Al-Nūr (The Light): Verses 6–10

The Rulings Concerning Those Who Accuse Their Spouses

Know that after the Almighty mentioned the rulings concerning the slander of unrelated chaste women, He followed it with the rulings concerning the slander of wives.

This verse encompasses several discussions:

Several views are mentioned regarding the occasion of revelation:

1. The Narration of Ibn Abbas (via the narration of ‘Āṣim ibn ‘Adiyy al-Anṣārī): When the verse, "And those who accuse chaste women and then do not bring four witnesses..." was revealed, ‘Āṣim ibn ‘Adiyy al-Anṣārī said: "If a man from us enters his house and finds another man upon his wife's belly, if he brings four witnesses to that, he has achieved his purpose and left. If he kills [the intruder], he is killed for it. If he accuses [his wife] but remains silent, he remains silent in suppressed rage. O Allah, grant us relief!"

‘Āṣim had a cousin named ‘Uwaymir, whose wife was named Khawlah bint Qays. ‘Uwaymir approached ‘Āṣim saying, "I have seen Sharīk ibn Suḥmā’ upon the belly of my wife Khawlah." ‘Āṣim exclaimed, and went to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), saying, "O Messenger of Allah, how quickly have I been afflicted with this concerning my own household!" The Prophet (PBUH) asked, "What is it?" He replied that ‘Uwaymir, his cousin, informed him that he saw Sharīk ibn Suḥmā’ upon the belly of his wife Khawlah. Since ‘Uwaymir, Khawlah, and Sharīk were all cousins of ‘Āṣim, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) summoned them all. He told ‘Uwaymir, "Fear Allah regarding your wife and your cousin's daughter, and do not slander her."

‘Uwaymir said, "O Messenger of Allah, I swear by Allah that I saw Sharīk upon her belly, and I have not approached her for four months, and she is pregnant by someone else." The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) then told her, "Fear Allah and report only what you have done." She replied, "O Messenger of Allah, ‘Uwaymir is a very jealous man. He saw Sharīk looking at me for a long time and speaking with me, and jealousy drove him to what he said."

Then, Allah revealed this verse. The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) commanded that a call be made: "The prayer is assembled." He led the afternoon prayer, then told ‘Uwaymir, "Stand up and say: 'I bear witness by Allah that Khawlah is an adulteress, and I am among the truthful.'" He said it a second time: "I bear witness by Allah that I saw Sharīk upon her belly, and I am among the truthful." He said it a third time: "I bear witness by Allah that she is pregnant by someone other than me, and I am among the truthful." He said it a fourth time: "I bear witness by Allah that she is an adulteress, and I have not approached her for four months, and I am among the truthful." Then he said the fifth time: "May the curse of Allah be upon ‘Uwaymir—meaning himself—if he is among the liars in what he said." Then he told him to sit down.

He told Khawlah to stand up. She stood and said: "I bear witness by Allah that I am not an adulteress, and my husband ‘Uwaymir is among the liars." She said the second time: "I bear witness by Allah that he did not see Sharīk upon my belly, and he is among the liars." She said the third time: "I bear witness by Allah that I am pregnant by him, and he is among the liars." She said the fourth time: "I bear witness by Allah that he never saw me committing any lewd act, and he is among the liars." She said the fifth time: "May the wrath of Allah be upon Khawlah if ‘Uwaymir is truthful in what he said." The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) then separated them.

2. Narration of Ibn Abbas (via al-Kalbī): ‘Āṣim returned to his family one day and found Sharīk ibn Suḥmā’ upon his wife’s belly. He then went to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)... (The rest of the narration is as above.)

3. Narration of ‘Ikrimah from Ibn Abbas: When the verse, "And those who accuse chaste women..." was revealed, Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah, the chief of the Anṣār, said: "If I found a man upon her belly, if I bring four witnesses, the man would have satisfied his desire and left!" The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "O company of Anṣār, do you not hear what your chief says?" They replied, "O Messenger of Allah, do not blame him, for he is a very jealous man." Sa‘d said, "O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, I know this is from Allah and it is the truth, but I was astonished by him." The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Indeed, Allah does not accept anything other than that."

Shortly after, Ibn ‘Umar came to him, reporting about a man named Hilāl ibn Umayyah (one of the three whose repentance Allah accepted). Hilāl said, "O Messenger of Allah, I found a man with my wife—I saw with my eyes and heard with my ears." The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) disliked what he brought. Hilāl said, "By Allah, O Messenger of Allah, I see displeasure in your face regarding what I informed you. Allah knows that I am truthful and have only spoken the truth." The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Either the Ibītat (staying overnight) or the establishment of the prescribed punishment (Ḥadd) upon you."

The Anṣār gathered and said, "We are afflicted by what Sa‘d said." While they were in that state, revelation descended upon him. When revelation descended, his face would change color, and his body would become flushed with redness. When it subsided, he said, "Rejoice, O Hilāl, for Allah has made a way out for you." He replied, "I had hoped for that from Allah." The Prophet (PBUH) recited these verses to them. He called for them, and they were summoned. Hilāl accused [his wife]. The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Allah knows that one of you is lying. Is there any repentant among you?" He ordered the Mulā‘anah (mutual cursing).

Hilāl swore four oaths by Allah that he was truthful. When he reached the fifth, the Prophet (PBUH) said to him, "Fear Allah, O Hilāl, for the punishment of this world is easier than the punishment of the Hereafter." He replied, "By Allah, Allah will not punish me for it, just as the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) did not flog me." And he swore the fifth oath.

Then the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) asked her, "Do you bear witness?" She swore four oaths by Allah that he was lying. When she began the fifth, he told her, "Fear Allah, for the fifth oath is the one that brings [the consequence]." She paused for an hour and almost confessed, but then said, "By Allah, I will not disgrace my people," and swore the fifth oath: "May the wrath of Allah be upon me if Hilāl is truthful in his statement." The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) separated them.

Then he said, "Wait for her: if she gives birth to a child with a specific description—athībij (thin-shanked), aṣhab (light-eyed), aḥmash al-sāqayn (thin-legged)—then the child belongs to Hilāl. But if she gives birth to a child khadlij al-sāqayn (thick-legged) and awraq (dark-eyed) and ja‘d (curly-haired), then the child belongs to the other man." She gave birth to a child awraq khadlij al-sāqayn. The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Were it not for the faith, there would have been a serious matter between me and her." ‘Ikrimah said that he saw that man later as a governor of one of the provinces, not knowing who his father was.

The phrase "four witnesses" was recited without the tā’ (i.e., arba‘atun instead of arba‘atun), either because witnesses (shuhūd) are a group, or because they are equivalent to souls (anfus).

The reason for reading arba‘an (accusative) is that it is in the position of a maṣdar (verbal noun), and the operative factor is the maṣdar implied in the statement: "The testimony of one of them is four testimonies." The implied structure is: "The obligation of the testimony of one of them is four testimonies."

It was also recited as an la‘nat Allāh and wa an ghaḍab Allāh (with an being lightened/unvocalized, and the following noun in the nominative case), or an ghaḍab Allāh (as a verbal noun for the action of wrath). It was also recited with the accusative for the fifth statement, meaning: "And he testifies the fifth testimony."

This section concerns four aspects:

Aspect One: What Necessitates Li‘ān (Mutual Cursing)

First Issue: If a man accuses his wife of adultery, he must face the Ḥadd (prescribed punishment) if she is muḥṣanah (married/chaste), or Ta‘zīr (discretionary punishment) if she is not, just as with accusing an unrelated woman. The difference lies in the means of acquittal:

• For accusing an unrelated woman, the Ḥadd is only dropped if the accused admits the slander or if evidence proves her adultery.
• For accusing a wife, the Ḥadd is dropped by one of these two, or by Li‘ān.

The Sharia legislated Li‘ān in this specific case, unlike with unrelated women, for two reasons:

1. There is no shame for him regarding the adultery of an unrelated woman, and it is better for him to conceal it. However, if his wife commits adultery, shame and corrupted lineage affect him, making patience impossible and requiring proof like in the case of an excuse. Thus, the Sharia specified Li‘ān for this situation.
2. It is generally understood that a man only accuses his wife of adultery based on certainty. The accusation itself suggests his truthfulness, but the circumstantial evidence is not complete. Therefore, an oath (faith) is added to strengthen it, similar to how one witness is strengthened by an oath according to many jurists.

Second Issue: Abū Bakr al-Rāzī said that the punishment for slandering both unrelated women and wives was flogging. The evidence is the Prophet’s (PBUH) statement to Hilāl ibn Umayyah: "Bring me four witnesses for yourself, or you will receive the flogging on your back." This proves that the punishment for slandering wives was flogging, but it was abrogated for husbands and replaced by Li‘ān. Similar reports exist regarding the man who asked, "What if a man finds another man with his wife? If he speaks, you flog him; if he kills him, you kill him; if he remains silent, he remains silent in suppressed rage." These reports indicate the punishment was flogging, which Allah abrogated with Li‘ān.

Third Issue: Al-Shāfi‘ī (RA) said that if a husband slanders his wife, the required penalty is the Ḥadd, but it is averted by Li‘ān, just as the Ḥadd for slandering an unrelated woman is averted by witnesses. If the husband refuses Li‘ān, the Ḥadd for slander applies. If he performs Li‘ān and she refuses hers, the Ḥadd for adultery applies to her.

Abū Ḥanīfah (RA) said: If the husband refuses Li‘ān, he is imprisoned until he performs it. Similarly, if the wife refuses, she is imprisoned until she performs Li‘ān.

Arguments for Al-Shāfi‘ī:

1. Allah says at the beginning of the Sūrah: "And those who accuse chaste women [i.e., non-wives]... then do not bring four witnesses, then flog them eighty lashes." Then He connected the ruling for wives: "And those who accuse their spouses and have no witnesses except their own selves, then the testimony of one of them is four testimonies..." Just as the consequence of slandering unrelated women is bringing witnesses or receiving the Ḥadd, the consequence of slandering wives is bringing Li‘ān or the Ḥadd.
2. The verse states: "...and it shall avert the punishment from her if she testifies four oaths by Allah..." The definite article (al-) on "punishment" (al-‘adhāb) does not imply all types of punishment, as she is not obligated to receive every punishment. Therefore, it must refer to the previously mentioned established punishment, which is the Ḥadd (as mentioned earlier in the Sūrah: "...and let a group of believers witness their punishment"). If the punishment referred to is the Ḥadd, then if she does not perform Li‘ān, she is flogged, and Li‘ān averts the Ḥadd. If one argues that "punishment" means imprisonment, we reply that the al- refers to the established context, which is the Ḥadd. Furthermore, interpreting it as Ḥadd prevents the verse from being ambiguous, whereas interpreting it as imprisonment makes the duration of imprisonment unknown (ambiguous).
3. Al-Shāfi‘ī argued that the invalidity of imprisonment for the wife is supported by her statement: "If the man is truthful, flog me; if he is lying, leave me alone." Why should imprisonment apply to her when it is not mentioned in the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Messenger, consensus, or analogy?
4. The husband slandered her and did not provide the means of acquittal (witnesses or his own testimony). Therefore, the Ḥadd is incumbent upon him based on the verse concerning unrelated women. If this applies to the man, it must apply to the wife, as no one differentiates here.
5. The Prophet’s (PBUH) statement to Khawlah: "Is the stoning easier for you than the wrath of Allah?" This is explicit proof.

Argument for Abū Ḥanīfah:

• Regarding the wife: She only refused Li‘ān, which is not evidence of adultery nor an admission of it. Therefore, she should not be stoned (if married/chaste), based on the Prophet’s (PBUH) saying, "The blood of a man is not lawful..." If stoning is not required for a married woman, flogging is not required for a non-married one, as no distinction is made. Moreover, refusal (nukūl) is not explicit proof of admission, so the Ḥadd cannot be established by it, just as with ambiguous speech that could mean adultery or something else.

Fourth Issue: The majority held that if the husband says to her, "O adulteress," Li‘ān is required. Mālik (RA) said that Li‘ān is only required if he says, "I saw you committing adultery," or if he denies paternity of a child she carries.

Arguments for the Majority: The generality of the verse "And those who accuse chaste women" covers all forms of accusation. Since there is no difference in the ruling for slandering an unrelated woman regardless of the specific accusation, the same applies to the wife.

Aspect Two: The Mūlā‘in (The One Performing Li‘ān)

Al-Shāfi‘ī (RA) said that whoever is qualified to swear an oath is qualified to perform Li‘ān. Thus, Li‘ān is valid between slaves, Dhimmi subjects, and those who have received the Ḥadd for slander. It is also valid if one is a slave and the other free, or if the husband is Muslim and the wife a Dhimmi.

Abū Ḥanīfah (RA) said Li‘ān is invalid in two situations:

1. If the wife is someone whose slanderer would not receive the Ḥadd if she were unrelated (e.g., a slave woman or a Dhimmi woman).
2. If one of them is not qualified to be a witness (e.g., someone punished for slander, a slave, or a disbeliever). However, he conceded that a fāsiq (sinner) and a blind person, though not qualified witnesses, can perform Li‘ān.

Arguments for Al-Shāfi‘ī: The apparent meaning of the verse "And those who accuse their spouses" includes everyone, and there is no reason for specialization. Analogy also supports this in two ways:

1. The purpose is to repel shame from oneself and repel the child of adultery from oneself. Just as the non-punished person needs this, the punished person needs it too.
2. There is consensus that the Li‘ān of a fāsiq and a blind person is valid, even though they are not qualified witnesses. Therefore, the same applies to others; the common factor is the need to repel the shame of adultery.

Arguments for Abū Ḥanīfah: Text and meaning.

• Text: The report from ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Āṣ that the Prophet (PBUH) said: "There are four women between whom and their husbands there is no Mulā‘anah: a Jewish or Christian woman married to a Muslim man, and a free woman married to a slave."
• Meaning: In the first case, the obligation for slandering a wife was the Ḥadd (based on the verse about non-wives), which was abrogated for spouses and replaced by Li‘ān. Since Li‘ān stands in place of the Ḥadd for spouses, Li‘ān is not required for someone whom a stranger would not be required to flog if he slandered her.
• In the second case, Li‘ān is testimony, so it should only be valid from those qualified to give testimony. We say Li‘ān is testimony for two reasons:
  1. Allah calls it testimony: "...and have no witnesses except their own selves, then the testimony of one of them is four testimonies by Allah," just as He said regarding debt testimony.
  2. The Prophet (PBUH), when ordering Li‘ān between the spouses, commanded them using the wording of testimony, not just the wording of an oath. Since Li‘ān is testimony, it should not be accepted from someone punished for slander, based on the verse: "And never accept their testimony." If this applies to the punished person, it applies to the slave and the disbeliever, either by consensus that they are not qualified witnesses or because no distinction is made.

Al-Shāfi‘ī’s Rebuttal: Li‘ān is not truly testimony but an oath, because a person cannot testify for himself. If it were testimony, the woman would need eight testimonies (being half the man's share), and it would be invalid for the blind and the fāsiq, whose testimony is invalid. If it is argued that the fāsiq might repent, the slave might be freed, making his testimony valid later. Al-Shāfi‘ī emphasized that if a slave is freed, his testimony is accepted immediately, whereas a repentant fāsiq's testimony is not accepted immediately. Al-Shāfi‘ī also challenged Abū Ḥanīfah: The testimony of Dhimmi subjects is accepted among themselves, so Li‘ān should be valid between a Dhimmi husband and wife.

The text concludes this section by noting that the penalties vary based on who the accusation is directed toward: if the husband does not perform Li‘ān, he receives half the Ḥadd for slander due to his slavery (if applicable). If he performs Li‘ān but she does not, her penalty varies based on whether she is married/chaste, free or slave.

Aspect Three: Rulings Resulting from Li‘ān

Al-Shāfi‘ī (RA) stated that Li‘ān results in five rulings: averting the Ḥadd (for the husband), denial of paternity (for the child), separation (Farqah), perpetual prohibition (Taḥrīm Mu’abbad), and the obligation of the Ḥadd (for the wife if she refuses). All these are established merely by the husband’s Li‘ān and do not require her Li‘ān or a judge's ruling. If the judge issues a ruling, it is merely an enforcement, not the establishment of the separation itself.

First Issue: Occurrence of Separation (Farqah)

There are four views on whether separation occurs upon Li‘ān:

1. ‘Uthmān al-Battī: Li‘ān does not necessitate separation.
2. Abū Ḥanīfah, Abū Yūsuf, and Muḥammad: Separation does not occur until the judge separates them after they complete Li‘ān.
3. Mālik, al-Layth, and Zufar: Separation occurs immediately upon completion of Li‘ān, even without a judge's decree.
4. Al-Shāfi‘ī (RA): If the husband completes his oaths, the bond of marriage is dissolved, and she is permanently unlawful to him, whether she performs Li‘ān or not.

Arguments for ‘Uthmān al-Battī:

1. Li‘ān is neither explicit nor implicit indication of separation; thus, it should not cause separation, just like other statements that do not imply divorce. At most, the husband is truthful, which does not imply perpetual prohibition (e.g., if evidence proved her adultery, it wouldn't cause perpetual prohibition). If he is lying and she is truthful, there is no indication of prohibition.
2. If they performed Li‘ān privately, it wouldn't cause separation, so it shouldn't when done before the judge.
3. Li‘ān stands in place of witnesses for slandering unrelated women. Since bringing witnesses only serves to drop the Ḥadd, Li‘ān only serves to drop the Ḥadd.
4. If the husband admits his lie afterward and is flogged, it does not cause separation. Similarly, Li‘ān, which stands in place of averting the Ḥadd, should not cause separation. The Prophet’s (PBUH) separation between the couple in the story of al-‘Ajlānī occurred because he divorced her three times after the Li‘ān.

Arguments for Abū Ḥanīfah (requiring a judge):

1. It is narrated in the story of ‘Uwaymir that after they finished, ‘Uwaymir said: "If I keep her, I have lied about her; she is divorced three times." He divorced her three times before the Prophet (PBUH) commanded him. This implies that if separation occurred by Li‘ān, his statement "If I keep her..." would be void, as keeping her would be impossible.
2. The Prophet (PBUH) executed his triple divorce, which is only possible if separation had not already occurred by Li‘ān.
3. The narration from Sahl ibn Sa‘d states: "The Sunnah concerning those who perform Li‘ān is that they are separated, and they never reunite." If separation occurred by Li‘ān, subsequent separation would be impossible.

Arguments for Al-Shāfi‘ī:

1. The verse states: "...and it shall avert the punishment from her if she testifies..." This indicates that the wife’s Li‘ān only affects averting punishment from herself, and all other rulings resulting from Li‘ān are established by the husband’s Li‘ān alone.
2. The husband’s Li‘ān alone is sufficient to deny paternity. Therefore, his statement must be the determining factor for establishing paternity, not hers. Notice that in her Li‘ān, she attributes the child to him, but we deny it from him. The denial by the husband is considered. Furthermore, if the husband admits his lie, the child is attributed to him. As long as he persists in his Li‘ān, the child is denied from him. Since his Li‘ān independently denies paternity, it must independently cause separation. If separation did not occur, the child would not be denied (based on the principle: "The child belongs to the bed"), as long as the marriage bond remains. Since the child is denied by his Li‘ān alone, the marriage bond must be dissolved by his Li‘ān alone.

Regarding the narrations used by Abū Ḥanīfah: they indicate that the Prophet (PBUH) informed them of the separation and ruled upon it, which does not negate that another factor caused the separation. His analogies rely on Li‘ān being testimony, which we argue is not the case; it is an oath. Regarding the claim that Li‘ān implies no prohibition: its proof lies in the denial of paternity, and denying paternity implies denying the lawfulness of the marriage.

Second Issue: Reuniting After Li‘ān

Mālik, Al-Shāfi‘ī, Abū Yūsuf, al-Thawrī, Isḥāq, and al-Ḥasan—and this is the view of ‘Alī, ‘Umar, and Ibn Mas‘ūd—held that those who perform Li‘ān never reunite.

Abū Ḥanīfah and Muḥammad held that if the husband admits his lie and is flogged, the prohibition on the marriage contract is lifted, and they may remarry with a new contract.

Arguments for Al-Shāfi‘ī:

1. The Prophet’s (PBUH) statement to the man who performed Li‘ān after it: "You have no way to her." He did not say, "Until you deny yourself." If denial were the ultimate remedy for this prohibition, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) would have referred them to it, as He did for the triple divorcee: "If he divorces her [for the third time], she is not lawful for him afterward until she marries a husband other than him."
2. The reports from ‘Alī, ‘Umar, and Ibn Mas‘ūd stating that those who perform Li‘ān never reunite. This has also been reported as a Marfū‘ (attributed to the Prophet PBUH).
3. The report from al-Zuhri via Sahl ibn Sa‘d regarding al-‘Ajlānī: "The Sunnah has passed that when they perform Li‘ān, they are separated, and they never reunite."

Argument for Abū Ḥanīfah: The verses "And Allah has permitted for you what is beyond that [i.e., those mentioned]" and "Then marry those that please you."

Third Issue: Denial of Paternity

Scholars agreed that paternity can be denied by Li‘ān. Some dissenting opinions held that the child remains his, citing the Prophet’s (PBUH) saying: "The child belongs to the bed." This view is weak because the reports confirming that lineage is negated by Li‘ān are nearly Mutawātir (mass-transmitted) and cannot be contradicted by a single report.

Fourth Issue: Completeness of Li‘ān

Al-Shāfi‘ī (RA) said that if one party performs only part of the Li‘ān words, the ruling is not established. Abū Ḥanīfah (RA) said that most of the Li‘ān words suffice for the whole if the judge rules on it. The apparent meaning supports Al-Shāfi‘ī, as it indicates that the wife cannot avert punishment from herself unless she completes what Allah mentioned.

Aspect Four: The Manner of Li‘ān

The verse clearly indicates the procedure:

1. The Husband: Swears four oaths by Allah, saying: "I bear witness by Allah that I am truthful in what I accused her of regarding adultery." Then he adds the fifth: "And the curse of Allah be upon me if I am among the liars." According to Al-Shāfi‘ī, these five statements establish the five rulings mentioned earlier.
2. The Wife: If she wishes to avert the Ḥadd for adultery from herself, she must perform Li‘ān. Only one ruling is established by her Li‘ān (averting the Ḥadd).

Sub-issues:

1. Consensus that Li‘ān, like testimony, is only established before a judge.
2. Al-Shāfi‘ī (RA) said the husband stands while swearing, and the wife sits. Then the wife stands while swearing, and the husband sits. The Imam instructs someone to hold his hand over the mouth of the swearer when reaching the curse/wrath, saying, "I fear that if you are not truthful, you will incur the curse of Allah."
3. Li‘ān should be performed in revered places: in Mecca, between the Maqām and the corner; in Medina, near the pulpit; in Jerusalem, within its mosque. The Li‘ān of a polytheist follows the same procedure. The time is Friday after the ‘Aṣr prayer, and a group of notable people (at least four) must be present.

Aspect Five: Other Benefits

First Issue: Our companions used this verse to refute the Khawārij’s view that adultery and slander constitute disbelief (Kufr), in two ways:

1. If the accuser is truthful, she is an adulteress; if he is lying, he is a slanderer. According to the Khawārij, disbelief must occur from one of them. This would necessitate separation without Li‘ān, and it would be separation due to apostasy, meaning inheritance would not be established between them.
2. If disbelief is established against her by Li‘ān, the required penalty should be execution, not flogging or stoning, as the punishment for apostasy differs from the Ḥadd for adultery.

Second Issue: The verse proves false the view that the occurrence of adultery invalidates the marriage contract. If he accuses her of adultery, his statement implies he acknowledges the marriage is void, similar to someone admitting his wife is his sister or a disbeliever. If this were true, separation would occur immediately upon accusation, before Li‘ān, which is contrary to consensus.

Third Issue: The Mu‘tazilah argued that the verse proves the slanderer deserves the curse of Allah if he is lying, meaning he is a fāsiq. Similarly, the adulterer and adulteress deserve the wrath of Allah and His punishment, otherwise, it would not be appropriate for them to curse themselves, just as one cannot ask God to curse children or the insane. If this is true, they deserve punishment, which is eternal (like reward). Since reward and punishment cannot coexist, their reward is nullified, meaning they cannot enter Paradise unless they repent, as the Ummah agrees that whoever enters Paradise from the accountable is rewarded for their obedience. This implies the eternal dwelling of sinners in Hellfire.

Our companions replied: We do not concede that being subject to Allah's wrath due to sin contradicts being accepted by Him due to faith. Even if we conceded that, we do not concede that only those deserving reward enter Paradise; the consensus is disputed.

Fourth Issue: The Mūlā‘inah (the wife performing Li‘ān) is specifically required to swear the fifth oath involving the wrath of Allah as an aggravation because she is considered the origin and source of immorality through her vanity and temptation. This is why she is mentioned first in the verse concerning flogging.

After the Almighty explained the rulings for slandering chaste women and spouses, which contain undeniable mercy and grace—as Allah provided a path for the man to achieve his goal, a path for her to avert punishment, and a path for both to repent and return—He then stated: "And were it not for the Grace of Allah upon you and His Mercy..." This magnifies His favor in what He explained regarding these rulings, and in what He postponed, preserved, and allowed repentance for. There is no doubt that there is an omission in the speech, as there must be an answer [to the implied condition], but leaving it unstated indicates a matter of immense significance that cannot be fully encompassed, and a silence that is more eloquent than speech.

Fifth Ruling: The Incident of the Slander (Ifk)

7. Indeed, those who brought forth the slander were a group among you. Do not think it to be evil for you; rather, it is good for you. For every man among them is the sin he has earned, and for him among them who took the lead in it is a great punishment.