it was mentioned over it, then it turns out otherwise, it becomes prohibited. This is because the reality of permissibility and prohibition does not change based on the belief of its opposite, nor by ignorance of its existence.

Section: If he sends his dog, and a Magian sends his dog, and they kill a piece of game, it does not become lawful; for the game of a Magian is forbidden, and when prohibition and permissibility coincide, prohibition prevails, like that which is born between an animal that is eaten and one that is not eaten. This is also because the original state is prohibition, and lawfulness is dependent upon a condition, which is slaughtering by one who is of the people of slaughtering, or his hunt which was achieved by slaughtering, and that has not been verified. Likewise, if they shoot it with their arrows and hit it, and it dies, there is no difference between their arrows hitting it simultaneously or one hitting before the other, unless the first one wounded it in a way that is mortal, such as if it slaughtered it or put it in the position of one slaughtered, and then the second one hit it while it was not yet mortally wounded, then the ruling is for the first one. If the first was a Muslim, it is permitted; if it was a Magian, it is not permitted. If the second was also mortal, most of our companions said: The ruling is for the first one as well, because the permissibility was achieved by it, so it is similar to the case where the second one was not mortal. It follows from the statement of al-Khiraqi that it is not permitted, due to his saying: And if he slaughtered and reached the vital spots, but the soul had not departed until it fell into water or something stepped on it, it shall not be eaten. And because the soul departed due to both wounds, it is similar to if they wounded it together. If the first one was not mortal and the second was mortal, the ruling follows the second in both prohibition and permissibility. If a Muslim and a Magian send a single dog and it kills game, it is not permitted for that reason. Likewise, if two Muslims send it and one of them mentions the name of Allah while the other does not. Similarly, if a Muslim sends two dogs, one trained and the other untrained, and they kill game, it does not become lawful. Likewise, if he sends his trained dog, and another trained dog joins it on its own, and they kill the game, it does not become lawful, according to the statement of most scholars, including Rabi'a, Malik, al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr,