Section: If he says, 'Zana'ta' (you committed zina), pronounced with a hamza, Abu Bakr and Abu al-Khattab said: It is slander, because the common people understand nothing from that except slander, so it is slander, just as if he said, 'Zanayta' (you committed adultery). Ibn Hamid said: If he is a commoner, it is slander, because he intends nothing by it but slander. If he is a scholar of the Arabic language, it is not slander, because its meaning in Arabic is 'you emerged' (tala'ta), and the apparent meaning is that he intends its literal denotation. The followers of al-Shafi'i have two views on whether it is considered slander. If he says, 'Zana'ta in the mountain,' the ruling is the same as if he said, 'Zana'ta' without adding 'in the mountain.' Al-Shafi'i and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan said: It is not slander. Al-Shafi'i said: An oath is taken from him regarding that. Our evidence is that when it is a commoner who does not know its literal meaning in the language, his intent is restricted to slander, and nothing else is understood from it; thus, it must be slander, just as if he had explained it as slander or committed a solecism other than this.

Section: If he says to a man, 'Ya zaniyah' (O female adulteress), or to a woman, 'Ya zani' (O male adulterer), he is explicitly slandering them. This was chosen by Abu Bakr and is the school of al-Shafi'i. Ibn Hamid chose the view that it is not slander unless he clarifies it as such. This is the position of Abu Hanifa, because it is possible that by saying, 'Ya zaniyah,' he intends, 'O one who is an expert in adultery,' just as one says to a scholar, 'allamah' (great scholar), to one who narrates much, 'rawiyah' (great narrator), and to one who memorizes much, 'huffazah' (great memorizer). Our evidence is that what constitutes slander for one of the two genders constitutes slander for the other, such as his saying: 'Zanayta' (you committed adultery), with the ta' (t) being both fathah (vowel 'a') and kasrah (vowel 'i'), applying to both. Furthermore, this expression is an address to them and an indication toward them using the term for adultery, which suffices without the need for distinguishing by the feminine ta' (ta' al-ta'nith) or its omission. Likewise, if he says to a woman, 'O you, a male adulterer,' or to a man, 'O you, a female adulterous soul,' he is a slanderer. Their argument that he intends by this that he is an expert in adultery is not valid; for whatever acts as a noun for an action, when the ha' (h) is attached to it, it is for intensification, as in their saying: 'Huffazah' for intensification in memorization, and 'rawiyah' for intensification in narration. Likewise are 'humazah' (backbiter) and 'lumazah' (slanderer).