Scholars differ over what this wording entails when used without qualification in an endowment, although many—or most—of them favour succession from one group as a whole to another, rather than distributive succession, as when we say:

“For these people, then for the poor.”

The jurists of our school hold two views on what this entails when left unqualified, although they mention no disagreement concerning the statement:

“I establish an endowment for these two, then for the poor.”

The distinction between the two formulations, according to one of these views, is what we explained earlier. The well-known position among the jurists of al-Shāfiʿī’s school is that the wording establishes succession from one group as a whole to another.

They also hold a view that, whenever a beneficiary dies, whether leaving children or not, his share is subject to a gap in the succession of beneficiaries. Some of them have derived a further view: that the deceased’s share passes to the entire second generation of beneficiaries.

Our purpose here is not to discuss what this wording entails when left unqualified. Rather, we are proceeding on the assumption that it does entail succession from one group as a whole to another, since the argument under the alternative interpretation is clear. As for the wording’s capacity to bear both meanings, no one who understands what we have said will dispute it. Once that capacity is established, it is well known that, when wording is joined to something that identifies one of its two possible meanings, that indication must be followed.

No reasonable person can doubt that the second statement makes clear that the founder of the endowment intended each parent’s share to pass to that parent’s children. Otherwise, there would be no difference between a beneficiary dying with children and dying without children. Indeed, there would have been no need to mention the condition at all.

The most that could be said is:

“It serves merely as emphasis, if it carries no implication to the contrary.”

The response is:

“Understanding it to establish a new provision is preferable to understanding it as mere emphasis.”