to clarify. If he says: "It is the third," she is divorced alone. If he says: "I did not divorce her," the first two are divorced. If he does not clarify, lots are drawn between the first two and the third. The Qadi said in "al-Mujarrad": This is more correct. If he says: "I divorced this one, or this one and this one," he is held to his clarification. If he says: "It is the first," she is divorced alone. If he says: "It is not the first," the other two are divorced, as if he had said: "I divorced this one, or these two." He does not have the right to sexual intercourse before the specification; if he has intercourse, it does not constitute a specification. If one of them dies, the divorce does not become specified in the other. Abu Hanifa said: The divorce becomes specified in the other, because she died before the establishment of her divorce. Our view is that the death of one of them, or intercourse with her, does not negate the possibility of her being the divorced one, so it is not a specification for other than her, like her illness. If he says: "I divorced this one and this one, or this one and this one," the apparent meaning is that he divorced two women and does not know whether they are the first two or the last two, as if he had said: "I divorced these two or these two." If he says: "They are the first two," the divorce becomes specified in them; if he says: "I did not divorce the first two," the last two become specified. If he says: "I only doubt the divorce of the second and the last two," the first is divorced, and doubt remains regarding the three. Whenever he interprets his speech with something plausible, it is accepted from him.

1285 - Issue: He said: "If he dies before that, the heirs draw lots, and the inheritance belongs to those who remain among them."

Ahmad explicitly stated this. Abu Hanifa said: The inheritance is divided among all of them, because they are equal in the probability of entitlement, and the right does not exit from them. al-Shafi'i said: The inheritance specific to them is withheld until they reach a settlement regarding it, because the entitled one among them is not known. The basis for al-Khiraqi's opinion is the statement of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and because they are equal and there is no way to specify, thus resorting to lots became obligatory, like someone who emancipates slaves during his terminal illness while having no wealth other than them, and the ruling has been established regarding them.