without right. Yet we know that those who fought at the Camel and Siffīn are not in the Fire, for both sides had excuses and an interpretive basis for fighting, as well as good deeds that prevented the grounds for punishment from taking effect.

He said, peace and blessings be upon him, in an authentic hadith:

“There are three whom Allah will neither speak to nor look at on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them, and theirs will be a painful punishment: a man who has surplus water but withholds it from a wayfarer—Allah will say to him, ‘Today I withhold My bounty from you, just as you withheld the surplus of what your hands did not produce’; a man who pledges allegiance to a ruler solely for worldly gain—if he is given something, he is pleased, but if he is not, he is displeased; and a man who, after the afternoon prayer, swears falsely concerning a commodity that he had been offered more for it than he actually had.”

This is a grave warning against anyone who withholds his surplus water, although some scholars permit a man to do so. This disagreement does not prevent us from believing that it is forbidden, citing the hadith as evidence. Nor does the existence of the hadith prevent us from believing that someone who adopts a different interpretation is excused in this matter and is not subject to this warning.

He also said, peace and blessings be upon him:

“May Allah curse the man who marries a woman to make her lawful again for her former husband, and the man for whom this is done.”

This is an authentic hadith transmitted from him through several routes, and also from his Companions. Nevertheless, some scholars have held such a marriage to be valid without qualification. Others have held it to be valid if this purpose is not stipulated in the contract. They have well-known grounds for being excused in this matter. According to the first group, analogy with established principles dictates that a marriage is not invalidated by stipulations, just as it is not invalidated by either of the two considerations being unknown. According to the second group, analogy with established principles dictates that contracts without an accompanying stipulation do not alter