His statement, “and if he was unaware,” meaning unaware of his death.

His statement, “then [the living person receives] half”: the reasoning is that he made the bequest to the living person and the deceased on the assumption that the deceased existed and was alive. Accordingly, the bequeathed property is divided equally between them. Since it is impossible to deliver the deceased person’s entitlement to him, the living person’s entitlement remains, namely, half.

His statement, “If he bequeaths his wealth to his two sons and to a non-heir, and they both refuse, then the latter receives one ninth”: that is, if he bequeaths all his wealth to his two sons and to a non-heir, saying, for example, “I bequeath my wealth to Zayd and to my two sons, Bakr and Khalid,” then the bequest of more than one-third is invalid if the heirs refuse to approve it. These two sons refuse and say, “We do not accept or approve what exceeds one-third.” The bequest is then reduced from the entire estate to one-third, and that one-third is divided equally among the three—the two sons and the non-heir. Thus, the non-heir’s share is one ninth, because it is one-third of one-third. Hence he said, “then the latter receives one ninth.”