This is what the Qadi mentioned, and it is the view of Malik and al-Shafi'i. This is because the heir competes with the stranger when the heirs authorize both bequests, so each of them receives a third; therefore, if they invalidate half of them through rejection, the invalidation applies to both of them, and what remains is shared between them, just as if that portion had been lost through a means other than rejection. Abu al-Khattab chose the view that the entire third belongs to the stranger. Something similar to this was narrated from Abu Hanifa, because they have no power to invalidate the third or less if it belongs to a stranger; if we had treated the bequest as shared between them, they would have had the power to invalidate what exceeds the sixth. If the heirs clarify this by saying: "We authorize the third for both of you, and we reject what exceeds it in your bequests," or they say: "We reject half of the bequest of each of you, and we retain half of it for him," then that is more emphatic in designating a sixth for each of them due to their explicit statement. If they say: "We authorize the entire bequest of the heir, and we reject half of the stranger's bequest," then it is as they said, because they have the right to authorize for both and reject for both, so they have the right to authorize for one and reject for the other. If they authorize the entire bequest for the stranger and reject half of the heir's bequest, it is valid, as we have stated. If they intend to reduce the stranger's portion to less than half of his bequest, they do not have that power, whether they authorize for the heir or reject for him. If they reject the entire bequest of the heir and half of the bequest of the stranger, then according to the Qadi, they have that right; this is because they have the right to authorize the third for both of them, in which case they would share it, and each of them would have half of it; then, if they retract regarding what belongs to the heir, the stranger does not exceed what he had in the state of authorization for the heir. According to the view of Abu al-Khattab, the entire third is reserved for the stranger, because he is only diminished by the competition of the heir, and when that competition ceases, it is mandatory to reserve the third for him, as he was bequeathed it. If he left two sons and bequeathed two-thirds of his wealth to them and a third to a stranger, and they rejected the bequest, Abu al-Khattab said: "In my view, the entire third belongs to the stranger." According to the Qadi, he receives a ninth. Derived from this are the same sub-issues we mentioned in the preceding case.