my children: So-and-so, So-and-so, and So-and-so,” leaving out the others. This is differentiation: these three are entitled to it, while the others are entitled to nothing, because he has differentiated between them. This, then, is the case in question. But is it permissible for him to differentiate between them, giving to one and depriving another? This is not permissible, due to the Prophet’s statement, peace and blessings be upon him: “Fear Allah and treat your children fairly.” (1)

The opposite of giving precedence is deferring. Thus, he may say: “This is an endowment for my children; whoever is negligent in the prayer is to be deferred.” In that case, we give to those who are not negligent and defer those who are negligent. Even if we assume that the negligent one has a greater need for the money than the others, we do not give him anything, because the endower stipulated that whoever possesses this quality is to be deferred.

His statement, “and the consideration of a quality,” means that the endower’s condition must be observed when it makes a particular quality a criterion. For example, he may say: “I have endowed this to my children who are seekers of knowledge.” This is the consideration of a quality, namely seeking knowledge: the seekers of knowledge are given, while the others are deprived. Or he may stipulate poverty, saying: “I have endowed this to my children who are poor.” Here, the poor are entitled to it, while the wealthy are not, because he has restricted it by a qualifying attribute. Likewise, if he says: “I have endowed this to my children who are married,” this is valid, because marriage is a quality intended by the Sacred Law, and because married people are generally in greater need than those who are unmarried.

His statement, “and its absence”: such as when he says: “This is an endowment for my children who are not—”