Two were raised as it is a report for the subject which is 'the testimony between you' on the condition: 'the testimony between you is the testimony of two.' Or as it is a subject of 'the testimony between you' meaning: in what is imposed upon you that two should testify. And Al-Sha'bi read: 'the testimony between you' with tanween. And Al-Hasan read: 'the testimony' with the accusative and tanween meaning: 'let two testify.' And if a time for testimony is present. And 'when the bequest' is a substitute for it, substituting it is evidence of the obligation of the bequest, and that it is among the necessary matters that a Muslim should not take lightly or forget about. The presence of death: its nearing and the appearance of signs of reaching the appointed time from among you from your relatives. And from others from the strangers if you travel in the land, meaning if death occurs while traveling and there is no one from your tribe with you, then testify with two strangers regarding the bequest. The relatives are preferred because they know the conditions of the deceased and what is better for him. And it was said 'from you' meaning from the Muslims, and 'from others' meaning from the people of the dhimmah. And it was said: it is abrogated, and the testimony of a dhimmi on a Muslim is not permissible, but it was allowed in the early days of Islam due to the fewness of Muslims and the difficulty of finding them while traveling. And from Makhlouf: it was abrogated by His saying: 'And let two just men from among you testify.' And it was narrated that Badil ibn Abi Mariam, the freedman of Amr ibn Al-As, who was among the emigrants, went out with Adi ibn Zayd and Tamim ibn Aws - who were Christians - as traders to the Levant. Badil fell ill and wrote a document containing what he had, and he placed it in his belongings without informing his companions, and he instructed them to deliver his belongings to his family. He died, and they searched his belongings, and they took a silver vessel containing three hundred mithqals, engraved with gold, and they concealed it. The family of Badil found the document and demanded the vessel from them, but they denied it, so they brought them to the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him. It was narrated by Al-Tirmidhi from the narration of Ibn Ishaq from Abu Al-Nadr, who is Muhammad ibn Al-Sa'ib Al-Kalbi from Badar, meaning Abu Salih, the freedman of Umm Hani, from Ibn Abbas from Tamim Al-Dari, may Allah be pleased with them. He mentioned it and said: its chain of narration is not authentic, and it was narrated by Al-Bukhari and Abu Dawood in a summarized form. Then it was revealed: 'You shall detain them and make them swear after the prayer,' after the afternoon prayer, because it is the time when people gather. And from Al-Hasan: after the afternoon or noon prayer because the people of Hijaz used to sit for judgment after them. And in the hadith of Badil: when it was revealed, the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, prayed the afternoon prayer and called Adi and Tamim and made them swear by the pulpit, and they swore, then the vessel was found in Mecca, and they said:

Indeed, we have bought it from Tamim and 'Adi. And it is said: It is the prayer of the People of the Covenant, and they honor the Asr prayer. If you are in doubt, it is an objection between the oath and that which is sworn upon. The meaning is: If you are in doubt about them and suspect them, then swear them. It is said: If the two witnesses are meant, then the swearing of the witnesses has been abrogated. If the guardians are meant, then the swearing of them is not abrogated. And it is reported from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, that he would swear the witness and the narrator if they were suspected. As for the swearing of the witness, I have not seen it. As for the swearing of the narrator, it has been narrated by the three books of Sunnah: Al-Bazzar and Ibn Hibban from the narration of Asma' ibn al-Hakam al-Fazari from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, who said: 'If I hear a hadith from the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, that benefits me, Allah benefits me from it as He wills. And if someone from his companions narrates to me, I swear him. If he swears to me, I believe him.' He said: 'And Abu Bakr narrated to me - and Abu Bakr spoke the truth - the hadith.' Al-Tirmidhi said: It is good; we do not know it except from this way. Some narrated this hadith as a stopping, meaning the text without the story. And Al-Bazzar said: This Asma' is unknown. And the pronoun in 'MUSIBAH' refers to the oath. And in 'KAN' it refers to that which is sworn upon, meaning: We do not exchange the truth of the oath by Allah for a worldly gain, meaning we do not swear falsely for the sake of money, even if the one we swear for is close to us, meaning: This is their custom in their truthfulness and trustworthiness always, and that they are included under the saying of Allah, the Most High: 'Be steadfast in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or your parents or your relatives.' The testimony of Allah means the testimony that Allah has commanded to be preserved and honored. And from Al-Shabi, he stood for the testimony, then began with Allah with the elongation, by dropping the particle of the oath and replacing it with the interrogative letter. And it has been narrated from him without elongation, as Sibawayh mentioned that some of them omit the particle of the oath and do not replace it with the interrogative hamzah, saying: 'By Allah, it was such and such.' And it was read: 'Lamalathimeen' by omitting the hamzah and dropping its vowel on the lam and merging the noon of it, like his saying: 'Returned to the guardian.' If you say: What is the position of 'You shall imprison them'? I say: It is an initiation of speech, as if it were said after stipulating justice in them, so how do we act if we doubt them? It was said: 'You shall imprison them.' If you say: How did you interpret the prayer as the Asr prayer while it is unrestricted? I say: Since it was known to them with the swearing after it, that sufficed for the specification, as if I said about some of the jurists: 'When he prays, he begins in the lesson,' knowing that it is the Fajr prayer. And it is permissible that the lam is for the genus, and that the swearing after the prayer is intended to make the prayer a means for speaking the truth and a deterrent from lying and falsehood ('Indeed, prayer prohibits immorality and wrongdoing'). So if it is discovered, then if it is revealed that they have committed a sin, meaning they did something that necessitated sin, and they deserve to be said that they are among the sinners, then 'two others' means two other witnesses who take their place from those who have incurred sin, meaning from those who have wronged them, and they are the family of the deceased and his kin. In the story of Badil: When the treachery of the two men became apparent, two men from his heirs swore that it was the vessel of their companion, and that their testimony was more rightful than their testimony. And the two closest are more deserving of the testimony due to their kinship and knowledge of them. Their elevation is on: 'They are the two closest,' as if it were said: Who are they? It was said: The two closest. And it is said: They are a substitute for the pronoun in 'they stand' or from 'two others.'

It is permissible for them to be raised by right, meaning from those who have the right to summon the first two of them for testimony due to their knowledge of the reality of the situation. The term 'the first' has been read as a description of those who have the right over them, in the genitive case, or in the accusative case as praise. The meaning of 'the first' is to take precedence over outsiders in testimony because they are more deserving of it. It has been read: 'the first ones,' and it is likely that 'the first' should be clarified. Al-Hasan read: 'the first two,' and this is used as evidence by those who see the oath being returned to the claimant. Abu Hanifa and his companions do not see that, and their reasoning is that the heirs have claimed against the Christians that they have deceived them, so they swore an oath. When their falsehood became apparent, they claimed the purchase of what they concealed, and the heirs denied it, so the oath was upon the heirs for their denial of the purchase. If you say: What is the meaning of the reading of those who read 'the first two' in the active form, such as Abu and Ibn Abbas? I say: Its meaning is from the heirs who have the right over the first two among them for testimony, to present them for the purpose of testimony, and to expose the liars by them. That which has been previously stated about the ruling is more likely that the witnesses come in a manner similar to that incident with the testimony on its face, or they fear that the oaths of other witnesses might be returned after their oaths, so they would be exposed by the appearance of their falsehood as occurred in the story of Badil. And listen to the response and acceptance.