Thabit and Ibn Muti' disputed over a house they held in common, taking the case to Marwan ibn al-Hakam. Zayd said, "I will swear on his behalf in my place." Marwan said, "No, by Allah, except at the places where rights are decided." It is said that Zayd began swearing that his right was indeed a right, while refusing to swear at the pulpit, and Marwan began to express his astonishment (10).

Our evidence is the saying of Allah the Almighty: {Then two others shall stand in their place from among those who have a prior claim against them, and they shall swear by Allah, "Our testimony is more truthful than their testimony"} (11). He did not mention a place, a time, nor any addition to the wording. The Prophet (peace be upon him) made Rukana swear regarding the divorce, saying: "By Allah, did you intend nothing but one?" He said, "By Allah, I intended nothing but one" (12). He did not intensify his oath with a time, a place, an increase in wording, or any of the other things we mentioned in the previous sections. Umar also swore for Ubayy when they brought their dispute to Zayd, and they were in Zayd's house (13). Uthman said to Ibn Umar: "Will you swear by Allah that you sold it and there was no defect in it that you know of?" (14). In what they mentioned (15), there is a restriction of these absolute texts and a contradiction of the consensus (ijma'). For what we have mentioned regarding the two Caliphs, Umar and Uthman, along with those who were present with them, was not objected to, and it is in a position of fame, so it is considered a consensus. As for His saying: {You shall detain them both after the prayer}, it was only regarding the People of the Book in the context of a will while traveling. This is a case in which analogy (qiyas) was contradicted in several places, including the acceptance of the testimony of the People of the Book against Muslims, the making of the two witnesses swear, and the making of their adversaries swear upon the discovery of their entitlement to the sin, while they do not practice it (18) at all, so how can they argue by it? And when he mentioned the oaths of...