Narration Of Sahabi Suwaybit And Nuayman Degrading And Making Fun Of Slaves
I write in response to the last thread, where I was corrected upon my incorrect perception of ” slave exchange ” permit.
My misconceptions have been cleared by reading from the thread, but only two question stands:
Why did the slaves have to BUY their freedom? Why could they not be freed, if ransom was not fixed for their release?
This makes Muslims back then look like kidnappers ( nauthubillah ): if the captive, or someone on behalf of the captive did not fix a ransom, then the captive would remain a captive and serve the Muslims, and the captive and their relatives would never reunite.
Why was this ransom important?
And why was their other mean of being free, providing service to their captor’s community?
These poor captives should not have to do a SINGLE bidding of their captors, and should be released without giving a SINGLE penny!
And one point I still stand with about this regard: if Muslims were taking ransom in exchange of captives, this means there was no meaning to being a captive, if their release was given to them in exchange of a few coins. This means Muslims didn’t have a reason for declaring peoples as captives, and were just looking for quick way to make profit! If Muslims wanted to, they would release captive upon request, without taking ransom or making them do their bidding!
why were these regulations the common practice?
I’m sorry if I write anything incorrect or disrespectful. If I do, please correct me.