Bilal the son of an Abyssinian ( Ethiopian ) man or Bilal the son of an Arab man?

[cooli3o]

The only distinction that existed was between the Arabs and the Red (referring to Persians/Romans). The Romans were positioned to the left, and the Persians to the right, surrounding the Arabian Peninsula and overshadowing the Arabs who were considered backward. Both groups, the Romans and Persians, were termed "Red" due to their whiteness and lank hair. This was in complete contrast to the Arabs inhabiting the desert and hot regions, who had shades of blackness and kinky hair.

IM saying the half-habesha man antara ibn shaddad the son of a slave pointed out in his poems the darkness of his motherskin to show how he was different to normal arabs and he was discriminated

 

[cooli3o]

The text does not specify that she was Habesha; in fact, they were likely Arabs. Additionally, there is no mention of them refraining from the funeral prayer because they were black or slaves, so I fail to see the correlation.

nope, because when hadeeth mention dark women it always specifies they are sawdaa,
for example this

last hadeeth may be weak, but clearly they show that the hadeeth existed during that time, so the arabs still had a rhetoric of black slave women being less than Arabs

 

[Nin123]

Ibn Qayyim may Allah have mercy upon him said in his book Al Jawabul Wafi on page 235:

“The one who advises people with falsehood is a speaking devil. The one who remains silent about the truth is a speechless devil.”

قول الناصح المتكفم بالباطل شيطان ناطق، والساكت عن الحق شيطان أخرس

It has been widely promoted by many that Bilal Ibn Rabaah ,which translates to Bilal the son of Rabaah was Ethiopian in origin. Although he has been regarded as an Abyssinian (Ethiopian), his father had an Arab name. At first glance, the idea that Bilal had an Abyssinian (Ethiopian) father who had an Arab seems logical. However, an Abyssinian (Ethiopian ) having an Arab name would have been almost unheard of in the times when the Abyssinians (Ethiopians) and Arabs were at war. This Arab – Ethiopian war was way before the Arabs became Muslims and of course before the Prophet Muhammad was given prophethood, which makes it even clearer as to why this would most likely not have been possible.

What does ‘Ibn’ mean ?

The term ‘ibn’ means “son” of someone or descendant of someone . Therefore, there is no confusion in regards to whether he was the actual son of Rabaah or not and no excuse to believe in the possibility of him being given a name by way of adoption. If he had actually been adopted he would have most likely been called Bilal Ibn Umayyah- Bilal son of Umayyah as Umayyah son of Khalaf was his owner.

Why could he not be called by other than his father’s name ?

Allah says in the Quran , Call them after their fathers. That is most just in the sight of Allah. If you know not their fathers, then call them your brothers in faith and your patrons. There is no blame on you if you make a mistake but you are accountable for what is done intentionally. Allah is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Quran 33:5)

ادْعُوهُمْ لآبَائِهِمْ هُوَ أَقْسَطُ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ‏



For this reason, we know if Rabah was not his father’s name , it would have been changed to his real father’s name after Allah had revealed this verse.

Why do I say that he would have reverted back to his original name if Rabah was not his name ?

Bukhari Book 65 Hadith 4782

Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar:
We didn’t use to call the freed slave of the messenger of Allah may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, Zaid bin Haarithah, anything but Zaid bin Muhammad until the Qur’anic Verse was revealed: “Call them (adopted sons) by their fathers names. That is more than just in the Sight of Allah.” (33.5)
حَدَّثَنَا مُعَلَّى بْنُ أَسَدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْعَزِيزِ بْنُ الْمُخْتَارِ، حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ عُقْبَةَ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي سَالِمٌ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ أَنَّ زَيْدَ بْنَ حَارِثَةَ، مَوْلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَا كُنَّا نَدْعُوهُ إِلاَّ زَيْدَ ابْنَ مُحَمَّدٍ حَتَّى نَزَلَ الْقُرْآنُ ‏{‏ادْعُوهُمْ لآبَائِهِمْ هُوَ أَقْسَطُ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ‏}‏‏.‏

​

The concept of Bilal Ibn Rabah not being from Ethiopia) is not a new concept​

In book 8 of Seera Alaam Al Nubalaa, Imaam Al Dhahabi may Allah have mercy upon him mentioned a famous narration,​

” On the authority of Ziyaad , on the authority of Umaamah, that the Prophet may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him said, ”There are four forerunners. I am the forerunner of the Arabs, Bilal is the forerunner of the Abysinians and Shuaib is the forerunner of the Romans and Salmaan is the forerunner of the Persians.”

Then he made it very clear that this narration is rejected!

”And this narration is rejected From what is apparent , Bilal is not Habeshi and as for Suhaib , he was an Arab from Al Nemir son of Qaasit.”
ا

قال الذهبي في سير الأعلام النبلاء ج ص ٥٣٠

عن محمد بن زياد، عن أبي أمامة، عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: ” السباق أربعة: أنا سابق العرب، وبلال سابق الحبشة، وصهيب سابق الروم، وسلمان سابق الفرس ” . وهذا حديث منكر فرد والأظهر أن بلالا ليس بحبشي، وأما صهيب، فعربي من النمر بن قاسط..


It is very interesting how this narration and others have been widely spread by many and even when they are told about it and referred to the scholars, they prefer to not correct their errors.

Will they didn’t consider him an arab and treated him like slave even though his father was arab man.

 

[Al Adnani]

His father Rabaa7 was 3arb this has been confirmed. He was still considered habeshi however

 

[cooli3o]

I don't think you understand Arabs were still racist to xabashis,
just like nowadays darkskinned indians are seen as lower caste to lightskinned ones, even though it is indians naturla colour
just like how girls bleach themselves in somali due to self hatred of their skin
alot of races are racist agaisnt people who look similar to them, but look different

xabashis were defintely darker than the Arabs, by todays standards they may have all been seen as dark skinned, but xabashis would have been pitch black

 

[Haragwaafi]

Bilal was a son of Arab tribal chief and a slave Abyssinian princess or noble

 

[Haragwaafi]

I don't think you understand Arabs were still racist to xabashis,
just like nowadays darkskinned indians are seen as lower caste to lightskinned ones, even though it is indians naturla colour
just like how girls bleach themselves in somali due to self hatred of their skin
alot of races are racist agaisnt people who look similar to them, but look different

xabashis were defintely darker than the Arabs, by todays standards they may have all been seen as dark skinned, but xabashis would have been pitch black

Any Slave that Abyssinians used to sell to Arabs were called Habasha from the land they were brought from as Abyssinians never enslaved their own kind but other primitive tribes deep in the interior of Ethiopia.

 

[cooli3o]

Any Slave that Abyssinians used to sell to Arabs were called Habasha from the land they were brought from as Abyssinians never enslaved their own kind but other primitive tribes deep in the interior of Ethiopia.

are you saying the Arabs were not racist?

 

[Haragwaafi]

are you saying the Arabs were not racist?

No

 

[techsamatar]

I don't think you understand Arabs were still racist to xabashis,
just like nowadays darkskinned indians are seen as lower caste to lightskinned ones, even though it is indians naturla colour
just like how girls bleach themselves in somali due to self hatred of their skin
alot of races are racist agaisnt people who look similar to them, but look different

xabashis were defintely darker than the Arabs, by todays standards they may have all been seen as dark skinned, but xabashis would have been pitch black

it seems there might be a misunderstanding. Both the Arabs and Abyssinians historically had blackness, and even today, the Habesha people are not uniformly jet black in complexion. In fact, they often exhibit a asmar or wheatish complexion majority. The majority of the original Arabs were closer in complexion to Adam and Asmar. It's worth noting that Bilal likely inherited his shadidul udma complexion from his father, considering that Ali ibn Talib, who was known as one of the purest Arabs, shared a similar complexion to Bilal.

 

[techsamatar]

are you saying the Arabs were not racist?

The concept of racism, as we understand it today, is indeed a modern term. It's important to recognize that in ancient times, cultures like the Romans and Greeks did not categorize people strictly based on skin colour. Instead, they often distinguished between themselves and others based on cultural, geographical, or social factors. In the context of the Roman Empire, a significant portion of slaves, around 90%, were Europeans or whites whom they considered barbarians. Skin colour wasn't the defining factor in their social hierarchy.

 

[cooli3o]

it seems there might be a misunderstanding. Both the Arabs and Abyssinians historically had blackness, and even today, the Habesha people are not uniformly jet black in complexion. In fact, they often exhibit a asmar or wheatish complexion majority. The majority of the original Arabs were closer in complexion to Adam and Asmar. It's worth noting that Bilal likely inherited his shadidul udma complexion from his father, considering that Ali ibn Talib, who was known as one of the purest Arabs, shared a similar complexion to Bilal.

we don't know what colour xabashis were back in the day,

also the sahaba narrated that different colours for the same sahaba many times.

Also bilal RA was half arab so even if he was the same colour as Ali ibn taalib it would make sense

 

[cooli3o]

The concept of racism, as we understand it today, is indeed a modern term. It's important to recognize that in ancient times, cultures like the Romans and Greeks did not categorize people strictly based on skin colour. Instead, they often distinguished between themselves and others based on cultural, geographical, or social factors. In the context of the Roman Empire, a significant portion of slaves, around 90%, were Europeans or whites whom they considered barbarians. Skin colour wasn't the defining factor in their social hierarchy.

yes that is what i mentioned in my post, you can be the same skin colour but still be racist(based on ethnicity) despite being the same skin colour

 

[techsamatar]

yes that is what i mentioned in my post, you can be the same skin colour but still be racist(based on ethnicity) despite being the same skin colour

Indeed, there were conflicts and hostilities between Arabs and Abyssinians, leading to wars and raids. Both sides enslaved each other, with Abyssinians often having superior power, wealth, and civilization. However, the Arabs looked down on Abyssinians, especially after the incident of the Year of the Elephant, where Abyssinians attempted to destroy the Kaaba but failed, leading to a significant number of prisoners of war. Despite their weaknesses and the fact that they hid in the mountains, they were saved, and their survival was attributed to Allah's intervention.

During the era of Jahiliya, the Arabs possessed a superiority complex based on their lineage, despite being inferior in power and wealth compared to their adversaries. This sense of superiority was bolstered by certain victories, such as the one in the Year of the Elephant, which contributed to their elevated status in their own eyes.

 

[Qeelbax]

Arab