What is the legal ruling when one states an obligation regarding property and immediately qualifies it with a different term (e.g., gifting a dwelling then calling it usufruct or loan)?

Primary text

When one states, 'To you is this dwelling as a gift (h̄ibah),' and then substitutes it with 'usufruct (sukuny)' or 'loan (ʿāriyyah),' this constitutes an admission of what was substituted, but not an admission of the dwelling itself. This is because the latter part of the statement negates some of what was established in the first part, which is permissible, similar to affirming a whole and then excepting a part of it. This structure is exemplified by the linguistic concept of 'badal al-ishtimāl' (substitutive clause of inclusion), where a part inherent to the whole is substituted, as seen in the verse regarding fighting during the sacred month (Quran 2:217) and Moses attributing his forgetfulness to Satan (Quran 18:63). If one states, 'To you is this dwelling, one-third of it,' or 'one-fourth of it,' it is valid, confirming the portion specified, and this is substitution of a part (badal al-baʿḍ), not exception.