which men are cognizant, for less than two men. This is the view of al-Shafi'i, because agency is an establishment of authority to act. It is possible that al-Khiraqi’s statement is like the first narration, because agency in property is intended for the property itself, so the testimony of women along with a man is accepted in it, like sales and loans. If the two testify to his agency, then one of them says: "He has dismissed him," his agency is not established by that, because the agency of one of them is not established by that. If the witness to the dismissal is a man other than those two, the dismissal is not established by his testimony alone, because dismissal is not established except by that which agency is established by. Whenever one of the two witnesses to the agency recants and says, "He has dismissed him," the judgment is not rendered based on their testimony, because this is a withdrawal of testimony before passing judgment based on it. Therefore, it is not permissible for the judge to pass judgment based on what the witness has withdrawn from. If the judge passed judgment based on their testimony, and then one of them recanted, saying: "He dismissed him after he appointed him," his statement is not heeded, because the judgment has already been executed based on the testimony, and the dismissal was not established. If they both say: "He had dismissed him," the dismissal is established, because the testimony was completed regarding the dismissal, just as its completeness in the agency.

Section: If one of them testifies that he appointed him on Friday, and another testifies that he appointed him on Saturday, the testimony is not complete, because the appointment on Friday is not the appointment on Saturday, so their testimonies did not complement each other regarding a single act. If one of them testifies that he acknowledged his agency on Friday, and the other testifies that he acknowledged it on Saturday, the testimony is complete, because the two acknowledgments are an account of one contract, and it is difficult to gather witnesses to have him acknowledge before them in a single state, so it is permissible for him to acknowledge before each one individually. Similarly, if one of them testifies that he acknowledged the agency before him in Arabic, and the other testifies that he acknowledged it in a non-Arabic language, it is established. If one of them testifies that he appointed him in Arabic, and the other testifies that he appointed him