1 – Who is responsible for putting up the stake; 2 – if the stake is to be returned, to whom does it revert?

He then turned to the major question for which he had written this treatise—and over which he was tried—namely: Is the presence of a muhallil (a non-staking participant introduced to legitimize the wager) obligatory?
He sets out at length the arguments of both sides, expounding especially the first opinion and the rejoinders offered by the second.
He marshals nearly fifty proofs, drawn from both transmitted reports and rational considerations, in support of allowing the stake without a muhallil, concluding that discussion with the words: “These are but a sample of our evidence that the muhallil is not a condition in racing.”
He then cites six proofs advanced by the proponents of the second view, and proceeds to refute those six proofs in a detailed, extended reply.

Next he devotes a section to clarifying the jurists’ positions on which forms of competitive contests may lawfully carry a prize and which may not.
He opens it by outlining the categories of such contests, explaining the ruling for each, and supplying illustrative examples.
He then lists twelve specific issues concerning competitions for a stake, namely:
1 – racing mules and donkeys for a prize;
2 – pigeon racing, and contests involving elephants and cattle.