from attending to the affairs of his subjects because of his personal worship, as indicated by His saying: “When they scaled the wall into the prayer chamber.” Although Allah, Most High, had appointed him as a successor to judge between people, an official should not occupy himself with that which distracts him from his duty. Since Allah Almighty had charged him with this task, he should not have set aside time exclusively for himself. Thus, when they came and found the prayer chamber closed, they climbed over its wall, because they had a pressing need.

Moreover, David, peace be upon him, gave judgment before the other disputant had presented the argument by which he would defend himself. As soon as the claimant said, “Indeed, this brother of mine has ninety-nine ewes…” to the end of the verse, he said, “He has certainly wronged you.” This indicates that no judgment should be given for one party without hearing the other party’s case.

But those who permit judgment against an absent person may say: This person was present, so hearing his argument was easy, unlike the absent person. Yet it is reported in the hadith of Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, said: “When two men bring a dispute before you, do not judge in favour of the first until you have heard the words of the other; then you will know how to judge.” Ali said: “Thereafter, I continued to serve as a judge.” (1) There is some criticism concerning this hadith, though some scholars have graded it sound.

As for rational consideration, they said: It is not possible to rule for this present claimant against the absent person, since it is possible that the latter has already paid him his due. Thus, if he says, “I claim one hundred riyals from him,” and brings witnesses, it is possible that the defendant has