and his share from the two of them is five hundred, leaving two thousand and five hundred. The owner of the wealth takes two thousand, because the other confirms it, and five hundred remains as profit between the owner of the wealth and the other agent, which they divide into thirds: the owner of the wealth gets two-thirds, and the agent gets one-third, which is one hundred sixty-six and two-thirds, and the owner of the wealth gets three hundred thirty-three and one-third; this is because the share of the owner of the wealth from the profit is half, and the share of this agent is one-fourth, so the remainder of the profit is divided between them in thirds. What the one who swore took, in excess of the amount of his share, is like that which was destroyed between them, and what is destroyed in a Mudaraba is calculated from the profit. This is the opinion of Al-Shafi'i.

Section: If he gives a man one thousand to trade with, and he makes a profit, then the agent says: "It was a loan, so the entire profit is mine," and the owner of the wealth says: "It was a Qirad, so the profit is between us," the statement is that of the owner of the wealth, because it is his property, so his statement is taken regarding the nature of its departure from his hand. Once he takes the oath, we divide the profit between them. It is possible that they take oaths against each other, and the agent receives the greater of the two: the share he stipulated for himself from the profit or the wage of his like; because if the greater amount is his share from the profit, the owner of the wealth has acknowledged it for him, while he claims the entire profit. If the wage of his like is greater, then his statement is accepted regarding his work, along with his oath. Just as the statement of the owner of the wealth is accepted regarding the profit of his wealth, once he swears, his statement is accepted that he did not work under this condition, and that he worked for a purpose that was not realized for him, so he receives the wage of his like. If each of them brings evidence for his claim, Ahmad stipulated in the narration of Muhanna that they cancel each other out, and the profit is divided between them in half. If the owner of the wealth says: "It was a consignment (bida'a)," and the agent says: "Rather, it was a Qirad," it is possible that the statement is that of the agent, because he did the work for him, so his statement is accepted regarding it. It is also possible that they take oaths against each other, and the agent receives the lesser of the two: his share from the profit or the wage of his like, because he does not claim more than his share from the profit, so he does not deserve an increase over it. If the lesser is the wage of his like, then it is not established that it was a Qirad, so he receives the wage for his work. If the owner of the wealth says: "It was a consignment," and the agent says: "It was a loan," each of them shall swear regarding