The testimony of a woman is half that of a man

 

The source of the doubt that its instigators believed that Islam had diminished the capacity of women, by making their testimony half that of men: [But if there are not two men, then a man and two women] is the confusion between “testimony” and “witnessing” that this noble verse speaks of. The testimony that the judiciary relies on to discover justice based on evidence, and extract it from the folds of the opponents’ claims, does not take masculinity or femininity as a criterion for its truthfulness or falsehood, and thus its acceptance or rejection. Rather, its criterion is the judge’s assurance of the truthfulness of the testimony regardless of the gender of the witness, whether male or female, and regardless of the number of witnesses. If the judge’s conscience is assured of the appearance of evidence, he should rely on the testimony of two men, or two women, or a man and a woman, or a man and two women, or a woman and two men, or one man or one woman. There is no effect of masculinity or femininity in the testimony that the judiciary rules on based on the evidence presented to it.
As for the verse of Surat Al-Baqarah, which says: [ And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. But if there are not two men, then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her.] It is talking about something other than “testimony” before the court. It is talking about the “witnessing” that the debtor does to ensure that his debt is preserved, and not about the “testimony” that the judge relies on in his ruling between the disputing parties. It - the verse - is directed to the owner of the right to the debt and not to the judge ruling in the dispute. Rather, this verse is not directed to every owner of the right to the debt and does not stipulate what it stipulated in terms of levels of testimony and the number of witnesses in all cases of debt. Rather, it is directed with advice and guidance only, advice and guidance to a specific creditor, and in special cases of debts that have special circumstances stipulated in the verse. It is a debt for a specified term. It must be written down. The writer must be just. It is forbidden for the writer to refuse to write.. and it is necessary for the one who has the right to dictate.. and if he is unable to do so, then his guardian should dictate fairly.. and the witnessing must be from two men from the believers.. or a man and two women from the believers.. and the witnesses must be from those whom the community approves of.. and it is not valid for the witnesses to refuse to testify.. and these conditions are not required in present trade.. nor in sales..
then the verse sees in this level of witnessing the most just and correct situation.. and that does not negate the lower level of equity..
and this fact has been understood in the fact that this verse is only talking about “witnessing” in a specific debt, and not about testimony.. and it is advice and guidance for the owner of the debt with special specifications and circumstances and is not legislation directed to the judge ruling in disputes.. the scholars of diligence understood this..
and among these scholars and jurists who understood this fact and elaborated on it is Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah [661728 AH / 1263 1328] And his student, the scholar Ibn al-Qayyim [691751 AH / 1292-1350 CE] from the ancients, and the master Imam Sheikh Muhammad Abduh [1265-1323 AH] and Imam Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltut [1310-1383 AH / 1893-1963 CE] from the modernists and contemporaries, Ibn Taymiyyah said in what he narrates from him and Ibn al-Qayyim confirms:
He said about the “evidence” upon which the judge rules.. and the legal and jurisprudential basis for which he established the hadith of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace: “The evidence is upon the claimant, and the oath is upon the defendant.” Narrated by al-Bukhari, al-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Majah:
“Evidence in Islamic law is the name for that which clarifies and reveals the truth. Sometimes it is four witnesses, sometimes three, as stated in the evidence of the bankrupt. Sometimes it is two witnesses, one witness, and one woman. It may be a refusal (2), an oath, or fifty oaths or four oaths, and it may be the witness of the case.”

(3) Just as evidence is established by the testimony of one man or more, it is established by the testimony of one woman or more, according to the standard of evidence that the conscience of the ruler - judge - is reassured by. Ibn Taymiyyah
elaborated on the distinction between the methods of preserving rights, which were guided to and advised by the verse of witnessing - verse 282 of Surat Al-Baqarah, which is directed to the owner of “the right of the debt” - and the methods of evidence, based on which the ruler - judge - rules. Ibn Al-Qayyim included this detail of Ibn Taymiyyah under the title [The methods by which a person preserves his right]. He said:
“The Qur’an did not mention two witnesses, a man and two women in the methods of ruling by which the ruler rules, but rather mentioned the two types of evidence in the methods by which a person preserves his right. God Almighty said: (O you who have believed, when you contract a debt for a specified term (4) So He, glory be to Him, commanded them to preserve their rights by writing (5), and He commanded the one upon whom the right is to dictate to the scribe, and if he is not one of those who can dictate, his guardian should dictate on his behalf. Then He commanded the one who has the right to have two men as witnesses to his right, and if he cannot find one, then a man and two women. Then He forbade the witnesses who are capable of bearing witness to refrain from giving evidence if they are asked to do so, then He permitted them not to write it in present trade, then He commanded them to have witnesses when exchanging goods, then He commanded them, if they were travelling and could not find a scribe, to use the pledge that was received as proof.
All of this is advice to them, and education and guidance for what preserves their rights, and what preserves rights is one thing and what the judge rules by is another, for the methods of ruling are broader than the witness and the two women, for the judge rules by refusal, and the rejected oath, and there is no mention of them in the Qur’an. Also: the judge rules by drawing lots according to the Book of Allah and the clear and authentic Sunnah of His Messenger. And he rules by fortune-telling (6) according to the clear and authentic Sunnah that has no opposition to it, and he rules by standing (7) according to the clear and authentic Sunnah, and he rules by the witness of the situation if the spouses or the makers of household and shop furnishings dispute, and he rules, in the case of those who deny the ruling by the witness and the oath, by the presence of bricks in the wall, so he gives it to the plaintiff if it is his side, and all of this is not in the Qur’an, and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not rule by it, nor did any of his companions.
If it is said: The apparent meaning of the Qur’an indicates that the witness and the two women are a substitute for the two witnesses, and that they are not ruled by except in the absence of the two witnesses.
It was said: The Qur’an does not indicate that, for this is an order to those with rights to preserve their rights. He, glory be to Him, guided them to the strongest methods. If they are unable to do the strongest, they move to something less than that. He, glory be to Him, did not mention what the judge rules with, but rather He guided us to what preserves the right, and the methods of ruling are broader than the methods by which rights are preserved (8).
After Ibn al-Qayyim cited these texts, quoting his Sheikh and Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, he commented on them, confirming them, saying: “I said [i.e. Ibn al-Qayyim]: There is nothing in the Qur’an that requires that a judgment should not be made except with two witnesses, or a witness and two women, for God Almighty only ordered those with rights to preserve their rights with this quorum, and He did not order the judges to rule with it, let alone that He ordered them not to rule except with it. For this reason, the judge rules with refusal, the rejected oath, the single woman, women alone with no man with them, and with the knots of swaddling clothes (9), the faces of bricks, and other methods of ruling that are mentioned in the Qur’an.. The methods of ruling are one thing, and the methods of preserving rights are another thing, and there is no connection between them, so rights are preserved with what the judge does not rule with, which the owner of the right knows will preserve his right, and the judge rules with what the owner of the right does not preserve his right, nor did it occur to him.. ” (10).
The methods of witnessing, in the verse of Surat Al-Baqarah that make the testimony of two women equal to the testimony of one man, are advice and guidance for the owner of a debt of a special nature - .. and not the legislation directed to the judge and the ruler and the comprehensive methods of testimony and evidence.. and it is also specific to a debt that has its specifications and circumstances, and it is not the general legislation in the evidence that shows justice so that the judges rule on it..
* After this control, distinction and definition.. Ibn Taymiyyah began to enumerate the cases of evidence and testimonies that the judge may rule based on.. He said: “It is permissible for the ruler - [the judge] - to rule based on the testimony of one man if he knows his truthfulness in matters other than the limits, and God did not obligate the ruler to rule except with two witnesses originally, but rather He ordered the owner of the right to preserve his right with two witnesses, or with a witness and two women, and this does not indicate that the ruler does not rule with less than that, rather the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, ruled with the witness and the oath, and with the witness only, and this does not contradict the Book of God according to those who understand it, and there is no difference between the ruling of God and the ruling of His Messenger.. and it was accepted The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, accepted the testimony of a Bedouin alone regarding the sighting of the crescent moon of Ramadan, and some jurists calling it news, not testimony, is a verbal matter that does not undermine the evidence, and the wording of the hadith refutes his statement. The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, permitted the testimony of a single witness in the case of looting (11), and the murderer did not demand another witness, and he made him swear. This story [and its narration in the two Sahihs] is explicit in that. The companions stated that the testimony of a single man is accepted without an oath when necessary, and this is what Al-Khirqi [334 AH 945 CE] transmitted in his Mukhtasar, and he said: The testimony of a just doctor is accepted in the case of a wound (12) if he is unable to have two doctors, and likewise the veterinarian in the case of an animal’s disease.. (13).
* Just as the testimony of one man is permissible in matters other than the prescribed punishments, and just as the testimony of men alone is permissible in matters of prescribed punishments, some people consider the testimony of women alone in matters of prescribed punishments permissible. Ibn Taymiyyah said, as narrated by Ibn al-Qayyim: “The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, accepted the testimony of one woman in matters of breastfeeding, and she testified to her own action. In the two Sahihs, on the authority of Uqbah ibn al-Harith: ‘He married Umm Yahya bint Abi Ihab, and a black slave woman came and said: I breastfed you both. I mentioned that to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and he turned away from me. He said: So I stepped aside and mentioned that to him, and he said: How so? And she claimed that she breastfed you both!’”
Ahmad stated this explicitly in the narration of Bakr ibn Muhammad on the authority of his father, who said: A woman testifies to something that men cannot be present in, such as proving the baby’s first cry (14), and in the bathhouse where women enter, and there are wounds between them.
Ishaq bin Mansur said: I said to Ahmad regarding the testimony of evidence: “The testimony of one woman is permissible in matters of menstruation, waiting period, miscarriage, bathing, and everything that only women have access to.”
He said: “The testimony of one woman is permissible if she is trustworthy, and it is permissible to judge based on the testimony of women alone in matters other than the prescribed punishments and retaliation according to a group of the predecessors and successors.” It was narrated from Ata’ [27-114 AH / 647-732 CE] that he permitted the testimony of women in matters of marriage. It was narrated from Shuraih [78 AH / 697 CE] that he permitted the testimony of women in matters of divorce. Some people said: The testimony of women is permissible in matters of prescribed punishments. And Muhanna said: Ahmad ibn Hanbal told me: Abu Hanifa said: The testimony of a midwife alone is permissible, even if she is Jewish or Christian.. (15)
This is because the criterion here in testimony is experience and justice, and the criterion is not the gender of the witness, whether male or female. In professions such as medicine, veterinary medicine, and translation before the judge, the criterion is “the knowledge of the people of experience” (16).
* Indeed, Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned in his discussion of the testimony mentioned in the verse of Surat Al-Baqarah that a woman’s forgetfulness, and thus her need for another to remind her (that one of them may forget and then one of them may remind the other), is not a nature or an innate characteristic of all women, and is not inevitable in all types of testimony. Rather, it is a matter related to experience and practice, meaning that it is subject to development and change.. Ibn Al-Qayyim narrated this from him, saying:
“Our Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah, may God Almighty have mercy on him, said: God Almighty’s statement: (But if there are not two men, then a man and two women from among those whom you accept as witnesses, so that she may err One of them, so one of them reminds the other (this is evidence that the testimony of two women in place of one man is only for one of them to remind the other, if she goes astray, and this only happens in what usually leads to error, which is forgetfulness and lack of control.. So what was from the testimonies in which error is not usually feared, it was not in it half as much as the man.. (17).
Even in witnessing, the debtor may preserve his debt according to the advice and guidance of the verse of Surat Al-Baqarah by having a man and a woman, or two women, witness, when the woman has experience in the subject of witnessing. In this witnessing, her testimony is not always half that of a man.
Ibn Al-Qayyim repeated and confirmed what we have mentioned in part, in a book other than his book [Al-Turuq Al-Hikmiyyah fi Al-Siyasah Al-Shari’ah]. He said in his book “I’lam Al-Muwaqqi’in ‘Ida Rabb Al-Alamin” while talking about “evidence” and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace: “The evidence is on the claimant and the oath is on the one who denies.” During his explanation of the letter of Omar bin Al-Khattab to Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari [21 AH 44 AH 602-665 CE] on the rules and etiquette of the judiciary - he said: “Evidence in the words of Allah and His Messenger, and the words of the Companions, is a name for everything that clarifies the truth. The word evidence is not specific to two witnesses. Allah said in the verse of debt: (And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. But if there are not two men, then a man and two women. This is in terms of bearing witness and the document by which the owner of the wealth preserves his right, not in terms of the methods of ruling and what the ruler rules with, for this is one thing and that is another. So the Almighty mentioned what preserves rights from witnesses, and He did not mention that the rulers do not rule except with this. For the methods of ruling are more general than the methods of preserving rights. And the Almighty said: (From among those whom you accept as witnesses (because the owner of the right is the one who preserves his wealth with whomever he pleases..).
Ibn Taymiyyah explained the wisdom behind the testimony of two women in this case being equal to the testimony of one man, that a woman is not one of those who usually bear witness to these types of dealings.. But if her experiences, practices and habits develop, her testimony, even in testifying to preserving rights and debts, is equal to the testimony of a man..He said:
“There is no doubt that this wisdom in polygamy is in tolerance. However, if the woman is sensible, has memorized, and is someone whose religion is trusted, then the intended meaning is achieved by her testimony, just as it is achieved by the testimony of religious people. For this reason, her testimony alone is accepted in some cases, and judgment is made based on the testimony of two women and the oath of the plaintiff, according to the most correct of the two opinions, which is the opinion of Malik [93-179 AH 712-795 CE] and one of the two views in the school of Ahmad.
The intended meaning is that the Lawgiver did not stop the ruling in preserving rights at all on the testimony of two males, neither in blood, nor in money, nor in private parts, nor in the limits. The secret of the matter is that the command to have polygamy in the aspect of tolerance and preserving rights does not necessitate the command to have polygamy in the aspect of ruling and proof. The Shari’ah never comes to reject a true report.”
This is what Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim said in their discussion of the verse of Surat al-Baqarah, which is what Imam Muhammad Abduh mentioned when he attributed the distinction of men’s testimony on this right that the verse spoke about over women’s testimony to the fact that women at that time were far from attending business meetings, and thus far from acquiring endurance and experience in these fields. This is a historical reality subject to development and change, and is not the nature or disposition of women throughout the ages. If Imam Muhammad Abduh had lived to this time, which is full of specialists in accounting, economics, and business administration, and “businesswomen” who compete with “businessmen,” he would have elaborated and expanded on what he said. However, it is enough for him that he spoke a century ago in his interpretation of this verse of Surat al-Baqarah, rejecting that women’s forgetfulness is a natural trait in them and is general in all subjects of testimony, saying:
“The commentators spoke about this and attributed its cause to temperament, saying: Women’s temperament is affected by coldness, followed by forgetfulness. This is not true, and the correct reason is that women are not meant to be busy.” In financial transactions and similar transactions, therefore her memory is weak, and it is not like that in domestic matters which are her concern, for she has a stronger memory than a man, meaning that it is the nature of human beings, males and females, to have a strong memory for matters which concern them and to be more occupied with them” (18).
Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltut, who absorbed the efforts of Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, and Muhammad Abduh, followed this path, adding to these efforts another science when he drew attention to the equality of a man’s testimony in “Li’an.” He wrote about a woman’s testimony and how it is evidence of her complete eligibility, contrary to the mistaken thought that considers Islam’s position on this issue as a derogation from her humanity. He wrote saying:
The saying of God Almighty: (But if there are not two men, then a man and two women (is not mentioned in the context of the testimony that the judge issues and rules, but rather it is in the context of guidance to the methods of verification and reassurance of rights between the parties to the transaction at the time of the transaction (O you who believe, when you contract a debt for a specified term, write it down. And let a scribe write between you with justice. Let no scribe refuse to write as God has taught him (until he said: (And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. But if there are not two men, then a man and two women from among those whom you accept as witnesses, so that if one of them errs, she may remember. (19)
The situation is one of ensuring rights, not of judging them. The verse guides to the best types of assurance that will reassure the souls of those dealing with them about their rights.
This does not mean that the testimony of a single woman or the testimony of women who do not have a man with them does not establish the right, and the judge does not rule on it, because the most that the judiciary requires is “evidence.”
The scholar Ibn al-Qayyim has established that evidence in Islamic law is more general than testimony, and that everything that proves and reveals the truth is evidence that the judge rules and issues a ruling on. This includes: the judge rules on the basis of conclusive evidence, and rules on the basis of the testimony of a non-Muslim if he trusts it and is reassured by it.
The consideration of two women in the matter of verification as one man is not due to the weakness of their minds, which follows and is an effect of their lack of humanity, but rather because, as Sheikh Muhammad Abduh said, “women are not meant to be occupied with financial transactions and similar transactions, and hence their memory is weak in them, and they are not like that in the household matters that are their occupation, for in them their memory is stronger than that of men, and it is the nature of human beings in general to have a strong memory for the matters that concern them and that they practice, and to be occupied with them more.
The verse came in accordance with what was common in the matter of women, and most women are still like that, they do not attend the councils of debts nor are they occupied with the markets of sales, and the occupation of some of them with that does not contradict this principle that their nature dictates in life.
If the verse guides to the most complete aspects of verification, and the dealers are in an environment in which women are mostly occupied with sales and attending councils of debts, then they have the right to verify the woman in the same way as verifying the man, as long as they are assured that she remembers and does not forget, in the same way that men remember and do not…” Forgetting it.
The jurists have stated that there are cases in which the testimony of a woman alone is acceptable, and these are cases in which men are not usually informed about their subjects, such as childbirth, virginity, women’s defects, and internal issues.
And there are cases in which the testimony of a man alone is acceptable, and these are cases in which the subjects arouse the woman’s emotions and she is not able to bear them, although they have estimated the acceptance of her testimony in blood if it is a way to prove the truth and the judge’s confidence in her. And there are cases in which the testimony of both of them is acceptable.
And we do not go far, and the Qur’an has stated that the woman is equal to the man in the testimony of cursing, which is what the Qur’an has legislated between spouses when the man accuses his wife and he has no witnesses to what he says (And those who accuse their wives and have no witnesses except themselves - the testimony of one of them is four testimonies by Allah that he is of the truthful * And the fifth is that the curse of Allah is upon him if he is of the liars * And the punishment is averted from her if she bears witness four times by Allah that he is of the liars * And the fifth is that the wrath of Allah is upon her if he is of the truthful) (20).
Four testimonies from a man, followed by invoking God’s curse upon him if he is lying, and it is met and nullified by four testimonies from a woman, followed by invoking God’s wrath upon her if he is truthful. This is the justice of Islam in distributing public rights between men and women, and it is a justice that ensures that they are equal in humanity. (21)
This is how the page of Islam has made clear.. and the pages of Islamic ijtihad in the issue of equality between the testimony of women and the testimony of men, as long as the witness, male or female, possesses the components, qualifications and experience of this testimony.. because the human capacity for each of them is one, and stems from the unity of creation, equality in duties, and mutual support in sharing in carrying the trust that man has carried, the trust of colonizing and developing this life.
* And last but not least, Ibn al-Qayyim cites as evidence the Qur’anic verse: (And thus We have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you) (22). However, women are like men in this testimony to the message of the Sharia and the narration of the Prophetic Sunnah. Women are like men in “narrating the hadith,” which is testimony to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace.
If this is something that the nation has agreed upon, and the narrators of the Prophetic hadith have practiced it generation after generation, “and narration is testimony,” then how can testimony from a woman be accepted against the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, but not against any other person? The just woman [according to Ibn al-Qayyim’s statement] is like a man in truthfulness, honesty, and religion (23).

This is the logic of the Islamic Sharia, and all of it is logic, and this is its justice between women and men, and all of it is justice. As Ibn al-Qayyim says: “God and His Messenger have never established a ruling that is proven false by the senses or reason, so far be it from His rulings, glory be to Him, for there is no better judge than Him, glory be to Him, nor more just. He does not issue a ruling that reason says: I wish he had ruled otherwise. Rather, all of His rulings are what reason and nature testify to as being good, and that they occur in the most perfect and best ways, and that nothing else is suitable in their place” (24).

(1) Al-Baqarah: 282.
(2) Refusal: is refusing to take an oath.
(3) Ibn al-Qayyim [Al-Turuq al-Hukmiyyah fi al-Siyasah al-Shari’ah] p. 34. Edited by Muhammad Jamil Ghazi. Cairo edition, 1977.
(4) Surah al-Baqarah: 282.
(5) Meaning writing.
(6) Al-Qafah: singular is Qayf, who is the one who knows the traces of the feet and knows the resemblance of a man to his brother or father.
(7) Al-Qama: oaths, sworn by the people of the neighborhood in which the murdered person was found.
(8) [Al-Turuq al-Hukmiyyah fi al-Siyasah al-Shari’ah] pp. 103-105, 219, 236.
(9) Singular is Qamat, with a kasra on the qaf and a sukoon on the meem: what is used to tie the specialization and the components of the building and its bricks.
(10) [Al-Turuq Al-Hukmiyyah fi Al-Siyasah Al-Shari’ah] p. 198.
(11) Al-Salab with a stressed “seen” and a fat-ha on the “lam”: is the belongings and equipment of the murdered person, taken by his killer. In the hadith: “Whoever kills a murdered person, his spoils are his.”
(12) Al-Mudawahah: is the wounds that are less than killing the soul.
(13) [Al-Turuq Al-Hukmiyyah fi Al-Siyasah Al-Shari’ah] pp. 98, 113, 123.
(14) The infant’s first cry: is that he makes something that indicates his life at the time of birth, such as raising a voice or moving a limb or eye, and it is a condition for him to enjoy the rights of the living.
(15) [Al-Turuq Al-Hukmiyyah fi Al-Siyasah Al-Shari’ah] pp. 115-117.
(16) The previous source, pp. 188, 193.
(17) [I’lam Al-Muwaqqi’in ‘an Rabb Al-‘Alamin] vol. 1, pp. 90-92, 94-95, 103, 104. Beirut edition, 1973.
(18) [The Complete Works of Imam Muhammad Abduh] Vol. 4, p. 732. Study and investigation: Dr. Muhammad Amara. Cairo edition, 1993 AD.
(19) Al-Baqarah: 282.
(20) An-Nur: 69.
(21) [Islam, Creed and Law] pp. 239-241. Cairo edition, 1400 AH, 1980 AD.
(22) Al-Baqarah: 143.
(23) [The Wisdom Methods in Islamic Politics] pp. 236, 244.
(24) The previous source, p. 329