and he testifies to what brings him a benefit, so he resembles one testifying for himself. If we were to accept his statement, no one would wish to invalidate the testimony of someone who testified against him without being able to do so, and thus rights would be lost, and the wisdom of the sharia regarding evidence would be nullified.

Section: The testimony of the mutawassimun (those who judge by physiognomy) is not accepted. This is when two travelers arrive and testify before a judge who does not know them; their testimony is not accepted. Malik said: He accepts them if he sees the signs of goodness in them, because there is no way to know their justice, and in withholding from accepting them there is a loss of rights, so it is necessary to refer to outward appearance (al-sima'). Our evidence is that their justice is unknown, so it is not permissible to judge by their testimony, like the two witnesses of the residents. What he mentioned is countered by the fact that accepting their testimony leads to judging by their testimony, [potentially] giving a right to one who is not entitled to it.

Section: Ahmad said: It is appropriate for the judge to inquire about his witnesses every little while, because a man changes from one state to another. Is this recommended or obligatory? There are two views regarding this; one is that it is recommended, because the original state is the continuation of what was, so it does not cease until the impugnment is proven. The second is that inquiry is obligatory whenever a period of time passes during which conditions might change, because a defect may occur, and that is according to what the judge perceives. The companions of al-Shafi'i have two views similar to these two.

Section: It is not for the judge to designate specific witnesses and accept none other than them, because Allah Almighty said: {And bring to witness two just men from among you}. Furthermore, this contains harm to people, because many of the incidents for which evidence is needed occur before those who are not designated. Whenever a person presents the testimony of non-designated witnesses, it is incumbent upon the judge to hear his evidence and examine the justice of his two witnesses; it is not permissible to reject them because they are from outside the designated group, for that contradicts the Book, the Sunnah, and the consensus. However, he may designate witnesses for people to call upon, so that they become independent of needing their attestation, and the judge becomes independent of investigating their states, which constitutes a form of alleviation, and they also attest to the justice of others whose integrity they know if they testify.

Section: There is no harm in admonishing the two witnesses, as it is narrated from Shurayh that he used to say to the two witnesses when