and Abu Yusuf, and Zufar, except in the case of manumission (itq), as it was narrated from them that it should be given priority because the right of Allah the Almighty is attached to manumission, its effect extends, and it is executed even in the property of another; therefore, it must be given priority. Our argument is that a gift is binding in the case of the sick person, so it is given priority over a bequest, just like a gift during good health, [and because it is a gift with fruit, it is prioritized over manumission, like a gift of charity] (12), and just as if the two rights were equal. Fifth, that when the one-third (13) is insufficient for all the gifts, the first one made is started with, whether that first one was manumission (14) or otherwise. Al-Shafi'i held this opinion. Abu Hanifah said: They are all equal if they are of the same type, but if they are of different types and a muhabah (concessionary sale/favorable bargain) was earlier, it is given priority. If it was later, it is made equal to manumission. This is because muhabah is a human right based on exchange, so it is prioritized if it occurs earlier, like the payment of a debt. If their types are equal, they are treated equally because they are gifts of one type reckoned from the one-third, so they are treated equally, just like a bequest. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: Manumission is given priority, whether it occurred earlier or later. Our argument is that they are two executed gifts, so the earlier of them is more deserving, just as if the first one were a muhabah according to Abu Hanifah, or a manumission according to his two companions. Furthermore, an executed gift is binding upon the giver; if it falls within the one-third, it is binding upon the heirs. If the second gift were to share in it, that would negate its binding nature upon the giver, because he has the right to retract some of it by another gift, unlike bequests, for they are not binding upon him; they only become binding upon death at one time, so they are equal in terms of their binding state, unlike two executed gifts. What he said regarding muhabah is incorrect, for it is in the position of a gift, and if it were in the position of an exchange or debt, it would not be from the one-third. As for if they occurred all at once, such as (15) if he appointed a group as agents for these donations, and they executed them all at once, then if they are all manumissions, we cast lots