Someone sent me this hadith (given with no context) on twitter, hoping to score a cheap point:
I emailed a knowledgable friend to ask about its interpretation. He wrote back:
Salam Paul,
This hadith needs to be read in light of another hadith which states…
عن أبي الطفيل عامر الكناني قال : ضحك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلّم ثم قال : ألا تسألوني مما ضحكت ؟ قلنا : يا رسول الله مما ضحكت ؟ قال : رأيت ناسا من أمتي يساقون إلى الجنة في السلاسل ، ما أكرهها إليهم ! قلنا : من هم ؟ قال : قوم من العجم يسبيهم المهاجرون فيدخلونهم في الإسلام
Abi Tufayl Amer al-Kinani said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) laughed and then said: Are you going to ask me about what I was laughing about? We said: Oh Messenger of Allah, what were you laughing about? He said: I saw people from my Ummah being herded into paradise in chains! We said: Who are they? He said: A group of non-Arabs taken prisoner by the Muhajirun and eventually enter paradise. [Collected by al-Haythami and authenticated by al-Albani]
Ibnul Jawzi said that this hadith is referring to people who were taken prisoner and then when they came to know about Islam and its beauty, they embraced it. They weren’t coerced into accepting Islam, but what led to their accepting Islam was ironically their initial capture and imprisonment.
So the Prophet (peace be upon him) is expressing his delight in the fact that the Muslim’s character and morals are so great, that even their prisoners of wars are getting impressed and adopting Islam eventually. It does not mean that they are being forced to accept Islam, nor does it mean that they are being imprisoned till they do or that they were imprisoned for that very purpose. The rules of war in Islam are known and need to be borne in mind.
Badrul Deen al-‘Aini in his commentary on Saheeh al-Bukhari said that the scholars differed whether this hadeeth only applied to the Sahabah (which may be the case, since the Prophet said “muhajirun” in that narration), but regardless, that’s not really the point.
Thanks,
Categories: Hadith, Islamophobia
Blogging Theology 
It would be possible to do the same and cherry pick statements out of context in order to portray Christianity as supporting slavery:
The Christian Council of Gangra issued a statement supporting slavery:
“If anyone, on the pretext of religion, teaches another man’s slave to despise his master and to withdraw from his service, and not serve his master with good will and all respect, let him be anathema.” ~ M. Fiedler & L. Rabben, Ed., “Rome has spoken…A guide to forgotten Papal statements and how they have changed through the centuries,” Crossroad, (1998) Page 81.
Unfortunately even when read within context the NT Bible clearly condones slavery:
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
The unknown authors of NT even portray Jesus as clearly approving thef beating slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong.
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)
LikeLike
Here’s a good one:
Jesus taught his disciples to “hate” their ‘father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters’
see Luke 14:26.
LikeLiked by 1 person
if hate could mean “love less than”
than love could mean “hate less than”
but we all know HATE means HATE
LikeLike
The age old perennial accusation that Islam condones slavery has been refuted ad nauseam on this blog and elsewhere:
Islam & Slavery by Shaykh Hamza Yusuf
https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/05/28/islam-slavery-by-shaykh-hamza-yusuf/
Its a tired old accusation. Meanwhile as verses above indicate, there are some serious concerns about Biblical teachings in regard to slavery.
LikeLike
This transparent and deceitful attempt by missionaries can be easily seen through when one remembers the following:
“There is NO COMPULSION whatsoever IN RELIGION; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is the same dishonorable tactic that Christian Missionaries used when they inserted the word “rape” in the translation of the original Arabic Hadeeth which never mentioned the word.
The blatant deceit and dishonesty of many Christian apologists never ceases to amaze me. It is sad how they sell out their own moral values and principles and are so readily willing to sink to the lowest depths in order to unscrupulously spread so much lies, slander, confusion and misunderstanding about Islam – all in order to justify their own false doctrines and beliefs, which were not even taught by Prophet Jesus himself.
What a dishonest and untruthful act in betrayal of the honest truth as taught by the true Abrahamic faith tradition!! I think all decent Christians should be ashamed of such sinful tactics which are used so often by so many Christian apologetic polemicists today. Other more good and honest Christians should call these disingenuous apologists out on such tactics in defense of the honest truth. Otherwise such sinful acts will bring shame on the name of those whose silence often seems to agree with such shameful deeds.
LikeLike
“Jesus taught his disciples to “hate” their ‘father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters’”
“there are cogent reasons for not using Mt, 10:37 to establish the meaning of Lk .14:26. One reason is quite simple: one cannot assume that Luke’s readers had read Matthew at the time Luke was written. At the time Luke was being written, the New Testament, as we know it, did not exist. It was not complete, and that applies to all four gospels. Therefore, it is implausible for the author of Luke to use a powerful word such as miseo, and then hope that someone would have read Matthew in order to explain what Luke meant. Rather, one would expect that Luke will use words that the audience will understand from the way that those words are used in the language of the reader. The Greek word miseo has as consistent and as strong meaning as any word in the entire Greek lexicon . It does not vary or is not subject to as much flexibility as other words may be. Matthew’s reading can also be explained without having to change the meaning of the word miseo in Luke. Matthew may not have liked the strong and harsh tone of Lk. 14:26, and so he changed it. “
LikeLike
Good answer! MashaAllah.
However, I think the most important lesson from this post is this statement
“I emailed a knowledgeable friend to (((ask))) about its interpretation”
Yes! That what I encourage every muslim to do if he faced a situation like that.
The prophet (ﷺ) said
“The cure for ignorance is inquiry” Sunan Abu Dawood.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Again, we must keep in mind the uncertain nature of many sahih hadiths.
But to clarify, I overestimated the uncertainty in hadiths…indeed, there is much uncertainty and problematic aspects of the hadith transmissions but it is not as weak as I mentioned in my computations (for example the 0.95 x 0.95 x 0.95 ….because of the issue of corroborating hadiths.
If there are corroborating isnads and there are (most of the time only one companion and often only one successor but usually more than one of the subsequent 4 nodes in the chain of transmission), then that greatly reduces the uncertainty. However, much uncertainty remains and corroboration itself is subject to some uncertainty because of the theory of isnad spread.
Allahu alam.
LikeLike