Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: His value is counted against his inheritance, and if anything remains from his value, he strives for it. As for us, our position is that a bequest is a donation of one's wealth through a gift, destruction, or creating the cause for such, and neither of these is present here; because manumission is not an act of his [the sick person's], nor does it depend upon his choice, and the acceptance of a gift is not a donation, nor is it the destruction of his wealth; rather, it is the acquisition of something that becomes ruined by its very acquisition. Thus, it resembles his acceptance of something he cannot preserve, or something that perishes by remaining [in his possession] at a time when he cannot dispose of it, and it differs from purchase, for that is a waste of his wealth in its price. The Qadi said: This which we have mentioned is the analogy of the opinion of Ahmad; for he said in several places: If he establishes a waqf (endowment) during his illness for his heirs, it is valid and is not considered a bequest, because the endowment is not wealth, for it is neither sold nor inherited. Al-Khabri said: This is the opinion of Ahmad, Ibn al-Majishun, and the people of Basra, and he did not mention any disagreement from Ahmad regarding it. As for if he purchases someone who becomes free upon his possession, the Qadi said: If the one-third covers it, he becomes free and inherits from him. This is the opinion of Malik and Abu Hanifah. If it does not fall within the one-third, he becomes free from it to the extent of the one-third, and he inherits to the extent of the freedom he possesses, and the remainder remains in slavery; if the heir is among those who become free upon his possession when he owns them, he becomes free upon him when he inherits him. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: There is no bequest for an heir, and his value is counted against his inheritance; if anything remains from his value, he strives for it. Some of the followers of Malik said: He becomes free from the capital (ras al-mal) and inherits, just like the gifted or inherited one, and this is the analogy of his statement, because he did not consider the waqf to be a bequest or a permission for the heir, so this is more appropriate; because the slave does not own his own person, so it is made a bequest for him (30), and it is not permissible to make the price a bequest for him, because it did not reach him, nor a bequest to the seller, because he has already received compensation for it. It is merely like building a mosque or a bridge, in that it is not a bequest to anyone who benefits from it, so that does not prevent him from inheritance. The followers of al-Shafi'i differed regarding the analogy of his opinion; some said: If the one-third covers it, he becomes free and inherits, because his manumission is not a bequest to him, according to what we have mentioned. It was said: He becomes free but does not inherit, because if he were to inherit, it would become a bequest to an heir, thus invalidating his bequest, and his manumission and inheritance would become void; so granting him the right to inherit would lead to the invalidation of his inheritance, so invalidating his inheritance is more appropriate. It was also said according to his school: His purchase is void; because its price is a bequest, and a bequest depends upon...