Malik related to me that he heard that Abu Salama ibn Abd ar- Rahman and Sulayman ibn Yasar were both asked, "Does one pronounce judgement on the basis of an oath with one witness?" They both said, "Yes."

Malik said, "The precedent of the sunna in judging by an oath with one witness is that if the plaintiff takes an oath with his witness, he is confirmed in his right. If he draws back and refuses to take an oath, the defendant is made to take an oath. If he takes an oath, the claim against him is dropped. If he refuses to take an oath, the claim is confirmed against him."

Malik said, "This procedure pertains to property cases in particular. It does not occur in any of the hadd-punishments, nor in marriage, divorce, freeing slaves, theft or slander. If some one says, 'Freeing slaves comes under property,' he has erred. It is not as he said. Had it been as he said, a slave could take an oath with one witness, if he could find one, that his master had freed him.

"However, when a slave lays claim to a piece of property, he can take an oath with one witness and demand his right as the freeman demands his right."

Malik said, "The sunna with us is that when a slave brings somebody who witnesses that he has been set free, his master is made to take an oath that he has not freed him, and the slave's claim is dropped."

Malik said, "The sunna about divorce is also like that with us. When a woman brings somebody who witnesses that her husband has divorced her, the husband is made to take an oath that he has not divorced her. If he takes the oath, the divorce does not proceed . "

Malik said, "There is only one sunna of bringing a witness in cases of divorce and freeing a slave. The right to make an oath only belongs to the husband of the woman, and the master of the slave. Freeing is a hadd matter, and the testimony of women is not permitted in it because when a slave is freed, his inviolability is affirmed and the hadd punishments are applied for and against him. If he commits fornication and he is a muhsan, he is stoned. If he kills a slave, he is killed for it. Inheritance is established for him, between him and whoever inherits from him. If somebody disputes this, arguing that if a man frees his slave and then a man comes to demand from the master of the slave payment of a debt, and a man and two women testify to his right, that establishes the right against the master of the slave so that his freeing him is cancelled if he only has the slave as property, inferring by this case that the testimony of women is permitted in cases of setting free. The case is not as he suggests (i.e. it is a case of property not freeing). It is like a man who frees his slave, and then the claimant of a debt comes to the master and takes an oath with one witness, demanding his right. By that, the freeing of the slave would be cancelled. Or else a man comes who has frequent dealings and transactions with the master of the slave. He claims that he is owed money by the master of the slave. Someone says to the master of the slave, 'Take an oath that you don't owe what he claims'. If he draws back and refuses to take an oath, the one making the claim takes an oath and his right against the master of the slave is confirmed. That would cancel the freeing of the slave if it is confirmed that property is owed by the master."

Malik said, "It is the same case with a man who marries a slave-girl and then the master of the slave-girl comes to the man who has married her and claims, 'You and so-and-so have bought my slave-girl from me for such an amount of dinars. The husband of the slave-girl denies that. The master of the slave-girl brings a man and two women and they testify to what he has said. The sale is confirmed and his claim is considered true. So the slave-girl is haram for her husband and they have to separate, even though the testimony of women is not accepted in divorce."

Malik said, "It is also the same case with a man who accuses a free man, so the hadd falls on him. A man and two women come and testify that the one accused is a slave. That would remove the hadd from the accused after it had befallen him, even though the testimony of women is not accepted in accusations involving hadd punishments."

Malik said, "Another similar case in which judgement appears to go against the precedent of the sunna is that two women testify that a child is born alive and so it is necessary for him to inherit if a situation arises where he is entitled to inherit, and the child's property goes to those who inherit from him, if he dies, and it is not necessary that the two women witnesses should be accompanied by a man or an oath even though it may involve vast properties of gold, silver, live-stock, gardens and slaves and other properties. However, had two women testified to one dirham or more or less than that in a property case, their testimony would not affect anything and would not be permitted unless there was a witness or an oath with them."

Malik said, "There are people who say that an oath is not acceptable with only one witness and they argue by the word of Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, and His word is the Truth, 'And call in to witness two witnesses, men; or if the two be not men, then one man and two women, such witnesses as you approve of.' (Sura 2 ayat 282). Such people argue that if he does not bring one man and two women, he has no claim and he is not allowed to take an oath with one witness."

Malik said, "Part of the proof against those who argue this, is to reply to them, 'Do you think that if a man claimed property from a man, the one claimed from would not swear that the claim was false?' If he swears, the claim against him is dropped. If he refuses to take an oath, the claimant is made to take an oath that his claim is true, and his right against his companion is established. There is no dispute about this with any of the people nor in any country. By what does he take this? In what place in the Book of Allah does he find it? So if he confirms this, let him confirm the oath with one witness, even if it is not in the Book of Allah, the Mighty, the Majestic! It is enough that this is the precedent of the sunna. However, man wants to recognise the proper course of action and the location of the proof. In this there is a clarification for what is obscure about that, if Allah ta'ala wills."

One of the two women of Hudhayl killed the other, Each of them had husband and sons. The Messenger of Allah (saws) fixed the blood-wit for the slain woman to be paid by the woman's relatives on the father's side. He declared her husband and the child innocent. The relatives of the woman who killed said: We shall inherit from her. The Messenger of Allah (saws) said: No, her sons and her husband should inherit from her.

The Messenger of Allah (saws) as saying: Refrain from seven (characteristics) which cause destruction. He was asked: What are they, Messenger of Allah ? He replied: To assign partner to Allah, magic, to kill a soul (man) which is prohibited by Allah except for which is due, to take usury, to consume the property of an orphan, to retreat on the day of the battle, and to slander chaste women, indiscreet but believing.

Abu Dawud said: The name Abu al-Ghaith is Salim client of Ibn Muti'.

Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "I heard Abdullah ibn Umar recite from the Qur'an, 'Prophet! When you divorce women, divorce them at the beginning of their idda.'"

Malik said, "He meant by that, to make one pronouncement of divorce at the beginning of each period of purity."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa from his father from A'isha umm al-muminin that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, mentioned Safiyya bint Huyy and he was told that she had started her period. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Perhaps she will delay us." They said, "Messenger of Allah, she has done tawaf," and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Then she will not delay us."

Malik said that Hisham said that Urwa said that A'isha said, "We have publicized that, so why do people make their women stay on to their inconvenience? If it were as they say, more than six thousand menstruating women would still be in Mina in the morning, all of them having already done the tawaf al- ifada.' "

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Said ibn al-Musayyab said, "The slave girl is not married when there is a free woman who is a wife unless the free woman wishes it. If the free woman complies, she has two-thirds of the division of time."

Malik said, "A free man must not marry a slave-girl when he can afford to marry a free-woman, and he should not marry a slave-girl when he cannot afford a free woman unless he fears fornication. That is because Allah, may he be Blessed and Exalted, says in His Book, 'If you are not affluent enough to marry believing women, who are muhsanat, take slave-girls who are believing women that your right hands own.' (Sura 4 ayat 24) He says, 'That is for those of you who fear al-anat.' "

Malik said, "Al-anat is fornication."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Abdullah and Hasan, the sons of Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib from their ather, mayAllah be pleased with him, that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade temporary marriage with women and the flesh of domestic donkeys on the Day of Khaybar.

Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn Utba ibn Masud that Abdullah ibn Abbas said, "I heard Umar ibn al- Khattab say, 'Stoning is in the Book of Allah for those who commit adultery, men or women when they are muhsan and when there is clear proof of pregnancy or a confession.' "

Malik related to me from Nafi from Sa'iba, the female mawla of A'isha, that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade killing the snakes which were in the houses except those with two white stripes on their back and the short ones. They made one go blind and caused miscarriages in women.

Allah's Apostle went out along with a group of his companions towards `Ukaz Market. At that time something intervened between the devils and the news of the Heaven, and flames were sent down upon them, so the devils returned. Their fellow-devils said, "What is wrong with you? " They said, "Something has intervened between us and the news of the Heaven, and fires (flames) have been shot at us." Their fellow-devils said, "Nothing has intervened between you and the news of the Heaven, but an important event has happened. Therefore, travel all over the world, east and west, and try to find out what has happened." And so they set out and travelled all over the world, east and west, looking for that thing which intervened between them and the news of the Heaven. Those of the devils who had set out towards Tihama, went to Allah's Apostle at Nakhla (a place between Mecca and Taif) while he was on his way to `Ukaz Market. (They met him) while he was offering the Fajr prayer with his companions. When they heard the Holy Qur'an being recited (by Allah's Apostle), they listened to it and said (to each other). This is the thing which has intervened between you and the news of the Heavens." Then they returned to their people and said, "O our people! We have really heard a wonderful recital (Qur'an). It gives guidance to the right, and we have believed therein. We shall not join in worship, anybody with our Lord." (See 72.1-2) Then Allah revealed to His Prophet (Surat al- Jinn): 'Say: It has been revealed to me that a group (3 to 9) of Jinns listened (to the Qur'an).' (72.1) The statement of the Jinns was revealed to him .