The Principle of Two Witnesses

The Principle of Two Witnesses

1991 11 November 21 The Principle of Two Witnesses (307) Haji Imdadullah (1817-1899) was a pious man of Deoband. Whenever someone spoke ill of a person, he would say: Bring two witnesses, and when the complainant failed to produce the two witnesses, he would dismiss the matter there and then. He would say “Your version is unreliable without its confirmation by two witnesses.”

This is exactly what the shariah advocates. Islam insists upon the principle of witnesses to establish proof. When a man has dealings with another, or makes a claim, it is incumbent upon him to produce reliable witnesses. In all other matters two witnesses are mandatory, with the exception of adultery, in which four witnesses are necessary.

When a man apportions blame to someone, the Islamic rule demands that he produces witnesses. Without the necessary evidence, his claim would be considered baseless.

However, because of the decline in the moral standards of today, this principle has largely been allowed to fall into abeyance. Evidence is hardly ever considered necessary, particularly in the case of soured relations, or long-standing grievances against others. However wild the allegations, they are accepted as truth. No one cares to demand two witnesses, and no one cares to produce them.

This malady is rampant, sparing neither the ordinary run of people nor the most senior religious leaders. I have not come across a single person, or even heard of anyone in my own lifetime who would demand two witnesses when his opponent is being blamed for something, or who would refuse to believe representations, which could easily be false, without the proper evidence.

In the past, what the word ‘piety’ connoted is evidenced in the incident quoted above. But now its meaning has completely changed. Today a man believes an allegation, without any evidence or witnesses, and his ‘piety’ remains intact. Despite this, he continues to be revered by his followers.