The Reformative Method and Legislative Wisdom: A Comprehensive Scholarly Response to the Claim of Slavery in Islam

In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate. All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of all worlds, and may blessings and peace be upon the noblest of the messengers.

To proceed:

Among the questions that are frequently raised in the modern age, and that occupy a wide space in contemporary discussions about Islam, is the following: “How can Islam allow slavery while claiming to be a religion of justice and mercy? Does enslaving a human being not contradict human dignity and freedom, which are fundamental rights? How can Islam permit concubinage with female slaves when they do not possess full freedom of choice? Why did Islam not prohibit slavery outright, just as it prohibited wine and usury? Is this not a contradiction of the principles of justice and human dignity?”

This is a question that deserves a balanced and detailed scholarly answer—one that reveals the true nature of the Islamic approach to historical reality and its wise, gradual method of reform.

However, although this question may appear legitimate and logical on the surface, and although it reflects an understandable sensitivity toward the issue of slavery in our present age, it is in fact based on confused concepts and inconsistent standards in understanding history, legislation, and social reform. A superficial approach that judges historical legal systems by the standards of the modern age—without a deep understanding of context, wisdom, methodology, and the realistic alternatives available—inevitably leads to flawed judgments and unfair evaluations that ignore historical realities and legislative wisdom.

The First Error: The Fallacy of Judging Outside the Historical and Social Context

The first thing we notice about this claim is that it is based on a logical fallacy known as “judging outside the context.” It evaluates Islam’s stance on slavery using modern values and standards, while completely ignoring the historical, social, and economic context in which Islam emerged, as well as the complex reality that prevailed at the time.

First: Slavery as a Global System Before Islam

Slavery was not an Islamic invention, nor an Arab innovation. Rather, it was a deeply entrenched global system present in all civilizations, cultures, and empires throughout history. Slavery formed the backbone of the economy in major empires—from Rome to Persia, from China to India. Prisoners of war were either killed or enslaved, with no regard for their humanity or dignity.

In the Roman Empire, which is often regarded as the cradle of law and Western civilization, slaves were treated as objects and property rather than as human beings. They were bought, sold, tortured, and killed without accountability or oversight. The Roman Colosseum witnessed the killing of thousands of slaves for entertainment, and the number of slaves in Rome was estimated to be in the millions. Roman law granted the master the right of life and death over his slave.

In ancient Greece, the birthplace of philosophy and democracy, Aristotle—the revered philosopher still studied in universities today—believed that some people were slaves by nature and that slavery was a natural and necessary system for society. Athenian democracy itself rested on the labor of slaves, who had no political or social rights whatsoever.

In Persian civilization, slavery systems were complex and varied, and slaves were used in all areas of life, from agriculture to domestic service to the military. In ancient China, slavery was an inseparable part of the social system, and slaves were sold in markets like commodities.

Second: The Situation in the Arabian Peninsula Before Islam

In the Arabian Peninsula before Islam, slaves were in some of the worst conditions imaginable. They possessed no rights and were treated with extreme cruelty. The causes of enslavement were numerous and varied: wars and raids, debts, selling children, kidnapping, gambling, and even minor crimes. A slave was treated like an animal—without opinion, without will, and without any realistic hope of freedom.

The Second Error: A Stark Contradiction in Ethical and Philosophical Standards

The second error in this claim is the clear and glaring contradiction in moral standards. The critic categorically rejects slavery, yet at the same time accepts various other forms of deprivation of freedom and restriction of human will, without seeing any inconsistency in this position.

First: Comparing Slavery and Imprisonment

He vehemently rejects the enslavement of a captured enemy combatant who fought against Muslims and sought to kill them and destroy their society, yet he fully accepts imprisoning that same combatant for life or even executing him. What is the real difference between the two situations in terms of freedom? In both cases, the person’s freedom is entirely taken away; his movement and choices are restricted, and he is forced into a specific way of life. The only difference lies in terminology: one is called a “prisoner,” and the other is called a “slave.”

In fact, a careful comparison shows that a slave within the Islamic system had clear and defined rights regarding food, drink, clothing, housing, medical care, and education. He also had multiple accessible pathways to freedom and a realistic hope for the future. By contrast, a modern prisoner—especially one serving a life sentence—may spend his entire life in prison with no hope of release, often under conditions far worse than those experienced by slaves in Islamic society.

Second: The Philosophical Contradiction in the Basis of Human Dignity

Let us ask a deeper question: if the human being—as claimed by materialistic atheistic thought—is merely a random collection of atoms produced by blind chance, without purpose or meaning, what truly distinguishes him from animals or even inanimate matter? Why does the human being possess special, sacred rights? Why is killing a human being considered a grave crime, while killing bacteria or flies is ordinary? Why is enslaving a human being considered oppression, while using animals for labor is regarded as normal?

The materialist atheist who denies the existence of a Creator has no logical or philosophical foundation upon which to establish human dignity in the first place. Blind nature clearly declares: the strong consume the weak, survival belongs to the fittest, and there is no place for mercy or justice in the struggle for existence. So where, then, did the idea of “human rights” come from, if the human being is merely an evolved animal produced by chance? And why should we not apply the simple law of the jungle: whoever is able to take, takes?

Third: The Faith-Based Logic of Human Dignity

As for the believer, he possesses a clear and powerful foundation: human dignity comes from the fact that the human being is a creation honored by Allah the Almighty. Allah created him with His own Hands, breathed into him of His spirit, and commanded the angels to prostrate before him.

Allah says: “Indeed, We have honored the children of Ādam, carried them on land and sea, provided them with good things, and favored them greatly over many of those We created.” [Sūrat al-Isrāʾ, 17:70]

However, this honor is not absolute, unconditional, or detached from responsibility. Rather, it is linked to the human being fulfilling the role for which he was created. Just as a state grants its citizen rights, privileges, and benefits—such as a passport, the right to vote, legal protection, and public services—and withdraws them when he betrays his country, commits crimes, or wages war against society, so too does the Almighty Creator, the Owner of the entire universe, grant human beings honor and dignity, and He has the right to withdraw it from those who deserve its removal.

The Third Error: Ignoring the Nature of the Islamic Method of Wise, Gradual Reform

The third error lies in neglecting the unique Islamic approach to social reform—an approach that is gradual, wise, and realistic. It takes into account complex realities, available capacities, and surrounding circumstances, and seeks to achieve the best possible outcomes with the least social harm and cost.

First: The Gradual Method in Other Issues

Islam did not come with a chaotic, destructive revolution that overturned everything overnight. Rather, it came with a precise and wise process of gradual reform. This wise method is clearly seen in many other rulings:

Wine was not prohibited all at once, but gradually through four consecutive stages: first, pointing out that it contains sin alongside some benefit; then prohibiting prayer while intoxicated; and finally issuing a decisive and absolute prohibition. Likewise, ribā (usury or interest) was not prohibited in Makkah, but rather later in Madīnah, and gradually, when society had become economically and socially prepared to implement just economic alternatives.

Second: A Contemporary Medical Example

To better understand the wisdom of this method, consider a clear contemporary medical example. If a doctor were to find a patient addicted to ten different types of dangerous and destructive drugs, would medical wisdom require him to forbid all of them at once, in a single day? Or would wisdom and sound medical knowledge require reducing them gradually in a calculated manner, in order to avoid deadly withdrawal symptoms that could lead to the patient’s death?

Any rational physician would choose the gradual approach. Sudden and total deprivation could kill the patient or cause severe harm, whereas a carefully planned gradual process ultimately leads to full recovery. A doctor who adopts the gradual method is not accused of “supporting drugs” or “encouraging addiction”; rather, he is praised for his wisdom and expertise.

Third: Applying This Method to Slavery

The same principle applies to social reform. An immediate and abrupt abolition of a deeply rooted and complex system like slavery—upon which the entire economy and social structure depended—would inevitably have led to massive and devastating social and economic disasters, and to widespread chaos that could have destroyed society altogether.

Imagine if Islam had categorically prohibited slavery from the very first day. What would have happened to the millions of slaves who possessed neither skills, wealth, nor shelter? What would have happened to an economy that depended on them? And what would have happened to prisoners of war? Would they all have been killed? Or released, only to return and wage war against the Muslims once again?

Divine wisdom therefore required a gradual method that achieves the final goal—the elimination of slavery—while minimizing harm and maximizing beneficial outcomes.

The Fourth Error: Completely Ignoring the Available Alternatives of That Era

The fourth error is the complete disregard for the practical alternatives available for dealing with prisoners of war in that historical era, along with an unfair comparison between the options of the modern age and those of the seventh century.

First: The Available Options for Prisoners of War

In that era, once war had ended and enemy combatants were captured, the victors had only a limited set of options:

Mass execution, which was the common practice of most victorious armies

Life imprisonment, under extremely harsh conditions and at great cost

Unconditional release, meaning the captives would return to fight again

Ransom, if someone was able to pay on their behalf

Enslavement, with the possibility of eventual freedom

Which of these options is more merciful and humane? Any fair-minded and rational person would recognize that enslavement—when accompanied by guaranteed rights and real opportunities for emancipation—was the most merciful option available at that time.

Second: The Absence of Modern Infrastructure

At that time, there were no:

Organized prisons meeting modern standards

International courts to try prisoners of war

International organizations to care for captives

Advanced economic systems to rehabilitate prisoners

None of these modern institutions existed. So how can the Islamic system be expected to apply standards that were not available in the first place?

The First Criterion: The Three-Part Islamic Method for Eliminating Slavery at Its Roots

Islam adopted a comprehensive and wise approach to dealing with slavery, built upon three balanced and integrated pillars: drying up the sources, expanding the paths to emancipation, and improving conditions. This holistic and gradual method proved its practical effectiveness throughout history and achieved remarkable results.

First Pillar: Restricting the Sources of Slavery to a Single Case

First: Abolishing All Pre-Islamic Causes of Enslavement

Whereas the causes of enslavement in the pre-Islamic era—and in other civilizations—were many and varied, including debt bondage (selling oneself to repay debt), kidnapping and raids, tribal attacks, selling free children, gambling losses, aggression against tribes, and even minor crimes, Islam abolished all of these causes completely.

It restricted slavery to a single source only: prisoners of war captured in legitimate, defensive, and just warfare.

This radical restriction dramatically reduced the number of slaves, because wars do not occur every day, not every war produces captives, and not every captive is enslaved.

Second: Making Enslavement an Option, Not an Obligation

Even in this sole remaining case—prisoners of war—Islam did not make enslavement mandatory or automatic. Rather, it granted the ruler three options, with enslavement being the last:

Mann: unconditional release without compensation

Fidāʾ: release in exchange for ransom or prisoner exchange

Enslavement: only when necessary, based on public interest and reciprocity

Allah, exalted is He, says: “So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike the necks. Then, when you have subdued them, bind them firmly, and thereafter either show grace or take ransom, until the war lays down its burdens.” [Sūrat Muḥammad, 47:4]

Notably, the verse explicitly mentions release and ransom, but does not explicitly mention enslavement. This indicates that the default ruling is release or ransom, while enslavement is an exception governed by necessity and interest.

Third: Enslavement as a More Merciful Alternative to Execution

In those harsh eras, the typical fate of prisoners of war was mass execution, or at best life imprisonment under horrific conditions without medical care or proper food. Islam introduced enslavement as a far more merciful alternative—one that preserved the captive’s life and offered a genuine opportunity for dignified living, social integration, and eventual freedom.

Which is more merciful and humane: killing a captured combatant en masse, or enslaving him while granting him the chance for life, freedom, and integration? Any fair-minded person would choose the second option without hesitation. History bears witness that many captives who were initially enslaved in early Islam later became military leaders, ministers, advisors, scholars, jurists, and some even rose to positions of caliphate and rule.

Second Pillar: Expanding the Paths to Emancipation and Making It One of the Greatest Acts of Worship

At the same time that Islam severely restricted the sources of slavery, it widely opened the doors of emancipation and liberation, making it one of the greatest acts of devotion and a guaranteed path to Paradise.

First Path: Mandatory Emancipation in Legal Expiations (Kaffārāt)

Islam made freeing a slave a compulsory expiation (kaffārah) for several sins and errors:

Expiation for accidental killing: “It is not for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake must free a believing slave…” [Sūrat al-Nisāʾ, 4:92]

Expiation for ẓihār (a pre-Islamic form of marital pronouncement): “Those who pronounce ẓihār upon their wives and then retract what they said must free a slave before they touch one another.” [Sūrat al-Mujādilah, 58:3]

Expiation for breaking an oath

Expiation for sexual intercourse during the daytime in Ramaḍān

This meant that thousands of slaves were freed every year due to these obligatory expiations.

Second Path: Strong Encouragement for Voluntary Emancipation

Islam powerfully encouraged voluntary emancipation, making it a direct means of salvation from the Hellfire. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever frees a believing slave, Allah will free every limb of his from the Fire in exchange for every limb of the slave—even his private parts for his private parts.” [Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 6715]

Third Path: The System of Mukātabah (Contractual Self-Purchase)

Islam introduced an advanced system known as mukātabah, whereby a slave and his master agree on a sum of money to be paid in installments in exchange for complete freedom. Many jurists hold that the master is obligated to accept this contract if he sees goodness in the slave. Allah also commanded that such individuals be helped from Zakāh (obligatory charity).

Allah says: “And those who seek a contract [of emancipation] from among those whom your right hands possess—contract with them if you know goodness in them, and give them from the wealth of Allah that He has given you.” [Sūrat al-Nūr, 24:33]

Allah also included those in bondage among the eight categories eligible for Zakāh: “Zakāh expenditures are only for the poor, the needy, those employed to collect it, those whose hearts are to be reconciled, for freeing slaves, those in debt, in the path of Allah, and the stranded traveler.” [Sūrat al-Tawbah, 9:60]

Fourth Path: Tadbīr (Deferred Emancipation)

This occurs when a master ties the slave’s freedom to his own death, saying, “You are free after my death.” This practice was widespread among Muslims, and many Companions of the Prophet ﷺ used it.

Fifth Path: Umm Walad (Emancipation Through Motherhood)

If a female slave bore a child from her master, she became an umm walad. She could no longer be sold, gifted, or bequeathed, and she would automatically be freed upon her master’s death. Her children were free from birth and enjoyed full rights, no different from the children of free women in lineage, inheritance, or any other matter.

Sixth Path: Emancipation Through Kinship

If a person came to own a close relative—such as a father, mother, child, sibling, grandparent, uncle, or aunt—that relative was automatically freed. Islam categorically prohibited enslaving one’s relatives.

Seventh Path: Emancipation Due to Abuse

If a master struck his slave without legal justification, slapped him, or harmed him, emancipation became obligatory as an expiation. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever slaps his slave or strikes him, his expiation is to free him.” [Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, 1657]

The Third Pillar: Improving the Conditions of Enslaved People and Guaranteeing Dignified Treatment

Islam did not stop at restricting the sources of slavery and expanding the avenues of emancipation. It also established firm and detailed rulings to protect enslaved people and ensure they are treated in a dignified, humane way—treatment that rises to the level of brotherhood.

First: Affirming Shared Humanity and Human Brotherhood

Islam strongly affirmed that the slave is a complete human being—sharing the same human nature, the same basic dignity, and the same fundamental human rights. The Prophet ﷺ said in the Farewell Sermon: “Your brothers are your servants (khawal). Allah has placed them under your authority. So whoever has his brother under his authority should feed him from what he eats and clothe him from what he wears. Do not burden them with what overpowers them, and if you do burden them, then help them.” [Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 30]

Notice how he called them “your brothers.” This is an explicit and unmistakable affirmation of brotherhood and original human dignity, with the difference being only in temporary circumstances.

Second: Equality in Food, Drink, and Clothing

Islam obligated the master to feed his slave from the same food he eats, give him from the same drink he drinks, and clothe him from the same clothing he wears. It is not permissible for the master to eat good food while feeding his slave inferior food, or to wear fine clothes while dressing his slave in ragged garments. The Prophet ﷺ said: “The slave has the right to his food and clothing, and he should not be burdened with work except what he can bear.” [Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, 1662]

Third: Prohibiting Harm, Injustice, and Torture

Islam decisively prohibited harming slaves and treated any assault against them as grounds for immediate emancipation. This means that any master who harms his slave effectively loses ownership automatically. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever falsely accuses his slave of something he is innocent of will be flogged on the Day of Resurrection.” [Musnad Aḥmad, 6460]

And he said: “Whoever kills his slave, we will kill him; and whoever mutilates his slave, we will mutilate him.” [Sunan Abī Dāwūd, 4515]

Fourth: Guaranteeing the Rights of Worship, Learning, and Personal Growth

Islam guaranteed the slave full rights to worship, seek knowledge, and develop as a person. A master is not allowed to prevent his slave from Ṣalāh (the prescribed prayer), fasting, Ḥajj (pilgrimage), or seeking knowledge. On the contrary, Muslims would encourage their slaves to learn and gain understanding of the religion.

As a result, there emerged among former slaves great scholars—jurists, ḥadīth scholars, Qurʾān commentators—who enriched Islamic civilization through their knowledge and thought.

Fifth: The Right to Marriage and Family Life

Islam permitted slaves to marry and form families, and it recognized the marriage of a slave as valid under Islamic law. In fact, it encouraged the marrying of slaves. Allah says: “Marry off the unmarried among you, and the righteous among your male slaves and female slaves. If they are poor, Allah will enrich them from His bounty.”[Sūrat al-Nūr, 24:32]

Sixth: The Right to Complaint and Legal Protection

A slave had the right to complain against his master before a judge if he was wronged or abused, and the judge was obliged to examine his case and grant him justice. Islamic history records many examples of judges ruling in favor of slaves against their masters.

The Second Criterion: Concubinage and Its Strict Legal Regulations

As for the issue of concubinage (tasarrī—taking female captives as lawful partners), it is a matter that requires careful and balanced understanding. It must be placed in its proper historical and social context, along with clarification of the strict legal safeguards Islam established to protect a woman’s dignity and prevent exploitation.

First: A Civilized Alternative to Sexual Chaos

In wars throughout history, captive women were subjected to the worst forms of collective sexual exploitation and horrifying violations. A captive woman could become exposed to assault by the victorious soldiers, raped collectively, treated as a tool for group pleasure, and then killed or left to die.

Islam came with a civilizational system that preserved the dignity of these women and protected them from such destructive sexual chaos. Instead of allowing a captive woman to be violated by hundreds of men, Islam placed her under the care of one man who became fully responsible for her food, clothing, housing, protection, and her physical and psychological care.

Second: The Nature of the Relationship and Mutual Responsibilities

It is natural and reasonable that, in return for these heavy obligations upon the man, he would have rights—among the most important being the right to marital intimacy. He provides for her from his wealth, protects her personally, cares for her in health and illness, and carries her responsibilities and needs.

This is not “exploitation,” but a regulated and structured system governing the relationship between man and woman in exceptional circumstances (war and captivity), preserving the dignity of both sides and securing the rights of each.

Third: Strict Legal Safeguards Governing Concubinage

Islam placed very strict safeguards that provide complete protection for the woman and prevent exploitation:

Mandatory dignified treatment: Islam obligated good and honorable treatment of female slaves. Allah says: “Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and show excellence to parents, relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor and the distant neighbor, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not love those who are arrogant and boastful.” [Sūrat al-Nisāʾ, 4:36]

Full equality for the children of female slaves: The children of a female slave from her master are free from birth and possess full rights. There is no difference between them and the children of free women in lineage, inheritance, dignity, or treatment. How many caliphs, princes, scholars, and leaders had mothers who were female slaves—such as the caliph al-Muʿtaṣim, the caliph al-Mutawakkil, and many of the ʿAbbāsid caliphs whose mothers were female slaves.

Umm Walad: full protection from sale: If a female slave gives birth, she becomes an umm walad (a “mother of a child”), with special protection: she cannot be sold, gifted, bequeathed, or treated as a commodity, and she is automatically freed upon her master’s death, becoming fully free.

Prohibition of forcing women into sexual immorality: Islam categorically prohibited forcing female slaves into prostitution or indecency for financial gain. Allah says: “Do not compel your slave girls into prostitution if they desire chastity, seeking the fleeting gains of worldly life. And if someone compels them, then indeed Allah, after their coercion, is Forgiving, Merciful.” [Sūrat al-Nūr, 24:33]

The right to religious practice and worship: A female slave has full right to practice her religion and worship. If she is Muslim, she has the right to Ṣalāh, fasting, and Ḥajj. If she is not Muslim, she has the right to practice her religion without coercion.

Fourth: Social and Humanitarian Wisdom

The system of concubinage in Islam served important social and humanitarian purposes:

Real protection for captive women: In ancient war societies, a woman who lost her family and protection could become homeless, without security or financial support, vulnerable to assault by anyone. The Islamic system ensured safe shelter, full protection, and ongoing provision.

Full social integration: Through lawful partnership and childbirth, these women would gradually integrate into Muslim society, and their children would become a natural part of the social fabric. This is far better than leaving them isolated or marginalized.

A reliable pathway to freedom: Many female slaves gained freedom through childbirth (since the umm walad is freed upon the master’s death) or through voluntary emancipation. Some even rose to very high social standing. This is far better than remaining permanently in captivity.

The Third Criterion: A Fair, Comprehensive Comparison With Historical and Contemporary Systems

To do justice to the Islamic position and understand it in its proper context, a broad and fair comparison must be made with how other civilizations operated, and with what exists in the modern era.

First: Slavery in Ancient and Modern Western Civilization

Brutal inhumanity in ancient times: In the Roman Empire, slaves were killed by the thousands for entertainment, thrown to wild beasts, and forced to fight to the death. Roman law granted the master the right to kill his slave for any reason—or for no reason at all. Slaves were treated like animals, or even worse.

The transatlantic slave trade: one of history’s most horrific crimes: The slave trade from Africa across the Atlantic Ocean (from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century) ranks among the worst crimes in human history. Millions of Africans died on the ships during the journey, and those who survived were subjected to terrifying inhuman treatment on American plantations.

Destructive institutional racism: More importantly, slavery in the West was built on pure racism, where Black people were viewed as naturally less than human and even described as being under a “curse” from God. This institutional racism created a social fracture whose effects remain to this day.

Extreme delay in addressing it: The United States did not resolve the issue of slavery until 1865 (after a bloody civil war), and Brazil in 1888, after long centuries of suffering and oppression. Even after official abolition, racial discrimination and segregation continued for more than another century.

Second: Slavery in the Islamic System

Humane and dignified treatment: By contrast, Islam affirmed from the very first day the full humanity of the slave and prohibited harming or oppressing him. It even called them “your brothers,” and it set strict regulations to protect them and guarantee dignified treatment.

Complete absence of racial foundations: Slavery in Islam was never based on race, color, or lineage. There were slaves and free people from all races and backgrounds: Arabs and non-Arabs, white and Black, Turks, Persians, Berbers, Andalusians. The only criterion was being a prisoner of war, regardless of race.

Real opportunities for social advancement: Many slaves in Islamic history rose to the highest positions: military commanders, ministers, advisors, scholars, and even caliphs and sultans.

Full integration after emancipation: A freed slave in Islam becomes a complete member of society, no different from anyone else in any matter. There is no separate class of “former slaves,” and no discrimination against them.

Third: Disguised Slavery in the Modern Age

Even more alarming is that the modern age—despite its proud slogans of freedom and human dignity—witnesses some of the ugliest forms of real enslavement, yet hidden under “legal” and “modern” labels:

Prison labor in the United States

U.S. prisons hold around 2.3 million inmates (about 25% of the world’s prisoners)

Most are compelled to work for wages ranging between $0.20 and $1.15 per hour

Major corporations benefit from this extremely cheap labor

Modern agricultural slavery

In Italy and Spain: thousands of migrants work 14 hours a day harvesting tomatoes

In France and Germany: migrant workers in conditions resembling slavery

In the United States: Mexican workers in harsh conditions on large farms

United Nations reports describe this as “modern agricultural slavery”

Global human trafficking

International Labour Organization: 50 million people in conditions of modern slavery

28 million in forced labor, 22 million in forced marriage

Europe and America: among the largest markets for trafficking for sex and labor

Profits reaching hundreds of billions annually

Modern debt bondage

In parts of South Asia: millions of workers trapped by impossible debts

In Latin America: agricultural workers held under debt-based systems

The Fourth Criterion: Historical Evidence for the Success of the Islamic Approach

Islamic history is filled with living examples showing the success of the Islamic approach in dealing with slavery, and the transformation of many enslaved people into leaders and scholars. This confirms that the Islamic system was not a system of exploitation and subjugation, but rather a system of integration, development, and gradual liberation.

Living Examples From Islamic History

Among the most prominent examples from the era of the Companions and the Successors is Sālim, the freedman (mawlā) of Abū Ḥudhayfah. He was once enslaved, then freed, and Abū Ḥudhayfah adopted him. He rose until he became the imām of the Muhājirūn (the Emigrants) in Qubāʾ, despite the presence of senior Companions. The Prophet ﷺ even recommended that the Qurʾān be learned from him. Sālim was martyred at al-Yamāmah while reciting the Book of Allah.

Another example is Bilāl ibn Rabāḥ al-Ḥabashī, who was tortured for embracing Islam until Abū Bakr freed him. He then became the first muʾadhdhin (caller to prayer) of the Prophet ﷺ and one of the Companions closest to him. Out of profound attachment to the Prophet ﷺ, he refused to call the adhān for anyone after him—except once in al-Shām.

As for ʿIkrimah, the freedman (mawlā) of Ibn ʿAbbās, he was a freed slave who became one of the greatest Qurʾān commentators (mufassirūn) in Islamic history. Imām Aḥmad said about him: “I have not met anyone among the companions of Ibn ʿAbbās more knowledgeable than ʿIkrimah.” Great imāms studied under him.

In later centuries, the Mamlūk state stands out: a state ruled by freed slaves from 1250 to 1517 CE. They led some of the greatest victories against the Mongols and the Crusaders in the battles of ʿAyn Jālūt and Marj al-Ṣuffar, and they ruled Egypt and the Levant for more than two and a half centuries.

Among their most famous leaders was al-Muẓaffar Sayf al-Dīn Quṭuz, a Turkish mamlūk who became the sultan of Egypt and led the decisive victory against the Mongols at ʿAyn Jālūt in 1260 CE, saving the Muslim world from Mongol devastation.

Another towering figure was al-Ẓāhir Rukn al-Dīn Baybars, also a Turkish mamlūk who became sultan of Egypt and the Levant. He expelled the Crusaders from most of the Levant and was nicknamed “the Conqueror of the Tatars and the Franks.”

In al-Andalus, the name of Ṭāriq ibn Ziyād shines brightly—the Amazigh freedman (mawlā) who led the conquest of al-Andalus in 711 CE. His name was immortalized in “Jabal Ṭāriq” (Gibraltar), and he became one of the greatest commanders in Islamic history.

As for the Ottoman state, the devshirme (dūshirmāh) system was implemented, through which Christian children were gathered, raised as Muslims, and trained at the highest levels. Many of the ṣudūr ʿiẓām (grand viziers) rose through this system to the highest offices in the state.

Among the most famous examples is Sultan Muḥammad al-Fātiḥ, whose mother was a mawlāh (an umm walad, a bondwoman who bore a child). He was the one who conquered Constantinople and ended the Byzantine Empire, becoming one of the greatest commanders in Islamic history by fulfilling the prophecy of the Prophet ﷺ.

Conclusion: Toward a Balanced and Fair Understanding

After this presentation and analysis from multiple angles, it becomes abundantly clear that the claim raised about Islam’s stance on slavery stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of Islamic legislation and its wise method of gradual reform, as well as from an unfair comparison between a complex historical reality and contemporary slogans that do not always align with actual practice.

We have seen that this claim rests on logical errors: judging the seventh century by the standards of the twenty-first, holding contradictory moral standards by rejecting slavery while accepting life imprisonment, neglecting the necessity of gradual reform in social change, and demanding that an ancient system implement solutions that did not even exist at the time.

A fair judgment of Islam’s approach to slavery requires understanding its wise three-part method: restricting the sources, expanding the avenues of emancipation, and improving conditions. It also requires a fair comparison with historical and modern systems, and attention to the historical evidence and civilizational achievements produced by this method.

Clear realities confirm that Islam did not invent slavery. It encountered it as a deeply entrenched global system and dealt with it through a wise reformative approach. Its method was the most merciful and just when compared to other historical systems, and it achieved remarkable practical results in freeing slaves, developing them, and integrating them socially—while the modern era continues to witness worse forms of real enslavement, hidden under legal labels.

Studying this Islamic approach offers important lessons for the modern world: the importance of wise gradualism in social reform, the necessity of considering reality and available capacities, the need for strict safeguards to protect human dignity, and the urgency of confronting modern forms of slavery with the same seriousness.

Islam is a religion of realism and wisdom, not a religion of hollow slogans or impossible idealism. Its rulings aim to achieve attainable justice within complex realities while continuously striving toward what is best and most complete. Its approach to slavery was a unique model of wise gradual reform—one that considers reality and seeks to change it with minimal harm and the best achievable outcomes.

All praise is due to Allah that humanity has today reached the abolition of slavery as a formal institution. This is precisely what Islam was moving toward through its gradual, wise method fourteen centuries ago. Yet the real challenge remains: eliminating modern forms of enslavement and achieving genuine, practical justice.

We invite every sincere seeker of truth and every person who truly seeks justice to reflect on these realities, and to judge Islam with fairness and integrity—without preloaded bias or ready-made conclusions—by viewing Islamic legislation through a comprehensive and balanced lens that considers historical context, legislative wisdom, and real-world outcomes.

Whoever is fair to Islam in this matter will find that it offered humanity a unique civilizational model for handling complex social problems, laid down sound foundations for wise gradual reform, and achieved astonishing practical accomplishments in liberating and honoring the human being. It preceded by centuries the principles of justice, equality, and human dignity that the world celebrates today.

We ask Allah, exalted is He, to grant us understanding of our religion, to show us the truth as truth and grant us the ability to follow it, and to show us falsehood as falsehood and grant us the ability to avoid it. We ask Him to protect us from falling into the traps of doubts, or judging the law of Allah by the deficient standards of human beings; to preserve our faith; and to make us among those who defend it with wisdom, good counsel, clear proof, and shining evidence. Indeed, He is All-Hearing, Ever-Responsive, and He knows best and is most wise.

Allah knows best, and may blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, and upon his family and all his Companions.