of so-and-so, it is not accepted, because handwriting can be imitated and forged. For this reason, the judge does not accept it. If knowing the handwriting were sufficient, knowing it from her [the woman] without testimony would have been sufficient. The judge [al-Qadi Abu Ya'la] mentioned that the testimony of the two witnesses is not valid unless they witness him writing it, and then they do not lose sight of it until they deliver the testimony. This is the school of al-Shafi'i. The correct view is that this is not a condition, for the letter of a judge does not require this, so this is even more appropriate. It may be that the owner of the letter does not know how to write and instead appoints someone to do it for him, and he may appoint someone who knows how to write. Rather, whenever he comes to them with a letter, reads it to them, and says, "This is my letter," it is permissible for them to testify to it.