—for slandering a Muslim.

643 — They unanimously agree that if anyone fabricates a slander against a slave, no ḥadd penalty is incurred.

644 — They unanimously agree that when a man says to another, “You son of a disbeliever,” while both of the latter’s parents were believing Muslims who have passed away, he becomes liable for the ḥadd penalty.

645 — They unanimously agree that if a man addresses another as “O Jew” or “O Christian,” he is subject to discretionary chastisement (taʿzīr) but no ḥadd applies.

646 — They unanimously agree that if a man slanders his father, his grandfather, or any of his male or female ancestors with an accusation of zina, the ḥadd penalty is due upon him.

647 — They unanimously agree that the slandered person has the right to demand the enforcement of the ḥadd[1] against the slanderer.

648 — They unanimously agree that if the slandered person is absent, neither his father nor his mother may pursue the slander charge so long as the slandered person is alive.

649 — They unanimously agree that surety (kafāla) is not permissible in ḥadd cases.

650 — They unanimously agree that the ḥadd is not established by an oath together with a single witness.

651 — They unanimously agree that when a man says to another, “You profligate,” or “You vile fellow,” no ḥadd can be taken from him.

652 — They unanimously agree that the ḥadd is exacted from a free offender even if the victim is wheelchair-bound, blind, or paralyzed in both hands[2], while the offender himself is healthy[3] and sound of limb.

653 — They unanimously agree that retaliatory execution (qiṣāṣ) applies equally between a woman and a man in cases of intentional homicide; a different opinion is reported from ʿAṭāʾ and al-Ḥasan.