and a sister, he would have a seventh, just as if a grandmother were with them, according to the three narrations. Likewise, if there were a mother and three sisters of different lineages in the case. If there is a husband with them, the case is out of nine, and the legatee has a tenth, according to the three narrations. If the heirs are three sisters of different lineages, the legatee has a sixth according to the three narrations. If they are a husband, two parents, and two sons, the case is out of fifteen, and it undergoes 'awl by another sixth, so it becomes out of seventeen. This is also according to the opinion of al-Khallal, because the smallest of the heirs' shares is a sixth. According to the other narration, the legatee has one share, added to the fifteen, so it becomes sixteen. If they are a wife, two parents, and a son, the inheritance distribution is out of twenty-four, and it undergoes 'awl by the sixth bequeathed, up to twenty-eight. According to the second narration, one share is added to it for the legatee, so it becomes out of twenty-five. According to the opinion of al-Khallal, it is increased by the equivalent of the wife's share, so it becomes out of twenty-seven. If there are five sons, the legatee (8) has a full sixth, and it is valid out of six (9) according to the three narrations. If there is a wife with them, the inheritance distribution is valid out of forty, then you add to it a share for the legatee, according to one of the narrations, it becomes forty-one (10). According to the opinion of al-Khallal, it is increased by the equivalent of the wife's share, so it becomes forty-five. According to the first narration, we add to it the equivalent of its sixth—and it has no sixth—so we multiply it by six, then we add its sixth to it, becoming two hundred and eighty; the legatee has forty, the wife has thirty, and each son has forty-two. If he left two parents and two sons, and bequeathed a sixth of his wealth to a man and a share to another, you make the one with the share like the mother, give the owner of the sixth a full sixth, and divide the remainder among the heirs and the legatee into seven, so it is valid out of forty-two; the owner of the sixth has seven, and the owner of the share has five, according to the three narrations. It is possible that the one with the share is given a full seventh, as if he had bequeathed it to him (11) without another bequest, so he would have six, and twenty-nine would remain, not divisible by six, so we multiply it by forty-two, which becomes two hundred and fifty-two.

Section: If he bequeaths a portion [juz'], an allotment [hazz], a share [nasib], or a thing [shay'] of his wealth, the heirs give him whatever they wish. I do not know of any disagreement regarding this. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others; because every thing is a portion, a share, an allotment, and a thing. Likewise if he said: "Give so-and-so from my wealth," or "provide for him." Because that has no limit in language or in the Sacred Law, so it remains upon its absolute sense.

962- Issue; he said: "And if he bequeathed to him the equivalent of the share of one of his heirs, without naming him, he shall have the equivalent of the one among them with the smallest share, as if he had bequeathed to him the equivalent of the share of one of his heirs. If they are a son and four wives, then it would be valid out of thirty-two shares; the wives have the eighth, which is four, and what remains is for the son. So add to the shares of the inheritance distribution the equivalent of the portion of one of his wives, then the inheritance distribution becomes out of thirty-three shares; the legatee has one share, each wife has a share, and what remains is for the son."

The sum of this is that if he bequeaths the equivalent of the share of one of his heirs, without specifying, if the heirs are equal in inheritance, such as sons, then he has the equivalent of the share of one of them, added to the inheritance distribution, and he is treated as one of them added to them. If they are unequal, like the case of al-Khiraqi, he has the equivalent of the share of the one among them with the least inheritance, added to their inheritance distribution. If he bequeaths the share of a specific heir, he has the equivalent of his share, added to the inheritance distribution. This is the opinion of the majority, and it is the view of Abu Hanifah and al-Shafi'i. Malik, Ibn Abi Layla, Zufar, and Dawud said: He is given the equivalent of the specific heir's share, or the equivalent of the share of one of them if they are equal, from the original wealth, without being added, and the remainder is divided between the heirs; because the share of...