evidence that a particular attribute is the reason why the Lawgiver prescribed this ruling in the original case, and that it is present in another case, then this analogy is disputed only by someone who is unaware of these two premises. A fuller discussion of this belongs elsewhere.

The point here is that the call of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, encompasses both mankind and jinn, in all their various kinds. It must not be supposed that he singled out the Arabs for any ruling whatsoever. Rather, he attached rulings to such designations as Muslim and disbeliever, believer and hypocrite, righteous and wicked, doer of good and wrongdoer, and other designations mentioned in the Quran and hadith. Neither the Quran nor the hadith singles out the Arabs for any ruling of Islamic law. Some scholars, however, thought this was the case with certain rulings, and the majority disagreed with them. Thus, a group of scholars, including Abū Yūsuf, thought that he had singled out the Arabs as exempt from enslavement. The majority of Muslims, however, hold that they may be enslaved, as established in authentic hadiths: he enslaved Banū al-Mustaliq, among whom was Juwayriyyah bint al-Hārith, then freed and married her and, on her account, freed those of her people who had been enslaved.

In the hadith concerning Hawāzin, he said:

“Choose one of the two: either the captives or the property.”

In the two Sahīh collections, Abū Ayyūb al-Ansārī reports that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Whoever says, ‘There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah alone