and the witness his testimony, and he shall revert with [the liability of] damages upon whoever he reverted upon. If that is unavailable, the judge is not obligated by it, and he says to the possessor of the right: "If you wish, come with paper, and I shall write upon it for you, for it is proof for you, and I do not compel you to it."

Section: If two adversaries come before him, and one of them mentions that his evidence is in the bureau of judgment, the judge shall extract it from his bureau. If he finds it written in his own handwriting under his seal, and it contains his judgment, if he remembers it, he shall judge by it. If he does not remember it, he shall not judge by it. Ahmad textually stated this regarding testimony; some of our companions said it, and it is the opinion of Abu Hanifa, al-Shafi'i, and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan. It is narrated from Ahmad, may Allah be pleased with him, that he does judge by it, and this was the opinion of Ibn Abi Layla. This is what I saw from Ahmad regarding testimony, because when it is in his container under his seal, it cannot be anything but authentic. The reasoning for the first [position] is that it is the judgment of a judge that he does not know, so it is not permissible to execute it except with clear evidence, like the judgment of someone else, and because it is possible for it to be forged against him and his seal, and handwriting resembles handwriting. If it is said: "If he found in his father's register a right against a person, it is permissible for him to claim it and swear upon it." We say: This contradicts judgment and testimony, by the evidence of consensus that if he found a testimony in his father's handwriting, it would not be permissible for him to judge by it or testify to it, and if he found his father's judgment written in his handwriting, it would not be permissible for him to execute it. And because he can revert to himself regarding what he judged, since it is his own action, so that was taken into consideration. As for what his father wrote, he cannot revert to himself regarding it, so estimation is sufficient for it.

Section: If a man claims against the judge, "You judged for me with this right against my adversary," and the judge remembers his judgment, he shall execute it and obligate his adversary to what he judged against him. This is not judging by [personal] knowledge, but rather it is an execution of his previous judgment. If the judge does not remember it, and two witnesses testify before him regarding his judgment, he is obligated to accept it and execute the adjudication. This was the opinion of Ibn Abi Layla and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan. The judge said: