What is the ruling if an heir admits a bequest to a person and then, within the same sitting, affirms the bequest while stating that what was bequeathed to the first person is actually for the second person?

Primary text

There are two views. The stronger view holds that the admission to the second person is accepted because the single sitting is treated like a single instance (*Hāl Wāhidah*). This view aligns with the statement of Al-Khiraqi, who stated that if a bequest is made to one person and then to another in the same sitting, the bequest is shared between them, whereas if made in two separate sittings, it belongs entirely to the first. The stronger position is that the right of the first person is not fully established in the entire one-third because the subsequent statement in the same sitting implies retraction regarding the first and affirmation regarding the second, akin to explicitly revoking the first bequest and making a new one to the second party. This view is held by Al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, the People of Reason, and aligns with the opinion of Al-Hasan, 'Ata', and Tawus.