Section: If one bequeaths to a man a dinar from the yield of his house, and its yield is two dinars, it is valid. If the heirs want to sell half of it and leave the half whose rent is one dinar, he has the right to prevent them from doing so, because it is possible that its rent may decrease below a dinar. If the house does not fall within the one-third [of the estate], they have the right to sell what exceeds it, and they must leave the one-third. If its yield is a dinar or less, it belongs to the legatee; if it is more, he receives one dinar, and the remainder belongs to the heirs.
Section: A bequest is valid even for that which one is unable to deliver, such as a runaway slave, a stray camel, a bird in the air, or fish in the water, because if a bequest is valid for something non-existent, it is more appropriate for these. Also, because a bequest is treated as equivalent to inheritance, and these things are inheritable, therefore they may be bequeathed. If he gains possession of it, he takes it and delivers it if it falls within the one-third; the executor has the right to strive to obtain it, and if he succeeds in obtaining it, he takes it if it falls within the one-third.
967 - Issue; He said: (And if he bequeaths a slave-girl to Bishr, then bequeaths her to Bakr, she is between them).
The sum of this is that if he bequeaths a specific item from his wealth to a man, then bequeaths it to another, or bequeaths a third of it to him, then bequeaths a third of it to another, or bequeaths his entire estate to a man, then bequeaths it to another, it is divided between them. This does not constitute a retraction of the first bequest. This is the opinion of Rabi'ah, Malik, al-Thawri, al-Shafi'i, Ishaq, Ibn al-Mundhir, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). Jabir ibn Zayd, al-Hasan, 'Ata', Tawus, and Dawud said: His bequest is for the latter of the two, because he bequeathed to the second what he had already bequeathed to the first, so it was a retraction, just as if he said: "What I bequeathed to Bishr is for Bakr." Also, because the second [bequest] contradicts the first, so when he performs it, it constitutes a retraction, as if he said: "This is for my heirs." Our evidence is that he bequeathed it to both of them, so they are equal in it, just as if he had said to both of them: "I have bequeathed the slave-girl to you." As for what they used as an analogy, in that [scenario] he explicitly stated the retraction of his bequest to Bishr, whereas in our issue, it is possible that he intended to include both, so the bequest of the other is not rendered void by mere doubt.
Section: If he bequeaths a slave to a man, then bequeaths a third of him to another, it is divided between them in quarters. And according to the opinion of the others, the second should have a full third of him. If he bequeaths his slave to two people, and one of them rejects his bequest, the other receives half. If he bequeaths to two people two-thirds of his estate, and the heirs reject that, and one of the two legatees rejects his bequest, the other receives a full third; because he bequeathed it to him individually, and the competition has ceased, so it is completed for him, just as if he were the sole recipient.
