Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (11/143)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

in every respect. This is because each heir’s share is undivided within the estate, so how can we oblige him to have his share separated out without his consent? Moreover, this may lead to discord among them, and the testator may estimate their values to be equal when in fact they differ.

His statement, “then it is valid by way of ratification,” means that the bequest is valid as a ratification, not as an initial gift. Accordingly, the conditions of a gift are not considered in this ratification, because it is the ratification of another person’s disposition. Thus, if one of the heirs is suffering from a terminal illness and possesses no wealth other than what he inherited from his deceased relative, and he approves it, his approval is valid even if it encompasses the entire estate. This is because he has not donated anything; at most, he has approved the deceased’s disposition before he himself came to own it, since the deceased had bequeathed it to a particular person. Hence, the heir’s approval is not an initial gift, nor is it a pure donation; rather, it is the ratification of another’s disposition.

A bequest made by a poor person whose heir is in need is disliked. A bequest of the entire estate is permissible for one who has no heir. If one-third is insufficient for the bequests, the reduction is apportioned proportionately, ...

His statement, “a bequest made by a poor person,” refers here to one who is considered poor by common convention, not to the poor person as defined in the chapter of zakah. In the chapter of zakah, a poor person is one who does not possess enough to meet his own needs and those of his dependants for a year. Here, however, a poor person is one whom people regard as poor: someone who does not leave behind substantial wealth, even if he possesses enough for his own maintenance for one year.

His statement, “whose heir is in need,” means that the heir too is poor like him and needs wealth. It is disliked for such a person to make a bequest, because after his death the heir’s heart becomes attached to the wealth. The testator made the bequest only in seeking reward, yet it is more appropriate to give the wealth to the one who has a legal right to it and is in need, rather than give it to an unrelated person. Therefore, so long as the heir is needy and the wealth is limited, it is disliked for a person to make a bequest, even of one-third.

من كل وجه؛ لأن كل وارث حقه مشاع في التركة، فكيف نلزمه بإفراز حقه بدون رضاه؟! ثم ربما يحصل تشاحن فيما بينهم، ثم إن الموصي قد يقدر أن قيمها واحدة وهي مختلفة. وقوله: «فتصح تنفيذاً» أي: تصح الوصية تنفيذاً لا ابتداء عطية، وعلى هذا فلا يعتبر شروط العطية في هذا التنفيذ؛ لأنه تنفيذ لتصرف الغير، وعليه فلو كان أحد الورثة مريضاً مرض الموت، وليس له مال إلا ما ورثه من مورثه، وأجاز فتصح إجازته ولو استوعبت جميع المال؛ لأنه لم يتبرع بشيء، فغاية ما هنالك أنه أجاز تصرف المُوَرِّث قبل أن يملكه هو؛ لأن المورث قد أوصى به لفلان، فتكون إجازة الوارث ليست ابتداء عطية، وليست تبرعاً محضاً، وإنما هي تنفيذ لتصرف غيره. وَتُكْرَهُ وَصِيَّةُ فَقِيرٍ وَارِثُهُ مُحْتَاجٌ وَتَجُوزُ بِالكُلِّ لِمَنْ لَا وَارِثَ لَهُ، وَإِنْ لَمْ يَفِ الثُّلُثُ بِالوَصَايا فَالنَّقْصُ بِالقِسْطِ، ..... قوله: «وتكره وصية فقير» المراد بالفقير هنا الفقير عرفاً، وليس الفقير في باب الزكاة، فالفقير في باب الزكاة هو الذي لا يجد كفايته وكفاية عائلته سنة، والفقير هنا ما عُدَّ عند الناس فقيراً، وهو من لم يترك مالاً كثيراً، ولو كان عنده مؤونة نفسه لمدة سنة. قوله: «وارثه محتاج» يعني وارثه ـ أيضاً ـ فقير مثله، يحتاج إلى المال، فهذا يكره أن يوصي؛ لأنه بعد موته تتعلق نفس الوارث بالمال، والموصي إنما أوصى طلباً للأجر، والأولى أن نعطي المال لمن له الحق شرعاً، وهو محتاج، ولا نعطيه شخصاً أجنبياً، فما دام الوارث محتاجاً والمال قليل، فإنه يكره للإنسان أن يوصي ولو بالثلث.