of the author, I may not testify; rather, I testify to the man’s testimony. But Shaykh al-Islam and his grandfather, al-Majd—may Allah have mercy on them both—held that one may testify to matters established through widespread report on the basis of the statement of one trustworthy person. Thus, he may say, “This is so-and-so, son of so-and-so.” We have previously mentioned this regarding identification: Shaykh al-Islam—may Allah have mercy on him—holds that identification by one person is permissible.

His statement: “and death.” A funeral procession passes by, and I ask, “Who is this?” They reply, “This is so-and-so, son of so-and-so.” May I testify that so-and-so, son of so-and-so, has died? It is permissible. Was I present with this man at the moment of death, when his soul departed? No; rather, I came to know it through widespread report.

His statement: “and unrestricted ownership.” Ownership is of two types: restricted ownership and unrestricted ownership. Restricted ownership is when I testify that this belongs to so-and-so and that he bought it from so-and-so. Widespread report is not sufficient for this. Unrestricted ownership is when I testify that this belongs to so-and-so, and it is commonly known that this is his house. Was I present on the day he bought it? Certainly not. There remains the possibility that he is merely renting it. Yet it is widely known among all the people—among the residents of the neighborhood and perhaps others—that this house belongs to so-and-so; so I may testify to that, even in court.

Likewise, regarding possession of this house: for example, a person has been in this house for some time and exercises control over it