Sometimes I hear it claimed that rape is a cut-and-dry case of hirabah. Wikipedia lists a few scholars who had this opinion. All other scholars I'm aware of classify rape as zina bil jabr, literally "forced illegal intercourse". This is relevant from two perspectives:
- the burden of proof for hirabah may be different than for zina (all scholars I'm aware of require the burden of proof for zina in rape cases, which is four witnesses or a confession; in contrast, at least Saudi Arabia is claimed to have a burden of proof of two witnesses or a confession for hirabah)
- the punishment for hirabah is different from the punishment for zina and coercion
I've seen the nuance mentioned that it matters whether the rapist used a weapon or not. My questions in this regard are these:
- which major scholars from which schools of law classified rape under hirabah?
- does the use of a weapon matter for the classification of rape as either zina or hirabah?