162 THE CONFLICT OF DOCTRINES IN TRADITIONS

undertook the expenses of maintenance himself (that is to say, as a charge on the treasury). This tradition is later than the two doctrines which it combines; its isnāds converge in Mālik's immediate authority Zuhrī.¹

There are two Iraqian opinions as to whether the ḥadd punishment ought to be applied in the mosque or not (Tr. I, 255 (b)). Abū Ḥanifa answers in the negative, and refers to a tradition from the Prophet; it occurs in Ibn Māja with an isnād through Ibn 'Abbās (see Comm. ed. Cairo). Abū Yūsuf (Kharāj, 109) has a tradition from 'Alī to the same effect, and a tradition in which the Successor Mujāhid declares: 'People used to disapprove of applying the ḥadd punishments in the mosque.' The same doctrine is ascribed to Ibrāhīm Nakha'ī (Āthār Shaib., quoted in Comm. ed. Cairo). The opposite opinion was held and applied in practice by Abū Ḥanifa's contemporary, the judge Ibn Abī Lailā. This was the old-established practice, in keeping with the original function of the mosque as the place for the assembly of the community and the transaction of its official business, and the other opinion was the result of a religious objection, based on the consideration of the dignity of the mosque. The tradition from Mujāhid represents it still as anonymous; it was projected back to Ibrāhīm as the eponym of the Iraqians, and provided with the authority of 'Ali and the Prophet. Mujāhid is the main transmitter from Ibn 'Abbās, and this explains the appearance of Ibn 'Abbās in the isnād.