that they do not know that their father had contracted a kitaba with him, because it is an oath regarding the negation of another person's action. If they swear, his slavery is established; if they refrain, judgment is passed against them, or the oath is redirected (16) according to the view of one who rules for its redirection, so the slave swears, and the kitaba is established. If one of them swears and the other refrains, judgment is passed for the enslavement of his half and the kitaba of his other half. If one of them confirms it and the other denies it, the kitaba is established for his half, and the burden of proof is upon him regarding the other half. If he has no evidence and the denier swears, his half becomes a mukatab and his half remains a slave. If the one who confirmed it testifies against his brother, his testimony is accepted because he does not draw a benefit to himself by it, nor does he deflect a harm by it. If there is another witness with him, the testimony is completed, and the kitaba is established for the entirety of him. If no one else testifies with him, does the slave swear along with him? There are two narrations. If he (the confirmer) is not upright, or if the slave does not swear with him, and the denier swears, his half is a mukatab and his half is a slave, and his earnings are shared between him and the denier equally, and his maintenance is from his earnings because it is for his own person and for the owner of his half. If he has no earnings, the denier is responsible for half of his maintenance. Then, if he and the owner of his half agree upon a shift arrangement (muhaya'a), whether annually, monthly, or however it may be, it is permitted. If one of them requests this and the other refuses, the apparent position in the words of Ahmad is that he is compelled to do so. This is the view of Abu Hanifah, because the benefits are shared between them, so if one of them wishes to take possession of his share without harm, the other is obligated to comply, just as with physical property. It is also possible that he is not compelled, which is the view of Al-Shafi'i, because the shift arrangement is a postponement of his due right, as the benefits on this day are shared between them, so compliance is not obligatory, similar to delaying his immediate debt. If they divide the earnings by shift or by half, and it does not suffice to pay his installments, the confirmer has the right to return him to slavery, and what is in his hand belongs to him specifically because the denier has already taken his right from the earnings. If the denier and the confirmer disagree regarding what is in the possession of the mukatab, and the denier says, "This was in his possession before the claim of kitaba, or he earned it (17) during the lifetime of our father," and the confirmer denies that, the statement is that of the confirmer along with his oath, because the denier is claiming his earning at a time when the original state is its absence, and because if he and the mukatab disagreed about that, the statement would be that of the mukatab, and likewise for those who stand in his place. If he pays the kitaba, the share of the confirmer is specifically emancipated, and it does not extend to the share of his partner, because he did not perform