there is no choice for him because he is a destroyer. If he left two thousand besides it, he becomes entirely free, and he inherits one-sixth of the two thousand, and the remainder is for the son. Malik and Abu Hanifah said this. It is said similarly according to the opinion of al-Shafi'i. It is said according to his opinion: He becomes free and does not inherit. It is said: His purchase is annulled. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: The father inherits one-sixth of the estate, which is five hundred, he accounts for it from his person, and he strives for half of his value, and he has no bequest. If he purchased his son for one thousand, owning nothing else, and died, and left his father, he becomes entirely free by purchase in the first view. In the second view, one-third of him becomes free by bequest, and two-thirds of him become free for his grandfather upon death, and his wala' is between them in thirds. Malik said this. Al-Shafi'i’s opinion regarding this is according to what we mentioned in the issue of the father. Abu Hanifah said: One-third of him becomes free by bequest, and he strives for the value of his two-thirds for the father, and he does not inherit. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: He inherits five-sixths of him, and he strives for the value of one-sixth of him. If he left two thousand besides it, he becomes entirely free, and he inherits five-sixths of the two thousand, and the father has the one-sixth. Malik and Abu Hanifah said this. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: For the father is one-sixth of the estate, five hundred, and the rest of it is for the son; he becomes free from it, and he takes one thousand and five hundred. If he left wealth from which the sold item can be paid out of its third, then according to the first view, he becomes entirely free and inherits from it as if he were originally free. According to the second view, he becomes free from it in proportion to the third of the estate, and he inherits in proportion to the freedom he possesses. If the purchaser did not leave a free father, but left a free brother, and did not leave any wealth, he becomes free from the principal wealth according to the first view, and one-third of him becomes free according to the second view, and the brother inherits two-thirds of him, then he becomes free for him. Abu Hanifah said: One-third of him becomes free, and he strives for his uncle for the value of his two-thirds. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: He becomes entirely free, and there is no duty of striving. If he left two thousand besides it, he becomes free, and he inherits the two thousand, and nothing is for the brother, according to all opinions, except for what is said according to al-Shafi'i’s opinion, that he becomes free and does not inherit. It is said: His purchase is void. If he purchased his son for one thousand, owning nothing else, and his value is two-thirds of a thousand, and he left another son, then according to the first view, he becomes free from the principal wealth, and the seller’s ownership of the amount of his value from the price is settled, and he has one-third of the remainder; because the purchaser favored him with it and nothing else remained of the estate, so he has one-third of it, which is one-ninth of a thousand, and he returns two-ninths, and they are between the two sons. According to the second view,