What is the ruling regarding a person who acknowledges a debt to a non-relative during their terminal illness when they also have existing debts proven by evidence or prior admission from a time of health, given sufficient assets?

Primary text

If a person acknowledges a debt to a non-relative during their terminal illness (*marad al-mawt*), and they also owe debts established by evidence or prior admission during their period of health, both debts are treated equally when the estate has sufficient means to cover both obligations. This view is held by Malik, Al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, and is the reported choice of Al-Tamimi, aligning with the apparent position of Al-Kharqi. Abu Ubayd stated this is the opinion of most people of Medina because both are rights requiring settlement from the principal estate, and neither is secured by collateral, thus they share equally, just as if both were established by evidence.