Is the testimony of a child valid for a parent, or vice versa?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Testimonies
Primary text
The testimony of a direct descendant, no matter how far removed (subfil), for a direct ascendant, no matter how high (a'la), is not accepted. Likewise, the testimony of a parent for a child, or a child for a parent, is rejected according to the apparent school of thought. This prohibition covers testimony between parents and children, and between grandparents and grandchildren, regardless of the line of descent (male or female). This view is held by Shurayh, Al-Hasan, Al-Sha'bi, Al-Nakha'i, Malik, Al-Shafi'i, Ishaq, Abu Ubayd, and the Ashab al-Ra'y. The reasoning is based on the inherent suspicion (*tuhma*) arising from shared property interests, as evidenced by the Hadith stating, 'You and your wealth belong to your father,' and the ruling that children are among the best of one's earnings. Furthermore, the testimony of a parent for a child is considered akin to testifying for oneself because the child's wealth is considered available to the parent if desired.
Supporting text
A second narration from Ahmad accepts the son's testimony for the father, but rejects the father's testimony for the son based on the preceding property rights rationale. A third narration, attributed to Umar ibn al-Khattab, Shurayh, Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, Abu Thawr, Al-Muzani, Dawud, Ishaq, and Ibn al-Mundhir, accepts the testimony of each for the other in matters where no direct personal benefit accrues, such as marriage, divorce, retribution (*qisas*), or non-essential financial matters, viewing them as otherwise trustworthy individuals whose testimony should be accepted like that of a stranger.