had emancipated him, he would not incur any liability, so there is no benefit in making him take an oath. If we say: one of the two pieces of evidence is preferred by drawing lots, we draw lots between them, and whoever wins the draw, we give him precedence. Abu Bakr said: This is the qiyas (analogy) based on the opinion of Abu Abd Allah. Accordingly, the one for whom the lot is drawn takes an oath, in one of the two views. If we say: it is divided, we divide the slave, making half of him sold and half of him free, and the emancipation extends to his entirety if the seller is solvent; because the evidence has been established against him that he emancipated him voluntarily, and emancipation in his half has been established by their testimony.

Section: If a man claims that a woman is his wife, and she confirms it, her admission is accepted; because she is confirming against herself while not being under suspicion, for if she were to initiate the marriage herself, she would not be prevented from doing so. If two men claim it, and she confirms it for one of them, it is not accepted from her; because the other is claiming ownership of half of her, and she is acknowledging that this has been owned by her, so her admission becomes a right of another. Also, because she is under suspicion, as if she were to initiate marriage to one of the claimants, she would not be permitted to do so before being separated from the claim of the other. If it is said: If they both claim an object in the possession of a third party, and he admits it for one of them, it is accepted. We say: Ownership is not established by his admission regarding the object, rather he is treated like the person in possession, so he takes an oath. Marriage is not established by an oath, so admission of it here is of no use. If one of the claimants has evidence, judgment is passed for him by it; because evidence is proof in marriage and other matters. If they both produce evidence, they contradict each other and are both void, and she is prevented from being with either of them. Neither of the claimants is preferred by the woman's admission for the reason we have mentioned, nor by her being in his house or in his hand; because possession (yad) is not established over a free woman, nor is there any way to divide her here, nor to draw lots, because there is no possession to accompany the drawing of lots from the oath, and it (the oath) has no place in marriage.