merely on the basis of her claim after six years? Even if she said, “I gave birth to her at that time, before he divorced me,” her statement would not be accepted either. Rather, his statement is accepted, supported by his oath that she did not give birth to the girl while married to him. Likewise, if she said, “I delivered this child before marrying the second husband,” and the first husband denied this, his statement that she did not give birth to her before marrying the second husband is accepted. This is especially so given that she delayed making her claim until she had married the second husband, for this indicates that her claim is false—particularly according to Mālik’s principle concerning claims delayed without excuse when they could have been made earlier, in these and similar matters.

He—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—was asked about a man who pronounced three divorces against his wife. A mufti advised him that the divorce had not taken effect, so the husband followed his ruling and subsequently had intercourse with his wife, who bore him a child. It was then claimed that the child was born of fornication.

He answered:

Anyone who says that is guilty of the utmost ignorance, misguidance, and defiance of Allah and His Messenger. The Muslims agree that whenever a husband has intercourse within a marriage he believes to be permissible, the child born to him within it is attributed to him, and father and child inherit from one another by unanimous agreement of the Muslims—even if that marriage is, in fact, invalid by unanimous agreement of the Muslims. This applies whether the husband is a disbeliever or a Muslim. If a Jewish man marries his brother’s daughter, the child born of that union is attributed to him and inherits from him by unanimous agreement of the Muslims, even though that marriage is invalid by unanimous agreement of the Muslims.