And wealth. Indeed, wealth is only considered regarding the spread of emancipation. This is not emancipation by way of spread; rather, it is due to the misconception in the act of intercourse, so there is no basis for considering wealth in it. The correct view is that he is free, and his value becomes due as a liability upon his father. The third condition is that they are both indigent; in this case, she becomes an umm walad to both of them, half of her is an umm walad to the first, and half of her is an umm walad to the second. He [al-Qadi] said: Upon each one of them is half of her dowry for the other. Regarding the child of each one of them, there are two views: one is that the entirety of the child is free, and the father has half of his value as a liability to his partner. The second is that half of him is free and the remainder is a slave to his partner, except that half of the first one's child is a slave belonging to the master, because he is a follower of the remaining half of the mother. As for the remaining half of the second one's child, his ruling is the ruling of his mother, because he was born from her after the ruling of umm walad status had been established for half of her to the first, so his enslaved half was a follower of her in that. Perhaps al-Qadi meant what happens if she becomes incapacitated and the kitabah is annulled. As for if she remains under the kitabah, she is entitled to the full dowry from each of them. When it is ruled that half of her child is enslaved, he must have her same ruling regarding the kitabah, because the child of a mukatabah is a follower of her. The fourth condition is that the first is indigent and the second is wealthy; his ruling is the same as the third, except that the child of the second is free, because freedom was established for half of him by the act of his father while he was wealthy, so it spread to his entirety, and he owes half of his value to his partner. The mother is not appraised against him, because half of her is an umm walad to the first. If this were valid, it would have been necessary that half of the child not be appraised against him, because his ruling is the ruling of his mother in this. Thus, when the ruling of umm walad status prevents spread in the mother, it prevents it in that which is a follower of her. The school of al-Shafi'i in this issue is close to what al-Qadi mentioned.

Section: If they disagree about who was the first among them, and each of them claims to be the first, then according to...