What is the ruling if the first wound was non-fatal, and the second was also non-fatal?

Primary text

If both wounds were non-fatal, there are three scenarios regarding the subsequent fate of the game. First, if the game is lawfully slaughtered afterward, it becomes lawful. Second, if the game dies without being lawfully slaughtered, it becomes unlawful because it died from two wounds, one permissible and one impermissible (like death resulting from the combined wounds of a Muslim and a Magian). In this case, the second hunter is liable for the full compensation because their wound was the cause of the prohibition. Third, if the game could have been lawfully slaughtered but was left until it died, it becomes unlawful for two reasons: neglecting the possibility of lawful slaughter and dying from combined permissible and impermissible wounds. The second hunter is liable for compensation, though there are two differing opinions regarding the amount.