regarding someone who sees his handwriting and his seal but does not remember the testimony; he said: He does not testify except to what he knows. And he said in another narration: He may testify if he recognizes his handwriting; how could testimony be otherwise? He also said in another place: If he recognizes his handwriting but does not memorize it, he should not testify unless it was copied before him and placed under his seal and in his secure keeping, then he may testify even if he does not memorize it. He also said: If he has poor memory, he should testify and write it down for himself. This is a third narration, which is that he testifies if it was written before him in his own handwriting and kept in his secure repository, and he does not testify if it was not as such, just like the judge in one of the two narrations: if he finds his verdict in his own handwriting under his seal, he enforces it, but he does not enforce it if it was not as such.

1888 - Issue; He said: (And that which the reports have converged upon, and the knowledge of which has settled in his heart, he may testify to, such as testimony regarding lineage and birth.)

This is the second type of hearsay (sama'), which is that which he knows through notoriety (istifadah). The scholars have reached a consensus on the validity of testimony regarding it in matters of lineage and birth. Ibn al-Mundhir said: As for lineage, I do not know of any scholar who has prohibited it, for if that were prohibited, its knowledge and the testimony regarding it would be impossible, as there is no way to know it with certainty otherwise, and direct observation (mushahadah) is not possible therein. If direct observation were required, no one would know his father, nor his mother, nor any of his relatives. And it has been said: Allah the Almighty said: {They know it as they know their sons} [Al-Baqarah: 146]. The scholars differed regarding that which testimony is permitted upon via notoriety, other than lineage and birth. Our companions said: There are nine things; marriage, absolute ownership, endowment (waqf) and its expenditure, death, manumission, clientage (wala'), guardianship, and dismissal. This is the view of Abu Sa'id al-Istakhri and some of the companions of al-Shafi'i. Others said: It is not permitted in endowment, clientage, manumission, and marriage, because testimony is possible therein by certainty, for it is a testimony to a contract, so it resembles other contracts. Abu Hanifa said: It is not accepted except in marriage and death, and it is not accepted in absolute ownership, because it is a testimony to wealth, so it resembles debt. His two companions (Abu Yusuf and Muhammad) said: It is accepted in clientage, like the case of 'Ikrimah, the client of Ibn 'Abbas. Our evidence is that it is generally difficult to testify regarding these things by observing them or observing their causes, so testimony regarding them via notoriety is permitted, just as in lineage. Malik said: We do not have anyone who testifies regarding the endowments of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) except through hearsay. Malik said: Hearsay in endowments and clientage is permissible. Ahmad said, in the narration of al-Marwudhi: Testify that the house of Bakhtan belongs to Bakhtan, even if he did not call you as a witness. It was said to him: Do you testify that so-and-so is the wife of so-and-so, when you did not witness the marriage? He said: Yes, if it is notorious, so I testify and say: Indeed, Fatimah is the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), and indeed Khadijah and 'Aishah were his wives, and everyone testifies to that without direct observation. If it is said: It is possible for him to have knowledge in these things by observing the cause. We say: The existence of the cause does not lead to certain knowledge that it is the cause, for it is possible that he bought what is not in the seller's possession, or hunted game that another had hunted and then escaped from him; even if that is imaginable, it is rare.