—a kerchief, he must return both the garment and the kerchief. If he says, “He has against me a garment inside a garment,” he is liable for both. Should he say, “He has against me a garment among ten garments,” Abu Hanifah and Abu Yusuf hold that only one garment is due, whereas Muhammad obligates him for eleven garments.

Whoever admits having usurped a garment and then produces one that is defective, his word is accepted upon his oath; the same applies if he acknowledges owing dirhams and adds that they are debased.

If he declares, “He has against me five in five,” intending multiplication and arithmetic, he is liable for a single five. But if he says, “I turned five with five,” he is liable for ten.

If he says, “He has against me from one dirham up to ten,” he is liable for nine according to Abu Hanifah—the starting figure and everything beyond it are binding while the limit is dropped—whereas Abu Yusuf and Muhammad oblige him for the full ten.

If he says, “I owe him one thousand dirhams from the price of a slave I bought from him but have not yet taken possession of,” and he names a particular slave, the claimant is told: “If you wish, deliver the slave and take the thousand; otherwise you have nothing.” If he says, “I owe him one thousand from the price of a slave,” without specifying the slave, the thousand is binding according to Abu Hanifah. If he says, “I owe him one thousand from the price of this slave,” he is not liable until the slave is handed over; once the slave is delivered the thousand becomes due, and if he is not delivered it is not due.

Should he say, “I owe him one thousand from the price of wine or a pig,” the thousand is binding and his explanation is not accepted. If he says, “I owe him one thousand from the price of some goods, and the coins are debased,” while the claimant insists they are sound, he must pay with sound coins according to Abu Hanifah.

Whoever acknowledges a ring to another grants him both the hoop and the gem. Whoever acknowledges a sword grants him the blade, the scabbard, and the baldrick; and whoever acknowledges a bridal canopy grants the poles and the covering.

If he says, “The unborn child of so-and-so is entitled against me to one thousand,” and then adds, “So-and-so bequeathed it to him,” or “His father died and he inherited it,” the acknowledgment is valid; but if he leaves the matter vague, the acknowledgment is not valid according to Abu Yusuf.

When a man acknowledges to another the unborn offspring of a female slave or the unborn lamb of a ewe, his acknowledgment is valid and binding.

If, during his death-illness, a man acknowledges debts while debts incurred during his health, as well as debts incurred during the illness through known causes, already exist, the debts from the time of health and those whose causes are known take precedence over all others. Thus, whenever any payment is made, it is taken from what he acknowledged during the illness; and if there is not—