The Islamic Discussion Thread ٤: It's Always Sunni In Arabia

[Frievolk]

All of them?
Muhammad's own Caliphate had a fuckload of campaigns of piracy in the the Red Sea (the only body of water he had access to) while taking slaves from Habasha (Ethiopia) and other regional governments.
The Rashidun Caliphate and virtually every other one after (up to the Ottoman Empire) also hunted in the Mediterranean, which was primarily why Colonialism happened.

I've never known them to do that? Source?

Which them?
The Ottomans had this whole Barbary Corsairs that fucked up trade in the Mediterranean sea by raiding European coastal cities with the intention of finding slaves, forcing Iberians to seek other trade routes (one of them accidentally reached a new Continent, etc.)

[Jolthig]

I've never known them to do that? Source?

Which them?
The Ottomans had this whole Barbary Corsairs that fucked up trade in the Mediterranean sea by raiding European coastal cities with the intention of finding slaves, forcing Iberians to seek other trade routes (one of them accidentally reached a new Continent, etc.)

The Rashidan Caliphate. I know the ottomans and the Barbary states did slave trade. The US got into a couple wars with them because of that.

[Jolthig]

Amin, one of the quotes you provided, literally agrees with me:

1: I already said "I know"
2: The only sentence that you 'highlighted' (saying "bolded and underlined" is too much to type lol) that agrees with you claim is the last sentence.

Okay, then I see nothing for us to disagree on.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

I've never known them to do that? Source?

Which them?
The Ottomans had this whole Barbary Corsairs that fucked up trade in the Mediterranean sea by raiding European coastal cities with the intention of finding slaves, forcing Iberians to seek other trade routes (one of them accidentally reached a new Continent, etc.)

Idk what Jolthig wants, but for me, I'm specifically talking about the Prophet Muhammad SAWS and the Rashidun.

[Jolthig]

Which them?
The Ottomans had this whole Barbary Corsairs that fucked up trade in the Mediterranean sea by raiding European coastal cities with the intention of finding slaves, forcing Iberians to seek other trade routes (one of them accidentally reached a new Continent, etc.)

Idk what Jolthig wants, but for me, I'm specifically talking about the Prophet Muhammad SAWS and the Rashidun.

Well, so am I.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

1: I already said "I know"
2: The only sentence that you 'highlighted' (saying "bolded and underlined" is too much to type lol) that agrees with you claim is the last sentence.

Okay, then I see nothing for us to disagree on.

Well we still disagree on whether Islamic slavery should be practiced. Here's my opinion:

I don't think any kind of slavery should be practiced because I don't trust people to act justly with that kind of power, even with the restraints Al-Islam imposes. At the same time, and Islamic nation shouldn't make haram what Allah SWT has made halal.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Idk what Jolthig wants, but for me, I'm specifically talking about the Prophet Muhammad SAWS and the Rashidun.

Well, so am I.

Oh ok.

[Jolthig]

Okay, then I see nothing for us to disagree on.

Well we still disagree on whether Islamic slavery should be practiced. Here's my opinion:

I don't think any kind of slavery should be practiced because I don't trust people to act justly with that kind of power, even with the restraints Al-Islam imposes. At the same time, and Islamic nation shouldn't make haram what Allah SWT has made halal.

Slavery is neither Haram nor halal as far as I know of? Personally I think any country that has slavery can abolish slavery through merit and education. This is what the Quran and Sunnah advocates.

[Herskerstad]

Not like e-pirating nowadays. Like actual pirating. Ships landing onshore, plundering villages. That sort of stuff.

I know what you meant. Which early Khilafahs are you talking about?

I mean it existed ever since Muhammad, who himself raided caravans. But those were mostly land-based and regional. I think it is after Uhman that you get the first real large scale attacks on the Mediterranean, though warfare was still rather decentralised so it's hard to say how many of these were ordered and how many were ad-hoc. I don't know the degree of naval piracy in the straights prior to such.

But a fair characterisation of Islamic warfare from it's earliest days would be focused on raiding and plundering. It zaps the enemies strength, enriches ones own, and draws them into a favourable position for a set-battle that one can often dictate.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Well we still disagree on whether Islamic slavery should be practiced. Here's my opinion:

I don't think any kind of slavery should be practiced because I don't trust people to act justly with that kind of power, even with the restraints Al-Islam imposes. At the same time, and Islamic nation shouldn't make haram what Allah SWT has made halal.

Slavery is neither Haram nor halal as far as I know of?

True, but when I think of "halal" I think of "obligatory stuff and stuff that you have the option to do". I could be wrong tho.

Personally I think any country that has slavery can abolish slavery through merit and education. This is what the Quran and Sunnah advocates.

True, but an educated slave is still a slave. I think the best way to abolish slavery fee sabeelillah is to get every slave to petition their masters to free them.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

I know what you meant. Which early Khilafahs are you talking about?

I mean it existed ever since Muhammad, who himself raided caravans. But those were mostly land-based and regional. I think it is after Uhman that you get the first real large scale attacks on the Mediterranean, though warfare was still rather decentralised so it's hard to say how many of these were ordered and how many were ad-hoc. I don't know the degree of naval piracy in the straights prior to such.

But a fair characterisation of Islamic warfare from it's earliest days would be focused on raiding and plundering. It zaps the enemies strength, enriches ones own, and draws them into a favourable position for a set-battle that one can often dictate.

Well you're just talking about war, not piracy. War is halal if done right, and piracy is haram, period. Same goes for raiding and plundering (by which I mean committing atrocities).

[Page]

Well we still disagree on whether Islamic slavery should be practiced. Here's my opinion:

I don't think any kind of slavery should be practiced because I don't trust people to act justly with that kind of power, even with the restraints Al-Islam imposes. At the same time, and Islamic nation shouldn't make haram what Allah SWT has made halal.

Slavery is neither Haram nor halal as far as I know of? Personally I think any country that has slavery can abolish slavery through merit and education. This is what the Quran and Sunnah advocates.

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"? Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

[Mattopilos II]

Slavery is neither Haram nor halal as far as I know of? Personally I think any country that has slavery can abolish slavery through merit and education. This is what the Quran and Sunnah advocates.

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"? Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

Only when he decides to talk to random people through dreams that can’t be tracked to anything physical me thinks.

[Jolthig]

Slavery is neither Haram nor halal as far as I know of? Personally I think any country that has slavery can abolish slavery through merit and education. This is what the Quran and Sunnah advocates.

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"? Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

The Quran is intended to be a book of all ages. It is intended for peoples of various circumstances. As for the case of Arabia, abolishing slavery with the pen would've been disastrous.

[Frievolk]

Well, so am I.

Oh ok.

The only link, thus far, that I have been able to find that all of us can read (the others were mostly in Farsi, which I doubt you guys are academically fluent in) can be found here. Scroll over to page 176 and beyond for the specific stuff (though I was wrong as it was mostly, once again, done in the Mediterranean, rather than the Red Sea where I originally suspected)

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Slavery is neither Haram nor halal as far as I know of? Personally I think any country that has slavery can abolish slavery through merit and education. This is what the Quran and Sunnah advocates.

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"?

Allah SWT doesn't explicitly prohibit slavery. It's just highly restricted.

Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

Allah SWT does as he wills.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"? Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

The Quran is intended to be a book of all ages. It is intended for peoples of various circumstances. As for the case of Arabia, abolishing slavery with the pen would've been disastrous.

^This, too

[Jolthig]

Oh ok.

The only link, thus far, that I have been able to find that all of us can read (the others were mostly in Farsi, which I doubt you guys are academically fluent in) can be found here. Scroll over to page 176 and beyond for the specific stuff (though I was wrong as it was mostly, once again, done in the Mediterranean, rather than the Red Sea where I originally suspected)

Teach me some Farsi then, Pilarcraft! What are you doing just standing there?!

[Herskerstad]

I mean it existed ever since Muhammad, who himself raided caravans. But those were mostly land-based and regional. I think it is after Uhman that you get the first real large scale attacks on the Mediterranean, though warfare was still rather decentralised so it's hard to say how many of these were ordered and how many were ad-hoc. I don't know the degree of naval piracy in the straights prior to such.

But a fair characterisation of Islamic warfare from it's earliest days would be focused on raiding and plundering. It zaps the enemies strength, enriches ones own, and draws them into a favourable position for a set-battle that one can often dictate.

Well you're just talking about war, not piracy. War is halal if done right, and piracy is haram, period. Same goes for raiding and plundering (by which I mean committing atrocities).

Well it's important to understand the age itself. Not all raiding expeditions were declarations of war. Not all pirate expeditions were under the banner of war. States were a lot more loosely defined back then and in the case of the Caliphates, since they had very low tax returns, they had to rely mostly on other sources for revenue. One of the biggest was the Caliph's claim to get wartime booty which included that made from piracy.

[Negarakita]

I mean it existed ever since Muhammad, who himself raided caravans. But those were mostly land-based and regional. I think it is after Uhman that you get the first real large scale attacks on the Mediterranean, though warfare was still rather decentralised so it's hard to say how many of these were ordered and how many were ad-hoc. I don't know the degree of naval piracy in the straights prior to such.

But a fair characterisation of Islamic warfare from it's earliest days would be focused on raiding and plundering. It zaps the enemies strength, enriches ones own, and draws them into a favourable position for a set-battle that one can often dictate.

Well you're just talking about war, not piracy. War is halal if done right, and piracy is haram, period. Same goes for raiding and plundering (by which I mean committing atrocities).

Is piracy haram? Because historically muslim pirated have been really good at it. The barbary ones especially, huge respect for them.

[Page]

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"? Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

The Quran is intended to be a book of all ages. It is intended for peoples of various circumstances. As for the case of Arabia, abolishing slavery with the pen would've been disastrous.

Muhammad and his successors led armies that conquered lands from Persia to Spain. They created a caliphate, converted people to Islam, and imposed their laws upon them. Is there some reason one can't impose a condition like the abolition of slavery on a defeated, conquered kingdom? In that position, the victor can do as they please.

[Genivaria]

If the Qu'ran is the word of God, shouldn't it just abolish slavery by God saying "Don't have slaves!"? Doesn't God get to make decisions like that?

The Quran is intended to be a book of all ages. It is intended for peoples of various circumstances. As for the case of Arabia, abolishing slavery with the pen would've been disastrous.

And once again we find that the One True Religion is confined by oral relativism.

[Jolthig]

The Quran is intended to be a book of all ages. It is intended for peoples of various circumstances. As for the case of Arabia, abolishing slavery with the pen would've been disastrous.

Muhammad and his successors led armies that conquered lands from Persia to Spain. They created a caliphate, converted people to Islam, and imposed their laws upon them.

No one was forced into Islam.

Is there some reason one can't impose a condition like the abolition of slavery on a defeated, conquered kingdom? In that position, the victor can do as they please.

Read my response to you again.

[Genivaria]

Muhammad and his successors led armies that conquered lands from Persia to Spain. They created a caliphate, converted people to Islam, and imposed their laws upon them.

No one was forced into Islam.

Is there some reason one can't impose a condition like the abolition of slavery on a defeated, conquered kingdom? In that position, the victor can do as they please.

Read my response to you again.

So Muhammad can do all these mighty things but the moral atrocity of slavery is conveniently impossible to abolish.
The thing about already having conquered and controlling a region is that you don't have to compromise anymore, tradition and law is what you make it.

[Jolthig]

The Quran is intended to be a book of all ages. It is intended for peoples of various circumstances. As for the case of Arabia, abolishing slavery with the pen would've been disastrous.

And once again we find that the One True Religion is confined by oral relativism.

Such as?

No one was forced into Islam.


Read my response to you again.

So Muhammad can do all these mighty things but the moral atrocity of slavery is conveniently impossible to abolish.

What mighty things are you referring to? Conquering Arabia and the surrounding lands isn't very specific.