he intended.” (1) And he said: “I judge only according to what I hear.” (2) When someone hears words such as these and knows that the man intended exaggeration, it is not possible to rule against him.

Is the acknowledgement of an intoxicated person valid? The authoritative position in the school is that it is valid, even though he is not acting voluntarily. They say: the acknowledgement resulted from drinking something unlawful, and we should not be lenient with such a person; rather, we should deal with him according to the harsher of the two rulings. Thus, if he is intoxicated and someone comes to him, makes him laugh, and increases his exhilaration, saying, “Did I not lend you ten thousand?” and he replies, “Yes, you are my companion, and you lent me ten thousand,” the school holds him to this acknowledgement. The sound view, however, is that he is not held to it, because he has no reason. This is why the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, did not hold his uncle Hamzah ibn Abd al-Muttalib, may Allah be pleased with him, accountable when he said to him: “Are you anything but slaves of my fathers?!” (3)

His statement: “If he is compelled to weigh out money and consequently sells his property, the sale is valid.” This issue bears some resemblance to that of one who is compelled to acknowledge something. His words, “compelled to weigh out money,” mean dirhams; he expressed it as weighing because dirhams are dealt with both by weight and by number. Thus, if he is compelled to weigh out currency—gold or silver—such that they say to him, “Hand over to so-and-so fifty ounces of silver,” and he says, “I have nothing,” whereupon they say, “Hand it over, or we will imprison you,” and so he sells his property to settle what he was compelled to pay—then is the sale valid? The author says: It is valid, because he was not compelled to sell.