What is the ruling if the person to whom the truce was granted is unidentifiable, with all besieged individuals claiming to be the one granted safety?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Jihad
Primary text
If the individual granted the truce is unclear, and every person in the fort claims to be him, if the actual recipient of the truce can be known, that ruling is followed. If the recipient is unknown, it is not permissible to kill any of them because each one is potentially truthful. This situation involves confusing the permissible with the forbidden where there is no necessity, thus prohibiting all of them. This ruling is analogous to confusing ritually slaughtered meat with carrion, or confusing one's sister with unrelated women, or confusing a married adulterer with innocent individuals. This is the position of Al-Shafi'i, and no dispute is known regarding it.
Supporting text
Regarding enslavement (isti'raq) in this case, there are two views. The first is that it is prohibited, which Al-Qadi mentioned Ahmad specifically stated. This is the Madhhab of Al-Shafi'i, based on the reasoning used for the ruling on killing (i.e., enslaving someone who cannot rightfully be enslaved is forbidden). The second view permits casting lots among them, such that the owner of the truce emerges by lot, and the rest are enslaved. This was stated by Abu Bakr because the right belongs to one of them but is not known, thus lots are cast, similar to freeing one unknown slave from a group. This differs from the ruling on killing, as the shedding of blood is averted by doubt (shubuhat), unlike enslavement. Consequently, killing is prevented for women and children, while enslavement is not precluded.