The analogy of the foundling is more appropriate than the analogy to anything else, because the foundling is also a found item. If one of them has evidence, he is prioritized by it. If each of them has evidence, the one whose evidence is earlier in date is prioritized, because the second [claimant] only took from someone whose right had already been established for another. If their dates are equal, or both are undated, or one is dated and the other is undated, they contradict each other. Do they both become void or are they both utilized? There are two views: One is that they become void, and it becomes as if neither of them has evidence. The second is that they are both utilized, and lots are drawn between them, so whoever the lot falls upon over his companion is more entitled. We will mention that in its chapter, if Allah the Almighty wills. If the foundling is in the possession of one of them, is his evidence prioritized over the evidence of the other, or is the evidence of the outsider prioritized? There are two views, based on the two reports regarding property claims. If one of the litigants is someone whose possession of the foundling is not upheld, it is left in the possession of the other, and no regard is given to the claim of the one whose possession is not upheld in any way.

954 - Issue; He said: "And if a Muslim and a disbeliever claim him, he is shown to the qafah (experts in physiognomy), and to whichever of them they attribute him, he is attributed."

Meaning: If his lineage is claimed, the claim of the lineage of a foundling falls into two categories. One is that he is claimed by someone who is alone in his claim. We then look: If the claimant is a free Muslim man, his lineage is attached to him without dispute among the people of knowledge, if it is possible for the child to be from him. This is because the acknowledgment is purely beneficial to the child by connecting his lineage, and there is no harm to anyone else in it, so it is accepted, just as if he had acknowledged a debt of property for him. Then, if the one acknowledging him is the one who found him, he is left in his possession. If he is someone else, he has the right to take him from the finder, because it has been proven that he is his father, so he is more entitled to his child, just as if evidence had been established for it. If the claimant is a slave, he is also attributed to him, because his semen has sanctity, so his lineage is attached to him like the free man. This is the view of al-Shafi'i and others, except that he does not have custodial rights (hadanah) established for him because he is occupied with the service of his master, and the child's maintenance is not obligatory upon him because he has no property, nor is it upon his master because the child is ruled to be free, so his maintenance is in the Public Treasury (Bayt al-Mal). If the claimant is a dhimmi (protected non-Muslim), he is attributed to him, because he is stronger than the slave in establishing the 'firaq' (marital bed), for it is established for him by marriage and intercourse in ownership.