marriage. Allah Most High says concerning them: “There is no blame upon them for putting aside their outer garments, provided they do not display their adornment.” [al-Nur: 60]

He said: As for beautiful-faced Turkish slave women, it is utterly impossible for them to be like the slave women in the time of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. In matters of looking, such a woman must cover her entire body from the gaze of others.

He supported this with a sound and acceptable rationale, saying: The purpose of hijab is to conceal that which may give rise to temptation, unlike the case of prayer. Thus, a person is required to cover himself in prayer even if he is alone in a place where none but Allah can see him. In matters of looking, however, covering is only required where people may look. He said: Thus, the effective cause in this case differs from that in the other. The effective cause with respect to looking is the fear of temptation, and in this regard there is no difference between free women and slave women. His statement is undoubtedly correct, and it is the view that must be adopted.

His statement, “and an umm walad,” is the third category. An umm walad, or “mother of a child,” is a slave woman who has borne her master a child. She remains enslaved until her master dies; when he dies, she is emancipated by his death. Her ruling is that of a slave woman—that is, her awrah extends from the navel to the knee . . .

His statement, “and one who is partially emancipated,” is the fourth category; that is, one part of her is free and another part remains enslaved.

An example is a slave woman jointly owned by two men. If one of them emancipates his share, the remainder is emancipated, and its value is taken from the emancipating master and paid to the owner of the other half. If the one who emancipated his share is poor, the well-known position of the school is that the remainder is not emancipated. They reasoned that if the emancipation were to extend to the remainder, the co-owner would be harmed