of your women" (9). The prohibition was not restricted to those in their guardianship (10). He also said: "And the wives of your sons who are from your own loins" (9). He also prohibited the wives of sons through breastfeeding, and the sons of sons. He said: "There is no sin upon you if you shorten the prayer if you fear that those who disbelieve will test you" (11). Shortening was permitted without fear. As for the male slave, there is no difference between him and the female slave; thus, specifying one of them establishes its ruling for the other, just as the statement of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace): "Whoever emancipates his portion of a jointly-owned slave" (12) has its ruling established for the female slave. Furthermore, the explicitly stated ruling (mantuq) is superior to it in any case. As for Abu Thawr, he opposed (13) the text of His statement: "And when they are protected (married), if they commit a shameful act, they shall have half of what the protected women have of punishment." He acted upon it where the text did not cover it, and he broke the consensus in mandating stoning for protected women, just as Dawud broke the consensus in completing the flogging for male slaves (14), and doubling the punishment of virgins over protected women.

Section: There is no banishment for a male slave or a female slave. This is the opinion of al-Hasan, Hammad, Malik, and Ishaq. Al-Thawri and Abu Thawr said: They are banished for half a year, due to His statement: "They shall have half of what the protected women have of punishment." Ibn Umar flogged a slave girl of his and banished her to Fadak (15). Regarding al-Shafi'i, there are two opinions corresponding to these two doctrines. Those who mandated it argued with the generality of his statement, peace be upon him: "And the virgin with the virgin: one hundred lashes and banishment for a year" (16). As for our evidence, it is the hadith mentioned in our argument, and it did not mention banishment within it, and if it were obligatory, he would have mentioned it; because it is not permissible to delay clarification.