What is the ruling regarding a buyer who consummates intercourse with a purchased female slave?
Chapter on Selling the Musarrah (Animal with milk retained in udder)
Al-Mughni
Book of Sales
Primary text
If a buyer has intercourse with a purchased female slave, no Hadd (statutory punishment) is incumbent upon him because he believed she was his property and because there is a difference of opinion regarding ownership. He is, however, liable for the dower equivalent to her status (*mahr al-mithl*). This is established because when the Hadd is waived due to a legal doubt (*shubha*), the *mahr* becomes obligatory, and intercourse within the property of another necessitates the *mahr*. Furthermore, if the slave was a virgin, the buyer is liable for the compensation for the loss of virginity (*arsh al-bikarah*). The justification for requiring both the *mahr* and *arsh* is that the *mahr* is compensation for the benefit (*manfa'ah*), while the *arsh* is compensation for a part (the virginity itself); thus, they combine. The benefit is accounted for by the *mahr*, and the specific part by the *arsh*.
Supporting text
If the case were one of a void marriage where intercourse occurred, the loss of virginity would not be compensated separately because the marriage contract implies permission for intercourse, unlike a sale contract, which does not imply permission for intercourse, evidenced by the permissibility of buying one whose marriage is invalid.