What is meant here
The point is not to establish a complete, detailed ruling concerning the share of a disabled or weak child. What is available is a summary attributing to Shahrur the use of this example to explain that a bequest concerns a particular individual case, unlike inheritance as a general law in this account.
What is attributed to Shahrur
The available evidence is that Shahrur says that “a disabled, young, or weak child may need special consideration in a bequest that the general law of inheritance does not permit.” This wording is the evidence editor’s paraphrase, not a verbatim statement from the episode; it therefore remains a preliminary attribution requiring verification against Episode 26.
Atlas explanation
This atom records an applied example in the presentation of the difference between inheritance and bequest; by itself, it is not sufficient to define either comprehensively. According to the summary, the example draws attention to the existence of a particular personal need; it does not specify the amount of the gift or its procedures.
Qualified conclusion
If the summary is confirmed upon returning to the original material, the function of the example is to show that an individual condition of weakness is raised within the logic of bequest in the presentation attributed to Shahrur, rather than being automatically settled by what general inheritance provides. This is an inference from the summary’s wording, not an independent quotation.
Open question and limits of the record
This record contains neither a verbatim statement from the episode nor raw context setting out the argument in detail. It is therefore not possible to determine the conditions of the example, its legal scope, or its precise relationship to the rest of Shahrur’s discussion of bequest and inheritance. The original episode must be examined, and what it establishes then compared with the pages of Towards New Foundations for Islamic Jurisprudence and The Mother of the Book and Its Detailed Elaboration.