anything while it is in the possession of the borrower, then the liability rests with the borrower, whether it destroyed something belonging to its owner or to someone else; because liability for it is incurred through possession (yad), and the possession belongs to the borrower. If the beast is in the possession of the shepherd, and it destroys crops, then the liability is on the shepherd, not its owner; because the destruction of crops by it during the day is not subject to liability unless possession of it is established, and the possession belongs to the shepherd, not the owner, so the liability is upon him, like the borrower. If the crops belong to the owner [of the beast], then if it was at night, he is also liable; because the liability of possession is stronger, evidenced by the fact that he is liable for it at night and during the day alike.

Section: If two witnesses testify to usurpation (ghasb), and one of them testifies that he usurped it on Thursday, while another testifies that he usurped it on Friday, the evidence is not complete, and he [the claimant] may swear an oath alongside one of them. If one of them testifies that he confessed to the usurpation on Thursday, and the other testifies that he confessed to its usurpation (51) on Friday, [the evidence is established; because the confession, even if it differs, refers to one single matter. If he testified that he confessed that he usurped it on Thursday, and the other testified that he [confessed that he] (52) usurped it on Friday] (53), the evidence is also not established. If one person testifies for him and he swears an oath alongside him, the usurpation is established. If the usurper had sworn [that he did not usurp it, by divorce] (54), we would not trigger his divorce; because the witness and the oath constitute evidence in matters of property, not in matters of divorce. And Allah knows best.