Was This Loophole For Prostitution Of Slaves Allowed?
Sorry for stepping into your discussion, but I felt it was appropriate to respond. The quotation you referred to is essentially claiming that repeatedly selling a female slave, having intercourse with her, and then returning her under the pretext of “discontent” was a legal method and was used as an accepted form of prostitution. To understand this issue properly, it is necessary to distinguish between Islamic legal principles and historical practices. What Islamic law permitted was that if a woman was lawfully owned by a man, he could have relations with her under the concept of milk al-yamin. This was not introduced as a substitute for marriage in an ideal sense, but rather as a regulation within the pre-existing global system of slavery at that time. Even then, it was subject to conditions, such as waiting periods, protection of lineage, the status of umm walad if she bore a child, and the prohibition of unjust harm or exploitation. However, purchasing a woman merely for temporary sexual use and then returning her according to a pre-arranged plan contradicts the spirit of Shariah. Jurists have regarded deception, legal tricks, and artificial contractual arrangements in sales as impermissible. If a sale is carried out with the hidden intention of having intercourse once and then returning her on some pretext, this effectively becomes a legal stratagem to disguise prostitution under the cover of ownership. In Islamic law, such stratagems are generally considered invalid or at the very least sinful, because intention and purpose carry significant weight. It should also be remembered that the Qur’an explicitly prohibited forcing slave women into prostitution during the pre-Islamic era. If a system involves repeatedly using a woman with different men while the original owner profits from it, this comes dangerously close to what was prohibited. Therefore, it cannot simply be justified by saying that ownership made everything lawful. Historically, if such abuses occurred in the Ottoman Empire or any other Muslim society, they should be viewed as social corruption or misuse of the legal framework, not as a clear and sanctioned ruling of Islam itself. Throughout history, deviations have occurred in many societies, but they should not automatically be attributed to the core principles of the religion. In summary, buying a woman solely for temporary sexual benefit and returning her according to a prior arrangement goes against the ethical and legal objectives of Shariah, and describing it as “legitimate prostitution” is not an accurate representation of Islamic legal and Qur’anic principles.