Marriage, drawing distinctions between the two that do not withstand scrutiny. These were mentioned by ʿAbd al-Haqq and others who discussed the questions in al-Mudawwana. If, before committing unlawful intercourse, one spouse claims to have had intercourse with the other and the other denies it, there is agreement that the spouse who denies it does not acquire the status required for stoning. There is likewise agreement that the spouse who acknowledges it by way of a claim against the other does not acquire that status. The acknowledgment may be withdrawn before or after being apprehended for unlawful intercourse, whether the person concerned is the man or the woman.

If one spouse acknowledges intercourse by way of a claim against the other, while the other denies it, there is agreement that the spouse who denies it does not acquire the status required for stoning. As for the spouse who acknowledges it, Ibn al-Qāsim held that this status is established, whereas Ibn ʿAbd al-Hakam held that it is not. ʿAbd al-Wahhāb reported these two opinions in his commentary on al-Risāla, though he did not set out the distinctions as precisely as they are presented here. The reasoning supporting Ibn ʿAbd al-Hakam’s position is that prescribed punishments are averted by doubt, and one spouse’s denial creates doubt concerning the other, who may have made the acknowledgment to serve some purpose. The reasoning supporting Ibn al-Qāsim’s position is that the person has made an acknowledgment against himself, and Allah says:

“Each soul bears only the consequences of its own deeds” [al-Anʿām: 164].

The acknowledgment must therefore be given effect against the person who makes it, even if the other spouse denies it. The precedent is the case in which one party acknowledges unlawful intercourse while the other denies it.

If their disagreement about intercourse occurs after they have committed unlawful intercourse, then the spouse who acknowledges marital intercourse acquires the status required for stoning through that acknowledgment and must be stoned, by agreement. As for the spouse who denies it, whether that denial is accepted is subject to the three opinions already mentioned concerning both spouses’ denial of intercourse after committing unlawful intercourse. Some have held that this disagreement does not apply here: the spouse who denies intercourse after committing unlawful intercourse receives the prescribed punishment, and the denial is not accepted, because the other spouse has acknowledged it against that person. This view has no merit, because one spouse’s acknowledgment against the other constitutes testimony that the other has the status required for stoning, and the testimony of a single witness is not admissible to establish that status.

Section

As for a free person who has not acquired through marriage the status required for stoning, the prescribed punishment is one hundred lashes and a year’s banishment, because the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “For a previously unmarried man and woman, one hundred lashes and a year’s banishment.” There are also the words in the hadith narrated by Mālik: “And he flogged