What is the ruling if the dispute between the slave and the master's heirs occurs after the master's death?

Primary text

If the dispute is between the *mudabbar* and the heirs of the master after his death, the ruling is the same as if the dispute were with the master himself, except that the claim is valid without difference of opinion because the heirs do not possess the right to retract. Their oaths are based on denying knowledge, as the dispute concerns the action of their deceased predecessor, and their oaths are based on denying his action. The oath is obligatory upon each heir individually, and if one refuses to swear, only his share of the slave is freed, and it does not extend to the rest. Similarly, if an heir admits, the manumission is attributed to the deceased's action, not the admitting or the one who refuses the oath.