Tawḍīḥ al-Aḥkām - Abd Allah al-Bassam - (7/198)

Tawḍīḥ al-AḥkāmAbd Allah al-Bassam

testimony is inadmissible.

Sharḥ al-Iqnaʿ states: “The impediments stand between a testimony and its objective, for the whole purpose of testimony is that it be accepted and judged by. The principal impediments are as follows:

First – Betrayal (khiyāna). The traitor is the very opposite of the trustworthy. Betrayal may relate to the rights of Allah Most High, by neglecting the obligatory duties He has laid down. Allah says: ‘O you who believe, do not betray Allah and the Messenger, nor betray your trusts’ (Al-Anfal 8:27). Anyone who neglects something Allah has commanded, or perpetrates something He has forbidden, is not trustworthy; he is a traitor, and his testimony is not valid.

Betrayal may also concern what people entrust to him of deposits and trusts. If he lacks the god-fearing restraint that would keep him from squandering or withholding them, one cannot feel secure about his word, and his testimony is therefore invalid.

Rawḍ al-Murbiʿ and its marginalia state: “Sixth: uprightness (ʿadāla), which is the performance of obligatory acts and the avoidance of prohibitions.”

Ibn Rushd said: “Muslims agree that uprightness is a condition for accepting a witness’s testimony,” citing the verse, “whom you approve as witnesses” (Al-Baqarah 2:282).

The Shaykh said: “The rejection of the testimony of one known to lie is unanimously agreed upon by the jurists.”

Uprightness, in every time, place, and community, is judged according to that community’s standards. Thus, the acceptable witness among any people is the one deemed upright by them; were he found among another community, his uprightness might take a different form. By this criterion judgments among people become possible.

Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm remarked: “The conditions for testimony are applied according to what is feasible.”

Second – The bearer of rancor (dhū al-ghamar). He is the spiteful person filled with enmity and hatred; his testimony is not accepted against one toward whom he harbors animosity and malice.

Rawḍ al-Murbiʿ and its marginalia state: “The testimony of an enemy against his enemy is not admissible,” and it

تقبل شهادته. قال في شرح الإقناع: الموانع تحول بين الشهادة ومقصودها؛ فإنَّ المقصود منها قبولها، والحكم بها، ومن الموانع ما يلي: الأوَّل: الخيانة: فالخائن ضد الأمين، وهي إمَّا أنْ تكون خيانة في حقوق الله تعالى؛ من تضييع ما افترض الله عليه من الواجبات؛ فقد قال تعالى: ﴿يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَخُونُوا اللَّهَ وَالرَّسُولَ وَتَخُونُوا أَمَانَاتِكُمْ﴾ [الأنفال: ٢٧]؛ فمن ضيَّع شيئاً ممَّا أمر الله تعالى به، أو ارتكب شيئاً ممَّا نهي عنه، فليس بأمين، وإنَّما هو خائن، لا تصح أنْ تقبل شهادته. وإمَّا أنْ تكون الخيانة فيما ائتمنه النَّاس عليه من الودائع، والأمانات؛ فلا يوجد عنده تقوى تمنعه من الحفاظ عليها وأدائها، فهذا لا يحصل الاطمئنان إلى خبره؛ فلا تصح شهادته. قال في الروض المربع وحاشيته: السَّادس: العدالة، وهي أداء الفرائض، واجتناب المحارم. قال ابن رشد: اتفق المسلمون على اشتراط العدالة في قبول شهادة الشاهد؛ لقوله تعالى: ﴿تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاءِ﴾ [البقرة: ٢٨٢]. قال الشيخ: رَدَّ شهادة من عرف بالكذب متفق عليه بين الفقهاء. والعدل في كلِّ زمانٍ ومكانٍ وطائفةٍ بحسبها، فيكون الشَّاهد في كلِّ قومٍ مَنْ كان ذا عدل فيهم، وإنْ كان وجوده في غيرهم، لكان عدله على وجهٍ آخر، بهذا يمكن الحكم بين النَّاس. وقال الشيخ محمد بن إبراهيم: شروط الشهادة تعتبر حسب الإمكان. الثاني: ذو الغَمَر: هو الحاقد ذو الشحناء والبغضاء؛ فلا تقبل شهادته على من يضمر له عداوة وشحناء. قال في الروض المربع وحاشيته: ولا تقبل شهادة عدوٍّ على عدوه؛ وهو