Ahmad said: I am not pleased with the testimony of the Jahmiyyah, the Rafidah, and the extremist Qadariyyah (27). The apparent opinion of al-Shafi'i, Ibn Abi Layla, al-Thawri, Abu Hanifah, and his companions is the acceptance of the testimony of the people of desires (ahl al-ahwa'). Sawwar permitted the testimony of people from Banu al-'Anbar who hold the view of Mu'tazilism. [Al-Shafi'i said] (28): Unless they are from those who consider it permissible to bear false witness for one another, like the Khattabiyyah, who are the followers of Abu al-Khattab (29). They testify to one another in support of their claims. The rationale for those who permitted their testimony is that it is a difference of opinion that does not expel them from Islam, similar to differences in secondary matters, and because their transgression does not necessarily indicate that they lie; for they have adopted those views as a matter of religion, believing it to be the truth, and they did not commit them while knowing them to be prohibited, unlike the transgression of actions. Abu al-Khattab said: It can be inferred from the permissibility of the testimony of the people of the covenant (ahl al-dhimmah) against one another that testimony is not rejected due to a transgression that one adopts as part of his religion regarding creed. It has been narrated (30) from Ahmad that it is permissible to relate reports from a Qadari if he is not an activist (da'iyah), and likewise is the case for testimony. As for us, it is one of the two types of transgression, and thus testimony is rejected because of it, just as it is for the other type; and because the innovator is a transgressor (fasiq), his testimony is rejected, based on the verse and the [legal] rationale. The fifth condition is that he must be alert and possess good memory (31) regarding that for which he is testifying; if he is heedless or known for frequent errors, his testimony is not accepted. The sixth condition is that he must possess a sense of honor (muru'ah). The seventh condition is the absence of impediments. We shall explain these conditions (31) in their appropriate places, if Allah the Almighty wills.

Section: The apparent import of the words of al-Khiraqi is that the testimony of a bedouin against one who is from the village/town, and the testimony of the people of the village against a bedouin, is valid if these conditions are met. This is the opinion of Ibn Sirin, Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i, and Abu Thawr. Abu al-Khattab chose this view. Imam Ahmad said: I fear that the testimony of a bedouin against a village dweller is not accepted. This implies that his testimony might not be accepted. This is the opinion of