al-Hārith. That the verse should be understood generally is supported by the report that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “It is not lawful to sell or buy singing slave women.” Confirmation of this was revealed in the Book of Allah Most High, meaning what he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, understood from the general wording of His words, Mighty and Majestic:

“And among the people is he who purchases idle talk.” [Luqmān: 6]

The statement in the hadith that it is not lawful to buy or sell singing slave women applies when the purchaser buys them for their singing, or the seller sells them for more than their value because of their singing. If, however, he buys them for service or similar purposes, without paying an additional amount for their singing, that is permissible for both seller and purchaser. If he buys them for service but pays more than their ordinary value because of their singing, that is unlawful for the seller and disliked for the purchaser. He has wasted his wealth, spent it on falsehood, and provided the seller with unlawful earnings, thereby assisting him in sin. Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has said:

“Cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and transgression.” [al-Mā’ida: 2]

If he buys them for their singing but pays only their value without regard to their singing, that is unlawful for the purchaser but permissible for the seller.

The apparent meaning of the statement in the hadith is that the entire price is unlawful for the seller, and this is explicitly Asbagh’s position. Yet the only part unlawful for him is the additional amount paid because of her singing. This is like someone who sells wine and a garment together in a single transaction for a sum of dinars: only the portion of those dinars attributable to the wine is unlawful for him. The meaning, then, is that because the unlawful portion of the singing slave woman’s price forms an undivided share of the total, he may not consume any of it, whether little or much, until he removes the unlawful portion, leaving the lawful portion free of it. If he consumes any of it, that is unlawful for him because of the unlawful portion mixed with it, even if he retains the rest of the price and it is sufficient to cover the entire unlawful amount. To illustrate: a man steals a dinar from funds jointly owned by him and his partner, then consumes it. It is unlawful for him because his partner’s share is mixed with his own, until he obtains his partner’s release from that claim or returns it to him.

There are two views concerning someone who buys a slave woman and discovers that she is a singer, when her singing increases her value: does this constitute a defect entitling him to return her or not? My view in this connection is that if she is a high-quality slave woman intended for his personal use, this constitutes a defect entitling him to return her, because the purchaser fears that this may bring