Rape in Islamic Law
This article or section is being renovated.
Rape, known in Islamic law as zina bil-ikrah or zina bil-jabr (literally "fornication by force"), is generally defined by Muslim jurists as forced intercourse by a man with a woman who is not his wife or slave and without her consent. As with enslaved females, according to Islamic law, married women are required to oblige their husbands sexual advances - raping one's slave or wife is permissible. The concept of "rape" is thus deemed to be equally non-existent in the contexts of both marriage and slavery.
A small number of hadiths are cited to support the Islamic punishments for rape. These narrations relate to the rape of free women and of female slaves who are not owned by the perpetrator. However, the Qur'an, on numerous occasions, permits Muslim men to have sexual relations with their own female slaves (famously referred to as "what your right hand possesses"), often in conjunction with the commandment for men to keep otherwise chaste. In addition, there are narrations in which female captives were raped prior to being ransomed back to their tribe.
The male rapist may be punished with a hadd penalty - stoning (if he is married) or lashings (if he is unmarried) - just as he would receive for ordinary Zina (fornication, or unlawful intercourse). There is no punishment for the rape victim if she is able to prove that she was raped. Four witnesses are required to prove that she was raped. Jurists disagree on whether the rapist must also pay a dowry as compensation to the victim. A controversial position of some modern jurists is that the hadd penalty for outlaws should apply to rapists (hadd Hirabah), described in Quran 5:33. Others say that rape can be treated by the judge as an offence that receives Tazir (discretionary) punishment (as in Pakistan, for example). These approaches avoid the impractical four witnesses requirement for applying a zina hadd penalty in absence of a confession from a rapist. In some other modern courts a woman risks being accused of zina if she cannot prove to this standard that she has been raped.
Kecia Ali, Associate professor of religion, Boston University (a Muslim convert) says regarding sex with slaves: "For premodern Muslim jurists, as well as for those marginal figures who believe that the permission [for slavery] still holds, the category “rape” doesn’t apply: ownership makes sex lawful; consent is irrelevant." Dr. Jonathan Brown, Associate Professor and Chair of Islamic Civilization at Georgetown University (also a Muslim convert) has made similar comments.
Rape in the Qur'an
There is no equivalent term for ‘rape’ in the Qur'an. And while chastity is encouraged as a virtue, it is frequently commanded alongside the recurring exception "except from their wives or those their right hands possess" (see Qur'an 23:1-6), encouraging men to pursue their sexual ends with those legal to them (their wives and slaves). There is no verse in the Qur'an which explicitly discourages forced sex.
Surah 4 is one of the surahs which discusses which women are lawful and forbidden to Muslim men. While the relevant verses in this surah, like much of the substantive content of the Qur'an, can border on the unintelligible in the absence of considerable context, the authoritative Tafsirs (Qur'an exegeses) and Sahih (authentic) Hadiths (prophetic narrations) associated with these verses have together worked to standardize the Islamic interpretive and legal tradition to some extent. Although the contents of the Qur'an are deemed theologically prior to the hadiths and especially the manmade tafsirs, independent and especially novel interpretations of the Qur'an that flaunt hadith and tafsir tradition are not accepted, particularly when such an interpretation results in a divergent meaning.
Qur'an 4:24 - rape of slaves and captives who were previously married
This verse indicates that Muslims are permitted to marry those whom their right hands possess (female slaves) who already have husbands, so long as the dower is paid. Other verses show that slave owners did not even have to marry their slaves in order to have intercourse with them (See the section below Freedom and marriage as a universal requirement).
Sahih hadiths in Muslim and Abu Dawud detail the nature of the permission granted by this verse: some of Muhammad's fighters were reluctant to have sexual contact with female captives who were already married to the un-believing men of the defeated party.
The hadith in Sahih Muslim is found in a chapter dedicated to the topic; the chapter is entitled "Chapter: It is permissible to have intercourse with a female captive after it is established that she is not pregnant, and if she has a husband, then her marriage is annulled when she is captured".
Ibn Kathir, the most prominent of all Qur'an interpreters, had this to say in regards to verse 4:24:
Similarly in Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Qur'an interpretation by two Jalals namely: Jalaluddin Mahalli and Jalaluddin Suyuti, both authorities):
Some early Muslim scholars held that slave marriages, whether between slaves or between a slavewoman and her master, are disolved when ownership is transferred because two men cannot have licit access to the same woman. Later, a concensus emerged that the marriage and licit sexual access remains between the slave woman and her husband on transfer of ownership unless he relinquishes it, whatever his status (for example, by offering him money to divorce her).
Qur'an 23:1-6 & 70:29-30
Several other verses in the Qur'an mention sexual relations with slaves as a category distinct from wives, making it clear that sexual relations with female slaves are permitted without marrying the slave first. For example, Surah 23 makes mention of successful Muslims and their characteristics:
The instruction to "guard [one's] private parts" is the Qur'an's standard manner of commanding chastity. What one's "right hand possesses" is likewise the Qur'an's standard manner of referring to one's slaves. Successful believers are those who engage in sexual activities only with their wives and slaves.
The same idea reoccurs in surah 70:
Rape in the hadiths
Scenes of Muhammad's companions, and indeed Muhammad himself, engaging in sexual activity with slaves and captives are common throughout hadith literature. While the female perspective is largely absent, leaving the reader to speculate as to whether the female slave or captive would have been receptive to the advances of Muhammad and his companions, it is fair to assume that in at least some (if not most or indeed all) of these cases, the sexual activity occurred without the female's consent and thus qualified as rape. This is particularly clear in the examples that follow where Muhammad's companions initiate sexual contact with the captive women shortly after having slayed their sons, husbands, fathers, and brothers. At the very least, it can be said that in no such case does Muhammad intervene in and that in all such cases he actively permits what, by all appearances, is an instance of his companion's raping a captive or slave.
Muhammad has intercourse with his slave girl Maria bint Sham'un
Muhammad had a child with a slave girl of his known as Maria the Copt, who was a gift to him from the Governor of Alexandria. In a hadith from Sahih Muslim, a phrase translated as "slave girl" is, in the orignal Arabic, umm walad (أُمِّ وَلَدِ) (literally: "mother of the child") and is the title given to a slave concubine who bore her master a child.
The following hadith is graded Sahih by Dar-us-Salam:
Tafsir al-Jalalayn says of the verse referred to in this hadith:
An alternate, or additional circumstance for this verse has also been narrated in multiple sahih hadiths (in yet another version Sahih Muslim 9:3497, Muhammad ate honey at Hafsa's house instead of Zainab's).
"Honey" was also a sexual euphemism and an explicit example of its usage in this sense is found in a hadith in Abu Dawud:
Ali rapes an underage ward of the state
Another relevant hadith is one which concerns an incident which led to the famous event of Ghadir Khumm, which is much disputed between Sunnis and Shias. Both Sunni and Shia sources agree that Muhammad received complaints about 'Ali taking a slave-girl from the Khums (the fifth of all booty allotted for the state) to which those complaining felt that no private party was entitled.
The Arabic of the Sunni hadith below mentions 'Ali taking a Ghusl bath (which is mandatory after sexual contact or ejaculation), implying sexual activity. Later, at a place called Ghadir Khumm, Muhammad tried to pacify those who were upset with 'Ali by declaring Ali to be his Mawla. Mawla is an honorific meaning something between "follower", "ally", and "leader", which the Shia interpret to mean "successor of Muhammad". Thus, in some sense, Ali's having raped an underage captive becomes the immediate cause of what the Shi'a insist was the the announcement of Ali's succession. The emergent Sunni polemic here casts some doubt on the historical reliability of the hadith, yet, as a hadith included in Sahih Bukhari, it more than meets the Sunni requirements for authenticity.
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 1449), one of the most famous Hadith scholars of all time, points out in his seminal Fath al-Bari (the still-standard commentary on Sahih Bukhari) what several scholars before him noted: that in accounts of this event, Ali does not observe the required iddah (waiting) period to determine whether or not the girl was pregnant. Al-Asqalani quotes al-Khattabi who summarizes the possibilities: "she was either a virgin [strongly implying a young age in a culture where women married young], had not yet reached maturity, or Ali's ijtihad [independent reasoning] led him to not adhere to the waiting period in her case."
Muhammad's companions rape captives intended for ransom
On one occasion, presented with newly captured women, Muhammad's companions were only concerned about whether coitus interruptus ('azl) was permissible.
In another version of the same hadith in Sahih Muslim (also found in Malik's Muwatta and Abu Dawud), it is said that the Muslims' goal was to ransom the women back to members of the defeated party for monetary gain. It is explained that as a result of not wanting to get the women pregnant prior to ransoming them, Muhammad's companions inquired as to whether coitus interruptus was permissible.
Yet another version of the same story in Sahih Bukhari is even clearer about Muhammad's companions' sole concern being the potential detriment to the price of the captives if they were impregnated.
Umar tells a man to beat his wife for preventing intercourse with his slave girl
Abdullah ibn Umar (the son of the 2nd Caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab) said that his father ordered a man to have intercourse with a slave girl after his wife had tried to make this haram for him by means of adult suckling.
Ghusl (full body wash) not required between intercourse with slave girls
Imam Malik was asked about intercourse with multiple slave girls.
Explicit distinction between zina and legal intercourse
Since zina (fornication or adultery) only applies to intercourse with other than one's wives or female slaves, it is only in these contexts that rape is considered possible. The following narration graded hasan (good) by al-Albani in Abu Dawud explicitly makes this distinction by recognizing offspring with one's wives or slaves as legitimate, and included in inheritance, and by labeling the offspring with other women as illegitimate, and removed from inheritance.
The Prophet (ﷺ) decided regarding one who was treated as a member of a family after the death of his father, to whom he was attributed when the heirs said he was one of them, that if he was the child of a slave-woman whom the father owned when he had intercourse with her, he was included among those who sought his inclusion, but received none of the inheritance which was previously divided; he, however, received his portion of the inheritance which had not already been divided; but if the father to whom he was attributed had disowned him, he was not joined to the heirs.If he was a child of a slave-woman whom the father did not possess or of a free woman with whom he had illicit intercourse, he was not joined to the heirs and did not inherit even if the one to whom he was attributed is the one who claimed paternity, since he was a child of fornication whether his mother was free or a slave.
Muhammad's other female captives
On at least two occasions, according to accounts in sahih hadiths, Muhammad captured and cohabited with war captives Safiyah and Juwairiyah, presumably against their will (having just led the slaughter of their families and tribes).
Surah 33 twice gives Muhammad explicit and direct permission to have sexual contact with his existing wives (having married more than a dozen times, he is prohibited here from marrying further) and with any slaves he may possess now or may acquire in the future.
Safiyah bint Huayy
Safiyah the daughter of Huayy was the wife of a Jewish Rabbi named Kinana. when Muhammad conquered the Jewish village of Khaibar, he had the Rabbi tortured and then killed. According to an account in Sahih Bukhari, Muhammad then took captive the Rabbi's wife.
Juwairiyah bint al-Harith
A hadith from Sunan Abu Dawud explains how, following a surprise attack on the Banu Mustaliq, Muhammad took captive the "very beautiful" Juwairiyah, making Aisha jealous.
A hadith in Sahih Bukhari confirms the same narrative.
Punishments for rape
Rape of a free woman
Muhammad ordered the stoning of a confessed rapist who attacked a free woman to whom he was not married.
Rape of another's slave
If the individual raped is a slave owned by other than the rapist, reparations are due to the owner of the slave in the form of a replacement slave or the amount by which the raped slave's value has been depreciated as a result of the rape. Hina Azam writes that "sexual ursupation of a slave woman was a form of property damage that required financial compensation to her owner for a depreciation of the property's value....usually equal to the amount by which she was depreciated by the act (this being of particular relevance if she was previously a virgin)".
Malik in his Muwatta confirms this punishment.
The authenticity of hadiths concerning the following incident in which Muhammad commands punishment by stoning for a man who has intercourse with his wife's slave are graded da'if (weak) by al-Albani, while Dar-us-Salam grade them hasan (good).
In another, similar incident, the rapist of his wife's slave is to be punished by stoning.
Limitations on rape
Avoiding severe physical injury
Beyond the temporary requirement of waiting past the Iddah period or conversion of a slave, the only restriction on raping one's slaves or wives is that the victims not incur severe physical injury in the process. However, this derives from a generic prohibition against incurring severe physical injury upon anyone at any time, and men are authorized to beat their wives and slaves as a form of physical discipline if they deny him sexual access or fail to obey him in some other mandatory capacity.
In practical terms, the relevance of the "do-no-harm" principle in this case is that a man should not penetrate his wives or slaves against their will if they are physically too small to withstand penetration (i.e. in the case of very young girls) or if they are seriously ill or injured to the point where penetration would inhibit their healing or magnify their injury. There is no consideration here for harm in the form of "mental anguish", and men are permitted to sexually utilize very young, ill, and/or injured wives and slaves against their will through means other than penetration (the example of "thighing" being one discussed explicitly by Islamic jurists) if such less egregious means will help avoid severe physical injury.
Waiting until the completion of the Iddah or childbirth
A hadith graded sahih by Dar-us-Salam in Abu Dawud describes the Iddah waiting period as the "one menstrual period" after acquisition of the slave wherein the new owner must abstain from sexual contact in order to ascertain whether or not the slave is pregnant, so as not to confuse paternity.
Another hadith graded sahih by Dar-us-Salam in Tirmidhi explains that if the slave is pregnant
Waiting until adult polytheist slaves convert, by force if necessary
Although Muhammad's men seem to have had intercourse with captive polytheist women whom they had captured during the expedition to Awtas/Autas, most jurists later ruled that this was later forbidden by Quran 2:221 (the verse only forbids marriage to polytheist women, but scholars inferred that this also applied to intercourse with slaves). Intercourse with Muslim, Christian, or Jewish slaves was not affected by this restriction.
Early scholars of fiqh devised a workaround for this restriction, including the allowance of raping younger captives who were polytheist:
- if Zoroastrian and idolatrous women are taken prisoner, they are coerced into Islam; if they embrace it, sexual relations with them are permissible and they can (also) be used as maidservants. If they do not embrace Islam, they are used as maidservants but not for sexual relations (wa idhā subhīna (sic) al-majūsiyyāt wa ‘abadat al awthān ujbirna 'alā al-Islām fa-in asl ama wutiʼna ma 'stukhdimna wa in lam yuslimna 'stukhdimna wa lam yūtaʼna).
The contradiction inherent in this passage is evident: despite the unspecified coercive measures, some of the women in question refused conversion and, consequently, the masters could not take full advantage of their services. If the only way to embrace Islam is pronouncing the declaration of faith, the conversion of a defiant woman may not be possible: it is not always feasible to force someone to utter the shahāda. According to a tradition transmitted on the authority of Hasan al-Basri, the Muslims used various devices to attain their objective: they turned the Zorastrian slave-girl toward the Ka‘ba, ordered her to pronounce the shahāda and to perform ablution. Her master then engaged in sexual relations after she had one menstruating period while in his house. Others hold that the master must teach the slave-girl to pray, to purify herself and to shave her private parts before any intercourse. The participation of the girl in this procedure is minimal, and this wording may be interpreted us a considerable lowering of the conversion requirements so that the girl becomes eligible for sexual intercourse as expeditiously as possible. Among the early traditionists, only a few were willing to go beyond this and allow sexual relations with a Zoroastrian slave-girl without insisting on at least a semblance of conversion.Shafi‘i's treatment of the issue is slightly different. Speaking of grown-up Zoroastrian or polytheist women taken into captivity, he maintains that no sexual relations with them are allowed before they embrace Islam without bringing up the question of converting them forcibly. If the female captives are minor but were taken captive with at least one of their parents, the ruling is the same. If, however, the girl was captured without her parents, or one of her parents embraced Islam, she is considered a Muslim and is coerced into embracing it (nahkumu lahā bihukm al-Islām wa nujbiruhā ‘alayhi). Once this happens, sexual relations with her are lawful.
While most Islamic scholars today are comfortable with at least the temporary abolition of slavery in light of the fact that Islamic scriptures universally praise the freeing of slaves as a meritorious act, few are comfortable with the idea of permanently and irreversibly amending divine law. As a result, the legal rulings relating to slaves and the technical permissibility of owning slaves under the proper circumstances (e.g. under the rule of a "legitimate khilafah", or caliphate) persist, as exemplified in the following fatwa from the most popular Islamic fatwa in the world.
Likewise, as with all rulings of the shariah, the basic rulings governing family relations are unchanging. It would be difficult even today to find a trusted Islamic authority that does not still, at some level, permit marital rape and give general license for wife beating as a potential means by which to compel one's able but unwilling spouse into sexual activity, among other things.
Modern revisionary perspectives and criticisms thereof
Violations of the spoils-distribution system as rape
Quote from al-Shafi'i
A quote from al-Umm of Imam al Shafi'i, the founder of the Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence, is sometimes misrepresented as forbidding slave owners from raping their female slaves.
It is clear, however, that "acquires by force" here refers to the manner in which the man gained possession of the slave girl, not a description of the later sexual act. Indeed, this quote comes from the section entitled ghasb (property usurpation). According to Islamic law, a fifth of all war and raid spoils (referred to as the Khum - literally "fifth"), including captives who may be sold for funds, is to be allotted for public spending. Taking and raping a captive from this public allotment, as Ali is reported to have in one instance, amounts to theft and zina (illegal intercourse). This, as well as taking and raping someone else's slave, is of course prohibited and punishable. Indeed, in the remainder of his many-volume legal work al-Umm, al-Shafi'i painstakingly outlines the laws regarding the sexual obligations of one's wives and slaves, in no place suggesting that rape of the female is punishable in these contexts.
Quote from Malik
A quote from the Muwatta of Imam Malik, founder of the Maliki school of jurisprudence, is also sometimes misrepresented in this vein. As with the quote taken from al-Umm, this quote from the Muwatta is likewise only referring to stolen slaves and has no bearing on one's own slaves and wives. Fines for raping slave girls were always paid to the master. And, just like Imam Shafi'i, Malik details the legal practices of slavery in several other places throughout the same text.
Hadith regarding the caliph Umar
A hadith in the Sunan of al-Bayhaqi describes the Caliph Umar punishing Dhiraar for raping a captive woman and is sometimes presented as evidence that one is not permitted to have sexual intercourse with slaves.
As with the quote taken from Imam Shafi'i, this almost certainly refers to a violation of the system for distributing war spoils. Dhiraar's intercourse with the captive girl was illegal and merited stoning not because of her captive status or lack of consent, but because he had intercourse with the girl without that girl having been allotted to him at the behest of the caliph (Umar in this case), who has the responsibility of distributing spoils. Neither captivity nor consent are mentioned as a factor in the punishment. Indeed, in a another hadith discussed above, Umar tells a man to have intercourse with his slave girl after his wife tried to prevent it.
Freedom and marriage as a universal requirement
Verses 4:23-24 (Quran 4:23-24) are sometimes presented as evidence for the idea that a man must first manumit and marry a slave in order to have sex with her. The verse lists the types of women a Muslim man is permitted to marry, one given option being his slave women, of whom he may free and marry. While 4:23-24 do not mention slaves outside of a marital context, several other verses (e.g. Quran 23:1-6 and Quran 70:29-30) make clear reference to sexual activity with slaves with whom the owner is not married by explicitly distinguishing between his sexual access to his wives and his sexual access to his slaves. The further example of Muhammad's companions raping captives from Banu al-Mustaliq prior to ransoming them (a scenario which effectively necessitates their non-marriage) confirms this idea.
In addition, there is the universally attested legal category of the Umm Walad (literally "mother of child") that is used by Islamic jurists to refer to those slaves who have given birth to one of their master's children. An Umm Walad is legally distinct from a free mother because she is still a slave. Indeed, the concept of Umm Walad is apparently attested even in the prophet's time according to a hadith in Sahih Muslim - further clarifying the matter is the fact that in this very hadith, Muhammad approves of the companion's sexual relations with his unmarried slave girl.
Encouragement to chastity as a prohibition on rape
Verse 24:33 (Quran 24:33), which instructs unmarried men to keep chaste and instructs slaveowners to "force not [their] maids to prostitution", is sometimes presented as evidence for the idea that sexual activity is only permitted in a marital context and that slaveowners may not compel their slave girls to sexual activity of any sort.
Chastity is instructed throughout the Qur'an and is repeatedly defined as the habit of one who "guards their private parts" from all except "their wives [of whom they may have up to four] and what their right hand possesses [i.e. female slaves, of whom they may have an unlimited number]" (e.g. Quran 23:6, Quran 33:50, Quran 33:52, and Quran 70:30). It is clear that, in the view of the Qur'an's author, an unmarried male may be considered chaste even if he engages in sexual activity with a technically unlimited number of women, so long as they are his slaves.
The portion of the verse which instructs slaveowners to "force not [their] maids to prostitution" has traditionally been understood in its simplest sense, which prohibits slaveowners from playing the role of a pimp and trafficking their slave women - such a business built on illegal intercourse is of course prohibited and, understood this way, the verse says nothing of novel import. Another accepted sense of this verse is that if a female slave desires her (or, say, her child's) freedom, her master ought to give her some legal means by which to pursue it, the alternative being her feeling compelled to prostitute herself to earn the funds necessary to purchase that freedom (traditional tafsirs also mention the also undesirable possibility of a master forcing a slave to prostitution as a condition for her freedom). Since such a temptation on the part of the slave girl is all the more plausible given the likelihood that she was captured in a war or raid where her people were both slaughtered and enslaved (leaving her with no means), and so the verse concludes by saying that if a slave girl is driven to such behavior, then Allah will be forgiving. And in the simpler sense, if her master forces her to prostitution, then Allah will forgive her for what was not in her control.
- Rape - A hub page that leads to other articles related to Rape
- The High Rape-Scale in Saudi Arabia - WomanStats Project (blog), January 16, 2013 (archived), http://womanstats.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/the-high-rape-scale-in-saudi-arabia/
- Susila, Muh Endriyo (2013). "Islamic Perspective on Marital Rape" 20 (2). Jurnal Media Hukum, p.328.
- Peters, R.. "Zinā or Zināʾ". in P. Bearman. Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.). Brill, 2012.
- Quran 24:4
- Dr Azman Mohd Noor, Punishment for rape in Islamic Law, Malayan Law Journal Articles  5 MLJ cxiv
- Kecia Ali, "The Truth About Islam and Sex Slavery History Is More Complicated Than You Think", Huffington Post, August 19th, 2016 (archived from the original), http://www.webcitation.org/6yjfMCtwF
- "In the case of a slave-concubine, consent was irrelevant because of the master's ownership of the woman in question" Brown, J.A.C. "Slavery & Islam", Chapter 7, London: Oneworld Publications, 2019
- "'slave rape' is a tough term to decipher from a Shariah perspective. A male owner of a female slave has the right to sexual access to her. Though he could not physically harm her without potentially being held legally accountable if she complained, her 'consent' would be meaningless since she is his slave." Comment by Dr. Jonathan AC Brown on his Reddit AMA session, 2016 Archive
- "(9) Chapter: It is permissible to have intercourse with a female captive after it is established that she is not pregnant, and if she has a husband, then her marriage is annulled when she is captured", Sahih Muslim (Book of Suckling), https://sunnah.com/muslim/17 See the three hadiths it contains: Sahih Muslim 8:3432, Sahih Muslim 8:3433, and Sahih Muslim 8:3434
- Kecia Ali, "Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam", Massachussets: Harvard University Press, 2010, pp. 154-160
- Quran 8:41
- لِاحْتِمَالِ أَنْ تَكُونَ عَذْرَاءَ أَوْ دُونَ الْبُلُوغِ أَوْ أَدَّاهُ اجْتِهَادُهُ أَنْ لَا اسْتِبْرَاءَ فِيهَا
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Fath al-Bari, 9, Dar Taybah, p. 487, https://www.google.com/books/edition/%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%AD_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A_%D8%AC_9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%BA%D8%A7%D8%B2%D9%8A/YzZJCwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%D9%84%D9%90%D8%A7%D8%AD%D9%92%D8%AA%D9%90%D9%85%D9%8E%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%90%20%D8%A3%D9%8E%D9%86%D9%92%20%D8%AA%D9%8E%D9%83%D9%8F%D9%88%D9%86%D9%8E%20%D8%B9%D9%8E%D8%B0%D9%92%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%A1%D9%8E%20%D8%A3%D9%8E%D9%88%D9%92%20%D8%AF%D9%8F%D9%88%D9%86%D9%8E%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%92%D8%A8%D9%8F%D9%84%D9%8F%D9%88%D8%BA%D9%90%20%D8%A3%D9%8E%D9%88%D9%92%20%D8%A3%D9%8E%D8%AF%D9%91%D9%8E%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%8F%20%D8%A7%D8%AC%D9%92%D8%AA%D9%90%D9%87%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8F%D9%87%D9%8F%20%D8%A3%D9%8E%D9%86%D9%92%20%D9%84%D9%8E%D8%A7%20%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%92%D8%AA%D9%90%D8%A8%D9%92%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%A1%D9%8E%20%D9%81%D9%90%D9%8A%D9%87%D9%8E
- Azam, Hina, "Rape", http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com, http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t349/e0075.
- Ruling on sexual intercourse with one's polytheistic slave-woman, Islamweb.net, November 14, 2014 (archived from the original), https://web.archive.org/web/20201227215257/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/272452/
- Bassam Zawadi, "Does Islam Permit Muslim Men to Rape Their Slave Girls?", Call to Monotheism (archived from the original), https://web.archive.org/web/20201112021758/https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/does_islam_permit_muslim_men_to_rape_their_slave_girls_
- Hina Azam, "Sexual Violation in Islamic Law: Substance, Evidence, and Procedure" New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015, p. 104
- Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459, Sahih Muslim 8:3371, Al-Muwatta 29:95, Sunan Abu Dawud :2167, and Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432
- See Tafsir Qurtubi 24:33 in particular; see also Tafsir al-Tabari 24:33, Tafsir Ibn Kathir 24:33, and Tafsirs 24:33 in general