Right-Hand possessions: A euphemism for slaves in Islam?
Throughout our history, the institution of religion has reconstructed the social, economical and domestic structure of different societies. In sociology the Functionalists argue that this certain institution is vital for a community as religions such as Christianity, Hinduism and Islam ingrain passiveness into their believers. God can be seen as creating and ordaining the social structure, as reflected in the following verse from the Victorian hymn:
‘The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
God made them high and lowly,
And ordered their estate.’
This helps those at the bottom of the stratification system to accept and come to terms with their poor circumstances and avoid any revolution. However, Marxists, believe that religion is a tool used by the upper class to exploit and control the lower classes socially and economically. Therefore, religion tends to help the Bourgeoisie (upper class) avoid any rebellion from the Proletariat (lower class). Hence, the social institution of religion has its benefits and drawbacks at an individual and societal level.
Religion of Islam
As I was born into a Muslim family, growing up I learnt all about how religion of Islam was a ray of light in the darkness of jahiliya (ignorance). Historically, before 7th century in the Middle Eastern countries, people had a barbarian style of living — rape, robbery, violence, slavery was common, baby girls were buried alive, people would kill over disputes, and there were no rules and regulations to run the system. In short, the Middle Eastern society was a chaos and on the emergence of Islam, all these ills were put to an end through exposure of Islamic teachings to the people.
Islam was a religion that introduced basic human rights to Middle Eastern people and taught them the differentiation of right from wrong. Islam laid down a strong foundation of an egalitarian system and brought peace and harmony into the society.
Slavery in Islam
Slavery is any scheme in which the laws of property are applied to individuals, enabling the ownership, purchase and selling of other individuals as a form of property de jure (i.e. legally). A slave cannot willingly withdraw from such an agreement and this contract operates without remuneration. Most cultures in history have practiced slavery. In pre-Islamic times, slavery was prevalent and recognized by many ancient legal systems. Slavery was done by various means at the time; people were enslaved by kidnapping and capture, battles, and debts.
However, Islam narrowed the origins of slavery to eliminate it. Many of aforementioned means were abolished by Islam.
In the farewell sermon of Holy Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) he stated “..all mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by taqwa (piety) and good action..” This statement from sermon reinforces the belief of how in Islam no human is above the other and hence, one cannot have authority over the other in a manner that their basic human rights are stripped away from them. Humans are born free, and they must live a life of freedom till the day they die.
Right-hand possessions in Islam
However, growing up I felt discontent with the verse “ …(The believers) Who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the war captives) whom their right hands possess- for (in their case) they are free from blame”. [Quran 23, 5–6]
In this verse, God is prohibiting Muslims from indulging into any sexual activities out of their marriage or with anyone besides their “right-hand possessions.” Right-hand possessions in the context are the female war captives that Muslim males are allowed to keep as concubines after a war. Furthermore, they are allowed to be intimate with them.
This comes across as highly problematic since allowance of concubinary in Islam conflicts with the practice of slavery, and Zina. If we look at it from an outsider’s perspective right hand possessions are not much different from slaves as they are under the possession of their owners. This further contradicts with the concept of Zina, as by definition Zina is the practice of indulging into sexual activities outside of marriage and concubines are not exactly one’s wives, hence how is intimacy between the possessor and the concubine permissible?
In order to find the answers to aforementioned concerns, I decided to do a research upon slavery and concubinary in Islam. The research was surrounded by questions such as: what is slavery and to what extent is it prohibited, and what is concubinary and what makes it any different from Zina?
Controversial Analysis: Sexual Relations with Slaves
Slavery and concubinary indeed are bitter-sweet topics that, to this day, cause a lot of controversy. Slavery, as explained above, is any scheme under which the rules of property law are extended to persons, enabling individuals to possess, purchase and sell other individuals as a type of property de jure. However, an extensive review of academic literature on these topics revealed that Islam commanded Muslims to treat their slaves no less than their own brothers and slavery is allowed in limited scenarios such as war.
One needs to understand that slavery and concubinary are indeed outdated practices. There was a time when these practices were common and individuals from lower classes were exploited significantly. But, at the emergence of Islam these practices were deemed acceptable in very specific instances such as war. Moreover, even in those instances where they were deemed acceptable, various guidelines were given by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) regarding their treatment. Slaves were asked to be treated as their own family and Muslim males were permitted to marry their concubines. The concubines were to have property rights and treated no less than a legitimate partner. Hence, once these concubines were a legitimate partner having their own property rights, the intimacy between the the two would not be considered as zina.
Conclusively, Islam did not immediately abolish slavery in its typical manner of enforcing rulings but abolished it by degrees to maintain social order; a societal order that was previously built and run on the backs of slaves. The holy book of Muslims, Quran includes a range of laws aimed at improving the slave situation. It recommends the liberation of slaves, and commands believers to treat their slaves like their own family member. Not only that, Islam even put an end to the practice of using derogative “slave” or “servant” terms so it was stipulated that the term “Fatah” (boy) or “Fatat” (girl) would be used for the captives.
However, one must reflect upon the ambiguity that if a Muslim man was allowed to keep a female war captive, as a right-hand possession or marry them, why were not Muslim females given the same right? The issue presented is that in the olden times, it was necessary to know who the biological father was for inheritance purposes. However, if in today’s time and age, slavery becomes prevalent in specific scenarios such as war; will women be allowed to keep male concubines since through DNA tests it is convenient to identify the biological parents?
After an extensive research, I found out that in the past, it was never about marrying several people for the sake of fulfilling sexual desires, but about giving support.
Back then, men were the main bread winners and when it was about a woman working it was mostly (unfortunately) prostitution. Considering that there were so many widows who lost their husbands in war, life was hard for these women. However, today, both men and women can work, and we do not live in days where there is no job for either gender.
On the other hand, the justification given to the allowance of concubinary is that in the past, women did not have many sources of income; hence, as mentioned above, they would turn towards prostitution and expose themselves to an exploitative illegal industry if they did not have any shelter.
However, male war captives were employed by families to maintain the socio-economic order hence why couldn’t the females be employed as well? Instead of keeping them as right-hand possessions, why weren't they kept as maids or servants who could provide their domestic services and get paid?
Besides this ambivalence, Islam indeed was a religion that enhanced the living style of middle-eastern people in the past and introduced a socio-economic system that reduced the disparity between individuals due to age, gender and class.
