02-17-2009, 07:05 AM
Why are we discussing Mahabharatam for role of Christianity and Islam in slavery? Is it because we want to contrast with the nature and practice of slavery in Christianity and Islam. An important difference at least with Islam is that since Islam is claimed primarily to be a revelation from "Allah", the Quranic injunctions about slavery become "Allah-given" (specially the chapter of Al-baqara, and references to "right-hand possessions"). I am yet to find any reference to slavery being justified as "Brahma"-given or "Shiva"-given in any "Hindu" texts, or even in the Mahabharatam. Regarding confusion about "slavery" from Indic viewpoint, also Arthasastra and Manu are important texts - in Arthasastra, slavery is mentioned in the same context of contract labour, and there are other provisions that are in sharp contrast to European slavery concepts. Slavery relations could also have been reconstructed in the modern period by the British when they changed dependency relations into bonded and subsequently "slave" labour. Islam's role in African slave trade is also a less discussed area - the Arba slave traders role in trans-Saharan slavery and development of the trade and practice which was tapped into by the British at the beginning of the Atlantic slave-trade should be discussed.