if their dates coincide, the two testimonies negate one another; but if the dates differ, both prices become due. The same ruling applies when the dates are omitted by both, or—according to the sounder view—by only one of them.

If a man dies leaving two sons, one Muslim and one Christian, and each declares, “He died upon my religion,” then, when it is known that the deceased was Christian, the Christian son is believed. Should they both produce undated testimony, the Muslim’s evidence is preferred; but if one set of witnesses specifies that the deceased’s last words were a declaration of Islam and the other states the reverse, the two pieces of evidence cancel each other. If the father’s religion is unknown and each son brings forward witnesses that he died on his religion, the testimonies likewise offset one another.

If a Christian dies leaving two sons, one Muslim and one Christian, and the Muslim son asserts, “I embraced Islam after his death, so the estate is to be divided between us,” while the Christian contends, “Rather, you converted before he died,” the Muslim is believed after taking an oath. If each party produces testimony, the Christian’s evidence is preferred. Now, if they agree that the son entered Islam in Ramadan, the Muslim alleging that the father died in Sha‘bān and the Christian claiming he died in Shawwāl, the Christian’s word is accepted, and—should each side present evidence—the Muslim’s testimony is preferred over the Christian’s.

If the deceased leaves two non-Muslim parents and two Muslim sons, and each side claims that he died upon its religion, the parents are believed after an oath. According to another opinion, judgment is suspended until the truth becomes clear or the parties reach a settlement.

When one set of witnesses testifies that, during his final illness, the deceased manumitted Salim for one third of his estate, and another set testifies that he freed Ghanim, likewise for one third, then, if the dates differ, the earlier manumission is upheld; if they coincide, lots are drawn; and if the dates are left unspecified, some hold that lots are again drawn, while another opinion rules that one half of each slave is emancipated.

I say: The authoritative view is that one half of each is set free, and Allah knows best.

If two unrelated witnesses testify that the deceased bequeathed the emancipation of Salim, amounting to one third of the estate, and two heirs in possession testify that he revoked that bequest and instead ordered the emancipation of Ghanim, also one third, the bequest in favor of Ghanim is established. But if the two heirs are morally unreliable, the revocation is not proven; Salim is set free first, and thereafter one third of the estate is applied toward freeing Ghanim.