Editing Sharia (section)

==== Women, non-Muslims, slaves ====
{{Main|Women in Islam|Dhimmi|Islamic views on slavery|History of slavery in the Muslim world}}
In both the rules of civil disputes and application of penal law, classical Sharia distinguishes between men and women, between Muslims and non-Muslims, and between free persons and slaves.{{sfn|Vikør|2014}}

[[File:Slavezanzibar2.JPG|thumb|180 px|[[Zanzibar]] child slave sentenced to transport logs by Arab master in Sultanate, 1890s]]
Traditional Islamic law assumes a patriarchal society with a man at the head of the household.{{sfn|Stewart|2013|p=502}} Different legal schools formulated a variety of legal norms which could be manipulated to the advantage of men or women,{{sfn|Lapidus|Salaymeh|2014|p=212}} but women were generally at a disadvantage with respect to the rules of inheritance and witness testimony, where in some cases a woman's witness testimony is effectively treated as half of that of a man.{{sfn|Stewart|2013|p=502}} Various financial obligations imposed on the husband acted as a deterrent against [[Triple talaq|unilateral divorce]] and commonly gave the wife financial leverage in divorce proceedings.{{sfn|Lapidus|Salaymeh|2014|p=212}} Women were active in Sharia courts as both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide variety of cases, though some opted to be represented by a male relative.{{sfn|Lapidus|Salaymeh|2014|p=213}}{{sfn|Vikør|2014}}

Sharia was intended to regulate affairs of the Muslim community.{{sfn|Vikør|2014}} Non-Muslims residing under Islamic rule had the legal status of [[dhimmi]], which entailed a number of protections, restrictions, freedoms and legal inequalities, including payment of the [[jizya]] tax.{{sfn|Nettler|2009}} Dhimmi communities had legal autonomy to adjudicate their internal affairs. Cases involving litigants from two different religious groups fell under jurisdiction of Sharia courts,{{sfn|Vikør|2014}} where (unlike in secular courts){{sfn|Esposito|DeLong-Bas|2018|p=85}} testimony of non-Muslim witnesses against a Muslim was inadmissible in criminal cases{{sfn|Masters|2009}} or at all.{{sfn|Lapidus|2014|p=351}} This legal framework was implemented with varying degree of rigor. In some periods or towns, all inhabitants apparently used the same court without regard for their religious affiliation.{{sfn|Vikør|2014}} The Mughal emperor Aurangzeb imposed Islamic law on all his subjects, including provisions traditionally applicable only to Muslims, while some of his predecessors and successors are said to have abolished jizya.{{sfn|Jones-Pauly|2009}}{{sfn|Hardy|1991|p=566}}  According to Ottoman records, non-Muslim women took their cases to a Sharia court when they expected a more favorable outcome on marital, divorce and property questions than in Christian and Jewish courts.{{sfn|Lapidus|Salaymeh|2014|p=360}}  Over time, non Muslims in the Ottoman Empire could be more or less likely to use Islamic courts. For example, in 1729 at the Islamic court in [[Galata]] only two percent of cases involved non-Muslims whereas in 1789 non-Muslims were a part of thirty percent of cases.'''<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gocek|first=Fatma Muge|date=2005|title=The Legal Recourse of Minorities in History: Eighteenth-Century Appeals to the Islamic Court of Galata|journal=Interdisciplinary Journal of Middle Eastern Studies|pages=53, 54}}</ref> '''Ottoman court records also reflect the use of Islamic courts by formerly non-Muslim women.'''<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Baer|first=Marc|date=August 2004|title=Islamic Conversion Narratives of Women: Social Change and Gendered Religious Hierarchy in Early Modern Ottoman Istanbul|journal=Gender & History|volume=16|issue=2 |pages=426, 427|doi=10.1111/j.0953-5233.2004.00347.x|s2cid=145552242 }}</ref> '''As it was illegal for non-Muslims to own Muslims and for non-Muslim men to marry Muslim women in the Ottoman empire, conversion to Islam would have been an option for non-Muslim women to free themselves of a spouse or master they did not want to subject to.'''<ref name=":2" /> '''However, this would likely lead to them being shunned by their former community.<ref name=":2" />

[[File:V.M. Doroshevich-East and War-Eunuch near Door of Sultan's Harem.png|thumb|Chief Eunuch of [[Abdul Hamid II]] (1912)]]
Classical fiqh acknowledges and regulates slavery as a legitimate institution.{{sfn|Stewart|2013|p=502}} It granted slaves certain rights and protections, improving their status relative to Greek and Roman law, and restricted the scenarios under which people could be enslaved.{{sfn|Lewis|1992|p=7}}{{sfn|El Achi|2018}} However, slaves could not inherit or enter into a contract, and were subject to their master's will in a number of ways.{{sfn|Lewis|1992|p=7}}{{sfn|El Achi|2018}} The labor and property of slaves were owned by the master, who was also entitled to sexual submission of his unmarried slaves.{{sfn|El Achi|2018}}{{sfn|Ali|2010|p=39}}

Formal legal disabilities for some groups coexisted with a legal culture that viewed Sharia as a reflection of universal principles of justice, which involved protection of the weak against injustices committed by the strong. This conception was reinforced by the historical practice of Sharia courts, where peasants "almost always" won cases against oppressive landowners, and non-Muslims often prevailed in disputes against Muslims, including such powerful figures as the governor of their province.{{sfn|Hallaq|2009|p=61}}{{sfn|Hallaq|2009b|p=167}} In family matters the Sharia court was seen as a place where the rights of women could be asserted against their husband's transgressions.{{sfn|Vikør|2014}}