by li'an, nor is zina confirmed by it; therefore, no hadd is incumbent upon her by it. Whoever slanders the son of a woman who has undergone li'an, saying, 'He is the son of zina,' shall be subjected to the hadd due to the report and the underlying meaning. The same applies if he says: 'He is the one for whom she was imprecated.' However, if he says: 'He is not the son of so-and-so,' referring to the one who performed the li'an, and he intends that he is legally disavowed from him, then there is no hadd upon him because he is truthful.

Section: As for if her zina is established through evidence, confession, or she was subjected to the hadd for zina, then there is no hadd upon her slanderer because he is truthful, and because the chastity (ihsan) of the slandered person is removed by the zina. If he says to one who committed zina during their state of polytheism, or to one who was a Magian and married a mahram relative after they became a Muslim: 'O adulterer,' then there is no hadd upon him when he clarifies it as such. Malik said: 'The hadd is upon him, because he slandered a Muslim whose zina was not established while in his Islam.' Our argument is that he slandered someone whose zina was established, which is similar to if his zina were established during Islam, and because he is truthful. What the words of al-Khiraqi entail is the obligation of the hadd upon him, due to his statement: 'Whoever slanders someone who was a polytheist and says, "I intended that he committed zina while he was a polytheist," no attention is paid to his statement, and he is subjected to the hadd.'

1574- Issue: He said: '(And if a woman is slandered, her child does not have the right to demand [the hadd], as long as the mother is alive).'

If her mother is slandered while she is dead, whether she was a Muslim or a disbeliever, free or a slave, the slanderer shall be subjected to the hadd if the son demands it, provided he is a free Muslim. As for if the mother is slandered while she is alive, her child does not have the right to demand it, because the right belongs to her; therefore, no one else may demand it, nor does anyone else stand in her place, whether she is under interdiction or not. This is because it is a right established for the purpose of seeking relief (tashaffi), so no one other than the one entitled to it stands in their place, just like in the case of qisas (retaliation). Her chastity is considered because the right belongs to her; thus, her chastity is considered, just as if she had no child. As for if she is slandered while she is dead, her child has the right to demand it, because it is a disparagement of his lineage, and because by slandering his mother, he attributes him to being a child of zina, and he does not merit this through the path of inheritance.