with a hundred and fifty dirhams, or with twenty-five dirhams, it is not valid. This is an anomalous and weak view that is not relied upon.

Section: If he says, "He has a thousand and a dirham against me," or "A thousand and a garment," or "A qafiz of wheat," then the ambiguous [term] is also of the same genus as the interpreted [term]. The same applies if he says, "A thousand dirhams and ten," or "A thousand garments and twenty." This is the view of the Qadi, Ibn Hamid, and Abu Thawr. Al-Tamimi and Abu al-Khattab said: One refers to the interpreted [term] to explain the ambiguous [one], because a thing is conjoined to its own genus. Allah the Almighty says: "[they] shall wait for themselves four months and ten [days]" (31). Furthermore, the "thousand" is ambiguous, so one refers back to the one making the admission to clarify it, just as if he had not conjoined [anything] to it. Abu Hanifa said: If he conjoins a measurable or weighable [commodity] to the ambiguous [term], it acts as an interpretation of it. If he conjoins a measurable [by length] or countable [item], it is not an interpretation, because "against me" (alayya) is for obligation upon the liability; therefore, if he conjoins to it that which is established in the liability by itself, it is an interpretation of it (32), such as his saying: "a hundred and fifty dirhams." To this we say: The Arabs suffice with the interpretation of one of the two phrases over the other phrase (33). Allah the Almighty says: "And they remained in their cave for three hundred years and added nine" (34). And Allah the Almighty says: "On the right and on the left, sitting [to record]" (35). Also, because he mentioned an ambiguous [item] with an interpreted one without evidence to show it is of a different genus, the ambiguous is [presumed] to be of the same genus as the interpreted, just as if he said: "a hundred and fifty dirhams," or "three hundred and thirteen men." This is confirmed by the fact that the ambiguous requires interpretation, and the mention of the interpretation in the phrase concurrent with it is suitable to clarify it; thus, it is obligatory to construe the matter as such. As for His saying: "four months and ten," it is impossible for the "ten" to be months for two reasons: First, the "ten" without the feminine marker (ta marbuta) is a number for the feminine, and the months (ashhur) are masculine, so it is not permitted to count them with it. Second, if they were months, He would have said "fourteen months," using the compound form, not the conjunctive form, just as He said: "Over it are nineteen" (36). Regarding their statement that the "thousand" is ambiguous, we say: That which indicates its interpretation has been joined with it, so it is similar to if he had said: "a hundred and fifty dirhams," or "a hundred and a dirham," according to Abu Hanifa. If it is said: When he says "a hundred and fifty dirhams," the dirham is mentioned for interpretation, which is why the number does not increase because of it, and thus it is suitable to interpret everything preceding it; unlike his saying: "a hundred dirhams," for he mentioned the dirham for the sake of obligation, not for interpretation, evidenced by the fact that the number increases with it. We say: It is suitable for both obligation and interpretation, and the need calls for interpretation; therefore, it is obligatory to construe the matter as such, to safeguard the speech of the one making the admission from ambiguity and vagueness, and to direct it toward clarity and expression. Regarding the statement of the companions of Abu Hanifa that "against me" is for obligation, we say: When that which is obligatory by it is conjoined to that which is [already] obligatory, and one of them is ambiguous and the other interpreted, and it is possible to interpret it by it, it is mandatory that the ambiguous be of the same genus as the interpreted. However, if that is not possible (38), such as conjoining a number for the masculine to the feminine, or vice versa, and the like, then one of them is not of the same genus as the other, and the ambiguous remains in its state of ambiguity, as if he said: "He has four dirhams and ten against me."