the other; because they are different.

Section: If a witness testifies for him that he sold him this slave for one thousand, and another witness testifies that he sold it to him for five hundred, the evidence is not complete due to their difference regarding the nature of the sale. He has the right to swear along with one of them and establish what he swore upon. If two witnesses testify for each contract, both sales are established. If they attribute the sale to the same time—for instance, one testifies that he sold him this slave at midday for one thousand, and another testifies that he sold it to him at midday for five hundred—the two pieces of evidence contradict each other and are void, because they cannot coexist, and each piece of evidence falsifies the other. If one witness testifies to each of these, he may swear along with one of them, and they do not contradict each other; because contradiction only occurs between two complete pieces of evidence.

Section: If one of them testifies that he usurped a garment whose value is two dirhams, and another testifies that its value is three, what they agreed upon is established for him, which is two dirhams, and he has the right to swear along with the other for the additional dirham; because they agreed upon two dirhams, and one of them testified alone to a third, so it is similar to if one of them testified to one thousand and another to five hundred. If two witnesses testify that its value is two dirhams, and two witnesses testify that its value is three, two dirhams are established for him. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: Three are due to him, because two witnesses have testified to that, and they constitute a proof, so one must act upon them, just as one acts upon the excess in reports, and just as if two witnesses testified for him to one thousand and two witnesses to two thousand, for then two thousand would be due to him. Al-Qadi said: An argument similar to this is possible for us, based on the issue of the one thousand and five hundred. To us, whoever testifies that its value is two dirhams denies that its value is three, so the two pieces of evidence contradict each other regarding the one dirham, and this differs from the excess in reports; for he who narrates the lesser amount does not deny the greater amount, and likewise, he who testifies to one thousand does not deny that there is another thousand owed. If it is said: Why then did you say that if two witnesses testify to each of the two values, they contradict each other, but if one witness testifies, they do not contradict, and he may swear along with the witness to the excess? We say: Because two witnesses constitute a proof and evidence, so if it is complete from