Man Lā Yaḥḍuruh al-Faqīh

رُوِيَ عَنْ يَاسِينَ اَلضَّرِيرِ عَنْ عَبْدِ اَلرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي عَبْدِ اَللَّهِ قَالَ: قُلْتُ لِلشَّيْخِ يَعْنِي مُوسَى بْنَ جَعْفَرٍ عَلَيْهِمَا اَلسَّلاَمُ أَخْبِرْنِي عَنِ اَلرَّجُلِ يَدَّعِي قِبَلَ اَلرَّجُلِ اَلْحَقَّ فَلاَ يَكُونُ لَهُ بَيِّنَةٌ بِمَا لَهُ قَالَ "فَيَمِينُ اَلْمُدَّعَى عَلَيْهِ فَإِنْ حَلَفَ فَلاَ حَقَّ لَهُ، وَ إِنْ رَدَّ اَلْيَمِينَ عَلَى اَلْمُدَّعِي فَلَمْ يَحْلِفْ فَلاَ حَقَّ لَهُ فَإِنْ كَانَ اَلْمَطْلُوبُ بِالْحَقِّ قَدْ مَاتَ وَ أُقِيمَتْ عَلَيْهِ اَلْبَيِّنَةُ فَعَلَى اَلْمُدَّعِي اَلْيَمِينُ بِاللَّهِ اَلَّذِي لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ لَقَدْ مَاتَ فُلاَنٌ وَ إِنَّ حَقَّهُ لَعَلَيْهِ فَإِنْ حَلَفَ وَ إِلاَّ فَلاَ حَقَّ لَهُ لِأَنَّا لاَ نَدْرِي لَعَلَّهُ قَدْ أَوْفَاهُ بِبَيِّنَةٍ لاَ نَعْلَمُ مَوْضِعَهُمْ أَوْ بِغَيْرِ بَيِّنَةٍ قَبْلَ اَلْمَوْتِ فَمِنْ ثَمَّ صَارَتْ عَلَيْهِ اَلْيَمِينُ مَعَ اَلْبَيِّنَةِ وَ إِنِ اِدَّعَى بِلاَ بَيِّنَةٍ فَلاَ حَقَّ لَهُ لِأَنَّ اَلْمُدَّعَى عَلَيْهِ لَيْسَ بِحَيٍّ وَ لَوْ كَانَ حَيّاً لَأُلْزِمَ اَلْيَمِينَ أَوِ اَلْحَقَّ أَوْ يَرُدُّ اَلْيَمِينَ فَمِنْ ثَمَّ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ لَهُ حَقٌّ".

It is narrated from Yasin Al-Dareer, from Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Abdullah, who said: I asked the Sheikh, meaning Imam Musa ibn Jafar Al-Kadhim (a.s), "Inform me about a man who claims a right against another man but has no evidence to prove his claim." Imam (a.s) said: "The defendant must take an oath. If he swears, then the claimant has no right. However, if the defendant refers the oath back to the claimant and the claimant refuses to swear, then he has no right either. If the person against whom the claim is made has died and evidence is presented against him, the claimant must take an oath by Allah (swt), there is no God but He (swt), that the deceased owed him the claimed right. If he swears, the claim is valid; otherwise, he has no right. This is because we do not know-perhaps the deceased settled the debt through evidence unknown to us or without evidence before his death. Therefore, an oath along with the evidence is required. If the claimant makes a claim without evidence, he has no right because the defendant is not alive. Had the defendant been alive, he would have been required to either take an oath, acknowledge the claim, or refer the oath back. Hence, no right is established for the claimant."

رَوَى شُعَيْبٌ عَنْ أَبِي بَصِيرٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اَللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ أَنَّهُ ذَكَرَ: "أَنَّ عَلِيّاً عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ أَتَاهُ قَوْمٌ يَخْتَصِمُونَ فِي بَغْلَةٍ فَقَامَتِ اَلْبَيِّنَةُ لِهَؤُلاَءِ أَنَّهُمْ أَنْتَجُوهَا عَلَى مِذْوَدِهِمْ لَمْ يَبِيعُوا وَ لَمْ يَهَبُوا وَ قَامَتِ اَلْبَيِّنَةُ لِهَؤُلاَءِ أَنَّهُمْ أَنْتَجُوهَا عَلَى مِذْوَدِهِمْ لَمْ يَبِيعُوا وَ لَمْ يَهَبُوا فَقَضَى عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ بِهَا لِأَكْثَرِهِمْ بَيِّنَةً وَ اِسْتَحْلَفَهُمْ ".

It is narrated by Shu'ayb from Abu Basir, from Abu Abdullah (a.s), that he mentioned: A group of people came to Commander of the Faithful Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s), disputing ownership of a mule. Both parties presented evidence. One group claimed that they had raised it at their feeding trough, had neither sold it nor gifted it, and provided witnesses to support their claim. The other group also claimed that they had raised it at their feeding trough, had neither sold it nor gifted it, and provided their own witnesses. Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s) ruled in favor of the group that had a greater number of witnesses and required them to take an oath to support their claim.

قَالَ أَبُو بَصِيرٍ: وَ سَأَلْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اَللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ عَنِ اَلرَّجُلِ يَأْتِي اَلْقَوْمَ فَيَدَّعِي دَاراً فِي أَيْدِيهِمْ وَ يُقِيمُ اَلْبَيِّنَةَ وَ يُقِيمُ اَلَّذِي فِي يَدِهِ اَلدَّارُ اَلْبَيِّنَةَ أَنَّهَا وَرِثَهَا عَنْ أَبِيهِ وَ لاَ يَدْرِي كَيْفَ أَمْرُهَا فَقَالَ "أَكْثَرُهُمْ بَيِّنَةً يُسْتَحْلَفُ وَ تُدْفَعُ إِلَيْهِ".

Abu Basir narrated that he asked Abu Abdullah (a.s), about a man who comes to a group of people and claims ownership of a house in their possession. He provides evidence, and the one in possession of the house also provides evidence that he inherited it from his father but does not know its exact history. Abu Abdullah (a.s), replied: "The one with more evidence is required to take an oath, and the house is given to him."

رُوِيَ عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ يَقْطِينٍ عَنْ أَبِي اَلْحَسَنِ اَلْأَوَّلِ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ قَالَ: "لاَ بَأْسَ بِالشَّهَادَةِ عَلَى إِقْرَارِ اَلْمَرْأَةِ وَ لَيْسَتْ بِمُسْفِرَةٍ إِذَا عُرِفَتْ بِعَيْنِهَا أَوْ يَحْضُرُ مَنْ عَرَفَهَا ".

It is narrated from Ali ibn Yaqtin, from Abu al-Hasan al-Awwal (a.s), who said: "There is no issue with bearing witness to a woman's acknowledgment (confession) without her unveiling her face, as long as she is identified either by her specific features or in the presence of someone who recognizes her."

وَ كَتَبَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ اَلْحَسَنِ اَلصَّفَّارُ رَضِيَ اَللَّهُ عَنْهُ إِلَى أَبِي مُحَمَّدٍ اَلْحَسَنِ بْنِ عَلِيٍّ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ: فِي رَجُلٍ أَرَادَ أَنْ يَشْهَدَ عَلَى اِمْرَأَةٍ لَيْسَ لَهَا بِمَحْرَمٍ هَلْ يَجُوزُ لَهُ أَنْ يَشْهَدَ عَلَيْهَا مِنْ وَرَاءِ اَلسِّتْرِ وَ يَسْمَعَ كَلاَمَهَا إِذَا شَهِدَ عَدْلاَنِ أَنَّهَا فُلاَنَةُ بِنْتُ فُلاَنٍ اَلَّتِي تُشْهِدُكَ وَ هَذَا كَلاَمُهَا أَوْ لاَ تَجُوزُ اَلشَّهَادَةُ عَلَيْهَا حَتَّى تَبْرُزَ وَ تُثْبِتَهَا بِعَيْنِهَا فَوَقَّعَ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ "تَتَنَقَّبُ وَ تَظْهَرُ لِلشُّهُودِ إِنْ شَاءَ اَللَّهُ".

It is narrated that Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Saffar (may Allah (swt) be pleased with him) wrote to Abu Muhammad al-Hasan ibn Ali (a.s) regarding a man who wanted to testify about a woman who was not his mahram (unmarriageable relative). He asked: "Is it permissible for him to testify about her from behind a curtain while hearing her speech, provided that two just witnesses testify that she is indeed so-and-so, the daughter of so-and-so, who is calling you to bear witness and this is her voice? Or is it not permissible to testify about her until she uncovers her face and is identified by her appearance?" The Imam (a.s) replied: "She should veil her face partially (wear a niqab) and appear before the witnesses, if Allah (swt) wills."

رَوَى إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ عَنِ اَلصَّادِقِ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: "تَبْطُلُ اَلشَّهَادَةُ فِي اَلرِّبَا وَ اَلْجَنَفِ وَ إِذَا قَالَ اَلشُّهُودُ إِنَّا لاَ نَعْلَمُ خَلِّ سَبِيلَهُمْ وَ إِذَا عَلِمُوا عَزِّرْهُمْ".

It is narrated by Isma'il ibn Muslim from Imam Jafar ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq (a.s) from his father Imam Muhammad ibn Ali Al-Baqir (a.s) that he said: "Testimonies are invalidated in cases of usury (riba) and bias (janaf). If the witnesses say, 'We do not know,' then release them. However, if they are found to have known, then they should be disciplined (ta'zir)."

وَ فِي رِوَايَةِ عَبْدِ اَللَّهِ بْنِ مَيْمُونٍ عَنِ اَلصَّادِقِ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ قَالَ: "جَاءَ رَجُلٌ مِنَ اَلْأَنْصَارِ إِلَى اَلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اَللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَ آلِهِ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اَللَّهِ أُحِبُّ أَنْ تَشْهَدَ لِي عَلَى نَخْلٍ نَحَلْتُهَا اِبْنِي قَالَ "مَا لَكَ وَلَدٌ سِوَاهُ" قَالَ نَعَمْ قَالَ "فَنَحَلْتَهُمْ كَمَا نَحَلْتَهُ" قَالَ لاَ قَالَ "فَإِنَّا مَعَاشِرَ اَلْأَنْبِيَاءِ لاَ نَشْهَدُ عَلَى اَلْجَنَفِ " ".

In a narration from Abdullah ibn Maymun from Imam Jafar ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq (a.s) from his father Imam Muhammad ibn Ali Al-Baqir (a.s), it is stated: "A man from the Ansar came to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and said: 'O Messenger of Allah (swt), I wish for you to bear witness for me regarding a palm grove that I have gifted to my son.' The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) asked: 'Do you have any children besides him?' He replied: 'Yes.' The Prophet (saws) then asked: 'Did you gift them as you gifted him?' He said: 'No.' The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: 'Indeed, we, the community of Prophets, do not bear witness to bias (janaf).'"

وَ فِي رِوَايَةِ أَبِي اَلْحُسَيْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ جَعْفَرٍ اَلْأَسَدِيِّ رَضِيَ اَللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ اَلصَّادِقُ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ: "لاَ تَشْهَدْ عَلَى مَنْ يُطَلِّقُ لِغَيْرِ اَلسُّنَّةِ".

In a narration from Abu al-Husayn Muhammad ibn Ja'far al-Asadi (may Allah (swt) be pleased with him), Imam Jafar ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq (a.s) said: "Do not bear witness for one who divorces contrary to the Sunnah."

قَالَ اَلصَّادِقُ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ: "إِذَا شَهِدَ رَجُلٌ عَلَى شَهَادَةِ رَجُلٍ فَإِنَّ شَهَادَتَهُ تُقْبَلُ وَ هِيَ نِصْفُ شَهَادَةٍ وَ إِنْ شَهِدَ رَجُلاَنِ عَدْلاَنِ عَلَى شَهَادَةِ رَجُلٍ فَقَدْ ثَبَتَ شَهَادَةُ رَجُلٍ وَاحِدٍ".

Imam Jafar ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq (a.s) said: "If a man testifies based on the testimony of another man, his testimony is accepted, and it counts as half a testimony. However, if two just men testify based on the testimony of one man, it is considered equivalent to the testimony of one man."

وَ رَوَى غِيَاثُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ: "أَنَّ عَلِيّاً عَلَيْهِ اَلسَّلاَمُ كَانَ لاَ يُجِيزُ شَهَادَةَ رَجُلٍ عَلَى شَهَادَةِ رَجُلٍ إِلاَّ شَهَادَةَ رَجُلَيْنِ عَلَى شَهَادَةِ رَجُلٍ".

Ghiyath ibn Ibrahim narrated from Imam Jafar ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq (a.s) from his father Imam Muhammad ibn Ali Al-Baqir (a.s): "Indeed, Imam Ali (a.s) would not validate the testimony of one man based on the testimony of another man, except if there were two men testifying based on testimony of one man."