Another is his view that a woman, a black dog, or a donkey passing in front of a worshipper invalidates the prayer.

Another is his view that a grandmother inherits while her son is alive. Another is his view affirming the validity of orchard-tending and sharecropping contracts and similar arrangements, even when the seed is supplied by the worker, according to one of the two reports from him. This is also the view of a group of al-Shāfiʿī’s followers.

Another is his view, according to one of the two reports, that a divorce pronounced by an intoxicated man does not take effect. This is also the view of some followers of Abū Hanīfa and al-Shāfiʿī.

Another is his view that when an endowment can no longer provide any benefit, it is to be sold and the proceeds used to purchase something that serves the same purpose. Within Abū Hanīfa’s school there is a position closer to Ahmad’s view (1) than others, and likewise in (2) Mālik’s school.

Likewise, he held that an endowment may be replaced—for example, by replacing one mosque with another and stripping the first of its status as a mosque—as was done (3) by ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb, may Allah be pleased with him. The schools of Abū Hanīfa and Mālik permit (4) such replacement when necessary in certain cases.

Another is his acceptance of an enslaved person’s testimony; his view that one who prays alone behind the row must repeat the prayer; and his view that converting Hajj into ʿumrah is permissible and sanctioned by the sharia—in fact, it is preferable. He also held that when a pilgrim combining Hajj and ʿumrah brings the sacrificial animal with him, combining the two is preferable (5) to performing ʿumrah followed by a separately consecrated Hajj, or Hajj alone, as the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—did.

Another example is his view that congregational prayer is an individual obligation.