Was Muhammad a slave owner ?

Oct 2018
1,209
Adelaide south Australia
#11
@kandal

"The same thing could be said of Buddha and other founders of religions too."

Umm, not really:;;Both buddhism and Christianity contain unambiguous moral codes.

The Buddha said "above all, loving kindness' . He also taught the practice of 'ahimsa' IE refraining from harming any living thing. Compassion is central to Buddhist teachings.

A mainstream view of Buddhism is that it is an atheistic philosophy, not a religion.

Jesus' parables, such as 'the good Samaritan' are also about compassion and right action.. "Turn the other cheek" 'is a literal admonition. So is

John:87 :So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."


In Buddhism there can be no enlightenment with living a compassionate life


The Eightfold Path

The Eightfold Path is composed of eight primary teachings that Buddhists follow and use in their everyday lives:




Four Noble Truths


  1. Unguarded sensory contact gives rise to craving and clinging to impermanent states and things,[3] which are dukkha,[10] "incapable of satisfying"[web 2] and painful.[web 2][3][4][5][6][web 3]
  2. This craving keeps us caught in samsara,[note 2] the endless cycle of repeated bhava ("becoming") and jāti (literally: "birth", interpreted as rebirth, but also as birth of the ego[11][12]), and the continued dukkha that comes with it.[note 3]
  3. There is a way to end this cycle,[13][note 4] namely by attaining nirvana, cessation of craving, whereafter birth and the accompanying dukkha will no longer arise again.[note 5][14]
  4. This can be accomplished by following the eightfold path,[note 1] confining our automatic responses to sensory contact by restraining oneself, cultivating discipline and wholesome states, and practicing mindfulness and dhyana (meditation).[15][16]
 

kandal

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,767
USA
#12
^^ The point I was trying to make is that Jesus didn't specifically speak against slavery, and Buddha didn't specifically speak against slavery either and was generally indifferent to caste system.
 
Last edited:
Oct 2018
1,209
Adelaide south Australia
#13
^^ The point I was trying to make is that Jesus didn't specifically speak against slavery, and Buddha didn't specifically speak against slavery either and was generally indifferent to caste system.
I think I covered that in a previous post.

That omission is only important to believers. As a non believer, I accept that the Buddha, Jesus, and Mohammed were simply men, albeit very good men, following the customs of the day..

As far as I'm aware, caste is not a part of Buddhist belief or practice. Of course, I may be wrong in terms of daily reality in India.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,644
Portugal
#14
Stick to the topic please, I asked about Muhammadthe prophet
That is confusing since your first post doesn’t have a single sentence and has a link to a video that isn’t about Muhammad, the prophet.

Posting links without any comment is often regarded as click bait and it is not the best option to initiate a conversation, even one that for some can be controversial.

In my opinion it is not a controversial theme or even a surprising one:

He was a man; At least for some period of his life he was healthy; He lived in a time period and a in a society were healthy man had slaves; Most probably he had slaves.
 
Likes: MamlukWarrior
Mar 2013
1,441
Escandinavia y Mesopotamia
#15
Muhammad Ali was not a great fighter. A good boxer surely, but certainly not a fighter. A mediocre semi-professional Thai-boxer or a mediocre Kyukoshin-Kai-karateka would easily smack and destroy Muhammad Ali's skull and legs in a street fight without rule. Without doubt.

Also that story is so mega funny. Muhammed Ali was born as Cassius Clay. Because he was not that much smart, he was tricked or thought that his name was a slave name, and thus he took the name Muhammad Ali and embraced the religion of peace, Islam. But here is the amusing details that the Parkinson-inflicted Muhammed Ali would be more shocked to hear: The Muslims' prophet Muhammad and his relative, Ali, were actually…. slave-traders.... ;) ... where they sold and bought black slaves :lol: ….. and even considered blacks to be half worth of whites :crying:

And Cassius Marcellus Clay (the politician) in which that not-so-smart boxer was named after was actually.... abolitionist. Not just an abolitionist, but a southern abolitionist who fought for the rights of blacks unlike Muhammad and Ali who saw blacks as half worth to whites and where they indulgenced themselves with buying and selling blacks, and where prophet Muhammed stated that Satan looked like a black person.

That reminds me of one another black Islamo-racist named Malcolm X. He was very angry so the greedy embraced him in jail and he became an intolerant preacher. When I was in gymnasium/High Scholl we never ever heard about this radical person, because when we had history about black movement rights in USA we focused on such a beloved human like Martin Luther King who included everybody. Malcolm X has not improved the rights for the blacks and his character is controversial that even ISIS-supporters praise him indeed these days. Martin Luther King in contrary is a beloved human today that even the whites in USA admire.





Yet we can see that There were not slaves in the earliest Islamic times.
That is not true. Muhammad actually saw no problem in mass-execution of non-Muslims and even had sexslaves:

Here Muhammad saw no problem in killing an entire tribe and taking their women as sexslaves:

"The people of (the tribe of) Quraiza agreed upon to accept the verdict of Sa`d. The Prophet (ﷺ) sent for him (Sa`d) and he came. The Prophet (ﷺ) said (to those people), "Get up for your chief or the best among you!" Sa`d sat beside the Prophet (ﷺ) and the Prophet (ﷺ) said (to him), "These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sa`d said, "So I give my judgment that their warriors should be killed and their women and children should be taken as captives." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You have judged according to the King's (Allah's) judgment.""

Source: Hadith - Book of Asking Permission - Sahih al-Bukhari - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)



Muhammed even ordered a subordinate to take another sexslave so Muhammed could take the most attractive sexslave for himself:

"Anas said “Captives were gathered at Khaibar. Dihyah came out and said “Apostle of Allaah(ﷺ) give me a slave girl from the captives.” He said “Go and take a slave girl. He took Safiyyah daughter of Huyayy. A man then came to the Prophet (ﷺ) and said “You gave Safiyyah daughter of Huyayy, chief lady of Quraizah and Al Nadir to Dihyah? This is according to the version of Ya’qub. Then the agreed version goes “she is worthy of you.” He said “call him along with her. When the Prophet (ﷺ) looked at her, he said to him “take another slave girl from the captives. The Prophet (ﷺ) then set her free and married her."

Source: Hadith - Book of Tribute, Spoils, and Rulership (Kitab Al-Kharaj, Wal-Fai' Wal-Imarah) - Sunan Abi Dawud - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)


And of course I picked al-Bukhari and Sahih because I know they are regarded as the most reliable among Muslims.






Various Arab Kingdoms in the 9th-11th century, later The Ottoman Empire and later Turkey were all societies that were admired in Europe for their liberal values.
That statement sounds like a camel urine mixed with milk just as when your “hero”(your own word) recommended it to drink.

Arab states in 800-1000 and/or the Ottoman Empire or Turkey were certainly not admired for their “liberal values”. They did not have them.

Liberalism is a concept that was developed in Europe around 1700 or so and is associated with names like John Locke and/or Montesquire, and is based on a philosophical idea that there should be no absolutism and no arbitrary imprisonment of citizens. It is law and order and transparent. Muslims states in 800-1000 did not have liberal values, and certainly not Ottoman Empire or Turkey as Ottoman Empire was a sort of monarchial Islamic theocracy with sovereign solely on a hook-nosed Sultan breaded in a sort of Islamo-qahbe system. Ottoman Empire is furthermore famous for the concept of "Ottoman Yoke" where suppression and rebellions were consistent in Balkan and where the Turks abducted children of its own Christian population to make them Islamic soldiers in that Devshirme-system, and where the "Eastern Question" annoyed the Turks as the Russians expanded constantly on the behalf of Ottoman Empire. For example, the Croatian Ivo Andric and the Albanian intellectual Muslim/atheist Ismail Kadaré have condemned the Ottoman era as an era that prevented Renaissaince in Balkan because of Turkish rule. And not to mention that Ottoman Empire ended its days with a worldwide famous genocide called Armenian Genocide which the Turks still deny very shameful and thus put a shame on their character and nation.

Turkey is neither “admired” for having “liberal values”. Turkey don't have it. Don’t confuse Kemal Ataturk’s (nationalistic) secularism as being “liberalism”. Turkey was founded after the Armenian Genocide as a nationalistic one-party-state that focused on the state rather than the rights of citizens, and even suppressed the Kurds’ rights. "Liberalism" is hardly a concept that many people would connect with Turkey.
 
Last edited:
#16
This video claims that he owned slave and was a white man.
.............. for once I'm speechless.

Maybe I should make a video, "The Earth is flat and George Washington was from Beijing".

Maybe somebody will use that as a source on Historum one day and my life's work will be complete.

Especially as the video will really be about Whales mating calls that people can relax and fall asleep to.
 
Feb 2019
62
Ariaca
#17
.............. for once I'm speechless.

Maybe I should make a video, "The Earth is flat and George Washington was from Beijing".

Maybe somebody will use that as a source on Historum one day and my life's work will be complete.

Especially as the video will really be about Whales mating calls that people can relax and fall asleep to.
He quoted Quaran and hadits as his source.
 
#19
He quoted Quaran and hadits as his source.
Did he own slaves, yes I'd be surprised if he didn't.

Everyone of standing and means had servants in Arabia, in fact they still do (not slaves but servants) its traditional to have helpers over there.

Was he white, I'm not going to answer such a ridiculous question where just a brief look at his history shows he's part of an established Meccan family ........ an Arabic Meccan family if that really needed clearing up.

I'm actually more interested in your reasons for these questions?
 

Haakbus

Ad Honorem
Aug 2013
3,765
United States
#20
I don't get the impression Buddha and Jesus really were challenging the political order. Most likely they saw slavery as part of the political order and not in and of itself a moral issue. If you're going to discuss the morality of slavery you might as well discuss the morality of inherited or absolute leadership.
 
Last edited:
Likes: bboomer

Similar History Discussions