{"id":153,"date":"2023-01-24T08:45:57","date_gmt":"2023-01-24T08:45:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/?p=153"},"modified":"2024-11-25T16:59:51","modified_gmt":"2024-11-25T16:59:51","slug":"legal-and-theological-dimensions-of-slavery-in-an-early-iba%e1%b8%8di-text","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/?p=153","title":{"rendered":"Legal and Theological Dimensions of Slavery in an Early\u00a0Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Text"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
Dr Omar Anchassi<\/a>, Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Bern on the SSC-funded Trajectories of Slavery in Islamicate Societies (TraSIS<\/a>) project.
We recommend that readers explore our other blog contributions which are linked here<\/a>.<\/em><\/summary>\n

<\/p>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n


Introduction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The text translated below, edited by the prolific Abdulrahman al-Salimi, is excerpted from an epistle authored by the Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b q\u0101\u1e0d\u012b<\/em> Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b M\u016bs\u0101 b. \u02bfAl\u012b (d. 237\/851) on behalf of the Omani Imam al-Muhann\u0101 b. Jayfar (r. 226\/841-237\/851) addressed to Mu\u02bf\u0101dh b. \u1e24arb (d.?).[1]<\/sup><\/a> According to al-Salimi, the text \u201cdiscusses a number of theological and legal questions that were currently preoccupying the people of Oman.\u201d[2]<\/sup><\/a> His edition is based on four manuscripts of the text found in various public and private libraries in Oman, all dated to the early 12th<\/sup>\/late 17th<\/sup> to early 18th<\/sup> centuries.[3]<\/sup><\/a>The excerpt focuses on slavery, though M\u016bs\u0101 b. \u02bfAl\u012b explores other issues, including the proper division of the spoils of war (referred to interchangeably as ghan\u012bma <\/em>and fay\u02be<\/em>), the conduct of jih\u0101d<\/em> (including which groups are eligible to pay the jizya<\/em> or poll-tax and which must either convert or be killed) and the division of Islam into various groups and factions after the Prophet\u2019s death, including the Mu\u1e25akkima\/Khaw\u0101rij.[4]<\/sup><\/a> For much of the text, as is common in early Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b literature, the author is keen to distinguish the Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012bs from more extreme groups of Khaw\u0101rij such as the Az\u0101riqa,[5]<\/sup><\/a> who regard it as lawful to enslave other Muslims and seize their property as booty.[6]<\/sup><\/a> As regards slavery, the main question in this text is whether it is lawful to purchase slaves of dubious origin, viz., persons seized by Muslim merchants in their travels, sold by their blood-relatives into slavery, stolen or usurped from their legitimate owners, or unlawfully exempted from the payment of the fifth (khums<\/em>) on the spoils of war.[7]<\/sup><\/a> M\u016bs\u0101 b. \u02bfAl\u012b adopts a cautious approach, deeming that in cases where there are serious causes for doubt about slaves\u2019 origins their purchase is best avoided. On the other hand, he eschews the overly abstemious reluctance to purchase slaves whose origins are not known with certainty; had this approach been correct, he writes, then the Prophet would not have accepted the slave-concubine M\u0101riya al-Qib\u1e6diyya (d. 13\/637) as a gift without further enquiry. I have sought in the footnotes to place the legal doctrines mentioned in the text in broader context, as when e.g., M\u016bs\u0101 b. \u02bfAl\u012b adopts the view that cavalrymen are entitled to two shares of the booty (as opposed to one for infantry), a doctrine that was rejected by the overwhelming majority of early Sunn\u012b jurists, who appeal to the conduct of early caliphs in support of their view. I also refer to the modern scholarly literature where I feel it might help illuminate the point in question, and have presented the text\u2019s original pagination in square brackets.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chapter on Slaves<\/strong> (B\u0101b al-raq\u012bq<\/em>)<\/strong>[8]<\/sup><\/a><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

[151<\/strong>] <\/strong>As for what you have mentioned regarding slaves, [viz.] that the natural state (al-a\u1e63l<\/em>) of human beings is freedom\u2014slavery being an adventitious condition (al-riqq<\/em> \u1e25adath<\/em>)[9]<\/sup><\/a>\u2014and that the Sunna<\/em> is that they be enslaved as part of the booty (ghan\u012bma<\/em>), the legal basis of booty being the summons to Islam. If [those summoned to] Islam refuse it, they are fought, and their lives and their property are forfeit. If any such [persons or property] are seized in war, they belong to the booty (fay\u02be<\/em>).[10]<\/sup><\/a> Any view opposing this is falsehood (b\u0101\u1e6dil<\/em>). You mentioned that some groups enter non-Muslim territory (bil\u0101d al-\u02bfaduww<\/em>) as merchants and [152<\/strong>] seize the inhabitants as slaves and cheat them out of their property,[11]<\/sup><\/a> removing them from their lands and trafficking in them, just as non-Muslims steal from each other, when God has prohibited theft (al-sariqa<\/em>), and the inhabitants are free persons (a\u1e25r\u0101r<\/em>) in their lands. I have understood what you have stated, and what concerns you therein. I shall explain it to you, God willing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for what you have mentioned regarding the natural state of human beings as freedom, and that the Sunna<\/em> has been to summon polytheists (ahl al-shirk<\/em>) to Islam\u2014if they refuse it, they are fought and enslaved and the fifth (khums<\/em>) is deducted therefrom, the rest becoming lawful to sell: then it is as you have said (fa-dh\u0101lika ka-dh\u0101lik<\/em>).[12]<\/sup><\/a>This is for non-Arabs (\u02bfajam<\/em>) specifically, as Arabs are not to be enslaved: nothing is accepted from the latter but Islam or death and the seizure of their property, nor are their children (dhar\u0101r\u012b<\/em>) to be enslaved.[13]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for what you have mentioned regarding merchants and their purchasing goods from those who have stolen them, and that it is unlawful to possess stolen goods or to purchase them from those who have stolen them: then it is as you have said, assuming the possessor knows this to be the case. Additionally, reports (athar<\/em>)[14]<\/sup><\/a> attest to the general lawfulness of anything purchased from Muslim markets (asw\u0101q ahl al-sal\u0101<\/em>), except what is specifically known to be prohibited, such as items obtained by means of theft, treachery, usurpation or usury; otherwise, they are lawful. Since it is established that it is generally lawful to purchase items from Muslim markets, we hold that the purchase of slaves therefrom is permissible (j\u0101\u02beiz<\/em>), unless it is known that they have been stolen or usurped, or that they feature any other element of unlawfulness that renders them unlawful, making their purchase likewise unlawful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Know that the Sunna<\/em> has affirmed that if the polytheists wage war upon one another and enslave one another, then their purchase is lawful, according to the jurists. If their blood-relatives deceive each other and sell one another into slavery, or if Muslims take such slaves as booty, or usurp non-Muslim slaves and subsequently sell them, then none of this is permissible.[15]<\/sup><\/a> As for slaves who claim that they were thus seized unlawfully prior to their sale, we prefer (m\u0101 nu\u1e25ibb<\/em>) that one not purchase them. As for slaves not known to have been obtained by these unlawful means, there is no harm (l\u0101 ba\u02bes<\/em>) in purchasing them. I shall inform you of something which will silence your doubts in this regard: do you see (a-ra\u02beayta<\/em>) that if a man enters a Muslim market and purchases an item or a slave therein which has been stolen or usurped, and he knows nothing of this and is not subsequently informed of it\u2014is he culpable for that, or not?[16]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[153<\/strong>] Thus, it follows that ignorance of such things is to be overlooked, and people are excused (ma\u02bf<\/a>dh\u016br\u016bn<\/em>) until [contrary] information reaches them. If such new information reaches them, they are no longer excused. [The purchase of] slaves is likewise: so, let your heart be at peace if you purchase them from Muslim markets, unless you have knowledge that their sale is unlawful in any of the ways I have mentioned in this letter. There is no might save in God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It has reached us that certain kings (mul\u016bk<\/em>)[17]<\/sup><\/a> gifted the Prophet\u2014may God\u2019s mercy and peace be upon him\u2014a Coptic slave-concubine (j\u0101riya<\/em>), with whom he\u2014may God\u2019s mercy and peace be upon him\u2014had intercourse. She bore him two sons, who subsequently died.[18]<\/sup><\/a> Had their purchase not been lawful in the manner I have described [viz. without knowledge of their previous condition], then the Prophet\u2014may God\u2019s mercy and peace be upon him\u2014would not have accepted the slave-concubine until he knew exactly how she came to be enslaved, and whether the fifth had been deducted as required: and for you and us both there is a goodly example (uswa \u1e25asana<\/em>) in the Prophet [Q. 33:21], may God\u2019s mercy and peace be upon him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You have mentioned a group of people who accepted you among their ranks, and then questioned you regarding my doctrine on fighting those who differ with us: are they to terminate their fight?[19]<\/sup><\/a> And should we fight those who do not fight us, or leave them be? And if we fight them, is their property to be seized as booty?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Know that that which you have asked about\u2014which this people have asked of you\u2014is something which the Umma<\/em>has split into factions over, their views diverging and each group claiming that it alone possesses the truth on the matter, to which they have greater claim than their rivals. This [?] pertains to the Mu\u1e25akkima specifically, after the people of Nahraw\u0101n\u2014may God have mercy on them\u2014and the people of al-Nukhayla.[20]<\/sup><\/a> They [the Mu\u1e25akkima] are the group who reproached \u02bfAl\u012b b. Ab\u012b \u1e6c\u0101lib for the appointment of the two arbiters[21]<\/sup><\/a> over an affair for which God was the sole arbiter, without delegating anybody else thereto, saying, may He be glorified and exalted, \u201cFight the group that transgress until they submit to the ordinance of God\u201d (Q. 49:9). \u02bfAl\u012b turned to this lowly world and was pleased with it, loving kingship, contradicting the Book of God through his actions. Those who responded to God\u2019s call by taking up arms against him were thus rendered safe [from divine punishment], casting him off and taking God for their sole arbiter, despising the [mere] judgement of men.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After the people of Nahraw\u0101n, the Khaw\u0101rij al-Mu\u1e25akkima<\/em> did not cease calling to a single cause (da\u02bfwa<\/em>) and way (shir\u02bfa<\/em>). Those who took up arms among them did not disregard the virtues of those who failed to do so and emigrate from them; nor did they denounce the sinful (who opposed them among) the Ahl al-Qibla<\/em>[22]<\/sup><\/a> as polytheists; nor did they treat them like those who did not share their doctrine, and nor did they permit the enslavement of their children and the seizure of their property as booty.[23]<\/sup><\/a> How could they permit enslaving them or seizing their property as booty, when they intermarried [154<\/strong>] and inherited from each other? They did not cease to cleave to this way\u2014God have mercy upon them\u2014when God sent al-Mird\u0101s[24]<\/sup><\/a>\u2014God have mercy upon him\u2014whose conduct was as I have described to you, until he and his companions were killed\u2014may God be pleased with them. Then N\u0101fi\u02bf b. al-Azraq[25]<\/sup><\/a>emerged, misguided and misguiding others; he sought to emigrate from others, denouncing all who opposed him from the Ahl al-Qibla<\/em> as polytheists, permitting the enslavement of their children, the seizing of their property as booty and the shedding of their blood without due cause. They did not excuse anyone from taking up arms, man or woman, free or enslaved. He shunned those who agreed with his doctrine while dawdling in the taking up of arms as polytheists, permitting that they be treated like those who had rejected his doctrine. Truly, he uttered an enormity, and committed a manifest sin, so the Muslims abandoned him, and cleaved to what their forbears (asl\u0101f<\/em>) and im\u0101m<\/em>s held to: they did not permit what God and His Prophet had made unlawful, nor did they prohibit what God and His Prophet made licit. This is the view of the party of justice (ahl al-\u02bfadl<\/em>) on the matter you asked about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All people are of two kinds: stubborn rejectors (j\u0101\u1e25id munkir mukhadhdhib<\/em>) and affirming believers (muqirr \u02bf\u0101rif mu\u1e63addiq<\/em>). Stubborn rejectors are polytheists (ahl al-shirk<\/em>), including idolators and People of the Book.[26]<\/sup><\/a> These are to be summoned to Islam; whoever among them adopts it is accepted [among us] accordingly.[27]<\/sup><\/a> Whoever refuses to do so is asked to pay the poll-tax; if they pay the poll-tax humbly out of hand, as God instructs [Q. 9:29], then this is accepted of them, and the sword is raised from them. If they refuse to render the poll-tax, they are fought; if they are defeated, their fighting men are killed and their children are enslaved, and their property is seized as booty for the Muslims. The booty is divided into five portions, four going to the conquering army (with two shares to cavalrymen and one to infantry),[28]<\/sup><\/a> and the remaining share is divided into four parts: a share for the Prophet and for [his] relatives, another for orphans, another for the needy, and the final share for wayfarers.[29]<\/sup><\/a> Thus is the booty to be divided, following your request in your letter. As for Arab polytheists (ahl al-shirk<\/em>), either they accept Islam, or they are killed.[30]<\/sup><\/a> As for the people of profession [i.e., of faith], knowledge and belief (ahl al-iqr\u0101r wa-l-ma\u02bfrifa wa-l-ta\u1e63d\u012bq<\/em>), they are of two types: a group who prove truthful in their profession [of faith], and who confirm their beliefs with their actions\u2014such are truly believers, to whom firm allegiance (al-wal\u0101ya al-th\u0101bita<\/em>) is owed here and hereafter.[31]<\/sup><\/a> Another group opposes [us], reneges, and goes astray, dishonouring their agreements, permitting what God has forbidden and forbidding what He has permitted and forsaking the path of the believers [Q. 4:115]. Among them are those who forsake that which they took a covenant with God to uphold, and others who are pleased with the deeds of the dissolute and profess allegiance to them; they profess faith while cleaving to disobedience. Among them are those who judge by other than what God has revealed [Q. 5:44] and cause God\u2019s limits to be neglected (\u02bfa\u1e6d\u1e6dala \u1e25ud\u016bd All\u0101h<\/em>), undertaking unlawful deeds and adopting this as their religion and summoning others to it. Such are people of our qibla<\/em>: we permit toward them that which the Qur\u02be\u0101n permits and forbid toward them that which it forbids. God said of such people, \u201cWavering, neither belonging to one, nor the other\u201d [Q. 4:143]. That is, neither belonging to the category of believers in name or in terms of due reward, nor to the polytheists by name [155<\/strong>] or judgement (al-ism wa-l-\u1e25ukm<\/em>)[32]<\/sup><\/a>: they are despotic rulers and transgressing tyrants. They are our enemies: we abhor them, fight them and do not leave them at peace; [we] forsake and disavow them, and permit taking up the sword (al-khur\u016bj<\/em>) against them. They are rebels, so we fight them until they submit to the ordinance of God [Q. 49:9]. We do not see it as proper to neglect rising up against them unless we are preoccupied with another enemy. We do not commence fighting them until we summon them to return to the truth, to renounce falsehood and tyranny and to return to justice. If they accept [our summons] and return to the truth, we accept them accordingly. If they reject [it], we invite God to judge between us [by fighting them], and He is the best of judges [Q. 95:8]. If we triumph over them, we do not permit enslaving their children or seizing their property as booty; we merely demand our lawful claims (\u1e25uq\u016bq<\/em>) from them, for God has neither permitted enslaving their children nor seizing their property as booty. He only permitted that their blood be shed and that they be fought until they return to the ordinance of God. This is our doctrine concerning the people of our qibla<\/em>; we do not charge a person with the wrongdoings of their associate (wal\u012b<\/em>), nor a neighbour for their neighbour, nor a parent for their child, a child for their parent, nor a free person for a slave, nor a slave for a free person, nor a woman for a man, nor a man for a woman; we do not frighten those who enjoy [rightful] safety, nor are we highwaymen; nor do we ask those in our obedience to transgress against those beyond our power, nor do we recruit those who profess our doctrine, but idly. We only recruit those awakened by decisive evidence.[33]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is our doctrine and our religion which we offer to God; it is to this that we summon those who oppose us, seeking no alternative; nor do we seek change therefrom. We have manifest proof and clear arguments for this from the Book [i.e., the Qur\u02be\u0101n] which it is not possible to elaborate in the present letter, which has already become lengthy; nor are all words suited to being committed to writing. In subsequent meetings, there is clarity for the blind. In God is our facility and rightful guidance; we ask Him to seal our lives with His forgiveness and goodly pleasure, and that He bless our knowledge, and that He bring us closer to Him with every increase in knowledge: for our Lord is over all things powerful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/sup><\/a> Al-Salimi transliterates the names as Muhann\u0101\u02be and Ma\u02bf\u0101dh, but I prefer Muhann\u0101 and Mu\u02bf\u0101dh. For the vocalisation Muhann\u0101, see e.g., Adam R. Gaiser, Muslims, Scholars, Soldiers: The Origin and Elaboration of the Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Im\u0101mate Traditions <\/em>(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 100, 108; Abdulrahman al-Salimi, Ib\u0101\u1e0dism East of Mesopotamia: Early Islamic Iran, Central Asia and India<\/em>(Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2016), 88. For the vocalisation Mu\u02bf\u0101dh, see ibid., 88. I thank Ashraf Hassan for discussing this point with me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/sup><\/a> Abdulrahman al-Salimi, \u201cIntroduction,\u201d in Ibadi Texts in Oman from the 3rd\/9th Century<\/em>, ed. Abdulrahman al-Salimi (Leiden: Brill, 2022), 1-30 (at 10).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[3]<\/sup><\/a> Ibid., 28.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[4]<\/sup><\/a> The Mu\u1e25akkima are the group who rebelled against the Caliph \u02bfAl\u012b (r. 35\/656-40\/661), refusing to accept his submission to arbitration (ta\u1e25k\u012bm<\/em>) in his struggle against Mu\u02bf\u0101wiya (r. 41\/661-60\/680), insisting that \u201cGod had made His intentions clear regarding the likes of Mu\u02bf\u0101wiya: he should be fought, using the terminology of Q 49:9, until he \u201creturned to the ordinance (amr<\/em>) of God\u201d.\u201d The name Mu\u1e25akkima derives from their slogan, \u201cno judgement but God\u2019s\u201d (l\u0101 \u1e25ukm ill\u0101 li-ll\u0101h<\/em>). See Adam R. Gaiser, \u201cKh\u0101rij\u012bs,\u201d Encyclopaedia of Islam: THREE<\/em>, accessed 12\/12\/2022 <http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1163\/1573-3912_ei3_COM_35487>. See also idem, Shur\u0101t Legends, Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Identities: Martyrdom, Asceticism, and the Making of an Early Islamic Community<\/em> (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2016), 126-27. On the origins of Ib\u0101\u1e0dism and its relationship to the early Mu\u1e25akkima, see also John C. Wilkinson, Ib\u00e2\u1e0dism: Origins and Early Development in Oman<\/em> (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 122-26.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[5]<\/sup><\/a> \u201cThe Az\u0101riqa\u2026required that all believers perform hijra<\/em> to the Azraq\u012b camp and wage war on the sect\u2019s opponents. The practice of taqiyya<\/em> was emphatically rejected; armchair sympathizers who abstained from hijra<\/em> (i.e., the so-called qa\u02bfada<\/em>, or \u201csitters\u201d) were to be regarded as outright unbelievers, from whom one must dissociate in precisely the way one should dissociate from all opponents: intermarriage was forbidden, relationships of inheritance were severed, and property held in trust was liable to appropriation.\u201d See Keith Lewinstein, \u201cAz\u0101riqa,\u201d Encyclopaedia of Islam: THREE<\/em>, accessed 13\/12\/2022 <http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1163\/1573-3912_ei3_COM_0171>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[6]<\/sup><\/a> The refusal to enslave other Muslims and seize their property as booty is one of the key points distinguishing Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012bs from more exclusivist groups among the Khaw\u0101rij. See for example S\u0101lim b. Dhakw\u0101n (fl. 2nd<\/sup>\/8th<\/sup> C.), The Epistle of S\u0101lim b. Dhakw\u0101n<\/em>, ed. and trans. Patricia Crone and Fritz Zimmermann (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 73, 91, 101, 107, 109, 113, 133.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[7]<\/sup><\/a> On Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b involvement in the slave trade (albeit in a non-Omani context), see e.g., E. Savage, \u201cBerbers and Blacks: Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Slave Traffic in Eighth-Century North Africa,\u201d The Journal of African History<\/em> 33 (1992), 351-68; J.H. van Riel, \u201cThe Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Traders of Bil\u0101d al-S\u016bd\u0101n<\/em>,\u201d MA dissertation, American University of Cairo (2012), 41-42, 54; Adam Gaiser, \u201cSlaves and Silver across the Strait of Gibraltar: Politics and Trade between Umayyad Iberia and Kh\u0101rijite North Africa,\u201d Medieval Encounters<\/em> 19 (2013), 41-70.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[8]<\/sup><\/a> Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b M\u016bs\u0101 b. \u02bfAl\u012b, \u201cEpistle of Imam al-Muhann\u0101\u02be b. Jayfar to Ma\u02bf\u0101dh b. \u1e24arb,\u201d in Ibadi Texts<\/em>, 138-56 (at 151-55).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[9]<\/sup><\/a> The notion that the ordinary state of humans is freedom is widely attested in Islamic legal texts. On this point, see Jonathan A. C. Brown, Slavery and Islam<\/em> (Oxford: Oneworld, 2020), 107-8. The text translated here considerably predates the earliest explicit formulation of the principle (viz. al-a\u1e63l huwa al-\u1e25urriya<\/em>) that Brown was able to find, in the work of the \u1e24anaf\u012b jurist al-Ja\u1e63\u1e63\u0101\u1e63 (d. 370\/981): see ibid., 423 fn. 81. This principle became an important legal maxim in questions such as the status of foundlings (sing. laq\u012b\u1e6d<\/em>). The early Sunn\u012b jurist Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 318\/930) writes, in this vein, that \u201cGod\u2026created Adam and secured him against being owned by others, and similarly his wife Eve: and all are descended from them. Thus, all the children of Adam are free, save those of the children of the polytheists (awl\u0101d al-mushrik\u012bn<\/em>) who fall into captivity…\u201d See Ibn al-Mundhir, Kit\u0101b al-Awsa\u1e6d min al-sunan wa-l-ijm\u0101\u02bf<\/a> wa-l-ikhtil\u0101f<\/em>, ed. Kh\u0101lid Ibr\u0101h\u012bm al-Sayyid et al<\/em>., 15 vols. (al-Fayy\u016bm: D\u0101r al-Fal\u0101\u1e25, 1431\/2010), 11:428. See also the discussion in Irene Schneider, \u201cFreedom and Slavery in Early Islamic Time (1st<\/sup>\/7th<\/sup> and 2nd<\/sup>\/8th<\/sup> Centuries),\u201d al-Qan\u1e6dara<\/em> 28 (2007), 353-82 (at 355-57).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[10]<\/sup><\/a> The terms ghan\u012bma<\/em> and fay\u02be<\/em> are used interchangeably in this text, but many jurists distinguished between them. Ghan\u012bma<\/em> was understood by some as property seized by force and fay\u02be <\/em>(referred to in Q. 59:7) as that taken by treaty; alternatively, they referred to moveable and landed property, respectively. See Roy Mottahedeh, \u201cQur\u02be\u0101nic commentary on the verse of khums<\/em> (al-Anf\u0101l VIII:41),\u201d in Sayyids and Sharifs in Muslim Societies: The Living Links to the Prophet<\/em>, ed. Morimoto Kazuo (Oxford: Routledge, 2012), 37-48 (at 37). See also the discussion in al-\u1e6cabar\u012b (d. 310\/923), J\u0101mi\u02bf al-bay\u0101n \u02bfan ta\u02bew\u012bl ayy al-Qur\u02be\u0101n<\/em>, ed. \u02bfAbd All\u0101h b. \u02bfAbd al-Mu\u1e25sin al-Turk\u012b et al.<\/em>, 26 vols. (Cairo: Hijr, 1322\/2001), 11:184-87. The Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b H\u016bd b. Mu\u1e25akkam (d. 280\/893 or 290\/903) does not distinguish the terms, though he mentions the unusual view of al-\u1e24asan al-Ba\u1e63r\u012b (d. 110\/728) that fay\u02be<\/em> refers to the poll-tax, specifically: see H\u016bd b. Mu\u1e25akkam, Tafs\u012br Kit\u0101b All\u0101h al-\u02bfAz\u012bz<\/em>, ed. Bal\u1e25\u0101j b. Sa\u02bf\u012bd Shar\u012bf\u012b, 4 vols. (Beirut: D\u0101r al-Gharb al-Isl\u0101m\u012b, 1990), 2:90-94; 4:321-23.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[11]<\/sup><\/a> Here I have adopted a variant reading noted by al-Salimi in his edition (fn. 138), choosing \u201censlave them\u201d (yastariqq\u016bnahim<\/em><\/em>) in preference to \u201csteal from them\u201d (yasruq\u016bnahum<\/em><\/em>), as this makes more sense in the context, and given the later discussion of the lawfulness of purchasing slaves obtained by dubious means.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[12]<\/sup><\/a> On the longstanding controversy on doubts about the deduction of the fifth and the lawfulness of the purchase of slaves, see Brown, Slavery and Islam<\/em>, 113-14.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[13]<\/sup><\/a> A minority of early jurists prohibited the enslavement of Arabs. See the discussion in Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728\/1328), Majm\u016b\u02bfat al-fat\u0101w\u0101<\/em>, ed. \u02bf\u0100mir al-Jazz\u0101r and Anwar al-B\u0101z, 37 vols. (al-Man\u1e63\u016bra: D\u0101r al-Waf\u0101\u02be, 1418\/1997), 31:219-20 (where this view is attributed to the Caliph \u02bfUmar and a number of early jurists). For a discussion of the relevant reports, see Ab\u016b Bakr al-Bayhaq\u012b (d. 458\/1066), al-Sunan al-kubr\u0101<\/em>, ed. Mu\u1e25ammad \u02bfAbd al-Q\u0101dir \u02bfA\u1e6d\u0101, 11 vols. (Beirut: D\u0101r al-Kutub al-\u02bfIlmiyya, 1424\/2003), 9:125-26.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[14]<\/sup><\/a> One gets the sense that references to athar<\/em> and Sunna<\/em> in this text are not concerned with Prophetic \u1e25ad\u012bth<\/em> as such, but earlier notions of communal norms, Schacht\u2019s \u201cliving tradition.\u201d For a discussion of the \u201cmadhhabization\u201d of Ib\u0101\u1e0dism and its late adoption of the early Sunn\u012b commitment to the probativeness of \u1e25ad\u012bth<\/em> reports, see Wilkinson, Ib\u00e2\u1e0dism: Origins and Early Development<\/em>, 377-78, 413-17. See also idem, Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b \u1e24ad\u012bth: An Essay on Normalization,\u201d Der Islam<\/em> 62 (1985), 231-59; Adam Gaiser, \u201c\u201cBallaghan\u0101 \u02bfan an-Nab\u012b<\/em>: Early Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Understandings of Sunna<\/em> and Siyar<\/em>, \u0100th\u0101r<\/em> and Nasab<\/em>,\u201d Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies<\/em> 83 (2020), 437-48.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[15]<\/sup><\/a> On the juristic debate on purchasing non-Muslims enslaved by their blood-relatives in the D\u0101r al-\u1e24arb<\/em>, see Brown, Slavery and Islam<\/em>, 463 fn. 52.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[16]<\/sup><\/a> A rhetorical question: clearly, he is not culpable in such a case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[17]<\/sup><\/a> In early sources such as Ibn Sa\u02bfd (d. 230\/845) and al-\u1e6cabar\u012b, it is the Muqawqis of Egypt who gifts M\u0101riya al-Qib\u1e6diyya to the Prophet in the year 6 or 7\/627-9. See Frants Buhl, \u201cM\u0101riya,\u201d Encyclopaedia of Islam: Second Edition<\/em>, accessed 12\/12\/2022 <http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1163\/1573-3912_islam_SIM_4968>. In the Kit\u0101b al-Maq\u0101l\u0101t<\/em> attributed to Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b al-Jubb\u0101\u02be\u012b (d. 303\/915-6), the Muqawqis is similarly referred to as a \u201cking\u201d (malik<\/em>) and is conflated with the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, reportedly meeting with Ab\u016b Sufy\u0101n (d. between 31\/651 and 33\/653) to ask him about the Prophet and his mission (in this account, it is the visit of Ab\u016b Sufy\u0101n that occasions the gift of M\u0101riya to the Prophet). See al-Jubb\u0101\u02be\u012b, Kit\u0101b al-Maq\u0101l\u0101t<\/em>, ed. \u00d6zkan \u015eim\u015fek, A. \u0130skender Sar\u0131ca, and Yusuf Ar\u0131kaner (Istanbul: End\u00fcl\u00fcs, 2020), 330-31.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[18]<\/sup><\/a> Early sources mention only one son born to M\u0101riya, Ibr\u0101h\u012bm (d. 10\/632).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[19]<\/sup><\/a> An yaq\u1e0d\u016b m\u0101 q\u0101tal\u016b \u02bfalayhi<\/em>: I thank Ashraf Hassan for his help with understanding this phrase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[20]<\/sup><\/a> At Nahraw\u0101n (38\/658), \u02bfAl\u012b crushed the Mu\u1e25akkima. Al-Nukhayla was the site of a rising against Mu\u02bf\u0101wiya in 41\/661 by Mu\u1e25akkima deserters from Nahraw\u0101n who sought to atone for their previous flight. As in Nahraw\u0101n, the rebels were slaughtered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[21]<\/sup><\/a> Namely, \u02bfAmr b. al-\u02bf\u0100\u1e63 (d. c. 42\/663) and Ab\u016b M\u016bs\u0101 al-Ash\u02bfar\u012b (d. c. 42\/662-3). The arbitration took place at \u1e62iff\u012bn in 37\/657.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[22]<\/sup><\/a> In Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b parlance, the Ahl al-Qibla<\/em> includes non-Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Muslims who are guilty of kufr al-ni\u02bfma<\/em>, but not shirk<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[23]<\/sup><\/a> This passage is meant to condemn the Az\u0101riqa and other groups among the Khaw\u0101rij for their extremism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[24]<\/sup><\/a> Ab\u016b Bil\u0101l Mird\u0101s b. Udayya (d. 61\/680-1), \u201ca hero of the early shur\u0101t<\/em> and of later Kh\u0101rijite groups (as well as the Ib\u0101\u1e0diyya) \u2026from Basra, Ab\u016b Bil\u0101l was said to have rebelled with forty of his followers\u2026[his] revolt became the focal point for sh\u0101r\u012b<\/em> and later Kh\u0101rijite identities.\u201d Adam R. Gaiser, Sectarianism in Islam: The Umma Divided<\/em> (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023), 64-65. See also Giorgio Levi Della Vida, \u201cMird\u0101s b. Udayya,\u201d Encyclopaedia of Islam: Second Edition<\/em>, accessed 13\/12\/2022 <http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1163\/1573-3912_islam_SIM_5221>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[25]<\/sup><\/a> N\u0101fi\u02bf b. al-Azraq (d. 65\/685), eponym of the Az\u0101riqa faction of the Khaw\u0101rij, killed in action against Zubayrid forces. See Keith Lewinstein, \u201cAz\u0101riqa,\u201d Encyclopaedia of Islam: THREE<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[26]<\/sup><\/a> Both idolators (\u02bfabadat al-awth\u0101n<\/em>) and People of the Book are guilty of polytheism, as in Q. 9:30-31. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

[27]<\/sup><\/a> The author thus accepts the view (subject to disagreement among the jurists) that non-Muslims other than Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians are eligible to pay the poll-tax. See Yohanan Friedmann, Tolerance and Coercion in Islam: Interfaith Relations in the Muslim Tradition<\/em> (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 77-80.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[28]<\/sup><\/a> Early jurists disagreed on whether cavalrymen were entitled to two or three shares of the booty, as opposed to the single share of infantrymen. The latter was the view of the overwhelming majority of Sunn\u012b jurists; the former was only supported by Ab\u016b \u1e24an\u012bfa (d. 150\/767). On this point, Ibn al-Mundhir writes, \u201cWe know of nobody who has disagreed with this [latter] view save al-Nu\u02bfm\u0101n, who has thereby opposed the Sunna<\/em> and how it has been understood by scholars past and present\u2026[even] his disciples (a\u1e63\u1e25\u0101b<\/em>) disagreed with him; his view is unique to him and has been forsaken by everybody else (munfaridan<\/em> mahj\u016bran<\/em>)\u201d. See Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Ishr\u0101f \u02bfal\u0101 madh\u0101hib al-\u02bf<\/a>ulam\u0101\u02be<\/em>, ed. \u1e62agh\u012br A\u1e25mad al-An\u1e63\u0101r\u012b, 10 vols. (Ras Al Khaimah: Maktabat Makka al-Thaq\u0101fiyya, 1425\/2004), 4:99-100. See also al-Q\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Ab\u016b Y\u016bsuf (d. 182\/798) al-Radd \u02bfal\u0101 Siyar al-Awz\u0101\u02bf\u012b<\/em>, ed. Ab\u016b l-Waf\u0101\u02be al-Afgh\u0101n\u012b (Hyderabad: Lajnat I\u1e25y\u0101\u02be al-Ma\u02bf\u0101rif al-Nu\u02bfm\u0101niyya, 1357\/1938), 17-21.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[29]<\/sup><\/a> On the various views on division of the booty and the fifth, in particular, see Mottahedeh, \u201cQur\u02be\u0101nic commentary,\u201d 38-42; al-\u1e6cabar\u012b, J\u0101mi\u02bf al-bay\u0101n<\/em>, 11:187-200.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[30]<\/sup><\/a> Jurists disagreed on whether Arab pagans were eligible to pay the poll-tax or whether they must convert or be killed. See Friedmann, Tolerance and Coercion<\/em>, 76-78. See also W\u0101\u02beil b. Ayy\u016bb al-\u1e24a\u1e0dram\u012b (d. c. 190\/806), Nasab al-Isl\u0101m: S\u012brat al-Im\u0101m Ab\u012b Ayy\u016bb W\u0101\u02beil b. Ayy\u016bb al-\u1e24a\u1e0dram\u012b<\/em>, ed. \u02bf\u0100yida bt. Mu\u1e25ammad al-Fihriyya (Muscat: Dh\u0101kirat \u02bfUm\u0101n, 1438\/2018), 82-83 (where polytheist, i.e., pagan Arabs must convert or be killed).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[31]<\/sup><\/a> On wal\u0101ya<\/em> and bar\u0101\u02bea<\/em> (disavowal) in early Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b fiqh<\/em>, see Ersilia Francesca, \u201cIb\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Law and Jurisprudence,\u201d The<\/em> Muslim World<\/em> 105 (2015), 209-23 (at 211-12).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[32]<\/sup><\/a> That is, al-asm\u0101\u02be wa-l-a\u1e25k\u0101m<\/em>, the theological category concerned with the evaluation of persons and their status as believers (or otherwise). See Naser Gozashteh, trans. Suheyl Umar, \u201cal-Asm\u0101\u02be wa al-a\u1e25k\u0101m,\u201d Encyclopaedia Islamica<\/em>, accessed 12\/12\/2022 <http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1163\/1875-9831_isla_SIM_0310>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[33]<\/sup><\/a> Wa-l\u0101 nunabbih n\u0101\u02beiman aqarra bi-l-\u02bfadl \u02bfan marqadihi ill\u0101 mustath\u0101ran bi-bayyinat \u02bfadl<\/em>: lit., \u201cnor do we warn the sleeping who confess [our doctrine of] justice [lazily] from their beds; [we] only [warn] those who [respond] enthusiastically to the testimony of a just witness.\u201d I wish to thank Ovamir Anjum for his help with understanding this phrase.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Introduction The text translated below, edited by the prolific Abdulrahman al-Salimi, is excerpted from an epistle authored by the Ib\u0101\u1e0d\u012b q\u0101\u1e0d\u012b Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b M\u016bs\u0101 b. \u02bfAl\u012b (d. 237\/851) on behalf of the Omani Imam al-Muhann\u0101 b. Jayfar (r. 226\/841-237\/851) addressed to Mu\u02bf\u0101dh b. \u1e24arb (d.?).[1] According to al-Salimi, the text \u201cdiscusses a number of theological and legal questions that were currently preoccupying the people of Oman.\u201d[2] His edition is based on four manuscripts of the text found in various public and private libraries in…<\/p>\n

Read More Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_eb_attr":"","iawp_total_views":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-153","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/153","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=153"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/153\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":357,"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/153\/revisions\/357"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=153"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=153"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trasisblog.unibe.ch\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=153"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}