Is the ruling on the acknowledging heir's liability different if the acknowledgment is proven by testimony versus acknowledgment?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Acknowledgment of Rights
Primary text
If the kinship were established by an external witness, it would be established. If the liability were greater than the acknowledging heir's share, the testimony would not be accepted because it draws a benefit for the witness (by reducing their own liability). Since the right, if proven by testimony, would only obligate the individual up to their share, establishing it through acknowledgment should not obligate them beyond that limit, similar to a bequest.
Supporting text
The situation differs from one where one of two heirs usurps part of the estate, because in usurpation, each heir is entitled to half of every portion. Here, the acknowledged person is entitled to one-third of every portion.