And if he is insolvent, then what he owned of it has been emancipated alone. And in every situation where we said she becomes an umm walad, she becomes an umm walad here, whether he is solvent or insolvent, according to the opinion of al-Khiraqi, just as when he makes a jointly-owned slave girl pregnant (istilad). Al-Qadi said: She becomes an umm walad regarding it to the extent of what he owned of her. This is the school of al-Shafi'i.

958 - Issue: He said: (If the legatee dies before the testator, the bequest is void).

This is the opinion of most scholars. It was narrated from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him. The same was said by al-Zuhri, Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, Rabi'ah, Malik, al-Shafi'i, and the scholars of opinion (ashab al-ra'y). Al-Hasan said: It belongs to the child of the legatee. 'Ata' said: If the testator knew of the death of the legatee and did not change anything in what he had bequeathed, then it belongs to the heir of the legatee; because he died after (1) the contract of the bequest, so the heir takes his place, just as if he died after the death of the testator and before acceptance. For us [our evidence is] that it is a gift that encountered the donee dead, so it was not valid, just as if he had gifted it to a dead person; this is because a bequest is a gift after death, and if he dies before acceptance, the bequest also becomes void. Even if we concede its validity, the gift encountered a living person, contrary to our issue.

Section: A bequest to a dead person is not valid. This was stated by Abu Hanifa and al-Shafi'i. Malik said: If he knew that he was dead, it is permissible, and it belongs to his heirs after the payment of his debts and the execution of his wills; because the purpose is to benefit him through it, and through this, the benefit is attained for him, so it resembles the case where he was alive. For us [our evidence is] that he bequeathed to someone to whom a bequest cannot be valid, since he did not know his state, so it is not valid even if he knew his state, like an animal. It differs from the living person; for the bequest is valid for him in both states. Furthermore, it is a contract that requires acceptance, so it is not valid for the dead, like a gift. Once this is established, if he bequeaths his third, or one hundred, to two people, one living and one dead, then the living person has