How, then, could he be a confessor while he explicitly states, "I do not know which of the two is the free one"? We only deemed it sufficient in maintaining the servitude of his slave by the possibility of the breach occurring regarding his companion. So, when the two slaves become his, and one of them is free without being specified, it becomes as if they were both his, and he had sworn to the emancipation of one of them alone; therefore, drawing lots between them is done at that time. If the swearer were one person and said: "If it is a crow, my slave is free, and if it is not a crow, my slave-woman is free," and its state is not known, lots are drawn between them, and one of them is set free. If one of them claims that he is the one who was freed, or if each of them claims that, the word is the master’s word, accompanied by his oath.

Section: If he says, "If it is a crow, this one is divorced, and if it is not a crow, the other one is divorced," and it flies away and its state is not known, one of them has been divorced. Consequently, sexual intercourse with both of them is prohibited for him, and he is held responsible for their maintenance until the divorced one among them is determined, because they are both withheld for his sake due to his right. Our companions held that he should draw lots between them, and the divorced one among them is determined by the drawing of lots, similar to our statement regarding slaves. The correct view is that the drawing of lots has no place here, for reasons we will mention later regarding when he divorces one and forgets which one she is. This is the opinion of the majority of scholars. According to this, the prohibition remains for both of them until he knows which one of them is the divorced one, and he is held responsible for their maintenance. If he says, "This is the one in which I committed the breach," she is prohibited to him, and his word is accepted regarding the permissibility of the other. If the one for whose divorce he did not confess claims that she is the divorced one, the word is his, because he is a denier. And does he take an oath? This is derived from two narrations.

Section: If he says, "If it is a crow, my wives are divorced, and if it is not a crow, my slaves are free," and it flies away and its state is not known, he is prevented from disposing of either of the two estates until it becomes clear, and he is responsible for the maintenance of all of them. If he says, "It was a crow," his wives are divorced and his slaves remain in servitude. If the slaves claim that it was not a crow so that they might be freed, the word is his. And does he take an oath? This is derived from two narrations. If he says, "It was not a crow," his slaves are freed and the wives are not divorced. If they [the wives] claim that it was a crow so that they might be divorced,