held by the majority of the imams and followed in Muslim practice from the time of their Prophet to the present day.

Whoever holds that a sale is not valid without a verbal formula from both parties may not, while holding that belief, hand over an orphan’s property except under a valid contract, such as a lease or a sale. In leases, sales and similar contracts—which the majority permit without a verbal formula, whereas some scholars permit them only with one—everyone must act consistently with the view he holds, whether it works to his advantage or against him. No one may adopt one view to determine his rights and the other to determine his obligations.

An example is someone who holds that, when he is a neighbor, he is entitled to a neighbor’s right of preemption, but when he is the purchaser, he need not honor that right. Another is someone who holds that, when he is one of the maternal half-siblings in the shared-inheritance case known as al-Himāriyya, the full siblings are excluded, but when he is one of the full siblings, he is entitled to share with the maternal half-siblings. Likewise, someone may hold that, when he is the plaintiff, judgment should be given in his favor on the basis of an oath referred back to him, and when he is the claimant, judgment should be given in his favor on the basis of one witness and an oath. There are many similar examples.

By agreement of the Muslims, no one may adopt such an approach to a disputed question. This amounts to permitting himself what he forbids someone in the same position, and forbidding that person what he permits himself; imposing obligations on another person in the same position that he does not impose on himself; and claiming rights for himself against others that he does not recognize for someone in the same position. It is necessarily known in the religion of Islam—indeed, in every religion—that this is impermissible. Whoever believes it permissible is a disbeliever. Indeed, whoever holds to the validity of