Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Race and Tribe: Difference between revisions

“And Kafaah in lineage. Thus the Quraysh are suitable matches for one another as are the (other) Arabs suitable matches for one another.”

I [Sahnun] said: What if he said to an Arab man, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’ or ‘Oh Persian!’ or ‘Oh ‎Roman!’ or ‘Oh Berber!’? Will the hadd [referring to the hadd punishment known as ‎‎hadd al-firyah – that is, the punishment of 80 lashes for slander] be implemented ‎according to Malik?‎

He [Ibn al-Qasim, Imam Malik’s companion for twenty years] said: Yes [the hadd will be ‎implemented].‎

I said: What if he said to a non-Arab [mawla], ‘Oh Persian!’, while he is a Roman? Or he ‎said to a Berber, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’ or ‘Oh Persian!’? Or he said to a Persian, ‘Oh Roman!’ or ‎‎‘Oh Nabatean!’? Will the hadd be implemented in this case according to Imam Malik or ‎not?‎

He said: Malik said: When it is said to a Persian, ‘Oh Roman!’, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’, or ‎something similar, then there is no hadd with regard to this. And it was differed upon ‎about Malik regarding whether or not the one who says to the Roman or Berber, ‘Oh ‎Ethiopian!’ would have the hadd upon him. And I think that there is no hadd upon him ‎‎[the criminal] except if he says to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’ while he ‎‎[the victim] is white. If there are among his [the victim’s] forefathers none who are black, ‎then the hadd is implemented. And if he [the criminal] described him [the victim] as an ‎Ethiopian, saying, ‘Oh son of an Ethiopian!’, and he [the victim] was a Berber, then the ‎Ethiopian and the Roman [descriptions] in this case are the same [that is,] if he [the ‎victim] was a Berber – and it [i.e. this ruling] is the best of what I have heard from the ‎speech of Malik. And it [i.e. this ruling] was confirmed with me unless it were said to him ‎‎[the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’, for that would be clear slander if there were no ‎black person among his forefathers.‎

I said: What if he said to a Persian or Berber, ‘Oh Arab!’‎ He said: There is no hadd upon him in this case.‎

I said: What if he said to an Arab, ‘Oh Qurayshi!’, or to a man of Mudar [the tribe], ‘Oh ‎Yemeni!’, or said to a man from Yemen, ‘Oh Mudari’‎ He said: I see all of this as the cutting-off of lineage, and I think that it warrants the hadd ‎just as Malik says regarding the cutting-off of lineage [a different hadd punishment than ‎the 80-lashes hadd punishment for slander – i.e. lying about lineage (“cutting off lineage”, ‎or qatt al-nasab) is not necessarily slander (qadhf), while saying someone is the “son ‎of a black person” or describing an Arab as a non-Arab is], because the Arab’s lineage is ‎traced through his forefathers, so whoever attributes him [the Arab] to other than his ‎forefathers has done away with his [the Arab’s] lineage, [and] thus the hadd is upon him. ‎‎[…]‎

I said: And if he said to an Arab, ‘You are not from the Arabs’, will he not suffer the hadd ‎according to Malik?‎ He said: Yes [the criminal will suffer the hadd]. […]‎

‎Chapter: He said to a man, ‘Oh son of a disabled person!’ or ‘Oh son of a black person!’ ‎‎[…]‎

I said: What if he [the criminal] said to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a cupper!’ [one who ‎conducts cupping therapy] or, ‘Oh son of a tailor!’‎ He said: Malik said: If he [the victim] is an Arab, then the hadd is implemented unless ‎there is among his [the victim’s] forefathers someone who did that type of work.‎ Malik said: And if he [the victim] is a non-Arab, I hold that he [the criminal] should swear ‎by Allah that he did not intend thereby the cutting-off of lineage, and there is no hadd ‎upon him, and upon him is the tazeer [i.e. some other discretionary punishment ‎decided by the judge – these punishments are not allowed to exceed 40 lashes].‎ I said: why is it [the ruling] differentiated in this [case] between the Arab and the non-‎Arab? ‎ He said: Because they [i.e. cupping and tailoring] are the work of the non-Arabs.‎

I said: And if he [the criminal] said to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’‎ He said: The hadd will be implemented upon him according to Malik if he [the victim] ‎was an Arab or a non-Arab unless there is a black person among his forefathers. […]‎

‎Chapter: Regarding he who said to a white man, ‘Oh son of a black person’ or ‘Oh one ‎blind in an eye!’ and he is healthy [i.e. not blind] […]‎

I said: What about the man who says to an Arab, ‘Oh non-Arab!’ Is he punished with the ‎hadd or not according to Malik?‎ He said: Yes [the criminal is punished with the hadd].‎ I said: What about the man who says to an Arab, ‘Oh slave!’ Is he punished with the hadd ‎or not according to Malik?‎ He said: Yes [the criminal is punished with the hadd].‎

I said: What if he said to a non-Arab, ‘Oh slave!’ - will he be lashed according to the hadd ‎or not according to Malik?‎ He said: I do not remember it [i.e. the ruling] from Malik, but I hold that there is no hadd ‎upon him. […]‎

‎Chapter: Regarding the one who was slandered and then left Islam‎

I said: What if I [Sahnun, being a criminal] slandered a man and then that man [the ‎victim] left Islam, thereafter returned to Islam, and then demanded of [i.e. against] me ‎the hadd [that it should be imparted against Sahnun] - Would you smite [i.e. lash] me for ‎him or not?‎ He said: There is no hadd upon his [the revert’s] slanderer [i.e. the criminal].‎

The superiority of Arabism is a superiority of class [jins] and not individual, for the ‎devout and pious non-Arab is better than the Arab who is negligent about the truth of ‎Allah. Also, the superiority of Arabism is choice from Allah almighty. It is possible that the ‎wisdom behind this is apparent to us, and it is also possible that the wisdom behind this is not apparent to us – except ‎that there‏ ‏are in the Arab those attributes and faults that indicate the face of this ‎preference. […]‎

He [Ibn Taymiyyah], Allah have mercy upon him, said: “That which the Sunnis believe is ‎that the Arab race is superior to the non-Arab race: their Hebrews, Syriacs, Romans, ‎Persians, and others.‎

‎“The Quraysh are the most of superior of the Arabs, the Bani Hashim are the most ‎superior of the Quraysh, and the messenger of Allah is the most superior of the Bani ‎Hashim, for he is the most superior creation as an individual and the most superior ‎among them in lineage.‎

‎“Also, the superiority of the Arab, then the Quraysh, and then the Bani Hashim is not ‎merely due to the existence of the prophet among them – even if this is part of their ‎superiority. Rather, they are superior in and of themselves. Thus, the messenger of Allah ‎is proven to be superior in person and lineage, otherwise circularity is necessitated. […]‎

‎“This is why it has come in a hadith: ‘Love of the Arab is faith [iman], and hatred for ‎them is hypocrisy’. […]‎

‎“And know that the hadiths regarding the superiority of the Quraysh and then the ‎superiority of Bani Hashim are many - this is not the place for listing them - and they ‎indicate this matter as well, for the Quraysh are to the Arabs as the Arabs are to ‎humankind. And this is how the Sharia came. […]‎

‎“The reason for this superiority – and Allah knows best – is what they have been favored ‎with in their intellects, tongues, morals, and deeds, and that is because superiority is ‎either by beneficial knowledge or righteous deeds. Also, knowledge has a basis, and that ‎is the strength of the intellect – that is in memorization and understanding; perfection ‎also, and that is in the power of logic – that is in explanation and expression. And the ‎Arabs are better at understanding than others, better preserved, and more capable of ‎explanation and expression. And their tongue is the most perfect of tongues in ‎explanation, at differentiating different and similar meanings, and combines many ‎meanings in a few words.‎

‎“And as for deed, this is based on morals, which are based on natural instincts in the ‎soul. And their instincts are more obedient to the good than those of others, for they are ‎closest to generosity, gentleness, courage, loyalty, and other such praiseworthy moral ‎traits.” End.‎

So this hadith is a primary text about the preference of Arabs over others and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs. And this is what the Imams have chosen from the………of their books, and even in individual books such as the book of Qurb about the merit of Arabs, authored by the great Imam al-Hafiz Zayn al-din al-`Iraqi. And it was summarized by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others.

Therefore the preference of Arabs over other nations, and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs is affirmed in the Sacred Law. Allah has even preferred some months over other months and some days and nights of over others, as well as places. So in the same way, Allah Glorious and Exalted is He, has chosen some men over others, such as the prophets over others and even some prophets over other prophets. Muslims should not have any objection to this, because all of this returns to the wisdom of the Most Wise, Glorious is He, who is not asked about what He does, but rather, they are the ones who are asked. So after a Muslim has believed in Allah as his Lord, the Truth, and that there is no God but Him, then he should know that this is from among His matters, Blessed and High is He, and there is nothing but magnificent wisdom in it that we might see or that we might not see. Either way, we are only responsible for submitting to His rule, Glorious is He. And among His rulings is that Arabs are preferred over others and that some Arabs are better than other Arabs, as the above hadith clearly explained. So it is not appropriate for anyone to disagree in this when the proof is perfectly valid.

And there should be no disagreement in what has just preceded nor any disagreement in what appears in the Magnificent Book and in the sunna where we find that the real source of Allah’s preference is God-fearingness (taqwa) which result in the good deeds that people earn and that they are accounted for. So whoever sends forth good for himself, Allah has preferred him over those who have sent forth evil. As for the preference of an Arab over a non-Arab, and the preference of some Arabs over others, this is not a deed that one can earn. Rather, it is a bounty that Allah gives to whom He wills. So he may will something for these people, and there is no objection to your Lord’s rule. This is like the preference of some days over others, because the mind reasons that all days are the same in and of themselves, and there is no distinction that might appear between them. However, the mind can understand why something is better if there is not ……….. So the Sacred law came and affirmed the preference of some over others, and for some of those things there were reasons and wisdoms, such as the preference of the night of Power over others because the Majestic Qur’an was revealed during it. And in some of these things, the wisdom is not apparent to us and so this falls into the chapter of absolute obedience, such as the number of cycles (rak`ahs) in the prayer.

It is obligatory on a Muslim to believe that Arabs are preferred over other nations because there is a proof for it. However, this is not one of the pillars of our religion such that if someone rejected this, they would be considered outside of Islam. But if one does reject this, one has sinned for not believing in it because it is an affirmed matter according to a clear rigorously authenticated hadith. Also, this issue is not something that is commonly known among most Muslims, so for this, one should not hasten to blame one who disagrees with it. It is necessary, rather, to tell him about the issue.

And the fact that Arabs are preferred over others does not mean that a non-Arab can not have a higher merit in the religion than an Arab, because a person earns the good deeds that Allah has recommended we compete for. This is the highest merit of God-fearingness and this will be the basis upon which things are decided in the hereafter. However, the merit of the Arabs will still remain, in terms of their respect and exaltation being higher than others. And from this some hadiths have come to us about the Quraysh being put first for the caliphate before others, such as the hadith in Bukhari (#3500) on the authority of Mu`awiyah, may Allah be well pleased with him who said, ” I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘This matter of government belongs to the Quraysh. Anyone who takes a hostile attitude to them will be thrown on his face, as long as they are true to the faith.” And Bukhari also related (#3501) on the authority of Ibn `Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, that he said, “Government continues to belong to the Quraysh, even if they are (no more than) two.”