Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa that Sawda bint Abdullah ibn Umar, who was in the household of Urwa ibn az- Zubayr, set off walking between Safa and Marwa when doing either hajj or an umra. She was a heavy woman and she began when everybody was leaving after the isha prayer, and she still had not completed her circuits when the first call was given for subh, but finished them between the two calls to prayer.

If Urwa saw people doing circuits on riding beasts he would tell them in very strong terms not to do so, and they would pretend to be ill, out of awe of him.

Hisham added, "He used to say to us about them 'These are unsuccessful and have lost.' "

Malik said, "Someone who forgets say between Safa and Marwa in an umra, and does not remember until he is far from Makka, should return and do say. If, in the meantime, he has had intercourse with a woman, he should return and do say between Safa and Marwa so as to complete what remains of that umra, and then after that he has to do another umra and offer a sacrificial animal."

Malik was asked about someone who met another man when doing say between Safa and Marwa and stopped to talk with him, and he said, "I do not like anyone to do that."

Malik said, "If anyone forgets some of his tawaf or is uncertain about it and remembers only when he is doing say between Safa and Marwa, he should stop the say and complete his tawaf of the House apart from that about which he is certain. After that he prays the two rakas of the tawaf, and then begins his say between Safa and Marwa."

Yahya related to me from Malik, from Yahya ibn Said, from Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn al-Harith at-Taymi, that Rabia ibn Abdullah ibn al-Hudayr once saw a man in a state of ihram in Iraq. So he asked people about him and they said, "He has given directions for his sacrificial animal to be garlanded, and it is for that reason that he has put on ihram ."

Rabia said, "I then met Abdullah ibn az- Zubayr and so I mentioned this to him and he said, 'By the Lord of the Kaba, an innovation.' "

Malik was asked about some one who set out with his own sacrificial animal and marked it and garlanded it at Dhu'l-Hulayfa, but did not go into ihram until he had reached al- Juhfa,and hesaid, "I do not like that, and whoever does so has not acted properly. He should only garland his sacrificial animal, or mark it, when he goes into ihram, unless it is someone who does not intend to do hajj, in which case he sends it off and stays with his family."

Malik was asked if somone who was not in ihram could set out with a sacrificial animal, and he said, "Yes. There is no harm in that."

He was also asked to comment on the different views people had about what became haram for some one who garlanded a sacrificial animal but did not intend to do either hajj or umra, and he said, "What we go by as far as this is concerned is what A'isha, umm al-muminin said, 'The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent his sacrificial animal off and did not go there himself, and there was nothing that Allah had made halal for him that was haram for him until the animal had been sacrificed.' "

(whose narrations attest each other) Allah's Apostle set out at the time of Al-Hudaibiya (treaty), and when they proceeded for a distance, he said, "Khalid bin Al-Walid leading the cavalry of Quraish constituting the front of the army, is at a place called Al-Ghamim, so take the way on the right." By Allah, Khalid did not perceive the arrival of the Muslims till the dust arising from the march of the Muslim army reached him, and then he turned back hurriedly to inform Quraish. The Prophet went on advancing till he reached the Thaniya (i.e. a mountainous way) through which one would go to them (i.e. people of Quraish). The she-camel of the Prophet sat down. The people tried their best to cause the she-camel to get up but in vain, so they said, "Al-Qaswa' (i.e. the she-camel's name) has become stubborn! Al-Qaswa' has become stubborn!" The Prophet said, "Al-Qaswa' has not become stubborn, for stubbornness is not her habit, but she was stopped by Him Who stopped the elephant." Then he said, "By the Name of Him in Whose Hands my soul is, if they (i.e. the Quraish infidels) ask me anything which will respect the ordinances of Allah, I will grant it to them." The Prophet then rebuked the she-camel and she got up. The Prophet changed his way till he dismounted at the farthest end of Al-Hudaibiya at a pit (i.e. well) containing a little water which the people used in small amounts, and in a short while the people used up all its water and complained to Allah's Apostle; of thirst. The Prophet took an arrow out of his arrow-case and ordered them to put the arrow in that pit. By Allah, the water started and continued sprouting out till all the people quenched their thirst and returned with satisfaction. While they were still in that state, Budail bin Warqa-al- Khuza`i came with some persons from his tribe Khuza`a and they were the advisers of Allah's Apostle who would keep no secret from him and were from the people of Tihama. Budail said, "I left Ka`b bin Luai and 'Amir bin Luai residing at the profuse water of Al-Hudaibiya and they had milch camels (or their women and children) with them, and will wage war against you, and will prevent you from visiting the Ka`ba." Allah's Apostle said, "We have not come to fight anyone, but to perform the `Umra. No doubt, the war has weakened Quraish and they have suffered great losses, so if they wish, I will conclude a truce with them, during which they should refrain from interfering between me and the people (i.e. the 'Arab infidels other than Quraish), and if I have victory over those infidels, Quraish will have the option to embrace Islam as the other people do, if they wish; they will at least get strong enough to fight. But if they do not accept the truce, by Allah in Whose Hands my life is, I will fight with them defending my Cause till I get killed, but (I am sure) Allah will definitely make His Cause victorious." Budail said, "I will inform them of what you have said." So, he set off till he reached Quraish and said, "We have come from that man (i.e. Muhammad) whom we heard saying something which we will disclose to you if you should like." Some of the fools among Quraish shouted that they were not in need of this information, but the wiser among them said, "Relate what you heard him saying." Budail said, "I heard him saying so-and-so," relating what the Prophet had told him. `Urwa bin Mas`ud got up and said, "O people! Aren't you the sons? They said, "Yes." He added, "Am I not the father?" They said, "Yes." He said, "Do you mistrust me?" They said, "No." He said, "Don't you know that I invited the people of `Ukaz for your help, and when they refused I brought my relatives and children and those who obeyed me (to help you)?" They said, "Yes." He said, "Well, this man (i.e. the Prophet) has offered you a reasonable proposal, you'd better accept it and allow me to meet him." They said, "You may meet him." So, he went to the Prophet and started talking to him. The Prophet told him almost the same as he had told Budail. Then `Urwa said, "O Muhammad! Won't you feel any scruple in extirpating your relations? Have you ever heard of anyone amongst the Arabs extirpating his relatives before you? On the other hand, if the reverse should happen, (nobody will aid you, for) by Allah, I do not see (with you) dignified people, but people from various tribes who would run away leaving you alone." Hearing that, Abu Bakr abused him and said, "Do you say we would run and leave the Prophet alone?" `Urwa said, "Who is that man?" They said, "He is Abu Bakr." `Urwa said to Abu Bakr, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is, were it not for the favor which you did to me and which I did not compensate, I would retort on you." `Urwa kept on talking to the Prophet and seizing the Prophet's beard as he was talking while Al-Mughira bin Shu`ba was standing near the head of the Prophet, holding a sword and wearing a helmet. Whenever `Urwa stretched his hand towards the beard of the Prophet, Al-Mughira would hit his hand with the handle of the sword and say (to `Urwa), "Remove your hand from the beard of Allah's Apostle." `Urwa raised his head and asked, "Who is that?" The people said, "He is Al-Mughira bin Shu`ba." `Urwa said, "O treacherous! Am I not doing my best to prevent evil consequences of your treachery?" Before embracing Islam Al-Mughira was in the company of some people. He killed them and took their property and came (to Medina) to embrace Islam. The Prophet said (to him, "As regards your Islam, I accept it, but as for the property I do not take anything of it. (As it was taken through treason). `Urwa then started looking at the Companions of the Prophet. By Allah, whenever Allah's Apostle spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet's companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them they would carry his orders immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke to him, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect. `Urwa returned to his people and said, "O people! By Allah, I have been to the kings and to Caesar, Khosrau and An- Najashi, yet I have never seen any of them respected by his courtiers as much as Muhammad is respected by his companions. By Allah, if he spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet's companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect." `Urwa added, "No doubt, he has presented to you a good reasonable offer, so please accept it." A man from the tribe of Bani Kinana said, "Allow me to go to him," and they allowed him, and when he approached the Prophet and his companions, Allah's Apostle said, "He is so-and-so who belongs to the tribe that respects the Budn (i.e. camels of the sacrifice). So, bring the Budn in front of him." So, the Budn were brought before him and the people received him while they were reciting Talbiya. When he saw that scene, he said, "Glorified be Allah! It is not fair to prevent these people from visiting the Ka`ba." When he returned to his people, he said, 'I saw the Budn garlanded (with colored knotted ropes) and marked (with stabs on their backs). I do not think it is advisable to prevent them from visiting the Ka`ba." Another person called Mikraz bin Hafs got up and sought their permission to go to Muhammad, and they allowed him, too. When he approached the Muslims, the Prophet said, "Here is Mikraz and he is a vicious man." Mikraz started talking to the Prophet and as he was talking, Suhail bin `Amr came. When Suhail bin `Amr came, the Prophet said, "Now the matter has become easy." Suhail said to the Prophet "Please conclude a peace treaty with us." So, the Prophet called the clerk and said to him, "Write: By the Name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful." Suhail said, "As for 'Beneficent,' by Allah, I do not know what it means. So write: By Your Name O Allah, as you used to write previously." The Muslims said, "By Allah, we will not write except: By the Name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful." The Prophet said, "Write: By Your Name O Allah." Then he dictated, "This is the peace treaty which Muhammad, Allah's Apostle has concluded." Suhail said, "By Allah, if we knew that you are Allah's Apostle we would not prevent you from visiting the Ka`ba, and would not fight with you. So, write: "Muhammad bin `Abdullah." The Prophet said, "By Allah! I am Apostle of Allah even if you people do not believe me. Write: Muhammad bin `Abdullah." (Az-Zuhri said, "The Prophet accepted all those things, as he had already said that he would accept everything they would demand if it respects the ordinance of Allah, (i.e. by letting him and his companions perform `Umra.)" The Prophet said to Suhail, "On the condition that you allow us to visit the House (i.e. Ka`ba) so that we may perform Tawaf around it." Suhail said, "By Allah, we will not (allow you this year) so as not to give chance to the 'Arabs to say that we have yielded to you, but we will allow you next year." So, the Prophet got that written. Then Suhail said, "We also stipulate that you should return to us whoever comes to you from us, even if he embraced your religion." The Muslims said, "Glorified be Allah! How will such a person be returned to the pagans after he has become a Muslim? While they were in this state Abu- Jandal bin Suhail bin `Amr came from the valley of Mecca staggering with his fetters and fell down amongst the Muslims. Suhail said, "O Muhammad! This is the very first term with which we make peace with you, i.e. you shall return Abu Jandal to me." The Prophet said, "The peace treaty has not been written yet." Suhail said, "I will never allow you to keep him." The Prophet said, "Yes, do." He said, "I won't do.: Mikraz said, "We allow you (to keep him)." Abu Jandal said, "O Muslims! Will I be returned to the pagans though I have come as a Muslim? Don't you see how much I have suffered?" (continued...) (continuing... 1): -3.891:... ... Abu Jandal had been tortured severely for the Cause of Allah. `Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "I went to the Prophet and said, 'Aren't you truly the Apostle of Allah?' The Prophet said, 'Yes, indeed.' I said, 'Isn't our Cause just and the cause of the enemy unjust?' He said, 'Yes.' I said, 'Then why should we be humble in our religion?' He said, 'I am Allah's Apostle and I do not disobey Him, and He will make me victorious.' I said, 'Didn't you tell us that we would go to the Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it?' He said, 'Yes, but did I tell you that we would visit the Ka`ba this year?' I said, 'No.' He said, 'So you will visit it and perform Tawaf around it?' " `Umar further said, "I went to Abu Bakr and said, 'O Abu Bakr! Isn't he truly Allah's Prophet?' He replied, 'Yes.' I said, 'Then why should we be humble in our religion?' He said, 'Indeed, he is Allah's Apostle and he does not disobey his Lord, and He will make him victorious. Adhere to him as, by Allah, he is on the right.' I said, 'Was he not telling us that we would go to the Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it?' He said, 'Yes, but did he tell you that you would go to the Ka`ba this year?' I said, 'No.' He said, "You will go to Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it." (Az-Zuhri said, " `Umar said, 'I performed many good deeds as expiation for the improper questions I asked them.' ") When the writing of the peace treaty was concluded, Allah's Apostle said to his companions, "Get up and' slaughter your sacrifices and get your head shaved." By Allah none of them got up, and the Prophet repeated his order thrice. When none of them got up, he left them and went to Um Salama and told her of the people's attitudes towards him. Um Salama said, "O the Prophet of Allah! Do you want your order to be carried out? Go out and don't say a word to anybody till you have slaughtered your sacrifice and call your barber to shave your head." So, the Prophet went out and did not talk to anyone of them till he did that, i.e. slaughtered the sacrifice and called his barber who shaved his head. Seeing that, the companions of the Prophet got up, slaughtered their sacrifices, and started shaving the heads of one another, and there was so much rush that there was a danger of killing each other. Then some believing women came (to the Prophet ); and Allah revealed the following Divine Verses:-- "O you who believe, when the believing women come to you as emigrants examine them . . ." (60.10) `Umar then divorced two wives of his who were infidels. Later on Muawiya bin Abu Sufyan married one of them, and Safwan bin Umaiya married the other. When the Prophet returned to Medina, Abu Basir, a new Muslim convert from Quraish came to him. The Infidels sent in his pursuit two men who said (to the Prophet ), "Abide by the promise you gave us." So, the Prophet handed him over to them. They took him out (of the City) till they reached Dhul-Hulaifa where they dismounted to eat some dates they had with them. Abu Basir said to one of them, "By Allah, O so-and-so, I see you have a fine sword." The other drew it out (of the scabbard) and said, "By Allah, it is very fine and I have tried it many times." Abu Basir said, "Let me have a look at it." When the other gave it to him, he hit him with it till he died, and his companion ran away till he came to Medina and entered the Mosque running. When Allah's Apostle saw him he said, "This man appears to have been frightened." When he reached the Prophet he said, "My companion has been murdered and I would have been murdered too." Abu Basir came and said, "O Allah's Apostle, by Allah, Allah has made you fulfill your obligations by your returning me to them (i.e. the Infidels), but Allah has saved me from them." The Prophet said, "Woe to his mother! what excellent war kindler he would be, should he only have supporters." When Abu Basir heard that he understood that the Prophet would return him to them again, so he set off till he reached the seashore. Abu Jandal bin Suhail got himself released from them (i.e. infidels) and joined Abu Basir. So, whenever a man from Quraish embraced Islam he would follow Abu Basir till they formed a strong group. By Allah, whenever they heard about a caravan of Quraish heading towards Sham, they stopped it and attacked and killed them (i.e. infidels) and took their properties. The people of Quraish sent a message to the Prophet requesting him for the Sake of Allah and Kith and kin to send for (i.e. Abu Basir and his companions) promising that whoever (amongst them) came to the Prophet would be secure. So the Prophet sent for them (i.e. Abu Basir's companions) and Allah I revealed the following Divine Verses: "And it is He Who Has withheld their hands from you and your hands From them in the midst of Mecca, After He made you the victorious over them. ... the unbelievers had pride and haughtiness, in their hearts ... the pride and haughtiness of the time of ignorance." (48.24-26) And their pride and haughtiness was that they did not confess (write in the treaty) that he (i.e. Muhammad) was the Prophet of Allah and refused to write: "In the Name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the Most Merciful," and they (the mushriks) prevented them (the Muslims) from visiting the House (the Ka`bah).

Malik related to me that he heard Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman and others mention that al-Furafisa ibn Umar al-Hanafi had a mukatab who offered to pay him all of his kitaba that he owed. Al-Furafisa refused to accept it and the mukatab went to Marwan ibn al-Hakam who was the amir of Madina and brought up the matter. Marwan summoned al-Furafisa and told him to accept. He refused. Marwan then ordered that the payment be taken from the mukatab and placed in the treasury. He said to the mukatab "Go, you are free." When al-Furafisa saw that, he took the money.

Malik said, "What is done among us when a mukatab pays all the instalments he owes before their term, is that it is permitted to him. The master cannot refuse him that. That is because payment removes every condition from the mukatab as well as service and travel. The setting free of a man is not complete while he has any remaining slavery, and neither would his inviolability as a free man be complete and his testimony permitted and inheritance obliged and such things in that situation. His master must not make any stipulation of service on him after he has been set free."

Malik said that it was permitted for a mukatab who became extremely ill and wanted to pay his master all his instalments because his heirs who were free would then inherit from him and he had no children with him in his kitaba, to do so, because by that he completed his inviolability as a free man, his testimony was permitted, and his admission of what he owed of debts to people was permitted. His bequest was permitted as well. His master could not refuse him that by saying, "He is escaping from me with his property."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that Said ibn al- Musayyab said, "The idda of the woman who bleeds constantly is a year."

Malik said, "What is done among us about a divorced woman whose periods stop when her husband divorces her is that she waits nine months. If she has not had a period in them, she has an idda of three months. If she has a period before the end of the three months, she accepts the period. If another nine months pass without her having a period, she does an idda of three months. If she has a second period before the end of those three months, she accepts the period. If nine months then pass without a period, she does an idda of three months. If she has a third period, the idda of the period is complete. If she does not have a period, she waits three months, and then she is free to marry. Her husband can return to her before she becomes free to marry unless he made her divorce irrevocable."

Malik said, "The sunna with us is that when a man divorces his wife and has the option to return to her, and she does part of her idda and then he returns to her and then parts from her before he has had intercourse with her, she does not add to what has passed of her idda. Her husband has wronged himself and erred if he returned to her and had no need of her."

Malik said, "What is done among us is that if a woman becomes a muslim while her husband is a kafir and then he becomes muslim, he is entitled to her as long as she is in her idda. If her idda is finished, he has no access to her. If he remarries her after the end of her idda, however, that is not counted as divorce. Islam removed her from him without divorce."

We went out with the Messenger of Allah (saws) accompanying the bier of a man of the Ansar. When we reached his grave, it was not yet dug. So the Messenger of Allah (saws) sat down and we also sat down around him as if birds were over our heads. He had in his hand a stick with which he was scratching the ground.

He then raised his head and said: Seek refuge with Allah from the punishment in the grave. He said it twice or thrice.

The version of Jabir adds here: He hears the beat of their sandals when they go back, and at that moment he is asked: O so and so! Who is your Lord, what is your religion, and who is your Prophet?

Hannad's version says: Two angels will come to him, make him sit up and ask him: Who is your Lord?

He will reply: My Lord is Allah. They will ask him: What is your religion? He will reply: My religion is Islam. They will ask him: What is your opinion about the man who was sent on a mission among you? He will reply: He is the Messenger of Allah (saws). They will ask: Who made you aware of this? He will reply: I read Allah's Book, believed in it, and considered it true; which is verified by Allah's words: "Allah's Book, believed in it, and considered it true, which is verified by Allah's words: "Allah establishes those who believe with the word that stands firm in this world and the next."

The agreed version reads: Then a crier will call from Heaven: My servant has spoken the truth, so spread a bed for him from Paradise, clothe him from Paradise, and open a door for him into Paradise. So some of its air and perfume will come to him, and a space will be made for him as far as the eye can see.

He also mentioned the death of the infidel, saying: His spirit will be restored to his body, two angels will come to him, make him sit up and ask him: Who is your Lord?

He will reply: Alas, alas! I do not know. They will ask him: What is your religion? He will reply: Alas, alas! I do not know. They will ask: Who was the man who was sent on a mission among you? He will reply: Alas, alas! I do not know. Then a crier will call from Heaven: He has lied, so spread a bed for him from Hell, clothe him from Hell, and open for him a door into Hell. Then some of its heat and pestilential wind will come to him, and his grave will be compressed, so that his ribs will be crushed together.

Jabir's version adds: One who is blind and dumb will then be placed in charge of him, having a sledge-hammer such that if a mountain were struck with it, it would become dust. He will give him a blow with it which will be heard by everything between the east and the west except by men and jinn, and he will become dust. Then his spirit will be restored to him.

Malik said that Ibn Shihab said, "The precedent of the sunna in the intentional murder is that when the relatives of the murdered person relinquish retaliation, the blood-money is owed by the murderer from his own property unless the tribe helps him with it willingly."

Malik said, "What is done in our community is that the blood- money is not obliged against the tribe until it has reached a third of the full amount and upwards. Whatever reaches a third is against the tribe, and whatever is below a third, is against the property of the one who did the injury."

Malik said, "The way of doing things about which there is no dispute among us, in the case of someone who has the blood-money accepted from him in intentional murder or in any injury in which there is retaliation, is that that blood-money is not due from the tribe unless they wish it. The blood-money for that is from the property of the murderer or the injurer if he has property. If he does not have any property, it is a debt against him, and none of it is owed by the tribe unless they wish."

Malik said, "The tribe does not pay blood-money to anyone who injures himself, intentionally or accidentally. This is the opinion of the people of fiqh in our community. I have not heard that anyone has made the tribe liable for any blood-money incurred by intentional acts. Part of what is well-known of that is that Allah, the Blessed, and the Exalted, said in His Book, 'Whoever has something pardoned him by his brother, should follow it with what is accepted and pay it with good will' (Sura 2 ayat 178) The commentary on that - in our view - and Allah knows best, is that whoever gives his brother something of the blood- money, should follow it with what is accepted and pay him with good will."

Malik spoke about a child who had no property and a woman who had no property. He said, "When one of them causes an injury below a third of the blood-money, it is taken on behalf of the child and woman from their personal property, if they have property from which it may be taken. If not, the injury which each of them has caused is a debt against them. The tribe does not have to pay any of it and the father of a child is not liable for the blood-money of an injury caused by the child and he is not responsible for it."

Malik said, "The way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute, is that when a slave is killed, the value for him is that of the day on which he was killed. The tribe of the murderer is not liable for any of the value of the slave, great or small. That is the responsibility of the one who struck him from his own personal property as far as it covers. If the value of the slave is the blood- money or more, that is against him in his property. That is because the slave is a certain type of goods."

It was narrated that Juwairiyyah bin Qudamah said: I did Haji and I came to Madinah the year ‘Umar was stabbed. He gave a speech and said: I dreamt that a red rooster pecked me once or twice - Shu`bah was not certain - and only a week later, he was stabbed. And he mentioned a similar report, except that he said: And l advise you be kind to the non-Muslim people under your rule (ahludh-dhimmah), and honour the covenant of your Prophet (ﷺ). Then I asked him after that and he said concerning the Bedouin: I advise you to be kind to the Bedouin, for they are your brothers and the enemy of your enemy,

Yahya said that Malik spoke about an investor paying qirad money to an agent who made a profit and then wanted to take his share of the profit and the investor was away. He said, "He should not take any of it unless the investor is present. If he takes something from it, he is responsible for it until it is accounted for in the division of the capital."

Malik said, "It is not permitted for the parties involved in a qirad to account and divide property which is away from them until the capital is present, and the investor is given the principal in full. Then they divide the profit into their agreed portions."

Malik spoke about a man taking qirad money, and buying goods with it while he had a debt. His creditors sought and found him while he was in a city away from the investor, and he had profitable merchandise whose good quality was clear. They wanted him to sell the merchandise for them so that they could take his share of the profit. Malik said, "None of the profit of the qirad is taken until the investor is present. He takes his principal and then the profit is divided mutually between them."

Malik spoke about an investor who put qirad money with an agent and he used it and had a profit. Then the principal was set aside and the profit divided. He took his share and added the share of the investor to his principal in the presence of witnesses he had called. Malik said, "It is not permitted to divide the profit unless the investor is present. If he has taken something here turns it until the investor has received the principal in full. Then what remains is divided into their respective portions."

Malik spoke about an investor who put qirad money with an agent. The agent used it and then came to the investor and said, "This is your portion of the profit, and I have taken the like of it for myself, and I have retained your principal in full." Malik said, "I do not like that, unless all the capital is present, the principal is there and he knows that it is complete and he receives it. Then they divide the profit between them. He returns the principal to him if he wishes, or he keeps it. The presence of the principal is necessary out of fear that the agent might have lost some of it, and so may want it not to be removed from him and to keep it in his hand."

Malik spoke to me about a man who wrote a kitaba for his slave for gold or silver and stipulated against him in his kitaba a journey, service, sacrifice or similar, which he specified by its name, and then the mukatab was able to pay all his instalments before the end of the term.

He said, "If he pays all his instalments and he is set free and his inviolability as a free man is complete, but he still has this condition to fulfil, the condition is examined, and whatever involves his person in it, like service or a journey etc., is removed from him and his master has nothing in it. Whatever there is of sacrifice, clothing, or anything that he must pay, that is in the position of dinars and dirhams, and is valued and he pays it along with his instalments, and he is not free until he has paid that along with his instalments."

Malik said, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things among us about which there is no dispute, is that a mukatab is in the same position as a slave whom his master will free after a service of ten years. If the master who will free him dies before ten years, what remains of his service goes to his heirs and his wala' goes to the one who contracted to free him and to his male children or paternal relations."

Malik spoke about a man who stipulated against his mukatab that he could not travel, marry, or leave his land without his permission, and that if he did so without his permission it was in his power to cancel the kitaba. He said, "If the mukatab does any of these things it is not in the man's power to cancel the kitaba. Let the master put that before the Sultan. The mukatab, however, should not marry, travel, or leave the land of his master without his permission, whether or not he stipulates that. That is because the man may write a kitaba for his slave for 100 dinars and the slave may have 1000 dinars or more than that. He goes off and marries a woman and pays her bride-price which sweeps away his money and then he cannot pay. He reverts to his master as a slave who has no property. Or else he may travel and his instalments fall due while he is away. He cannot do that and kitaba is not to be based on that. That is in the hand of his master. If he wishes, he gives him permission in that. If he wishes, he refuses it."

Malik was asked whether the tenth or the twentieth was taken out of olives before they were sold or after and he said, "The sale is not taken into consideration. It is the people who produce the olives that are asked about the olives, just as it is the people who produce foodstuffs that are asked about it, and zakat is taken from them by what they say. Someone who gets five awsuq or more of olives from his olive trees has a tenth taken from the oil after pressing. Whereas someone who does not get five awsuq from his trees does not have to pay any zakat on the oil."

Malik said, "Someone who sells his crops when they are ripe and are ready in the husk has to pay zakat on them but the one who buys them does not. The sale of crops is not valid until they are ready in the husk and no longer need water."

Malik said, concerning the word of Allah the Exalted, "And give its due on the day of its harvesting," that it referred to zakat, and that he had heard people saying that.

Malik said, "If someone sells his garden or his land, on which are crops or fruit which have not yet ripened, then it is the buyer who has to pay the zakat. If, however, they have ripened, it is the seller who has to pay the zakat, unless paying the zakat is one of the conditions of the sale."

Malik said there was no harm if a man who sold some drapery and excluded some garments by their markings, stipulated that he chose the marked ones from that. If he did not stipulate that he would choose from them when he made the exclusion, I think that he is partner in the number of drapery goods which were purchased from him. That is because two garments can be alike in marking and be greatly different in price.

Malik said, "The way of doing things among us is that there is no harm in partnership, transferring responsibility to an agent, and revocation when dealing with food and other things, whether or not possession was taken, when the transaction is with cash, and there is no profit, loss, or deferment of price in it. If profit or loss or deferment of price from one of the two enters any of these transactions, it becomes sale which is made halal by what makes sale halal, and made haram by what makes sale haram, and it is not partnership, transferring responsibility to an agent, or revocation."

Malik spoke about some one who bought drapery goods or slaves, and the sale was concluded, then a man asked him to be his partner and he agreed and the new partner paid the whole price to the seller and then something happened to the goods which removed them from their possession. Malik said, "The new partner takes the price from the original partner and the original partner demands from the seller the whole price unless the original partner stipulated on the new partner during the sale and before the transaction with the seller was completed that the seller was responsible to him. If the transaction has ended and the seller has gone, the pre-condition of the original partner is void, and he has the responsibility."

Malik spoke about a man who asked another man to buy certain goods to share between them, and he wanted the other man to pay for him and he would sell the goods for the other man. Malik said, "That is not good. When he says, 'Pay for me and I will sell it for you,' it becomes a loan which he makes to him in order that he sell it for him and if those goods are destroyed, or pass, the man who paid the price will demand from his partner what he put in for him. This is part of the advance which brings in profit."

Malik said, "If a man buys goods, and they are settled for him, and then a man says to him, 'Share half of these goods with me, and I will sell them all for you,' that is halal, there is no harm in it. The explanation of that is that this is a new sale and he sells him half of the goods provided that he sells the whole lot."

Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community about a mudabbar is that the owner cannot sell him or change the position in which he has put him. If a debt overtakes the master, his creditors cannot sell the mudabbar as long as the master is alive. If the master dies and has no debts, the mudabbar is included in the third (of the bequest) because he expected his work from him as long as he lived. He cannot serve him all his life, and then he frees him from his heirs out of the main portion of his property when he dies. If the master of the mudabbar dies and has no property other than him, one third of him is freed, and two thirds of him belong to the heirs. If the master of the mudabbar dies and owes a debt which encompasses the mudabbar, he is sold to meet the debt because he can only be freed in the third (which is allowed for bequest) ."

He said, "If the debt only includes half of the slave, half of him is sold for the debt. Then a third of what remains after the debt is freed. "

Malik said, "It is not permitted to sell a mudabbar and it is not permitted for anyone to buy him unless the mudabbar buys himself from his master. He is permitted to do that. Or else some one gives the master of the mudabbar money and his master who made him a mudabbar frees him. That is also permitted for him."

Malik said, "His wala' belongs to his master who made him a mudabbar."

Malik said, "It is not permitted to sell the service of a mudabbar because it is an uncertain transaction since one does not know how long his master will live. That is uncertain and it is not good."

Malik spoke about a slave who was shared between two men, and one of them made his portion mudabbar. He said, "They estimate his value between them. If the one who made him mudabbar buys him, he is all mudabbar. If he does not buy him, his tadbir is revoked unless the one who retains ownership of him wishes to give his partner who made him mudabbar his value. If he gives him to him for his value, that is binding, and he is all mudabbar."

Malik spoke about the christian man who made a christian slave of his mudabbar and then the slave became muslim. He said, "One separates the master and the slave, and the slave is removed from his christian master and is not sold until his situation becomes clear. If the christian dies and has a debt, his debt is paid from the price of the slave unless he has in his estate what will pay the debt. Then the mudabbar is set free."

Yahya related to me, that Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us about a man buying cloth in one city, and then taking it to another city to sell as a murabaha, is that he is not reckoned to have the wage of an agent, or any allowance for ironing, folding, straightening, expenses, or the rent of a house. As for the cost of transporting the drapery, it is included in the basic price, and no share of the profit is allocated to it unless the agent tells all of that to the investor. If they agree to share the profits accordingly after knowledge of it, there is no harm in that."

Malik said, "As for bleaching, tailoring, dyeing, and such things, they are treated in the same way as drapery. The profit is reckoned in them as it is reckoned in drapery goods. So if he sells the drapery goods without clarifying the things we named as not getting profit, and if the drapery has already gone, the transport is to be reckoned, but no profit is given. If the drapery goods have not gone the transaction between them is null and void unless they make a new mutual agreement on what is to be permitted between them ."

Malik spoke about an agent who bought goods for gold or silver, and the exchange rate on the day of purchase was ten dirhams to the dinar. He took them to a city to sell murabaha, or sold them where he purchased them according to the exchange rate of the day on which he sold them. If he bought them for dirhams and he sold them for dinars, or he bought them for dinars and he sold them for dirhams, and the goods had not gone then he had a choice. If he wished, he accepted to sell the goods and if he wished, he left them. If the goods had been sold, he had the price for which the salesman bought them, and the salesman was reckoned to have the profit on what they were bought for, over what the investor gained as profit.

Malik said, "If a man sells goods worth one hundred dinars for one hundred and ten, and he hears after that they are worth ninety dinars, and the goods have gone, the seller has a choice. If he likes, he has the price of the goods on the day they were taken from him unless the price is more than the price for which he was obliged to sell them in the first place, and he does not have more than that - and it is one hundred and ten dinars. If he likes, it is counted as profit against ninety unless the price his goods reached was less than the value. He is given the choice between what his goods fetch and the capital plus the profit, which is ninety-nine dinars."

Malik said, "If someone sells goods in murabaha and he says, 'It was valued at one hundred dinars to me.' Then he hears later on, that it was worth one hundred and twenty dinars, the customer is given the choice. If he wishes, he gives the salesman the value of the goods on the day he took them, and if he wishes, he gives the price for which he bought them according to the reckoning of what profit he gives him, as far as it goes, unless that is less than the price for which he bought them, for he should not give the owner of the goods a loss from the price for which he bought them because he was satisfied with that. The owner of the goods came to seek extra, so the buyer has no argument against the salesman in that to make a reduction from the first price for which he bought it according to the list of contents."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had asked Ibn Shihab whether someone doing itikaf could go into a house to relieve himself, and he said, "Yes, there is no harm in that."

Malik said, "The situation that we are all agreed upon here is that there is no disapproval of anyone doing itikaf in a mosque where jumua is held. The only reason I see for disapproving of doing itikaf in a mosque where jumua is not held is that the man doing itikaf would have to leave the mosque where he was doing itikaf in order to go to jumua, or else not go there at all. If, however, he is doing itikaf in a mosque where jumua is not held, and he does not have to go to jumua in any other mosque, then I see no harm in him doing itikaf there, because Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, says, 'While you are doing itikaf in mosques,' and refers to all mosques in general, without specifying any particular kind."

Malik continued, "Accordingly, it is permissiblefor a man to do itikaf in a mosque where jumua is not held if he does not have to leave it to go to a mosque where jumua is held."

Malik said, "A person doing itikaf should spend the night only in the mosque where he is doing itikaf, except if his tent is in one of the courtyards of the mosque. I have never heard that someone doing itikaf can put up a shelter anywhere except in the mosque itself or in one of the courtyards of the mosque.

Part of what shows that he must spend the night in the mosque is the saying of A'isha, 'When the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was doing itikaf, he would only go into the house to relieve himself.' Nor should he do itikaf on the roof of the mosque or in the minaret."

Malik said, "The person who is going to do itikaf should enter the place where he wishes to do itikaf before the sun sets on the night when he wishes to begin his itikaf, so that he is ready to begin the itikaf at the beginning of the night when he is going to start his itikaf. A person doing itikaf should be occupied with his itikaf, and not turn his attention to other things which might occupy him, such as trading or whatever. There is no harm, however, if some one doing itikaf tells some one to do something for him regarding his estate, or the affairs of his family, or tells someone to sell some property of his, or something else that does not occupy him directly. There is no harm in him arranging for someone else to do that for him if it is a simple matter."

Malik said, "I have never heard any of the people of knowledge mentioning any modification as far as how to do itikaf is concerned. Itikaf is an act of ibada like the prayer, fasting, the hajj, and such like acts, whether they are obligatory or voluntary. Anyone who begins doing any of these acts should do them according to what has come down in the sunna. He should not start doing anything in them that the muslims have not done, whether it is a modification that he imposes on others, or one that he begins doing himself. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, practised itikaf, and the muslims know what the sunna of itikaf is."

Malik said, "Itikaf and jiwar are the same, and Itikaf is the same for a village-dweller as it is for a nomad."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abd arRahman ibn al-Qasim from his father that A'isha umm al-muminin said, "We went out on a journey with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and, when we came to Bayda' or Dhat al-Jaysh, a necklace of mine broke. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, stopped to look for it and the people stopped with him. There was no water nearby and the people were not carrying any with them, so they came to Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and said, 'Don't you see what A'isha has done? She has made the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the people stop when there is no water nearby and they are not carrying any with them.' "

A'isha continued, "Abu Bakr came and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had fallen asleep with his head on my thigh . Abu Bakr said, 'You have made the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the people stop when there is no water nearby and they are not carrying any with them ' "

She continued, "Abu Bakr remonstrated with me and said whatever Allah willed him to say, and began to poke me in the waist. The only thing that stopped me from moving was that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had his head on my thigh. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, slept until morning found him with no water. Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, sent down the ayat of tayammum and so they did tayammum. Usayd ibn Hudayr said, 'This is not the first baraka from you, O family of Abu Bakr.'"

A'isha added, "We roused the camel I had been on and found the necklace under it."

Malik was asked whether a man who did tayammum for one prayer should do tayammum when the time of the next prayer came or whether the first tayammum was enough. He said, "No, he does tayammum for every prayer, because he has to look for water for every prayer. If he looks for it and does not find it then he does tayammum."

Malik was asked whether a man who did tayammum could lead others in prayer if they were in wudu. He said, "I prefer that someone else should lead them. However, I see no harm in it if he does lead them in prayer."

Yahya said that Malik said that a man who did tayammum because he could not find any water, and then stood and said the takbir and entered into the prayer, and then someone came with some water, did not stop his prayer but completed it with tayammum and did wudu for future prayers.

Yahya said that Malik said, "Whoever rises for prayer and does not find water and so does what Allah has ordered him to do of tayammum has obeyed Allah. Someone who does find water is neither purer than him nor more perfect in prayer, because both have been commanded and each does as Allah has commanded. What Allah has commanded as far as wudu is concerned is for the one who finds water, and tayammum is for the one who does not find water before he enters into the prayer."

Malik said that a man who was in a state of major ritual impurity could do tayammum and read his portion of Qur'an and do voluntary prayers as long as he did not find any water. This applied only to circumstances in which it was allowable to pray with tayammum.

Yahya said that Malik said, "The person who puts up the principal must not stipulate that he has something of the profit alone without the agent sharing in it, nor must the agent stipulate that he has something of the profit alone without the investor sharing. In qirad, there is no sale, no rent, no work, no advance, and no convenience which one party specifies to himself without the other party sharing unless one party allows it to the other unconditionally as a favour and that is alright to both. Neither of the parties should make a condition over the other which increases him in gold or silver or food over the other party."

He said, "If any of that enters the qirad, it becomes hire, and hire is only good with known and fixed terms. The agent should not stipulate when he takes the principal that he repay or commission anyone with the goods, nor that he take any of them for himself. When there is a profit, and it is time to separate the capital, then they divide the profit according to the terms of the contract. If the principal does not increase or there is a loss, the agent does not have to make up for what he spent on himself or for the loss. That falls to the investor from the principal. Qirad is permitted upon whatever terms the investor and the agent make a mutual agreement, of half the profit, or a third or a fourth or whatever."

Malik said, "It is not permitted for the agent to stipulate that he use the qirad money for a certain number of years and that it not be taken from him during that time."

He said, "It is not good for the investor to stipulate that the qirad money should not be returned for a certain number of years which are specified, because the qirad is not for a term. The investor loans it to an agent to use for him. If it seems proper to either of them to abandon the project and the money is coin, and nothing has been bought with it, it can be abandoned, and the investor takes his money back. If it seems proper to the investor to take the qirad loan back after goods have been purchased with it, he cannot do so until the buyer has sold the goods and they have become money. If it seems proper to the agent to return the loan, and it has been turned to goods he cannot do so until he has sold them. He returns the loan in cash as he took it."

Malik said, "It is not good for the investor to stipulate that the agent pay any zakat due from his portion of the profit in particular, because the investor by stipulating that, stipulates fixed increase for himself from the profit because the portion of zakat he would be liable for by his portion of the profit, is removed from him.

"It is not permitted for the investor to stipulate to the agent to only buy from so-and-so, referring to a specific man. That is not permitted because by doing so he would become his hireling for a wage."

Malik spoke about an investor in qirad who stipulated a guarantee for an amount of money from the agent, "The investor is not permitted to stipulate conditions about his principal other than the conditions on which qirad is based or according to the precedent of the sunna of the Muslims. If the principal is increased by the condition of guarantee, the investor has increased his share of the profit because of the position of the guarantee. But the profit is only to be divided according to what it would have been had the loan been given without the guarantee. If the principal is destroyed, I do not think that the agent has a guarantee held against him because the stipulation of guarantees in qirad is null and void."

Malik spoke about an investor who gave qirad money to a man and the man stipulated that he would only buy palms or animals with it because he sought to eat the dates or the offspring of the animals and he kept them for some time to use for himself. He said, "That is not permitted. It is not the sunna of the Muslims in qirad unless he buys it and then sells it as other goods are sold."

Malik said, "There is no harm in the agent stipulating on the investor a slave to help him provided that the slave stands to gain along with him out of the investment, and when the slave only helps him with the investment, not with anything else."

[Muslim].

Yahya related to me from Malik that Abu'z-Zinad informed him that a governor of Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz took some people in battle and had not killed any of them. He wanted to cut off their hands or kill them, so he wrote to Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz about that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote to him, "Better to take less than that."

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done among us about a person who steals the goods of people which are placed under guard in the markets, and their owners put them in their containers and store them together is that if anyone steals any of that from where it is kept, and its value reaches that for which cutting off the hand is obliged, his hand must be cut off, whether or not the owner of the goods is with his goods and whether it is night or day."

Malik said about some one who stole something for which cutting off the hand was obliged and then what he stole was found with him and he returned it to its owner, "His hand is cut off."

Malik said, "If someon says, 'How can his hand be cut off when the goods have been taken from him and returned to their owner?', it is because he is in the same position as the wine drinker when the smell of the wine is found on his breath and he is not drunk. He is flogged with the hadd.

"The hadd is imposed for drinking wine even if it does not make the man intoxicated. That is because he drank it to become intoxicated. It is the same as that with cutting off the hand of the thief for theft when it is taken from him, even if he has not profited from it and it was returned to its owner. When he stole it, he stole it to take it away."

Malik said that if some people came to a house and robbed it together, and then they left with a sack or box or a board or basket or the like of that which they carried together, and when they took it out of its guarded place, they carried it together, and the price of what they took reached that for which cutting off the hand was obliged, and that was three dirhams and upwards, each of them had his hand cut off.

"If each of them takes out something by himself, whoever of them takes out something whose value reaches three dirhams and upwards must have his hand cut off. If any of them takes out something whose value does not reach three dirhams, he does not have his hand cut off."

Yahya said that Malik said, "What is done among us is that when a man's house is locked and he is the only one living in it, cutting off the hand is not obliged against the one who steals something from it until he takes it out of the house completely. That is because all of the house is a place of custody. If someone other than him lives in the house and each of them locks his door, and it is a place of custody for each of them, whoever steals anything from the apartments of that house must have his hand cut off when he leaves the apartment and goes into the main house. He has removed it from its place of custody to another place and he must have his hand cut off."

Malik said, "What is done in our community about a slave who steals from the property of his master is that if he is not in service and among those trusted in the house and he enters secretly and steals from his master something that for which cutting off the hand is obliged, his hand is not cut off. It is like that with a slave-girl when she steals from her master's property. Her hand is not cut off."

Malik then spoke about a slave who was not in service and not one of those trusted in the house, and he entered secretly and stole from the property of his master's wife that for which cutting off the hand was obliged. He said, "His hand is cut off."

"It is like that with the wife's slave-girl when she does not serve her or her husband nor is she trusted in the house and she enters secretly and steals from her mistress's property that for which cutting off the hand is obliged. Her hand is not cut off."

"It is like that with the wife's slave-girl who is not in her service and is not trusted in the house and she enters secretly and steals from the property of her mistress's husband something for which cutting off the hand is obliged. Her hand is cut off."

It is like that with the man who steals from his wife's goods or the wife who steals from her husband's goods something for which cutting off the hand is obliged. If the thing which one of them steals from his spouse's property is in a room other than the room which they both lock for themselves, or it is in a place of custody in a room other than the room which they are in, whichever of them steals something for which cutting off the hand is obliged, their hand should be cut off."

Malik spoke about a small child and a foreigner who does not speak clearly. He said, "If they are robbed of something from its place of custody or from under a lock, the one who stole it has his hand cut off. If the property is outside of its place of custody or locked room(when it is stolen), the one who robbed them does not have his hand cut off. It is then in the position of sheep stolen from the mountain and uncut fruit hanging on the trees "

Malik said, "What is done among us about a person who robs graves is that if what he takes from the grave reaches what cutting off the hand is obliged for, his hand is cut off . That is because the grave is a place of custody for what is in it just as houses are a place of custody for what is in them. "

Malik added, "Cutting off the hand is not obliged for him until he takes it out of the grave."

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."