—that which is intrinsically impure—cannot be owned, though one may derive benefit from it. The rest of one’s property may be owned and used. Thus, if the testator has three equivalent dogs and bequeaths one dog to this man, the bequest takes effect whether or not the heirs consent, because they retain two of the same kind.

Likewise, regarding contaminated oil, they say that it is not deemed property, so its sale is invalid. However, intrinsic impurity differs from contamination: something intrinsically impure includes the fat of carrion, the fat of swine, and the fat of every animal whose meat is forbidden to eat. It is this fat that is meant here. A bequest of it is invalid.

As for oil extracted from trees, it cannot be intrinsically impure; it can only become contaminated. Animal fat and suet, if taken from an impure animal, are intrinsically impure; but if they are from a pure animal and are touched by impurity, they are contaminated. Tree oil may become contaminated, but it is not intrinsically impure.

Accordingly, a bequest of contaminated oil is valid, because it may lawfully be used for treating leather, coating ships, and similar purposes. It thus has a lawful benefit.

May it be sold?

The answer is: if we hold that it can be purified—and this is the correct view—then it may be sold. It is like an impure garment, which may be sold and then purified. But if we hold that it cannot be purified, then it may not be sold. The relied-upon position of the school is that it cannot be purified and may not be sold, but the correct view is otherwise.

“And he is entitled to one-third of both of them, even if the estate is large, if the heirs do not consent; and a bequest of an unspecified item, such as a slave or a ewe, is valid . . .”

His statement, “And he is entitled to one-third of both of them, even if the estate is large, if the heirs do not consent”: “he” means the beneficiary of the bequest. He is entitled to one-third of the dog and one-third of the contaminated oil, even if the estate is large. However, if the heirs approve the bequest of the entire dog or the entire quantity of oil, then it all belongs to him. Let us give an example to make the point clear:

A man bequeaths a crop-guarding dog to someone, while he owns livestock worth hundreds of thousands. If the dog were sold, it would be worth ten riyals, whereas the livestock would be worth millions. When he dies, the heirs say, “We do not approve the bequest.” The beneficiary is then entitled to one-third of the dog, because a dog is a distinct category with no equivalent