was behind the mysterious deaths of many of his concubines. 

6- Shaghab conspired to allow her son to become a caliph, but as Al-Mo'tadid died suddenly in 289 A.H., his son, Al-Moktafy, succeeded him to the throne. Shaghab had to wait until her son reached the age of 13 to kill Al-Moktafy by poisoning to allow his successor, her son Al-Moqtadir, to be enthroned. As she controlled her son fully, she wielded such influence and authority over the Abbasid throne for 25 years. 

7- The first decree of Shaghab was to ban others from calling her "Shaghab"; instead, she called herself in the formal title Al-Sayeda Um Al-Moqtadir. Her second decree was to confiscate all jewels and precious stones of all concubines of the seraglio of her rivals, and to grant them to gentlewomen and female slaves under Thamal, who helped her in her plots and assassinations, and Thamal got the lion's share of such confiscated jewels. Shaghab called Thamal Um Moussa Al-Qahramana, as her main gentlewoman in the palace. Thamal had such influence that she dismissed viziers from their posts.    

8- To spite religious scholars/imams/clergy of the Sunnite religion of her age, Shaghab issued an unprecedented decree by appointing Thamal as the Supreme Judge of Baghdad, and on Fridays, she would judge cases of people justly, within male judges and scholars under her command. Fabricated hadiths to vilify and asperse women as a gender were concocted at such era by envious Sunnite imams; yet, most high-rank scholars and historians never expressed their discontent.  

9- Most high-rank deities of the Sunnite religion lived in that era, and they were zeroes and nothings before the Abbasid palaces and diwan (i.e., palace court); yet; they were deified as demi-gods after their deaths by the Muhammadan Sunnite human cattle. Most of such gods never expressed their fury at Thamal and Shaghab, and some died in the era of Shaghab and some outlived her: Al-Bokhary, Moslem, Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Makhlad, Ibn Qotayba, Al-Razi, Abou Dawood Al-Dhaheiri, Ibn Shureih, Abou Othman Al-Heiry, Al-Nisaa'i, Al-Jibaa'i, Ibn Al-Jalaa, Abou Yaali, Al-Astani, Al-Rawandi, Al-Tabari, Al-Zajjaj, Al-Akhfash, Al-Baghoui, etc.  

10- Shaghab went on taking revenge from her rivals and foes; in 299 A.H., she confiscated possessions and money of the former Qahramana (head gentlewoman) named Fatima and had her murdered by drowning in the River Tigris Other killed female slaves and concubines were the old ones who became head gentlewomen (Qahramanas). Shaghab confiscated possessions of so many viziers and retinue men and dismissed them from their posts to appoint new ones loyal to her. 

12- Yet, Shaghab had some charity works done; she established a big hospital on the River Tigris in 306 A.H. and she prepared an army using her own money to defend Baghdad against the Qarmatians in 315 A.H.

13- Conspiracies never stopped against Shaghab and her son, Al-Moqtadir, as Turkish military leaders revolted against the caliph and deposed him, appointing Al-Qahir as caliph instead. Yet, this plot failed and Al-Moqtadir was enthroned once more and he pardoned his younger brother, Al-Qahir, and spared his life. Later on, a second successful revolt occurred; Al-Moqtadir was killed by the Turkish military leaders in 320 A.H., and the rebels, led by the Turkish leader Mo'nis Al-Khadem, appointed Al-Qahir as the legitimate successor and caliph. Once enthroned, he witnessed the torture of Shaghab himself upon his orders, and he tortured her many times by his own hands. Eventually, he tied her legs by a rope, lifted her upside down from the ceiling, and left her screaming for hours. Her urine would drown her face in such position, and after he extorted from her all hidden locations of her treasures and money, he tortured her to death.      

Lastly: This is the era in which the Sunnite religion has emerged and has been named as such; a very corrupt decadent age that begot a very bad, corrupt, and deadly religion!

References: History of Al-Tabari 10/139, History of Ibn Al-Atheer, 6/119, 11/105, and 11/169:175, History of Caliphs by Al-Siyouti: 604, Al-Muntazim by Ibn Al-Jawzy: 13/253, Al-Wafi bi Al-Wafeiyyat by Al-Safadi: 16/167.  

COMMENTS:

1- Muhammad Shaalan: I discern from the article above that all murderers and killers are killed/murdered later on as retribution ordained by Fate. This is true in the Middle Ages of caliphate and today as well. 

2- Salah Amer Al-Najjar: I feel sorry that Egypt was conquered by Arabs to be ruled by sons of whores and prostitutes of Arabia! Yet, such bastards were deified by the Muhammadans later on! Episodes of Dr. Mansour titled "Salafism Exposed" on the YouTube are filled with more details on that subject; the eras of sexual immorality and profligate rulers, sultans, and caliphs and their scandals and crimes fill a huge number of tomes and volumes! Is that the caliphate that the terrorist MB members and Salafists dream of reviving one day in Egypt! Shame on such terrorist ignoramuses!

Female Slaves in Rule: Shagaret Al-Dor the Sultana of Egypt:

Firstly: before she became the Sultana/Queen of Egypt:

1- The Mamelukes (i.e., male slaves bought by the Ayyubids and trained to be military soldiers and leaders) reached the rule of Egypt as they inherited the Ayyubid dynasty, their masters, that came to an end. The Mameluke empire reached from the west of Iraq to east of Libya, and from south of Hejaz to the south of Asia Minor. The Mameluke sultan, leaders, soldiers stopped and defeated the Moghuls in Palestine before they would step into Sinai to conquer Egypt. The Mamelukes were the ones to eradicate crusaders forever from the Levant, once and for all in a decisive victory as they crushed the Europeans. The Mamelukes were the ones to lead and dominate via Egypt the 'Islamic' world; even emperor of India used to send messages to them to declare his nominal submission and loyalty to them. The Mamelukes were the ones to adorn districts of Cairo with monuments, mosques, and buildings that stand until now. Before the Mameluke empire was established, the Mamelukes were the ones to defeat Louis IX of France when he attacked Egyptian Mediterranean coast within a crusade, to capture him, and to make him ransom himself by a huge amount of golden coins. With such great victories and many laurels, the very first Mameluke to be enthroned in Egypt was a former female slave: Shagaret Al-Dor the Sultana of Egypt, who was former concubine and later-on wife of the Ayyubid sultan Al-Saleh Najm Eddine Ayoub.       

2- The Ayyubid dynasty sultans and princes fought and murdered one another within incessant strife before their imminent collapse, and even some of them enlisted the help of crusaders to defeat his kinsmen. The best and wisest one of such dynasty was probably its last one, the Ayyubid sultan of Egypt Al-Saleh Najm Eddine Ayoub.   

3- The redoubtable Ayyubid Sultan Al-Saleh Ayoub was known for his absolute power, supreme authority and control, guarding his silence, dignity, solemnity, and shunning festivity and amusements. No one would dare to begin an audience with him without prior permission, and he was so proud that at one point, his eldest son, Omar, was captured and imprisoned by his rival in the Levant, Ismail the Ayyubid, Al-Saleh Ayoub was too proud to ask him to release his son; eventually this son languished and died in prison. Al-Saleh Ayoub  was so furious at one point at his brother, Al-Adil the Ayyubid, that he had him murdered and confiscated his possessions, and accepted no intercession to spare his brother's life. That is why we cannot say that he fell violently in love with Shagaret Al-Dor, a mere concubine of his of Turkish origin. Yet, she managed to convince him to set her free and to marry her; this was the challenge she won, as she conquered his heart by her beauty, reasoning mind, and sharp intelligence. She bore him a son, named Khalil, who died early as a child, but she was formally titled Um Khalil; this was what she gained from her dead child.

4- Another chance occurred to prove the intelligence of Shagaret Al-Dor in critical periods: crusaders attacked Damietta, and its Ayyubid battalion fled the city in fear as they were surprised and deserted the city to the crusaders led by Louis IX. Meanwhile, the sultan was seriously taken ill during his planning to move the Egyptian army toward Mansoura to face the crusaders. Shagaret Al-Dor felt that her husband was dying, as doctors told her his case was hopeless, and she convinced him to sign and seal thousands of empty formal papers used for issuing his royal decrees. She formed a committee to manage the affairs of Egypt and supervise the military mobilization. She send letters and orders sealed by her husband, the sultan, to mobilize and urge soldiers to fight back the crusaders, and she moved into a palace near Mansoura along with her dying husband, to encourage, plan, and supervise the military actions. She used to send soldiers who would perform military skirmishes to frighten and kill some crusaders in Damietta, to sabotage their camps, and to sap their resources and energy. 

5- When her husband the sultan died, she kept it as a secret from everyone for a certain period. She buried him in secrecy, and made everyone think he was still alive and sending sealed orders. She never changed habits and customs of daily life in the palace to keep his death a top secret, and stopped anyone wishing to visit him during his ailment as he kept to bed, under the pretext that he did not wish to be seen in agony and pain. The Egyptians knew instinctively that their sultan was dead months ago, but they spread the news in hushed voices as they know how critical the situation was. The crusaders got news of the sultan's death and that boosted their moral to march their troops toward Mansoura. A decisive battle  ensued, and the Mameluke armies defeated and vanquished the troops of the crusaders, killing off most of them and capturing Louis IX in 648 A.H. in Mansoura. Queen Shagaret Al-Dor sent for the dead sultan's eldest son, Turan Shah, to come to ascend to the throne of Egypt. She made all people in the retinue and government to swear featly and allegiance to Turan Shah before his coming. She went on heading the military planning process and endeavors until she could defeat the crusaders and crushed his armies. The victory was assured by plans set by Queen Shagaret Al-Dor and the military wisdom and acumen of the two Mameluke leaders: Aqtay and Aybak.

6- Turan Shah reached Egypt to find that Queen Shagaret Al-Dor had earned a decisive victory over crusaders and preserved his throne for him. Instead of being thankful to her and to the Mamelukes, he treated everyone contemptuously and preferred his own Mamelukes that he intended to make them replace the old, victorious ones owned by his late father. He demanded from Queen Shagaret Al-Dor all her money and possessions and that of the State Treasury. She felt that he had evil intentions toward her, and she advised the Mamelukes to kill him, and they did it. Thus, Queen Shagaret Al-Dor began her route toward authority by intrigues and conspiracies.

Secondly: Sultana Shagaret Al-Dor and the Abbasid caliph Al-Mostaasim:

1- Once Turan Shah was murdered, it was natural that his paternal uncles' sons in the Levant would desire to claim the throne of Egypt. The Mamelukes had to quickly prevent this to keep the throne for themselves; acknowledging her stature and role, the notable, powerful, and rich Mamelukes agreed on making Queen Shagaret Al-Dor the Sultana and ruler of Egypt, with the right to seal and sign formal papers of the sultanate of Egypt. She used to sign using her formal title Um Khalil. Mosques imams acknowledged her rule as the Queen of Egypt and prayed for her sake on Friday sermons as the Queen of 'Muslims'. Her rule began in 648 A.H. she wore the robe of sovereignty made of expensive silk embroidered with gold. Princes kissed the ground under her feet as customary at the time, as she stood before a curtain. Her first royal decree was to hold talks with the captured Louis IX, who eventually ransomed himself with the total sum of 400.000 dinars in gold.

2- The Abbasid caliph Al-Mostaasim denounced the fact that Shagaret Al-Dor became the ruler of Egypt, and sent a formal message, within which he mocked all Egyptians by saying that if they lacked men, he would send them a man to be their ruler. Queen Shagaret Al-Dor felt that because of such embarrassing letter that showed her lack or full legitimacy to the throne before the public eye inside and outside Egypt, she had to formally give up authority and rule behind the curtain; she got married to the man who was to be the first Mameluke sultan: Ezz-Eddine Aybak.

3- We have tackled how a former female slave achieved many feats and saved Egypt amidst critical times when she was the Sultana: the Queen of Egypt, who was a former concubine in a seraglio of an Ayyubid sultan. What about the pampered filthily rich Abbasid caliph who was brought up within a ruling dynasty that reigned for more than 700 years? Let us also tackle how the Abbasid caliph Al-Mostaasim lost Iraq and his throne and caused thousands to lose their lives because of the Moghuls. Ibn Tababa, the historian contemporary to this caliph, describes in his periodicals this last Abbasid caliph in Baghdad as a weak, low-profile, impressionable person with no experience in rule and in the affairs of the caliphate, and he was an easy prey for those greedy ones around him. This caliph used to spend his time listening to music and songs and watching dancers in court. His retinue consisted of ignorant, mean, and greedy men living off him. . Ibn Katheer asserts in his books that the last Abbasid caliph used to adore storing huge amounts of money, to the extent that he confiscated to himself the money (about 100.000 dinars) given to him as a trust by Al-Nasser Dawood, of the Ayyubid Dynasty, and people rebuked him for that deed.  

4- This type of avarice and insatiable greed for money was the main reason behind the defeat of this caliph by the Moghuls. Such avarice and greed of the last caliph, like his ancestors, led him to confiscate the annuities of the soldiers in this critical time when the Moghuls drew nearer to Baghdad. Ibn Katheer asserts that this last caliph disbanded the army soldiers and refused to give them their dues, and these soldiers had to beg in streets and markets and at gates of mosques. Poets composed verses to lament those soldiers and the decadent degenerated affairs of the caliphate and Islam, as per Ibn Katheer in his historical accounts.

5- The caliph who confiscated the money due to his soldiers was an extravagant person who used to lavish excessive sums of money over his subordinates, servants, henchmen, and slaves as well as men in his retinue who were used to confiscate other people's money and possessions unjustly. Such evil people were the ones who controlled and monopolized the wealth in Baghdad in such decadent and declining times by controlling the caliph, while scientists and scholars and artist would die of hunger. In such upside-down state of affairs, a declining empire would be about to end and witness its downfall, and the horrid image was completed by the spread of bribery, wide-scale confiscations of properties and possessions of others unjustly, countless internal troubles and general unrest, as well as decadent demeanor of immorality while inhabitants of Baghdad immersed in trivial matters, ignoring the imminent danger of the Moghuls at the gates of the city. This resulted in Moghuls massacring all dwellers of Baghdad, conquering it along with all Iraq, destroying its civilization and heritage, and razing the city to the ground after looting it. After razing Baghdad to the ground, Hulago, the Moghul leader and chieftain, entered with his forces the palace of the caliphate. The last caliph was brought to him, shivering in terror. Hulago shouted at him and said mockingly that he was the caliph's guest and demanded all worthy and valuable things in the palace to be brought before him. All coffers and huge boxes containing precious stones, jewelry, gold …etc. were brought to him. Hulago gave them away to his men and servants as gifts, and demanded to know all the secret chambers and hidden storehouses of treasures that the caliph knew about. Under duress, the terrified caliph told him all about that, and especially of the underground grand basin in the garden of the palace, which was filled with golden bars, each weighing about 100 pounds! Hulago and his soldiers excavated and extracted all gold from this basin. Hulago expressed his wonder at such a fool of a sultan who had such treasures and did not spend some money on soldiers and military armies to defend himself and his throne. Hulago mocked and taunted the last caliph as he owned all such priceless treasures and was stingy enough not to pay the annuities of his soldiers!  Hulago ordered that the women of the seraglio of the caliph were to be brought to him. They were 700 concubines and 1000 slave-girls and female servants. The crying caliph tried to appeal and implore to Hulago to spare them, saying that they never went out of the palace, and that they had never seen moon and the sun, as his women were prisoners of the seraglio, just like the gold bars he buried! Such was his view concerning women, and females in general, and concerning Shagaret Al-Dor! All treasures and precious stones and jewels gathered by the Abbasid caliphs for five centuries were accumulated on top of one another by Hulago and the Moghuls, and appeared like huge mountains seen from afar! Women of the seraglio were distributed among Moghuls. Al-Mostaasim witnessed all sorts of humiliation before he was killed by the Moghuls who trampled over him with their feet until he died, as per the historical accounts of Al-Hamazany, the historian.

5- Such a person was the last Abbasid caliph of Baghdad, and such was the Sultana Shagaret Al-Dor. He lost his caliphate because of his folly and greed, and he was killed brutally and his money and women were taken as spoils. He caused the end of the Abbasid era. Queen Shagaret Al-Dor protected her country and kingdom, Egypt, and forced Louis IX to sign a treaty never to attack any Muslim country at all as long as he would live, among her above-mentioned feats of heroism. Both this queen and that last Abbasid caliph ruled within the tyrannical logic of the Middle Ages. Which of them do we prefer, if we are to submit to tyranny anyway?! 

Thirdly: the death of Sultana Shagaret Al-Dor:

1- Queen Shagaret Al-Dor began her life within margins of the lines of history as a mere concubine, but she jumped into the headlines of historical accounts to occupy a unique place in the history of Muslims as the very first and last woman to be enthroned as sole sovereign/ sultana. Her life was linked to the critical period of Egyptian history as crusaders attacked Egypt and as the Ayyubid dynasty came to an end and gave way to the emergence of the Mameluke era. Queen Shagaret Al-Dor was the very first Mameluke ruler. Her life ended in a tragic manner, as her murder was caused by political intrigues that extinguished her mercilessly, just as she never had mercy toward her rivals and foes.   

2- Because of the condemnation of Al-Mostaasim regarding Queen Shagaret Al-Dor as sole sovereign, and because the public opinion inside and outside Egypt favored and endorsed his rebuke, she felt the urgent need to get married; she formally ceded power and married Ezz Eddine Aybak, the rich and powerful Mameluke military leader, who was made a sultan and enthroned soon afterwards. Of course, Queen Shagaret Al-Dor was the real ruler behind curtains, and she held all power in her hands, with Aybak overtly seen by the public as the new sultan, the very first male Mameluke ruler, like a façade to her.

3- Before getting married, Queen Shagaret Al-Dor had two suitors to choose from: Aybak and Aqtay. Both were rich and powerful Mameluke military leaders who wooed her incessantly. Aqtay had his emissary Beibars (the powerful and intelligent Mameluke military leader who later on was enthroned as caliph on his turn) to woo and court her, but he talked of nothing but his master' military prowess and bravery. The Queen felt Aqtay can never share his power with her; she refused his addresses. Aybak had his emissary Qotoz (the powerful Mameluke military leader who later on was enthroned as caliph before Beibars and vanquished the troops of the Moghuls in Palestine, and then, he was killed and succeeded by Beibars) to woo and court her, and he talked about the fervent and ardent love and desire of his master who would do anything to please her. Queen Shagaret Al-Dor found in Aybak an obedient husband who could not dare to oppose her sovereignty because he loved her. She used to command him and he would gladly obey her as queen of his heart. Aqtay refused to be spurned and threatened to destroy the capital and rule over another part of Egypt independently, and his Mamelukes tried to assassinate Aybak and declared rebellion against the queen. Aybak and the Queen had no choice left but to assassinate Aqtay.

4- After a short period of marital bliss, Aybak soon enough felt irritated and annoyed by the interference of the Queen in affairs of the throne and rule. Aybak began to gradually get rid of her influence and authority, and he successfully wooed and was betrothed to an Ayyubid princess whose father ruled Al-Mosul, in Iraq. Shagaret Al-Dor was furious and blind with jealousy, as Aybak deserted her palace and lived in another palace, sought a new wife from the Ayyubid dynasty in Iraq, and remarried his divorcee, Um Ali, the mother of his only son, Ali. Jealousy and lack of sleep prevented Shagaret Al-Dor from thinking clearly; she plotted  conspiracy to murder Aybak, her husband, to regain her power and authority and to revenge herself. She lost her mind to think that she would manage to go unpunished. Her jealousy clouded her intelligence this time; she forgot that the Mamelukes of Aybak would rebel and avenge his murder.

5- Shagaret Al-Dor sent a letter to Aybak to implore him to return to her palace and bed, and she reminded him of her love and his. He entered her palace to renew and rekindle their love, and after making love to her, he got undressed to bathe in the grand bathroom of the palace. Once inside the basin of hot water, the assassins employed by Shagaret Al-Dor murdered him by crushing his testicles before her eyes. Before his death, he screamed in agony, asking for mercy from the Queen, and when she implored the assassins to stop as she changed her mind, the assassins told her that if he were to live, he would murder them. As expected, Mamelukes of Aybak rebelled and revolted against Shagaret Al-Dor once they knew of the murder of their master; they murdered the assassins brutally and arrested Shagaret Al-Dor, and eventually, she was handed over to her revengeful rival: Um Ali, the widow of Aybak who was his first wife.       

6- Um Ali enjoyed the scene of putting Shagaret Al-Dor to death, upon her orders, as female slaves had beaten her to death with wooden sandals. Um Ali ordered the bloody corpse be thrown, naked, from the palace walls. Few days later, people of Cairo took pity on their queen and put the corpse in a bag made of palm leaves to bury her! Um Ali celebrated her revenge by distributing to all residents of Cairo plates of a special dessert she concocted herself and carried her name until now in English and in Arabic: the Um Ali dessert consists of milk, dried grapes, sugar, nuts, white bread, and ghee. This oriental dessert is well-known now in Europe and Turkey. Both were former female slaves: Shagaret Al-Dor reached the throne and headlines of history books, and Um Ali who entered the lines of cookery and cuisine books!

Lastly: we are to draw useful lessons from such a history:

1- We are still living in the Middle East the masculine culture of Al-Mostaasim: the culture of males whose brains are centered in their genitalia, regarding women (free ones and slaves) only as sub-human sex objects. Such inhuman culture is manifested in writings of the Sunnite religion, especially the Ibn Hanbal doctrine. Such corrupt books revolved around the heritage notions of the second Abbasid Era of decadence. Al-Mostaasim lived this culture of glorifying genitalia and he spent his lifetime between legs of thousands of free women and enslaved concubines; he never contacted their brains, until Hulago deprived him of his women, money, riches, caliphate, possessions, and his life.     

2- Some free men and women were punished by being enslaved forcibly; this was one of the gravest injustices of life, but some were rewarded by appointing themselves as rulers and sovereigns like Kafur and Shagaret Al-Dor, and those former concubines who ruled the Abbasid caliphate behind curtains for decades. Let us not forget that Queen Shagaret Al-Dor was the very first former female slave to rule a nation of free women and men. 

3- People today still commit the grave mistake of using the terms 'Islam' and 'Muslims' (past and present) interchangeably, thinking wrongly that they are synonymous; nothing could be further from the truth. Such wrong overlapping makes Islam (the Quran alone for Quranists) responsible for this false outlook and faulty regard toward women. In fact, such inferior attitude toward women has been maintained, backed, and propagated by the Sunnite religion and NOT by Islam (i.e., Islam as the Quran alone) and has been formed because of the erroneous thinking that the Muhammadans' earthly, man-made religions are part of Islam. This is grave injustice against God and people, and it impedes reformist endeavors by Quranists led by us, Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour, especially that West media calls terrorists as 'Islamists' and their terrorism as 'jihad', despite the fact that their terror contradict Islam/the Quran and the fact that their inferior look to women is against the Quranic teachings; yet, some call such misogyny as part of 'Islamic' sharia! Indeed, it is part of the Sunnite/Wahabi sharia. Sadly, the Wahabi Ibn Hanbal jurisprudence (fiqh or theology) is still being taught in the KSA and its Wahabi institutions all over the world, the Cairo-based Al-Azhar and its branches and schools all over the globe, and in all ordinary schools in the Arab world, and its corrupt clergy and imams (of both genders) find outlets to spread their lies and falsehoods in international and local media. In contrast, we Quranists cannot find any widespread media to reach people to spread our enlightenment of Quranism (our vision of real Islam) and we cannot even build a small mosque anywhere. American Quranists are too poor to build a small mosque for Friday congregational prayers. This means one thing: we are still living the age and culture of Al-Mostaasim, even if we had millions of the examples of successful, wise, intelligent, and shrewd women like Queen Shagaret Al-Dor.  

References: Al-Eibar 5/222, Al-Solok 1/361, History of Ibn Katheer, 13/199, Al-Nojom Al-Zahera 7/56, Husn Al-Muhadarah  2/39, Shazarat Al-Dhahab 5/268, Al-Wafeiyyat 16/120.

COMMENTS: 

1- Salah Amer Al-Najjar: I thank our dear Dr. Mansour for showing to us scandals and crimes of caliphs and imams in history that bear the name of Islam forcibly and unjustly; the Muhammadans of today repeat such narratives blindly as if they were religion! All hadiths are fabricated lies that cover millions of sheets! Such ignoramuses of today teach such falsehoods at Al-Azhar and all over the Arab world as Islam! Such calamity must be stopped by spreading enlightenment for years to come. I admire immensely the writings of our dear Dr. Mansour as it is simple to understand and delves deep into knowledge and logic that expose falsehoods and refute fabrications and lies, with the power of knowledge that enters into our deep inner side as readers. I think I can no longer eat the dessert called Om Ali! 

CHAPTER III: Slaves in the Sunnite Religion:

Slaves at the Early Beginnings of the Sunnite Legislation:

Anas Ibn Malik:

Introduction:

1- It is a laughter-inducing fact that the vast majority of orally narrated so-called hadiths are attributed to those who were very young children when Prophet Muhammad died, as they lived long after his decease to fabricate and spread whatever they liked, claiming that they heard such hadiths from Muhammad. What is more funny and silly is that the great number of hadiths attributed to such children makes one imagines that as if Muhammad in his last years kept talking separately to each child for several months, among such children who narrated their fabrications as they grew up were Ibn Abbas and, the most dangerous and worst of them all, Anas Ibn Malik (whom no one dared to contradict and refute until now except us, Dr. A. S. Mansour). 

2- Let us give below a brief overview on Anas Ibn Malik, taken from his biography written in the book titled "Al-Tabakat Al-Kobra" authored by Ibn Saad, an Arab historian.

Firstly: Anas Ibn Malik:

1- Historians are sure that he died in 93 A.H., shortly before he could have reached the age of 100 years. This means that if it is true that Prophet Muhammad died in 11 A.H., Anas Ibn Malik as a child was 11 or 12 years old at the time when Muhammad died. Is it possible that a 12-year-old child had been a servant to Muhammad for years?! Was that necessary? Muhammad was surely served by his wives and his tribesmen of the Hashemites. Hence, Anas Ibn Malik lied when he said he served Muhammad. In fact, Anas Ibn Malik made use of his long life to gain fame and huge amounts of money for 80 years after Muhammad's death and 30 years after the death of Abou Hurayrah in 59 A.H. (who was one of the most renowned narrators/fabricators of hadiths, loyal to the Umayyad Dynasty). Abou Hurayrah was one of the chief allies of the Umayyads who would spread his fabrications, falsehoods, and lies about Muhammad in return for money generously bestowed on him by the Umayyads to serve their political propaganda, and he remained faithful to that dynasty until his death in Basra, Iraq, which was ruled at the time by his close friend, Al-Hajaj, the grand vizier loyal to Umayyads who fought their battles and won their struggles for them, who died in his turn in 95 A.H. Once Abou Hurayrah died, Anas Ibn Malik took his place for the Umayyads, and he enjoyed protection of Al-Hajaj for 18 years from 75 A.H. to 93 A.H. when Anas Ibn Malik died.

2- During his long stay in Iraq, Anas Ibn Malik was visited by throngs of people to hear what he says about Muhammad. He was sort of an icon or a popular star for those thirsty to hear anything related to Muhammad. Anas Ibn Malik sought fame and wealth; he did not hesitate to fabricate narratives, making use of the fact that the so-called companions of the prophet died and thus no one would dare to contradict, correct, or refute him at all. Those how were eager to hear and spread his fabrications did not stop for a moment to think that more than 70 years separate Anas Ibn Malik in Iraq and Muhammad's Yathreb and that memories of old people sometimes tend to forget and imagine things that did not possibly occur. "…and some of you will be returned to the vilest age, so that he may not know, after having known…" (22:5). Hence, such throngs were too eager and apt to believe whatever Anas Ibn Malik would recount, and he used his fame and stature to invest his narratives and make tons of money. Of course, such endeavors for wealth entailed that Anas Ibn Malik must flatter, obey, and please Umayyad rulers and despots while overlooking and justifying their countless grave injustices.

3- The name of Anas Ibn Malik was never mentioned in any historical accounts about successive wars and conquests committed once Muhammad died until Anas Ibn Malik died in Iraq. Hence, Anas Ibn Malik never participated in any battle for or against anything or anyone. Understandably, Ibn Saad the historian never mentions about Anas Ibn Malik except what he used to tell about himself: being servant to Muhammad and later on certain episodes of his life in Iraq, where Anas Ibn Malik lived in luxury while Iraqis suffered bloodbaths and strife. He even heard about the violent military attacks on Yathreb (his birthplace city) and Mecca to quell rebels and never rebuked the Umayyads for it; instead, he became very close with Al-Hajaj who committed massacres in Iraq and Yathreb many times. Strangely, disciples of Anas Ibn Malik who narrated, wrote, and spread his fabrications and falsehoods were sometimes incarcerated and killed by Al-Hajaj and his cronies, and Anas Ibn Malik never cared for them at all!      

4- Ibn Saad asserts that Anas Ibn Malik used to love money very much, more than the rest of the so-called companions of Muhammad. Growing wealthy and filthily rich, Anas Ibn Malik defended himself against possible criticism that might arise due to the fact that such money he received from the unjust Umayyads and their ill-gotten money, he fabricated a hadith that Muhammad prayed for him to be granted by God pardon of sins, long life, and huge wealth! Anas Ibn Malik had to fabricate other hadiths to defend himself against other accusation: he fabricated a hadith about men are not to wear silk-fabric clothes, but when he wore rich embroidered silk garments in Iraq, granted to him by Umayyad caliphs, he had to confess he did that to show God's bounty to him via the Umayyads! The palace where Anas Ibn Malik lived and died in Basra, Iraq, was so spacious and grand indeed, and it was very well known to people at the time, and the same goes for his orchards, farms, and lands; he had to fabricate hadiths about Muhammad praying to God to grant Anas Ibn Malik the answer to all his prayers! He claimed that  when rain was scarce at one time, he prayed for rain, and clouds rained only in his lands, farms, and orchards, leaving lands of others suffer scarcity of water! Such utter nonsense fabricated by him show him to be selfish being, even when telling falsehoods and lies about himself! Let alone lies and fabrications he weaved and yarned about Muhammad! He was an inveterate liar and fabricator!  

Secondly: hadiths about enslavement authored and fabricated by Anas Ibn Malik:

1- Naturally, Anas Ibn Malik would fabricate hadiths to support, justify, and condone crimes, injustices, and despotism of the Umayyad dynasty, and their crimes of course included enslavement. The Umayyads were known for their enslaving pretty women from Asia, North Africa, and Europe by all possible means. Anas Ibn Malik legalized such crime by fabricating a narrative about Muhammad, telling that he used to enslave women, and he even got married to one of these women, called Safiyya. Of course, the blind, mindless Sunnite cattle believe such falsehoods until this very day!

2- There are many conflicting and contradictory narratives authored by Anas Ibn Malik about enslavement; we will quote some of them below. (… Hadith No. 12553: a series of narrators recounted that some men described and talked about the reputed beauty of Safiyya, one of the women enslaved after a battle against the infidels, and they praised her beauty to the Prophet who sent money to her enslaver to buy her at once, and she was made ready to be his bride that very night; the mother of Anas Ibn Malik bathed and prepared the pretty body of the bride. Both bride and bridegroom stayed for a long time in their tent, making love, and later on, everybody praised the beauty of the new bride, as the Prophet ordered some food to be brought to him, and some men brought dates, corn, ghee, and bread and water. The bride and bridegroom ate together before others and withdrew to their tent once more for a longer period. Other women and female slaves praised the beauty of the pride, as she sat behind the bridegroom on horseback. Men were so spellbound by her beauty that the Prophet had to cover her…). This false narrative shows Muhammad as taking an enslaved woman from her enslaver who for sure made love to her and he married her without waiting for the three-month waiting period ordained by God in the Quran! This is utter nonsense! (… Hadith No. 12472: a series of narrators recounted that  the Jewish tribe of Khaybar was defeated in the battle against the Prophet, and a Jewess named Safiyya was enslaved by a man who took her as his female slave/concubine, but her reputed beauty made the Prophet buy her from her enslaver and freed her, and married her in one day, making her being set free as her dowry …). (… Hadith No. 11973: a series of narrators recounted that women of the Khaybar tribe were enslaved, and Safiyya, the prettiest of them all was enjoyed in bed by her captor, but the Prophet bought her from him, and when her beauty stunned men and women as she took her seat behind the Prophet on his camel, he covered her entirely, and he enjoyed this new wife in bed in his tent in the very same day he bought her. Some women said that this Jewess had jinxed the camel of the Prophet as it was about to fall …). (… Hadith No. 12479: a series of narrators recounted that when the camel carrying the Prophet and his new bride, the freed female slave Safiyya, was about to fall, people said that this Jewess had jinxed the camel of the Prophet. Abou Talha advised the Prophet to cover his new bride with a long swathe of cloth, and this was done at once. And the camel reached Yathreb in safety …). By the way, Abou Talha mentioned in this false hadith narrative/account was the step-father of Anas Ibn Malik. Long live in good health the mother of Anas Ibn Malik!

COMMENTS:

1- Othman Ali: I thank Dr. Mansour for allowing us this great opportunity to learn from tragic incidents of history that expose the early Muhammadans and their heinous crimes during the Arab conquests that prove them as enemies of the Quran. My question to Dr. Mansour, as our great historian of course, is as follows: did oral narrators and fabricators of hadiths used to tell others that their discourse was part of Islam or not?! Did they used their lies to gain money and higher social positions and rank?! If so, when their lies were forced upon Islam as part of it?! thank you in advance! 

2- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank Othman Ali for his important question. We assert here that falsehoods, fabrications, and lies began as oral traditions never written during the Umayyad period, and such oral narratives have been the foundation of the earthly, man-made creeds that have replaced Islam (i.e., the Quran alone), and such lies were asserted by the crime of Arab conquests that made the so-called companions as enemies of God and the Quran by their crimes of looting, aggression, rape, and invasions. Such criminals were deified after their death in the Sunnite creed, as we read in books of history and cite Quranic verses as evidence. The problem is that most Muhammadans do not read: they are like a herd of cattle. This is not verbal abuse; this description fits them so as to shock them and to alert them to facts and tenets of true Islam in the Quran.   

3- Ben Levante: I think there are some spelling errors, especially about the age of Malik, but this does not affect the fact that his narratives/fabrications are utter nonsense that he ascribed to Prophet Muhammad decades after his death! Such naïve Arab societies in Arabia at the time believed any oral narratives of any type! How foolish! I still want an answer to my question about 70:29-30, as for polygamy, number of women used to exceed that of men who would die in battles, but polygamy deserves to be tackled in a separate book, I think.

4- Fathy Ahmed Madi: I thank and greet our dear Dr. Mansour for accepting me as a novice in the Quranism great website, hoping we join all our fellow Quranists in the caravan of enlightenment to serve God and His true religion, the Quran, and to refute falsehoods of the so-called hadiths.

5- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank Fathy Ahmed Madi and Ben Levante, and spelling errors and mistakes have been corrected.

Enslavement within Falsehoods of the Biography Written by Ibn Ishaq

Introduction:

1- If Ibn Ishaq were to live in our modern times, certainly he would have been one of the greatest fiction writers. He lived during the caliphate of Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour, the Abbasid caliph. Ibn Ishaq was favored by this Abbasid caliph; he made use of the talent of Ibn Ishaq to fabricate the fiction that came later on to be called ''biography of Muhammad''. Upon this caliph's orders, Ibn Ishaq in his book has drawn a portrait of Muhammad that reflects and sketches the character of Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour, thus contradicting the real depiction of Muhammad's character found in the Quran alone. The real Muhammad was sent as a mercy to the humankind, as we read in the Quran, and NOT to raid, rob, rape, kill, murder, conquer, confiscate, occupy, and enslave. In a coming book, we will analyze and criticize the biography authored by Ibn Ishaq and rewritten by Ibn Hisham, and we will focus on exposing and refuting such falsehoods ascribed forcibly to Muhammad, within both levels of the texts and narrators.      

2- Ibn Ishaq authored his fictional biography of Muhammad in a mind-captivating style of narration that appealed to people at his time, and incorporated poems and verses scattered all over his text, in order to appeal to the Abbasid era readers and to appeal to the Abbasid caliph and his cronies and retinue.

3- Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour was not only the real founder of the Abbasid caliphate, but also was a pioneer in propaganda for it in its earlier stage of secret calling; hence, he authored hundreds of fabricated hadiths and stories that urge the assumed right of the sons of Abbas, one of the paternal uncles of Prophet Muhammad, to rule instead of the Umayyad dynasty. Abbasids stole secrets and mottoes of clandestine organizations at the time calling for Shiite rule under one of the descendants of Ali Ibn Abou Talib, the son of one of the paternal uncles of Prophet Muhammad, and shortly before the collapse of the Umayyad caliphate, the Hashemites gathered in a secret meeting to swear fealty to one of the descendants of Ali Ibn Abou Talib to urge his ascendency to be a caliph. Simultaneously and secretly, the Abbasids who attended such meeting so as to cover their ulterior motives led another secret movement in Khorasan (in Persia) to call for the coming Abbasid caliphate, and such calls were led by a powerful military leader called Abou Muslim Al-Khorasany, who managed to put an end to the Umayyad caliphate along with the Abbasid leaders. Hence, the Shiite members of the Hashemites who favored the descendant of Ali to become caliph felt betrayed by the Abbasids and the Hashemites declared propaganda war on the Abbasids, with Yathreb as center of that struggle. Most of dwellers of Yathreb favored the descendant of Ali, where Malik Ibn Anas and Ibn Ishaq were rivals in determining who was the favored and popular scholar and historian and in tarnishing and vilifying each other. Ibn Ishaq favored and backed the Abbasids from day one, whereas Malik Ibn Anas supported and backed the Shiites of Yathreb. When the descendant of Ali was defeated in battle and killed, Ibn Ishaq moved to Baghdad, the new caliphate capital, to get closer to the caliph Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour.    

4- The caliph Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour, with his expertise in propaganda and fabricating hadiths, feared that one of the foes of the Abbasids (like Malik Ibn Anas who lived in Yathreb) might write an anti-Abbasids biography of Prophet Muhammad, especially that Yathreb was the homeland of oral traditions accumulated and increased by fabrications about life-story of Muhammad. If a foe to the Abbasids would write such biography, he would expose Abbas, paternal uncle of Muhammad, who fought against early Muslims in the battle of Badr and was once captured as POWs and mostly remained in Mecca allying himself to Abou Sufyan who fought early Muslims most of his life, until Abbas and Abou Sufyan apparently converted to Islam shortly before Muhammad's death. The Abbasid caliph Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour realized that Ibn Ishaq was the right person at the right time and location, within favored political circumstance to write a pro-Abbasid biography of Muhammad. Of course, this biography authored by Ibn Ishaq is totally false; he has claimed in it that he heard oral narratives and accounts from a series of narrators, and most of his stories are ascribed to a historical figure named as Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary. We have proved in earlier research that Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary died long before narrators who ascribe to him their falsehoods and fabrications were born.    

5- We give below an overview of some of the fabricated stories authored by Ibn Ishaq related to the topic of enslavement, and such stories were deemed at the time as ''irrefutable faith tenets necessarily known''!

Firstly:

  Ibn Ishaq fabricated a narrative about a battle called Bani Al-Mustaliq, and ascribed his false accounts related to it to Aisha, one of the wives of Muhammad. Such fabrications were repeated later by Al-Bokhary. We have refuted such narratives earlier through historical research in our book titled "The Quran Is Enough". Let us below quote some of his false narratives fabricated about the topic of enslavement.

1- Ibn Ishaq has fabricated the following story from the figment of his imagination: (… The Prophet after a two-month stay in Yathreb decided to attack the Jewish tribe near Yathreb, named Khozaa, and the battle of Bani Al-Mustaliq began … Fighting was so fierce and the tribesmen were defeated and many of them were killed during battle, and the Prophet enslaved all of their women and children among spoils and riches looted at the time …). This is utter nonsense; spoils in the Quran NEVER include enslaving persons; see 59:6. In our opinion, spoils in that verse refers to money obtained by the rulers peacefully, by trade and the like activities, without war.

2- Ibn Ishaq claims falsely that one of Muhammad's wives, Juayriya, was a former slave among the enslaved women of the same above-mentioned fictional battle, and when enslaved women were distributed among fighters, Juayriya the prettiest of all, was bought by Muhammad from its owner after she asked his help to be freed, and she was freed and got married to Muhammad. This nonsensical story was authored by Ibn Ishaq to endorse the crime of enslavement in the Sunnite religion propagated by the Abbasids under the name of Islam. 

3- Following the footsteps of Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham, another narrator and fabricator, authored another similar story, where the father of Juayriya came to ransom his enslaved daughter, and on his way to Yathreb, he stole two camels owned by Muslims and hid the in a certain desert valley. When he met the Prophet and proposed to ransom his daughter to set her free, the Prophet told him about the two camels and that he must return them. The man was astounded and converted to Islam and returned the two camels, and the prophet paid the dowry for his new bride, 400 dirhams. This fictional account contradicts the Quran that asserts that Muhammad never knew the unknown and he could not predict anything.  

Secondly: within the battle of Khaybar:

1- Ibn Ishaq writes the following fictional story about the battle of Khaybar: (… One of the trusty narrators who talked to me heard from Anas Ibn Malik that the Prophet used to stop fighting in times of prayers and never attacked people at night …). It is strange here that Ibn Ishaq would copy words of an anonymous narrator and calling him as 'trusty'; this shows that the story is made up, while Anas Ibn Malik did just the same while giving big roles in his narratives to his mother and his step-father Abou Talha: (… The Prophet rode his horse and was followed by horsemen like Abou Talha, who was so close to the Prophet …). How Anas Ibn Malik was an inveterate liar! The false story goes on as follows: (…  After achieving victory in the battle of Khaybar, Safiyya was among the enslaved women who was a married pretty woman, but the Prophet took her from her enslaver and give him instead to concubines among the other enslaved women … The Prophet got married to her without waiting for the required three-month waiting period …). May God curse the liars Anas Ibn Malik and Ibn Ishaq!

2- Falsehoods of Ibn Ishaq are copies in many later books like that of Al-Bokhary, and among his lies is the one about prohibiting the eating of donkeys' flesh, as thus the anonymous narrator urged his followers to throw away cauldrons that were cooking pieces of donkeys' flesh. We have written before about prohibited foods are mentioned only and exclusively in the Quran; see 2:173, 5:3, 5:87-88, 6:145, 16:114-117, and 10:59-60, and no one is to add to them at all, as such addition is a violation against God's legislation.

3- Another lie fashioned by Ibn Ishaq is about Safiyya who saw a dream that the moon descended and sat on her lap, and when she told her first Jewish husband about it, he slapped her on the face, accusing her of lusting over Muhammad who ruled over Yathreb! Another false story is about the Prophet torturing her ex-husband to extort confessions from him about a hidden treasure whose location was known only to him, and once confessed, the Prophet ordered his death by the sword! Such lies contradict the Quran that asserts that Muhammad was sent as a mercy to the humankind, NOT to terrorize, torture, and murder people!

4- Another funny and silly story revolves around a Jewess giving a poisoned cooked sheep, but the Prophet knew at once about the plot to assassinate him once he took one bite to throw it at once and put the plotters to death. Strangely, Ibn Ishaq asserts in his fabricated accounts that the Prophet died years later as a result of that poisoned food! This is against science: can a poisoned live for years before his death?! 

5- Ibn Ishaq fashioned another lie to elevate the stature of Abbas, the great grandfather of the Abbasid dynasty/caliphate, asserting that he was a Muslim in Mecca long before it was defeated by Yathreb. He claimed that Abbas felt happy in mecca when the Prophet fought in Khaybar the Jews located there, though this location was near Mecca and this should be posing a threat to the Meccans, and Abbas announced his conversion to Islam that was held secret for a long time! He urged the Meccans to convert to Islam to protect their money and possessions as the Prophet was sure to enter Mecca with his army! Of course, this is utter nonsense to any proper historian.  

Thirdly: more lies and falsehoods about enslavement:

1- The cursed Ibn Ishaq asserts in his fabricated stories that the Prophet used to count and gather all battle confiscated spoils, animals, and enslaved women, who were so many, to distribute among his men and to keep a lot for himself!

2- Ibn Ishaq made up a story about the tribe of Hawazen whose men converted to Islam after being defeated, and the tribesmen requested their enslaved women be freed, and the people of Yathreb agreed to their request, and the Prophet had asked his close companions to return the enslaved women he distributed among them days earlier for their sexual use! 

3- Ibn Ishaq recounts this funny story about Abdullah Ibn Omar Ibn Al-Khattab: (… A series of narrators told me that Abdullah Ibn Omar Ibn Al-Khattab prayed at the Sacred Kaaba Mosque while his folks were preparing his new enslaved woman for his bed for tonight, but as men of the tribe of Hawazen reclaimed their women, all Yathreb dwellers obeyed the Prophet by freeing and returned all enslaved women, and Abdullah Ibn Omar Ibn Al-Khattab  was sad that he could not get the chance to enjoy his female slave before being set free ! …).

4- Ibn Ishaq recounts a funny, strange story about one companion whose share of enslaved women was one old female of less physical beauty and he refused to return her to her folks in Hawazen unless he was compensated generously, more than ransoms of other freed female slaves, because he had no chance to enjoy her sexually as other companions did, because she was ugly!

5- Ibn Ishaq has written another vile story about the so-called companions of the Prophet who chased the Prophet as they were angry with their share of enslaved women, who were not pretty enough, until he had to hide from the furious lot inside a tree! They had to snatch his outer garment in anger, and he had to defend himself against being greedy or stingy!

Lastly: the human cattle of the Muhammadans still believe that such distorted biography of falsehoods fabricated by Ibn Ishaq as part of history of Prophet Muhammad and Islam! What fools!

COMMENTS:

1- Fathy Ahmed Madi: I feel bound to say that of course, historical rifts and political conflicts led to more disputes over loots and soon enough over religion itself. I thank Dr. Mansour for showing us the historical truth and how the Muslims' history has been forged for centuries. Whenever I discuss such topics with my friend and neighbors, their Salafist thought would stop their listening attentively to me, which made me feel sad; but once I read Quranist articles by Dr. Mansour, I no longer feel the odd one out or feel like a loner. I felt that my faith and ideas are true and just. History of caliphs is the one responsible for distorting meanings of the Quran for centuries until now. Fabricators of hadiths and narratives about Prophet Muhammad distorted real history of early Muslims: known only within the Quran alone. Corrupt imams justified grave injustices in their fiqh books to obsequiously gratify sultans and caliphs. Repeated lies and falsehoods have been believed eventually; see 43:22.   

2- Marwa Ahmed Mustafa: This is an excellent article, as usually typical of our dear Dr. Mansour, may God protect and help him in his time and endeavor to write to us useful articles and books, of both history and religion, that enlighten our minds.

3- Saeed Ali: Indeed, the religion of the Sunnite Muhammadans consists mainly of the book of lies and fabrications by Ibn Ishaq. I thank Dr. Mansour for his enlightenment in all his iconoclastic writings that clear our heads from so many intellectual idols and golden calves that persist in Arab culture today. Arabs spend millions to spread such books of falsehoods all over universities and schools, especially the one by Ibn Ishaq! The Muhammadans take their religion from oral sermons and such corrupt books of lies! The Quran tells us to read it, not to listen to such falsehoods accumulated for centuries after Prophet Muhammad's death.  

4- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all of our beloved Quranists for their useful comments, and we implore the Almighty to help us go on with our efforts on our website. We welcome dear Fathy Ahmed Madi to our website and we wait for more of his useful comments. May God bless and preserve our dear fellow Quranists Marwa Ahmed Mustafa and Saeed Ali.

Malik in his Book Does Not Consider Slaves as Human Beings!

Introduction:

1- Sharia legislations of the Sunnite religion has nothing to do with the Quran, as the Sunnite scholars endorsed and allowed injustices such as enslavement and selling and buying human beings. This is a long story to tell that will entail another coming book. As for the scope of this present book, we will give a brief overview of such endorsement of injustice as per the book authored by Malik. We hope our fellow Quranists will be exploring this theme further later on: how the Sunnite sharia differs 100% from the Quranic sharia in all aspects. The book authored by Malik is called Al-Mowata', and it was oral traditions that was written in 20 surviving versions by different authors who were disciples of Malik, and we will quote from the version of M. Ibn l-Hassan Al-Shaybany and the version of Yehya Ibn Yehya within two topics: divorce and withdrawal method.

2- It is obvious that legislations of man-made, fabricated, earthly religion of the Sunnites express whims and caprices spread dominantly in the period when the legislations were written by men who oppress women and control life aspects at the Middle Ages.  This is different from the divine sharia in the Quran where there is no room for whims, caprices, injustices. Among the 20 versions of the book Al-Mowata', the version of Al-Shaybany, who was a former disciple of Abou Hanifa, the famous jurist with a doctrine carrying his name, is the most famous one, but it differs great deal from another authorized version written by Ibn Yehya. Both versions are held in high esteem by Sunnite scholars past and present, but they differ a lot in series of narrators, commentaries, texts, and numbers of hadiths.     

3- The masculine regard of lusting over women as sex objects with no minds and no souls is a dominant stance in all Sunnite books of fiqh (i.e., jurisprudence) and theology. Thus, during the Arab conquests, fighters and soldiers would eagerly enslave as many pretty women as possible to enjoy them sexually by rape before they might die in a coming battle, and this led many Sunnite scholars to overlook the three-month waiting period before marrying or copulating with divorced women and widows to make sure they were not pregnant. Sunnite scholars urged a less waiting periods for enslaved women and female slaves in general, in comparison to free women. 

4- The debate around withdrawal method was rife in the first century A.H., before and during the Umayyad caliphate, as this method (a.k.a. in Latin: coitus interruptus) consisted of a man withdrawing his penis from the vagina of a woman before ejaculation to prevent her being impregnated.  Arab soldiers during Arab conquests desired the women captured within the conquered nations, but hated to have offspring by such women, as Arabs felt at the Umayyad era deep contempt for non-Arabs in general. Hence, the withdrawal method was a common practice at the time, and Arabs needed an endorsed doctrinal view favorable to it by scholars and theologians, so that Arab conquerors would enjoy these non-Arab women sexually without having the disgrace to have offspring by them! When the Abbasids took over and establish their caliphate, the withdrawal method was frowned upon as the Abbasid rulers relied on staunch allies in Persia, and men of non-Arab origin rose in high-rank positions at the time. Hence, some scholars and theologians opposed withdrawal method and some were in favor of it, and hot debates ensued.   

5- Another important aspect that was hushed at the time was the moral degeneration, dissipation, and lewdness of the profligate Arabs during the Umayyad era, which was the social norm practiced unabashedly in public and no longer hushed within the Abbasid era. An Arab used to enjoy sexually a large number of concubines and enslaved girls, and would often marry a lot of wives and divorce them any time pleased that him. Ibn Saad, the historian, express in his book his surprise at the number of wives and concubines owned by old Arab men, which exceed the limit of the sexual prowess of young men at the time, and each Arab man had a large number of offspring born to him by free wives and enslaved women as well, and the social problem arises about parentage, as most Arab men enjoy concubines for a shirt while to replace them when they got bored by other enslaved women, and the number of fatherless children increased at the time, as some fathers refused to acknowledge such children to give their names to them, thus posing another social problem, as we discern from narratives of the time authored by Malik.  

6- Typically, the illiterate Malik would dictate to his various disciples, inventing in the process the series of narrators, who were dead and could not contradict him, and ascribe the deeds and words falsely to Muhammad, and the Sunnite human cattle would believe such nonsense authored by Malik, until this very day. Let us quote below Malik in the versions written by Al-Shaybany and Ibn Yehya.

Firstly: the version of Ibn Yehya about the topic of the withdrawal method

 (… Hadith No. 1260: Yehya told from Malik who took the word from a series of narrators that one of the Prophet's companions, Abou Saeed Al-Khodary, was asked in a mosque about withdrawal method to preen impregnation, and he asserted that during battle of Bani Al-Mustaliq with the Prophet, fighters coveted sex with women, and enslaved women were great in number and beauty, and when fighters asked the Prophet if they are allowed to copulate with them without making them pregnant by spelling semen outside their vaginas, the Prophet allowed us to do this…).(… Hadith No. 1261: a series of narrators asserted that the companion Saad Ibn Abou Waqas used to withdraw his virile member from his women and concubines before spilling his semen to avoid impregnation …).(… Hadith No. 1262: a series of narrators asserted that the companion Abou Ayoub Al-Ansari used to spill his semen outside his women to avoid their becoming pregnant …). (…Hadith No. 1263: a series of narrators asserted that the companion Abdullah Ibn Omar Ibn Al-Khattab used not to withdraw his male member at all from inside of his women as he hated the practice very much deemed by him to be unnatural …). (… Hadith No. 1264: a series of narrators asserted to Malik that the companion Zeid was asked by a man from Yemen about spilling one's semen outside women's vagina in case of a man's desire not to have more children, and Zeid asserted that women are owned totally by men like agricultural fields, to be irrigated or to stop water from them as a farmer would see fit …). (… Hadith No. 1265: a series of narrators asserted to Malik that one of the companions of the Prophet asked Abdullah Ibn Abbas about withdrawal, and he ordered his female slave to be brought to ask her about such practice if done to her by former masters. When she affirmed that she witnessed the deed by them, Malik assured that withdrawal must be done only after prior permission of one's free wife who was not a former slave, whereas in case of female slaves, their permission is not required at all, as they are owned, bought, and sold by their male masters …).

Secondly: analysis:

 Hadith No. 1260 allows withdrawal to be applied at will, and we remind readers here that the battle of the Bani Al-Mustaliq is a historical hoax never occurred, but it was forged in historical accounts in order to justify the crimes of enslavement as if done before by Muhammad and to accuse one of the wives of Muhammad, Aisha, of adultery, as she was hated by Shiites; more details of this are found in our book titled "The Quran Is Enough". Hadith No. 1261 contradicts with another confirmed historical account that the companion Saad Ibn Abou Waqas had a big number of children from his women, wives and concubines, and this shows that he never applied the withdrawal method at all, or maybe it was not known to him at the time. Hadith No. 1262 asserts that the withdrawal method was applied by Abou Ayoub Al-Ansari, while Hadith No. 1263 asserts that the Ibn Omar hated the practice in general, and most of his large number of children were born from the wombs of enslaved non-Arab women, as per the historian Ibn Saad. Hadith No. 1264 makes Zeid and Ibn Abbas allowing withdrawal and Malik added the detail that free wives must give permission to their husbands first, while female slaves are not to be told beforehand as they do not count as human beings! They were to Malik merely bought and sold sex objects! We conclude from the above that contradicting and conflicting views about this topic show that the female slaves were treated as sub-human sexual tools without rights of any kind.

Thirdly: discussion of accounts of withdrawal method in the version of Al-Shaybany:

1- Al-Shaybany mentions the above hadiths written by Ibn Yehya and he added a comment he ascribes to Malik in Hadith No. 550 in this version: (… Thus, we allow withdrawal as a perfectly harmless practice as per the needs of a man and his wives, with their prior permissions, but as for female slaves, no man would be obliged to ask their opinions, as asserted by Abou Hanifa …). Of course, such lies are ascribed by Malik and Al-Shaybany here to the scholar Abou Hanifa, decades after his death!

2- Al-Shaybany writes this hadith never mentioned by Ibn Yehya: (… Hadith No. 551: Malik heard from a series of narrators including Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary ending in Omar Ibn Al-Khattab as a caliph urged his men to withdraw their members from the female slaves as fatherless children became too many in number in Yathreb, as female slaves were enjoyed and then sold or their masters would die in battle, and Omar feared that the number of fatherless children would increase and threaten the Yathreb population … it came to pass that at a certain point of time, Omar had a pregnant female slave in his house, where he copulated with her, but he doubted that her pregnancy was not by him, and he prayed to God to guide him to the truth and never to allow unclean progeny into his bloodline. And when she gave birth to a black baby, she had to admit that she conceived him from her previous master, a black shepherd, and Omar sent her back with her baby to that shepherd, declaring that this is the shepherd's son and not his. This shows that withdrawing one's virile member from vagina of female slaves is a good practice to avoid such problem …). Of course, this story is not true at all; Malik never met with Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary who died decades before Malik was a grown-up man, as we have proven before in one of our previous books. Hence, such false account was authored by Malik as a response to the moral degeneration and decadence spread in his era reflected in other historical accounts.

3- (… Hadith No. 552: Malik told us that he heard from a series of narrators that Omar Ibn Al-Khattab threatened people of Yathreb that if a female slave would come to him to complain about her offspring which were unacknowledged by their masters, he would force men to acknowledge the offspring, and he urged men in the city to stop producing children by applying withdrawal …)

What Ibn Yehya writes about Malik and his opinions of divorce:

1- (… Malik asserts that if a male slave divorces his wife who is a female slave, her waiting period is before re-marrying another man is two months, and three months in case his divorced wife is a free woman … a female slave to be sold can wait only for one-month period …). (…Hadith No. 1255: Ibn Yehya told us that Malik told him from a series of anonymous narrators that female slaves enjoyed by their masters out of wedlock can marry after one-month or two-month waiting period if necessary …). (… Hadith No. 1256: Ibn Yehya told us that Malik told him from a series of anonymous narrators that female slaves enjoyed by their masters without marriage is one month if their masters died …). (…Hadith No. 1257:  Malik asserts that female slaves enjoyed sexually but had no period blood to wait for three consecutive months before being enjoyed in bed by a new master who bought her…). (… If the master of a female slave died after enjoying her in bed, she is to wait for two-month waiting period of time before copulating with her new master/husband …). (… Hadith No. 1258: Ibn Yehya told us that Malik told him from a series of anonymous narrators that a female slave whose husband died must wait for two months and five nights before getting remarried …). (… Hadith No. 1259: Malik told us that Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary told him that a female slave divorced by her husband who was a male slave must wait for two months before remarriage to another man, and three months if her dead husband or her divorced husband was a free man, and if she was freed before marrying her dead husband, she is a free woman that have a waiting three-month period …)

Fourthly: analysis:

 Malik again ascribed his words to Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary whom he never met at all, and he depends on anonymous narrators. Another big mistake is in the phrasing of hadiths with conflicting details about the length of waiting period for female slaves and making male slaves divorce two times instead of three times like free men; such utter nonsensical notion contradict the Quran, as waiting period for all women is three consecutive months without differentiating between free women and female slaves, and there is no differentiation between free men or slaves as husbands in the Quran; see 2:228-230.

Fifthly: Al-Shaybany and Malik about the topic of divorce:

 (…Hadith No. 555: Malik told us from Ibn Shehab Al-Zohary  that he heard a number of narrators assert that a male slave divorced his free wife twice, and caliph Othman told the slave that they cannot remarry ever again …). (…Hadith No. 556: Caliph Othman prevented a free woman to return to her husband after two times of divorce because this former husband was a slave and not a free man …). (…Hadith No. 557: A male slave cannot remarry his wife after two times of separation and divorce, even if she is a female slave or a free woman …). (… Hadith No. 558: Abou Hanifa and other scholars held in high esteem by people asserted the view that waiting period of divorced female slave is three months and female slave widow for two months …).

Analysis:

 Al-Shaybany has authored whole hadiths never mentioned in the version of Ibn Yehya, and such hadiths are contradictory and some are ascribed to Abou Hanifa after his death, who belittled hadiths in general as source of legislations. It is funny that Al-Shaybany has made male slaves divorce two times instead of three times like free men and made the waiting period of female slaves less than that of free women (i.e., widows and divorced ones), as if their wombs were different as per their social status or rank! It is as if anatomy and minds of female and male slaves differ from that of free persons!   

Finally: Malik never viewed female and male slaves as human beings!

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: The above section shows that it was recurrent in former times in the Middle Ages that a free woman would free and marry her bought male slaves as per 70:29-30 that include believers of both genders.

2- Ahmed Drami: Indeed, Dr. Mansour, men in the Middle Ages treated women (free ones and slaves) as if they were cattle for breeding and sex tools. A female slave must have the same waiting period of three months before getting married to another man, just like free divorced women, especially that no scientific advances of echography to make sure a woman is pregnant or not. I think ancient scholars and imams deliberately misunderstood 4:25 as belittling female slaves with status lower than free women; but in fact, it indicates bearing in mind abuse suffered by female slaves.    

3- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank Ahmed Drami and Ben Levante; we assert here that polygamy was prevalent at the time and many free men fornicated with tens of female slaves, as moral degeneration spread when many men were killed in battles. Thus, free women married their male slaves after freeing them; yet, some extremist fatwas insisted at the time that former male slaves had no right to divorce their free women/wives. Matters exacerbated as slavery grew more in the Abbasid era as lucrative business; female slaves would learn all arts (sexual, literary, musical, poetical, and otherwise) to please rich, insatiable masters. Some female slaves and concubines married caliphs and became mothers of caliphs. Most of the Abbasid caliphs in fact were born of female slaves.   

4- Fathy Ahmed Madi: I would like to add this comment: to allow caliphs and affluent ones to sexually use female slaves while disregarding religion, the corrupt imams allowed female slaves to uncover in public their upper bodies and not their lower bodies, especially to allow potential buyers to 'examine' the commodity! This utter nonsense was fabricated in the form of hadiths! It is  shame to declare such a notion as part of Islam! Shame on them!   

5- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank  and welcome Fathy Ahmed Madi, and we have made him a writer on our website; we are looking forward for useful articles penned by him to build on accumulated knowledge in thousands of articles published here, while adhering to the conditions stipulated by the website regarding writing on it. May God reward him.

6- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I think it is justice, equality, and charity regarding the lack of difference between a man marrying  freed female slave and his marrying a free woman in terms of inheritance, rights, dowry, etc. as per the Quranic verses 2:228-230 and 4:11-12. Likewise, there is no difference between a woman marrying freed male slave and her marrying a free man. Thank you, Dr. Mansour.

7- Fathy Ahmed Madi: This is a testimony from Dr. Mansour in which I take pride; thank you, dear Dr. Mansour, for your kind words and for making me a writer in your great website of Quranism. I vow to adhere to the conditions stipulated by the website regarding writing on it. I hope my writings posted here would be beneficial and in service of real Islam: the Quran alone. 

Contradictions in the Legislations Related to Enslaved Female Singers:

Introduction:

1- The crime of Arab conquests has been the root of all evils that included enslavement and slave-trading  as well as social strata of male and female slaves as a demographic phenomenon in the past that influenced social and political life within the affluent ones' palaces, rulers' palaces, taverns, brothels, and traders and markets of slaves.

2- This had led to many results as follows:

2/1: socially: there was a negative influence on free women, as female slaves and concubines exceeded them in beauty, culture, brains, etc. and thus they had drawn the attention of men more instead of making men focus on educating free women.

2/2: politically: many concubines/ female slaves ruled without being enthroned (e.g., Al-Khayzuran, Shaghab, and Qabeeha) and while being enthroned (e.g., Shagaret Al-Dor).

2/3: historically: it is strange that historical accounts of the Middle-Ages caliphates ignored hundreds of millions of free men and women, whereas famous male and female slaves were mentioned within hundreds of lines in history along with rulers, princes, governors, viziers, poets, literati, religious imams and scholars, etc. Thus, female slaves were the focus of authors of books of history. Besides, they were the focus books of authors of books of literature, from which we know what is not written in history books within social history of the Middle-Ages.  

2/4: legislatively: since legislation or sharia of earthly, man-made, fabricated religions of the Muhammadans have been based on whims and caprices, they differ a great deal from one scholar/imam or historian to another and from one era to another within all topics, especially the topics related to free women and female slaves. Intellectual wars of ideas created a large number of tomes, volumes, and booklets authored by a range of writers: from conservative scholars/imams to liberal non-mainstream writers. Sadly, all such groups vied in fabricating hadiths and in penning erroneous and faulty interpretations of the Quranic verses.    

3- This topic above entails lots of fundamental historical researches; we will give here general lines and points, hoping that serious researchers would follow our example and explore such field further. We give more details on that subject below.

Firstly:

1- The Hejaz region, especially the cities of Mecca and Yathreb, was the location of hot ongoing debates and political and military opposition against the Umayyads, whose capital was Damascus. From both cities, revolts and rebels would break out to protest the Umayyad  monopoly of rule as hereditary caliphate where a caliph inherit his father/brother the caliph, within system of oppression and tyranny. From Yathreb many revolts broke out, such as that of Al-Hussein, who was killed in Karbala, Iraq, along with many of his family members, and he was deified by Shiites like his father deified by him before: Ali Ibn Abou Talib. This revolt drove the Umayyads to send troops that destroyed Yathreb, killing thousands of its inhabitants and raping many women. Later on, another revolt broke out from Mecca, led by Abdullah Ibn Al-Zubayr, who declared himself as caliph. He was defeated and crucified to death by the Umayyads, whose troops desecrated Sacred Kaaba Mosque. To prevent dwellers of Mecca and Yathreb of ever revolting again,  and to avoid more disgraceful bloodshed of the Umayyads murdering their kinsmen in Hejaz and Qorayish, the Umayyads found an easy, peaceful, ideal solution to their problem; dwellers of both cities must enjoy a decadent life of carnal pleasures: sex, lots of money and food, lots of imported exotic various goods, and many more female slaves who sing, dance, play instruments, chant verses, recount stories, anecdotes, histories, and jokes, and have sexual adventures. Hence, nights of decadence in Mecca and Yathreb were filled with pleasures, poetry, and promiscuity. Hence artistic schools of singing, chanting and composing poems, and playing music vied and rivaled within nights of carnal delights in houses and festivals. Poets thrived and gained a lot of money at such times within the Umayyad era.    

2- Within the Abbasid era, the same occurred: Hejaz was the hub and center of the opposition movements led by the Shiite Alawites against the Sunnite Abbasids, their kinsmen and sons of their great paternal uncle, Abbas. In Iraq, there was a cultural, intellectual, racial, and geographical diversity that was reflected during the First Abbasid Era in the liberal religious school of thought based on personal opinions regarding the Quranic verses interpretation, led by an imam called Abou Hanifa, who had his views on fiqh (jurisprudence), theology, and philosophy. He never authored any books, but his disciples did and convey some of his principles and notions. In  Yathreb, however, emerged another rival conservative school of thought that banned personal opinions and it had to make up and fabricate thousands of hadiths, i.e., sayings, deeds, and acts ascribed falsely to Prophet Muhammad, 200 years after his death! Some fabricated hadiths/stories were ascribed to historical figures that used to live around Muhammad in Mecca and Yathreb, who died without knowing that anything (deeds or words) would be ascribed to them two centuries after their deaths! Such fabrications, lies, and falsehoods began by an imam called Malik Ibn Anas. 

3- The thought school initiated by Malik was not merely a reaction to liberalism of Iraq in terms of intellectual endeavors; rather, it was also a violent reaction to the immorality, promiscuity, decadence, and degeneration that had become deep-seated in Mecca and Yathreb since the Umayyad era, that began gradually since the days of Arab conquests and became daily living and lifestyle. Thus, both cities turned into huge brothels or singing (by both male and female singers), sexual pleasures provided by prostitutes and female slaves as well as homosexual men, female dancers, poets and their lewd tales and poems, etc. Many well-known books of literature authored in the First Abbasid Era testify to such historical fact: "Al-Aghany''  by al-Isphahany, and "Al-Iqd Al-Fareed" by Ibn Abd Rabou, apart from numerous booklets of verses and long poems and books of biographies of poets and notable persons of the time. The though school of Malik faced all of the above by fabricating ''the punishment of stoning'' and by fabricating hadiths to restrict movement and lifestyle of free (un)married women, young and old. Strangely, such conservative school filled with prohibitions of hundreds of things condoned and was lenient with female slaves and concubines: to allow quick sexual exploitation of female slaves by men, Malik made the waiting period of them two months instead of the three-month period ordained by God in the Quran to all divorced women or widows before their remarriage. Malik and his disciples (who had written different versions of his hadiths and false historical accounts about Muhammad) authored several accounts and stories that assert a falsehood about Muhammad's marriage to an enslaved woman named Safiyya, while she was already married to living man, and without waiting period of the divorced women! To make masters check the human goods (female slaves) in slaves market, such Malik disciples, followers, and scholars made it in their sharia the notion that it was possible to see the naked-up-to-the waist body of a female slave before buying it, while free women would be covered when they got outside homes from top to toe! Such utter nonsense that Wahabism revived in the 20^th and 21^st centuries!   

4- Our previous writings on history of the Second Abbasid Era explain how obscurantism and close-minded notions moved to Baghdad decades later after the death of Malik. Let us remember that the Abbasid call or claim for caliphate before the demise of the Umayyad dynasty was based on making caliphate within the Qorayish Hashemites families who were close kinsmen of Prophet Muhammad: descendants of Abbas, one of the paternal uncles of Muhammad. Such claims were based as well on the myth of an just imam/leader (who is to be a descendant from Muhammad's tribe, presumably) that will emerge one day to restore peace and justice all over the Muslim nations, typical of the city-state of Yathreb led by Muhammad in the 7^th century A.D., and therefore, the term ''Sunnite'' emerged and spread for the very first time shortly before the collapse of the Umayyad dynasty; it first denoted justice modeled on Prophet Muhammad, lost by the Umayyads, but later on, this un-Quranic and non-Islamic notion came to mean traditions ascribed to Muhammad centuries after his death. Opposition movements against the Umayyads sometimes included religious cultural elite figures such as religious figures Al-Hassan Al-Basry, Saeed Ibn Al-Musayyab, and Saeed Ibn Jubayr. Another group of opposition denied the notion of fatalism (i.e., the philosophy about bad occurrences ordained by God and imposed by Him on people) propagated by the Umayyads to force people to accept their injustices, and such group asserted that injustice was never ordained and it must be opposed; such group included Maabad al-Juhany, killed by the Umayyad vizier Al-Hajaj, and Ghilan Al-Dimishqi, killed by the Umayyad caliph Hisham Ibn Abdul-Malik.       

5- As the Umayyad dynasty collapsed, the Abbasid emerged and established their capital, Baghdad, in Iraq, and people thought that an era of injustice had ended. Cultural elite members of the period thought that an era of justice had begun. To their surprise and disappointment, more bloodshed and the gravest injustices occurred. The very first caliph gave himself the title "the Assassin", and indeed, he terrorized and murdered thousands of people, while his successor, the caliph Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour, committed more than a tenfold amount of the Assassin's crimes! Such madness and massacres drove some of the religious cultural elite crazy; they called themselves ''the weepers'', as they formed their religion based on weeping groups in public. We refer readers to our article on the weepers, published on our Quranism website. Political circumstances and conditions within the Abbasid caliphate drove the caliph Al-Motawakil to adopt the Sunnite religion and make hadiths a formal religion an core of Islam! The Sunnite religion came to be synonymous with Islam; this was a grievous error, indeed, and Arabs suffer because of it now. The extremist Sunnite Ibn Hanbal doctrine scholars were welcomed, supported, and paid by Al-Motawakil, but decades later, they destroyed Iraq; we have explained this in a previous article of ours. We focus here on the fact that the extremist Sunnite Ibn Hanbal doctrine scholars revived ideas formulated by Malik and explained by Al-Shafei, and both are still deities of the Sunnite religion until now.            

6- Liberal-minded authors existed during the early decades of the Abbasid era, such as the well-known author Al-Jahiz, died in 255 A.H., and who was contemporary to Ibn Hanbal, died in 241 A.H., and Al-Bokhary, died in 256 A.H., and both are still deities of the Sunnite religion until now. The negative views of women in hadiths forged by Al-Bokhary and Ibn Hanbal seem to seek to bury omen alive into the dust! Al-Jahiz, however, opposed them by his liberal views expressed in his books; he was shrewd and sly enough to choose from accounts and hadiths told by others to support his views and refute those of Al-Bokhary and Ibn Hanbal, his intellectual foes, suing their methodology. Let us here brief some of the liberal views of Al-Jahiz below.                

Secondly: an overview of the book about enslaved female singers authored by Al-Jahiz:

1- Al-Jahiz begins his book by dedicating his book to his intimate friends, mentioning their names and epithets, who were rich and enjoy an epicurean lifestyle, who were art lovers and loved culinary pleasures and carnal ones as well, and who were lovers of music, female singers among pretty slaves. He mockingly dedicated his book also to a group of his intellectual foes among the extremist scholars, whom he describes as the ignoramuses who are uncouth philistines. He dedicates his book to readers who love enslaved female singers and enjoy them as well as blessing from God.  

2- Hence, it seems that at the time, debates were hot about allowing or prohibiting the owning of enslaved female singers, and Al-Jahiz felt the urge to express his views on the subject. Al-Jahiz states clearly in the introduction that he opposes extremist views of religious imams and scholars who vehemently oppose arts like music, poetry, and singing, under the pretext of prohibition of listening to 'devilish' voices of female singers, and he asserts that he has authored this book to prove the habit of owning and enjoying listening to enslaved female singers as the best refined source of joy in this transient world.       

3- Within early lines after the introduction, Al-Jahiz asserts the higher stature of the female gender in comparison to the male gender, refuting the views adopted by the masculine, patriarchal scholars of religion about the female gender inferiority to the male gender, as women were treated as sexual animals for the pleasurable  use of men and for breeding only. Al-Jahiz asserts the superiority of women, who are for him the best companions of men on equal footing to them, and as they had the divine task of childbirth, they are the source of joy and fertility of the humankind; thus, they must be treated with more respect for men, who could not possibly live without the feminine presence in their lives. Thus, God created men in need of women and vice-versa; no one could deny this law of nature, as per Al-Jahiz.  

4- Al-Jahiz refutes negative views of extremist scholars about women and singing by asserting that as long as the Quran does not prohibit something explicitly, no one has to right to prohibit or ban such a thing never frowned upon by God and His messenger Muhammad. Hence, all things never mentioned in the Quran are allowed as halal: permissible and legal.  

5- Within lines later, Al-Jahiz touches on the main topic of his book: extremist scholars essentially claimed they must keep women indoors out of jealousy and because males love to own and control females. Al-Jahiz asserts that to guard one's women jealously against other male rivals is never a pretext to stifle women's freedom by prohibiting hundreds of things to restrict their mobility and lifestyle. He sees that such attitudes as against real Islamic jurisprudence that never prohibits lawful and permissible things, acts, and practices, like singing, music, and listening to both of them.

6- Al-Jahiz quotes historical accounts to prove that separation of women from outside social life and the segregation of the two sexes are both grave errors leading to unnatural psychological and social ailments. Al-Jahiz asserts that within the early years of Islam before the death of the Prophet, women enjoyed free mobility, travelled alone, participated actively in male-dominated societies, and before and after the advent of Islam, couples and lovers sang praises of each other in verse. Women used to see men and be seen by men; faces were not covered or veiled at all a century ago in Arabia, asserted Al-Jahiz. He quoted many instances of women-fighters who mingled with men and discussed affairs of tribes within meetings of men gathered to reach decisions on certain issues. No one at the time prohibited women from being looked at by men or from looking at men in public.     

7- Paragraphs later, Al-Jahiz tackles the topic of the female slaves, and how many of them were so accomplished, knowledgeable, and cultured that they became fit to the company of kings, governors, and caliphs. Al-Jahiz quoted many examples of such famous female slaves and their stories, adventures, and love relations with caliphs.  

8- Al-Jahiz uses some arguments that employ logical reasoning to refute segregation of genders imposed by scholars; how come old maids would be allowed to mingle with men, whereas young virgins would not?!

9- Al-Jahiz pinpoints the contradictions of extremist scholars' views that differentiate between free women and female slaves, mocking their views of different waiting periods and inexplicable marriages rules, as if female slaves were indeed freer from all social restraints imposed on free women, in an obvious paradox. Al-Jahiz accuses scholars of being unjust and therefore unrelated to Islam: the essence and soul of justice.  

10- Al-Jahiz within other paragraphs tackles the main topic of his booklet: enslaved female singers. He asserts that they were owned and enjoyed by Arab and non-Arab kings and affluent people for centuries, as a refined art wholesome to the soul of both the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs. Al-Jahiz quotes many examples from history of the caliphates. 

11- Al-Jahiz refutes the extremist scholars' prohibition of poetry, music, and singing, asserting that the Quran never mentions anything on the three subjects; besides, such refined arts nourished the mind, heart, and soul, without diverting men from worshipping God, as such simple pleasures were not harmful at all to those who enjoy them. On the contrary, such arts made men appreciate life, people, and creatures and fill men with compassion and love and other higher values. He quoted stories about prophets to assert his viewpoint. Al-Jahiz asserts that arts were as vital to men as food and drink. 

12- Al-Jahiz belittles the matter of checking of female slaves in slaves-markets before buying them, and after a long argument about criteria of beauty of the body, soul, and mind of female slaves and asserting the proper accomplishments and talents to look for, Al-Jahiz asserts that small, petty mishaps and mistakes between men and female slaves inside houses may be forgiven by God as long as things would not amount to full process of fornication.  

13- Al-Jahiz eventually refutes hadiths fabricated by extremist scholars about prohibiting a woman to be alone with a man away from eyes of others. He refutes linking keeping, buying, and enjoying listening to enslaved female singers with immorality and promiscuity, as music and singing induced refined feelings, not driving men to think of carnal pleasures.

CHAPTER IV: Some Types of Slavery in the Middle Ages:

Enslaved Female Singers:

Introduction:

 Of course, apart from using female slaves to serve men sexually in bed and to be used as servants to free women to do domestic chores, Arabs liked artistic pleasures like singing of songs, watching female slaves dancing in groups, chanting verses and poems, and listening to the female slaves playing musical instruments. Many such talented female slaves are immortalized in books of history and literature. Let us brief some details about enslaved female singers below.

Firstly: debates over singing and enslaved female singers:

1- Extremist religious scholars were vehemently against all arts, and singing of enslaved female singers in particular. Liberal-minded thinkers like Al-Jahiz refuted such extremist views, as we have briefed above about his book. Al-Jahiz quoted well-known love stories in verse about couples in Arabia before and after the advent of Islam. Al-Jahiz quoted well-known stories of similar nature about caliphs and their talented female slaves.   

2- Some political opposition figures who hated the Umayyads condemned the promiscuity of caliphs, especially Yazeed Ibn Mu'aweiya and Yazeed Ibn Abdul-Malik. The latter loved passionately two enslaved female singers named Hababbah and Salammah, whose fame reached all Hejaz and the Umayyad caliph bought them and brought them to Damascus, the Umayyad capital. Hababbah died during his caliphate and Salammah survived him. Salammah was bought by the caliph in return for 20 thousand dinars. Both enslaved female singers used to entertain the young caliph by singing to him, sharing a meal with him, drinking wine together, and being drunk, he would bathe in the swimming pool in the garden of the palace in Damascus, feeling intoxicated by both wine and beautiful singing, asserting that he was flying in the seventh heaven. Of course, such news spread about the promiscuous caliph and were used by the opposition figures who hated the Umayyads in their anti-Umayyad propaganda. Once a rebel delivered a sermon in Mecca about such promiscuous caliph, wishing he would fly into Hell for eternity. After the death of Yazeed Ibn Abdul-Malik and his successor/son Al-Waleed Ibn Yazeed was as promiscuous as his father, and he was murdered by rebels. Al-Tabari and Al-Safadi, the historians, mention in his historical accounts that Al-Waleed used to have sex with concubines of his father, and illicit relation as per the Quran, especially with the enslaved singer named Salammah. 

3- Of course, such 'mild' promiscuity of the Umayyads was nothing compared to the promiscuity of the Abbasids. The Umayyads were not familiar very much with affluent lifestyles of the Byzantine style of the Levant at the time. In contrast, the Abbasids brought the Persian and Byzantine influences of extravagance, promiscuity, and affluent lifestyle; hence, they had been introduced to many arts of carnal and intellectual pleasures of various types and sorts. Physical beauty of female slaves was no longer the only reason to buy them; they must be esteemed accomplished by their talents of singing, playing music, dancing, knowing etiquette, theology and fiqh, literature (especially songs and poems), history, art of conversation, and of course, arts of sexual pleasures and how to please men in bed. Of course, such accomplishments would make their prices soar, as much as they were deemed cultured well enough; some knew their route to Abbasid palaces and caliphs' beds. Ibrahim Al-Mosley, who died in 188 A.H., was a well-known male singer/composer during the Abbasid caliphate; he would teach and train female slaves to make their prices soar as accomplished female slaves. He amassed great wealth because of his slave-trade; when he died, he left his son 24 million dirhams, and his son, Ishaq, inherited his father's talent and field of work, of course.      

Secondly: with the passage of centuries, fiqh scholars grew more lenient in their views of singing and enslaved female singers:

1- According to the above, the Abbasid era witnessed more fame and active social life for female slaves and more segregation, regression, and exclusion of free women. With the passage of time, Ibn Hanbal doctrine extremist scholars grew more lenient toward enslaved female singers and concubines in general. We have mentioned the refutations by Al-Jahiz of the extremist views of such topic, in his book authored in the 3^rd century A.H. In the 6^th century A.H., Ibn Al-Jawzy, the historian-cum-scholar and the Ibn-Hanbal-doctrine fabricator/narrator of hadiths who died in 597 A.H., took great care to write histories of concubines and enslaved female singers, mentioning events never recorded by Al-Tabari about the 3^rd century A.H.

2- Al-Jawzy writes in his history book titled "Al-Muntazim" a story that he claims that it occurred in 73 A.H. (but in our view, the story is improbable at all) about Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan, the Umayyad caliph who established firmly the foundations of the Umayyad caliphate. The caliph would sit in a terrace to judge cases and complaints of his subjects. A complainer wrote that he desired to make the caliph allow him to hear three differ tunes/songs, and he would do whatever he would like with him after that, even if he killed him in return for it. the caliph was furious for such impertinent request that showed longing for listening to enslaved female singers. The requester was a poor, simple adolescent of 18 years old. He was brought to the caliph in the terrace to rebuke him for such impertinence to seek pleasures of caliphs and affluent ones. The adolescent insisted on his request, asserting he was ready to die for it! The caliph cunningly decided to make this adolescent a good example. He ordered a very pretty enslaved female singer, as beautiful as a full moon, to be brought to the terrace with her musical instrument. He told her to sit and to sing three different songs to the adolescent. In the very first song, the adolescent was so intoxicated with pleasure that he tore his clothes and remained in his underwear. In the second song, the adolescent was so intoxicated with pleasure that he swooned for a half-hour. In the third and last song, the adolescent was so intoxicated with pleasure that he threw himself from the balcony and died as a result. The caliph said that he would have him killed anyway, and he got what he deserved. But he caliph later on expressed his sympathy with the dead adolescent, and regretted his deed.   

3- Such romanticized account was of course fabricated by Ibn Al-Jawzy; it is never probable to occur during the Umayyad era nor the Abbasid one. Ibn Jawzy used to fabricate narratives; caliphs were not so naïve to host poor subjects in palaces for no reason. Such stories of committing suicide out of love, passion, etc. was typical of fabrications authored by Sufis in the 6^th century A.H., and stories of similar nature are mentioned by Al-Ghazaly in his several-volume Sufi book of narratives and verse titled "Ehyaa' Olom Eddine". Tearing one's clothes out of mystic passion was typical in the 6^th century Sufis, especially during hearing chants and songs. It is funny that Ibn Jawzy fabricated a series of narrators to lend his false story credibility. Hence, he ascribed his false story to dead people who never knew of the fact that their names would be used in that ill manner by Ibn Jawzy. This author/historian used to lie about hadiths and his historical narratives. His fabrications reflected truly the culture of his era, especially as far as enslaved female slaves are concerned.     

4- Despite fabrications of Ibn Al-Jawzy, we will quote him further in the following section about stories of Harun Al-Rashid, his cronies, and his enslaved female singers, as his stories reflected his era in the 6^th century more than any other books, even more than tomes and volumes of the literary book titled "Al-Aghany" by the well-known author Al-Isphahany.  

Enslaved female singers during the caliphate of Harun Al-Rashid:

  Ibn Al-Jawzy narrates the following anecdotes during the reign of Harun Al-Rashid, in his book titled "Al-Muntazim".

1- There was a very strong friendship between Harun Al-Rashid's vizier, Jaffer Al-Barmaky, and the composer, musician, and slave-trader Ibrahim Al-Mosley and his son Ishaq. Jaffer and Ibrahim once performed pilgrimage with Harun Al-Rashid in Mecca and Yathreb. Yathreb at the time was known for its best and prettiest female slaves who can sing and play instruments. Jaffer asked Ibrahim to find for him a very pretty talented one. Ibrahim went to the biggest slaves market in Yathreb, but after long search, he found not his object. Some slave traders knew what he was searching for, and told him that he would find his desire in a house of a poor man who wish to sell his female slave, and she had the required qualities and talents. Ibrahim saw her beauty, admired her knowledge and etiquette, and listened to her excellent voice and knew how she played her instruments very well indeed. He felt that her original owner was a formerly rich man who descended to poverty suddenly, and he haggled the price for her, but the man insisted on the total sum of 40 thousand dinars, not a dirham less than that, in order to pay his debts and gain some profit margin. Ibrahim agreed and requested and was granted a period of time to get the sum. Telling Jaffer about her, Ibrahim made him desirous to see her. Jaffer disguised as a servant and came with Ibrahim to see her. Once he saw her beauty and listened to her melodious voice, Jaffer showed his true identity and was willing to pay the required sum. Yet, the deal was not done; the female slave did not knew she was about to be sold, and she wept bitterly. Her master apologized, as he would like to settle his debts. She told him she loved him and that she would not leave him for the whole world. Jaffer and Ibrahim left the house, as her master declared that he freed her and would marry her this very night.   

2- There were many reasons for the plight of the Al-Barmaky family of viziers, as the caliph Harun Al-Rashid killed them off in one night and confiscated their possessions and palaces. Some historians assert that among the various reasons was that Harun Al-Rashid desired to have in bed Futayna, the singing concubine of Jaffer Al-Barmaky, who was very pretty and an excellent singer with melodious, angelic voice. Harun Al-Rashid was much surprised as Jaffer refused to grant her to him as a gift. This story might be true; as all historians agree that Harun Al-Rashid had an eye for women and was known for desiring those whom he did not own who were owned by others around him, feeling a sense of victory to confiscate/buy such female slaves from their masters! When Harun Al-Rashid had Jaffer murdered along with the rest of his family members, he confiscated Futayna to himself. When Harun Al-Rashid ordered her to sing, she refused as she still mourned the death of her lover and master, Jaffer, and prayed to be excused from singing. Harun Al-Rashid threatened that if she would not sing, he would have her killed. She was adamant not to allow Harun Al-Rashid to enjoy her in bed; knowing she would die anyway, she sang a dirge to mourn her dead lover, Jaffer, and Harun Al-Rashid was so furious that he ordered his executioner to cut her head off at once.

3- A man of Baghdad named Zalzal, who died in 174 A.H., once had a pretty female slave who sang beautifully and no other enslaved female singer was up to her caliber. Ibrahim Al-Mosley wanted very much to buy her, but Zalzal adamantly refused, and Ibrahim was too shy to ask him again. When Zalzal died, his inheritors decided to sell all slaves in his house, and Ibrahim went fast to the auction to buy this pretty female slave, but he found her too thin and weak out of grief for her dead master/lover Zalzal. She refused to be sold and she refused to sing to potential buyers. When Ibrahim told Harun Al-Rashid about her, the caliph bought her and ordered her to sing. She refused at first, but upon his insistence, she sang and then was too weak that she was about to swoon. When Harun Al-Rashid left her an hour in a separate room to weep as much as she liked, he asked her to tell him her story. She told him how much she loved Zalzal and she would never be owned by any other man after his death. Harun Al-Rashid admired her faithfulness in love and freed her, and ordered a monthly salary to be brought to her house he bought to her.    

4- Ishaq Al-Mosley, the son of Ibrahim Al-Mosley, once narrated this story told to him by his father. Ibrahim had less money at one point and he complained his impecuniousness to Yehya Al-Barmaky, as no one at that time of economic depression would buy accomplished female slaves who were costly. Yehya told him that an Egyptian prince wanted very much to buy a distinguished female singer of beauty and knowledge. He told Ibrahim to take no less a dirham than 30 thousand dinars. After haggling with the prince, Ibrahim had to sell her in return for 20 thousand dinars only; her singing was exquisite, and Yehya blamed him for losing 10 thousand dirhams for such a precious melodious voice that aroused the deepest fibers of the soul of Yehya as he listened to her singing along with Ibrahim and the prince. Eventually, Yehya fell in love with her, and he urged Ibrahim to demand 30 thousands dinars instead of 20, and as the Egyptian prince was annoyed at such exorbitant price, he relinquished the deal, and Yehya bought her from Ibrahim for 50 thousands dinars!   

5- This account is about the culture of female slaves. Al-Asmaay was a slave-trader, who was brought to palace the grand vizier of Harun Al-Rashid, namely Al-Fadl Al-Barmaky, who brought to him two pretty female slaves to check and to try to sell for the highest price possible to Harun Al-Rashid, for the sake of Al-Fadl, in return for a very good commission. Al-Asmaay checked both of them and found that one of the female slave was so erudite and knowledgeable in Arabic grammar, the Quran, theology, etiquette, poetry, singing, literature, playing instruments, history, dancing, etc. whereas the other one was far behind her in terms of knowledge. When he managed to sell the more accomplished one to Harun Al-Rashid, as he admired her beauty and accomplishments, in return for 20 thousand dinars, Al-Fadl was so happy that when Al-Asmaay told him to wait until he would teach and train the other one properly, Al-Fadl granted her to him as a gift, instead of the commission, and Al-Asmaay agreed on the deal. Instead of teaching and selling the other one, whose beauty was incomparable, Al-Asmaay wooed her hands, and she agreed. He freed her and got married to her, and once accomplished, he enjoyed her singing alone and he enjoyed her very much in bed.     

COMMENTS:

1- Ahmed Drami: I am bound to say that I feel that true believers were not to buy female slaves for sexual gratification or for other uses as well. The horrid notion was based on the dominant culture and economy at the time; female slaves were presented as desirable commodity. I feel that there was only one reason to buy female or male slaves: to free them or to get married to them. I have learnt useful lessons from you, Dr. Mansour, about Islamic legislations found exclusively in the Quran, and your Quranism theory answered  so many questions that lingered in my mind for years. Chief among such lessons is that Quranic legislations submit to legislative purposes and rules, as the case with exceptions permitted in the Quran for prohibited things; yet, as for the topic of prohibiting enslavement, we feel that the Quran prohibits it indirectly as it prohibits all types of injustices committed by all people anytime anywhere because of their worship of money, authority, and power. God the Omniscient knows sins of the unrepentant; see the Quranic Chapter 100. 

Female Slaves in Bedchambers of Sultans:

Introduction:

 Sunnite fiqh and sharia legislations endorsed and justified enslavement, and the existence of male and female slaves was a dominant feature and phenomenon in the age of writing tomes and volumes by the Muhammadans during the Abbasid era after oral unwritten traditions accumulated during the Umayyad era. Writing began to be the norm – after decades of oral traditions – in fields like literature, history, legislation, theology, and religion. While free women were hidden within veils (covering all body except the face) and full veils (covering all body and face) as well as being kept at home and never allowed to get out alone, the writers of history, literature, and theology focused on female slaves. It is funny that historians of the Abbasid era rarely mention princesses of the Abbasid dynasty caliphs and wrote sheets and sheets about concubines of caliphs and rulers in their bedchambers, whose active sexual life with powerful men paved their way to control the Abbasid throne. Of course, we give below brief overviews, and hopefully, other deeper studies will be written by us and by our fellow Quranists later on.     

1- Empires and caliphates began with strong monarchs who establish their monarchy or kingdom firmly, and they would have no time for carnal pleasures, as their time was dedicated to bloodshed, massacres, and controlling others. When the empire or caliphate was firmly established and settled, peace would reign and monarchs and/or caliphs would find ample time for pleasures of all sorts like sex, singing, eating delicacies, hoarding treasures, etc. And this fact applies to all historical monarchies all over the ancient world, regardless of the label: Persian and Byzantine empires and the Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid, and Ottoman caliphates. Every ruler aimed at full control, power, and authority and they used to struggle against one another for transient gaining of the world: lands, fruits, animals, gold, silver, precious stones, and women; see 3:14. Hence, if founders of empires engaged in struggles and wars and had no time for pleasure, their successors/descendants had ample time for carnal pleasures of all sorts.     

2- For instance, After Mu'aweiya and his two successors/caliphs established the Umayyad empire firmly, their descendants had the chance and time to become profligate, decadent, and promiscuous. For example, the caliph Al-Waleed Ibn Yazeed came to Mecca in the pilgrimage season to drink wine on top of the roof of the Kaaba! When he got killed, his severed head was carried to his brother, Suleiman, who succeeded him to the throne, and this brother said that he was glad that this promiscuous wine-drinking pig was killed, and that he once tried to have sex with Suleiman himself! This killed caliph was rumored to have raped his step mothers!  

3- For instance, the Abbasid caliphate was founded by the caliph labeled Al-Saffah (i.e., the Assassin) and firmly settled as an empire by the caliph Al-Mansour who killed hundreds of thousands of people as well as by his son the caliph Al-Mahdi who killed thousands of opposition figures after accusing them of being heretics and apostates. When the fourth caliph, Al-Hady was enthroned, he had ample time for carnal pleasures with women in his bedchamber.  At the time, slave-trade grew and boomed, as female slaves were sold for high prices because of their beauty and knowledge of sex, poems, etiquette, arts, singing, instruments playing, history, theology, etc. Some slave-traders were musicians, like the famous Al-Mawsily, who trained female slaves to sing and play after buying them for little money, and after teaching them arts and etiquette, they were sold at high prices to the affluent and the caliphs and their cronies. Caliphs and wealthy men used to check and test ''the goods'' or female slaves in terms of physical beauty and in terms of her knowledge and accomplishments, and would pay large sums of money for them.      

4- Al-Mahdi, the Abbasid caliph, checked the female slave, Al-Khayzuran, before buying her, and after scrutinizing her body, he expressed his regret that despite her exquisite beauty, her legs were not soft-skinned. When she told him that when he will need her legs for his sexual use, he would not be seeing them when he would make love to her, he admired her witty answer and bought her. She was his favorite concubine, and he set her free and married her when she bore him his two sons that became caliphs later on: Al-Hady and Harun Al-Rashid. When Al-Hady was enthroned in Baghdad, he fell in love with his concubine, named Ghader, and he thought that he must not allow any man to have her in bed after his death, and on his death bed, he made his younger brother, Harun Al-Rashid, to swear that he would never touch Ghader and keep her alone to live in peace in the Abbasid seraglio. Harun Al-Rashid swore solemnly and so did Ghader herself. Yet, once Al-Hady died, Harun Al-Rashid demanded Ghader in bed. She refused him and reminded him of the solemn oaths, but Harun Al-Rashid told her he would bear the blame for breaking such oaths. She had nothing but to obey Harun Al-Rashid in bed as his new concubine!     

5- Harun Al-Rashid was the most famous Abbasid caliph in terms of making love to a large number of women; historians like Al-Tabari mentions that he had 4000 beautiful concubines and female slaves in his seraglio, and he liked to hear their singing and to throw golden coins at them, and each female slave at such singing banquets would gather 3000 dirhams.

6- Harun Al-Rashid used to covet and desire sexually female slaves that are not his, as we read in the following passage taken from the history book titled "Al-Muntazim": (…Harun Al-Rashid visited his ill uncle Suleiman Ibn Jaffer Al-Mansour, who died in 199 A.H., and he saw a very beautiful female slave in his palace, named Daifaa, and he fell instantly in love with her, and he begged his uncle to grant him this concubine, and Suleiman was too shy to refuse a caliph's request. As Harun Al-Rashid took her, he had to return her to his uncle few days later, after he got bored from her in bed and enjoyed her as much as he pleased, because Suleiman fell more ill since his favorite lovely concubine went away, and once Harun Al-Rashid heard his verse about her, he had to return her to him:

I complain to God about the injustice of a caliph

Who is just with everyone else, except me and Daifaa!

Another story was about Harun Al-Rashid who once visited the palace of one of his viziers, Khaled Al-Barmaky, and he saw a very pretty buxom concubine there, named Helena, and when she saw that Harun Al-Rashid desired her immensely, she joked with him by telling him that she wanted her share in him like the rest of concubines of Baghdad. Harun Al-Rashid laughed and asked her how he would manage to have her in bed tonight. She asked him to make Khaled Al-Barmaky grant her to him as a gift, and he did just that …)

7- Harun Al-Rashid loved to fornicate by overlooking Quranic sharia and applying corrupt Sunnite sharia to find pretexts concocted by his supreme judge who adopted the Abou Hanifa doctrine, Abou Youssef, who was the favorite disciple of Abou Hanifa. For instance, Harun Al-Rashid desired sexually a concubine in the seraglio that was owned by his late father. This concubine refused him in bed, asserting that since his late father copulated with her, it is illegal in Islam to allow one of his sons to have her in bed. This concubine feared God, more than Harun Al-Rashid did. Harun Al-Rashid shunned and overlooked the verse 4:22, and so did Abou Youssef, who issued a corrupt fatwa to the promiscuous, lecherous Harun Al-Rashid to allow him to have sex with this concubine; Abou Youssef resorted to the manipulative ways well-known in the Abou Hanifa doctrine to twist Quranic truths and to discard them altogether. Abou Youssef told Harun Al-Rashid that the testimony of a concubine is never valid in the Sunnite religion, especially in his doctrine! Hence, Abou Youssef endorsed fornication to please and gratify the caliph Harun Al-Rashid, instead of fearing God and seeking to obey His laws in the Quran! Another shocking story told by Abou Youssef is as follows: he was brought from his home to stand before Harun Al-Rashid in his palace court to judge an urgent case. Harun Al-Rashid wanted to copulate with singing female slave owned and enjoyed as a concubine by his paternal uncle, Eissa Ibn Jaffer Al-Mansour, and wanted to put him to death in case he refused to give her up. The problem was that Eissa beforehand swore solemn oaths to God that he would never sell her or grant her as a gift to anyone, and he did not know how to break free from such solemn oaths to avoid being killed. Abou Youssef issued a strange fatwa: he told Eissa to sell half of her body to Harun Al-Rashid and to grant him as a gift the other half of her body! Once Eissa was dismissed from the palace court, Harun Al-Rashid wanted Abou Youssef to find a way to allow him to copulate with her tonight. Abou Youssef said that she was a slave girl, and had to wait for three-month period before taking up another husband to make sure she was not pregnant. Harun Al-Rashid insisted that he must have her tonight in bed at any cost. Abou Youssef thought of a strange fatwa: this slave girl must have her status changed into freed to be a former slave and must get married to Harun Al-Rashid as a free woman, and thus, no waiting period was necessary at all! Harun Al-Rashid did just that and had her in bed this very night. Next day, Harun Al-Rashid gave Abou Youssef 200 thousand dirhams and richly embroidered garments, and the concubine herself gave Abou Youssef 10 thousands dirhams as a gift. This corrupt fatwa was of course against Islam in the Quran; any divorced or widowed women must wait three whole months before being allowed to remarry, and this law applies to all women, free or enslaved, but the corrupt Abou Youssef discarded the Quran to please a caliph and gain money. It seems that the Abbasid caliphs owned their Sunnite creed and its obsequious scholars to issue fatwas for them as per their whims, with complete disregard for God's Quranic sharia! A final note: if it had not been for such stories about concubines and female slaves in historical accounts, we would not have known about the very existence of Suleiman and Eissa, the paternal uncles of Harun Al-Rashid!          

8- Most of the caliphs that succeeded Harun Al-Rashid liked to have as many concubines as possible, except his son, the caliph Al-Amin, who sexually preferred hairless males in bed. One of the grandsons of Harun Al-Rashid, the caliph Al-Wathiq, died because of his dedicating his time to daily sex. He once called his Christian physician, Mikhail, to ask him to prepare a concoction to help him get more erections as he began to lose them quickly. The physician warned him against too much sex to preserve his life and to ward off ailment. The caliph removed the silk cover on his lap to show the physician a very pretty nubile concubine with her face buried in the caliph's crotch. The caliph insisted that he could not wait to copulate with her, and he had to have a cure that will sustain an erection for a long time. The physician was astounded, and he advised the young caliph to eat meat of lions, prepared by a special recipe. Al-Wathiq ate too much of such recipe till he died in 232 A.H., at the age of 32!   

9- After the death of Al-Wathiq, his brother Al-Motawakil was enthroned as caliph, and he had like his grandfather Harun al-Rashid, 4000 concubines and that he enjoyed all of them in bed, as we read in the book titled "Moroj Al-Zahab" authored by the historian Al-Masoody.

10- The Abbasid caliph Al-Mo'tadid, who died in 289 A.H., died actually because of having sex too much until he lost his health and his life. He had a large number of concubines and female slaves, but he loved mostly his concubine Durayrah, and he built her a special palace with and orchard and a piscine-like water pool, with total cost of 60 thousands dinars of gold, to live with her away from prying eyes. He sometimes would bring other singing slaves to entertain him and Durayrah. The poet Ibn Bassam mocked and derided this caliph in these short lines of poetry:

He left all people astonished and bewildered

And he stayed away from them at the pool

To enjoy ramming into the vagina of Hurayrah!

11- The very last Abbasid caliph, Al-Mostaasim, was defeated and killed by Hulago. Al-Hamazany, the historian, tells us in his accounts that Hulago ordered the caliph to come before him in the palace court, after the invasion of Baghdad, and as Hulago ordered his cronies to know the number of women in the seraglio, it turned out that there were 700 wives and 1000 concubines to the caliph! The caliph implored Hulago to spare his life and that of his women who never saw moon or sun, as they were locked for years inside the palace! Hulago mocked him and distributed the women among his men and soldiers and ordered the caliph's being kicked to death by all his Asian soldiers! Hulago saw that this caliph was more trivial and silly to deserve to die by the sword like brave men!

12- Of course, such historical facts we have quoted above are mentioned in accounts and books authored by historians of the time, but books of literature and poems have more graphic sexual details and adventures about female slaves of caliphs that we feel shy to mention here.

13- Those concubines in bed sometimes reached full power and authority and controlled the enthroned caliphs who were their lovers, husbands, or sons.

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: This was indeed the lowest depths of degeneration and moral decline; history books offered for the masses in the Arab world dignify Harun Al-Rasheed, as well as most Abbasid and Umayyad caliphs as if they were faultless angels! The worst type of falsehood is to teach such distorted history in schools to pass such profligate rulers as examples to follow! The same crime happens in Friday sermons in the Arab world! Such fabricated history is part of the religion of the Sunnites! Shame on them! 

Types of Enslavement: Forced Labor and Impalement:

Introduction:

1- Enslavement by kidnaping within raids or conquests was not the only type of enslavement; there has been temporary enslavement of free persons by terrorizing them into forced labor without wages, except little food, to build projects, palaces, bridges, etc. in the Middle Ages, and sadly, the bad unjust practice of forced labor still lingers in the modern world in other forms. For instance, Hitler and Nazis used POWs and captives in forced labor; similarly, Stalin did the same with his German POWs and captives.  

2- Usually, persons enslaved into forced labor worked under terror, torture, flogging mercilessly with whips. The Ottomans invented a terrible death penalty to terrorize those who were enslaved into forced labor by choosing a victim to be impaled in public, to die slowly before their eyes to make them work faithfully so as to avoid the same fate!

3- Let us below give an example of using forced labor to build the biggest bridge in Bosnia, during the Ottoman Era in the 16^th century.

Firstly:

1- The Ottoman Prime Minister at the time was born in Bosnia, in a village near the city of Višegrad, and he was kidnapped and sold in his childhood as a slave in Turkey, where he ascended the social ladder via his intelligence until he became a high-rank officer and later on the Prime Minister, or the Grand Vizier.

2- Feeling gratitude to Bosnia, where he was born and lived as a child, he wanted to build an enormous, grand Ottoman-architecture-style 180-meter-long bridge over the River Drina, near Višegrad.

3- Sadly, forced labor was used to build this bridge, as typical of such periods in history. To force people to build this bridge, the Ottoman Prime Minister ordered the slow death by impalement of a victim before everyone else in 1571 A.D., to serve as an example for others who might refuse to work. The Bosnian Nobel laureate novelist Ivo Andrić(1892:1975) authored a historical novel about such event, titled "The Bridge on the Drina", which is one of the great novels in world literature, translated into many languages. It was translated into Arabic in Egypt and published by the Egyptian Ministry of culture.   

4- We quote the following passages from the novel, about the impalement of the victim who was falsely accused of attempting to sabotage the construction of the bridge. We apologize in advance for quoting such horrible depiction of the impalement of the victim, named Radisav. 

Secondly: we quote the following passages from Chapter 3 of the novel, pages 54-60.

1- (… From the minaret of the main mosque in the city center, a shrill, clear voice pierced the ears, causing worry among the gathered people. Seconds later, the door of the stable was wide open, and two rows of guards, five in each row, got out of it, and in the middle of the two rows walked Radisav, barefooted and bareheaded. He walked while bending a little, as usual, in little steps. His fingers were injured and blood streak out of them, as his nails were cut off. He was carrying on his shoulder a long, white, sharp wooden pole. Three gypsies followed the two rows, to help in putting Radisav to death. Suddenly, the sheriff appeared, and no one knew from where he came, on his horseback, to be ahead of this procession that would have to march 100 steps to reach the scaffolds area. People gathered and watched attentively, craning their necks and standing on their toes, eager to watch the man who plotted a conspiracy by leading a resistance movement to sabotage the construction of the bridge. To their surprise, they saw him as a trivial, miserable looking man. They imagined him in a different way before they saw him. no one knew why he was walking in that laughter-inducing manner, as they never saw the burns all over his body, caused by chafing against shackles and fetters, as such burns were covered now by a shirt made of sheep wool. Hence, he seemed to them a very silly person who could not have possibly organized a resistance movement that led to his death now. The white pole alone added ominous horror to the tragic scene that drew everyone's attention …)

2- (… When they reached the scaffolds, the sheriff dismounted from his horse and gave it to his servant in a theatrical manner, and he disappeared into the steeply route. Moments later, people saw them climbing the scaffolds slowly and carefully, with guards surrounding Radisav completely so that he would not throw himself into the river. They climbed slowly until they reached the top, with wooden planks covering a space fit for an average room, like a raised stage for all to see from below, where Radisav stood along with the gypsies, the sheriff, and the guards surrounding Radisav …)

3- (… Below, people watched and fidgeted, as 100 steps separated them from the wooden planks, seeing all but unable to hear anything in detail. They exerted strained efforts to hear and see clearly … suddenly, the horrid scene to follow forced them to move their faces away and to hurry to their homes, feeling sorry they gathered here in the first place …)

4- (… Radisav hesitated a moment to obey the order to lie down. He moved slowly toward the sheriff, overlooking the guards as if they did not exist, and he told the sheriff slowly: "Listen, I beseech you with your life and your Hereafter to do me this favor: impale me in a way that will not make me pained like a dog!" The Sheriff shuddered in anger and shouted at him: "Move away from me, Christian infidel! You dared to sabotage the construction ordered by the Sultan and now you plead for mercy like women! You deserve this bloody death!" Radisav lowered his head and the gypsies removed his woolen shirt, and his burns and injuries were now clear, caused by the fetters and shackles, swollen red. Radisav lay down, with his face to the wooden planks, as he was ordered …)

5- (… The gypsies moved his arms into his back, and tied each of his legs by two ropes, and eventually pulling both ropes in opposite directions … the pole was positioned on two small pieces of wood so that its head was directed at the buttocks of the Christian peasant Radisav, who was about to be impaled. A knife was used to cut the cloth of his trousers above the buttocks. Luckily, watchers from their position down the scaffold could not see that being done by the executioner. They only saw the tied body quivered, rose, and lowered, as the pole entered the body of Radisav. One gypsy hammered the pole with studied number of times, while another directed the pole in a way so that it moves into the body without causing instant death to vital organs. The body of the victim quivered involuntary, but he did not utter any sound …)

6- (… Silence was deafening among watchers to the extent that every step in the street or on the scaffolds were heard. They heard Radisav hitting the wooden planks with his forehead, and eventually, a strange non-human voice was heard coming from the impaled tortured body, with the pole being hammered into it, without piercing the vital organs. The limbs of Radisav shivered involuntarily, his fingers were frozen, and his face grew paler …)

7- (… hammering stopped for a moment, as the right shoulder of the victim swollen. The executioner cut a cross through the swelling and pale-colored blood seeped from it slowly and then fast, and the head of the pole emerged from the swollen cut area in the right shoulder, and hammering went on until the head of the pole reached above the right ear of Radisav …)

8- (… The pole impaled the victim Radisav like a poke enters a lamb, but instead of the poke coming out from a lamb's mouth, the pole came out from the right shoulder of Radisav, without hurting much the lungs, heart, and intestines … the hammer was thrown into the wooden planks by the executioner, and one of the gypsies came nearer to the impaled unmoving body and checked it. blood trickled from under the pole between the legs of the victim, forming a puddle on the wooden planks. The gypsy made sure that Radisav was still alive, though his face grew paler, his eyes wider, and his mouth gaped. Radisav could not control the facial muscles; his face was like a mask, but his short breath and beating heart assured the gypsies that he was still alive. The gypsies moved the impaled body and nailed the base of the pole with long nails between two wedges, and the pole was made still by other pieces of wood in the scaffolds …)

9- (… The gypsies finished their task and withdrew back to join the rows of guards. The wooden stage-scene now had no one but the impaled victim, naked up to his waist, erect on the wedged pole for all eyes to see like a statue in the air overlooking the river … some people moved their faces away in fear an shock, and many walked to their homes without looking back. Yet, many people waited and watched the scene, motionless and speechless before the human body hanging in the air, stiffening in an unnatural way … fear reached their spines and intestines, with their legs shook, and thus they were not able to move away like the rest who did …)

10- (… The sheriff, the executioner, and two guards came near the impaled victim, to check it closely. A trickle of blood was flowing in a thin thread along the pole, but Radisav was alive and he did not faint. His body heaved slowly, and his veins moved involuntarily in his neck. Radisav faintly uttered these words "Turks …. Turks …. Turks on the bridge … Die like dogs … Drown like dogs …" and he began to moan …)

11- (… The gypsies gathered their tools and descended the scaffolds, and so did guards and the sheriff … people moved away before them and scattered. Only small children remained behind, sitting on rocks and small trees, waiting for something, as if they knew that this was not over yet. Children wondered what will become of the impaled man over the river, standing still in the skyline, as if he were a swimmer about to jump …)

12- (… The sheriff assured his superior, Abid Agha, that everything was done smoothly and in the right manner, and that the prisoner was still alive, as his vital organs were intact. Abid Agha gave no response, not even a look. He just ordered his horse be brought by a signal of his hand, and he said goodbye to Touson Effendi and Mr. Antoine … people scattered and the caller roamed the streets, telling people that the execution was done, and it will be exacted on anyone who would dare to repeat the crime committed by the impaled criminal …)

13- (… The sheriff stood at the street that was suddenly empty, and he felt disturbed. His servant held the rein of his horse, and his men waited for his orders. He felt the urge to say something, but he did not utter a word. Strong sentiments surged within him and filled his heart. He remembered all what he could not previously recall before impaling the victim … he remembered the ultimatum of Abid Agha to him that he will be put to death by impalement if he could not arrest the criminal who sabotaged the construction of the bridge. The sheriff had a narrow escape, this time …)

Lastly: We read here about the crime of impalement accompanying a charitable work of building a bridge for the benefit of people, and the query raised is the following: could such a beneficial act for people be done without such grave injustice?

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: I think that the cruel way of putting victims to death by impalement was practiced in ancient times by Babylonians and Assyrians, and later on Europeans in the Middle Ages, besides being buried alive. Such heinous torture was never just, regardless of the  crime of the person/victim. Yet, I wonder if this applies to the punishments mentioned in 5:33 in the Quran. What are the use of such punishments, if they are inapplicable?  

2- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank Ben Levante and we assert the following points to answer his question: 1) retribution by impalement is against the Quranic command of never to commit excess in retribution against murderers as per 17:33, and thus, if a murderer is not to be tortured by impalement, this applies to other criminals who committed other crimes as well, and 2) 5:33 would be applied only when a real Islamic country emerges based on peace, human rights, justice, freedom, and social solidarity (like many West countries now) and when such country face terrorists like ISIS who massacre, rape, loot, etc. among other heinous crimes. ISIS terrorists and their likes must be fought and will be spared punishment only in case of real repentance, accompanied by paying diyya (i.e., money paid for manslaughter to the family of the killed person) and restoring stolen money and items. If they are fought and defeated, the ISIS terrorists must be punished each of the as per his/her crimes (quantities and qualities of crimes); thus, banishment for terrorizing and helping criminals, capital punishment for murderers, and cutting limbs for rape, looting, etc.  

Types of Enslavement: Forced Labor in Egyptian History:

Introduction:

1- Forced labor is the worst type of enslavement of free persons, or those who are deemed apparently to be free. Forced labor is in two forms: temporary and permanent. Within temporary forced labor, free persons are forced to work in return for low wages, or for little food, to build and erect temples, palaces, and buildings for the affluent ones, masters, or rulers or to build a huge project of the State, and once the project is completed, they are set free … for a while! Within permanent forced labor, peasants in rural villages would toil all year long for almost nothing; as in harvest times, cronies and soldiers of the sultan would get all the harvested produce and would punish peasants if they would dare to hide some for their children.

2- Middle Ages witnessed both forms of forced labor, especially the permanent one of peasants who seemed to be imprisoned in rural areas and lands like cattle or a herd of sheep. Within the crime of Arab conquests, soldiers who defended their homelands against Arab invaders were killed, and their children and women were enslaved, while peasants were forced to toil like animals for the benefit of the new Arab conquerors and invaders. Of course, such peasant were forced to serve earlier Roman occupiers and rulers; nothing new under the sun. yet, at least earlier occupiers never used the name of God as pretext to justify their crimes and injustices (against people and God) as did Arabs of the Qorayish tribe   

3- We give below a brief overview of both types of forced labor in Middle-Ages Egypt.

Firstly: Qaraqosh and Ibn Mamati: forced labor within the struggle between the sword and the pen:

1- In 1975, we were researching in the Cairo Public Library, Department of Manuscripts, to copy material for our Ph.D. thesis titled "The Influence of Sufism in the Mameluke Era in Egypt". We were surprised to find many so manuscripts authored by Al-Siyouti, and later on, it was transpired that this historian used to commit plagiarism in most of his writings by quoting dead authors and ascribing their works to himself unjustly. For instance, he has ascribed to himself the authorship of the book titled "Al-Fashoosh fi Hokm Qaraqosh" (i.e., On the Rule of Qaraqosh), and after much research, we have discovered that the real author is Ibn Mamati, the Egyptian high-rank scribe during the reign of Saladin, the well-known Ayyubid sultan of Egypt, Iraq, and the Levant.  

2- In the early 1990s, we have published an article in the Cairo-based, independent Al-Ahrar newspaper to analyze this book on Qaraqosh by Ibn Mamati, focusing on the notion that within the ongoing struggle between swords and pens, pens win eventually. This article has been reflecting indirectly our status at the time: we had nothing but a pen of enlightenment against the Mubarak military rule and its Azharite cronies – our intellectual foes – and non-Azharite cronies like Gamal Badawi, the editor-in-chief of the Cairo-based independent Al-Wafd newspaper, who dared to plagiarize many historical information we gathered from manuscripts and rephrased them, without reference to us at all, in one of his editorials. Gamal Badawi was praised and rewarded at the time as a great erudite scholar! Shame on him!  

3- In our article on the book on Qaraqosh, we have tackled the features and traits of Bahaa Eddine Qaraqosh, the powerful military leader in service of Saladin who established most defense fortresses in Cairo and the Levant at the time, including the Great Wall around Cairo and the Mountain Fortress in 572 A.H., as crusaders tried incessantly to attack Egypt at that era. Qaraqosh represented the sword, while Ibn Mamati who wrote a book to deride him represented the pen. We have tackled in our article how the struggle between the sword and the pen ended in the victory of the pen.

4- Ibn Mamati (544:606 A.H.) was a scribe, poet, and historian who descended from a notable, rich Egyptian family that converted to ''Islam'' in the Fatimid era, and its members rose in high-rank governmental posts. Ibn Mamati inherited his job of a scribe, and he authored many books in history, including one about Saladin's biography, and an encyclopedia on laws. But his most famous book   is the satirical one on Qaraqosh, who was the rival of Ibn Mamati in the palace court of Saladin, and enmity and jealousy grew between the pen and the sword. Of course, the sword initially achieved its temporary victory, driving Ibn Mamati to flee Egypt to settle in Aleppo in 604 A.H. where he died in poverty in 606 A.H. Yet, the pen of Ibn Mamati achieved an everlasting victory eventually; military achievements and buildings erected by Qaraqosh as well as his loyalty to Saladin and his son were forgotten because of the satirical book deriding him, though it mainly contained rumors.   

5- In this satirical book by Ibn Mamati, the author made good use of his pen and his Egyptian nature of satire, typical of many authors in many eras in Egypt, to deride Qaraqosh, the fierce military leader, in an unprecedented style of humor at the time; he penned laughter-inducing, satirical tales featuring Qaraqosh as its hero, depicting him as the epitome of foolishness, ignorance, gullibility, authority, and dominance.   

6- Because Qaraqosh was so much hated by the Cairene people at the time (i.e., those living in Cairo, capital of Egypt), all the Cairene people – and later on all Egyptians at large – celebrated and propagated the book deriding him authored by Ibn Mamati, and it orally spread in all their councils and gatherings, especially by ones who read about injustices by rulers and their cronies in the previous tens of centuries, as Egyptians used to adopt passive resistance against unjust rulers by deriding them and telling jokes about them. Later on, Qaraqosh has become to the populace the symbol of all unjust rulers in all eras, and the book on him by Ibn Mamati turned into oral traditions or literature Egyptians like to remember and recount all over the centuries to vent their ire against unjust people in power. There is even an Egyptian proverb that goes as follows: (This more unjust than the rule of Qaraqosh!). This satirical book by Ibn Mamati was so well-known that Al-Siyouti, a historian of the Mameluke era in Egypt, had rewritten it and claimed himself to be its author, as the late editor-in-chief Gamal Badawi did with our article that we wrote in Al-Ahrar newspaper.        

7- We do NOT apologize for the previous points as a lengthy introduction for our topic here: forced labor in Egypt. Egyptians hated the unjust Qaraqosh mainly because of his forcing Egyptians to work for free in his projects erected in Cairo. That was why they celebrated the satirical book and made Qaraqosh the symbol of all unjust tyrannical rulers. We do believe that Egypt until now is the center of unjust despots. Among the features of Middle-Ages injustice and slavery was temporary forced labor of Egyptian workers and permanent forced labor of Egyptian peasants.     

8- Egyptian mothers used to pray for their sons as thus: "May God protect you against the evil unjust rulers"!

Secondly: an overview of temporary forced labor during the Mameluke era:

1- In our book on Sufism during the Mameluke era, we have tackled religious buildings erected in that era, and such establishments were linked to both Sufism and injustice; as people were forced to participate in building processes. Mameluke emirs/princes used to build schools (i.e., madrassas) of Sufism, and Al-Makrizi, the historian, writes the following about one of these schools: (… It is a dark school with no sources of light, and it has no joy typical of houses of worship … the reason is that its owner was an unjust, greedy, and arrogant prince … he made his soldiers force people to work in building such madrassa and they used to flog and torture workers … and he paid them almost nothing; they worked for little daily food! Hence, such madrassa is built by ill-gotten money and grave injustice … once established, this madrassa gathered a great number of Sufis …).  

2- Egyptian workers suffered unpaid  forced labor amidst despicable conditions of being tortured and flogged in case of non-submission to build such religious institutions, as we read  in the lines of protest of the aristocratic historian Abou Al-Mahasin during the Mameluke era: (… Prince Seif Eddine began to build a large religious madrassa … but he used most arbitrary, unjust methods … his men would beat workers sometimes to death … workers were never paid at all … those refused to work were tortured … this prince never stopped his harsh injustice until he give up and ghost and died eventually, to everyone's relief …).

3- Of course, such forced labor in cities like Cairo used to occur before the eyes of historians at the time, and they wrote about it, but forced labor of peasants in the Egyptian countryside which was more unjust and grievous indeed, few lines were written on it by historians who lived in cities. 

Thirdly: an overview of permanent forced labor imposed on Egyptian peasants during the Mameluke era:

1- In our book on the Egyptian society within false sharia applied during the reign of the Mameluke sultan Qaitbay, we have written many lines about the formal forced labor of peasants in the Egyptian countryside at the time. 

2- Peasants at the time were treated like slaves during the Mameluke era; they could not leave agricultural lands, as they were never allowed to, as if they were cattle attached forcibly to lands and farms of the feudal landlords. Yet, peasants at the time were never bought and sold, but they were – along with their families and progeny – forced to remain within the feudal system, never to leave acres of lands of their Mameluke landlords. Those peasants who dared to flee or escape such forced slavery were punished by authorities that forced them to return to their location; those who helped in such escape or facilitated their hiding were severely punished as well. 

3- Mamelukes and their cronies and henchmen used to create elaborate ways to terrorize, torture, and intimidate peasants to remain in forced labor without complaint. Al-Makrizi, the historian, has written in his accounts about a Mameluke governor/prince who ruled a large region within the Nile Delta in 702 A.H. who used to torture to death disobedient peasants by impalement and to force them never to ride horses, carry cudgels or swords, or to dress in black.  

4- Mameluke governors of Egyptian regions used to have free rein to force Egyptian peasants into labor for nothing (or in return for little food) while terrorizing and torturing them when necessary. One of such governors of the Nile Delta during the reign of Qaitbay is mentioned by Ibn Al-Sayrafi, the historian, in his book, in 876 A.H. as peasants of the West Delta region, Egypt, complained to the sultan about the grave injustices committed by their governor, but the unjust sultan, Qaitbay, accused them of talking in an improper way to him and provided no evidence to prove their complaint, and ordered their receiving severe beatings before they go away! Hence, Ibn Al-Sayrafi, the historian, did not approve of their lack of etiquette! Hence, no Mameluke sultans liked to hear complaints; their ears would hear only praises and hypocritical words! Such poor peasants were of course illiterate and could not understand the wiles of unjust rulers; how come they would be expected to provide clear evidence of any type! They were beaten and allowed ''graciously'' to walk home!     

5- Historians of the Mameluke era wrote elaborately about projects of sultans, like building dams, canals, irrigation projects, bridges, etc. but they wrote very little, and NOT disapprovingly, about forced labor of peasants, whose cries and lamentations would be unheard within hypocritical poems in praise of sultans. 

6- Qaitbay the sultan was said to be pious and that he used to perform many acts of worship at night; yet, his injustice did not differ from his predecessors. Besides, Qaitbay knew for sure that his governors in the Egyptian countryside lived off forced labor imposed on peasants, and that was the norm at the time and no one would protest; severe beatings were the punishments for disobedient peasants who protested against such grave injustices, as we have mentioned above.     

7- Forced labor of peasants was linked at the time with torture at harvest time, as many peasants used to vie in hiding some of the crops to feed their offspring, and peasants would brag before one another that they withstood severe floggings by men of authority without confessing hiding some crops!

8- Of course, Mameluke authorities at the time knew quite well the despicable conditions of forced labor of peasants and how they used to hide some crops; hence, Mameluke sultans would in advance impose taxes and fines on them and confiscate their little possessions. Those who refused or protested would have to suffer imprisonment and/or torture. By the way, there were at the time prisons of the Mameluke caliphate to incarcerate the masses and  other 'private' prisons established by notables and the affluent ones among the Mameluke government to imprison whoever they liked. Ibn Al-Sayrafi, the historian, once has praised in his accounts a Mameluke prince who set free 170 peasants (as an act of charity during the fasting month of Ramadan) from his private prison, who were being disciplined for disobedience and their possessions were confiscated. This means that this Mameluke prince had his private prison to incarcerate and punish/torture peasants mercilessly in his feudal lands who would not pay taxes imposed on them by this Mameluke prince!         

9- To mention the worst, this 'pious' sultan named Qaitbay used to throw peasants who could not pay imposed taxes into one of his worst prisons: Al-Maqshara, a name in Arabic that refers literally to the location when the victims were flayed alive! This brutal death by flaying was imposed by Qaitbay on four peasants in 877 A.H. among a group of peasants who dared to submit a complaint against heavy taxes imposed on them. The four corpses of dead flayed peasants were sent along with the released prisoners to their villages to serve as an example to terrorize others and to warn them against disobedience! Yet, Ibn Al-Sayrafi, the historian and learned judge, who mentions this story has ended it by asserting that God lent Qaitbay victory over those who tried to evade taxes! The pious sultan would flay victims to death and the scholar/historian would praying for him for more victories!   

10- Hence, so that forced labor would continue, terrorism committed by Mameluke princes, governors, and sultans had to go on within imprisonment, torture, impalement, and flaying!

11- Despite inhuman punishments imposed on peasants who would run away and flee feudal lands, some peasants would actually manage to escape into cities; yet, they would flee permanent forced labor in the countryside to face temporary one in cities like Cairo. Ibn Al-Sayrafi, the historian, writes in the same year 877 A.H. that most peasants who fled to Cairo were arrested and imprisoned, and later on after being disciplined, they were sent by force to work in irrigation projects in Giza city on the Nile, near Cairo, without wages at all except food. When authorities found that the number of imprisoned ones was not sufficient for the irrigation project, Ibn Al-Sayrafi mentions in his accounts that the governor of Cairo devised a devilish plan to gather more free people into forced labor; he crucified with nails a naked, innocent man into a large wooden cross carried by soldiers in all streets of Cairo and made criers and callers urge people of Cairo to gather to witness the retribution exacted on a killer. When people gathered in an open place to watch, as usually typical in the Middle Ages, soldiers of the governor arrested all men to use them in forced labor in the irrigation project! It is noteworthy that Ibn Al-Sayrafi, the historian, never expressed protest or condemnation of such events mentioned in his accounts!     

Lastly:

1- Okasha the peasant in the time of the Mameluke era of soldiers/rulers fled his village so as not to be forced to work for free, and once in Cairo, he was forced to work for free! He never knew that he would be entrapped along with thousands of peasants to dig the Suez Canal while being flogged with the whip until he would die! 

2- Okasha the peasant in the time of the military rule of today in Egypt was recruited as a soldier within the obligatory military service and was forced to temporarily serve higher ranks by doing chores for free, and then he chose to work in one of the Gulf monarchies within forced labor (temporary or forever) under the mercy of the Gulf monarchies sponsor system. 

3- Poor, poor Okasha!

4- Who would dare to say that enslavement has come to an end in modern times?!  

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: I beg to pose this question: was the Byzantine Empire a secular one or a theocracy? The likes of Qaraqosh were repeated in history in different eras and locations under many empty mottoes: democracy, nationalism, communism, and the so-called Islamism. As for 9:33, I read Dr. Mansour's comment, but I was talking about punishments mentioned in the Quran regardless of the sins/crimes committed, as I feel I cannot accept cutting of limbs as punishment, regardless of the crime, even if it is massacring and many people. I know the Quran has made strict conditions to apply the corporeal punishment, but what about changing social conditions in the modern world?! To apply punishments mentioned in 5:33, one must be 100% sure that the criminal is guilty of committing this or that crime, but such percentage is not possible I think. Why would we leave such criminal at the mercy of whims of any judge?! I prefer to preserve the lives of criminals/suspects instead of their being convicted wrongly. I am against torturing criminals by cutting off their limbs, whereas I agree with some European legislations that stopped applying the capital punishment. What do you think, Dr. Mansour?!  

2- Dr. A. S. Mansour: we thank Ben Levante fir his comment, and we assert that the Byzantium was a secular empire using the Church to serve its purposes of hegemony after separation from the Roman empire, which was essentially pagan and occupying Egypt after the defeat of Queen Cleopatra. Rome persecuted Egyptian Copts at the time. Theocracy was manifested in the empire of Qorayish created by the crime of Arab conquests of the 7^th century within which non-Arab was deemed infidel and heretic. As for punishments described in 5:33, we assert the following points from our personal Quranist views: 1) such punishments in 5:33 are meant not for retaliation, rather for deterrence and reform to proactively prevent the committing of crime and to urge immediate repentance in case of committing it; real punishment is in Hell in the Hereafter for those who died without repentance and committed injustices, 2) this is our vision in making worldly punishment fitting the enormity/degree of the crime, as seen by legislators in a given country, 3) Quranic legislations of Islam precede European laws in preventing retribution for deaths; as one can pay diyya (i.e., money paid for manslaughter to the family of the killed person) as per 2:178, as opposed to the Torah principle of an eye for an eye, mentioned in 5:45 in the Quran about the Jews, and 4) we assert that the West countries – at varying degrees – are nearer to the application of Quranic sharia laws, as the international charters of human rights are the nearer human writing to the real Islamic sharia laws in the Quran.

3- Maktab Hasoob: I think that the comment by Ben Levante is linked to the essence of Quranic legislations: are they relative or absolute? Dynamic or static? In other words, if a real Islamic country would emerge one day to apply the Quran alone, can such a country apply and not to apply certain verses? I refer to heritage, witnesses, individual freedom, drinking wine, sex between two consenting adults, etc. Should such a country oppose and prevent certain habits or not?! Would this violate 5:49? How can we be so sure that the Quranic verses cope social changes of every era?  

4- Maktab Hasoob: As for aspects of the enslavement topic raised by Dr. Mansour, I tend to think that enslavement was linked directly to the lack of working force; by the way, before secularism of the 18^th century, all countries were theocratic in the ancient world: Egypt, Japan, China, India, Iraq, Persia, Byzantium, etc. as theocracies are natural product of creeds that predate them with their texts. I wonder why imams of the Muhammadans never tackle Quranic verses about how to rule and govern.

Types of Enslavement: Forced Labor during the Digging of the Suez Canal:

Introduction:

1- Mostly, ordinary slaves in the past who were bought were living in better conditions in comparison to free persons who were enslaved within forced labor temporarily or permanently and coerced through terror and torture to work under the danger of being flogged any time. Ordinary male and female slaves in the past who were bought used to live in their masters' or owners' houses, working within households or in farms, with close relations of affinity between them and their masters within daily living for years; hence, mostly, such slaves did not suffer cruelty or mistreatment. Sadly, the opposite was true for those free persons enslaved within forced labor temporarily or permanently; they were harshly and cruelly treated because they were originally free ones who were made to forget they were free, so that they work very hard driven by deep fear of being flogged, imprisoned, tortured, or put to death by flaying or impalement. Those free men enslaved within forced labor were not controlled only by other persons; rather, by a ruling system of intricate net of governors, supervisors, and overseers with whips in their hands, who were in turn controlled by tyrant despots, within a vicious, hellish circle of injustice!    

2- We feel sorry and sad that most of those concerned with the issue of slavery turn a blind eye to forced labor, though it is the worst type of slavery, while they focus on the lesser type of ordinary slavery of buying female or male slaves and sing the praises of overt abolishment of slavery in Europe and the USA while until now the worst types of covert enslavement are maintain worldwide: forced labor. Let us tackle how forced labor was used to dig the Suez Canal, while torturing Egyptian peasants for ten years of diffing it (1859:1869). 

3- Laws of using forced labor to dig the Suez Canal were issued a year before Lincoln became president of the USA and he abolished slavery. Forced labor was used for ten years to dig the Suez Canal. No one all over the world dared to condemn enslavement of Egyptian peasants into forced labor. Europe began to free slaves since 1792, but Ferdinand De Lesseps, the French citizen of the French culture of "liberty, equality, and fraternity", was the one to sign the concession contract of digging of the Suez Canal, and in accordance with that concession, free Egyptians were enslaved into forced labor to serve the purposes of the French and the interests of De Lesseps, and NOT to serve the purposes and interests of Egypt and Egyptian peasants; we give some details below.

Firstly: the Suez Canal from the birth of the idea to the concession contract:

1- When Napoleon's Expedition in Egypt failed, he sent a diplomat to Egypt to know all about its conditions and to help choose a ruler of Egypt who would be loyal to France. This French diplomat was Mathew De Lesseps, who befriended the Albanian army officer Muhammad Ali, fanned his ambition, and helped him to be the governor/ruler and later on king of Egypt: Muhammad Ali Pacha of Egypt. His ascendancy to the throne was aided by the will of the Egyptians themselves, led by Azharite scholars. Once enthroned, Muhammad Ali Pacha returned the favor to Mathew De Lesseps by hosting his son, Ferdinand De Lesseps, in Egypt, who was a poor French young man desperate for work. Muhammad Ali Pacha appointed Ferdinand De Lesseps as a personal tutor to his small, fat male child, Saeed, who became the Khedive Saeed Pacha of Egypt later on. It is rumored by some historians that Ferdinand De Lesseps sexually tempted Saeed as a child and drove him to be a 'passive' homosexual. Historically, we are not sure if this is true or not; if so, poor Egyptian peasants paid a heavy price for it!       

2- Ferdinand De Lesseps (1805:1894) was among the followers of Saint Simon (1760:1825), who were the first to call for the digging the Suez Canal, when they established in Paris a society dedicated to studies related to digging a canal between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. Their dream in digging the Suez Canal drove them to meet with the King of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pacha, who had close relations with France, to ask his permission to begin such project. Muhammad Ali Pacha adamantly refused the Suez Canal project so as not to make such a canal be used as a pretext to the French to re-conquer Egypt. Ferdinand De Lesseps met with Khedive Saeed Pacha, grandson and successor of Muhammad Ali Pacha, his old friend and pupil, and convinced him to approve of the Suez Canal project. Ferdinand De Lesseps received by virtue of royal decree a concession contract consisting of 12 items that include the digging of a canal to link the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, with 99 years of concession and control of it by the Europeans beginning by the date of its inauguration. On 5^th of Jan., 1856, the second concession contract and the basic law of the Suez Canal Company, whose items include the fact that the Suez Canal Company will undertake the digging process and that Egyptian digging laborers will constitute 4/5 of all needed laborers. Such concession contract has been so unjust as far as Egypt is concerned, as Ferdinand De Lesseps took advantage of his old friendship with Khedive Saeed Pacha to influence him to agree on all requests, or rather demands, of the French, regardless of Egypt and Egyptian peasants who suffered for it.    

Secondly: an overview of forced labor during the digging of the Suez Canal:

1- The basic law of the Suez Canal Company has included the fact that Egyptian digging laborers will constitute 4/5 of all needed laborers, and such law was the basis of forced labor policy adopted by Ferdinand De Lesseps to dig the Suez Canal, and the statute of the Suez Canal Company was approved by Khedive Saeed Pacha, and such statute caused forced labor that enslaved about million Egyptian peasants! At the time in 1862, the population of Egypt was 4.8 million. Hence, Khedive Saeed Pacha forced about million Egyptian peasants during the ten years of digging to leave their villages, families, and lands to be enslaved into forced labor using rudimentary, primitive manual tools to dig the Suez Canal, without any digging machines at all. More than 120 thousand Egyptians died in the process of digging; they died of hunger, thirst, torture, and epidemics, and most of their corpses were lost within layers of digging. 

2- The Delta city of Zaqazeeq (whose name means ''small fish'' in vernacular Egyptian colloquial Arabic) in Egypt was the center of gathering all peasants brought by force from all over Egyptian countryside villages, where men of good, strong body-build would be chosen to travel on foot, while tied with ropes, to the digging areas, each carrying a water bottle and some dried bread, and they would reach digging areas extremely exhausted.     

3- Tourists at the time were amused by watching Egyptian peasants toil in the process of digging the Suez Canal!

4- As those who imposed forced labor always needed to use terrorism and torture, a camp was established to discipline and punish rebellious, defiant, and disobedient diggers, and the Suez Canal Company had often resorted to the Egyptian police to quell rebels, especially among those who came forcibly from Upper Egypt.  

5- A hospital and ambulance center were established to care for foreign employees and workers of the Suez Canal Company, while providing no medical care at all for Egyptian peasants in their forced labor; hence, epidemics and ailments killed thousands of them. The most comment illnesses among the Egyptian peasants/diggers were respiratory diseases, diarrhea, dysentery, hepatitis, small pox, and tuberculosis, and later on, in summer of 1865, cholera killed thousands more, to the extent that there were extreme difficulties to bury the victims; their corpses were thrown to the desert. Another tragedy killed hundreds of them; as they were digging wet muddy stratum of soil, it contained flammable phosphorus that led to the death of hundreds of them instantly!  

6- Upon orders of Ferdinand De Lesseps, in Dec. 1861, Khedive Saeed Pacha visited the digging areas himself and ordered 20 thousand young men be brought into forced labor to accelerate the rate of digging. Hence, in 1862, 22 thousand Egyptian peasants were forced to dig the Suez Canal, coming by force used by Egyptian authorities from Lower and Upper Egypt. 

Thirdly: forced labor during the digging of the Suez Canal in the book by the Egyptian author Dr. Abdel-Aziz Al-Shennawi (died in 1986):

1- Dr. Al-Shennawi was our Professor who taught us undergraduate courses of history at Al-Azhar University within our fourth, last year and later on within postgraduate studies courses (1973-1974). He was a historian and a researcher par excellence, as we discern from his books on European history, history of the Ottoman Empire, and history of Al-Azhar institution, and his Ph.D. thesis on forced labor during the digging process of the Suez Canal.  

2- Dr. Al-Shennawi was irritable and easily driven to verbal abuse of others; we tend to think that this was because of two factors: A) he was a real historian and a genius in his field while Azharite professors who were ignoramuses were placed above him as they graduated from Al-Azhar University while he was a graduate of Cairo University, History Department, Faculty of Arts, and consequently a non-Azharite in the first place and therefore received a different treatment as an inferior, and B) tragedy struck him as he was tortured by Salah Nasr (redoubtable head of Egyptian central intelligence in the 1960s) to force him to submit certain rare documents about the digging of the Suez Canal. He had copied such documents from the archives of the main royal palace in Egypt, Abdeen Palace, within the period 1940:1952 as material for his Ph.D. thesis. After submitting what he had, he lived while carrying bitter memories of unforgettable horrible experience of being insulted and tortured.   

Fourthly: a book review:

The book title: ''Forced Labor during the Digging of the Suez Canal", 3^rd edition, 1966,  Alexandria, Egypt, authored by Dr. Abdel-Aziz Al-Shennawi: Professor of modern contemporary history, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.

1- Contents of the book: Introduction, Chapter 1: The Era of Tyranny of Consulates in Egypt, Chapter 2: The Two Friends Deal with the Problem of Finding Labor, Chapter 3: Commencement of the Project and Suspension of Laborers' Statute, Chapter 4: Propaganda of the Company in Egypt to Gather Laborers and why it Failed, Chapter 5: Propaganda of the Company in the Levant to Gather Laborers and why it Failed, Chapter 6: Covert Forced Labor, Chapter 7: Overt Forced Labor, Chapter 8: Too Much Use of Forced Labor, Chapter 9: British Hypocrisy, Chapter 10: Egyptian Peasants in the House of Commons, Chapter 11: Laborers Die of Thirst while Digging, Chapter 12: Spread of Epidemics and Diseases among Laborers while Digging, Chapter 13: Wages of Laborers, Chapter 14: The Crime of Khedive Saeed Pacha and the Suez Canal Company against the Egyptian Economy, Chapter 15: The Suez Canal Company Dug the Canal Thanks to Forced Labor System).

2- Excerpts and quotations from the book that describe the plight and despicable conditions of the Egyptian peasants enslaved into forced labor are compiled below.

A) (…The Suez Canal Company reserved the right to hold 15-day wages of any laborer to ensure his not quitting, and then he would receive all his wages from the safe of the Company if he managed to fulfill all his tasks. Such item in the contract presupposes that laborers might quit or flee to escape despicable conditions of digging. Likewise, another contract item imposes penalties on laborers who try to escape … We conclude two facts: firstly, coercion was used with Egyptians forced to dig the Suez Canal, as they could not possibly quit at all, and as they were heavily guarded and watched over to prevent their escape and to prevent any laxity in digging; secondly, the Suez Canal Company knew in the first place beforehand that Egyptian laborers forced to dig will reject digging because of low wages and despicable and hazardous conditions, with no enticements to go on digging …) (pages 38 & 39, Chapter 2).

B) (… Before such unfavorable conditions, the Suez Canal Company continued to gather as many Egyptian laborers as it could using its own devices, and its committees roamed Egyptian villages in Lower Egypt to convince and coax Egyptian peasants to work in digging … An employee of the Suez Canal Company was employed for that mission as he spoke Egyptian Arabic: Joseph Vernoni, who had his assistants to help him to organize laborers and sent them to Suez …) (page 66, Chapter 3). (… A French man, Olivier Ritt, was among the managers of the Suez Canal Company and he once sent a letter in 1861, asserting that the Egyptian government had sent a large number of laborers to dig a canal of drinking water, and that such laborers had done a perfect job. Such statements show that the Egyptian government undertook the mission to gather and send laborers, as no one went there willingly in response to propaganda of the Suez Canal Company …) (pages 111 and 112, Chapter 6).

C) (… Khedive Saeed Pacha was interested in furthering the digging process regardless of interests of Egyptians, as he resorted to violence and restrictive firm measures to quell rebellious laborers. He sent a ship into Upper Egypt through the Nile to meet with governors of villages to urge them to gather as many youths as possible for the digging and to be responsible for them by overseeing their digging areas in Suez themselves by day and never to allow anyone's escape by night. He made the Egyptian police in service of the Suez Canal Company since Jan. 1862, and policemen undertook the mission in guarding peasants being transferred to Zaqazeeq city in the Nile Delta, before employees of the Suez Canal Company transfer them to digging areas …) (page 135, Chapter 7).

D) (… Police officers used to oversee and supervise at day the digging process. Riding on horseback, such processions used to stir fright among laborers. When Egyptian overseers would be lax in their job, police officers would punish them by making them laborers. A French observer once wrote to describe such police officers as both firm and fair. Overseers had to be creel and firm with laborers, flogging and beating in public anyone who might rebel or urge others to rebel or disobey  … A French observer once wrote sarcastically that whips replaced Arab justice, but of course, such sarcastic remark could be nothing further from the truth  …) (pages 137 & 138, Chapter 7).

E) (… Few laborers dug the Suez Canal while surrendering to the status quo as Fate ordained, digging while thinking only of the water caravan of camels to quench their thirst … Sometimes, they died of thirst before the caravan would arrive … Some laborers suffered  lot as they drank water drawn from wells that contained too much minerals and salt …) (page 233, Chapter 11).

F) The head medical doctor of the company has published the following statistics about Egyptian workers, in a report dated 1^st of July 1864 (page 266, Chapter 12):

Month	No. of workers	No. of the ill	No. of the dead
Jan. 1864	10907	470	24
Feb.	11420	237	45
March	10563	315	41
Apr.	6022	321	38
May	8868	200	26
Total	47780	1480	174

G) (… Epidemics and diseases spread among the digging laborers, among other calamities like scarcity of water, working in return for no wages at all, over-exhaustion, flogging, torture, and imprisonment  … Diseases that struck them included typhoid, cholera, fevers, and small pox … Some waves of epidemics would disappear  months later only to return with a vengeance in the next year …) (page 266, Chapter 12).

H) (… One Egyptian manager asserted that laborers received no wages at all, except insufficient food … Much later, surviving laborers received measly stipends, and most of them never ceased to try to escape such forced labor … foreign laborers enjoyed better wages and working conditions, despite the fact that they never dug as efficiently in terms of quantity and quality as Egyptian ones … who worked from sunrise to sunset nonstop … in many cases, they would go on digging by night, as one French observer wrote … many of them died of over-exhaustion…) (page 290, Chapter 13).

I) (… In many cases, the Suez Canal Company would withhold wages and present water bottles and little food instead to Egyptian laborers in order to save money by means of fraud, as it ran heavy debts: at least 4.500.000 Franc; equal to LE 173250 at the time … The Suez Canal Company tried to evade payment of such sum, but the courts imposed its ruling, and it had to reduce, postpone, and sometimes withhold wages of Egyptian laborers …) (page 296, Chapter 13).

Lastly: Who would dare to say that enslavement has come to an end in modern times?!  

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: Sadly, human beings have enslaved human beings for centuries until now via the severest types of exploitation, especially in the third world by colonialists until now. Let us remember that even before abolishing slavery in Europe, in the 19^th century when the Suez Canal was being dug, a worker would work for 12-16 hours daily in factories in Germany or Britain, along with his wife and offspring. But workers syndicates struggled until fairness and justice prevailed now in the 20^th and 21^st centuries. I wish the third world countries would draw lessons from such experience. Many Arabs do not use their minds. I watched recently a re-aired old TV talk-show in a Christian TV channel in which Dr. Mansour is interviewed by a former Muslim converted to Christianity. I like this episode very much; Muslims of today seem not to realize that the problem does not lie in their relations with non-Muslims; rather, it lies in their inability to perceive their mistakes and ailments. 

2- Ahmed Drami: I feel bound to say that enslavement of free persons still exists in the KSA; a female Senegalese single woman who worked as a servant in the KSA is being accused of murdering her mistress on 16^th of June, 2016, and she was arrested pending trial. Senegalese diplomats are negotiating the Saudis to set her free as no proofs are there to convict her. No one asked why would such a naïve young woman would kill her own mistress. Other Asian and African  young women who work as servants in the KSA are mistreated in despicable conditions akin to forced slavery. A Senegalese woman once told me she left the KSA as her master forced her to clean up houses of his neighbors for free 24/7! This is utter injustice! Such Saudi masters know nothing of Islam!

3- Muhammad Shaalan: I would like to share this story with you; more than ten years ago, our dear Dr. Mansour requested from me to look for the book by Dr. Abdel-Aziz Al-Shennawi and to send it to him in the USA. This book, reviewed above, made me search for a copy of it in all known and less well-known libraries and bookshops in Cairo, Egypt. But I failed to find a copy of this book. Eventually, a good friend of Dr. Mansour found a copy and gave it to his younger brother, Eng. Abdel-Latif Saeed, and before sending it by another traveler to the USA to Dr. Mansour, I photocopied the book for myself, and I still keep such a copy jealously and dearly.   

4- Muhammad Shaalan: Of course, before finding this great book, despair of finding it drove me to read as many books as possible about the Suez Canal and how the project was done, and we can evaluate how invaluable the topic is for those interested in modern history of Egypt; Dr. Mansour has aroused our curiosity for such a topic, and finding the book at last was a great surprise and a source of joy as I read it. 

5- Muhammad Shaalan: Dr. Mansour made me learn how to evaluate great books even before one gets hold of them to read them. Rare books are hard to find, especially one tackling certain areas of modern Egyptian history. Even some connoisseurs of old books have advised me to look for the book reviewed above in Alexandria, Egypt, where the first edition was printed. I feel glad I photocopied, read, and kept this great book within permission of Eng. Abdel-Latif Saeed, thank goodness. 

6- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our beloved fellow Quranists, and we pray to the Almighty to reward all and each one of them. We say the following to Ben Levante: we will tackle modern, contemporary enslavement in a coming article/section. Of course, our episodes with a Christian TV channel stirred stagnant waters, as the Muhammadans feel troubled when their 'holy' devilish notions and ancient sanctified concepts are attacked. Many internet fatwas have called for our assassination; this occurred many times because of our writings on many various subjects that undermine and refute many Sunnite sacrosanct holy of holies, especially their deified mortal figures. Yet, with the passage of years, death threats and death fatwas diminished in number, and this is a mark for our success in making our intellectual endeavors reach Arab youths, even hate mails decreased in number in our email address. As for our dear Ahmed Drami, we will tackle how modern, contemporary slavery still persists in the Gulf monarchies despite being nominally abolished, and we wish you would write to us articles about Muslims in Senegal. As for our dear Muhammad Shaalan, we thank you and we remember how you have helped us personally in Egypt many times with brotherly affection. You never let us down. May God reward you in the Hereafter.  

7- Muhammad Shaalan: With all due love and respect, I would like to offer to ship as a gift a 1000-page book for our dear Dr. Mansour, authored by Dr. Abdel-Aziz Al-Shennawi, titled "The Ottoman Empire".

8- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank our dear fellow Quranist Muhammad Shaalan for his offer; in fact, we have this book in our home library.

Types of Enslavement: An Overview of Eunuchs:

Introduction:

1- It is one of the worst types of injustices to turn a free, innocent male child into an enslaved eunuch to be brought up as a sexless human being, being neither male or female, and sadly, such inhuman practice of castration was prevalent in the Middle Ages from China to Byzantium, before the revelation of the Quran. 

2- Castration was of two types: total castration by the removal of both testicles and the penis and partial castration by the removal of testicles only. Sadly, most of the small castrated boys would die, and those who remain alive were sold at high prices into slavery. Growing up, eunuchs underwent psychological and physical changes: their height was more than average and the fingers were elongated, while the lower lip would be hanging downwards noticeably, with poorer eyesight. Eunuchs would tend to be solitary, weeping, and sad most of their lives, but if they would be placed in high-rank posts, they would be too cruel.  

3- During the Middle Ages, some Muslims, Christians, and Jews participated in the crime of castration. For instance, historically, captives from Slavic areas in Europe would be brought to France so that some Jewish slave-traders would castrate them and sell them as while eunuchs to Muslims in Andalusia. In Andalusia, later on known as Spain, there were centers of castration near the French borders and near the city of Cordoba. Al-Maqry, the Arab historian, has mentioned in his book titled ''Nafh Al-Teeb" that some Muslims used to castrate in such areas of Andalusia. As for black eunuchs, their center was in Egypt. Caravans carrying about 5000 black slaves would come from Darfur and Cordovan cities, in Sudan, within a 40-day journey to the city of Asyut, Egypt, where black enslaved children would be castrated. Most of such children would die in the process as a result. The remaining ones would be sent to the capital of Ottomans, Istanbul, after being healed from the wound. The ones undertaking the mission of castration in Asyut were Coptic monks in the monasteries of Asyut. Outside the Muslim world, castration was known in Byzantium and in China as well.        

4- It is noteworthy that imams, theologians, and clergymen of earthly, man-made, fabricated religions of the Muhammadans never protested, either verbally or in their writings, against this inhuman practice of castration as an evil think of vice to be fought and stopped. No one of them felt the disgrace and shame of forcing innocent children lose their freedom and manhood, to live afterwards, if they escaped such brutal death, as a freak who lost his human quality and who would be used sexually by masters/sultans who would sodomize eunuchs while scholars/imams sang the praises of such ''respected'' sultans and rich masters and notables.

Eunuchs before the revelation of the Quran:

1- Religious writings in the areas from Byzantium to China reflected the practice of castration. 

2- Castration and eunuchs are mentioned in the Old Testament in the Bible; see Daniel 1:6-12 and Deuteronomy 1:23.

3- A Christian researcher once has written that "…there were many eunuchs in the Church and they were despised… Paul had to restore their stature in a lawful, legal manner within a certain social legislation to prepare them to enter into the Kingdom of God. Paul tried to deal with such psychological issue; he gave eunuchs the ability to connect themselves to God and to attain social stature, and some of them would work in churches in good posts… they needed to be treated equally within churches as persons with special gift, as we read what Paul writes in Corinthians 1 7:7… but Christ had a clear stance toward matrimony, as shown in the conversation with the Samaritan woman in John 4:16-18… "

Secondly: eunuchs during the Umayyad era:

1- The Quran never mentions anything about eunuchs or castration. Fabricated hadiths about eunuchs or castration were formulated within the last years of the Abbasid era and the early days of the Mameluke era, but the scholar Ibn Al-Qayyim, in his book titled "Al-Manar Al-Manif", considered such hadiths as false and fabricated, as they tackle notions such as hatred of certain races, especially Turks, and despising eunuchs and slaves as sources of evil.

2- The very first historical indication of the existence of eunuchs in the Umayyad era is mentioned in the biography of the very first Umayyad caliph Mu'aweiya written in the history book of the historian/scholar Ibn Katheer, who has written the following about the wife of Mu'aweiya, Maysoon, the mother of his son, Yazeed, who was a beautiful, wise, religious woman. One day, her husband entered the palace with a eunuch in his hand, and she covered her face before the male stranger, but Mu'aweiya told her not to be bashful as this slave was a eunuch, but she moved away, telling him that a eunuch is a man anyway, not to be shown to women in respectable households. It was expected that Mu'aweiya would bring eunuchs in his palaces and courts, as he was influenced by his life in the Levant, where Byzantines had their habits and customs. Maysoon, who was descendant from the famous tribe of Kalb, was astonished about eunuchs because castrated slaves were never found in Arabia at the time.     

3- Within later decades, the existence of eunuchs became familiar, and the very first historical indication of the castration process is mentioned in the biography of the Umayyad caliph Suleiman Ibn Abdul-Malik, who was known for his extreme jealousy concerning his women in his seraglio, as we read in the history book titled "Al-Muntazim", authored by Ibn Al-Jawzy: (… the caliph Suleiman Ibn Abdul-Malik was with his concubine at the roof of his palace, and he found her listening attentively to poems being sung from a near camp of tents by a male effeminate singer … as he felt jealous that his concubine is not attentive to him, and he ordered the singer to be brought to him by force … after a brief conversation with the caliph, the concubine asked the caliph to order the man to sing his poems to her … when she felt ecstasy, the caliph was so jealous that he ordered that male singer to be castrated … soon enough, the caliph ordered the castration of all effeminate men and male singers who used to gather in Yathreb …). 

Thirdly: eunuchs during the Abbasid era:

1- Homosexuality spread during the Abbasid era, as male masters used to have sex with eunuchs; as a result, the number of eunuchs increased, especially in palaces of the affluent rich and the palaces of Abbasid caliphs.

2- The Abbasid caliph Al-Amin disliked women sexually and loved several eunuchs; he used to buy several of them to accompany him wherever he went and to be his closest associates and friends in his palaces all day long and all night long. Al-Amin rejected women of the seraglio, and people of Baghdad used to mock the homosexuality of Al-Amin who hated women. At one point, the famous poet at the time, Abou Nawwas, mocked Al-Amin in his verse:

O Muslims! Praise God your Lord

And Ask Him to preserve Al-Amin

Whose way is carnal pleasure with eunuchs

And all men followed his way suit!

3- During the Abbasid era, it was no longer a source of shame to court eunuchs in verse, to fall in love with them, and to praise their beauty in poems and how they provide sexual pleasures for their lovers. Slave-traders sold eunuchs for highest prices, more than enslaved children and slave-girls, to make use of the men's desire of sexual gratification with eunuchs. The rich, affluent men imitated the caliph Al-Amin in preferring eunuchs to women in bed, and some eunuchs were taught to sing and to compose verses and some were used in battles after receiving military training, apart from their being used sexually. Al-Thaaliby the historian has mentioned in his book titled ''Al-Lataif wa Al-Taraif" that eunuchs at one point were knights by day and brides at night! He has mentioned that eunuchs were used in bed and in battles simultaneously. One poet has once said about eunuchs:

They are women for settled men

And they are men for travelling men

4- Al-Jahiz, the famous thinker, historian, and philosopher, writes about eunuchs in his booklet titled "Mufakharat Al-Jawary wa Al-Ghilman" (i.e., On Beauties of Slave-Girls and Eunuchs): (… and we mentioned eunuchs and their soft skins, slender bodies, and physical charms … such refined carnal pleasures with eunuchs was never known to our Arab ancestors … in fact, nowadays, eunuchs are sexually favored more than nubile slave-girls … eunuchs in general are not men, nor women, and their manners are in between women and small boys, as their temper are changeable, and they grow sick more frequently, but their masters bear up with them, unlike their losing patience with beautiful female slaves … once castrated, their soft, clear skins grow brighter and softer, their nether orifices/anuses grow wider, and their lust for virile men grow stronger, and thy lose their body hair, and they tend to weep a lot … they fluctuate between manners of women and boyish children who lose their temper easily and grow furious for trivial reasons … they never keep a secret, and have no patience at all, and they urinate in beds, especially when the spongy ones have excessive wine-drinking habits ... and eunuchs live longer than virile men, as they do not copulate at all; rather, they are used for the carnal lusts of their masters … eunuchs are acting like women in the presence of men and like men in the presence of women …). And he writes later on lewd passages about homosexual practices done to eunuchs, with words reflecting the dominant culture of his age.

COMMENTS:

1- Ben Levante: I would like to talk about social mores in the time when the Quran was revealed. I do not think that homosexual practices and castration of slaves were dominant in Arabia in the 7^th century. Castration is a crime indeed that began in the Middle Ages in the ancient world, whereas homosexuality of Sodom and Gomorrah predates Arabs in Arabia. Circumcision of males and females is never mentioned in the Quran; hence, it is a social habit that has nothing to do with Islam, and it should be a crime, as it is ordained by Satan to change God's creation in the human body.

2- Fathy Ahmed Madi: I feel bound to say that the Muhammadans will never understand that their clergymen and rulers will not reveal the truth about anything to them, especial related to history of ancient ''made-holy'' rulers and their crimes that show them as devilish figures who denied God and the Last Day as they forsook Islam in the Quran. ISIS terrorists are reviving such terrible practices and injustices of the so-called caliphate. Corrupt rulers want Arabs to forget all about real Islam: the Quran. Thank you all!

3- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our dear fellow Quranists and we implore the Almighty to help us go on with our efforts on our website. As for dear Ben Levante, we assert that suffice it that God prohibits all types of injustices, small and big, little and many. Historically, Arabs in their Arabian deserts never knew homosexuality and castration; they were nomads and Bedouins moving constantly or city dwellers or villagers. Once they conquered Iraq, Persia, the Levant, etc. they had relations of trade and war with the Byzantines, and they took from them in the Abbasid Era the carnal lusts of homoerotic nature and they took the habit of castration of slaves from African nations. As for our dear Fathy Ahmed Madi, we thank him for his remarkable comments that open new horizons and questions that entail articles to discuss such as comments and questions of Ben Levante. Indeed, when we write about eunuchs, we feel as if instead of ink, we immerse our pen in blood of our heart. We hate all types of injustices done to innocent, helpless, peaceful victims; there is nothing worse than a male child captured and kidnapped to be castrated to his death or to be a mutilated figure used sexually by perverts. No imams of the Sunnite religion at the time have talked about such putting an end to such injustice in their books. Shame on them! But we are not surprised by their tolerating such heinous crimes; they have committed grave injustice toward God, and consequently, they have remained silent before injustices done to people.  

CONCLUSION:

Freeing of Slaves between the Quranic Sharia and the Laws of Europe and the USA:

Firstly: Europe Has Abolished Ancient Slavery that Has Been Replaced with a More Cruel Widespread Type of Slavery:

1- The very first industrial revolution began in 1784 when vapor machines were invented, with Britain as the pioneer followed by the other countries of West Europe, and such revolution led to various changes, as machines helped in both agriculture and industry and many farmers and peasants were fired from their work in lands as machines replaced them. More factories were built and the need for more raw material led to colonization of Asia and Africa and to more explorations in North and South America and Australia. Britain was the pioneer in both industrialization and colonialism. 

2- When millions of farmers and peasants lost their work, they had to move to industrial cities along with their wives and children, and they lived within margins of cities, suffering chosen forced labor as they worked longer hours while having lesser wages, with no medical care at all. Such workers were injured by machines, and in many cases would lose limb(s) and get fired! At the time, there were no syndicates to organize strikes and to protect their rights against the blood-sucking capitalists and there were no industrial security at all. Later on, syndicates emerged, strikes were organized, and communist ideology spread in China, East Europe, and the former USSR. 

3- Within the conditions mentioned in the above point, Europe abolished slavery; yet, a worse type of enslavement took place when free men had to accept forced labor with little wages in order to survive. Former slaves used to live in safety and security within houses/farms of their owners who dealt with them kindly and humanly in most cases, for the sake of their work and household. Unlike the case with factories owners: they dealt with workers with the worst types of laws allowing blood-sucking capitalists to exploit their labor and hours in return for so little wages, and they were not responsible for their housing, food, and medical care; thus, once workers were injured or fell ill, they were thrown out. Thus, the European industrial revolution did not allow room for abolishment of slavery; rather, it turned free European workers into impoverished slaves of different forms within forced labor and despicable conditions.

4- There were two forms of enslavement resulted from the industrial revolution in Europe.

4/1: Colonialism:  Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, and The Netherlands enslaved millions of people in countries they occupied: such as India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and the Southeast of Asia and Arab countries, as people there worked forcibly to produce raw material and other treasures needed for European industry stolen from invaded countries.

4/2: European capitalism was so unjust that communism emerged as a result, raising banners of justice for workers and equality citizens. Yet, communist regimes became more extremist and totalitarian. Capitalist West countries in open, free markets make hundreds of factories and bank owners control and monopolize wealth and power, while those outside such circle live as free poor ones. In contrast, communist regimes make the ruler/president controls and monopolizes wealth and power as well as citizens. This applies to Stalin in Russia, Mao Zedong in China, Castro in Cuba, and ruler of North Korea. Such communist rulers enslave whole nations and everything is in service of rulers, and no one is free to do anything at all even in solitude!

Secondly: USA and Slavery:

 The above applies to the USA, and conditions there were worse and more despicable; because of abolishment of slavery, the American civil war broke out, with thousands of those killed and injured and handicapped, among civilians and soldiers, and after much sacrifices, nothing is achieved as far as abolishing slavery is concerned. Those enslaved for agricultural reasons were later on enslaved of their own choice for the sake of industrialization in the USA. We give more details below.   

1- Abraham Lincoln, in his presidential campaign in 1860, raised the motto of freeing slaves, and shortly before his becoming president, eleven states declared their separation and the confederate states were established under the leadership of Jefferson David. Lincoln considered this as a rebellion, and the American civil war erupted on 12^th of April, 1861, and it ended in the surrender of Lee Grant the leader of the confederates armies on 9^th of April 1865. 

2- The economic factor is the reason behind the abolishment of slavery in the USA; as southern states had agriculture-based economy, especially in planting cotton, and it was cheaper to use slaves instead of importing agricultural machines from Europe. As for the north states, their industry-economy was influenced by Europe and its industrial renaissance, and industrialization needed work force. Hence, black slaves in the southern states brought from Africa and its western coasts must be freed by Lincoln to be forced to work in American industry. Apart from the legal and political debate evolving around that topic, such endeavor of Lincoln was merely a fig leaf to cover the over-ambition and greed of American capitalism in the northern states at the time. 

3- Hence, the formal, outward liberation of slaves by saying to them the famous phrase: ''you are free to go'', was a big act of deceit: outwardly is torment  and inside is mercy; a given former slave was set free to move away with his family members to go anywhere, after living for so long in the household and farm of his former master, getting food and shelter, but what would he do once free?! He would certainly immigrate with his family to cities where factories were there in northern states. Yet, such a slave would find millions like him, hungry and homeless, and not all factories could have the capacity to hire such millions. Hence, instead of starving with his family, such a poor slave must accept forced work with lowest wages and hardest labor for long hours daily, mercilessly and uncharitably. If such a slave would grow lazy or become ill or injured, he would not be tormented or beaten, but bill be thrown away and fired from his job! This is not to mention that the white Americans, away from mottoes of equality raised by Jefferson, despised African-American people, and considered black persons as subhuman or non-human; at the time, there was a debate around if black persons are human beings or not! 

4- Because of the culture of enslavement, racial discrimination in the USA lasted for about 100 years after freeing slaves, and such racial discrimination ended after much struggle by African-American citizens, supported in the 20^th century by human rights groups, that included white persons, especially civil rights movement between 1955 to 1968 that aimed at incriminating racial discrimination against African-American citizens and at giving them the right to vote and citizenry-based equality. Such struggle resulted in the assassination of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X. it is a shame that racial discrimination and latent hatred of African Americans linger in some white American citizens until now, as exemplified by American white policemen shooting African Americans on several occasions, leading African Americans to protest against such racial discrimination. Hence Lincoln did not abolish roots of slavery; he did not remove injustice and impose equality and justice for all, as he aimed to change slaves from one position and conditions to another worse position and conditions.      

5- Thus, Europe and the USA have freed few millions of slaves brought by force from Africa, but both have invented a worst type of enslavement of hundreds of millions of free persons! The reason: the basis of enslavement is still there: injustice. As far as Islam is concerned, the Quran has fought and prohibited all types of injustices and urged justice on all levels. Europe at the time has made injustice as the creed of all actions directed at the impoverished inside Europe and invaded nations outside it. 

Thirdly: The Genius of the Quranic Solution:

1- The genius of the Quranic solution does not lie only in the fact that it deals with the roots of the slavery problem by prohibition of all types of injustices and to call for justice, fairness, and charity: "God commands justice, and charity, and generosity towards relatives. And He forbids immorality, and injustice, and oppression. He advises you, so that you may take heed." (16:90), but also in urging a peaceful solution to the slavery problem alongside with the value of justice and the value of charity that is above justice in the Quran.

2- We have mentioned before in our previous writings that an Islamic country is a peaceful one that never commits aggression and never begins to transgress against anyone, and thus, there is no room for it to enslave anyone or even to capture POWs, as causing harms to peaceful civilians is prohibited. Hence, the source of enslavement is prohibited in such Islamic country. Moreover, freeing slaves coming from outside a given an Islamic country into it by buying them is available as an Islamic duty by the pious, righteous rich persons. Even those who choose to remain inside the Islamic country as  refugees will receive all justice and charity. Thus, war is never an option or a proposed solution to abolish slavery outside the Islamic country by force, as good intentions can never be cause for waging wars at all; wars are big problems in themselves, and they are allowed in Islam ONLY in cases of self-defense and stopped when aggressors stop their aggression. Hence, self-defensive wars are akin to a precise surgical operation to remove cancerous cells. Aggressive enemies are the cancer to be controlled and removed, and once aggression stops, war stops as well. 

3- This Islamic solution/remedy has been adopted partially by the victims of modern, contemporary types of slavery: Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Mandela, who managed within peaceful jihad to address the consciousness of humanity and goodness of persons of which no human soul is devoid.

4- This Islamic solution/remedy was not adopted by the leader of the Zanj rebellion during the Abbasid era. The Arabic word ''Zanj'' means literally ''black enslaved persons''. The Zanj rebellion broke out in Iraq from 255 A.H.  to 270 A.H. during the Second Abbasid Era to protest violently and through bloodshed against the Abbasid affluence and injustices. The wealth of the Abbasid affluent ones was a result of the sweat and toil of the Zanj within a feudal system that enabled caliphs to distribute agricultural lands among his cronies and retinue within many cities like Basra. The black slaves had to reclaim and plant such lands, and slave-traders procured such black slaves from Africa to the Gulf area and to the south of Iraq. Such throngs of black slaves worked in agriculture within despicable conditions, constant flogging, and lack of proper nutrition. They had to carry tons of salt layers that used to cover south of Iraq from the Persian Gulf to reclaim arable lands underneath it, and to move salt to where it would be sold. In return for such arduous tasks, they ate only few dried dates and little green leaves daily. In contrast, affluent ones in Iraqi cities, especially Baghdad, used to eat dishes of tongues of fish, with each dish cost more than 1000 dirhams. Hence, such grave injustices led to rebellion within camps of the Zanj, and such revolt was led by a nameless leader, who later on called himself as Ali Ibn Muhammad, claiming he was a Shiite rebelling against Arabs of Iraq and Najd. This leader became one of Al-Khawarij and became very soon very popular among all black slaves. This leader made use of the despicable conditions and plight of the Zanj within the Persian Gulf and southern Iraq, noticing the huge gap between the impoverished and the hungry on the one hand, and the affluent ones living in palaces on the other hand, while exploiting slaves. This leader of the revolt gathered thousands of followers, and the Abbasids could not vanquish and defeat them except with extreme difficulty. At one point, this leader and all his Zanj followers raided Basra and demolished all its houses and palaces, enslaving its women, and burning the city to the ground. Later on, a plague stuck Iraq and thousands of people died daily. A historian called Al-Suly has mentioned that Zanj rebels killed at least 1.5 Muslims, and their leader at one point killed 300 thousand people in Basra. Such leader used to ascend the pulpit in his mosque to slander and verbally abuse the so-called companions of Prophet Muhammad, who were 'holy' to the Sunnites. It was rumored that a Hashemite woman would be sold in return for three dirhams in the camp of the Zanj leader, and each black rebel, or former slave, had at least ten Hashemite women for his sexual gratification and to serve him as female slaves. Naturally, the Zanj rebellion ended in nothing at all, despite such huge number of victims!                 

5- This solution by means of committing bloodshed never brought positive results, and the same applies to the solutions offered by the Americans, the Europeans, and communists that have only replaced traditional ancient ways of enslavement by modern, contemporary forms of slavery.

Lastly:

 As injustices reign supreme all over the globe, enslavement lingers within its two main types: the Salafist traditional ancient one and the contemporary one from human trafficking to capitalist exploitation.

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: I assert here that the Quran is the solution as applied by the real Islamic rule that lasted for 11 years of justice, freedom, and charity in the Yathreb city-state of Prophet Muhammad in the 7^th century. Islam is the religion of peace and justice, but such fact has been buried by the unjust Arab conquerors after Muhammad's death. That was why slavery lingered for centuries, as the Arabs forsook the Quran during the Middle Ages until now. May God reward Dr. Mansour for his intellectual endeavors to enlighten us.

2- Ben Levante: I agree with Dr. Mansour, may God grant him the best of health, in all his views expressed above. We remind readers here that Al-Zanj rebelled in history after being enslaved to work in return for food only to reclaim lands for the affluent ones in Iraq in the Middle Ages. Such affluent ones used to eat sumptuous dishes bough by ill-gotten money! Affluent ones of today eat caviar! Some Egyptians spend millions of US$ to import caviar to the affluent ones, whereas poor peasants in Egypt sometimes die of hunger!

3- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our beloved fellow Quranists, and we implore the Almighty to grant us health to go on writing on our website. We assert the following to Ben Levante: a given Islamic country cannot possible control other countries; of course, slavery must be banned and abolished by laws all over the globe. The unjust ones will be losers in the Hereafter, but to execute such ban, this must be within the State institutions. Peaceful ones have many choices: to have patience, to immigrate, or legitimate self-defense against aggressors. Above all, a given country or state must apply justice on all levels and to fight injustices, this is a prerequisite to abolish all forms of slavery. 

4- Khaled Saleh: I would like to assert to Dr. Mansour slavery is based on two bases: injustice and exploitation. It is unethical to allow persons to ''own'' other persons anywhere in the globe. Some people who worship money and power seek to be superior over the rest of humanity; even free ones are enslaved by capitalists in their factories and companies! Let us remember 20:60-64. Legislative and ethical relativity in relation to slaves and their likes still remains amidst poverty and plight of many races. Thank you.  

5- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I ask Dr. Mansour what he means by saying inside it is mercy and outwardly there is torment. Does he mean the other way round: outwardly is mercy and inside it is torment to say to slaves: you are free to go? I thank Dr. Mansour for his precise analysis that shows his genius in tackling the Quranic verses. May God reward Dr. Mansour in Heaven.

6- Saeed Ali: I greet Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti and I would like to be permitted to answer his question in lieu of Dr. Mansour; he did not make a mistake by saying inside it is mercy and outwardly there is torment. He meant to say that mercy is shown by freeing slaves but torment is waiting for freed unprotected slaves who could not find jobs, protection, nutrition, housing, etc. and this is utter torment within merciless societies of inhuman notions and total lack of social justice at the time. God bless you. 

7- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I thank Saeed Ali very much for answering my question, and I hope he will write many useful articles of his own later on.

8- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank Saeed Ali and Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti; their dialogue lends vivacity to our website as real Quranist brethren should act and mingle on the intellectual level; and thanks for correcting our possible mistakes. By the way, we feel acutely the long periods of absence of Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti who represents the open-minded Kuwaiti culture and mentality. May God bless and reward all of you.  

9- Muhammad Shaalan: I would like to add the fact that enslavement is a devilish notion coined by Satan, by making arrogant human beings think they are the betters of some other human beings; devils want all humanity with then in Hell; see 17:62, and this can only be possible when devils control souls of people fully, and such control is akin to enslavement. Hence, devils urge human beings to enslave and exploit one another in many different overt and covert ways. Thank you!

10- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I thank Dr. Mansour for asking about me and for praising me; I was too busy because of matters of vital importance, but I will follow all new articles with comments without allowing transient-world matters to divert me away from this website. There are many Kuwaiti youths who are better than myself in many directions, I think. I would like to assert a phrase I hear in a movie called ''The Ten Commandments'': "God made man, man made the slave'', as this phrase fits perfectly the topic of this book.

11- Marwa Ahmed Mustafa: I salute you, dear Dr. Mansour. I feel bound to say that types of exploitation and enslavement will linger for longer durations as long as there are poverty and oppression that crush the poor and limit their hopes to just make ends meet, whereas blood-sucking capitalists control everything and consider the poor ones as insects to be crushed mercilessly. We read nowadays about female servants sexually abused, tortured, and killed by their employers in the Arab world. The Gulf countries enslave their foreign employees in the worst possible manner fit only within the Middle Ages! Why on earth such bad habits are revived within new ways in the 21^st century?! 

Slaves in Our Modern Age:

Firstly: The Last Countries to Formally Abolish Slavery while Retaining the Culture of Slavery:

Mauritania:

1- Mauritania overtly abolished slavery in 1981because of international community pressure, and the law to consider slavery as a punishable crime was issued only in 2007. Yet, 17% of the population in Mauritania are slaves as per reports of SOS. Walk Free Foundation has made Mauritania on top of the list of countries practicing modern, contemporary slavery, suffered by 4% of the population in Mauritania: about 140.000 persons. By 2015, Mauritania issued a law considering crimes related to slavery as crimes against humanity that are imprescriptible.    

2- Yet, the deep-rooted culture of slavery still persists, especially in rural areas where no human rights groups can reach; this is consolidated by long history of enslavement and class distinction inside the Mauritanian society that include many races: Arabs, Amazigh/Berber, and black Africans.  

3- Because of this dominant culture of slavery, a black Mauritanian writer/blogger has been tried and sentenced to death, allegedly accused of insulting Prophet Muhammad. While being tried, this writer asserted that no offense is intended at all; he wants only to denounce class distinction and social injustice in Mauritania, and if his article has been misinterpreted, he announces his repentance before all people. He asserted in his article that Islam has nothing to do with caste system and class distinction, as both are against being religious. That is why he has received a death sentence despite his clearing the name of Islam and how Islam negates and refutes such social injustice: how such a former black slave he would dare to touch a raw nerve within the Mauritanian society?!

The KSA:

1- King Feisal issued a royal decree to free slaves and stop trading in slaves on 7^th of Nov. 1962.

2- Before that date, it was a widespread custom to buy and sell slaves in special markets made for that purpose, an eye-witness tells us that one of the slaves markets was near the Sacred Mosque in Mecca, where male and female slaves of all age groups were bought and sold; some of them were sold as their masters wanted to get rid of them, and some were brought from outside Arabia. Girls and women would sit on wooden stools put against a wall, covered with thin veils, while boys and men would be on the other side on wooden stools, and potential buyers would check slaves in terms of health and appearance and talk to them if they knew Arabic. If acceptance to serve the new master is verbally uttered by a certain slave chosen by the buyer, the slave-trader would get his money and the new master would take his chosen slave.

3- Another witness says that after 40 years of abolishing slavery and slave-trading in the KSA, some senior elderly Saudi citizens would tell stories about the era of slave-trading in different Saudi markets in many cities, and how slave-traders were filthily rich indeed. One of such elderly citizens would tell that male and female slaves used to have ID papers that describe them physically, while mentioning names of past and present owners and their addresses. One elderly citizen said that his father once bought a male slave in return for 200 SR in Yathreb, and sold this slave for a relative in return for 8000 SR years later. This charitable, kind relative set the slave free, but the freed slave refused to leave, insisting on serving him till death, as a cherished member of the household. Elderly citizens insisted that the number of slaves was tens of thousands, who were set free as per royal decree of 1962. Some of these former slaves worked in trade or in agriculture, and some had civil posts and carried names of tribes in which they used to live. Some old documents show that slavery was practiced for centuries in Yathreb; an 18-year-old slave-girl in 1956 would be sold in return for 38.000 SR while another woman in the same year was sold in return for merely 400 SR, though her papers showed that she was a good housekeeper and a cook. Other documents reveal that there were rules and laws to protect slaves, buy obligating the masters to feed, clothe, heal, and remedy the slaves and to deal kindly with them, and never to separate a female slave from her offspring. Slaves had the right to complain to judges in cities if mistreated by their owners, and judges would warn owners to deal with the slaves kindly. If the complaints persisted for two months, judges would order owners to give up their slaves to the city. A Saudi citizen tells the story about his caring for an elderly former slave who is old enough to be his grandfather; as this citizen's grandfather bought this former slave as a boy who was kidnapped from Yemen decades ago and was castrated, and when this slave was freed in 1962, he cried and refused to leave his kind, charitable former owner, and he became a faithful helper/ servant for the household in return for a salary. All children called this former slave as ''uncle'', and treated him as a family member, and when he grew old, the family members cared for him to the last, until his recent death. A female senior citizen tells the story about female slaves in her father's household, who participated in rearing her and her siblings like kind nannies or moms. Such nannies were in most cases treated kindly and charitably as household members. One of such nannies had a son who assumed a high-rank position in the Saudi government. Among the revealed documents was a contract of selling a young female slave in return for 4000 SR in 1369 A.H., while mentioning her physical qualities and abilities in service of masters, but when slaves were freed in 1962, IDs were issued for them as Saudi citizens, with estimated birth-date, given name, etc.   

4- Indeed, the culture of slavery is still deep-seated inside the KSA; as the royal family ascribing the State and citizens to its family name, as if such citizens were enslaved to the royal family as per Middle-Ages culture like the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman dynasties. Besides, foreign working force (Muslims and non-Muslims) inside the KSA are being enslaved within the so-called sponsor system, as if foreign workers and employees are being enslaved of their own choice as per the chosen slavery in Europe and the USA a century ago, after abolishing slave-trading. Hence the royal Saudi family has imitated the West countries in enslaving workers formerly within the sponsor system, whereas the West capitalists now have given workers their rights, while slavery is deep rooted in the culture, name, and lifestyle of Saudis. 

Secondly: Reports on Contemporary Slavery:

1- This report is titled ''Slavery and its Various Manifestations'', and we quote from it: (… Slavery in ancient times was linked to fetters and chains and absolute ownership, but in our modern times, it takes various forms, from recruiting children in military actions, human trafficking, prostitution, forcing women to be sex workers, forced labor, arbitrary laws, to manipulating children as working force. Such phenomena are sometimes legalized by law and accepted by societies, but they are flagrant violations of human rights and human dignity. Many conditions support the existence of contemporary, modern slavery in the developing world, such as poverty, discrimination, and social exclusion as well as wars and economic collapse that exasperate matters in recent decades … )

2- Walk Free Foundation is concerned with abolishing all forms of contemporary slavery all over the globe. Its slavery index has mentioned on 31^st of May, 2016, that about 46 million persons all over the world are suffering under the yoke of contemporary slavery; we quote words of this foundation here: (… contemporary slaves are about 45.8 million persons all over the world, and the number has increased at the rate of 28% more than the estimations of 2014, indicating that contemporary slavery has increased. Slavery index is based on indications related to human trafficking, military recruitment of children, forcing others to be sex workers, forced marriages of minor female children, being in debts, and laws violating human freedom and human rights. The report tackles data of the slavery index in 167 countries, within 42.000 interviews in 53 languages, so that enslaved people's number is reached and how governments are dealing with their conditions. Such interviews cover 44% of the world population …). 

3- CNN has launched a webpage titled the Road to Freedom, aiming at helping end modern-age contemporary slavery by shedding light on its victims and some success stories of those gaining their freedom. Under the title "Contemporary Slavery Increases at the Rate of 30% All Over the Globe", we quote the following: (… A new study has shown that contemporary, modern-age slavery rates have increased 30% all over the world … 4% of North Koreans are deemed as enslaved … 50 million persons all over the world are deemed as enslaved, mostly in India, Bangladesh, China, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Qatar, Cambodia, and Hong Kong … Such countries made no endeavors to end modern, contemporary forms of slavery … India has the biggest number of enslaved persons, while North Korea comes on top of the list in the slavery index in terms of the rate of enslaved population: 4.37% …). 

Asia develops its economy by compromising human rights:

 Asian countries like India and China are admired because of their rapid economic growth, but such growth has a darker side: the highest rates of contemporary slavery all over the globe; 56% of contemporary slaves are found in Asia. Asian countries suffer phenomena like human trafficking, forced labor, and forcing women to be sex workers as well as children abuse/exploitation, and such phenomena are being overlooked by the Indian and Chinese governments for the sake of economy. Let us continue quoting the report of Walk Free Foundation about the slavery index all over the world: (… the least contemporary modern-age slavery rates are found in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, and Luxemburg …)

Contemporary slavery in Arab countries:

 Another report asserts that no Arab country is free from modern-age contemporary forms of slavery; hundreds of thousands of people suffer from is: 570 thousand in Egypt, 454 thousand in North Sudan, apart from increasing numbers of Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, especially after the emergence of ISIS terrorists. Slavery index defines contemporary, modern-age slavery as "owning and controlling persons within depriving them of individual freedom for the purpose of exploitation and making use of them or to move them forcibly or to get rid of them". Undoubtedly, fighting and combating contemporary, modern-age slavery entail international solidarity, as human trafficking that cross international borders constitutes the biggest form of contemporary, modern-age slavery and its illegal gains reach over 150 billion $ annually. Under the title "Slavery in the Arab World", we quote the following: (… as usual in such surveys, Arab countries are never absent, where thousands of persons suffer contemporary, modern-age slavery , with Qatar on top of the list in terms of rate, while Egyptians working outside Egypt in Arab countries form the biggest rate of those suffering contemporary, modern-age slavery. Lowest rates are found in Oman and the KSA due to their lower rates of population growth in comparison to the rest of the Arab world at large …). Under the title "The Gulf Countries Enslave Others", we quote the following: (… Asian and African employees and workers inside the Gulf monarchies suffer persecution and racial discrimination especially within arbitrary laws of stay and labor; they might get deported anytime without notice and they have no legal rights at all … this makes women suffer exploitation by their employers … such despicable conditions are because of the sponsor system adopted by all the Gulf monarchies, seen by Amnesty International as embodying contemporary, modern-age slavery in its worst form … Qatar was accused many times of several human rights violations because of such despicable conditions, especially because of the dire, inhuman circumstances of workers in projects preparing Qatar and its infrastructure to host World Football Cup 2022 … female minors coming from Egypt, Morocco, and Lebanon are forced to marry old men or to be sex workers for Gulf rich men … such men sometimes go to borders of Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey to marry Syrian and Iraqi female minors from refugees camps, caring nothing about their tragedy …). Under the title " ISIS Terrorists Enslave Women and Recruit Children in Military Actions", we quote the following: (…Syrians and Iraqis suffer flagrant violations of human rights committed by all warring parties, but ISIS terrorists are the worst, as they revive slavery of ancient times typically of the Middle-Ages, when they enslaved and captured about 3000 Yazidi Iraqi women to sell as slaves in return for money … ISIS terrorists have recruited children and trained them militarily to use arms and weapons and drove them to commit suicide bombings, as shown in many ISIS videos …). Let us not forget that military service in Egypt is akin to forced labor under the cover of military recruitment, as uneducated young men are spending their period of military service in serving high-rank officers for free for several months. Such frustrated, angry young men end their military service while hating Egypt because of bad memories of being exploited in conditions akin to unpaid forced labor. Let us not forget that Egyptian and Arab prisons – overt and secret ones – are locations of enslavement and torture, especially for political prisoners. Such political prisoners, like ourselves in the 1980s in Cairo, never forget such horrible experience all their life. The Egyptian prison is alive inside ourselves till this very moment!  

Lastly: To Accuse the Great Religion of Islam of Endorsing and Justifying Enslavement Is Utter and Adamant Stupidity:

 Islam provides the ideal solution to end slavery without this Quranic solution, injustice dominates along with ignorance, corruption, tyranny, exclusion, and enslavement; when tyranny dominates, enslavement dominates as well either within outright slavery or within the worst contemporary widespread types as per international reports of human rights. Instead of defending Islam against the accusation of its purported encouraging of slavery and clearing its name, the mortal gods/deities of the Sunnite religion in particular revive enslavement in our modern age, in its ancient ways as perpetrated by Sunnite Wahabi terrorists of ISIS and Boko Haram, or in an covert ways perpetrated by Arab tyrannical regimes within contemporary forms of slavery. The best discourse: "O people! We created you from a male and a female, and made you races and tribes, that you may know one another. The best among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is All-Knowing, Well-Experienced. " (49:13). God says nothing but the Truth.    

COMMENTS:

1- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I desire to talk about the Japanese in relation to enslavement; I was watching a documentary about the problem of human trafficking, and I felt shocked by this story: a Columbian pretty young girl was promised decent job in japan, but upon her arrival in Tokyo, a her male employer took her passport and made her sign IOWs unbeknownst to her! She was entrapped! She was forced to work as a sex worker to pay up, and she had to have sex with at least ten men per night! When she fled and went into the police station, policemen let her down and never helped her! It seems that countries of the First World are not totally free from forced slavery and enslavement! Japanese have yet to apologize for using Korean women as forced sex workers during WWII. Yet, Japan is looked upon now as a leading pioneer country on many levels. Japan now stopped being unjust to other countries. Let us learn from its example to make the world respect Arabs. Thank all of you, especially dear Dr. Mansour.   

2- Ben Levante: About injustices, enslavement, and slaves, I would like to add that the old ways of bondage are now revived in new ways. There is vast difference between injustices supported, overlooked, or tolerated by laws and injustices being fought by laws. In many cases, the results are the same in both cases. For instance, in Germany, where I live, unemployed persons are paid money and have medical insurance, etc. and so are refugees; yet, poverty, exploitation, and prostitution still exist. Germany does its best to control such vices, but the problem linger despite all this. Another example is the USA; it allowed enslavement once and then abolished slavery, but poverty, exploitation, and prostitution still exist. I feel that the Quran is against enslavement, as it urges its being abolished by the best possible way: to provide enticements for freeing slaves. I feel that the expression ''what your right hand possesses'' refers to the past: those who owned slaves already; this is NOT a sort of encouragement to own more and more slaves even by buying them. Within such gradual freeing of slaves of both genders, a given Islamic country must stop human trafficking. I feel bound to say that I like very much the last sentence by Dr. Mansour about prisons; what he writes apply to all Arab prisons and third-world prisons as well. May God reward him in Heaven for his intellectual endeavors.

3- Ahmed Drami: I feel bound to say that imams/narrators of hadiths fabricated them to serve the unjust and to spread and justify injustices, especially related to slaves in the Middle Ages; such fabricators urged the notion that an escaped slave can never perform prayers deemed acceptable by God! How dared they to tell such lies?! Such notions are effrontery to God! Indeed, I do believe that such hadiths are opium of the masses (we allude here to Karl Marx). The Sunnite religion is the opium of the Muhammadans masses, for sure; it is a system of intoxicating brains of the oppressed ones, in Mauritania for instance, to have a tarnished image of Islam to accept oppression as the norm and never to rebel against it. Mauritanian slaves there are urged to accept bondage in return for protection and food! What a shame! God will certainly  punish the unrepentant oppressors in Hell; see 13:5.    

4- Saeed Ali: I urge all of us to remember always that piety is the ultimate goal; this is the useful, great lesson we all learn from our dear Dr. Mansour, may God protect and preserve him and grant him the best of health. We are looking forward to other books of similar nature that expose the falsehoods of the Sunnite religion. I thank Abou Ayoub, Ahmed Drami, and Ben Levante for their very useful comments, may God reward and protect you and all our brethren the Quranists all over the globe. All of us are to remember that piety is the target to be attained by all acts of worship and good deeds. Piety is reflected in what we call conscience; pangs of conscience are good indicators of sinning and sense of guilt when one commits bad deeds that entail repentance, atonement, and imploring God for forgiveness. People trespass against God and against their fellow human beings; people commit injustices, and Arabs began such sins that go on until now when they committed the crime of Arab conquests in the 7^th century, and as a result, many types of injustices, including many forms of slavery, linger. Pious believers fear God, and if they commit mistakes, their pangs of conscience make them stop trespassing, make amends, and apologize to the wronged parties. We must follow the example of Dr. Mansour in his urging us never to lose hope in anything. I seize the chance here to welcome novices to the Quranism website, hoping they will be good, faithful Quranists, and I hope they will help us propagate Quranism all over cyberspace, with due thanks and respect to the novices.     

5- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our beloved Quranists, and we assert here that all your important comments have enriched the topic of this book; may God reward all of you in Heaven. We say to Ben Levante that the Islamic country of justice in the manner of the Yathreb city-state led by Prophet Muhammad in the 7^th century is not an impossible imaginary utopia; rather, it is possible and it is existing at varying degrees within the West countries. Sometimes we wish that the Quranic expression ''what your right hand possesses'' would be written in the past tense or in a manner that indicates its being something in the past; yet, it gives us comfort that there are Quranic legislations urging freeing of all types of slaves and acting charitably to them and even getting married to them. Hence, within this light, a real Islamic country is a realistic one that takes great care to apply and ensure human rights; hence, it is its duty to free slaves by buying them beforehand and freeing them at once, while dealing with them kindly and fairly as citizens, without engaging into wars with other countries that permit buying and selling slaves. Some rich volunteers have bought enslaved ones from ISIS terrorists and helped them to be refugees in European countries – despite all risks involved – this is better than waging wars that exacerbate the problem of enslavement, increase number of those killed, and elongate the duration of the crisis without possible quick solutions. Thus, the poor innocent victims would be saved instead of losing their lives; and we personally tend to think that we belong to the innocent victims from all colors, races, and religions.          

CONCLUSION:

Freeing of Slaves between the Quranic Sharia and the Laws of Europe and the USA:

Firstly: Europe Has Abolished Ancient Slavery that Has Been Replaced with a More Cruel Widespread Type of Slavery:

1- The very first industrial revolution began in 1784 when vapor machines were invented, with Britain as the pioneer followed by the other countries of West Europe, and such revolution led to various changes, as machines helped in both agriculture and industry and many farmers and peasants were fired from their work in lands as machines replaced them. More factories were built and the need for more raw material led to colonization of Asia and Africa and to more explorations in North and South America and Australia. Britain was the pioneer in both industrialization and colonialism. 

2- When millions of farmers and peasants lost their work, they had to move to industrial cities along with their wives and children, and they lived within margins of cities, suffering chosen forced labor as they worked longer hours while having lesser wages, with no medical care at all. Such workers were injured by machines, and in many cases would lose limb(s) and get fired! At the time, there were no syndicates to organize strikes and to protect their rights against the blood-sucking capitalists and there were no industrial security at all. Later on, syndicates emerged, strikes were organized, and communist ideology spread in China, East Europe, and the former USSR. 

3- Within the conditions mentioned in the above point, Europe abolished slavery; yet, a worse type of enslavement took place when free men had to accept forced labor with little wages in order to survive. Former slaves used to live in safety and security within houses/farms of their owners who dealt with them kindly and humanly in most cases, for the sake of their work and household. Unlike the case with factories owners: they dealt with workers with the worst types of laws allowing blood-sucking capitalists to exploit their labor and hours in return for so little wages, and they were not responsible for their housing, food, and medical care; thus, once workers were injured or fell ill, they were thrown out. Thus, the European industrial revolution did not allow room for abolishment of slavery; rather, it turned free European workers into impoverished slaves of different forms within forced labor and despicable conditions.

4- There were two forms of enslavement resulted from the industrial revolution in Europe.

4/1: Colonialism:  Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, and The Netherlands enslaved millions of people in countries they occupied: such as India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and the Southeast of Asia and Arab countries, as people there worked forcibly to produce raw material and other treasures needed for European industry stolen from invaded countries.

4/2: European capitalism was so unjust that communism emerged as a result, raising banners of justice for workers and equality citizens. Yet, communist regimes became more extremist and totalitarian. Capitalist West countries in open, free markets make hundreds of factories and bank owners control and monopolize wealth and power, while those outside such circle live as free poor ones. In contrast, communist regimes make the ruler/president controls and monopolizes wealth and power as well as citizens. This applies to Stalin in Russia, Mao Zedong in China, Castro in Cuba, and ruler of North Korea. Such communist rulers enslave whole nations and everything is in service of rulers, and no one is free to do anything at all even in solitude!

Secondly: USA and Slavery:

 The above applies to the USA, and conditions there were worse and more despicable; because of abolishment of slavery, the American civil war broke out, with thousands of those killed and injured and handicapped, among civilians and soldiers, and after much sacrifices, nothing is achieved as far as abolishing slavery is concerned. Those enslaved for agricultural reasons were later on enslaved of their own choice for the sake of industrialization in the USA. We give more details below.   

1- Abraham Lincoln, in his presidential campaign in 1860, raised the motto of freeing slaves, and shortly before his becoming president, eleven states declared their separation and the confederate states were established under the leadership of Jefferson David. Lincoln considered this as a rebellion, and the American civil war erupted on 12^th of April, 1861, and it ended in the surrender of Lee Grant the leader of the confederates armies on 9^th of April 1865. 

2- The economic factor is the reason behind the abolishment of slavery in the USA; as southern states had agriculture-based economy, especially in planting cotton, and it was cheaper to use slaves instead of importing agricultural machines from Europe. As for the north states, their industry-economy was influenced by Europe and its industrial renaissance, and industrialization needed work force. Hence, black slaves in the southern states brought from Africa and its western coasts must be freed by Lincoln to be forced to work in American industry. Apart from the legal and political debate evolving around that topic, such endeavor of Lincoln was merely a fig leaf to cover the over-ambition and greed of American capitalism in the northern states at the time. 

3- Hence, the formal, outward liberation of slaves by saying to them the famous phrase: ''you are free to go'', was a big act of deceit: outwardly is torment  and inside is mercy; a given former slave was set free to move away with his family members to go anywhere, after living for so long in the household and farm of his former master, getting food and shelter, but what would he do once free?! He would certainly immigrate with his family to cities where factories were there in northern states. Yet, such a slave would find millions like him, hungry and homeless, and not all factories could have the capacity to hire such millions. Hence, instead of starving with his family, such a poor slave must accept forced work with lowest wages and hardest labor for long hours daily, mercilessly and uncharitably. If such a slave would grow lazy or become ill or injured, he would not be tormented or beaten, but bill be thrown away and fired from his job! This is not to mention that the white Americans, away from mottoes of equality raised by Jefferson, despised African-American people, and considered black persons as subhuman or non-human; at the time, there was a debate around if black persons are human beings or not! 

4- Because of the culture of enslavement, racial discrimination in the USA lasted for about 100 years after freeing slaves, and such racial discrimination ended after much struggle by African-American citizens, supported in the 20^th century by human rights groups, that included white persons, especially civil rights movement between 1955 to 1968 that aimed at incriminating racial discrimination against African-American citizens and at giving them the right to vote and citizenry-based equality. Such struggle resulted in the assassination of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X. it is a shame that racial discrimination and latent hatred of African Americans linger in some white American citizens until now, as exemplified by American white policemen shooting African Americans on several occasions, leading African Americans to protest against such racial discrimination. Hence Lincoln did not abolish roots of slavery; he did not remove injustice and impose equality and justice for all, as he aimed to change slaves from one position and conditions to another worse position and conditions.      

5- Thus, Europe and the USA have freed few millions of slaves brought by force from Africa, but both have invented a worst type of enslavement of hundreds of millions of free persons! The reason: the basis of enslavement is still there: injustice. As far as Islam is concerned, the Quran has fought and prohibited all types of injustices and urged justice on all levels. Europe at the time has made injustice as the creed of all actions directed at the impoverished inside Europe and invaded nations outside it. 

Thirdly: The Genius of the Quranic Solution:

1- The genius of the Quranic solution does not lie only in the fact that it deals with the roots of the slavery problem by prohibition of all types of injustices and to call for justice, fairness, and charity: "God commands justice, and charity, and generosity towards relatives. And He forbids immorality, and injustice, and oppression. He advises you, so that you may take heed." (16:90), but also in urging a peaceful solution to the slavery problem alongside with the value of justice and the value of charity that is above justice in the Quran.

2- We have mentioned before in our previous writings that an Islamic country is a peaceful one that never commits aggression and never begins to transgress against anyone, and thus, there is no room for it to enslave anyone or even to capture POWs, as causing harms to peaceful civilians is prohibited. Hence, the source of enslavement is prohibited in such Islamic country. Moreover, freeing slaves coming from outside a given an Islamic country into it by buying them is available as an Islamic duty by the pious, righteous rich persons. Even those who choose to remain inside the Islamic country as  refugees will receive all justice and charity. Thus, war is never an option or a proposed solution to abolish slavery outside the Islamic country by force, as good intentions can never be cause for waging wars at all; wars are big problems in themselves, and they are allowed in Islam ONLY in cases of self-defense and stopped when aggressors stop their aggression. Hence, self-defensive wars are akin to a precise surgical operation to remove cancerous cells. Aggressive enemies are the cancer to be controlled and removed, and once aggression stops, war stops as well. 

3- This Islamic solution/remedy has been adopted partially by the victims of modern, contemporary types of slavery: Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Mandela, who managed within peaceful jihad to address the consciousness of humanity and goodness of persons of which no human soul is devoid.

4- This Islamic solution/remedy was not adopted by the leader of the Zanj rebellion during the Abbasid era. The Arabic word ''Zanj'' means literally ''black enslaved persons''. The Zanj rebellion broke out in Iraq from 255 A.H.  to 270 A.H. during the Second Abbasid Era to protest violently and through bloodshed against the Abbasid affluence and injustices. The wealth of the Abbasid affluent ones was a result of the sweat and toil of the Zanj within a feudal system that enabled caliphs to distribute agricultural lands among his cronies and retinue within many cities like Basra. The black slaves had to reclaim and plant such lands, and slave-traders procured such black slaves from Africa to the Gulf area and to the south of Iraq. Such throngs of black slaves worked in agriculture within despicable conditions, constant flogging, and lack of proper nutrition. They had to carry tons of salt layers that used to cover south of Iraq from the Persian Gulf to reclaim arable lands underneath it, and to move salt to where it would be sold. In return for such arduous tasks, they ate only few dried dates and little green leaves daily. In contrast, affluent ones in Iraqi cities, especially Baghdad, used to eat dishes of tongues of fish, with each dish cost more than 1000 dirhams. Hence, such grave injustices led to rebellion within camps of the Zanj, and such revolt was led by a nameless leader, who later on called himself as Ali Ibn Muhammad, claiming he was a Shiite rebelling against Arabs of Iraq and Najd. This leader became one of Al-Khawarij and became very soon very popular among all black slaves. This leader made use of the despicable conditions and plight of the Zanj within the Persian Gulf and southern Iraq, noticing the huge gap between the impoverished and the hungry on the one hand, and the affluent ones living in palaces on the other hand, while exploiting slaves. This leader of the revolt gathered thousands of followers, and the Abbasids could not vanquish and defeat them except with extreme difficulty. At one point, this leader and all his Zanj followers raided Basra and demolished all its houses and palaces, enslaving its women, and burning the city to the ground. Later on, a plague stuck Iraq and thousands of people died daily. A historian called Al-Suly has mentioned that Zanj rebels killed at least 1.5 Muslims, and their leader at one point killed 300 thousand people in Basra. Such leader used to ascend the pulpit in his mosque to slander and verbally abuse the so-called companions of Prophet Muhammad, who were 'holy' to the Sunnites. It was rumored that a Hashemite woman would be sold in return for three dirhams in the camp of the Zanj leader, and each black rebel, or former slave, had at least ten Hashemite women for his sexual gratification and to serve him as female slaves. Naturally, the Zanj rebellion ended in nothing at all, despite such huge number of victims!                 

5- This solution by means of committing bloodshed never brought positive results, and the same applies to the solutions offered by the Americans, the Europeans, and communists that have only replaced traditional ancient ways of enslavement by modern, contemporary forms of slavery.

Lastly:

 As injustices reign supreme all over the globe, enslavement lingers within its two main types: the Salafist traditional ancient one and the contemporary one from human trafficking to capitalist exploitation.

COMMENTS:

1- Saeed Ali: I assert here that the Quran is the solution as applied by the real Islamic rule that lasted for 11 years of justice, freedom, and charity in the Yathreb city-state of Prophet Muhammad in the 7^th century. Islam is the religion of peace and justice, but such fact has been buried by the unjust Arab conquerors after Muhammad's death. That was why slavery lingered for centuries, as the Arabs forsook the Quran during the Middle Ages until now. May God reward Dr. Mansour for his intellectual endeavors to enlighten us.

2- Ben Levante: I agree with Dr. Mansour, may God grant him the best of health, in all his views expressed above. We remind readers here that Al-Zanj rebelled in history after being enslaved to work in return for food only to reclaim lands for the affluent ones in Iraq in the Middle Ages. Such affluent ones used to eat sumptuous dishes bough by ill-gotten money! Affluent ones of today eat caviar! Some Egyptians spend millions of US$ to import caviar to the affluent ones, whereas poor peasants in Egypt sometimes die of hunger!

3- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our beloved fellow Quranists, and we implore the Almighty to grant us health to go on writing on our website. We assert the following to Ben Levante: a given Islamic country cannot possible control other countries; of course, slavery must be banned and abolished by laws all over the globe. The unjust ones will be losers in the Hereafter, but to execute such ban, this must be within the State institutions. Peaceful ones have many choices: to have patience, to immigrate, or legitimate self-defense against aggressors. Above all, a given country or state must apply justice on all levels and to fight injustices, this is a prerequisite to abolish all forms of slavery. 

4- Khaled Saleh: I would like to assert to Dr. Mansour slavery is based on two bases: injustice and exploitation. It is unethical to allow persons to ''own'' other persons anywhere in the globe. Some people who worship money and power seek to be superior over the rest of humanity; even free ones are enslaved by capitalists in their factories and companies! Let us remember 20:60-64. Legislative and ethical relativity in relation to slaves and their likes still remains amidst poverty and plight of many races. Thank you.  

5- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I ask Dr. Mansour what he means by saying inside it is mercy and outwardly there is torment. Does he mean the other way round: outwardly is mercy and inside it is torment to say to slaves: you are free to go? I thank Dr. Mansour for his precise analysis that shows his genius in tackling the Quranic verses. May God reward Dr. Mansour in Heaven.

6- Saeed Ali: I greet Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti and I would like to be permitted to answer his question in lieu of Dr. Mansour; he did not make a mistake by saying inside it is mercy and outwardly there is torment. He meant to say that mercy is shown by freeing slaves but torment is waiting for freed unprotected slaves who could not find jobs, protection, nutrition, housing, etc. and this is utter torment within merciless societies of inhuman notions and total lack of social justice at the time. God bless you. 

7- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I thank Saeed Ali very much for answering my question, and I hope he will write many useful articles of his own later on.

8- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank Saeed Ali and Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti; their dialogue lends vivacity to our website as real Quranist brethren should act and mingle on the intellectual level; and thanks for correcting our possible mistakes. By the way, we feel acutely the long periods of absence of Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti who represents the open-minded Kuwaiti culture and mentality. May God bless and reward all of you.  

9- Muhammad Shaalan: I would like to add the fact that enslavement is a devilish notion coined by Satan, by making arrogant human beings think they are the betters of some other human beings; devils want all humanity with then in Hell; see 17:62, and this can only be possible when devils control souls of people fully, and such control is akin to enslavement. Hence, devils urge human beings to enslave and exploit one another in many different overt and covert ways. Thank you!

10- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I thank Dr. Mansour for asking about me and for praising me; I was too busy because of matters of vital importance, but I will follow all new articles with comments without allowing transient-world matters to divert me away from this website. There are many Kuwaiti youths who are better than myself in many directions, I think. I would like to assert a phrase I hear in a movie called ''The Ten Commandments'': "God made man, man made the slave'', as this phrase fits perfectly the topic of this book.

11- Marwa Ahmed Mustafa: I salute you, dear Dr. Mansour. I feel bound to say that types of exploitation and enslavement will linger for longer durations as long as there are poverty and oppression that crush the poor and limit their hopes to just make ends meet, whereas blood-sucking capitalists control everything and consider the poor ones as insects to be crushed mercilessly. We read nowadays about female servants sexually abused, tortured, and killed by their employers in the Arab world. The Gulf countries enslave their foreign employees in the worst possible manner fit only within the Middle Ages! Why on earth such bad habits are revived within new ways in the 21^st century?! 

Slaves in Our Modern Age:

Firstly: The Last Countries to Formally Abolish Slavery while Retaining the Culture of Slavery:

Mauritania:

1- Mauritania overtly abolished slavery in 1981because of international community pressure, and the law to consider slavery as a punishable crime was issued only in 2007. Yet, 17% of the population in Mauritania are slaves as per reports of SOS. Walk Free Foundation has made Mauritania on top of the list of countries practicing modern, contemporary slavery, suffered by 4% of the population in Mauritania: about 140.000 persons. By 2015, Mauritania issued a law considering crimes related to slavery as crimes against humanity that are imprescriptible.    

2- Yet, the deep-rooted culture of slavery still persists, especially in rural areas where no human rights groups can reach; this is consolidated by long history of enslavement and class distinction inside the Mauritanian society that include many races: Arabs, Amazigh/Berber, and black Africans.  

3- Because of this dominant culture of slavery, a black Mauritanian writer/blogger has been tried and sentenced to death, allegedly accused of insulting Prophet Muhammad. While being tried, this writer asserted that no offense is intended at all; he wants only to denounce class distinction and social injustice in Mauritania, and if his article has been misinterpreted, he announces his repentance before all people. He asserted in his article that Islam has nothing to do with caste system and class distinction, as both are against being religious. That is why he has received a death sentence despite his clearing the name of Islam and how Islam negates and refutes such social injustice: how such a former black slave he would dare to touch a raw nerve within the Mauritanian society?!

The KSA:

1- King Feisal issued a royal decree to free slaves and stop trading in slaves on 7^th of Nov. 1962.

2- Before that date, it was a widespread custom to buy and sell slaves in special markets made for that purpose, an eye-witness tells us that one of the slaves markets was near the Sacred Mosque in Mecca, where male and female slaves of all age groups were bought and sold; some of them were sold as their masters wanted to get rid of them, and some were brought from outside Arabia. Girls and women would sit on wooden stools put against a wall, covered with thin veils, while boys and men would be on the other side on wooden stools, and potential buyers would check slaves in terms of health and appearance and talk to them if they knew Arabic. If acceptance to serve the new master is verbally uttered by a certain slave chosen by the buyer, the slave-trader would get his money and the new master would take his chosen slave.

3- Another witness says that after 40 years of abolishing slavery and slave-trading in the KSA, some senior elderly Saudi citizens would tell stories about the era of slave-trading in different Saudi markets in many cities, and how slave-traders were filthily rich indeed. One of such elderly citizens would tell that male and female slaves used to have ID papers that describe them physically, while mentioning names of past and present owners and their addresses. One elderly citizen said that his father once bought a male slave in return for 200 SR in Yathreb, and sold this slave for a relative in return for 8000 SR years later. This charitable, kind relative set the slave free, but the freed slave refused to leave, insisting on serving him till death, as a cherished member of the household. Elderly citizens insisted that the number of slaves was tens of thousands, who were set free as per royal decree of 1962. Some of these former slaves worked in trade or in agriculture, and some had civil posts and carried names of tribes in which they used to live. Some old documents show that slavery was practiced for centuries in Yathreb; an 18-year-old slave-girl in 1956 would be sold in return for 38.000 SR while another woman in the same year was sold in return for merely 400 SR, though her papers showed that she was a good housekeeper and a cook. Other documents reveal that there were rules and laws to protect slaves, buy obligating the masters to feed, clothe, heal, and remedy the slaves and to deal kindly with them, and never to separate a female slave from her offspring. Slaves had the right to complain to judges in cities if mistreated by their owners, and judges would warn owners to deal with the slaves kindly. If the complaints persisted for two months, judges would order owners to give up their slaves to the city. A Saudi citizen tells the story about his caring for an elderly former slave who is old enough to be his grandfather; as this citizen's grandfather bought this former slave as a boy who was kidnapped from Yemen decades ago and was castrated, and when this slave was freed in 1962, he cried and refused to leave his kind, charitable former owner, and he became a faithful helper/ servant for the household in return for a salary. All children called this former slave as ''uncle'', and treated him as a family member, and when he grew old, the family members cared for him to the last, until his recent death. A female senior citizen tells the story about female slaves in her father's household, who participated in rearing her and her siblings like kind nannies or moms. Such nannies were in most cases treated kindly and charitably as household members. One of such nannies had a son who assumed a high-rank position in the Saudi government. Among the revealed documents was a contract of selling a young female slave in return for 4000 SR in 1369 A.H., while mentioning her physical qualities and abilities in service of masters, but when slaves were freed in 1962, IDs were issued for them as Saudi citizens, with estimated birth-date, given name, etc.   

4- Indeed, the culture of slavery is still deep-seated inside the KSA; as the royal family ascribing the State and citizens to its family name, as if such citizens were enslaved to the royal family as per Middle-Ages culture like the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman dynasties. Besides, foreign working force (Muslims and non-Muslims) inside the KSA are being enslaved within the so-called sponsor system, as if foreign workers and employees are being enslaved of their own choice as per the chosen slavery in Europe and the USA a century ago, after abolishing slave-trading. Hence the royal Saudi family has imitated the West countries in enslaving workers formerly within the sponsor system, whereas the West capitalists now have given workers their rights, while slavery is deep rooted in the culture, name, and lifestyle of Saudis. 

Secondly: Reports on Contemporary Slavery:

1- This report is titled ''Slavery and its Various Manifestations'', and we quote from it: (… Slavery in ancient times was linked to fetters and chains and absolute ownership, but in our modern times, it takes various forms, from recruiting children in military actions, human trafficking, prostitution, forcing women to be sex workers, forced labor, arbitrary laws, to manipulating children as working force. Such phenomena are sometimes legalized by law and accepted by societies, but they are flagrant violations of human rights and human dignity. Many conditions support the existence of contemporary, modern slavery in the developing world, such as poverty, discrimination, and social exclusion as well as wars and economic collapse that exasperate matters in recent decades … )

2- Walk Free Foundation is concerned with abolishing all forms of contemporary slavery all over the globe. Its slavery index has mentioned on 31^st of May, 2016, that about 46 million persons all over the world are suffering under the yoke of contemporary slavery; we quote words of this foundation here: (… contemporary slaves are about 45.8 million persons all over the world, and the number has increased at the rate of 28% more than the estimations of 2014, indicating that contemporary slavery has increased. Slavery index is based on indications related to human trafficking, military recruitment of children, forcing others to be sex workers, forced marriages of minor female children, being in debts, and laws violating human freedom and human rights. The report tackles data of the slavery index in 167 countries, within 42.000 interviews in 53 languages, so that enslaved people's number is reached and how governments are dealing with their conditions. Such interviews cover 44% of the world population …). 

3- CNN has launched a webpage titled the Road to Freedom, aiming at helping end modern-age contemporary slavery by shedding light on its victims and some success stories of those gaining their freedom. Under the title "Contemporary Slavery Increases at the Rate of 30% All Over the Globe", we quote the following: (… A new study has shown that contemporary, modern-age slavery rates have increased 30% all over the world … 4% of North Koreans are deemed as enslaved … 50 million persons all over the world are deemed as enslaved, mostly in India, Bangladesh, China, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Qatar, Cambodia, and Hong Kong … Such countries made no endeavors to end modern, contemporary forms of slavery … India has the biggest number of enslaved persons, while North Korea comes on top of the list in the slavery index in terms of the rate of enslaved population: 4.37% …). 

Asia develops its economy by compromising human rights:

 Asian countries like India and China are admired because of their rapid economic growth, but such growth has a darker side: the highest rates of contemporary slavery all over the globe; 56% of contemporary slaves are found in Asia. Asian countries suffer phenomena like human trafficking, forced labor, and forcing women to be sex workers as well as children abuse/exploitation, and such phenomena are being overlooked by the Indian and Chinese governments for the sake of economy. Let us continue quoting the report of Walk Free Foundation about the slavery index all over the world: (… the least contemporary modern-age slavery rates are found in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, and Luxemburg …)

Contemporary slavery in Arab countries:

 Another report asserts that no Arab country is free from modern-age contemporary forms of slavery; hundreds of thousands of people suffer from is: 570 thousand in Egypt, 454 thousand in North Sudan, apart from increasing numbers of Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, especially after the emergence of ISIS terrorists. Slavery index defines contemporary, modern-age slavery as "owning and controlling persons within depriving them of individual freedom for the purpose of exploitation and making use of them or to move them forcibly or to get rid of them". Undoubtedly, fighting and combating contemporary, modern-age slavery entail international solidarity, as human trafficking that cross international borders constitutes the biggest form of contemporary, modern-age slavery and its illegal gains reach over 150 billion $ annually. Under the title "Slavery in the Arab World", we quote the following: (… as usual in such surveys, Arab countries are never absent, where thousands of persons suffer contemporary, modern-age slavery , with Qatar on top of the list in terms of rate, while Egyptians working outside Egypt in Arab countries form the biggest rate of those suffering contemporary, modern-age slavery. Lowest rates are found in Oman and the KSA due to their lower rates of population growth in comparison to the rest of the Arab world at large …). Under the title "The Gulf Countries Enslave Others", we quote the following: (… Asian and African employees and workers inside the Gulf monarchies suffer persecution and racial discrimination especially within arbitrary laws of stay and labor; they might get deported anytime without notice and they have no legal rights at all … this makes women suffer exploitation by their employers … such despicable conditions are because of the sponsor system adopted by all the Gulf monarchies, seen by Amnesty International as embodying contemporary, modern-age slavery in its worst form … Qatar was accused many times of several human rights violations because of such despicable conditions, especially because of the dire, inhuman circumstances of workers in projects preparing Qatar and its infrastructure to host World Football Cup 2022 … female minors coming from Egypt, Morocco, and Lebanon are forced to marry old men or to be sex workers for Gulf rich men … such men sometimes go to borders of Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey to marry Syrian and Iraqi female minors from refugees camps, caring nothing about their tragedy …). Under the title " ISIS Terrorists Enslave Women and Recruit Children in Military Actions", we quote the following: (…Syrians and Iraqis suffer flagrant violations of human rights committed by all warring parties, but ISIS terrorists are the worst, as they revive slavery of ancient times typically of the Middle-Ages, when they enslaved and captured about 3000 Yazidi Iraqi women to sell as slaves in return for money … ISIS terrorists have recruited children and trained them militarily to use arms and weapons and drove them to commit suicide bombings, as shown in many ISIS videos …). Let us not forget that military service in Egypt is akin to forced labor under the cover of military recruitment, as uneducated young men are spending their period of military service in serving high-rank officers for free for several months. Such frustrated, angry young men end their military service while hating Egypt because of bad memories of being exploited in conditions akin to unpaid forced labor. Let us not forget that Egyptian and Arab prisons – overt and secret ones – are locations of enslavement and torture, especially for political prisoners. Such political prisoners, like ourselves in the 1980s in Cairo, never forget such horrible experience all their life. The Egyptian prison is alive inside ourselves till this very moment!  

Lastly: To Accuse the Great Religion of Islam of Endorsing and Justifying Enslavement Is Utter and Adamant Stupidity:

 Islam provides the ideal solution to end slavery without this Quranic solution, injustice dominates along with ignorance, corruption, tyranny, exclusion, and enslavement; when tyranny dominates, enslavement dominates as well either within outright slavery or within the worst contemporary widespread types as per international reports of human rights. Instead of defending Islam against the accusation of its purported encouraging of slavery and clearing its name, the mortal gods/deities of the Sunnite religion in particular revive enslavement in our modern age, in its ancient ways as perpetrated by Sunnite Wahabi terrorists of ISIS and Boko Haram, or in an covert ways perpetrated by Arab tyrannical regimes within contemporary forms of slavery. The best discourse: "O people! We created you from a male and a female, and made you races and tribes, that you may know one another. The best among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is All-Knowing, Well-Experienced. " (49:13). God says nothing but the Truth.    

COMMENTS:

1- Abou Ayoub Al-Kuwaiti: I desire to talk about the Japanese in relation to enslavement; I was watching a documentary about the problem of human trafficking, and I felt shocked by this story: a Columbian pretty young girl was promised decent job in japan, but upon her arrival in Tokyo, a her male employer took her passport and made her sign IOWs unbeknownst to her! She was entrapped! She was forced to work as a sex worker to pay up, and she had to have sex with at least ten men per night! When she fled and went into the police station, policemen let her down and never helped her! It seems that countries of the First World are not totally free from forced slavery and enslavement! Japanese have yet to apologize for using Korean women as forced sex workers during WWII. Yet, Japan is looked upon now as a leading pioneer country on many levels. Japan now stopped being unjust to other countries. Let us learn from its example to make the world respect Arabs. Thank all of you, especially dear Dr. Mansour.   

2- Ben Levante: About injustices, enslavement, and slaves, I would like to add that the old ways of bondage are now revived in new ways. There is vast difference between injustices supported, overlooked, or tolerated by laws and injustices being fought by laws. In many cases, the results are the same in both cases. For instance, in Germany, where I live, unemployed persons are paid money and have medical insurance, etc. and so are refugees; yet, poverty, exploitation, and prostitution still exist. Germany does its best to control such vices, but the problem linger despite all this. Another example is the USA; it allowed enslavement once and then abolished slavery, but poverty, exploitation, and prostitution still exist. I feel that the Quran is against enslavement, as it urges its being abolished by the best possible way: to provide enticements for freeing slaves. I feel that the expression ''what your right hand possesses'' refers to the past: those who owned slaves already; this is NOT a sort of encouragement to own more and more slaves even by buying them. Within such gradual freeing of slaves of both genders, a given Islamic country must stop human trafficking. I feel bound to say that I like very much the last sentence by Dr. Mansour about prisons; what he writes apply to all Arab prisons and third-world prisons as well. May God reward him in Heaven for his intellectual endeavors.

3- Ahmed Drami: I feel bound to say that imams/narrators of hadiths fabricated them to serve the unjust and to spread and justify injustices, especially related to slaves in the Middle Ages; such fabricators urged the notion that an escaped slave can never perform prayers deemed acceptable by God! How dared they to tell such lies?! Such notions are effrontery to God! Indeed, I do believe that such hadiths are opium of the masses (we allude here to Karl Marx). The Sunnite religion is the opium of the Muhammadans masses, for sure; it is a system of intoxicating brains of the oppressed ones, in Mauritania for instance, to have a tarnished image of Islam to accept oppression as the norm and never to rebel against it. Mauritanian slaves there are urged to accept bondage in return for protection and food! What a shame! God will certainly  punish the unrepentant oppressors in Hell; see 13:5.    

4- Saeed Ali: I urge all of us to remember always that piety is the ultimate goal; this is the useful, great lesson we all learn from our dear Dr. Mansour, may God protect and preserve him and grant him the best of health. We are looking forward to other books of similar nature that expose the falsehoods of the Sunnite religion. I thank Abou Ayoub, Ahmed Drami, and Ben Levante for their very useful comments, may God reward and protect you and all our brethren the Quranists all over the globe. All of us are to remember that piety is the target to be attained by all acts of worship and good deeds. Piety is reflected in what we call conscience; pangs of conscience are good indicators of sinning and sense of guilt when one commits bad deeds that entail repentance, atonement, and imploring God for forgiveness. People trespass against God and against their fellow human beings; people commit injustices, and Arabs began such sins that go on until now when they committed the crime of Arab conquests in the 7^th century, and as a result, many types of injustices, including many forms of slavery, linger. Pious believers fear God, and if they commit mistakes, their pangs of conscience make them stop trespassing, make amends, and apologize to the wronged parties. We must follow the example of Dr. Mansour in his urging us never to lose hope in anything. I seize the chance here to welcome novices to the Quranism website, hoping they will be good, faithful Quranists, and I hope they will help us propagate Quranism all over cyberspace, with due thanks and respect to the novices.     

5- Dr. A. S. Mansour: We thank all our beloved Quranists, and we assert here that all your important comments have enriched the topic of this book; may God reward all of you in Heaven. We say to Ben Levante that the Islamic country of justice in the manner of the Yathreb city-state led by Prophet Muhammad in the 7^th century is not an impossible imaginary utopia; rather, it is possible and it is existing at varying degrees within the West countries. Sometimes we wish that the Quranic expression ''what your right hand possesses'' would be written in the past tense or in a manner that indicates its being something in the past; yet, it gives us comfort that there are Quranic legislations urging freeing of all types of slaves and acting charitably to them and even getting married to them. Hence, within this light, a real Islamic country is a realistic one that takes great care to apply and ensure human rights; hence, it is its duty to free slaves by buying them beforehand and freeing them at once, while dealing with them kindly and fairly as citizens, without engaging into wars with other countries that permit buying and selling slaves. Some rich volunteers have bought enslaved ones from ISIS terrorists and helped them to be refugees in European countries – despite all risks involved – this is better than waging wars that exacerbate the problem of enslavement, increase number of those killed, and elongate the duration of the crisis without possible quick solutions. Thus, the poor innocent victims would be saved instead of losing their lives; and we personally tend to think that we belong to the innocent victims from all colors, races, and religions.