or [whether it is ambiguous] to the woman who her husband is, unless they intend by their statement that if she chooses one of them, separation is made between her and the other, and then the chosen one contracts her marriage. This is good, for by separating her from one of them, one is dispensed with the need to separate her from both of them, and by annulling one of the two marriages, one is dispensed with annulling both. If she refuses to choose, she is not compelled. Likewise, it should be that if lots are drawn between them and the lot falls to one of them, she is not compelled to marry him; because it is not known that he is her husband. Thus, it becomes necessary to annul both marriages, and she may marry whoever she wishes from among them or from others immediately, if it was before consummation. If one of them had consummated with her, she shall not marry until her waiting period (idda) from his intercourse is completed.

Section: If each of them claims that he is the one who preceded in the contract, and neither of them has evidence, their claims are not accepted. If the woman confesses in favor of one of them, her confession is not accepted. Ahmad stated this clearly. The companions of al-Shafi'i said: It is accepted, just as if she had confessed at the outset. Our position is that the adversary in that matter is the other husband, so her confession is not accepted to invalidate his right, just as if she had confessed against him regarding a divorce. If both husbands claim against the woman that she knows which of them was the predecessor, and she denies it, she is not required to swear an oath. The companions of al-Shafi'i said: She is required to swear an oath, based on their view that her confession is acceptable. If she is separated from one of them due to her choosing the other, or due to the lots falling in his favor, and she confesses to him that his contract was the predecessor, then her confession should be accepted; for they both agreed upon that without an opposing adversary, so it is similar to the case where there is no other contract holder.

Section: If it is known that the two contracts occurred simultaneously and neither preceded the other, then they are both void; there is no need to annul them because they are void from their origin, and there is no dowry for her from either of them, nor