the hadd; therefore, its disclosure is considered necessary. Some scholars said: It is permissible for witnesses to look at that [the private parts] of them, in order to establish the testimony against them so that the deterrent of the hadd may be attained. If they testify that they saw his phallus having disappeared [in her vagina] (11), it is sufficient, and the simile is by way of emphasis. As for their identifying the person who was committed adultery with or the adulterer, if the testimony is against a woman, and the place of the adultery, the Qadi stated that it is a condition, so that the woman might not be one whose marital status is a matter of disagreement, and mention of the place is considered so that the testimony of one of them is not regarding a different act than the one the other testified to. For this reason, the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) asked Ma'iz, saying: "You have confessed four times, so with whom?" (12). Ibn Hamid said: It is not necessary to mention these two, because mentioning them is not considered in confession, nor did their mention appear in the authentic hadith, and there is no mention of the place in the hadith of testimony regarding the stoning of the two Jews. Furthermore, that for which the mention of the time is not required, the mention of the place is not required for it either, like marriage, and what they mentioned (13) is invalidated by the time. The seventh condition is the arrival of all the witnesses in one single session (majlis). Al-Khiraqi mentioned it, saying: If four people come separately while the judge is sitting in his court, he should not rise before their testimony. If some of them arrive after the judge has risen, they are slanderers, and the hadd is upon them. Malik and Abu Hanifa said this. Al-Shafi'i, al-Batti, and Ibn al-Mundhir said: This is not a condition, due to the saying of Allah the Almighty: "Why did they not produce four witnesses for it?" (14). The session was not mentioned, and He said: "And summon four witnesses from among you against them, and if they testify, then confine them to the houses" (15). Also, because every testimony that is acceptable if they are in agreement is accepted if they are separated in different sessions, like all other testimonies. As for our evidence, it is that Abu Bakra, Nafi', and Shibl ibn Ma'bad testified before Umar against al-Mughira ibn Shu'ba regarding adultery, but Ziyad did not testify, so he administered the hadd to the three (16). If