what it commanded the free women.

The Sunnah, through actual practice, distinguished between them and the free women, though it did not do so with any sweeping verbal declaration. Rather, the settled custom of the believers was that the free women veiled themselves, while the bondwomen did not.

The Qur’an exempted from among the free women the elderly who no longer hope for marriage, and thus placed no duty of veiling upon them. It also exempted a class of men—those lacking sexual desire—thereby allowing women to reveal their concealed adornment before them, since no lust exists on either side. By the same logic, exempting certain bondwomen is even more warranted: namely, those whose failure to veil and display of adornment would plainly stir desire and temptation.

Just as among the close male relatives (maḥārim) there are stepsons and the like, toward whom passion and longing may arise, so that showing hidden adornment to them is forbidden, the Qur’anic address was issued in general terms that matched prevailing custom; whenever a situation falls outside that custom, its ruling departs from its counterparts. Accordingly, if the overt presence of a bondwoman and looking at her give rise to temptation, that must be prevented—exactly as would be done in any similar matter. The same principle applies between a man and other men, and between a woman and other women.

If a woman proves a temptation to women, or a man to men, the command to the onlooker to lower the gaze becomes binding just as the command to guard the private parts is. Hence, when bondwomen or boys are strikingly handsome and there is fear1 that gazing at them may lead to temptation, the ruling is the same, as the scholars have stated.

Al-Marwadhi said: I asked Abū ʿAbd Allāh—meaning Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal—about a man who looks at a male servant. He replied, “If he fears temptation, he should not look at him…”