At this, some of those present remarked, “There is nothing objectionable in that,” whereas the Chief Judge Badr al-Din considered it a mark of disrespect.

A memorandum then arrived instructing the judge to deal with him in the manner required by the sharia (1). The judge replied, “I have already said to him what is said to someone in his position.”

The authorities next gave him a choice among three options: to reside in Damascus, to live in Alexandria under certain conditions, or to be imprisoned. He chose imprisonment.

A group later came to him, urging him to travel to Damascus while undertaking to observe the stipulated conditions (2); he agreed, so they mounted him on a postal horse (3) on the night of the eighteenth of Shawwal.

The following day another courier was dispatched after him and brought him back. He appeared before the Chief Judge in the presence of a number of jurists, and some of them said to him, “The state will settle for nothing less than imprisonment.”

The Chief Judge (4) added, “That is in his own best interest.” He therefore deputized Shams al-Din al-Tunisi (5), the Maliki, and authorized him to pronounce the sentence of imprisonment. Shams al-Din, however, refused, saying, “Nothing has been proven against him.”