retraction; because he has attached to it a right that allows for its sale, so it is more significant than offering it for sale. There is another view that it is not a retraction, which is a view held by the followers of al-Shafi'i, because it does not remove ownership, so it resembles leasing it. The same ruling applies to the mukataba.

Section: If he bequeaths grain then grinds it, or flour then kneads it, or dough then bakes it, or bread then crumbles it, or makes it into breadcrumbs, it is a retraction; because he has removed its name and exposed it to usage, which indicates his retraction. This is also the view of al-Shafi'i. If he bequeaths flax or cotton and spins it, or yarn and weaves it, or cloth and cuts it, or silver bullion and mints it, or a sheep and slaughters it, it is a retraction. This is the view of the People of Opinion and al-Shafi'i in his manifest school. Abu al-Khattab chose the view that it is not a retraction, and it is a statement of Abu Thawr, because it does not remove the name. Our evidence is that he has exposed it to usage, so it is a retraction, like the preceding examples. His statement that "it does not remove the name" is incorrect, for cloth is not called yarn, and yarn is not called flax.

Section: If he bequeaths something specific, then mixes it with something else in a way that it cannot be distinguished, it is a retraction; because it is impossible to deliver it, which indicates his retraction. If he mixes it with something from which it can be distinguished, it is not a retraction, because it is possible to deliver it. If he bequeaths a qafiz of wheat from a pile, then mixes it with something else, it is not a retraction, whether he mixes it with something equal, better, or worse, because it was undivided (musha') and remains undivided. It is said: If he mixes it with something better, it is a retraction, because he cannot deliver the bequeathed item except by delivering something better, and it is not incumbent upon the heir to deliver something better; thus, it becomes impossible to deliver, unlike the case where he mixes it with something equal or worse.

Section: If something happens to the bequeathed item that removes its name, without an act from the testator, such as grain falling on the ground and becoming a crop, or a house collapsing and becoming an empty plot, during the lifetime of the testator, the bequest for it becomes void, because the name no longer applies to what remains. If the collapse of the house