out of fear or out of regard for his rights. If a slave refrains from this out of regard for his master’s rights, the woman has even greater reason to do so, for she would be betraying the very purpose of her marriage. By contrast, what is required of the slave is service, and his sexual misconduct is comparable to the woman’s stealing from her husband’s wealth.

Another benefit is that this obstacle leaves her no hope of attaining him, whether through marriage or illicit intercourse. An unmarried woman, by contrast, could hope to marry him lawfully.

Another is that, had he explained his refusal merely by saying that it was adultery, she might have sought to leave her husband and marry him. Such a course is forbidden solely on account of the husband’s rights. Thus, if a man willingly divorces his wife, another man may marry her—even if he divorces her so that the other man can marry her. This is what Saʿd ibn al-Rabīʿ offered ʿAbd al-Rahmān ibn ʿAwf, saying: “I have two wives. Choose whichever you wish, so that I may divorce her and you may marry her.” Without the husband’s consent, however, this is not lawful. As related in al-Musnad, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“He is not one of us who turns a woman against her husband or a slave against his masters.”

The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, also forbade a man to propose marriage over his brother’s proposal or to intervene in his brother’s purchase negotiations. If, after a proposal but before the marriage contract, it is unlawful for another man to seek to marry the woman, how much more so after the contract, consummation and married life together!

Had he explained his refusal by saying that this was forbidden adultery, she might have hoped to leave her husband and marry him, for women’s scheming is indeed great; things of this kind have happened. Thus, when he invoked the right of