Ibn al-Hasan. Abu Hanifa said: If he makes an exception of a measured or weighed item, it is permitted; but if he makes an exception of a slave or a garment from a measured or weighed item, it is not permitted. Malik and Ash-Shafi'i said: An exception from a different genus is valid absolutely, because it has appeared in the Glorious Book and the language of the Arabs. Allah the Almighty said: "And when We said to the angels, 'Prostrate before Adam,' so they prostrated, except Iblis; he was of the jinn" (1). Allah the Almighty also said: "They will not hear therein ill speech or commission of sin (25) except [the saying of] 'peace, peace'" (26) (2). The poet said (3):

And a land where there is no companion Except for the wild calves and the white camels

Another said (4):

... He failed to answer, and there was no one in the encampment Except the marks of the dwelling, which I barely discern...

Our position is that an exception is the diverting of an utterance by the particle of exception from what it would have required had it not been there. It is said: It (5) is the removal of some of what is encompassed by the object of the exception, derived from the phrase "thanaytu fulanan an ra'yihi" (I diverted so-and-so from his opinion) when you turn him away from an opinion he was intent upon, and "thanaytu inana dabbati" (I turned the reins of my mount) when you turn it away from the direction it was heading. A thing of a different genus is not originally included in the speech; so if he mentions it, he has neither diverted the speech from its direction nor turned it from the course of its flow, thus it is not an exception. It is only called (6) an exception figuratively; in reality, it is a rectification (istidrak). "Illa" (except) here carries the meaning of "lakin" (but). This is what the scholars of the Arabic language have said, among them Ibn Qutaybah, and he narrated it from Sibawayh. Rectification does not come except after negation; this is why an exception from a different genus did not appear in the Glorious Book except after negation, and an affirmative sentence does not follow it unless there is a clause after it. Once this is established, there is no room for rectification in an acknowledgment, because acknowledgment is an affirmation of the item acknowledged. Therefore, if he mentions a rectification after it, it is void. If he mentions it after a clause, such as saying: "I owe him a hundred dirhams, but I have a garment upon him," then he is an acknowledger of something while claiming something (7) else, so his acknowledgment is accepted, and his claim is invalidated, just as if he had stated that explicitly without the wording of exception. As for the saying of the Almighty: "So they prostrated, except Iblis," Iblis was one of the angels, based on the evidence that Allah the Almighty did not command anyone other than them to prostrate. If he had not been of them, he would not have been commanded to prostrate, nor would he have been disobedient by leaving it, nor would Allah the Almighty have said regarding him: "So he was defiantly disobedient to the command of his Lord" (8). Nor would He have said: "What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" (9). If he were not commanded, then why would Allah have cursed him, cast him down, and driven him away? Allah the Almighty did not command prostration except to the angels. If they say: "Rather, the command encompassed the angels and those who were with them, so Iblis entered into the command by virtue of being with them," we say: Your reasoning has collapsed, for whenever Iblis (10) was included in the object of the exception and was commanded to prostrate, his exception is from the same genus, and this is apparent to whoever is fair-minded, if Allah the Almighty wills. Based on this, whenever he says: "I owe him a thousand dirhams, except a garment," the thousand becomes binding upon him, and the exception falls away, similar to if he said: "I owe him a thousand dirhams, but I have a garment upon him."

The second section: If he makes an exception of a physical object (ayn) from currency (wariq), or currency from a physical object, our companions differed regarding its validity. Abu Bakr Abd al-Aziz held that it is not valid, due to what we have mentioned. And this is the opinion of Muhammad ibn