If Rafidites are not Muslims according to Ulema can they be made into slaves?

[Abdul1234]

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullah

Imagine in the future there is a restored Sunni Caliphate of some form which becomes involved in a war with Rafidite Iran. Imagine the Caliphate defeats the Iranians but is left with a problems of over 50 million people, many of whom who are liable to try to restore twelver shiah rafidite rule to the country if left to their own devices.

Deobandi and Wahhabi Ulema both hold rafidites as being disbelievers therefore would it be lawful for proven rafidites to be enslaved like it is lawful to enslave disbelieving prisoners of war?

is there any existing scholarly work on the issue of whether it is possible to enslave a rafidite whose beliefs mean that he is not a Muslim even though he may call himself one?

and before any Shiahs on here get offended I am not suggesting that this should be done and neither do I think it would likely be a fitting thing for a Muslim to do with people who follow the Qur'an and the Messenger (saws) in a way, I am merely trying to understand what are the legal implications of these rulings from part of the Sunni Ulema.

and personally I doubt Allah would particularly be pleased with the one who tried to revive this institution, especially after good Muslims spent long centuries using their wealth to free slaves

[abid786]

Imagine the Caliphate defeats the Iranians but is left with a problems of over 50 million people, many of whom who are liable to try to restore twelver shiah rafidite rule to the country if left to their own devices.

Knowing many Persians, I highly doubt that many of them would want to reinstate Shia rule/law to Iran.

[Abdul1234]

Knowing many Persians, I highly doubt that many of them would want to reinstate Shia rule/law to Iran.

that's possible, there's certainly many who are already tired of it, but there's also a hardcore of self-whipping nut-jobs and its these that would likely form separatist terrorist groups against any Sunni invaders.

[Abdul1234]

and before you get the wrong idea and think that Muslims want to enslave people, they don't - slavery is best left in history and I am sure that this is what Allah always intended for it - I'm only asking this question as a very theoretical question about what would/may theoretically be legal under the Shariah based on these fatawa of disbelief that have been made about them.

[Abdul1234]

and what about Qadianis - is it right that they could theoretically be enslaved if the were taken as prisoners of war?

[Salamat]

and before you get the wrong idea and think that Muslims want to enslave people, they don't - slavery is best left in history and I am sure that this is what Allah always intended for it - I'm only asking this question as a very theoretical question about what would/may theoretically be legal under the Shariah based on these fatawa of disbelief that have been made about them.

There is nothing wrong with taking slaves from those who the muslims are able to defeat. Say, Godwilling, the muslims overcome the russians and/or Chinese, it would be permissible to take spoils of war including slaves.
However, as much as I find Rafidite Shi'ism abhorrent I'd not see it permissible to once again invade iran as if it is still a Zoroastrian country and take their people as slaves, that is madness and only hate filled fanatics who celebrate at the deaths of innocent shias in pakistan, iraq and elsewhere would be okay with that.

I always believed the sectarian diatribe in our books should be left there, and not to be enacted in our world, let the ulema debate the shia, no need for crazy
awwam to blow up anymore shia mosques...

[Abdul1234]

There is nothing wrong with taking slaves from those who the muslims are able to defeat. Say, Godwilling, the muslims overcome the russians and/or Chinese, it would be permissible to take spoils of war including slaves.
However, as much as I find Rafidite Shi'ism abhorrent I'd not see it permissible to once again invade iran as if it is still a Zoroastrian country and take their people as slaves, that is madness and only hate filled fanatics who celebrate at the deaths of innocent shias in pakistan, iraq and elsewhere would be okay with that.

I always believed the sectarian diatribe in our books should be left there, and not to be enacted in our world, let the ulema debate the shia, no need for crazy
awwam to blow up anymore shia mosques...

you are assuming that a future Sunni Caliphate will be able to establish cordial relations with the Iranian Republic (if it is still there) - what if it cannot?

I agree with you brother in the sense that anything that has not been forbidden is halal and clearly in the context of warfare it was permitted -

but not all things that are halal or that are even expressly permitted by Allah are liked by him -

for example think about divorce, which He himself describes as being the thing he hates most of the permitted things -

and in many many places Allah has encouraged us to free the slaves, freeing them as a charity or freeing them as an act of contrition for wrong doing or for our mistakes etc...

It is very clear that He loves us to free the slaves.

I may be very wrong in my understanding of this, but personally I'm pretty sure that although Allah has not forbidden it and has allowed it in the context of warfare I have a strong feeling that slavery is something He doesn't like and that it is permitted because of its necessity not because it is nice (just like divorce).

but really what I am asking is not whether it is a good idea for anyone to do so, and I am not asking whether it is nice,

rather what I am asking is whether the scholars (and the people who follow them) who have declared the Rafidite Shiah to be non-Muslims hold it as lawful or unlawful to enslave them if they fight the Sunnis?


and really I don't think it is the same thing at all as Pakistan's mad sectarian gang thing - I think that is something else all together.

[Abu Zakir]

They would perform Taqiya (dissimulation) like they have in the past when they were overpowered or a minority group living within a sunni majority. Sunnis would not have any idea who is a shia and who is not, it may temporarily suppress shiahism...but once the sunni dominance waned they would re-assert their power.

[Abdul1234]

They would perform Taqiya (dissimulation) like they have in the past when they were overpowered or a minority group living within a sunni majority. Sunnis would not have any idea who is a shia and who is not, it may temporarily suppress shiahism...but once the sunni dominance waned they would re-assert their power.

If say it was some time in the future and a Sunni Caliphate invaded Iran how could this situation be dealt with then?

Brother what do you think the scholars would probably say halal or haram to enslave and disperse them?

[Abdul1234]

Personally I think it is a bad idea and I hope it never happens, for two reasons...

1. they may have wrong beliefs but they call themselves Muslims and have some attachment to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah despite of them.

2. this view about their being disbelievers is not universal amongst the Sunni scholars - at the end of the day only Allah knows which Sunni view on them is correct.

3. at the end of the day slavery is not nice and it is almost certainly best left in the past InshaAllah, thanks to modern technology we have new far better alternatives to slavery for dealing with the problem of fanatical Shiah p.o.w.'s etc if this sort of problem should ever arise in the future (such as the possibility of pleasant secure re-education centres that using kindness and psychological methods to re-educate people who have harmful ideas), yes?