Second: a witness who is not upright, whose testimony requires the taking of homicide oaths, according to Ashhab’s report from Mālik.

Third: whatever takes the place of a witness, such as a pledge, the lowering of the curtain, the defendant’s refusal to swear an oath, knowledge of the container and its fastening, and possession accompanied by a mere claim or by equally balanced evidence on both sides, and similar circumstances.

Fourth: testimony based on what is most probable in matters where certainty is unattainable.

Fifth: testimony based on hearsay concerning clientage, according to Ibn al-Qāsim’s position.

Section

Testimony that entails a legal ruling without establishing the right claimed falls into three categories:

First: testimony by witnesses who are not upright concerning entitlement to a particular item. According to Asbagh, this requires that the item be held pending resolution.

Second: testimony by two witnesses, or one male witness and two women, that something like the property being claimed was stolen from the claimant; or testimony by two witnesses whose uprightness has been impugned—concerning which they differ.

Third: testimony by one upright male witness and two women concerning divorce or manumission, which requires an oath according to all of them; or concerning prior dealings between the litigants, which requires an oath according to some of them; or concerning marriage, which averts the prescribed punishment; or concerning a claim to a gratuitous benefit, which requires an oath from the defendant according to those who do not allow judgment on the basis of an oath together with a witness, and when the claimant refuses to swear an oath alongside his witness.