bearing a loss (1), and that is pure gambling. Once they bring in a third contestant, however, a third possibility appears: he may outperform them both, in which case he takes both of their stakes and owes nothing himself (2). With his entry the arrangement now resembles juʿālah contracts, for it is as though the two principal contestants have offered this muḥallil a reward (3) if he beats them; so long as he does not beat them, he is entitled to no reward (4).

They add: Even if all we possessed on this matter were the verdict of the most knowledgeable of the Successors—especially in the legal cases of ʿUmar—namely Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib (ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUmar used to send to inquire of him about his father’s rulings) (5), that alone would suffice, for he delivered this very fatwa. He was followed in it by the jurists of hadith, such as Imām Aḥmad and al-Shāfiʿī, and by the jurists of reasoned opinion, like Abū Ḥanīfah and his students (6). Who remains besides these scholars? Three pillars of the ummah are on our side, and as for the fourth, Mālik, there are two reports from him, one of which agrees with Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib on the permissibility of the muḥallil.