requires that purity be maintained, though it need not have existed at the outset. Another is his view that impurity is removed by anything that removes it. This is one of the three positions in the schools of Ahmad and Mālik. The same applies to his view that an impure substance becomes pure through transformation.

Another example is Mālik’s view that the one-fifth share is to be distributed in the same manner as fay’. This is also a position in the school of Ahmad, for two reports are related from him concerning the one-fifth due on buried treasure (1): is it to be distributed as fay’ or as zakat (2)? If it is distributed as fay’, this is only because it is treated as ancillary to the one-fifth share of war spoils.

Another is his view that the jizya may be taken from any unbeliever with whom a treaty may lawfully be concluded, with no distinction between Arabs and non-Arabs or between the People of the Book and others. Lineage is never a consideration; rather, religion is the criterion (3) in matters of protected status, enslavement, and the permissibility of slaughtered meat and marriage. This is the soundest position on this issue, and it is one of the two positions in the school of Ahmad. Ahmad differs from him only regarding the taking of jizya from the Arab polytheists, but no Arab polytheists remained after the revelation of (4) the jizya verse; rather, all the Arab polytheists had embraced Islam.

Another example is Mālik’s view that the people of Mecca shorten the prayer at Minā and Arafat. This is also a position in the school of Ahmad and others.

Another is his school’s position on adjudicating cases on the basis of evidentiary indications (5) and corroborating evidence, and on enforcing the prescribed penalties