Should child marriage be banned in Somalia?

[anonimo]

How is banning slavery unislamic?

The statement I made did not concern the issue of whether banning slavery was Islamic, just highlighted it was never done for religious reasons as there was no religious impetus behind its banning but international pressure from the West that led to authorities banning it in Muslim countries. Slavery is a recognised practice in the Qur'an and during the time of the Prophet SAW/Sahabah. Sure Islam brought restrictions on how slaves can be acquired, their treatment and the encouragement of manumission etc., but it is an accepted practice in Islam which for which there was no debate around its continued existence in Muslim societies until the Europeans exerted pressure on their colonial subjects and Muslim states from 19th century onwards.

I don't have any particular "fuss" about child marriage specifically. Im just moreso annoyed how none of these people are even willing to acknowledge that they have reformist beliefs

I wasn't addressing you directly with the 'fuss' statement but just highlighting how it is not a unique phenomenon in relation to how authorities have undermined Islamic rulings with contradictory laws over the past century.

Nonetheless, you are relatively right with the reformist statement. Whether they are conscious of it is another debate. Some people feel passionately about this issue for societal, non-religious reasons and if they can find a religious 'loophole' propagated by a 'scholar', they are for it irrespective of how flimsy the rationale behind it is. If a non-debatable Quranic and Sunnah based ruling can be discarded without a classical precedent, what is stopping other rulings from being ignored?

It is a Pandora Box indeed as there are calls by the liberally minded for several other Islamic rulings to be 'reformed' so as to make Islam more 'complimentary' of the times/society we live in. In other words, change the way the Deen is interpreted/practiced; this already happened with the evolution of liberal Jewish and Christian sects in these religions.

 

[JohnCena]

absolutely disgusting.

 

[jemappelle]

The statement I made did not concern the issue of whether banning slavery was Islamic, just highlighted it was never done for religious reasons as there was no religious impetus behind its banning but international pressure from the West that led to authorities banning it in Muslim countries. Slavery is a recognised practice in the Qur'an and during the time of the Prophet SAW/Sahabah. Sure Islam brought restrictions on how slaves can be acquired, their treatment and the encouragement of manumission etc., but it is an accepted practice in Islam which for which there was no debate around its continued existence in Muslim societies until the Europeans exerted pressure on their colonial subjects and Muslim states from 19th century onwards.

But were the way those slaves were attained halal and with good intentions?

 

[anonimo]

But were the way those slaves were attained halal and with good intentions?

A lot of slaves were obviously acquired illegally through raids, Tatars targeting Slavs; Arabs based in the Swahili coast; Arabs in the Sudan........

However, some slaves were obtained by non-Muslims selling slaves; the Habashas, Oromos etc. selling Cushite, Habasha and Nilo-Saharan (Kunama and Nara) slaves for example. These slaves were sold all over the Red Sea Arab countries. 'Abyssinian' women were common and preferred over other S-S African slave women in Egyptian and Saudi slave markets. Were these slaves acquired illegally if they are bought from non-Muslims? Ask the scholars I guess. I know it is not permitted to enslave a free born person unless the necessary conditions are met but this is different so can't comment.

Furthermore, a lot of them were intergenerational slaves. The Mauritanian ones for example. Are they descendants of those acquired through Jihad or purchases?

 

[jemappelle]

A lot of slaves were obviously acquired illegally through raids, Tatars targeting Slavs; Arabs based in the Swahili coast; Arabs in the Sudan........

However, some slaves were obtained by non-Muslims selling slaves; the Habashas, Oromos etc. selling Cushite, Habasha and Nilo-Saharan (Kunama and Nara) slaves for example. These slaves were sold all over the Red Sea Arab countries. 'Abyssinian' women were common and preferred over other S-S African slave women in Egyptian and Saudi slave markets. Were these slaves acquired illegally if they are bought from non-Muslims? Ask the scholars I guess. I know it is not permitted to enslave a free born person unless the necessary conditions are met but this is different so can't comment.

Furthermore, a lot of them were intergenerational slaves. The Mauritanian ones for example. Are they descendants of those acquired through Jihad or purchases?

The question is, were these slaves legitimate slaves in the first place, was there any societal use to keep them as slaves, were these slaves being treated properly, or were they illegitimately turned into slaves, sold and abused, and having no real need to be slaves

Islamically slaves are there for a reason, if you are not in jihaad and have slaves then eventually you want slaves to be independent and form part of society, that can't happen straight away which is why Islamically you don't just free all slaves, there is a process, but, what was done in these countries, was abuse of slaves, they had no need for them, and there was no use to them in society

 

[Yaraye]

y'all still arguing on this thread. its been a week!

 

[anonimo]

The question is, were these slaves legitimate slaves in the first place, was there any societal use to keep them as slaves, were these slaves being treated properly, or were they illegitimately turned into slaves, sold and abused, and having no real need to be slaves.

As I have previously answered, unless I have a time machine, htf can I answer this question? I cannot account for enslaver or enslaved in this hypothetical questioning.

Islamically slaves are there for a reason, if you are not in jihaad and have slaves then eventually you want slaves to be independent and form part of society, that can't happen straight away which is why Islamically you don't just free all slaves, there is a process, but, what was done in these countries, was abuse of slaves, they had no need for them, and there was no use to them in society

Sxb, your reasoning is your own. Unless one is All Seeing, you cannot know why people continued to own slaves from the time of Sahabah to the 20th century, or how religiously illegitimate the practice was a whole.

As for your process argument, sorry, but it doesn't add up considering there has been no mechanism instituted by Muslim authorities from the time of Sahabah to the 19th century to abolish slavery altogether. It was a religiously acceptable part of life with manumission mainly down to individual owners or ruling elites, not scholarly directives.

This topic has been done to death man, can't be asked to dabble in cyclical arguments.

 

[jemappelle]

Sxb, your reasoning is your own. Unless one is All Seeing, you cannot know why people continued to own slaves from the time of Sahabah to the 20th century, or how religiously illegitimate the practice was a whole.

As for your process argument, sorry, but it doesn't add up considering there has been no mechanism instituted by Muslim authorities from the time of Sahabah to the 19th century to abolish slavery altogether. It was a religiously acceptable part of life with manumission mainly down to individual owners or ruling elites, not scholarly directives.

You can read books of history on this topic.

Slavery was never abolished all together because war always happened or always was an option
It does not mean that slavery was predominate in also Muslim countries, in fact alot of Muslim countries especially during the time of the salaf had no slaves.

Slavery is always there as an option during times of jihaad, but after that if there is no use for it then the Islamic system makes way for people to leave slavery

Plus during the sahabas times they wouldn't even take slaves sometimes if the city could run by itself under the command of an Islamic leader, so slavery is not always an option during war

 

[anonimo]

You can read books of history on this topic.

Slavery was never abolished all together because war always happened or always was an option
It does not mean that slavery was predominate in also Muslim countries, in fact alot of Muslim countries especially during the time of the salaf had no slaves.

Slavery is always there as an option during times of jihaad, but after that if there is no use for it then the Islamic system makes way for people to leave slavery

Plus during the sahabas times they wouldn't even take slaves sometimes if the city could run by itself under the command of an Islamic leader, so slavery is not always an option during war

My first post referenced slavery to highlight how it was abolished by non-religious authority figures not out of religious conviction but Western pressure. Like I said, this subject has been done to death.

You want to defend how slavery was conducted by the Ummah? Be my guest cos you are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[King Khufu]

If two teenagers marry - no [tradition]
If a child marries adult - yes ((banned))

 

[Garaad diinle]

As for your process argument, sorry, but it doesn't add up considering there has been no mechanism instituted by Muslim authorities from the time of Sahabah to the 19th century to abolish slavery altogether. It was a religiously acceptable part of life with manumission mainly down to individual owners or ruling elites, not scholarly directives.

Yes there are no mechanism or discussion about abolishing slavery but there is no argument in islam that's against abolishing slavery. We know that some of the rasul ﷺ wishes didn't happen because of the societal opposition. For example when the rasul ﷺ wanted to rebuild al-Kaʿbah in the shape that ibrahim عليه السلام build it in but he didn't know how the muslims at large would react and how meccens in particular would feel about it. Slavery was part and parcel of arab society and islam regulated but it didn't mandated it. Having slaves isn't wajib and freeing them is considered a good deed.

 

[jemappelle]

Yes there are no mechanism or discussion about abolishing slavery but there is no argument in islam that's against abolishing slavery. We know that some of the rasul ﷺ wishes didn't happen because of the societal opposition. For example when the rasul ﷺ wanted to rebuild al-Kaʿbah in the shape that ibrahim عليه السلام build it in but he didn't know how the muslims at large would react and how meccens in particular would feel about it. Slavery was part and parcel of arab society and islam regulated but it didn't mandated it. Having slaves isn't wajib and freeing them is considered a good deed.

on the point you mentioned people do not know the Ka'ba was rebuilt 4 times