Shurayh, al-Hasan, al-Shafi'i, and Abu Thawr permitted the testimony of each of them for the other, because it is a contract based on benefit, which does not prevent the acceptance of testimony, like a lease contract. There is another narration from Ahmad that aligns with their view. Al-Thawri and Ibn Abi Layla said: The testimony of a man for his wife is accepted, because there is no accusation of bias regarding him, but her testimony for him is not accepted, because his wealth and the increase in her right to maintenance are obtained through her testimony for him regarding property (2), so she is suspected of bias for that reason. As for our view, each of them inherits from the other without being a barrier, and one customarily has unrestricted use of the other's property, so their testimony for one another is not accepted, just as the son's testimony for his father is not. Furthermore, the affluence of the husband increases the maintenance of his wife, and the affluence of the wife increases the value of her private parts (3) owned by her husband. Thus, each of them benefits from their testimony for the other, and it is not accepted, like one's testimony for oneself. This is confirmed by the fact that the property of each of them is attributed to the other. Allah the Exalted says: "And abide in your houses" (4). And He says: "Do not enter the houses of the Prophet" (5). He attributed the houses to them at one time, and to the Prophet (peace be upon him) at another. He also said: "Do not turn them out of their houses" (6). And Umar said to the man who told him: "My slave stole my wife's mirror": There is no cutting (penalty for theft) upon him; your slave stole your property (8). This differs from a lease contract in all these aspects.

1899 - Issue: He said: (And the testimony of a brother for his brother is permissible).

Ibn al-Mundhir said: The scholars are in consensus that the testimony of a brother for his brother is permissible. This was reported from Ibn al-Zubayr (1). Shurayh, Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, al-Sha'bi, al-Nakha'i, al-Thawri, Malik, al-Shafi'i, Abu Ubayd, Ishaq, Abu Thawr, and the scholars of opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y) held this view. It was narrated in the work of Ibn al-Mundhir from al-Thawri that the testimony of any unmarriageable relative (dhi rahim mahram) is not accepted. And from Malik, that it is not accepted