Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (11/133)

the bequest takes effect when the slave has become free, and once he is free, he may validly own property. But it is not valid for a man to give a gift to his slave, based on the view that a slave cannot own through being granted ownership; and a gift must become the recipient’s property immediately.

The eleventh difference: a gift pertains exclusively to property, whereas a bequest may concern both property and rights. Thus, it is valid for a person to appoint someone by bequest as trustee over his endowment, and—according to a weak view—it is valid for him to appoint someone by bequest to arrange the marriage of his daughters. A gift, however, pertains exclusively to property.

It should be known that one of the means of acquiring knowledge is for a person to recognize the distinctions between similar issues. Some scholars have authored books on this subject, such as the distinctions between sale and lease, between lease and a unilateral-reward contract, between a gift and a bequest, and between all similar issues. One of the means by which a person broadens his understanding and gains depth in knowledge is to be diligent in tracing such distinctions and recording them. This is what has been made easy for us to mention, though further distinctions may become apparent upon reflection.

We have mentioned that, according to one view—and this is the established position of the school—a person may appoint someone by bequest to arrange the marriage of his daughters. The correct view, however, is that such an appointment is not valid, because he is the guardian of his daughters only so long as he is alive. The order of guardianship is not determined by the guardian himself; rather, it is determined by the One who appoints the guardian—Allah, the Most High. Accordingly, when a person dies, his guardianship in marrying off his daughters ceases, just as the guardianship of the remaining guardians ceases.

Thus, if a man says at the time of his death, “I appoint so-and-so by bequest to undertake the marriage of my daughters,” and then dies while they have a paternal uncle, the stronger view is that their paternal uncle is to arrange their marriages. According to the second view, the appointed executor is to arrange their marriages.

الوصية تصادف العبد وقد عتق، وإذا عتق صح أن يتملك، ولا يصح أن يعطي عبده بناءً على أن العبد لا يملك بالتمليك، والعطية لا بد أن يتملكها في حينها. الفرق الحادي عشر: العطية خاصة بالمال، والوصية تكون بالمال والحقوق، ولذلك يصح أن يوصي شخصاً ليكون ناظراً على وقفه، ويصح على قولٍ ضعيف أن يوصي شخصاً بتزويج بناته، ولكن العطية خاصة بالمال. وليعلم أن من أسباب تحصيل العلم أن يعرف الإنسان الفروق بين المسائل المشتبهة، وقد ألف بعض العلماء في هذا كتباً، كالفروق بين البيع والإجارة، وبين الإجارة والجعالة، بين العطية والوصية، وكل المسائل المشتبهة، فمن أسباب اتساع نظر الإنسان وتعمقه في العلم أن يحرص على تتبع الفروق ويقيدها. هذا ما تيسر لنا، وقد يكون عند التأمل فروق أخرى. وقد ذكرنا أنه يصح على قول أن يوصي الإنسان بتزويج بناته وهذا هو المذهب، والصحيح أنه لا تصح وصيته بتزويج بناته؛ لأنه ولي على بناته ما دام حياً، وترتيب الولاية ليست إلى الولي، بل هي إلى ولي الولي وهو الله ﷿، وعلى هذا فإذا مات الإنسان انقطعت ولايته في تزويج بناته، كما تنقطع ولاية بقية الأولياء. فلو قال شخص عند موته: أوصيت إلى فلان أن يتولى تزويج بناتي ثم مات ولهن عم، فالقول الراجح أن يزوجهن العم، والقول الثاني: يزوجهن الوصي.