three, which is one-fifth. In the 'Doctrine of the Apportioners', he has six out of thirty-six, which is one-sixth. If there is a daughter, a son's daughter, a brother's child who is a hermaphrodite, and a paternal uncle, it is out of six: the daughter has half, the son's daughter has a sixth, the hermaphrodite has a sixth, and the paternal uncle has what remains, according to both opinions alike.

Section: If he leaves two hermaphrodites or more, you assign them according to the number of their potential states in one of the two methods. You assign four states for two, eight for three, sixteen for four, and thirty-two for five. Then, you aggregate their wealth in all states and divide it by the number of their states; what results from the division is for them if they are from one side. If they are from different sides, you sum what belongs to each of them in the states and divide it by the total number of states, and the result of the division is his portion. This is the opinion of Ibn Abi Layla, Dirar, and Yahya ibn Adam. The opinion of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan is based on the analogy of al-Sha'bi's view. The other method is that they are assigned two states: once as males and once as females, just as you do for one individual. This is the opinion of Abu Yusuf. The first is more correct because it gives each individual according to the probability within him, thus ensuring justice between them. In the other method, some probabilities are given while others are excluded, which is an arbitrary decision unsupported by evidence. The explanation of this in the case of a hermaphrodite child, a hermaphrodite brother's child, and a paternal uncle is: if they are both males, the wealth is for the child; if they are both females, the child has half and the remainder is for the uncle. Thus, it is out of four according to those who assign them two states; the child has three-quarters of the wealth, and the uncle has one-quarter. Those who assign them states add two other states: that the child alone is male, and that the brother's child alone is male. The issue is thus out of eight; the child has the wealth in two states and half in two states, so he has one-quarter of that, which is three-quarters of the wealth. The brother's child has half the wealth in one state, so he has one-quarter of it, which is an eighth, and the uncle has the same. This is more equitable. Whoever holds the opinion of the 'claim' regarding what exceeds the certain portion says: the brother has half with certainty, and the other half they contend for, so it is divided between them in thirds, and it is resolved out of six. The same ruling applies to a hermaphrodite brother and a brother's child, and in every case of two agnates where one excludes the other; the excluded person inherits nothing if they are a female. If he leaves a daughter, a hermaphrodite child, a hermaphrodite son's child, and an agnate, he who assigns them two states makes it out of six: the hermaphrodite child has three, the daughter has two shares, and the remainder is for the uncle. And he who assigns them four states makes it out of twelve, and assigns the son's child half of a sixth, and the uncle his sixth; this is the most equitable of the two paths because the other path involves disinheriting the son's child despite the probability of his inheritance being equal to the probability of the uncle's inheritance. You act in this manner for three or more. This amount is sufficient for this chapter, as it is rare and seldom needed; the assembly of two or more hermaphrodites is the rarest of the rare and its occurrence has not been heard of, so there is no need to dwell upon it.

Section: We have found in our era something similar to this, which the scholars of inheritance (fara'idi) have not mentioned and have not heard of. We found two individuals who have no outlet in their front, neither a penis nor a vagina. As for one of them, they mentioned that he has nothing in his front except a protruding piece of flesh like a hillock, from which urine continuously oozes. He sent to us asking about his ruling regarding prayer and avoiding impurity in this year, which is the year six hundred and ten. The second is an individual who has only one outlet between the two exits, from which he defecates and urinates. I asked the person who informed me about him regarding his attire, and he informed me that he only wears women's clothing, mingles with them, spins with them, and considers himself a woman. I was told that in some lands of the non-Arabs ('Ajam), there is a person who has no outlet at all, neither front nor back, and he only vomits what he eats [and what he drinks]. This and its likes are in the meaning of the hermaphrodite, except that it is not possible to judge it by his urination. If he has no other sign, he is 'mushkil' (problematic); he should be given the ruling of the problematic hermaphrodite regarding his inheritance and all his rulings. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

1039 - Issue: He said: (The son of the woman who underwent li'an, his mother inherits from him, and her agnates; if he leaves a mother and a maternal uncle, his mother has a third, and what remains is for the uncle.)

The summary of it is that if a man performs li'an with his wife, disavows her child, and the ruler separates them; he is disavowed.