to his heirs. It was said to him: "Do you not hold that there is no bequest for an heir?" He replied: "Yes, but an endowment is not a bequest, because it cannot be sold, nor inherited, nor does it become property for the heirs from which they benefit by its revenue." In the report of Ahmad ibn al-Hasan, he explicitly addressed the issue of someone endowing his third to some of his heirs to the exclusion of others, and stated: "It is permissible." Al-Khabari (7) said: "The majority permitted this." Ahmad argued using the hadith of Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, where he said: "This is what Abdullah Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, has bequeathed; if an event should befall him, then Thamgh is charity, as well as the slave within it, the share at Khaybar, his bondsmen therein, and the one hundred wasq which Muhammad—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—fed me. Hafsa shall manage it as long as she lives, then those with sound judgment among her family shall manage it. It shall not be sold, nor bought. He shall spend from it as he sees fit upon the beggar, the deprived, and the kin. There is no blame upon the one who manages it if he consumes from it or purchases bondsmen." Abu Dawud narrated something similar to this. The argument is that he granted Hafsa the right to manage his endowment, eat from it, and purchase bondsmen. Al-Maymuni said: "I said to Ahmad: 'The Prophet—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—only commanded Umar to make the endowment, and there is no mention of an heir in the hadith.' He replied: 'Since the Prophet—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—commanded him to do so, and he indeed endowed it upon his heirs and restrained the capital for them all, and because an endowment is not in the sense of ownership (9), for it is not permitted to dispose of it; thus, it is like the manumission of an heir.' Our position is that it is a singling out of some heirs with his wealth during his illness, so it is prohibited, like gifts. Furthermore, everyone for whom a bequest of the physical item is not permitted, it is not permitted for the usufruct, like a foreigner regarding what exceeds the third. As for the report of Umar, he did not single out some heirs with his endowment, and the dispute is only regarding the singling out of some of them. As for granting the management to Hafsa, that is not an endowment upon her, so it is not relevant to the subject of the dispute. Being a benefit from the revenue does not necessitate the permissibility of singling out, evidenced by the fact that if he bequeathed the usufruct of a slave to his heirs, it would not be valid. It is possible that Ahmad's statement in the report of the group be interpreted as him having endowed it upon all the heirs, so that it is in accordance with the hadith of Umar and in accordance with the evidence we have mentioned.