← All cases · Sunan an-Nasā'ī
Argument 9 of 20 · Sunan an-Nasā'ī

Sex With Female Captives (Nasa'i's Preservation)

Nasa'i 3380 (parallels q04, m02, m03, d01)
The text
Nasa'i 3380 — Various Nasa'i hadith on sex with female captives, with Nasa'i preserving the operational rules: capture annuls previous marriage, single menstrual cycle (istibrāʾ) before sexual access, pregnant captives postponed until delivery. The content parallels Abu Dawud 2155 / 2150 (entry d01), Muslim 1438 (entry m02), Muslim 1456 (entry m03), and the Quranic anchor Q 4:24 (entry q04).
Context

Nasa'i 3380 preserves the canonical framework for sex with female war captives that is treated under multiple entries (q04, m02, m03, d01). The Nasa'i version provides cross-collection independent attestation.

The substantive issues are addressed in those entries. The Nasa'i contribution: cross-collection consistency reinforces that the framework is canonical Sunni teaching, not a peripheral or contested doctrine.

The analysis from entries q04, m02, m03, d01 applies fully here.

Premises
  1. P1. Nasa'i 3380 preserves the framework for sex with female war captives, with content paralleling Q 4:24 and multiple canonical hadith.
  2. P2. The framework permits sex after a single menstrual cycle (istibrāʾ), with pregnant captives postponed until delivery.
  3. P3. The hadith is sahih across multiple canonical collections — overwhelming cross-collection attestation.
  4. P4. The framework was applied throughout Islamic history and revived by ISIS in 2014-2017 with explicit textual citation.
  5. P5. The framework treats women as non-consenting property whose sexual use is regularised by procedural rules.
  6. P6. Modern Muslim apologetic responses condemn the modern application but cannot refute the textual basis.
  7. P7. A morally serious revelation does not establish a procedural framework for legitimising sexual access to non-consenting captive women. (See entries q04, m02, m03, d01.)
Conclusion

Nasa'i 3380 reinforces the captive-rape framework with cross-collection attestation. The framework is canonical Sunni teaching with overwhelming textual support. Modern application by jihadist groups (ISIS) has been textually accurate. Modern Muslim apologetic responses have not refuted the textual basis. (See entries q04, m02, m03, d01 for fuller treatment.)

Common Muslim responses · with counter-responses
Common Muslim response · 1

The istibrāʾ framework was protective of captive women.

Counter-response

It was procedural for the captor's benefit, not for the captive's. (See entry m02.)

Common Muslim response · 2

Captives could choose Islam and become wives.

Counter-response

The choice was structurally coerced. (See entry m03.)

Common Muslim response · 3

Slavery was universal; Islam ameliorated.

Counter-response

Permission for non-consensual sex is endorsement, not amelioration. (See entry q04.)

Common Muslim response · 4

Modern Muslims condemn captive-rape.

Counter-response

Condemnation is consequentialist, not textual. (See entry q04.)

Common Muslim response · 5

The framework was specific to ancient warfare contexts.

Counter-response

The framework is preserved as canonical Islamic law and was revived by ISIS in 2014-2017. (See entry q04.)