يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ شَهَٰدَةُ بَيْنِكُمْ إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَكُمُ ٱلْمَوْتُ حِينَ ٱلْوَصِيَّةِ ٱثْنَانِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ أَوْ ءَاخَرَانِ مِنْ غَيْرِكُمْ إِنْ أَنتُمْ ضَرَبْتُمْ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ
"O you who believe! When death comes to one of you, the witnessing among you at the time of the bequest: two just men from among you, or, if you are travelling and the affliction of death befalls you, two others not from among you."
The condition is stated openly: in antum ḍarabtum fi'l-arḍi fa-aṣābatkum muṣībatu'l-mawt — while travelling and at the moment of death.
I record this as an observation: the ruling regulates not the ordinary case but the exceptional case; and in the exception the scope of witnessing is widened according to what is possible.
| Stage | How it works |
|---|---|
| 1 | The two witnesses are detained after prayer and confirm on oath: lā nashtarī bihī thamanan wa law kāna dhā qurbā |
| 2 | If a discrepancy comes to light (fa-in ʿuthira ʿalā annahuma'staḥaqqā ithmā), two men from among the rightful claimants take their place and swear (107) |
The root ع-ث-ر: to stumble; to come upon something unexpectedly. ʿUthira ʿalā — "if it is brought to light".
ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰٓ أَن يَأْتُوا۟ بِٱلشَّهَٰدَةِ عَلَىٰ وَجْهِهَآ أَوْ يَخَافُوٓا۟ أَن تُرَدَّ أَيْمَٰنٌۢ بَعْدَ أَيْمَٰنِهِمْ (108)
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is this sentence of reasoning: the verse does not lay down the rule and leave it; it says what behavioural effect the rule is aiming at — that the testimony be brought as it stands, or the fear that the oath will be turned back. That is, deterrence is the declared purpose of the regulation.
The legal application of these verses (the testimony of a non-Muslim, whether the ruling is still in force) has been widely debated in classical law; no preference is adopted in this commentary and no ruling is issued.