Book review: Slavery within the Islamic world

Book review: Slavery within the Islamic world - the forbidden truth (L’ esclavage en Terre d’Islam: un tabou bien gardé)

Now this looks interesting.

A review by Elie Smith, an African journalist living and working in Paris, of the latest book by Malek Chebal - L’ esclavage en Terre d’Islam: un tabou bien gardé which he translates as Slavery within the Islamic world -- the forbidden truth. I have taken the review from the website African Path but it is also features on his own blog. The book itself is in French but this particular review is in English.

A recent book written by Malek Chebal has come to shed more light not only on the Arab slave trade, but also on slavery in the greater Islamic world.

Mr Chebal is an anthropologist and perhaps France’s best specialist on Islam. He has written more than 20 books on different aspects and topics of Islam and the Islamic society in her diversity. The title of his 496 page book, which is divided into three parts is: Slavery within the Islamic world: the forbidden truth (my own English translation) and in French: L’ esclavage en Terre d’Islam: un tabou bien gardé.

But the author asks these questions: did Islam as a religion, which started in the 7th century really wanted to eradicate slavery in her bastion in the Arabian peninsular? Or did it simply wanted to give slavery a humane or acceptable face? Sub title 2 of part one is in titled: words to describe/ how slaves and slavery are identify in the Islamic world.

And here, the author tells us that, the Islamic word has a very rich vocabulary for slaves and slavery and he adds that, all those names or terminologies are stratagems employed either to hide what they are doing or to give slavery a humane or acceptable face.

But in the ancient Arabian peninsular and in ancient Iraq, the author tells us that, slaves were designated according to their colours. . .

Sub title four is in titled: Black & White. This part brings to the fore a reality within the Islamic world that is known but never officially admitted or accepted by Muslims. And the author writes that, racial divide within Islam is appalling.

But why is it not denounced? The author has an answer. He writes that, one reason why Muslims seldom denounced their internal racism is because; it would be tantamount to opening a can of worms. . . The author points out that, in Islam, black Muslims or black slaves are perpetually discriminated by Arabs. Why? Simply because, Arabs have always had a condescending regard toward blacks, a notion or practice that, the advent of the Islamic faith has not changed but perpetuated. The author concludes.

Sub title six is in titled: ethnic group versus religion and the author tells us here again that, while Islam has racist practices, another dimension in the divisions that exist in the faith are that of the ethnic origin of her members. He continues: there is a deep divide in Islam, between Arabs or precisely Bedouins Arabs from the Middle East and other groups such as the Persians and the Turks, from the same region. Between these three ethnic groups, who are all vying for the position of leadership within the faith, those who consider themselves as the rightful leaders of the Islamic religion are the Bedouin Arabs. Why? The author writes that, Bedouins are supremacist. Their legends are laden with claims of their noble status and he adds that, it is this quest for noble status within the Islamic faith, which makes many to claim to be descendants of Prophet Mohammed, who was from an ancient noble Bedouin family. Sub title 7 is in title those without names.

The author tells us that, one characteristic of slaves was that, they had no name or their names were ignored. Hence, the prevalence of generic names for slaves or people of slave ancestry within the Islamic world and the author also write that, the generic terms used by Arabs to identify a slave or those with slave linage are: abd or abid. And within slaves, those who were educated were/are either called riqq or raqiq, mawla (teacher) and Malik (the possessed). Another important sub title of part one, is that which focuses on another category of slaves common within the Islamic world: Eunuchs.

The author tells us here that, within the Islamic world and elsewhere, where slavery was or is still practiced, slaves are classified according to their colours and geographic origins. But another sinister aspect with Islamic slavery he adds: is /was her appetite for Eunuchs who were or are a special brand of slaves. And the author stressed that, most eunuchs were blacks from Sudan, Nubia, and occasionally from Ethiopia and other parts of the horn of Africa. The author also writes that, while the horn of Africa was a factory for the production of eunuchs, the only region or country in the region that was spared was Somalia. And he adds that, while slavery caused the death of many East Africans, the demand for eunuchs increased their mortality, because during the castration period, many slaves selected for the hideous process lost their lives via bleeding. The other interesting subject handled in part one of the book are the slave routes.

And the author points out that, the Arab slave trade had three main routes. The first was along the East African coast: Zanzibar via Djibouti, Egypt and the final destination was Mesopotamia. Slaves from this route were sold in Jordan, Palestine, Syria, and Anatolia and in India. The second route to source slaves was southern Libya and Chad.

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/15178

I have begun to see the heart of “Islamic” thought as no more than the historic traditions, morals and values of the bedouin tribes, as of the 7th century, written in theological terms as if its “prophet” had found something new, when the only thing different was the propagation of the 7th century traditions, morals and values of the bedouin tribes as a new “religion” from God.

The disputes that Mohamed had on the Arab peninsula were "theological" only in the political sense of the proclamation of Mohamed as the "authority" to whom respect - including financial respect - was due, and were otherwise not great differences (outside of "Mohamed says")of belief ABOUT God, the nature of God or what God expected of a person.

Therefore, to me, the heart of Islam is simply ethnic, Arab mores and political, not religious, in its primary goals.

The reality of the "submission" to "God" is actually submission to whoever says they represent "Islam" (beginning with Mohamed), and so much of Islamic practice contains, and is justified by Muslims, in the name of this form of submission for every and any act that simply advances control, rule, dominance by "Islam".

The issue is not the equality of “passions” but the true, objective, nature of their source(s).

In my view, politicians who are Christians and others, may, sometimes, here in the U.S. chose to lift up an issue on a position that may in part be derived from values obtained from their religion; values that in fact others outside their religion may share from their own non-Christian sources. In my view they do so, most of the time, to support those values in greater measure than to support “Christianity” per se. In my view, Muslims raise their issues predominately, in politics, in support of Islam, period (or at least their view of Islam).

Their (Muslim) actions demonstrate, in my view, that Islam is more political, in nature, than religious; for all other major religions have a core space that is beyond politics and beyond political-based religious supremacy. I do not find a core space beyond politics and beyond the need for that political supremacy in Islam.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.