Q21
Slavery
The question, at its strongest
"The Quran speaks of 'those your right hands possess' and permits men to have sex with women they own. It regulates slavery but never abolishes it. The Prophet himself owned slaves and had a concubine. Muslim societies held slaves for twelve centuries, and abolition came under European pressure, with some Muslim scholars resisting it. In 2014, ISIS enslaved Yazidi women and quoted the classical texts. How can a just God's final law have allowed this, and what stops someone from bringing it back?"
Why people ask it
ISIS's enslavement of Yazidi women in 2014 made the question urgent. Modern readers rightly see slavery as one of history's great wrongs, and find the texts jarring. Descendants of enslaved people, in Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere, ask it about their own history.
Short answer
The Quran did not abolish slavery. It made freeing slaves an act of high virtue and a required atonement for several sins, gave slaves a right to buy their freedom, and limited the ways people could be enslaved. Classical law allowed a master to have sex with his female slave without her consent, and the Prophet (pbuh) himself had slaves and at least one concubine. Muslim-led abolition came late, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, largely under outside pressure. Today, Muslim scholars overwhelmingly hold slavery to be forbidden, on the grounds of scholarly consensus, binding treaties, and the Sharia's aim of freedom. That modern position is real and widely shared, but it is not the classical one, and honesty requires saying both.
The full answer
11min read
For the heart and mind
If you are descended from enslaved people, your history is not a footnote. Your ancestors were people "honored" by God (17:70), whatever their legal status, and no defence of a legal system should make their suffering smaller. You are right to want the truth told without softening. You may also find meaning in the Quran's insistence that "the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you" (49:13), and in the many freed slaves the tradition honours, such as Zayd ibn Haritha and Bilal.
If you are a Muslim and this topic shakes you, that is a sign of a working conscience. You do not have to defend everything in history to keep your faith.
What the Quran says
Freeing slaves as virtue and atonement. "And what can make you know what is [breaking through] the difficult pass? It is the freeing of a slave" (90:12–13), from Sura al-Balad, Meccan. Righteousness includes giving wealth "for freeing slaves" (2:177). Other verses (4:92; 5:89; 58:3; not quoted here) make freeing a slave an atonement for manslaughter, broken oaths and a pre-Islamic form of divorce.
The right to buy freedom. "And those who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there is within them goodness and give them from the wealth of Allah which He has given you. And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity" (24:33), from Sura al-Nur, Medinan. This is the mukātaba, a contract by which a slave pays for freedom.
Captives. "So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens" (47:4), Medinan. The verse names release ("favour") or ransom for prisoners of war; it does not mention enslavement. Classical jurists nonetheless allowed the ruler to enslave captives as well (Wikipedia, "Islamic views on slavery", citing classical law).
Sex with female slaves. The Quran praises believers "who guard their private parts / Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed - / But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors" (23:5–7), Meccan. It forbids "married women except those your right hands possess" (4:24), Medinan — classical scholars read this as allowing a captive woman whose husband remained on the other side. To the Prophet (pbuh) it says: "We have made lawful to you your wives… and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives]" (33:50). And: "marry those that please you of [other] women… But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses" (4:3). These verses permit sexual relations with women one owns. That is what they say, and the page should not soften it.
What the Prophet (pbuh) taught
"Your slaves are your brothers." Al-Maʿrur reports that he saw Abu Dharr (ra) wearing a cloak like his slave's. Abu Dharr explained that he had insulted a man's mother, and the Prophet (pbuh) told him: "You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them" (Bukhārī 30 Ṣaḥīḥ (sound)). The hadith demands equal food and clothing and limits work; it does not abolish ownership.
The Prophet's household. According to the sources summarised by Wikipedia ("Islamic views on slavery"; "Maria al-Qibtiyya"), the Prophet (pbuh): freed Zayd ibn Haritha and adopted him as a son; married Safiyya bint Huyayy, a captive of Khaybar; had Mariya al-Qibtiyya, sent to him as a gift in 628 by al-Muqawqis, the Christian governor of Alexandria; and freed Mariya's sister Sirin and married her to the poet Hassan ibn Thabit. Mariya bore him a son, Ibrahim, who died in infancy. Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Saʿd and al-Tabari list Mariya among his wives, while Abu ʿUbayda listed her among his concubines; there is a scholarly debate on which she was. Ibn ʿAbbas (ra) is reported as saying, "Her son has set her free" — in classical law, a slave woman who bore her master's child (umm walad) could not be sold and became free at his death. A few historians (John Morrow, 2023, as cited by Wikipedia) doubt that Mariya existed; that is a minority view and has not yet been checked. The Shafiʿi jurist al-Mawardi (al-Hawi al-Kabir) is cited by Sedick as treating her as a lawful concubine.
How scholars have understood it
How people became slaves. In classical law, enslavement was allowed through "capture in war (on the condition that the prisoner is non-Muslim)"; children of a slave mother (not fathered by her owner) were born slaves; slaves could be bought, and received as tribute. Non-Muslims living under Muslim rule (dhimmīs) "could not be enslaved", and "a free person could not sell himself or his children into slavery" (Wikipedia, "Islamic views on slavery", citing classical sources and Sikainga). In practice, many slaves were bought from outside the Muslim world, which the law's restrictions did not stop.
Legal rights. Owners were bound to provide "sustenance… shelter, food, clothing, and medical attention", and slaves could not inherit property (Wikipedia). Brown's book, as summarised by Azzuhri, treats slavery (riqq) as a legal status rather than a single moral category, notes the presumption that every person is free unless proven otherwise, and says a master could not refuse a mukātaba contract (pp. 110–111). A child born to a master by his slave was free, and the mother became an umm walad.
Consent in concubinage. Kecia Ali (2017) concludes that premodern Sunni jurists did not require a master to obtain his slave's consent before sex. She writes that she recalls "no instance in any Maliki, Hanafi, Shafiʿi, or Hanbali text" of the eighth to tenth centuries requiring it, adds that "the mere absence of discussion proves nothing, of course", and argues that the silence is nonetheless telling because the same jurists did discuss consent to marriage. Jurists agreed that an owner could marry off his female slave without her consent; al-Shafiʿi (d. 820) says he may do so "whether she is a virgin or non-virgin" (p. 149). Forced sex within these relationships fell outside the legal category of zinā; quoting Hina Azam, Ali writes that "concerns about consent in sex acts were secondary" to the legal status of the act (p. 150). Ali herself states that "meaningful consent is a prerequisite for ethical sexual relationships" (p. 148).
Scale. [Moderate; estimates are uncertain.] Rönnbäck summarises current estimates: about 12.5 million people were carried across the Atlantic from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries (Transatlantic Slave Trade Database); "around 5 million people" were taken from sub-Saharan Africa through the trans-Saharan, Red Sea and Indian Ocean trades in the same centuries, about two-thirds across the Sahara; and before 1500, numbers "can only be guessed at", with scholars suggesting "a couple of million people in total" for 650–1400. Earlier claims of tens or hundreds of millions "are now generally recognized to have been vastly inflated". The Atlantic trade took mostly men and boys for plantation labour; the Red Sea and Indian Ocean trades took comparatively more young women, as domestic workers or concubines. Enslaved people also came to Muslim lands from Europe, Central Asia and elsewhere; those numbers are not covered here.
History
The Ottoman steps. Sultan Abdülmecid I closed Istanbul's public slave market in 1847 (from December 1846), but the trade "simply moved indoors" (Toledano, as cited by Wikipedia). A ban on the Circassian and Georgian slave trade in 1854 contributed to a rebellion in the Hijaz, which led to the Hijaz being exempted (Miers, cited by Wikipedia). The firman of 1857 "formally prohibited the import of African slaves" but "did not prohibit slavery as such", excluded the Hijaz, and "was never enforced in practice". The Kanunname of 1889 formally banned the trade.
The twentieth century. Saudi Arabia formally abolished slavery in 1962: a June 1962 royal decree banned the sale and purchase of people, and in November 1962 King Faisal prohibited owning slaves (Miers, cited by Wikipedia). Mauritania abolished slavery in 1981, and slavery has been documented there since (Wikipedia).
Did Islam produce an abolitionist movement? Kecia Ali (cited by Wikipedia) writes that "there has not been a strong internally developed critique of past or present slaveholding practices". Brown's book contrasts the Euro-American tradition, where abolitionism arose, with others, including Islam, which "did not consensually abolish slavery" (Azzuhri). But there were Muslim abolitionist arguments: Tunisian reformers argued for abolition "on the basis of Islamic law", and Ameer Ali argued that "the Qur'an disapproved of slavery, but Muhammad could not abolish the institution overnight" (Wikipedia).
The reasoning
Step 1: the Sharia's aim of freedom. Ibn ʿAshur names freedom (ḥurriyya), in its first meaning "the opposite of slavery", as an aim of the Sharia. He argues that the Sharia was "prevented from abolishing the factors of slavery all at once", so "it combated slavery's causes by reducing its numbers" and "abolished many factors leading to slavery" (Treatise, "Universal Principles"). On this reading, the direction of the law points to abolition.
Step 2: consensus. The 2014 Open Letter to al-Baghdadi, signed by Muslim scholars from many countries, states: "The re-introduction of slavery is forbidden in Islam. It was abolished by universal consensus", referring to "a century of Muslim consensus on the prohibition of slavery". The letter's argument is that a scholarly consensus (ijmāʿ) binds later generations. Objection: the classical consensus was that slavery was permitted, and whether a modern consensus of about a century can count as binding ijmāʿ in the classical sense is exactly what is disputed.
Step 3: treaties. The same letter notes that "all the Muslim countries in the world are signatories of anti-slavery conventions". Classical law requires Muslims to keep their agreements.
Step 4: the permission was never a command. Owning slaves was permitted, not required; the ruler could always choose release or ransom for captives (47:4). A permitted act can be restricted for the public good.
Brown's view. As Aammari summarises it, Brown holds that "God wishes freedom" (p. 264), so abolition is the best way to realise that wish, and that modern norms of consent make concubinage a "dead letter" in Islamic law and ethics. The Iranian scholar Mohsen Kadivar argues that slavery is "no longer permissible in Islam" by "abrogation by reason" (Wikipedia).
Could ISIS bring it back legitimately? On the Open Letter's argument, no: it holds that a later group cannot overturn the modern consensus or the treaties Muslim states have signed, and cannot claim a permission that the community, through its scholars and states, has closed. Limit: ISIS rejected exactly these premises — the authority of modern consensus and of treaties — and quoted the classical texts. The strongest defence against a revival is that Muslims say clearly why the classical permission no longer holds, not that they pretend it never existed.
The strongest objection, and the reply
"If God allowed slavery and sex with captives, was it ever morally right?" This is the hardest question. Three positions are held by Muslims. Some, like Brown, argue that slavery was not always "a gross, intrinsic moral evil at all points in history" (Aammari, quoting p. 269), and that its moral weight depended on what it meant in a given society. Others, like Kecia Ali, hold that sex without meaningful consent is wrong, and that the tradition must face this. A third view, Ibn ʿAshur's, is that the law accepted an institution it could not end at once while moving toward freedom. Limit: none of these answers fully settles the moral question, and readers should know that serious Muslim scholars disagree. The concubinage rules, in particular, have no fully satisfying answer.
"Gradual abolition is a myth: it stalled for twelve centuries." Reply: the critic is largely right that the movement did not come from within classical law. Critics such as Gordon (cited by Wikipedia) argue that the Prophet's example gave slavery Islamic legitimacy, and Clarence-Smith criticises Mawdudi's "dogged refusal" to give up on slavery. Limit: the gradualist reading is a modern interpretation of the law's direction, not a description of what happened.
"Islamic slavery was gentle." Reply: there were real protections — mukātaba, the umm walad, equal food and clothing in the hadith — and some slaves rose to great power. Limit: many enslaved people died in raids and on the way; women had no right to refuse sex; and the law was often ignored. "Gentle" is not an honest summary.
The range of views
- Classical law — slavery and concubinage permitted, with rights and paths to freedom; consent to sex not required (Kecia Ali, 2017).
- Ibn ʿAshur — the Sharia aims at freedom and reduced slavery's causes.
- Brown (2019) — abolition not indigenous to Islam, but consistent with God's wish for freedom; concubinage a "dead letter" today.
- Kecia Ali — the tradition must face the absence of consent.
- The Open Letter (2014) — reintroducing slavery is forbidden by consensus.
- Kadivar — slavery no longer permissible, by "abrogation by reason".
- Mawdudi (as criticised by Clarence-Smith) — refused to give up slavery in principle.
Questions readers ask next
Did the Prophet (pbuh) own slaves or concubines?
Yes, according to the sources. He freed several, including Zayd and Sirin; he had Mariya, whose status as wife or concubine is debated.
How did people become slaves?
Through capture in war (non-Muslims only), birth to a slave mother, or purchase from outside. Free Muslims and dhimmīs could not be enslaved.
What does maqāṣid mean?
The aims of the Sharia — the goods the law exists to protect. Ibn ʿAshur counts freedom among them.
How does it compare with the Atlantic trade?
Current estimates: about 12.5 million across the Atlantic (16th–19th centuries) and about 5 million out of Africa through the Muslim world's trade routes in the same centuries, plus earlier and non-African enslavement. The patterns differed: plantation labour in one, more domestic and military slavery in the other.
Was slavery in Muslim lands always racial?
The law did not make it racial, but the trades out of Africa created strong links between blackness and slavery in many Muslim societies — a legacy that descendants still face.
What do Muslims think now?
Muslim scholars and states overwhelmingly hold slavery to be forbidden (Open Letter, 2014).
Key verses
وَمَآ أَدْرَىٰكَ مَا ٱلْعَقَبَةُ١٢ فَكُّ رَقَبَةٍ١٣
Transliteration: wamā adrāka mā l-ʿaqabatu · fakku raqabatin
And what can make you know what is [breaking through] the difficult pass? It is the freeing of a slave
Translation: Saheeh International
-
But let them who find not [the means for] marriage abstain [from sexual relations] until Allah enriches them from His bounty. And those who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there is within them goodness and give them from the wealth of Allah which He has given you. And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is [to them], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful. 24:33
Arabic text and transliteration
وَلْيَسْتَعْفِفِ ٱلَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ نِكَاحًا حَتَّىٰ يُغْنِيَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِۦ ۗ وَٱلَّذِينَ يَبْتَغُونَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ مِمَّا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَٰنُكُمْ فَكَاتِبُوهُمْ إِنْ عَلِمْتُمْ فِيهِمْ خَيْرًا ۖ وَءَاتُوهُم مِّن مَّالِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِىٓ ءَاتَىٰكُمْ ۚ وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا۟ فَتَيَٰتِكُمْ عَلَى ٱلْبِغَآءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِّتَبْتَغُوا۟ عَرَضَ ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا ۚ وَمَن يُكْرِههُّنَّ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ مِنۢ بَعْدِ إِكْرَٰهِهِنَّ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
walyastaʿfifi alladhīna lā yajidūna nikāḥan ḥattā yugh'niyahumu l-lahu min faḍlihi wa-alladhīna yabtaghūna l-kitāba mimmā malakat aymānukum fakātibūhum in ʿalim'tum fīhim khayran waātūhum min māli l-lahi alladhī ātākum walā tuk'rihū fatayātikum ʿalā l-bighāi in aradna taḥaṣṣunan litabtaghū ʿaraḍa l-ḥayati l-dun'yā waman yuk'rihhunna fa-inna l-laha min baʿdi ik'rāhihinna ghafūrun raḥīmun
Sources
- Saheeh International via the site's Tanzil data — 90:12–13, 24:33, 2:177, 4:3, 17:70, 49:13.
- Saheeh International via legacy.quran.com — 4:24, 23:5–7, 33:50, 47:4.
- Sahih al-Bukhari 30, via alim.org, https://www.alim.org/hadith/sahih-bukhari/1/2/30.
- Kecia Ali, "Concubinage and Consent", International Journal of Middle East Studies 49 (2017), pp. 148–152.
- Anggi Azzuhri, review of Jonathan A. C. Brown, Slavery and Islam (Oneworld, 2019), American Journal of Islam and Society 41:3–4, pp. 108–112.
- Lahoucine Aammari, review of Brown, Slavery and Islam, Hespéris-Tamuda LVI(1) (2021), pp. 459–462.
- Ibn ʿAshur, Treatise on Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah (IIIT translation) — section "Universal Principles", on freedom.
- "Open Letter to Dr. Ibrahim Awwad Al-Badri, alias 'Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi'" (19 September 2014), https://rissc.jo/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Letter_to_Baghdadi-EN_ARB.pdf.
- Klas Rönnbäck, "The Slave Trades out of Africa", in The History of African Development (AEH Network online textbook), https://www.aehnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Ronnback_Slave_Trades_out_of_Africa.pdf.
- Wikipedia: "Islamic views on slavery"; "Maria al-Qibtiyya"; "Disestablishment of the Istanbul Slave Market"; "Prohibition of the Black Slave Trade"; "Slavery in Saudi Arabia" — used for dates and for the sources they cite (Toledano, Erdem, Miers, Sikainga, Clarence-Smith, Morrow), which not yet consulted directly.
- Irshaad Sedick, "Why Was Lady Maria Lawfully Kept by the Prophet as a Concubine?", SeekersGuidance.
- J.A.C. Brown, Slavery and Islam (2019)
- K. Ali (2010)
- E. Toledano (1998)
- Pérouse de Montclos, Études (2002, Fr.)
- Gilli-Elewy, Der Islam 77 (2000, Ger.)
- TDV, "Köle" (Tr.)