Section

Their position in judicial rulings is to give precedence to the litigant whose case is stronger and assign the oath to that party. Thus, in disputes over rights, they rule on the basis of one witness together with the claimant’s oath. In qasāma (the oath procedure in homicide cases), they begin by having the claimants swear; if they swear fifty oaths, they become entitled to claim redress for the blood shed.

The Kufans, however, hold that only the defendant takes an oath. They therefore do not require the claimant to swear, whether in qasāma or otherwise, nor do they rule on the basis of one witness and an oath. They do not consider an oath incumbent upon the claimant.

It is well known that the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, accords with the position of the Medinans. The hadith concerning qasāma is authentic and firmly established on this matter. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said to the Ansār:

“You swear fifty oaths and thereby establish your right to redress for your companion’s blood.”

When al-Shāfi‘ī and others like him among the scholars of Iraq debated Medinan scholars, such as Abū al-Zinād and others, concerning qasāma, the Medinans would argue against them on the basis of the Sunnah, which no one can avoid accepting. They would tell them: “The Sunnah and the various aspects of truth may indeed run counter to personal opinion, yet Muslims have no choice but to accept them.” These words form part of a lengthy account transmitted with a chain of narration.