Section: When testimony for adultery is complete, and the person testified against confirms it, the hadd does not fall away. Abu Hanifa said: It falls away, because a condition for the validity of the evidence (bayyina) is denial, and the confession is not complete. Our position is the words of Allah the Almighty: "If they bear witness, keep them in houses until death takes them or Allah ordains for them a way." The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) explained the "way" to be the hadd; thus, its execution is mandatory. Also, the evidence was completed against him, so the hadd became mandatory, just as if he had not confessed. Furthermore, the evidence is one of the two proofs for adultery, so it is not invalidated by the existence of another proof or a part of it, such as a confession. This is confirmed by the fact that the existence of a confession reinforces the evidence and conforms to it; it does not contradict it, so it does not undermine it, just like the verification (tazkiya) of witnesses and praising them. We do not concede the condition of denial; confession is only deemed sufficient in matters other than the hadd when it is found in its completeness. Here, it is not complete, so it is not permissible to suffice with it, and it is necessary to hear the evidence and act upon it. Based on this, if he confesses once or less than four times, that does not prevent hearing the evidence against him. And if the evidence was completed against him, and he made a full confession against himself, then retracted his confession, the hadd does not fall away from him due to his retraction, even though his statement suggests otherwise.

Section: If two witnesses testify and he confesses twice, the evidence is not complete, and the hadd is not mandatory. We know of no disagreement in this among those who require a confession of four times; this is the opinion of the adherents of reason (As-hab al-Ra'y), because one of the two proofs was not completed, and one cannot be combined with the other, like a partial confession of one time.

Section: If the evidence is completed, then the witnesses die or are absent, it is permissible to judge by it and to carry out the hadd. Al-Shafi'i stated this as well. Abu Hanifa said: It is not permissible to judge, as it is possible that they have retracted, and this is a doubt that wards off the hadd. Our position is that every testimony by which it is permissible to judge while the witnesses are present, is permissible while they are absent, like all other testimonies. The possibility of their retraction is not a doubt, just as if one were to judge by their testimony.

Section: If they testify to an ancient (old) act of adultery, or he confesses to it, the hadd is mandatory. Malik, Al-Awza'i, Al-Thawri, Ishaq, and Abu Thawr stated this.