If none of them has evidence, it is divided among them in thirds, and each one of them must take an oath regarding what is ruled in his favor, because the hand of each one of them is upon a third of it. If one of them has evidence, you look: if it belongs to the claimant of the whole, then it is his. If it belongs to the claimant of the half, he takes it, and the rest is divided between the other two in two halves; the claimant of the whole gets a sixth without an oath, and he takes an oath regarding half of the sixth, and the other person takes an oath regarding the quarter that he takes. If the evidence belongs to the claimant of the third, he takes it, and the rest is divided between the other two; the claimant of the whole gets a sixth without an oath, [and he takes an oath regarding the other sixth], and the other person takes an oath regarding all of what he takes. If each of them has evidence for what he claims, and we say: the evidence of the possessor is given precedence, it is divided among them in thirds; because the hand of each one of them is upon a third. If we say: the evidence of the outsider is given precedence, then the evidence of the claimant of the third should be nullified, because it is internal (in possession), and the claimant of the half gets a sixth; because his evidence is external regarding it, and the claimant of the whole gets five-sixths; because he has a sixth without evidence, for the reason that there is no one disputing him over it—as no one claims it—and he has two-thirds because his evidence is external regarding both of them. It was said: rather, the claimant of the third gets a sixth; because the evidence of the claimant of the whole and the claimant of the half conflicted regarding it, so they nullified each other, and it remained for the one in whose hand it is, and the claimant of the half has nothing; due to the absence of that in it, and it is the same whether the claimant of the third has evidence or not. If the asset is in the possession of someone else, and he admits that he does not own it, and they have no evidence, then half belongs to the claimant of the whole; because there is no one among them who claims it, and lots are drawn among them for the remaining half; if the lot falls to the owner of the whole, or to the owner of the half, he takes an oath and takes it; if it falls to the owner of the third, he takes an oath and takes the third; then lots are drawn between the other two for the sixth, and whoever wins the lot against his companion takes an oath and takes it. If each of them provides evidence for what he claims, then the half belongs to the claimant of the whole; for what we have mentioned, and the additional sixth is contested by the claimant of the whole and the claimant of the half, and the third is claimed by all three, and the pieces of evidence have conflicted regarding it. If we say: the pieces of evidence are nullified, we draw lots between the contenders regarding what they contested; whoever wins the lot against his companion takes an oath and takes it, and the ruling regarding it is as if they had no evidence. This is the opinion of Abu 'Ubayd, and the opinion of al-Shafi'i when he...