Some classical polemical discussions attribute to the Samanis and Brahmanas a denial that widespread reports can yield certainty. This is an account of a particular epistemological objection, not a blanket assessment of every member of the communities named.
A reply points to widely known historical figures, including Alexander: people who did not witness his age can nonetheless know some facts about the past. If all testimony were dismissed without exception, such familiar historical recognition would become difficult to explain.
The philosophical point is that the fallibility of any isolated speaker does not establish the universal impossibility of knowledge through reports. When a report fulfills the specific conditions of tawātur, its collective evidential force must be considered rather than dismissed by appeal to individual fallibility alone.