Reappraising the Theory of Imposing Condition for Numerous Confessions in Proving Adultery

Adultery is proved only through numerous and frequent confessions (four times) and confession to less than that would not invoke legal punishment (ḥadd). This view is widely accepted by the Imāmī jurists. Among them, however, is Ibn ‘Aqīl ‘Ammānī who stands against the widely accepted view and believes that such crimes are provable by means of a single confession.By reappraising this issue and analyzing and evaluating the evidences of both views, the writer takes on a third theory. In brief, the writer believes that a single confession would suffice for proving the adultery provided that it meets all the conditions of effectiveness. Only the adultery leading to stoning (rajm), in terms of the narrations existing in this regard, requires four independent confessions in order to be proved. Besides enjoying a specific reason, the bulk of this theory is consistent with the generalities of the evidences like the overall rule "the confession of the wise on themselves is admissible", and the latter instance corresponds more with the "principle of precaution in bloodshed".