His saying - glorified and exalted is He -: "O you who have believed, testimony among you when death approaches one of you at the time of the will is to be by two just men from among you or two others from outside. If you are in doubt, they should be detained after the prayer, and they should swear by Allah if you doubt, 'We will not exchange it for a price, even if he is a near relative, and we will not conceal the testimony of Allah. For then indeed, we would be among the sinners.'" "And if it is found that the two have committed a sin, then two others should stand in their place from those who have a right against the two. And they should swear by Allah, 'Our testimony is more deserving than their testimony, and we have not transgressed. For then indeed, we would be among the wrongdoers.'" Makkī ibn Abī Ṭālib - may Allah be pleased with him - said: These verses are among the most complex in the Qur'an, in terms of grammar, meaning, and ruling. Al-Qāḍī Abū Muḥammad - may Allah have mercy on him - said: This is the statement of one who has not experienced clarity in interpreting it; and that is evident from his book - may Allah have mercy on him -; and by it we seek help. We do not know of any disagreement that the reason for this verse is that Tamīm al-Dārī and ʿAdī ibn Badā' were both Christians; they traveled to Medina wanting to go to Sham for their trade. Al-Wāqidī said: They are brothers; and also arriving in Medina was Ibn Abī Māriyah, the freedman of ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ, wanting to trade in Sham. So they set out together; and Ibn Abī Māriyah fell ill on the way. Al-Wāqidī said: He wrote a will with his hand and concealed it in his belongings, and he instructed Tamīm and ʿAdī to deliver his belongings. After a while, they came to Medina with his belongings and delivered them; and his heirs from Banī Sahm found his will written. They missed some things he had written; so they asked them about it; and they said: We do not know; this is what we received for him. So they brought them to the Messenger of Allah - blessings and peace be upon him -; and the first verse was revealed. The Messenger of Allah - blessings and peace be upon him - swore them in the afternoon; and the matter remained for a while; then it was found in Mecca among his belongings a large vessel of silver, adorned with gold. It was said to the one who had it: From where did you obtain this vessel? They said: We bought it from Tamīm al-Dārī and ʿAdī ibn Badā'; so the matter was raised to the Prophet - blessings and peace be upon him -; and the second verse was revealed. The Messenger of Allah - blessings and peace be upon him - ordered two men from the heirs of the deceased to swear; Al-Wāqidī said: Abdullah ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ and al-Muṭṭalib ibn Abī Wadaʿah swore, and they were deemed deserving.

Ibn Abbas narrated that Tamim al-Dari said: "The people are absolved from these verses, except for me and except for Adi ibn Bad'ah; and he mentioned the story; except that he said: And he had with him a silver cup - intending it for the king - so I and Adi took it; we sold it for a thousand; and we divided its price; when I embraced Islam after the arrival of the Messenger of Allah - blessings and peace be upon him - in Medina, I felt guilty about that; so I went to his family and informed them of the news; and I paid them five hundred; so they rushed to Adi; and they brought him to the Messenger of Allah - blessings and peace be upon him -; and Amr ibn al-As swore; and another man with him; and five hundred were taken from Adi."

The judge Abu Muhammad - may Allah have mercy on him - said: The words of this story differ in the records; and what I have mentioned is the core of the matter; and it has not been established for Adi that he was a companion - as far as I know - nor has his Islam been confirmed; and some later scholars classified him among the companions; and they weakened his matter; and there is no reason for me to mention him among the companions.

As for the meaning of the verse from the beginning to the end, it is that Allah, the Exalted, informed the believers that His ruling regarding the testimony of the one making a will when death approaches him is that there should be the testimony of two just witnesses; if he is traveling - which is the act of traveling on the earth - and there is no one with him among the believers; then let him bring two witnesses from those who are present from the people of disbelief; and if they come and give testimony regarding his will, they should swear after the prayer that they did not lie; and they did not alter; and that what they testified to is true; they did not conceal the testimony of Allah; and judgment is made based on their testimony; if it is discovered - after that - that they lied; or betrayed; and similar to this which is a sin; then two men from the guardians of the one making the will in the journey should swear; and the two witnesses are fined what was revealed against them; this is the meaning of the verse according to the school of Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, and Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, and Yahya ibn Ya'mur, and Sa'id ibn Jubayr, and Abu Mijlaz, and Ibrahim, and Shuraih, and Ubaydah al-Salmani, and Ibn Sirin, and Mujahid, and Ibn Abbas, and others; they say: The meaning of His saying: "from you": from the believers; and the meaning of: "from others": from the disbelievers; some of them said: And that is because the verse was revealed and there was no believer except in Medina; and they used to travel in trade with the people of the Book; and the idol worshippers; and the various types of disbelievers.

And this mentioned group disagreed; and the school of Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, and Shuraih, and others is that the verse is definitive; and al-Tabari reported from al-Shabi that a man was at the point of death in Daqouqah; and he did not find anyone among the believers to witness for him regarding his will; so he brought two witnesses from the people of the Book; and they came to Kufa; and they went to Abu Musa al-Ash'ari and informed him; and they came with his inheritance; so Abu Musa al-Ash'ari said: This is a matter that did not occur after what was in the time of the Prophet - peace and blessings be upon him -; then he swore them after the Asr prayer; and he accepted their testimony.

Al-Tabari reported from Shuraih that he did not permit the testimony of a Christian or a Jew against a Muslim, except in the case of a will; and it is also not permissible in the case of a will unless they are traveling.

And the position of a group among those mentioned is that it has been abrogated by His saying, the Most High: "And let two witnesses from among you testify" [At-Talaq: 2]; and by what has been established by the consensus of the majority of people that the testimony of a disbeliever is not permissible.

And a group of scholars interpreted the verse differently; Al-Hasan ibn Abi al-Hasan said: And His saying, the Most High: "from among you" means from your kin; and your relatives; and His saying: "or two others from outside of you" means from outside of kin and tribe; and this was said by Ikrimah, the freedman of Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Shihab. They said: Allah commanded to have two just witnesses from among the relatives, as they are more knowledgeable about the state of the will and more aware of the form of justice in it. If the matter is in travel and no relatives are present, then two foreigners may testify; and if they testify and there is no suspicion, the testimony stands; but if there is suspicion that they have tilted the will towards someone or added or subtracted, they should swear after the 'Asr prayer, and their testimony will stand. If it is later discovered that there was a change from either of them and they are deserving of sin, then two relatives should swear, and the testimony of the first two is invalidated.

And some people said: The verse is abrogated; and a witness should not swear; and this is mentioned about Malik ibn Anas, Ash-Shafi'i, and all the jurists.

And Al-Tabari - may Allah have mercy on him - mentioned that this swearing in the verse is according to the circumstances; and that the first two witnesses only swear if there is suspicion; and if there is suspicion, then a claim is established against them, and they are obliged to swear. However, this suspicion is only in the case of betrayal from either of them; and if it is later found that they deserved sin, it is considered; if the matter is clear, they are liable without the oath of the two relatives; and if it is based on one witness or on evidence that necessitates their betrayal, or something similar that is like a witness, it is held against the wrongdoer; and the claimants swear along with what has been established for them from a witness or evidence.

Abu Muhammad the judge - may Allah have mercy on him - said: This is the disagreement regarding the meaning of the verse and the form of its ruling; and let us now return to the grammatical analysis and discuss word by word from the verse; and let us aim for the beneficial saying; for the people have mixed up the interpretation of this verse severely; and mentioning that and responding to it is lengthy; and in clarifying the truth that the minds accept with conviction is convincing; and Allah is the One sought for help.

His saying: "The testimony between you"; some said: The testimony here means: "the presence"; and Al-Tabari said: The testimony means: "the oath"; and it is not that which is performed.

The judge Abu Muhammad - may Allah have mercy on him - said: All of this is weak; and the correct view is that it is the testimony that is preserved to be given; and their raising is at the beginning; and the evidence in His saying: "Two"; Abu Ali said: The estimation is: "The testimony among you in your wills is the testimony of two"; so the added part was omitted; and the part to which it is added took its place; and another estimated it first; as if he said: "Two are establishing the testimony among you".

And the testimony was added to "between"; for the sake of expansion in the circumstance; so that it is treated like nouns; as He, the Most High, said: "Indeed, you have been severed between you" [Al-An'am: 94].

Al-A'raj, Al-Sha'bi, and Al-Hasan read: "Testimony" with tanween; "between you" with نصب; and the parsing of this reading is in accordance with the parsing of the reading of the seven; and it was narrated from Al-A'raj and Abu Haywah: "Testimony" with نصب and tanween; "between you" in نصب; Abu Al-Fath said: The estimation is: "To establish a testimony between you are two".

And His saying, the Most High: "When death approaches one of you"; its meaning is: When the approach of presence is near; otherwise, if death were to be present, no dead person would witness; and this is like His saying, the Most High: "So when you recite the Qur'an, seek refuge with Allah" [An-Nahl: 98]; and like His saying: "When you divorce women, divorce them" [At-Talaq: 1]; and this is frequent; and the doer in "when": is the source which is "testimony"; and this is on the condition that you make "when" in the place of "when"; it does not need a response; and you may make "when" - in this verse - one that needs a response; but it has been sufficed with what preceded in His saying: "The testimony among you"; as the meaning is: "When death approaches one of you, it is necessary that he should witness".

And His saying: "At the time of the will" is a time circumstance and the doer in "approaches"; and if you wish, you can make it a substitute for "when"; Abu Ali said: And you can attach it to "death"; it is not permissible to work in it with "testimony" because if it worked in a time circumstance, it would not work in another circumstance of it.

And His saying: "Two just men"; is a description for His saying "two"; and "from you": is also a description; after a description.

And His saying, the Most High: "From others than you"; is a description for "two others"; and "you travel in the land"; its meaning is: "You traveled for trade"; you say: "I traveled in the land" meaning: I traveled for trade; and "I traveled the land": I went in it to fulfill a person's need; and this travel is what a believer may lack two believers in; therefore, it was specifically mentioned; because the travel of jihad hardly lacks two believers.

Abu Ali said: His saying: "You detain them"; is a description for "two others"; and the interruption between the described and the description is with His saying: "If you are"; to "death"; and the interruption indicates that the recourse to two others from outside the faith; or kinship; according to the differences of scholars in that; is only with the necessity of travel; and the occurrence of death in it; and the response to "if" has been sufficed with what preceded from His saying: "Or two others from among you".

The majority of scholars said: The prayer here is the 'Asr prayer; because it is the time of people gathering. The Prophet - blessings and peace be upon him - mentioned it among those who swore about their goods; and he commanded the li'an in it. Ibn Abbas - may Allah be pleased with him - said: It is only after the prayer of the dhimmis; as for the 'Asr, there is no sanctity for it according to them.

And the 'fa' in his saying: ﴿ "Then they both swear"; ﴾ is a conjunction of one sentence to another; because the meaning is complete in his saying: ﴿ after the prayer ﴾. Abu Ali said: And if you wish, you may not consider the 'fa' as a conjunction of one sentence to another; but you may make it a consequence; like the saying of Dhī al-Rummah:

And the person of my eye is sometimes exposed to water ∗∗∗ and sometimes it appears and sometimes it gathers and drowns.

Its estimation according to them is: If it is exposed, it appears; so likewise if you restrain them, they will swear.

And his saying: ﴿ "If you doubt"; ﴾ is a condition that does not allow the swearing of the two witnesses except by it; and whenever there is no doubt or disagreement, there is no oath. However, it appears from the ruling of Abu Musa that the swearing of the dhimmis is completed by the oath, and the bequest is executed for its people; even if there is no doubt. And this doubt - according to those who do not see the verse as abrogated - arises in cases of betrayal; and in the accusation of bias towards some of the bequeathed over others; and the oath occurs with that according to him. As for those who see the verse as abrogated, no swearing occurs except when there is doubt in betrayal; or transgression in some form of transgression; so the swearing according to him is based on the claim against a denier; not as a completion of the testimony.

And the pronoun in the saying of the two swearers: ﴿ We do not buy with it a price ﴾ refers back to the oath; and it is possible that it returns to the name of Allah, Blessed and Exalted. Abu Ali said: It returns to the distortion of the testimony; and his saying: ﴿ "We do not buy"; ﴾ is a response to what is necessitated by his saying: ﴿ "Then they both swear by Allah"; ﴾ because the oath and similar matters are received in the same way as oaths are received; and the estimation of "with it a price"; means: with a price; because a price is not bought; and likewise His saying, Blessed and Exalted: ﴿ They exchanged the verses of Allah for a small price ﴾ [At-Tawbah: 9]; its meaning is: with a price; and it is not permissible that "we buy"; in this verse means "we sell"; because the meaning would invalidate it; even if that exists in the language in other contexts.

And He specified the relatives by mention because the custom is the inclination of people towards their relatives; and their ease in benefiting from them what is not easily obtained.

And His saying, Blessed and Exalted: ﴿ And we do not conceal the testimony of Allah ﴾; He added "testimony"; to Himself, Blessed and Exalted; as He is the one commanding its establishment; and prohibiting its concealment.

Al-Hasan and Al-Sha'bi read: "And do not conceal"; with the mīm being in the jasm state. And Ali ibn Abi Talib, and Naim ibn Maysarah, and Al-Sha'bi - contrary to him - read: "Testimony"; with tanween; "Allah"; was in the accusative case with "we do not conceal"; as if the speech is: "And we do not conceal Allah's testimony". Al-Zahrawi said: It is possible that the meaning is: "And we do not conceal testimony, by Allah"; then the waw was omitted; and the verb was placed in the accusative for brevity. And Yahya ibn Adam narrated from Abu Bakr ibn Ayyash: "Testimony"; "Allah"; by cutting the alif; without elongation; and lowering the hā. And it was also narrated from Al-Sha'bi and others that he used to pause on the hā of "testimony"; with silence; then he would cut the written alif without elongation; as previously mentioned. And it was narrated from him that he used to read "Allah"; with the elongation of the alif of questioning in both ways; I mean with the hā of "testimony" being silent; and moving it with tanween in the accusative case. And this reading, which is the tanween of testimony; and the elongation of the alif of questioning was also narrated from Ali ibn Abi Talib - may Allah be pleased with him -; Abu al-Fath said: As for the silence of the hā of "testimony"; and pausing on it; and resuming the oath; it is a good way; because resuming the oath at the beginning of the speech is more respectful and carries more awe than being included in the presentation of the saying. And Abu Abdur-Rahman Al-Sulami; and Abdullah ibn Habib; and Al-Hasan Al-Basri - as mentioned by Abu Amr Al-Dani - read: "Testimony"; with the accusative and tanween; "Allah"; with the elongation in the hamzah of questioning which is a substitute for the letter of the oath "that"; with the elongation of the alif of questioning as well; it entered for the purpose of stopping or confirming for the souls of the two who are swearing; or for those who addressed them. And Ibn Muhaisn read: "For the wrongdoers"; with idgham.

And His saying, the Exalted: "If it is discovered"; is a metaphor for what is revealed about His knowledge after its concealment; by agreement; and after it was not expected; and was not intended; and this is as it is said: "Upon the knowledgeable, you have fallen"; and "You have fallen upon such and such". Abu Ali said: And the sin here is the name of the thing taken; because its taker is sinful by taking it; thus it was named sinful; just as what is taken unjustly is called "wrong". Sibawayh said: The wrong is the name of what has been taken from you; and likewise this taken is named by the name of the source.

Qadi Abu Muhammad - may Allah have mercy on him - said: And what appears here is that the sin is in its essence; and it is the ruling that follows them; and the relationship that they obtain after their committing the alteration of the testimony; or for taking what does not belong to them; or something like that.

And "they deserved"; its meaning is: they warranted it from Allah; and they were worthy of it; so this is deserving in its essence; it is the true warranting; and if the sin is the thing taken, it was not said about it "they deserved"; because they wronged; and betrayed in it; for they only deserved a place of evil and the ruling of disobedience; and that is the sin.

And His saying, exalted is He: "So two others"; means: if it is found that they are corrupt; the first two are by the right hand and the establishment of the case is two others from the people who are the guardians of the deceased; and their share is due upon them; or their appearance; or their wealth; or whatever you wish from these estimates.

Ibn Kathir, Nafi', Abu Amr, and Al-Kisai read: "is due" with the 'ta' being pronounced; and "the first two"; in the dual form of "first"; and Qura read from Ibn Kathir: "was due" with the 'ta' being opened; "the first two"; in the dual form; and likewise Hafs narrated from Asim; and Hamzah and Asim - in the narration of Abu Bakr - read: "is due" with the 'ta' being pronounced; "the first" in the plural form of "first"; and Al-Hasan ibn Abi Al-Hasan read: "was due" with the 'ta' being opened; "the two first"; in the dual form of "first"; and Ibn Sirin read: "the first two"; in the dual form of "first"; and their accusative form is based on the estimation: the first two, so the first two; in rank and proximity.

Abu Ali said - in the reading of Ibn Kathir; and those with him -: the elevation of "the first two" cannot be without it being at the beginning; and it has been delayed; so it is as if in estimation: "and the first two regarding the deceased are two others who will stand"; thus the statement comes like their saying: "I am Tamimi"; or it could be a news of a beginning that is omitted; as if it is: "so two others stand in their place, they are the first two"; or it could be a substitute for the pronoun in "they will stand"; or it could be ascribed to "is due"; and Abu Al-Hasan permitted in it another thing; which is that "the first two" is an attribute for "two others"; because when it was described, it was specified; thus it was described for the sake of the specification that it has.

The judge Abu Muhammad - may Allah have mercy on him - then said: Then Abu Ali said - after this speech of his -: As for what is ascribed to "is due"; it cannot be without it being the shares; or the will; or the sin; and what is taken is called "sin"; as it is said regarding what is taken from the oppressed: "oppression"; and for this reason it is permissible that "is due" be ascribed to it; then he said - after some words -: If you say: Is it permissible for "is due" to be ascribed to "the first two"? The answer is: That is not permissible; because what is due is only the will; or something from it; as for the first two regarding the deceased, it is not permissible for them to be due; so "is due" cannot be ascribed to them.

The judge Abu Muhammad - may Allah have mercy on him - said: In this speech there is consideration; and it is permissible to attribute "istahiqq" to "al-awlayn"; and that is because Abu Ali carried the term of entitlement to mean that it is real; so he did not permit it except where real entitlement is valid in the case; and only the share and the like are truly entitled; and the term entitlement in the verse is merely a metaphor; and it does not mean "they have truly deserved a sin"; for the entitlement here is real; and in his saying: "istahiqq"; it is metaphorical; because there is no basis for this entitlement except the dominance over the situation; by virtue of the isolation of this deceased; and his lack of kinship; or for his people of his religion; so "istahiqq" here is like saying to an oppressor who wrongs you: "This has truly been taken from me due to his oppression"; so you liken him to the truly entitled one; since he has overstepped his bounds; and taken possession; and likewise it is said: "So-and-so has truly deserved from him his time of such work"; if that matter has dominated him over his times; and thus is "istahiqq" in the verse in any case; and if it is attributed to the shares and the like; because his saying: "istahiqq" is a connection to "alladhina"; and "alladhina" refers to the category opposing the two unjust witnesses; for the witnesses have never truly deserved anything in this case of real entitlement; but only imagined themselves as the entitled; so we can estimate "al-awlayn" as a beginning; and it has been delayed; so "istahiqq" can be attributed - in this way - to the wealth; or the share; and the like; in the sense of metaphor; and likewise if "al-awlayn" is the news of the beginning; and likewise in place of the pronoun in "yaquman"; and on the description; according to the doctrine of Abu al-Hasan; and we can estimate the words to mean: from the group that has been absent; and their right was; and the intended is that their guardian should be present; so when they were absent and this testator isolated himself; this situation became entitled - and these two witnesses are not of the people of the religion - to the guardianship; and the matter of the two regarding this group; then the action was built for the object on this meaning in brevity; and this purpose is strengthened by the fact that the action is transitive with "ala"; when it was with ability; and carrying its form on the situation; and it is not said: "istahiqq minhu; or fihi"; except in the case of real entitlement in its essence; but as for "istahiqq alayh"; it is said in the context of possession; and dominance; and the metaphorical entitlement; and the pronoun in "alayhim"; refers - in any case in this reading - to the group that contradicts the two sinful witnesses; and it is possible that it returns to the category of those from whom is the witness of falsehood; as we will clarify now - if Allah wills - in another reading.

As for the narration of Qura from Ibn Kathir: "istahiqq"; with the opening of the ta, it is possible that "al-awlayn" is a beginning; or a news of a beginning; and the meaning would be: "in the group or the tribe that has truly deserved the case against this category of the witness of falsehood"; and the pronoun in "alayhim"; refers to the category of the two witnesses of falsehood.

(p-291) The judge Abu Muhammad - may Allah have mercy on him - said: In this interpretation, there is a transformation; and a lifting; and a craft in 'those who'; and upon this is based the speech of Abu Ali - in the book 'Al-Hujjah'; and it is possible that the meaning is: 'from those upon whom the standing is deserved'; and the correct interpretation of the two interpretations is that the pronoun in 'upon them' refers back to 'those'; 'the two first'; which is raised by 'deserved'; and this is derived from three meanings:

One of them is that the intended meaning of those who deserved is their wealth; and their inheritance: the witnesses of falsehood; so he named the witnesses of falsehood 'the two first'; in that he made their state the first like that; meaning he made their non-existence more deserving of this deceased; and his inheritance; thus he acted in it.

And the second meaning is that the intended meaning of the group is: those upon whom it is right that the two first be from them; so 'deserved' means: 'was right'; and 'was obligatory'; as you say: 'this building has deserved'; meaning: 'has been right'; like 'was amazed'; and 'was astonished'; and the like.

And the third meaning is that 'deserved' is made to mean 'strived'; and 'was required'; so it is as if the speech is: 'two others from the people who were present from them; thus they deserved their right upon them'; meaning: they deserved it for them; and they strove in it; and they required it by their oaths; and their closeness; and the like of this meaning which is given by the transitive use of 'upon'; the poet's saying:

I strive for the tribe of Banu Malik ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ every person in his affair strives.

And likewise in the hadith: 'I used to tend their sheep'; in some narrations of the hadith of the three who one of them mentioned his righteousness towards his parents; when the rock fell upon them.

(p-292) And as for the reading of Hamzah, its meaning is: 'from the people upon whom their matter was deserved'; meaning: they were overpowered by it; then he described them as the first; meaning: in mention in this verse; and that is in His saying: 'two just men from among you'; then after that he said: 'or two others from outside of you'.

And His saying, the Exalted: 'then they both swear by Allah'; means the two others who take the place of the witnesses of alteration; and their saying: 'our testimony is more rightful than their testimony'; meaning: 'for what we informed of; and we mentioned it from the text of the case; it is more rightful than what they mentioned first; and they altered in it; 'and we did not exceed the limit' in our saying this; nor did we add to the limit.' And their saying: 'if we do, then we are among the wrongdoers'; is a disavowal in the form of astonishment and abhorrence of wrongdoing; and wrongdoing is placing something in a place other than its proper place.