Sufyan’s case, for he was well known among his people for being miserly. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, said: “I judge only according to what I hear.” (1) Thus, the hadith of Hind contains no evidence for issuing judgment against an absent party.

If someone asks: How can these scholars cite this hadith as evidence when its lack of indication is so clear?

The answer is that this is not the first issue in which the evidence is clear yet disagreement still arises. How many issues are disputed despite their evidence being clear; and how many positions are supported by their proponents with proofs from the Quran and sunnah that contain no proof at all. For Allah grants His bounty to whomever He wills. Just as one person is wealthy and another poor, one is of good character and another ill-tempered, one is tall and another short, one beautiful and another unattractive, so too people differ in understanding. Otherwise, with the slightest reflection, one realizes that the story of Hind, may Allah be pleased with her, does not, on its face, indicate a judgment. This is especially so because, in the particular case that occurred, those who cite it as evidence would not themselves issue judgment against an absent party, for they do not rule against an absent party except on the basis of evidence. Indeed, a right cannot be established while the defendant is absent except through evidence, since an admission is impossible: the defendant is not present. Therefore, evidence was indispensable, yet the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, did not request it.

If we hold that it is permissible to issue judgment against an absent party—whether unconditionally, as is the established position of the school, or according to the surrounding indications, which is my preferred view—then we must take precautions to protect the defendant. How do we do so? We say to the claimant: “Swear that he has not…”