Yes, that is valid. Thus, if he says, “This is an endowment for my children, and its administrator is So-and-so from among my children,” that is valid, and no one may object to it—unless, of course, he acts contrary to the requirements of the trust; that is a different matter.

His statement, “and other than that,” means that these eight are not exhaustive. Rather, this applies to everything stipulated by the endower, provided that it does not contravene the Sacred Law. The reason it is obligatory to refer back to the endower’s condition is that he has removed this property from his ownership subject to a particular description and condition. Therefore, we may not dispose of it except in accordance with the terms upon which he removed it from his ownership.

“If he makes no specification and stipulates no condition, the wealthy and the male—and their opposites—are equal, and administration belongs to the beneficiary of the endowment.”

His statement, “If he makes no specification,” refers to the endower.

His statement, “and stipulates no condition,” means that he stipulates nothing specific.

His statement, “the wealthy and the male—and their opposites—are equal,” means that if he makes no specification and stipulates nothing—neither an administrator, nor a qualifying description, nor precedence, nor postponement—then the wealthy and the male, along with their opposites, are equal. The opposite of the wealthy is the poor, and the opposite of the male is the female. Thus, if he says, “This is an endowment for my children,” and says no more, then it is for all his children: male and female, young and old, wealthy and poor alike. A male does not receive the share of two females, because this is not complete ownership; rather, it is an entitlement-based grant of ownership. This is why those for whom the endowment was made do not have the right to sell it, mortgage it, or make it an endowment themselves. It is therefore unlike a gift, for in a gift the male must be given the share of two females, whereas an endowment is not so.

Thus, if he says, “This is an endowment for my children,” and he has four sons and four daughters, it is divided into eight shares, with the male receiving the same as the female. The reason for this is that