Part 2: Allah/Muhammad Forced Poor Slave Women to Move with Naked Breasts in Public

Do you know that: 

1. The Hijab has nothing to do with modesty, as Islam prohibited Slave Women from taking the Hijab or even covering their naked breasts in public.
2. According to Islam, the Hijab was considered a privilege and honor exclusively for free Muslim women, while slave women were not allowed to take it.
   
3. Umar Ibn Khattab used to beat slave women if they ever by mistake took the Hijab, and told them not to resemble free Muslim women by taking the Hijab.
4. Additionally, it is worth noting that Muhammad specified that the 'Awrah (nakedness) of slave women should be from navel to knee, while their chests remained uncovered. This meant that there were thousands of slave women who appeared publicly, even in the presence of Muhammad, with their breasts exposed.

Understanding these historical facts about Islam could lead Muslim women today to reconsider the necessity of wearing the Hijab.

Table of Contents:

• Muhammad revived the old custom of Arabia, where only high-status women were allowed to take a Hijab
  • In the pre-Islamic era, neither free nor slave women used to cover their breasts
  • The Quranic Verse makes clear that Hijab was only for free Muslim women against slave women
  • Hijab has nothing to do with modesty, but it is this respect and acknowledgement of women's autonomy that truly embodies the concept of modesty
  • Role of Umar Ibn Khattab
    • An excuse by Islamic preachers: But the verse of Hijab 33:59 was revealed during the incident of 'Umar and Sawda
  • Umar Ibn Khattab, the second Caliph, used to beat the slave women with a stick if they ever attempted to take Hijab (Jilbab)
    • Please also note the difference between "Jilbab" and "Khimar":
  • Looking and touching the private parts of half-naked slave women in the Islamic Bazaars of slavery
  • All four Sunni Imams are unanimous that the nakedness (Awrah عورۃ) of a slave woman is from the navel to the knee
    • Hanafi Fiqh:
    • Maliki Fiqh:
    • Shafi'i Fiqh:
    • Hanbali Fiqh:
  • Traditions about the 'Awrah (i.e. nakedness) of a slave woman:
  • Slave women were standing in the mosques with naked breasts, during prayers
  • The Video of Naked Slave Girls in Saudi Arabia in 1964
  • Some Original Photos of half-naked Muslim slave women
  • The Hijab is not a CHOICE, but Women must be veiled outside the house in Islam
  • Prophet Muhammad used to roam around the city in public while holding the hands of the slave girls who belonged to other men
  • 'Aisha bathed in front of two Mahram MEN, while the nakedness of a woman in front of Mahram man is also just like the nakedness of a slave woman
  • Excuses by Islamic apologists:
    • The Dishonest Translation of verse 24:31 by modern Islamic apologists to prove that Khimar was also used to cover the naked breasts of slave women
    • Islamic Preachers: Hijab is necessary for a woman so that her husband does not feel jealous and uncomfortable due to his Ghayrah (Arabic: غَيْرَة)
    • 'Lowering the gazes' is only an Unnatural restriction, which results only in 'sexual frustration':
    • Islamic Apologists: Slave women were allowed to expose their chest/breasts, but it was not necessary
  • An article by a Muslim Apologist (Abu Amina Elias), who denies that the breasts of slave women were naked
    • First Issue: All Scholars that are mentioned in this article, came several hundred years after Muhammad
    • 2nd Issue: Not a SINGLE Proof is present, which states breasts of a slave woman is included in their 'Awrah
    • 3rd Issue: Only so-called proof by Abu Hayyan and Ibn al-Qattan is their conjecture about verse 33:59
    • 4th Issue: Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah came up only with their conjecture
    • 5th Issue: The claims by Sheikh Albani
    • 6th Issue: Deceptive claim about Hanbali Fiqh
    • 7th Issue: Casting doubts about Umar Ibn Khattab beating the slave women for taking Jilbab
    • 8th Issue: Excuse that slave women made their breasts naked only while they were physically working
    • 9th Issue: Ibn Umar was not touching the bodies of the slave women in the open markets, but only examining the minor slave-girls
    • 10th Issue: Imam Malik's statement
    • Islamic apologists: Taba'in became corrupt and they initiated the Bidah (innovation) of naked breasts of slave women
    • Islamic apologist: Touching the body parts of a slave woman is Ok, while she is standing there for sale
  • Is Allah really All-Knowing? Why then He forgot to mention in the Quran that slave women have to cover their breasts?
  • Tawattur (the widespread practice) in actions of Sahaba and Tabaeen in keeping thousands of slave women with naked breasts in public

Muhammad revived the old custom of Arabia, where only high-status women were allowed to take a Hijab

In pre-Islamic Arabia, there existed a cultural practice where high-status women were required to wear veils as a symbol of "honor," while prostitutes and slave women were not allowed to veil themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab#History

Elite women in ancient Mesopotamia and in the Byzantine, Greek, and Persian empires wore the veil as a sign of respectability and high status.^[74] In ancient Mesopotamia, Assyria had explicit sumptuary laws detailing which women must veil and which women must not, depending upon the woman's class, rank, and occupation in society.^[74] Female slaves and prostitutes were forbidden to veil and faced harsh penalties if they did so.^[7] Veiling was thus not only a marker of aristocratic rank, but also served to "differentiate between 'respectable' women and those who were publicly available".^[7][74]

Muhammad did not introduce Islamic hijab with the intention of promoting modesty, but rather he adopted the prevailing practices of the pre-Islamic Arabs. His aim was to distinguish free Muslim women from slave women through the implementation of hijab.

In the pre-Islamic era, neither free nor slave women used to cover their breasts

During the pre-Islamic era, it was customary for women, both free and slave, in various cultures around the world, including pre-Islamic Arab society, to not cover their chests.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir (link) and in Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur (link), under the commentary of verse 24:31, it is written:

أن جابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري حدث أن أسماء بنت مرشدة كانت في محل لها في بني حارثة، فجعل النساء يدخلن عليها غير متأزرات، فيبدو ما في أرجلهن من الخلاخل، وتبدو صدورهن وذوائبهن، فقالت أسماء ما أقبح هذا فأنزل الله تعالى الآية۔۔۔ وقوله تعالى { وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ } يعني المقانع يعمل لها صنفات ضاربات على صدورهن لتواري ما تحتها من صدرها وترائبها ليخالفن شعار نساء أهل الجاهلية فإنهن لم يكن يفعلن ذلك، بل كانت المرأة منهن تمر بين الرجال مسفحة بصدرها، لا يواريه شيء، وربما أظهرت عنقها وذوائب شعرها وأقرطة آذانها

Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari narrated that Asma bint Marwan had a place for herself in Bani Haritha, and women would visit her without wearing veils. Their ankles would be visible, along with their chests and necklines. Asma expressed her disapproval of this, and as a result, Allah revealed the verse: "...And let them draw their coverings over their chests" [Quran 24:31], meaning they should cast their outer garments in a way that it covers their chests, concealing what is beneath them. This was in contrast to the practices of the women of the pre-Islamic era (jahiliyyah), as they did not observe such covering. Instead, women would pass by men with their chests exposed, revealing their necks, hair, and earrings.

What Muhammad did was to ask free Muslim women to wear Hijab, but he PROHIBITED slave women to take Hijab. 

Therefore, even after the verse of the Hijab, there were thousands of slave women present in front of Muhammad with naked breasts. And it stayed the same way during the 1300 years long history of Islamic Slavery. 

The Quranic Verse makes clear that Hijab was only for free Muslim women against slave women

Quran 33:59:
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِىُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَٰجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَآءِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَٰبِيبِهِنَّ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰٓ أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ ۗ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا
O Prophet! say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments (Arabic: Jilbab); this will be more proper, so that they may be recognized (as free Women) and not annoyed/molested. 

According to the consensus of Muslim Quran commentators, it is widely documented that this particular verse was revealed in response to a specific incident in Medina. During that time, people would gather and sit on the sides of the streets, subjecting passing women to harassment and molestation. However, upon the revelation of this verse, the harassment of free women ceased as they started wearing hijab, which distinguished them from slave girls who did not wear hijab. Unfortunately, the molestation of slave girls persisted, as their lack of hijab served as a recognizable marker of their status as slaves.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Commentary of Verse 33:59 (link):

يقول تعالى آمراً رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم تسليماً أن يأمر النساء المؤمنات ــــ خاصة أزواجه وبناته لشرفهن ــــ بأن يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن ليتميزن عن سمات نساء الجاهلية وسمات الإماء ... قال السدي في قوله تعالى { يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّ قُل لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَآءِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلاَبِيبِهِنَّ ذٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰ أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلاَ يُؤْذَيْنَ } قال كان ناس من فساق أهل المدينة يخرجون بالليل حين يختلظ الظلام إلى طرق المدينة يتعرضون للنساء، وكانت مساكن أهل المدينة ضيقة، فإذا كان الليل، خرج النساء إلى الطرق يقضين حاجتهن، فكان أولئك الفساق يبتغون ذلك منهن، فإذا رأوا المرأة عليها جلباب، قالوا هذه حرة، فكفوا عنها، وإذا رأوا المرأة ليس عليها جلباب، قالوا هذه أمة، فوثبوا عليها، وقال مجاهد يتجلببن فيعلم أنهن حرائر، فلا يتعرض لهن فاسق بأذى ولا ريبة.

Translation:
... (In this verse, Allah ordered the free women) to draw their Jilbabs over their bodies, so that they will be distinct in their appearance from the women of the Jahiliyyah and from slave women ...
And As-Suddi said about the revelation of this verse 33:59 that the mischief-mongers among the people of Madīnah would come out on the streets at dusk and get after the women. The houses of the people of Madīnah [in those days] were very small in size and at nightfall the women would go out on these streets [making their way to the fields] to relieve themselves. These evil people would tease and molest these women. While if they saw a woman who would be wearing a Jilbab (cloak/outer garment), they would say she is a free woman [and not a slave] and would abstain [from molesting her] and if they saw a woman who would not be wearing a cloak, they would molest her by saying that she is a slave woman.
And Mujahid said that those women would wear cloaks [in the way prescribed by the Qur'ān] so that it be known that they are free women and the mischief-mongers would not then harm or molest them.

Abu Saleh said (Tafsir-e-Tabari, Verse 33:59):

حدثنا ابن حميد، قال: ثنا حكام، عن عنبسة، عمن حدثه، عن أبـي صالـح، قال: قدم النبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الـمدينة علـى غير منزل، فكان نساء النبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم وغيرهنّ إذا كان اللـيـل خرجن يقضين حوائجهنّ، وكان رجال يجلسون علـى الطريق للغزل، فأنزل الله: { يا أيُّها النَّبِـيُّ قُلْ لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَناتِكَ وَنِساءِ الـمُؤْمِنِـينَ يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنَّ } يقنعن بـالـجلبـاب حتـى تعرف الأمة من الـحرّة. 
Abu Saleh narrated: When the holy prophet came to Medina, he had no house in Medina. He and his wives and other women used to go outside at evening to relieve themselves. And men used to sit on the streets and used to recite poetry (to tease and molest the women). Upon that Allah revealed the verse of Hijab (33:59) so that free women could be differentiated from the slave women. 

— Tafsir Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani (d. 211 AH/826 CE) (link):

عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن الحسن قال كن إماء بالمدينة يقال لهن كذا وكذا كن يخرجن فيتعرض لهن السفهاء فيؤذوهن لأنه فكانت المرأة الحرة تخرج فيحسبون أنها أمة فيتعرضون لها ويؤذونها أخبرنا فأمر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم المؤمنات أن يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن ذلك أدنى أن يعرفن من الإماء أنهن حرائر فلا يؤذين
Translation:
Al-Hassan al-Basri (died 110 Hijri year) said: Slave women in Medina used to be called with specific names (i.e. they were molested) when they went outside. One day, some ignorant people approach women and harm them, thinking they were slave women. This was because free women would also go out, and they would be mistaken for slave women, and people would approach them and cause harm. The Prophet (peace be upon him) then commanded the believing women to bring their outer garments closer to them (i.e. to take the Hijab). This was to ensure that they would be recognized as free women and not be harmed."

Tafsir Ibn Jarir, verse 33:59 (link):

حدثنـي مـحمد بن سعد، قال: ثنـي أبـي، قال: ثنـي عمي، قال: ثنـي أبـي، عن أبـيه، عن ابن عبـاس، قوله: { يا أيُّها النَّبِـيُّ قُلْ لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَناتِكَ وَنِساءِ الـمُؤْمِنِـينَ يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنَّ }.... إلـى قوله: { وكانَ اللَّهُ غَفُوراً رَحِيـماً } قال: كانت الـحرّة تلبس لبـاس الأمة، فأمر الله نساء الـمؤمنـين أن يدنـين علـيهنّ من جلابـيبهنّ ، وأدنى الجلباب: أن تقنع، وتشده على جبينها.
Ibn Abbas said about the verse 33:59, the free (Muslim) women used to dress same as the slave women. Upon that Allah ordered them that they let down upon them their over-garments (Arabic: Jilbab), and letting the outer-garment means to cover their faces and to tie it on their foreheads. 

From Mujahid (link):

عن مـجاهد، قوله: { يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنَّ } يتـجلببن فـيُعلـم أنهنّ حوائر فلا يعرض لهنّ فـاسق بأذى من قول ولا ريبة.
According to Mujahid, regarding the phrase "to bring their outer garments closer to them" (Quran 33:59), it means that they should wear veils that clearly indicate they are free women, so that no immoral person would harm them or have any doubt about their status.

Ibn Kathir also wrote in his commentary under verse 24:31 of Surah Nur (link):

هذا أمر من الله تعالى للنساء المؤمنات، وغيرة منه لأزواجهن عباده المؤمنين، وتمييز لهن عن صفة نساء الجاهلية وفعال المشركات. وكان سبب نزول هذه الآية ما ذكره مقاتل بن حيان قال بلغنا ــــ والله أعلم ــــ أن جابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري حدث أن أسماء بنت مرشدة كانت في محل لها في بني حارثة، فجعل النساء يدخلن عليها غير متأزرات، فيبدو ما في أرجلهن من الخلاخل، وتبدو صدورهن وذوائبهن، فقالت أسماء ما أقبح هذا فأنزل الله تعالى { وَقُل لِّلْمُؤْمِنَـٰتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَـٰرِهِنَّ }

This is a command (i.e. veiling) from Allah Almighty to the believing women, as a protection for their honor and a distinction from the characteristics of women in the pre-Islamic era and the practices of pagan women. The reason behind the revelation of this verse, as mentioned by Muqatil ibn Hayyan, is that Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari reported that Asma bint Marwan had a designated place in Bani Haritha, where women would visit her without wearing veils. Thus, their ankles would be exposed, along with their chests and ornaments. Upon seeing this, Asma expressed her disapproval. As a result, Allah Almighty revealed the verse: "And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision [i.e., to look down and not to expose their adornment]..." (Quran 24:31).

Names of 12 Sahaba (companions) and Tabaeen (successors) who reported it are:

1. ٰIbn Abbas (ابن عبـاس): Tafsir Ibn Jarir
2. Suddi ( السدي): Tafsir Ibn Kathir
3. Abu Malik ( أبي مالك): Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur
4. Abu Saleh (أبي صالح)ٰ: Tafsir Ibn Jarir
5. Ibn Shahab (ابن شهاب): Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur
6. Qatadah (قتادة): Tafsir Ibn Jarir
7. 'Aisha (عائشة)ََ: Tafsir Durr-eManthur
8. Kalbi (الكلبي): Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur
9. Muawiyyah bin Qurrah (معاوية بن قرة): Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur
10. Hasan (حسن): Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur
11. Mujahid (مجاهد): Tafsir Ibn Jarir
12. Muhammad bin Ka'b al-Qarzi (محمد بن كعب القرظي): Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur

Note:

Islamic preachers often assert that those individuals who engaged in harassment and molestation of women while sitting on the sides of the streets were hypocrites. However, this claim is contested by some who argue that they were not hypocrites but rather companions of Muhammad (Sahaba).

These individuals, who engaged in harassment and molestation, were not addressed as hypocrites in the Quran. Surprisingly, the Quran neither issued warnings nor threats against them, let alone punishments. Instead, the Quran seemingly allowed them to continue their misconduct towards slave women, while providing protection only to free women through the requirement of hijab.

This portrayal of events raises concerns, as it appears that the Quran provided no safeguards for the well-being of slave women, inadvertently granting these individuals a "license" to persist in their mistreatment of vulnerable slave girls.

Hijab has nothing to do with modesty, but it is this respect and acknowledgement of women's autonomy that truly embodies the concept of modesty

Regrettably, a significant majority of ordinary Muslims today remain unaware of the historical realities and complexities surrounding hijab and its relation to Islam. This truth often comes as a surprise to them, as many Islamic preachers strive to conceal or downplay these aspects.

It is common for some Muslims to assert that women must wear hijab in order to prevent men from experiencing lustful desires, using the analogy that an uncovered candy attracts flies. However, it is important to recognize that this viewpoint oversimplifies the multifaceted reasons and interpretations associated with hijab within the Islamic tradition.

Please see, it was Islam which compelled thousands of slave women to move in public without a Hijab (i.e. without a wrapper). So, the question is, did Islam thus make Sahaba sexually aroused and did Sahaba rape those slave women for having naked breasts in public?

Reality: 

• Hijab has nothing to do with modesty, but modesty is truly defined by the respect for women and their autonomy to make choices about their lives.
• The Western world, with its emphasis on upholding women's rights and their choices, is a true example of modesty and decency.
• Hijab is not modesty, but for 14 prolonged centuries, it has been a distressing symbol of severe discrimination against impoverished slave women.

Role of Umar Ibn Khattab

It is known that Muhammad faced challenges when it came to rejecting Umar's desires and suggestions. Throughout Muhammad's life, there were instances where Umar made wishes or suggestions, and Muhammad later claimed to receive revelations in alignment with those desires.

This pattern is observed in the context of veiling women as well. It appears that Umar Ibn Khattab played a significant role in advocating for the veiling of free Muslim women, as he engaged in multiple discussions with Muhammad on the matter (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 146). 

Subsequently, following the unfortunate incident of women being molested in Medina, Muhammad claimed that the verses regarding veiling were revealed in accordance with Umar's desires.

However, it is worth noting that Umar held more extreme views on this matter. It appears that he was not content with the ruling of veiling for women and sought something beyond that. This becomes apparent through an incident involving Umar and Sawda, one of Muhammad's wives, which took place after the revelation of the hijab verses

Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 4795:

Narrated Aisha: Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She had a large frame and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So `Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, "O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sauda returned while Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! I went out to answer the call of nature and `Umar said to me so-and-so." Then Allah inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put in down, he said (to Sauda), "You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs."

To those who advocate for Umar's stance, one might question the following:

Why should Sawda, or any woman for that matter, bear the burden of constantly finding new ways to conceal herself and endure the added restrictions? What harm would it have caused if people still recognized her when she ventured outside?

Interestingly, while Umar expressed dissatisfaction with Hafsa's veiling, he paradoxically resorted to physically disciplining slave women for attempting to wear hijab by beating them with a stick. Furthermore, he even stripped them of their jilbab (outer garment sheet), as we will explore further in this article. 

An excuse by Islamic preachers: But the verse of Hijab 33:59 was revealed during the incident of 'Umar and Sawda

It is impossible for Islam apologists to accept the incident that Sahaba used to molest women and thus Hijab verse was revealed only to differentiate between the Free and the Slave women. They have to deny it while it is shaking the whole religion of  Islam and every person becomes doubtful about it after knowing these facts.

Therefore, they try to use the following tradition and claim that the verse of the Hijab was not revealed due to the molestation of slave women by companions, but during the incident of Umar and Sawda.

Sahih Bukhari, 146:

Our Response: 

Firstly, it is clear that any sub-narrator of this tradition made a mistake, while another tradition of Sahih Bukhari (which we have already mentioned above), is also from 'Aisha, where she clearly mentioned that this incident of 'Umar and Sawda happened after the verse of Hijab had already been revealed. 

Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 4795:

Narrated Aisha: Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She had a large frame and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So `Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, "O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. ....

Secondly, it is also clear from both the traditions that Umar needed to recognize her through her tall height/large frame, while she was indeed wearing a Hijab (Jilbab), due to which he was unable to see her face. This proves that the verse of Hijab (33:59) had already been revealed before this incident. 

Thirdly,  the verse itself (33:59) contradicts the notion that it was specifically revealed during the incident involving Umar and Sawda. There are two significant facts that support this claim.

The first fact is, by taking Jilbab (cloaks), actually the women Cannot be recognized (while their faces are covered). Therefore, nobody knows which woman is actually inside the cloak. 

But the Quran is saying: "(the women) should take Jilbab (cloaks) so that they Can be recognised (Arabic: أدنى أن يعرفن) ...".

So, why then the Quran is saying the opposite, i.e. that they Can be recognized by using cloaks? The reason is, the Quran is saying it in the sense of recognizing who are slave women, and who are free Muslim women. 

Thus, this part of the verse is itself proof that this verse was not revealed about the incident of Umar/Sawda.

And the second fact is, this verse is also claiming: "... and (these women are) not molested".

Please ask these Islamic preachers, if Umar Ibn Khattab was molesting Sawda. Surely the answer is No. It was not Umar Ibn Khattab who molested Sawda, but it were those people, who were sitting on the streets, who were molesting the women of Medina. 

Therefore, this serves as further evidence that the hijab verse (33:59) is unrelated to the incident involving Umar and Sawda. Instead, it stands as a testimony to the existence of the twelve traditions that recount the incident of women being molested in Medina.

Umar Ibn Khattab, the second Caliph, used to beat the slave women with a stick if they ever attempted to take Hijab (Jilbab)

According to authentic traditions, Umar Ibn Khattab used to beat those slave girls with a stick, who ever attempted to hide their naked bodies by taking Jilbab. He used to tell those slave girls not to try to become equal in status with the free Muslim women by taking Jilbab/Muqna (Jilbab and Muqna, both are outer garments, used for Hijab) .

Saudi grand hadith master Sheikh Albani recorded this authentic tradition (link):

أخرجه ابن أبي شيبة في "  المصنف " ( 2 / 82 / 1 ) :  حدثنا وكيع قال :  حدثنا شعبة عن قتادة عن أنس قال : "  رأى عمر أمة لنا مقنعة فضربها وقال :  لا تشبهين بالحرائر " .  قلت :  وهذا إسناد صحيح
Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah recorded in his book al-Munsaf  that Umar Ibn Khattab saw a slave girl who took a garment/sheet as a Hijab and covered her body. Upon that Umar hit her and told her that she should not try to resemble the free Muslim women (by taking Jilbab/Muqna).”
The chain of narration of this Hadith is “authentic/Sahih”
This same tradition is also narrated by Ibn Qalabah (link).

Abdur Razzak (d 211 Hijri year) recorded this narration (link):

عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن أيوب عن نافع أن عمر رأى جارية خرجت من بيت حفصة متزينة عليها جلباب أو من بيت بعض أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فدخل عمر البيت فقال من هذه الجارية فقالوا أمة لنا – أو قالوا أمة لآل فلان – فتغيظ عليهم وقال أتخرجون إماءكم بزينتها تفتنون الناس
Umar once saw a young girl leaving the house of Hafsa (his daughter), adorned with a jilbab — or, from one of the houses of the Prophet’s wives. Umar entered the house and said, “Who is this girl?” They said, “A slave of ours” — or, a slave of someone’s family. He became enraged at them and said, “Your slave girls left with their adornment, and created discord (by taking Jilbab) amongst the people (while they were unable to distinguish her from the free Muslim women).”

Imam Shaybani (died 189 hijri year) wrote in his book al-Masoot (link):

ولا ينبغي للرجل أن ينظر من أمة غيره إذا كانت بالغة أو تشتهي مثلها أو توطأ إلا ما ينظر إليه من ذوات المحرم ولا بأس بأن ينظر إلى شعرها وإلى صدرها وإلى ثديها وعضدها وقدمها وساقها ولا ينظر إلى بطنها ولا إلى ظهرها ولا إلى ما بين السرة منها حتى يجاوز الركبة
It is not permissible for a man to look at a slave woman other than his own, if she has reached puberty, or he has a desire for her, except what it is permissible to look at from his close relative women (maharam). So, there is no harm that he looks at her hair, her chest, her breasts, her arm, her foot, or leg. And he does not look at her stomach or back, or what is between the navel and the knees.

 And Saudi grand hadith master Sheikh Albani recorded this tradition (link):

حدثنا على بن مسهر عن المختار بن فلفل عن أنس بن مالك قال: "  دخلت على عمر بن الخطاب أمة قد كان يعرفها لبعض المهاجرين أو الأنصار ,  وعليها جلباب متقنعة به ,  فسألها:  عتقت؟ قالت:  لا:  قال:  فما بال الجلباب؟!  ضعيه عن رأسك ,  إنما الجلباب على الحرائر من نساء المؤمنين ,  فتلكأت ,  فقام إليها بالدرة ,  فضرب بها رأسها حتى ألقته عن رأسها ".
قلت:  وهذا سند صحيح على شرط مسلم.
Companion Anas bin Malik said: A slave girl of some Muhajir or Ansar came to Umar Ibn Khattab in a state that she was wearing a Jilbab (and she covered her breasts and body with it). Upon that Umar ordered her to take away the Jilbab from her head, while Jilbab is reserved only for the free (Muslim) woman. The slave girl hesitated, upon which Umar stood up and he started beating her with the stick. He hit her head, till the slave girl removed the Jilbab.
Sheikh Albani said that his Hadith is “authentic (Sahih)” according to the standards of Imam Muslim.

The traditions related to Umar Ibn Khattab further corroborate the twelve traditions that highlight the revelation of the hijab verse (33:59) as a means to distinguish between slave women and free Muslim women. These traditions collectively provide supporting evidence for this understanding of the verse's purpose.

Please also note the difference between "Jilbab" and "Khimar":

• A Jilbab (or  Muqna) was a big outer garment/sheet that is put on the head, draped around the body and that totally covers the breasts and the body of the woman. In the verse of Hijab (Quran 33:59), the writer of the Quran ordered free Muslim women to use this same Jilbab, to cover their breasts and bodies. While slave women were not allowed to use Jilbab to cover their breasts and the body. In traditions, Umar Ibn Khattab removed this same Jilbab from the heads of slave women, which again exposed their naked breasts. 

• And “Khimar (Arabic:  خمار)” is a small headscarf, which covers only the head and comes up to the shoulders. We see Arab men using this “Khimar” (Arabic headscarf) today. 

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 275:

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَسَحَ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ وَالْخِمَارِ

 Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wiped over the socks and Khimar (Arabic Head Scarf)

Slave women were allowed to cover their head and hair by wearing Khimaar خمأر. Covering the head was a per-Islamic tradition due to the heat in Arab area.

And 'Abdul Razzaq recorded in this book al-Musanif (link):

عبد الرزاق عن بن جريج قال بلغني عن أشياخ من أهل المدينة أن الخمر على الإماء إذا حضن وليس عليهن الجلابيب

Abd al-Razzaq narrated from Ibn Jarir who said: "I heard from the elders of Medina that when a slave girt started to menstruate, she would cover her head with Khimar, but not wear a Jilbab."

Thus, Khimar was not the main distinguishing factor between free women and slave women, as both of them were covering their heads with Khimar. 

The main distinguishing factor between them was Jilbab. And in the traditions above, Umar Ibn Khattab removed this Jilbab of slave women, which again exposed their naked breasts.

Looking and touching the private parts of half-naked slave women in the Islamic Bazaars of slavery

The 1400 years of history of Islam also consists of this shameful act against humanity, where Muslims forced those women/girls to become half naked by exposing their breasts, and then forced them to stand in front of thousands of men in the Islamic Bazaars of slavery, who not only looked at them with lust but they were also allowed to touch their private parts (as if they were sheep and goats).

Imam Bayhiqi wrote in his book Sunan al-Kubra (link):

عن نافع ، عن ابن عمر ” أنه كان إذا اشترى جارية كشف عن ساقها ووضع يده بين ثدييها و على عجزها
Translation:
Nafe’e narrated that whenever Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her buttocks.

Musanaf Abdul Razzaq recorded this tradition (link):

عبد الرزاق ، عن الثوري ، عن جابر ، عن الشعبي قال : "  إذا كان الرجل يبتاع الأمة ، فإنه ينظر إلى كلها إلا الفرج " .
Shu’bi said: If any man has to buy a slave girl, then he can see the whole of her body, except for her vagina

Musanaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Volume 4, page 289 Tradition 20241 (link):

نا علي بن مسهر عن عبيدالله عن نافع عن ابن عمر أنه إذا أراد أن يشتري الجارية وضع يده على أليتيها وبين فخذيها وربما كشف عن ساقها
‘Naf’e reported: Ibn Umar, when intending to buy a slave girl, would place his hand on her breasts, between her thighs, and sometimes even expose her leg.

Musnaf Abdur Razak, Volume 7, page 286, Tradition 13204 (link):

13204 عبد الرزاق ، عن ابن عيينة قال : وأخبرني ابن أبي نجيح ، عن مجاهد قال : " وضع ابن عمر يده بين ثدييها ، ثم هزها " .

‘Mujahid reported that ibn Umar placed his hand between (a slave girl’s) breasts and shook them’

Musanaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Volume 4, page 289 Tradition 20241 (link):

حدثنا جرير عن منصور عن مجاهد قال :  كنت مع ابن عمر أمشي في السوق فإذا نحن بناس من النخاسين قد اجتمعوا على جارية يقلبونها ، فلما رأوا ابن عمر تنحوا وقالوا :  ابن عمر قد جاء ، فدنا منها ابن عمر فلمس شيئا من جسدها وقال :  أين أصحاب هذه الجارية ، إنما هي سلعة
Mujahid said: ‘I was walking with ibn Umar in a slave market, then we saw some slave dealers gathered around one slave girl and they were checking her, when they saw Ibn Umar, they stopped and said: ‘Ibn Umar has arrived’. Then ibn Umar came closer to the slave girl, he touched some parts of her body and then said: ‘Who is the owner of this slave girl, she is just a commodity!’

Imam Shaybani (died 189 hijri year) wrote in his book al-Masoot (link):

ولا ينبغي للرجل أن ينظر من أمة غيره إذا كانت بالغة أو تشتهي مثلها أو توطأ إلا ما ينظر إليه من ذوات المحرم ولا بأس بأن ينظر إلى شعرها وإلى صدرها وإلى ثديها وعضدها وقدمها وساقها ولا ينظر إلى بطنها ولا إلى ظهرها ولا إلى ما بين السرة منها حتى يجاوز الركبة
"It is not permissible for a man to look at the body of a female slave who is mature or whom he desires, except for what is allowed in the case of mahram (close relatives). There is no harm in looking at her hair, chest, breasts, shoulders, arms, and legs. However, one should not look at her stomach, back, or the area between her navel and knee.".

The slave women of Umar Ibn Khattab used to serve men with naked breasts. Imam Bayhiqi recorded this tradition and declared it "Sahih" in his book al-Sunan al-Kubra (link):

 ثم روى من طريق حماد بن سلمة قالت : حدثني ثمامة بن عبد الله بن أنس عن جده أنس بن مالك قال : " كن إماء عمر رضي الله عنه يخدمننا كاشفات عن شعورهن تضطرب ثديهن " . قلت : وإسناده جيد رجاله كلهم ثقات غير شيخ البيهقي أبي القاسم عبد الرحمن بن عبيد الله الحربي ( 1 ) وهو صدوق كما قال الخطيب ( 10 / 303 ) وقال البيهقي عقبه : " والاثار عن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه في ذلك صحيحة " .

Anas bin Malik said: ‘The female slaves of Umar were serving us with uncovered hair and their breasts shaking”

Sheikh Albani also declared it "Sahih" (Link).

 This humiliation of the slave woman is the real “Islamic modesty”, which is utterly shameful. 

All four Sunni Imams are unanimous that the nakedness (Awrah عورۃ) of a slave woman is from the navel to the knee

Even when Islam was not selling the slave women in the Bazaars, still it forced them to move outside in front of thousands of men, with naked breasts, while Islam declared the intimate parts of slave women (‘Awrah) of slave women were from the navel to the knee only.

It is perhaps the “Biggest Contradiction” in Islam. On one side, Islam asked free Muslim women to take a full-body Hijab, but on the other side, Islam snatched away the right of Hijab from slave women and even forced them to move outside with naked breasts.

All four Sunni Imams of Fiqh are unanimous that the nakedness of a slave woman is only from the navel to the knee. 

Hanafi Fiqh:

Hanafi Scholar Imam Jassas wrote (link):

يَجُوزُ لِلْأَجْنَبِيِّ النَّظَرُ إلَى شَعْرِ الْأَمَةِ وَذِرَاعِهَا وَسَاقِهَا وَصَدْرِهَا وَثَدْيِهَا
Translation:
"It is permissible for a non-mahram (non-related) person to look at the hair, arms, legs, chest, and breasts of a female slave."

According to Hanafi Fiqh book "Fatawa-a-Alamgiri" (which was written by 500 Islamic Scholars upon the order of Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir (link):

It is allowed to see the whole body of a slave woman of another person, except between her navel and the knees ... And all that is allowed to be seen, it is also allowed to be touched.

Maliki Fiqh:

And it is written in the Book "Al-Sharh al-Saghir" of Maliki Fiqh (link):

فيرى الرجل من المرأة -  إذا كانت أمة -  أكثر مما ترى منه لأنها ترى منه الوجه والأطراف فقط، وهو يرى منها ما عدا ما بين السرة والركبة، لأن عورة الأمة مع كل واحد ما بين السرة والركبة
"When a man sees a female slave, he sees more of her than she sees of him, as she only sees his face and extremities. Meanwhile, he sees everything except for what is between her navel and knee because the nakedness (Awrah) of a female slave, in the presence of a non-mahram (a non-related man), is everything except what lies between her navel and knee."

The Maliki Scholar Imam Ibn Abi Zayd (died 386 Hijri) wrote in his book "al-Jameh" (link), and also see here:

"He (i.e. al-Imam Malik ibn Anas) strongly disapproved of the behavior of the slave women of al-Medinah in going out uncovered above the lower garment (i.e with naked breasts). He said: "I have spoken to the Sultan about it, but I have not received a reply."

Imam Qurtabi writes in his famous Tafsir of the Quran, Verse 7:26 (Link):

“ وأما الأمة فالعورة منها ما تحت ثدييها ، ولها أن تبدي رأسها ومعصميها .  وقيل :  حكمها حكم الرجل”
Translation:
"As for the slave woman, her 'awrah (private area) is from below her breasts, but she is allowed to uncover her head and wrists. It is also said that her ruling is like that of a man."

Please also watch the video of Sheikh Hamza Yousuf (link) where he is telling that slave women used to walk outside with naked breasts during the era of the prophet Muhammad.

Shafi'i Fiqh:

And it is also the same ruling in the Fiqh of Imam Shafii too. See the book "Al-Muhadab fi Fiqh al-Shafi'i, written by Shirazi (link):

المذهب أن عورتها ما بين السرة والركبة
Translation:
The view is that the 'awrah (private area) of a slave woman is from the navel to the knees.

Hanbali Fiqh:

Kitab al-Kafi fi Fiqh al-Imam Ahmed (link):

وقال ابن حامد عورتها كعورة الرجل ، لما روى عمر بن شعيب عن أبيه عن جده أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال :  إذا زوج أحدكم أمته عبده أو أجيره فلا ينظر إلى شيء من عورته فإن ما تحت السرة إلى الركبة عورة يريد عورة الأمة ، رواه الدارقطني .  ولأنه من لم يكن رأسه عورة لم يكن صدره عورة ،
Translation:
Ibn Hamed said that the 'awrah (private area) of a slave woman is like that of a man. This is based on the narration of 'Umar ibn Shu'aib from his father, from his grandfather, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "When any of you marries his slave woman or a female servant, he should not look at any part of her 'awrah. For what is below the navel and above the knees is 'awrah, referring to the 'awrah of the slave woman." This narration was reported by ad-Daraqutni. And because if one's head is not considered 'awrah, then their chest is also not considered 'awrah.

Traditions about the 'Awrah (i.e. nakedness) of a slave woman:

And Imam Abdul Razzaq recorded many traditions upon the 'Awrah (i.e. nakedness) of a slave woman in his books "al-Munsif". Some of these traditions are presented below (link):

13206 - عبد الرزاق عن ابن جريج عن رجل عن ابن المسيب أنه قال: يحل له أن ينظر إلى كل شئ فيها، ما عدا فرجها.
Said ibn al-Musayyib said if one wants to buy a slave girl, then he can see whole of her body except for her vagina (link).

13207 - عبد الرزاق عن الثوري عن جابر عن الشعبي قال: إذا كان الرجل يبتاع الأمة فإنه ينظر إلى كلها إلا الفرج.
Abdul Razzaq reported from Ath-Thawri, from Jabir, from Ash-Sha'bi, who said: "When a man buys a slave woman, he is allowed to look at all of her except her vagina." (link).

13208 - عبد الرزاق عن ابن جريج قال: أكل في.... (1) أصدق عمن سمع عليا يسأل عن الأمة تباع، أينظر إلى ساقها، وعجزها، وإلى بطنها؟ قال: لا بأس بذلك، لا حرمة لها، إنما وقفت لنساومها.
A reliable person heard Ali (the fourth caliph) being asked about buying a slave woman and whether it is permissible to look at her legs, her private area, and her stomach. Upon that he replied there is no harm in seeing them while a slave woman has no honour. Rather, it is allowed in order to assess her before bargaining (link).

1792 - ( روى أبو حفص بإسناده : " أن ابن عمر كان يضع يده بين ثدييها ( يعني الجارية ) وعلى عجزها من فوق الثياب ويكشف عن ساقها " ذكره في الوقع ) . صحيح . أخرجه البيهقي ( 5 / 329 ) من طريق عبيد الله بن عمر عن نافع عن ابن عمر : " أنه كان إذا اشترى جارية كشف عن ساقها ووضع يده بين ثدييها وعلى عجزها " . وفي آخره زيادة : " وكأنه كان يضعها عليها من وراء الثياب " . ولعلها من البيهقي أو من بعض رواته . والسند صحيح .
Abu Hafs narrated with his chain of narration: "Ibn Umar used to place his hand between the breasts of the slave woman (referring to the chest area) and on her private area above her clothing, and he would uncover her leg." It is mentioned it is authentic report. Al-Bayhaqi narrated it in his Sunan (5/329) through the narration of Ubaidullah ibn Umar from Nafi' from Ibn Umar: "Whenever he would buy a slave girl, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her private area." At the end of the narration, there is an addition: "It is as if he would place his hand on her from behind the clothing." It is possible that this addition is from Al-Bayhaqi or from some of its narrators. And the chain of narration is authentic.

Saudi grand Mufti Albani declared this tradition to be "authentic" (link).

13203 - عبد الرزاق عن ابن عيينة عن عمرو بن دينار عن مجاهد قال: كنت مع ابن عمر في السوق، فأبصر بجارية تباع، فكشف عن ساقها، وصك في صدرها، وقال: اشتروا، يريهم أنه لا بأس بذلك.

Abdul Razzaq reported from Ibn Ayyinah, from Amr ibn Dinar, from Mujahid who said: "I was with Ibn Umar in the marketplace when he saw a slave girl being sold. He uncovered her leg and tapped her chest, and he said: 'Buy her, showing them that there is no defect in her.'" (link)

Slave women were standing in the mosques with naked breasts, during prayers

What's more, slave women were offering their PRAYERS with naked breasts. Imam Ibn Hazm recorded in his book Al-Muhala, Kitab al-Rizaa, Volume 10 page 23 (link):

لا يستحي من أن يطلق أن للمملوكة أن تصلي عريانة يرى الناس ثدييها وخاصرتها وان للحرة أن تتعمد أن تكشف من شفتي فرجها مقدار الدرهم البغلي تصلي كذلك ويراها الصادر والوارد بين الجماعة في المسجد

“He (Abu Hanifa) was not shy to say that a slave woman can pray naked and the people can observe her breasts and waist. A free woman can purposely show the parts of her vagina during prayers and can be observed by whosoever enters and leaves the mosque.”

Another Saudi grand Mufti Sheikh Uthaymeen gave this fatwa (link):

الأَمَةُ -  ولو بالغة -  وهي المملوكة، فعورتها من السُّرَّة إلى الرُّكبة، فلو صلَّت الأَمَةُ مكشوفة البدن ما عدا ما بين السُّرَّة والرُّكبة، فصلاتها صحيحة، لأنَّها سترت ما يجب عليها سَتْرُه في الصَّلاة.
The slave woman, even if she is an adult, and by slave woman we mean a female slave, her 'Awrah (private parts) is from the navel to the knee. If the slave woman prays with her body uncovered except for what is between the navel and the knee, her prayer is valid because she covered what is obligatory for her to cover in prayer.

And Umar Ibn Khattab was hitting the slave girls for attempting to cover their bodies by taking the Hijab. This humiliation of the slave girls for taking a Hijab is the real “Islamic modesty”, that Muslim preachers hide today from others (including normal Muslims).

The Video of Naked Slave Girls in Saudi Arabia in 1964

Saudi Arabia strongly resisted the abolition of slavery. However, under pressure from the Western world, it was forced to officially ban slavery in 1962. Nevertheless, the practice continued secretly for several more years. The following video is from 1964 and you can see slave girls in it with naked breasts. 

This video is age-restricted, and you have to watch it directly on YouTube. Here is the direct link. 

Some Original Photos of half-naked Muslim slave women

Prophet Muhammad used to roam around the city in public while holding the hands of the slave girls who belonged to other men

Look at these Muslim men doing dramas of modesty by not shaking hands with women.

On one side, Muhammad made a woman's life difficult in the name of “Hijab and modesty”,  practically imprisoning her in her home and cutting her off from the outside world. She was prohibited from interacting with other men, and even if she needed to speak, she was required to do so in a harsh voice.

But on the other hand, Prophet Muhammad used to walk in public while holding the hands of the slave girls who belonged to other men.

Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith 4177:

“If a female slave among the people of Al-Medinah were to take the hand of the Messenger of Allah, he would not take his hand away from hers until she had taken him wherever she wanted in Al-Medinah so that her needs may be met.”
Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)

Please remember that this slave girl was there with naked breasts too, which makes things even more complicated.

Why did Prophet Muhammad feel the need to hold her hand? Couldn't they simply walk around the city without holding hands?

This same tradition is also present in Sahih Bukhari too.

Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 6072:
Anas bin Malik said, "Any of the female slaves of Medina could take hold of the hand of Allah's Apostle and take him wherever she wished."

Can you see these two extreme contradictions?

On one hand, free women are confined and covered from head to toe in Jilbab, and sometimes even further restricted within the walls of their homes. They are forced to live unnatural lives, where any interaction with men is strictly prohibited.

But on the other hand, slave women are left exposed, with their breasts uncovered. They are treated as commodities, allowing customers to touch their private parts like animals.

This happened while no Allah is present above in the heavens, and a human (i.e. Muhammad) was making the laws in the name of revelations on his own.

'Aisha bathed in front of two Mahram MEN, while the nakedness of a woman in front of Mahram man is also just like the nakedness of a slave woman

As we mentioned above:

• Before the revelation of the verse of Hijab, neither free Muslim women nor slave women covered their naked breasts in public, as it was a custom of the Arabs of that era.
• After the revelation of the verse of Hijab, free Muslim women began covering their naked breasts and bodies with Jilbab ONLY in Public.
• But the instruction to wear Jilbab did not apply indoors in front of Mahram men. Therefore, free Muslim women did not covered their naked breasts with Jilbab inside their homes in front of their Mahram male relatives. According to Islamic law, a free Muslim woman's 'Awrah (private parts) in front of Mahram men extended only from her navel to her knees.

Sahih al Bukhari, Bab Grhusl Volume 1, Book 5, Number 251:

Narrated Abu Salama: ‘Ayesha’s brother and I went to ‘A’isha and he asked her about the bath of the Prophet. She brought a pot containing about a Sa’ of water and took a bath and poured it over her head and at what time there was a screen between her and us.

The grand scholar Ibn Hajar el-Asqallani, the commentator of Sahih Bukhari, wrote under this hadith (link): 

قوله : ( وبيننا وبينها حجاب ) قال القاضي عياض : ظاهره أنهما رأيا عملها في رأسها وأعالي جسدها مما يحل نظره للمحرم ; لأنها خالة أبي سلمة من الرضاع أرضعته أختها أم كلثوم وإنما سترت أسافل بدنها مما لا يحل للمحرم النظر إليه

Qadi Ayad says: It is apparent that they could see her actions from her head and the top half of her body, because they were allowed to do as she was a milk-aunt to Abu Salamah and his brother from her sister Umm Kulthum. As for the lower part of her body, this was covered.

And it is written in Fatawa Alamgiri (also knowns as Fatawa-e-Hindiya, as it was compiled by 500 scholars from India on the orders of Emperor Aurganzeb Alamgir). Link:

وَأَمَّا نَظَرُهُ إلَى ذَوَاتِ مَحَارِمِهِ فَنَقُولُ : يُبَاحُ لَهُ أَنْ يَنْظُرَ مِنْهَا إلَى مَوْضِعِ زِينَتِهَا الظَّاهِرَةِ وَالْبَاطِنَةِ وَهِيَ الرَّأْسُ وَالشَّعْرُ وَالْعُنُقُ وَالصَّدْرُ وَالْأُذُنُ وَالْعَضُدُ وَالسَّاعِدُ وَالْكَفُّ وَالسَّاقُ وَالرِّجْلُ وَالْوَجْهُ ،  وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ ، كَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ . وَمَا حَلَّ النَّظَرُ إلَيْهِ حَلَّ مَسُّهُ وَنَظَرُهُ وَغَمْزُهُ مِنْ غَيْرِ حَائِلٍ

As for looking at his Mahram women (like mother, adult daughter, sister and every Mahram female like the grandmother, child, grandchild and aunt) we say that it is permissible for him to look at the apparent and hidden areas of their adornment, which include the head, hair, neck, chest, ears, shoulders, upper arms, forearms, hands, legs, and face. This is the correct view, as mentioned in Al-Muhit. Whatever is permissible to look at, it is also permissible to touch, look at, and wink at without any barrier.

Excuses by Islamic apologists:

Here are a few excuses, which are presented by Islamic apologists today:

The Dishonest Translation of verse 24:31 by modern Islamic apologists to prove that Khimar was also used to cover the naked breasts of slave women

Please be aware of dishonesty of some of the modern Islamic apologists. Their deception is where they have started claiming that Khimar was not a head covering, but Allah ordered to cover the breasts too with Khimar. 

Quran 24:31:

وَقُل لِّلْمُؤْمِنَٰتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَٰرِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا ۖ وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ ۖ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا لِبُعُولَتِهِنَّ أَوْ ءَابَآئِهِنَّ أَوْ ءَابَآءِ بُعُولَتِهِنَّ ...

[Dr. Mustafa Khattab]  And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their chastity, and not to reveal their adornments except what normally appears. Let them draw their veils (i.e. Khimar خمار)  over their chests (Arabic:جُيُوبِهِنَّ), and not reveal their ˹hidden˺ adornments except to their husbands, their fathers

So, they have started translating Khimar as "veils" (instead of a "Head Covering"), and the word جُيُوبِ as chests (instead of neckline/bosom). By doing so, they want to make this argument that although Umar took away the Jilbab from slave women, but it didn't expose their naked breasts, while slave women were covering their breasts with Khimar. 

However, this modern translation is wrong, and here is proof:

• It is important to note that in the verse, the Arabic word جُيُوبِ (singular جَيْب) is used. When modern Muslim translators translate it as 'chest', then it is wrong. The correct translation of جَيْب (singular جَيْب) is 'neckline/bosom', referring to the area where ornaments like necklaces are worn. It does not refer to covering the breasts of women, but rather the upper part of the chest and neck. You can find the exact translation of this word on wiktionary (link). 'Chest' is not the appropriate translation, as the Arabic word for chest is "Sadar (صدر)". Therefore, this verse only instructed women to conceal their ornaments such as earrings and necklaces by using their headscarves.
• However, many Muslim translators (link) didn't show this dishonesty, and they indeed translated these words (i.e. Khimar and Jiyub) correctly as a "head covering" and "Bosoms/necklines". 

It is written in Tafsir Madarak al-Tanzil, under verse 24:31 (link):

كانت جيوبهن واسعة تبدو منها صدورهن وما حواليها وكن يسدلن الخمر من ورائهن فتبقى مكشوفة فأمرن بأن يسدلنها من أقدامهن حتى تغطيها
(During the (pre-Islamic) time of ignorance, the custom among the Arab women was) their bosoms were naked due to which their chest and area around it was exposed. And women used to hang their head scarfs (Khimar) on the backside, due to which bosoms (necklines) were exposed. They were ordered (in this verse) to hang their head scarfs on the front side, so that the bosoms are covered. 

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 275:

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَسَحَ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ وَالْخِمَارِ

 Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wiped over the socks and Khimar (Arabic Head Scarf)

And it is written in Tafsir-e-Mazhari, under the commentary of this verse 24:31 (link):

All the Scholars are 'Unanimous اجماع' that this verse is only for the free (Muslim) women ... Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ahmad deemed the nakedness of a slave woman from navel till knees. While Imam Abu Hanifa considered her stomach and back to be a part of her nakedness too. 

Islamic Preachers: Hijab is necessary for a woman so that her husband does not feel jealous and uncomfortable due to his Ghayrah (Arabic: غَيْرَة)

Islamic preachers claim:

If woman wears revealing clothing which shows her beauty in front of other males; her husband would feel extremely jealous and feel uncomfortable due to his Ghayrah (Arabic: غَيْرَة). But with hijab, this is evaded.

May we then ask the Islamic preachers what about the Ghayrah of poor slave women? Why did Muhammad prohibit Hijab for slave women? Why did Muhammad then keep the breasts of slave women naked? There were thousands of slave women in front of Muhammad with naked breasts. Why did Umar Ibn Khattab use to beat slave women who took Hijab, even by mistake?

And if a Muslim master got lust for a slave woman of another man, then they could simply swap their slave women with each other, and rape them. Tafsir-e-Mazhari is a commentary of the Quran, which is taught in every Hanafi school. It is written under the commentary of verse 33:52 (link):

Ibn Zayd said about this verse {وَلَآ أَن تَبَدَّلَ بِهِنَّ مِنْ أَزْوَٰجٍ nor to exchange your present wives for other women (Verse 33:52)} that people used to swap their wives during the era of ignorance ... upon that Allah revealed this verse. But the slave women are not included in it, and you can swap them and there is no problem in it. 

So, where has that jealousy and Ghayrah gone now? 

Even worse, in the case of the wife of the male slave, even this swap is not needed. If the master gets lust for the wife of his male slave, then he can simply take her away from him and rape her. And after fulfilling his lust, he can once again return her over to his slave. 

Sahih Bukhari, 5105:

وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ.

Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} Married free women are forbidden to you except your married slave women that your right hands possess. There is no harm in a man (i.e the owner) taking his female slave (for himself) from his male slave.

So, what is about the Ghairah of a poor male slave, whose wife is being raped by his owner? Unbelievable!

And why does Islam talk only about the Ghairah of men? Why does it not care even the slightest about the Ghayrah of poor slave women? Why are they made to be raped by multiple Muslim men in a TEMPORARY sexual relationship without their consent? 

Islam turns even small pre-pubescent captive girls of war into slaves, although they had no role in the wars, and they were totally innocent. And then Islam took away all their Ghayrah, and they were also raped by multiple Muslim men in temporary sexual relationships. 

'Lowering the gazes' is only an Unnatural restriction, which results only in 'sexual frustration':

Islamic preachers claim:

Allah ordered the lowering of gazes in the Quran, and it is also modesty. Men normally lustfully gaze at, look at women(even if inadvertently, without being aware of it) but hijab prevents women getting unsolicited, unwanted looks.

We absolutely don't agree with Muslim's claim of this so-called 'modesty' in the name of 'lowering the gazes', while:

• 'Lowering of the gazes' is also not modesty, but an unnatural restriction upon the women and the men. 
• And Muslim men were ordered to lower their gazes only in the presence of free Muslim women. As far as slave women are concerned, then Muslim men are not needed to lower their gazes and they are allowed to look at them. It is written in Hanafi Fiqh book Fatawa Alamgiri (link): "It is allowed to see the whole body of a slave woman of another person, except between her navel and the knees ... And all that is allowed to be seen, it is also allowed to be touched." And it is written in the Book "Al-Sharh al-Saghir" of Maliki Fiqh (link): فيرى الرجل من المرأة - إذا كانت أمة - أكثر مما ترى منه لأنها ترى منه الوجه والأطراف فقط، وهو يرى منها ما عدا ما بين السرة والركبة، لأن عورة الأمة مع كل واحد ما بين السرة والركبة Translation: A man can see more of the body of a slave woman as compared to what she can see of a man. She is allowed only to see his hands and feet, while a man is allowed to see her whole body naked except for the part between her navel and knees.
• And prohibiting women to talk with men, or both of them to interact with each other is also not modesty, but again an unnatural restriction. 
• These unnatural restrictions result only in the form of an extremely 'Frustrated' society. Please read our article:  The practice of Islamic Hijab and Modesty leads only to sexual frustration.
• And in order to see the real destruction of these unnatural restrictions, please see the Incident of Ifk, where people put the howdah of 'Aisha on the camel, while they thought 'Aisha was present there. But 'Aisha was not present there. This happened while Islam prohibits interaction between men and women, and thus people didn't even say "hello" to 'Aisha. This led to such devastating results where 2 tribes of Muslims were about to kill each other, and Muhammad was close to divorcing 'Aisha, and this whole drama lasted for a complete month. 

Once again, let us make it clear that: 

• It is the RESPECT of women and their choices, which is counted as modesty. 
• And the Western world is modest. It provided women with protection by demanding that men respect women and their choices. 

Islamic Apologists: Slave women were allowed to expose their chest/breasts, but it was not necessary

Islamic apologists also come up with this excuse:

The verses, narrations, and exegeses only state that the slave women were not allowed to cover their hair, which was the main distinguishing factor between free women and slave women. They were allowed to expose their chest/breasts, but it was not necessary.

Response:

This is not true.

Firstly, there is no Quranic verse or Hadith present which claims that it was the own personal choice of slave women either to expose their chests or to cover them. Islamic apologists must come up with proof for this claim. 

Secondly, according to verse 33:59 and Ahadith it was Jilbab جلبأب, which was the main distinguishing factor between free and slave women. Slave women were not allowed to wear the Jilbab. Jilbab was a big sheet of garment, which was put on the head, and it covered the whole body along with breasts.

Thirdly, slave women were indeed allowed to cover their head and hair by wearing Khimaar خمأر , which is a small "head scarf", which Arab men do wear still today. Covering the head was a per-Islamic tradition due to the heat in Arab area. Thus, Khimar was not the main distinguishing factor between free women and slave women. 

Fourthly, the 'Awrah (nakedness) of slave woman is from the navel to the knee. Therefore, the main question is, why didn't Allah (i.e. Muhammad) ORDER that it is OBLIGATORY upon slave women to cover their breasts and body? What would have happened if slave women had to cover their breasts under these obligatory orders? Unfortunately, Islamic apologists don't answer this main and direct question. 

Fifthly, yes some slave women tried to cover their breasts by wearing putting the Jilbab on their heads (covering their breasts too), but Umar Ibn Khattab started beating them and told them not to try to resemble free Muslim women. He compelled those slave women to remove the Jilbab from their heads, again exposing their breasts. Please read all the traditions about Umar Ibn Khattab above in the article where he is removing this Jilbab. Thus, it was not an option that slave women had either to expose or to cover their breasts. 

Here are few Ahadith about Khimar and how slave women used to wear it:

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 275:

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَسَحَ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ وَالْخِمَارِ 
 Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wiped over the socks and Khimar (Arabic Scarf)

This shows that Khimar was only a head covering. 

And 'Abdul Razzaq recorded in this book al-Musanif (link):

عبد الرزاق عن بن جريج قال بلغني عن أشياخ من أهل المدينة أن الخمر على الإماء إذا حضن وليس عليهن الجلابيب

Abd al-Razzaq narrated from Ibn Jarir who said: "I heard from the elders of Medina that when a slave girt started to menstruate, she would cover her head with Khimar, but not wear a Jilbab."

And it is written in Tafsir-e-Mazhari, under the commentary of this verse 24:31 (link):

All the Scholars are 'Unanimous اجماع' that this verse is only for the free (Muslim) women ... Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ahmad deemed the nakedness of a slave woman from navel till knees. While Imam Abu Hanifa considered her stomach and back to be a part of her nakedness too. 

An article by a Muslim Apologist (Abu Amina Elias), who denies that the breasts of slave women were naked

Of course, proofs are so abundant that the breasts of slave women in Islamic society were naked, that it is impossible for the Islamic apologists to refute all the proofs directly. 

Nevertheless, they tried to deceive the readers by bringing lame excuses from a few later coming Muslim scholars. You can read this complete article here. 

This article is unable to bring a single proof from the Quran or Hadith against this unanimous practice of the early whole Islamic Community, where the breasts of slave women were kept naked.

In fact, this article is proof itself that later coming few Islamic Scholars were so much ashamed of this practice, that they tried to hide it by making lame excuses.

First Issue: All Scholars that are mentioned in this article, came several hundred years after Muhammad

This article presented the statements of the following Scholars, that who denied that slave women were naked during Muhammad's era. 

• Ibn Hazm (died 456 Hijri)
• Ibn al-Qattan (died 623 Hijri)
• Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728 Hijri)
• Abu Hayyan (died 745 Hijri)

All of them came about 450 years after Muhammad. Ibn Hazm (died 456 Hijri) was the first one who went against the IJMA of all Salaf Muslims of the first 450 years. 

And the second problem is that all of them belonged to the Zahiri Madhab. 

And all other Ulama (of 4 Sunni Fiqh) during their time and after them and until now deny them on the issue of the nakedness of a slave woman. 

• Just look at Tābi‘ūn (i.e. the 2nd generation of Muslims after Sahaba), and Tabi' al-Tabi'in (i.e. 3rd generation of Muslims), like Abu Malik, Abu Saleh, Muawiyyah, Hassan, Siddi and Mujahid (see the discussion about verse 33:59 above in our article).
• Just look at the fatwas of all 4 Sunni Imams of Fiqh.
• Just look at the practice of the whole Muslim community. Imam Malik personally disliked it but he was a witness himself that the whole Muslim community was practising it where the breasts of slave women were naked. Thus, Imam Malik was unable to convince the Caliph to stop this practice, as Malik was unable to present any proof from Quran and Sunnah against it.
• Even after Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah (and all others who are mentioned in this article), the later coming Muslim Scholars like Ibn Kathir and Fiqh Scholars didn't give any importance to these lame excuses of Ibn Taymiyyah and to these other few Zahiri madhab followers and kept this view that breasts of slave women were naked in the Islamic society.

2nd Issue: Not a SINGLE Proof is present, which states breasts of a slave woman is included in their 'Awrah

In this whole article:

• They are unable to bring a SINGLE Quranic verse that says that slave women have to take cover their breasts.
• They are unable to bring a SINGLE Hadith of Muhammad, where he says that slave women have to cover their breasts.
• They are unable to bring a SINGLE Athar (report) from Sahaba which asks slave women to cover their breasts.
• They are unable to bring a SINGLE report by Tabi'in which asks slave women to cover their breasts.
• They are unable to bring a SINGLE Fatwa of Salaf Muslims of the first 450 years, which tells that the breasts of slave women are included in their 'Awrah. 

Yes, they do not have a single proof. 

While there are many Ahadith (mentioned above in our article), which are unanimously telling only one thing i.e. slave women were present there with naked breasts.

The deception of Islamic apologists is that they themselves are not able to present a single Hadith in their favour but deny all those reports which go against them. 

3rd Issue: Only so-called proof by Abu Hayyan and Ibn al-Qattan is their conjecture about verse 33:59

In the whole article, only Abu Hayan, Ibn al-Qattan brought a single proof i.e. verse 33:59 and claimed that this verse prohibits the naked breasts of slave women. According to this article:

Abu Hayyan (died 745 hijri) wrote: "The apparent meaning of His saying ‘the believing women’ (i.e. verse 33:59) includes free women and maidservants. 
Ibn al-Qattan (died 623 hijri) wrote: "Upon this, there is no difference between free women and maidservants in respect to the verse 33:59. 

It is not counted as proof, but only their claim, which is based only upon their conjecture, as they failed in bringing any other proof from the Quran, or any other single Hadith as support of their claim. 

In fact, this verse is refuting them itself as it is making a distinction between the free women and the slave women, as has been mentioned by all the rest of Muslims Scholars and Mufassirin (Quran Interpreters), and Tabaeen (2nd Generation Muslims) and Umar Ibn Khattab used to beat and took away the Jilbab from the slave-women only due to this verse. 

Verse 33:59 is as under:

(Quran 33:59)

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ

O Prophet! tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments (Arabic: Jilbab); this will be more proper so that they may be recognised (as free women, and differentiated from the slave-women), and thus they will not be molested (by men).

We had already presented the detailed proofs and sayings of 2nd and 3rd generation of Muslims (i.e. Tābi‘ūn and Tabi' al-Tabi'in) and Muslim Scholars and Muffasirin and Fiqh Imams, and Ahadith, who are all denying this claim of Abu Hayyan and Ibn al-Qattan (see the details above in our article).

4th Issue: Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah came up only with their conjecture

According to this article, the Zahiri scholars Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah made the following claims:

Ibn Hazm (died 456 hijri) wrote: The nakedness of a woman is her entire body excluding the face and palms only. The free man and male servant, the free woman and maidservant are equal in this respect; there is no difference

Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728 hijri) worte: The default position is that the nakedness of a maidservant is like a free woman, ...

Answer:

It is not proof. It is counted only as a claim/conjecture by Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah, which they presented without any proof from the Quran or Hadith.

And these claims/conjectures of Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah have no value as they have been refuted by Quranic verse 33:59 itself, where Quran is itself making a distinction between free Muslim women and the slave women by ordering only the free women to take the Jilbab (outer sheet). And Umar Ibn Khattab himself took away the Jilbab from slave women, how could then Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Hazm claim that the nakedness of free women and the slave women is the same?

All the Muslim Quran Mufassirin (Interpreters) are refuting Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah.

All the Ahadith on this subject are refuting Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah.

All the Fiqh Imams refuted Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyyah.

Ibn Taymiyya also wrote (link):

إنَّ الإماء في عهد الرسول عليه الصَّلاة والسَّلام، وإن كُنَّ لا يحتجبن كالحرائر؛ لأن الفتنة بهنَّ أقلُّ، فَهُنَّ يُشبهنَ القواعدَ من النِّساء اللاتي لا يرجون نكاحاً، قال تعالى فيهن: ) فَلَيْسَ عَلَيْهِنَّ جُنَاحٌ أَنْ يَضَعْنَ ثِيَابَهُنَّ غَيْرَ مُتَبَرِّجَاتٍ بِزِينَةٍ ) (النور: من الآية60)، يقول: وأما الإماء التركيَّات الحِسَان الوجوه، فهذا لا يمكن أبداً أن يَكُنَّ كالإماء في عهد الرسول عليه الصَّلاة والسَّلام، ويجب عليها أن تستر كلَّ بدنها عن النَّظر،
Slave women during the Prophet’s time didn't use to cover themselves like free women, while their chances of spreading Fitna (making men excited through their half-naked body) were not too much, and their ruling was like of the old women who didn’t need to take Hijab as Quran said in verse 60 of Surah Noor. But as far as the beautiful Turkish slave women of today are concerned, then they could not be compared with the slave women of the time of prophet Muhammad. These beautiful Turkish slave women should thus cover whole of their bodies and to safeguard themselves from the eyes of men.

This claim of Ibn Taymiyyah makes absolutely no sense.

• Was there really no young and beautiful Arab or Persian of Black slave girls present during the time of the prophet Muhammad? 
• Were all of the young Arab, Persian and Black slave girls of the prophet’s era UGLY?
• And how those young Araba and Persian of black slave women became equal to OLD women? Yes, old free women are not needed to follow the strict Hijab code, but they are yet not allowed to move in public with naked breast. Nevertheless, young slave women were present in public with naked breasts. 

5th Issue: The claims by Sheikh Albani

This article claims that Albani wrote:

It is strange that some exegetes are fooled by these weak narrations, such that they adhere to the view restricting His saying ‘the believing women’ as free women to the exclusion of maidservants,

Answer:

As compared to Albani, there are Tabaeen (like Abu Malik, Abu Saleh, Muawiyyah, Hassan, Siddi and Mujahid) who all pointed out that in this verse the believers who are addressed are the free Muslim women, and this verse was itself revealed to make a distinction between the free and the slave woman.

After Tabaeen, all the Fiqh Imams, and all the Quran Mufassirin of the first 450 years and then later till today (except for a few Zahiris) pointed out that this verse is indeed making a distinction and, in this verse, the "believing women" only mean the free women as only they had to take the jilbab. 

Therefore, the conjecture of Albani has no value in front of these Tabaeen, and then Ijma of the whole Ummah for the first 500 years, and late too except for a few Zahiri Scholars.

Therefore, there are not "some exegetes", but ALL of them (except for a few Zahiris) accepted these traditions and the collective practice of Muslim Society proves that 'Awrah of a slave woman is only from navel to knee. 

Islamic apologists also claim that Albani declared all these Traditions as weak:

It is strange that some exegetes are fooled by these weak narrations

While the reality is totally opposite to what Albani claims, as:

•  Neither are they "some exegetes", but almost ALL of them accepted these traditions.
• And All the Fiqh Imams accepted these traditions.
• And in fact, it is no more a question of traditions, because it was the continuous practice of the whole Muslim society and in the first 450 years no one challenged it. The first one was Ibn Hazm who claimed otherwise, but he was unable to bring a single verse from Quran or single Hadith for his claim. 

6th Issue: Deceptive claim about Hanbali Fiqh

This article also claimed:

The Hanbali scholars said the nakedness of a maidservant is like the nakedness of a free woman. It is not permissible to look at her except with what is permissible to see in regards to a free woman.

Firstly, this article didn't answer the other Fiqhs of Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi'i.

Secondly, it is deceiving the readers while Hanbali Fiqh Scholars also claimed the same that awrah of salve women is only from the navel to the knees.

Kitab al-Kafi fi Fiqh al-Imam Ahmed (link):

وما يظهر دائماً من الأمة كالرأس واليدين إلى المرفقين والرجلين إلى الركبتين ليس بعورة ، لأن عمر رضي الله عنه نهى الأمة عن التقنع والتشبه بالحرائر ، قال القاضي في الجامع وما عدا ذلك عورة ، لأنه لا يظهر غالباً ، أشبه ما تحت السرة . وقال ابن حامد عورتها كعورة الرجل ، لما روى عمر بن شعيب عن أبيه عن جده أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : إذا زوج أحدكم أمته عبده أو أجيره فلا ينظر إلى شيء من عورته فإن ما تحت السرة إلى الركبة عورة يريد عورة الأمة ، رواه الدارقطني . ولأنه من لم يكن رأسه عورة لم يكن صدره عورة ،

Translation:

What normally appears of the slave woman, like the head, the hands up to the elbows, and the feet up to the knees, it is not 'awrah, because 'Umar, radhiyallahu 'anhu, forbade the slave woman from covering her head (at-taqannu') and imitating the free women. Al-Qadhi said in "al-Jami'" that everything besides that (i.e. what is mentioned above) is 'awrah, because it is usually not exposed, similar to what is beneath the navel. Ibn Hamid said that her 'awrah is the same as the 'awrah of the man, because of what is narrated by 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, from his father, from his grandfather, that the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, said: "When one of you marries off his slave woman to his slave or hireling, let him not look at anything of her 'awrah, for whatever is below the navel until the knees is 'awrah." He meant the 'awrah of the slave woman. Narrated by ad-Daraqutni. Head is not included in the 'awrah of a slave woman as well as their breasts...

And the tradition of  'Amr b. Suh'aib (which is mentioned by Ibn Hamid), it has been recorded in Sunan Abu Dawud through different chains of narration. 

Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4114 and 4113:

7th Issue: Casting doubts about Umar Ibn Khattab beating the slave women for taking Jilbab

This article tried to cast doubts about the wrongdoing of Umar Ibn Khattab by writing:

Anas reported:

قَالَ رَأَى عُمَرُ أَمَةً لَنَا مُتَقَنِّعَةً فَضَرَبَهَا وَقَالَ لَا تَشَبَّهِي بِالْحَرَائِرِ

Umar saw one of our maidservants wearing a veil and he flogged her. Umar said: Do not resemble free women.

(Source: Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 6/236)

The authenticity of this report, through various chains of authority, is questionable. Even if it is authentic, it does not prove anything about the limits of a maidservant’s nakedness.

We have already provided multiple traditions above, which have been authenticated by Muslims Scholars themselves, and all of them prove that indeed Umar Ibn Khattab beat the slave woman for taking the Jilbab and hiding her body. And indeed it proves that the breasts of slave women became naked after the removal of Jilbab/Muqna, while it was the only garment they used to hide their naked bodies and breasts. 

Islamic apologists claim that the tradition says the Umar uncovered the head/hairs of the slave girl and not her breast. 

Answer:

Covering the head/hair was not a part of the 'Awrah (nakedness) of the slave women. Their 'Awrah was only from the navel till the knees.

The slave girls used the Jilbab for covering the whole body and it was Jilbab that was the sign of distinction between the free woman and the slave woman.

Therefore, when Umar took away the Jilbab, then not only breasts became naked, but also the head/hairs, but it was not the issue.

8th Issue: Excuse that slave women made their breasts naked only while they were physically working

The article claims:

 It seems to have been a concession granted as a way of lightening their workload ...

It is a lame excuse. 

Covering the naked breasts is not a problem in doing physical work.

And when Umar Ibn Khattab beat the slave woman for wearing Jilbab, then she was not working at that time, but she was only walking in public with a Hijab. Nevertheless, Umar Ibn Khattab still took away her Hijab and told her not to resemble the free Muslim women by taking a Hijab. 

9th Issue: Ibn Umar was not touching the bodies of the slave women in the open markets, but only examining the minor slave-girls

Islam not only allowed the customers to watch the naked breast and bodies of the slave women but they were also allowed to touch their bodies, including the private parts like breasts, buttocks and thighs (whole body, except for vagina). For example, Imam Bayhiqi wrote in his book Sunan al-Kubra (link):

عن نافع ، عن ابن عمر ” أنه كان إذا اشترى جارية كشف عن ساقها ووضع يده بين ثدييها و على عجزها
Translation:
According to Nafi', from Ibn 'Umar, it is narrated that when he would purchase a female slave, he would uncover her leg and place his hand between her breasts and on her private part.

But this Website of Islamic apologists denied it, and presented the following excuse:

The word used in this Hadith is “jariya جارية” , and Jariya refers to a very young girl that has the ability to run around, not even a girl who attained puberty.

This is a strange excuse. 

Firstly, even if Ibn Umar and Muslim customers were placing their hands on the naked breasts and buttocks of a young girl, still that is disgusting enough to leave the whole religion of Islam. 

Secondly, it is a false excuse, and Allah/Muhammad allowed to dishonour even the fully grown-up slave girls and slave women by touching their naked bodies.

The word "Jariya" does not mean small girl (as Islamic apologists claimed), but it means fully grown-up slave girl. We can see it in hundreds of other Ahadith. For example, let us see this word in a Hadith that is present in Sahih Muslim, Book of Marriage (link):

عَنْ جَابِرٍ، أَنَّ رَجُلاً، أَتَى رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ إِنَّ لِي جَارِيَةً هِيَ خَادِمُنَا وَسَانِيَتُنَا وَأَنَا أَطُوفُ عَلَيْهَا وَأَنَا أَكْرَهُ أَنْ تَحْمِلَ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ اعْزِلْ عَنْهَا إِنْ شِئْتَ فَإِنَّهُ سَيَأْتِيهَا مَا قُدِّرَ لَهَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَلَبِثَ الرَّجُلُ ثُمَّ أَتَاهُ فَقَالَ إِنَّ الْجَارِيَةَ قَدْ حَبِلَتْ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ قَدْ أَخْبَرْتُكَ أَنَّهُ سَيَأْتِيهَا مَا قُدِّرَ لَهَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏