Did Ibn Umar Touch Female Slaves in Markets? — A Hadith-Critical Examination of All Relevant Narrations
The claim that Islam permits sexual harassment rests on a series of narrations attributed to the companion Abdullah ibn Umar regarding the inspection of female slaves at the point of purchase. A systematic examination of every chain of transmission for these narrations demonstrates that the most explicit and problematic versions are weak or fabricated, that al-Albani’s authentication of the most widely circulated narration was incorrect due to an undetected gap in the chain, and that the narrations which do survive critical scrutiny describe conduct far more limited than what critics allege.
Contextual Introduction — Islam and Slavery
Before addressing the narrations, a foundational point must be established. Islam did not originate the institution of slavery — it was a universal feature of human civilization from the earliest recorded history, present in all peoples and all legal systems. When Islam came, it placed restrictions on slavery, called for good treatment of enslaved people, and opened extensive pathways to emancipation. The Prophet’s final will, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was: “Prayer, and those your right hands possess.”
Islam forbade the enslavement of free people except through war and the capture of combatants, as was the universal practice of warfare at that time. It made freeing enslaved people one of the greatest acts of worship to Allah and an expiation for certain sins. It permitted mukatabah — contractual self-purchase — by which an enslaved person could earn their freedom. It forbade the sale of an umm al-walad — a woman who had borne her owner’s child — and mandated her freedom upon his death. Humanity did not reach the stage of formally abolishing slavery until approximately 1300 years after Islam, and neither Judaism nor Christianity prohibited it.
Islam opened the door to freeing slaves. Allah commanded in the Quran to free slaves if they wished to do so. Islam made freeing enslaved people and setting them free one of the greatest acts of worship, and made it an expiation for some sins such as breaking an oath. Islam also permitted a man to have intercourse with his female slave and have children from her, as was the custom of humanity at that time — this protected both parties from unlawful relations, and if the female slave became the mother of a child, it was forbidden for her owner to sell her, and she was freed after his death.
Some slaves and their children became great imams of the Muslims, such as Nafi’, the freed slave of Ibn Umar, and Amr ibn Dinar, and others. Humanity did not reach the stage of eliminating slavery until about 1300 years after Islam.
With this foundation established, the specific narrations in question must now be examined on their own hadith-critical merits.
The Hadith Claiming a Man May Look at the Entire Body of a Female Slave Except Her Private Parts
The most sweeping narration on this topic reads: “Whoever wants to buy a female slave, or buys her, let him look at her entire body except her private parts, and her private parts are between the knot of her garment and her knees.”
Abu al-Husayn ibn Bishran al-Adl informed us in Baghdad — Ismail ibn Muhammad al-Saffar — on the authority of al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Affan — on the authority of Ibn Numayr — on the authority of Ubayd Allah ibn Umar — on the authority of Nafi’ — on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Whoever wants to buy a female slave, or buys her, let him look at her entire body except her private parts, and her private parts are between the knot of her garment and her knees.” It has also been narrated on the authority of Hafs ibn Umar, on the authority of Salih ibn Hassan, on the authority of Muhammad ibn Ka’b, with the same meaning.
Source: http://library.islamweb.net/hadith/display_hbook.php?bk_no=673&hid=2959&pid=331541
Al-Bayhaqi himself commented immediately after narrating it: “This is a chain of transmission that cannot be used as evidence, and Isa ibn Maymun is weak. It has been narrated on the authority of Hafs ibn Umar, on the authority of Salih ibn Hassan, on the authority of Muhammad ibn Ka’b, and he is also weak.”
Both chains of transmission for this narration pass through weak narrators — Isa ibn Maymun and Hafs ibn Umar — and al-Bayhaqi explicitly stated it cannot be used as evidence. This hadith is not authentic. Hafs ibn Umar and Isa ibn Maymun both lied. It is not permissible to attribute these words to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The scholars have explained this matter and it is not reasonable to use this hadith as evidence.
The Narration Attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib — Unknown Chain
The Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq (13208) contains:
Abd al-Razzaq on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, who said: I was told by someone who is more truthful than someone who heard Ali being asked about a female slave being sold. Can one look at her leg, her buttocks, and her stomach? He said: There is nothing wrong with that, she has no sanctity. She was only stopped to bargain with her. (7/287)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
This chain contains two unknown people. Ibn Jurayj was told by a person he believes, and this person is unknown, narrating on the authority of another unknown person who claims he heard Imam Ali say these words. A chain consisting entirely of unknowns constitutes layered darkness and cannot be used as evidence. It is not permissible to attribute this statement to Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him.
The Narration from Said ibn al-Musayyab — Unknown Intermediary
Abd al-Razzaq (13206): Abd al-Razzaq from Ibn Jurayj from a man from Ibn al-Musayyab that he said it is permissible for him to look at everything in her except her vagina. (6/287)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
This is an effect with a lost chain of transmission. Ibn Jurayj once again narrates on the authority of an unknown man whose name was not mentioned. The religion of Allah is not taken from unknown narrators.
The Narration from Al-Sha’bi — Known Liar in the Chain
Abd al-Razzaq (13207): Abd al-Razzaq from al-Thawri from Jabir from al-Sha’bi, who said: If a man buys a female slave, then he looks at all of her except the vagina. (7/287)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
This narration has a weak chain because it includes Jabir al-Ju’fi, who is a Shi’ite accused of lying. The scholarly verdicts on him are recorded in Tahdhib al-Kamal:
Source: http://library.islamweb.net/hadith/display_hbook.php?hflag=1&bk_no=1857&pid=644811
“Jabir was a liar.”
“I did not encounter a liar I have met more than Jabir al-Ju’fi. I did not bring him anything of my opinion except that he brought me a trace of it and claimed that he had thirty thousand hadiths from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, which he did not reveal.”
“O Jabir, you will not die until you lie about the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.” Days and nights did not pass until he was accused of lying.
“As for Jabir al-Ju’fi, by Allah, he was a liar who believed in the return.”
“His hadith is abandoned. He is not trustworthy, and his hadith is not to be written down.”
“His hadith is lost.”
Sufyan and Shu’bah forbade narrating from Jabir al-Ju’fi. Yahya ibn Saeed al-Qattan and Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi abandoned him. Ahmad ibn Hanbal confirmed that Yahya and Abd al-Rahman abandoned him. Al-Tirmidhi said: “He is not strong in hadith.” Ibn Ma’in said in another place: “His hadith is not to be written, and there is no honor in it.”
Even among the minority of scholars who accepted Jabir al-Ju’fi conditionally, the condition was that he must use the explicit hearing formula — “he told us” (haddathana) — rather than “on the authority of” (an). Yahya ibn Abi Bakr said on the authority of Shu’bah: “If Jabir said ‘he told us’ and ‘I heard,’ then he was one of the most trustworthy people.” In this narration Jabir says “on the authority of al-Sha’bi” and not “al-Sha’bi told us.” The narration is therefore not acceptable even by the standards of those who conditionally accepted him.
The Al-Bayhaqi Narration on Ibn Umar — Al-Albani’s Authentication Was Incorrect
This is the narration most widely cited on anti-Islamic websites. The chain reads: Abu al-Husayn ibn Bishran al-Adl — Ismail ibn Muhammad al-Saffar — al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Affan — Ibn Numayr — Ubayd Allah ibn Umar — Nafi’ — Ibn Umar.
The narration states: Whenever Ibn Umar bought a female slave, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks. It was as if he was placing it on her from behind the garment.
Al-Albani authenticated it in Irwa’ al-Ghaleel (6/201) on the grounds that all named narrators are trustworthy. He said: “This was mentioned in al-Waqa’. It is authentic. It was narrated by al-Bayhaqi (5/329) on the authority of Ubaydullah ibn Umar from Nafi’ from Ibn Umar: ‘When he bought a slave girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks.’ At the end of it is an addition: ‘And it is as if he would place it on her from behind her clothes.’ Perhaps this is from al-Bayhaqi or from one of his narrators. The chain of transmission is authentic.”
However, al-Albani missed a critical chronological gap. The problem lies between Ibn Numayr and Ubayd Allah ibn Umar:
Ubayd Allah ibn Umar died around the year 145 or 147 AH. He was born after the year 70 AH and was among the younger followers. Al-Haytham ibn Adi said he died in the year 147 AH.
Ibn Numayr — Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Numayr — was born in the year 161 AH. He was a peer of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ali ibn al-Madini.
Ibn Numayr was born approximately 13 to 15 years after the death of Ubayd Allah ibn Umar. It is impossible for Ibn Numayr to have heard directly from Ubayd Allah ibn Umar. There is at least one unknown narrator who transmitted this report from Ubayd Allah ibn Umar to Ibn Numayr, and that narrator has been omitted from the chain. The chain of transmission is therefore not valid, and al-Albani’s authentication was incorrect.
The Ibn Abi Shaybah Narration on Ibn Umar — Strange Narration
A similar narration appears in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah: Narrated to us by Ali ibn Mashair, on the authority of Ubayd Allah, on the authority of Nafi’, on the authority of Ibn Umar, that when he wanted to buy a female slave, he would place his hand on her buttocks or between her thighs, and sometimes he would uncover her legs.
The reason for this chain being problematic is the narrator Ali ibn Mashair. Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said about him in Taqrib al-Tahdhib:
Source: http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-8609/page-331
“Ali ibn Mashair, Qurashi Kufi, judge of Mosul, trustworthy, he has strange things. After he became ill, he narrated strange narrations from the eighth generation, died in the year eighty-nine.”
This narration — that Ibn Umar would place his hand between the thighs of a female slave — is undoubtedly one of his strange narrations. The chain of transmission of this hadith is not authentic.
The Abd al-Razzaq Narration with Three Mixed Chains — Abd al-Razzaq 13201
Abd al-Razzaq narrated a report through three chains simultaneously but mixed their wordings together without distinguishing which wording belongs to which chain. The combined text reads: On the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar, on the authority of Nafi’, on the authority of Ibn Umar, and Ma’mar, on the authority of Ayoub, on the authority of Nafi’, on the authority of Ibn Umar, that when he wanted to buy a slave girl, and he agreed with them on a price, he would put his hand on her buttocks, and look at her legs and her vagina, meaning her belly. On the authority of Ma’mar, on the authority of al-Zuhri, on the authority of Salim, on the authority of Ibn Umar, similarly.
Source: http://library.islamweb.net/hadith/display_hbook.php?bk_no=60&pid=29579&hid=12835
Each of the three chains has its own defect.
The First Chain — Abdullah ibn Umar al-Umari Is Weak
The Abdullah ibn Umar in this chain is not the great companion, but Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Hafs ibn Asim ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab — the fifth grandson of the Commander of the Faithful. Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said about him in al-Taqrib:
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/trj/1/130/2845.html
“Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Hafs ibn Asim ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Umari al-Madani — weak, a worshipper from the seventh generation, died in the year seventy-one, and it was said after that.”
Al-Dhahabi said in al-Mizan: “He was trustworthy in his memory, but he narrated from Nafi’ and a group.” Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “He is trustworthy and there is nothing wrong with him.” However, Ibn al-Madini said: “Abdullah is weak.” Al-Nasa’i and others said: “He is not strong.” Ibn Hibban said: “He was one of those overcome by righteousness and worship until he neglected to memorize the news and memorize the narrations well. When his mistakes became serious, he deserved to be abandoned.” Source: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?bk_no=56&ID=115&idfrom=273&idto=817&bookid=56&startno=178
The scholars said that he was a truthful, pious, and righteous man, but he was weak and not strong in narrating hadiths, and his memory was flawed. Some said that his mistakes in narration were so great that he deserved to be abandoned.
The Second Chain — Muammar’s Narrations from the Iraqis Are Weak
The reason for weakness in the second chain is Muammar ibn Rashid. Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali documented in his Explanation of the Causes of al-Tirmidhi that Muammar’s narrations from the people of Iraq are weak.
Source: http://kl28.com/house_of_knowledge/print/Shrh_All_AtTrmdhy_Labn_Rjb_page_109
Yahya ibn Ma’in said: “If Muammar tells you from the Iraqis, then beware of him, except from al-Zuhri and Ibn Tawus, for his hadith from them is sound. As for the people of Kufa and Basra, no, and he did not do anything about the hadith of al-A’mash.”
Ayoub al-Sakhtiyani — the narrator in this chain — is from Basra, from the people of Iraq. Source on Ayoub: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?ID=932&bk_no=60&flag=1
Therefore Muammar’s narration from Ayoub, who is one of the Iraqis and specifically from Basra, is not correct.
The Third Chain — The Wording Is Not Stated
The third chain through al-Zuhri on the authority of Salim on the authority of Ibn Umar concludes only with “similarly” (mithluhu) — Abd al-Razzaq did not specify the wording of this chain. The exact wording is therefore not before us, and it cannot be used to prove that Ibn Umar placed his hand on the buttocks of female slaves. Whatever is contained in this narration, as long as its wording is not mentioned, it cannot serve as evidence for any specific act.
Additionally, this chain allows for discussion on another ground. Ibn Hajar placed al-Zuhri in the third class of those known for tadlis in the book Tabaqat al-Mudallisin:
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/trj/1/175/3980.html
“Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Ubaid Allah ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, the jurist of Medina, resident of the Levant, famous for his leadership and majesty, from the followers. Al-Shafi’i, al-Darqutni, and more than one described him as a forger.”
The third class is those of whom the imams did not rely on their hadiths except for what they explicitly stated they heard. In this chain, al-Zuhri says “on the authority of Salim” and not “Salim told us.”
The Abd al-Razzaq Narration 13205 — Ibn Jurayj Uses the Ambiguous Formula
Abd al-Razzaq (13205): Abd al-Razzaq on the authority of Ibn Jurayj on the authority of Nafi’ that Ibn Umar would uncover her back, stomach, and leg and place his hand on her buttocks. (7/286)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
The defect here is that Ibn Jurayj says “on the authority of Nafi’” and not “Nafi’ told us.” The distinction matters greatly for Ibn Jurayj specifically. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “If Ibn Jurayj says: So-and-so said, or so-and-so said, or I was informed, then he has come up with strange things. If he says: I was informed and I heard, then that is enough for you.” Ja’far ibn Abd al-Wahid said on the authority of Yahya ibn Saeed: “Ibn Jurayj was truthful. When he said ‘he told me,’ it is a hearing. When he said ‘he informed us,’ it is a reading. When he said ‘he said,’ it is like the wind.”
Source: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?ID=1069&bk_no=60&flag=1
Al-Daraqutni said in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib: “Avoid the forgery of Ibn Jurayj, for he is an ugly forger. He only forged what he heard from someone who was criticized, such as Ibrahim ibn Abi Yahya, Musa ibn Ubayda, and others. As for Ibn Uyaynah, he forged from trustworthy people.”
Source: http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-3310/page-2873
Since Ibn Jurayj here uses “on the authority of Nafi’” rather than “Nafi’ told us,” the chain is defective and cannot serve as evidence.
The Abd al-Razzaq Narrations 13198 and 13199 — Two Defective Chains Through Ibn Jurayj
Abd al-Razzaq (13198): Abd al-Razzaq on the authority of Ibn Jurayj on the authority of Ata’, who said: I said to him: When a man buys a female slave, can he look at her legs when she has menstruated or at her stomach? He said: Yes. Ata’ said: Ibn Umar would put his hand between her breasts and look at her stomach and look at her legs or he would order that. (7/285)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
The defect in this chain is that some scholars have weakened the narration of Ibn Jurayj on the authority of Ata’ al-Khurasani specifically. Abu Bakr said: I saw in the book of Ali ibn al-Madini that I asked Yahya ibn Saeed about the hadith of Ibn Jurayj on the authority of Ata’ al-Khurasani, and he said: “It is weak. I said to Yahya that he says: ‘He told me.’ He said: Nothing. It is all weak, it is just a book that he gave to him.”
Source: http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-3310/page-2873#page-2874
Abd al-Razzaq (13199): Abd al-Razzaq told us, he said: Ibn Jurayj told us, he said: Amr or Abu al-Zubayr told me, on the authority of Ibn Umar, that he found merchants gathered around a slave girl, so he uncovered her leg and put his hand on her stomach. (7/285)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
This trace is narrated by Ibn Jurayj on the authority of Amr or Abu al-Zubayr — and neither Abd al-Razzaq nor Ibn Jurayj specifically identifies the narrator, leaving the reader uncertain whether it is Amr ibn Dinar or Abu al-Zubayr al-Makki. Abu al-Zubayr is a narrator about whom there is significant discussion. Shu’bah said about him: “You take from Abu al-Zubayr, and he does not know how to pray!” Shu’bah tore up a student’s book when he learned he had narrated from Abu al-Zubayr. Ibn Uyaynah said “Abu al-Zubayr told us, and he is Abu al-Zubayr” — indicating he considered him weak. Al-Shafi’i said: “Abu al-Zubayr needs support.” Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Hatim said: “His hadith should be written down but should not be used as evidence.”
Ibn Hajar placed Abu al-Zubayr in the third class of tadlis narrators, meaning his hadith is not acceptable unless he explicitly states he heard it. In this narration he says “on the authority of Ibn Umar” and not “Ibn Umar told me.”
This trace is also not authentic.
The Narrations from Mujahid Through Amr ibn Dinar — The Surviving Narrations
Abd al-Razzaq (13202): Abd al-Razzaq on the authority of Muammar on the authority of Amr ibn Dinar on the authority of Mujahid, who said: Ibn Umar passed by some people who were buying a slave girl. When they saw him turning her over, they refrained from doing so. Then Ibn Umar came to them and uncovered her leg, then he pushed her chest and said: Buy. Muammar said: Ibn Abi Nujayh informed me, on the authority of Mujahid, who said: Ibn Umar placed his hand between her breasts, then shook her. (7/286)
Abd al-Razzaq (13203): Abd al-Razzaq on the authority of Ibn Uyaynah on the authority of Amr ibn Dinar on the authority of Mujahid, who said: I was with Ibn Umar in the market and he saw a slave girl being sold, so he uncovered her leg and slapped her chest and said: Buy her, showing them that there was nothing wrong with that. (7/286)
Source for both: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
There are two people named Amr ibn Dinar. The first is Amr ibn Dinar al-Makki, a great follower and trustworthy narrator. The second is Amr ibn Dinar, the freed slave of the Zubayr family from Basra, who is weak — Ahmad, al-Fallas, and Abu Hatim declared him weak; Ibn Ma’in said he is lost; al-Bukhari said there is doubt about him; al-Nasa’i said he is not trustworthy and also said he is weak; al-Daraqutni and others declared him weak; Ibn Hibban said it is not permissible to write down his hadith except as a matter of astonishment as he narrates fabricated hadiths from reliable narrators; al-Tirmidhi said he is not strong in hadith.
Source: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?ID=851&bk_no=60&flag=1
The Amr ibn Dinar in these narrations is most likely Amr ibn Dinar al-Makki — the great trustworthy follower — since al-Thawri and Ibn Uyaynah are both Meccan scholars known for narrating from Amr ibn Dinar al-Makki. Therefore the chains of transmission of these narrations are most likely correct.
What do these narrations actually contain? Ibn Umar uncovered a slave girl’s leg — and the leg in Arabic refers to the area between the knee and the foot — and pushed or slapped her chest. The chest is not the breast. Ibn Umar touched the chest area, not the breasts themselves. The addition in narration 13202 from Ibn Abi Nujayh clarifies further: “Ibn Umar placed his hand between her breasts, then shook her” — meaning he placed his hand on the chest between the two breasts and avoided the breast itself. There is no authentic narration establishing that Ibn Umar touched the buttocks, back, or between the thighs of a female slave.
The Ibn Abi Nujayh Narration — Conditional Acceptance
Abd al-Razzaq (13204): Abd al-Razzaq on the authority of Ibn Uyaynah, who said: Ibn Abi Nujayh informed me on the authority of Mujahid, who said: Ibn Umar placed his hand between her breasts and then shook her. (7/286)
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/116/4399.html
Ibn Abi Nujayh was placed by Ibn Hajar in the third class of tadlis narrators specifically in his narrations from Mujahid. In the book Tabaqat al-Mudallisin:
Source: http://islamport.com/d/1/trj/1/175/3980.html
“Abdullah ibn Abi Nujayh al-Makki, the interpreter, narrated more from Mujahid, and he used to conceal his narrations. Al-Nasa’i described him as such.”
His formula here is “on the authority of Mujahid” rather than “Mujahid told us.” However, many scholars have authenticated him on the basis that his concealment was only of the written book of al-Qasim ibn Abi Bazza from which he drew his tafsir narrations from Mujahid, and that his hadith is otherwise acceptable. Even those who are more cautious about him accept his narrations that come through explicit hearing formulas.
Even if this narration is accepted on those grounds, its content is not problematic — it clarifies that Ibn Umar placed his hand on the area of the chest between the two breasts, not on the breasts themselves.
The Ibn Abi Shaybah Narration Through Mansur — The Sound Chain
The Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah contains: Jarir narrated to us on the authority of Mansur on the authority of Mujahid, who said: I was walking with Ibn Umar in the market when we saw some slave traders who had gathered around a slave girl and were turning her over. When they saw Ibn Umar, they moved aside and said: Ibn Umar has come. Ibn Umar approached her, touched part of her body and said: Where are the owners of this slave girl? She is nothing but merchandise.
This chain — Jarir on the authority of Mansur on the authority of Mujahid — is sound. What it contains is that Ibn Umar touched part of the slave girl’s body. The other narrations that survive scrutiny through Amr ibn Dinar explain what that part was: he uncovered her leg and pushed her chest. Ibn Umar’s statement “she is nothing but merchandise” does not indicate contempt for the humanity of the enslaved woman — it means that since she is offered for sale in the market, the buyer has the right to examine her condition before spending his money. He wanted to make clear to the bystanders that there was nothing wrong with examining a female slave before purchase within the limits of what is permissible.
Summary of All Narrations
There is no authentic narration — through any surviving chain — establishing that Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, placed his hand on the buttocks, back, or between the thighs of a female slave. Every narration making that claim is either fabricated, carries a known liar in the chain such as Jabir al-Ju’fi, contains unknown narrators whose reliability cannot be established such as the chains in the Ali ibn Abi Talib narration and the Said ibn al-Musayyab narration, is narrated through a narrator known for concealing his sources who uses the ambiguous “on the authority of” formula such as Ibn Jurayj in narrations 13205 and 13199 and Abu al-Zubayr in narration 13199, carries a narrator known for strange narrations such as Ali ibn Mashair, carries a weak narrator in the chain such as Abdullah ibn Umar al-Umari in the first chain of the triple narration, carries a narrator whose narrations from Iraqis are rejected such as Muammar narrating from Ayoub al-Sakhtiyani, or contains an undetected chronological gap such as in the al-Bayhaqi narration authenticated by al-Albani where Ibn Numayr — born in 161 AH — could not have heard from Ubayd Allah ibn Umar who died around 145–147 AH.
The narrations that survive critical scrutiny — primarily those through Amr ibn Dinar al-Makki from Mujahid — establish only that Ibn Umar would uncover the leg below the knee and touch the chest area between the breasts. Neither of these actions constitutes what critics characterize as sexual harassment.
All narrations claiming that Ibn Umar touched the buttocks, back, or between the thighs of female slaves in markets are either fabricated, carry known liars in the chain, carry unknown narrators, use the ambiguous transmission formula from narrators known for concealment, carry weak narrators, or contain chronological gaps that make direct transmission impossible. Al-Albani’s authentication of the al-Bayhaqi narration was incorrect — he did not notice that Ibn Numayr, born in 161 AH, could not have heard from Ubayd Allah ibn Umar who died around 145–147 AH, meaning at least one unknown narrator was omitted from the chain. The hadith claiming a buyer may look at the entire body of a female slave except the private parts is also weak through both its chains as al-Bayhaqi himself stated, and cannot be attributed to the Messenger of Allah. What the surviving sound narrations establish is limited to Ibn Umar uncovering the leg below the knee and touching the chest area between the breasts — not the breasts themselves, not the buttocks, not the thighs, not the back. The claim that Islam permits sexual harassment is not established by any authentic narration. All reports on this question in their most explicit forms are da’if, and al-Albani’s grading of the most widely circulated narration as authentic was incorrect.
m.trinity14040125151826226-e00c85482f68b84a.jpg)
...am Talaat](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D2DKyJCOwLk&t=4s&pp=ygUh2YjYryDYtNio2YfYqSDYudmI2LFYqSDYp9mE2KjZitip)