he takes their stake; but if they both outrun him, they keep their stake and the muhallil (1) is not liable for anything. Should the muhallil finish first together with one of them, he (2) and that contestant divide the defeated rider’s stake.

The scholars then differed on another matter concerning the muhallil: may there be more than one muhallil, or may there (3) be only a single one?

The outward sense of their remarks is that the muhallil is treated like either of the two parties—he may be one person or a number of people (4).

Abū al-Ḥasan al-Āmidī, one of the Hanbali authorities, said: “It is not permissible to have more than one muhallil, even if the competitors were a hundred, because a single muhallil fulfils the requirement.” (5)

They further stated that if the two contestants both stake money without a muhallil, the agreement amounts to gambling.

• Mālik’s position (6) is that the stake may be furnished only by a third party who is not one of the racers (7)—whether the ruler or someone else—and that he does not run with them. Whoever of the two contestants wins takes that stake. If the one who put up the stake does run with them, then one of two scenarios arises: either the race involves only two horses, or it involves more than two.