Section

The author—may Allah have mercy on him—devotes this section to testimony based on testimony. Do not lose sight of the matter of one judge writing to another, for there are two related branches here: one concerning the ruling on a judge’s written communication to another judge, and the other concerning testimony itself, namely testimony based on testimony.

Testimony based on testimony is needed for the following reasons:

First: suppose that the witnesses are in a place far from the court, out in the desert, and are unable to go to the judge.

Second: the witnesses may be in the town, but ill and unable to attend; thus, testimony based on testimony is needed.

Third: the original witnesses may fear for their safety if they testify; thus, testimony based on testimony is needed.

Fourth: the person testified against may be a relative of the original witness, and the witness may not wish people to know that he has testified against him. He therefore delegates his testimony to someone else.

These are four reasons, though there may be others. The point is that need—and at times necessity—calls for testimony based on testimony.

An example of testimony based on testimony is for me to testify that Zayd is owed one hundred riyals by Amr. I then say to another person: “Testify that I testify that Zayd is owed one hundred riyals by Amr,” or, “Testify to my testimony against Amr.” The intended meaning is what matters; the wording is not important. Is testimony based on testimony permissible in every matter? The answer is no. Rather, it is subject to conditions. Hence, the author says: