the divorce. Ibn 'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: 'If you intended one of them specifically and then forgot who it was, they all share in the divorce. But if you did not intend one of them specifically, then divorce whichever of them you wish.' Al-Shafi'i and the people of Iraq said: One refers back to his designation in all cases. If he had intercourse with one of them, it is considered a designation for her through the marriage, according to the opinion of the people of Iraq and some of the companions of al-Shafi'i, may Allah be pleased with him. Al-Shafi'i said: It does not count as a designation. If he dies before clarifying, the inheritance is shared among all of them, according to the opinion of the people of Iraq. Malik said: They are all divorced, and they have no inheritance. Al-Shafi'i said: Their inheritance is withheld, and if the divorce was before consummation, he gives each one half of a dowry, and the rest is withheld from their dowries. Dawud said: The ruling of their divorce is void due to the ambiguity, and each one is entitled to a full dowry and the inheritance is among them all. If they die before him, the latter one is divorced, according to the opinion of the people of Iraq. Al-Shafi'i said: One refers back to his designation, according to what we have mentioned. Our view is the statement of 'Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and the statement of Ibn 'Abbas does not contradict it; because Ibn 'Abbas acknowledges 'Ali's precedence, as he said: 'If a statement from 'Ali is established for us, we do not go beyond it to anyone else.' He also said: 'My knowledge compared to the knowledge of 'Ali is only like a puddle compared to the vast sea.' Also, because it involves the removal of ownership from a human, so lots should be used in cases of ambiguity, just as in the case of emancipation (i'taq). This has been established in the case of emancipation by the report of 'Imran ibn al-Husayn. Also, because the rights are equal in a way that makes it impossible to determine the deserving party without lots, therefore, it is appropriate that lots be used, like in the division (qisma) and travel (safar) between wives. As for dividing the inheritance among everyone, it involves giving one of them wealth she does not deserve, and reducing another's right for certain, while withholding it without a deadline is a waste of their rights, and depriving everyone is a certain denial of the right from its owner. If he had two wives, and he divorced one of them, then one of them died, and then he died, lots are drawn between them, so whoever...