contrary. Except that it was narrated from Ibn Shubruma that the claimant of the whole is entitled to three-quarters of it, because the half belonging to him is not disputed, and the other half is divided between them according to their respective claims to it. Our argument is that the hand of the claimant of the half is upon what he claims, so his statement is accepted regarding it along with his oath, like all other claims. If each of them has evidence for what he claims, their two pieces of evidence conflict [regarding the half, so the half belongs to] the claimant of the whole, and the other half is based on the disagreement as to which of the two pieces of evidence is given precedence; the manifest position of the Madhhab is to give precedence to the evidence of the plaintiff (the one who claims the whole), so the entire house belongs to the claimant of the whole. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifa and his two companions. If the house is in the hand of a third party who does not claim it, the half belongs to the claimant of the whole, as there is no one disputing him over it, and lots are drawn between them for the other half; whoever the lot falls to, he takes an oath and it becomes his. If each has evidence, they conflict and are nullified, and they become like those who have no evidence. If we say: both pieces of evidence are utilized, they are drawn by lot, and the one for whom the lot falls is given precedence, in one of the two positions. The second is that the [disputed] half is divided between them, so the claimant of the whole ends up with three-quarters of it.

Section: If a house is in the possession of three people, one of them claims half of it, another claims a third of it, and another claims a sixth of it, this is an agreement among them regarding the nature of their ownership, and there is no disagreement or denial here. If each one of them claims that the remainder of the house is a deposit (wadi'a) or a loan ('ariya) with me, and each one of them has evidence for what he claims of ownership, it is ruled in his favor; because his evidence testifies for him regarding what he claims, and there is no opponent to it. If none of them has evidence, each one of them takes an oath, and a third of it is left in his possession.

Section: If one of them claims all of it, the other claims half of it, and the other claims a third of it, if there is no