Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

is permissible in the Arabic language. Allah, Exalted is He, says:

“Be just; that is nearer to righteousness.” [al-Ma'idah 5:8]

Thus, His saying, “that,” refers to the justice understood from the word “Be just.” So, if a testator bequeaths one-third of his estate and subsequently acquires wealth, it is included in the bequest, because the relevant one-third is that which exists at the time of death, not at the time the bequest is made.

For example, a man bequeaths one-third of his estate when he possesses three thousand; at the time of the bequest, one-third is one thousand. But then Allah enriches him, and at his death he possesses three million. The bequest will therefore be one million. This is why he said, “and subsequently acquires wealth, it is included in the bequest.”

His statement, “even blood money,” indicates a difference of opinion, though it is a weak one. It has been said that blood money is not included in the bequest, since it only becomes due after his death and thus belongs exclusively to the heirs. Those who hold that it is included in the bequest say: the beneficiary of the bequest becomes entitled to the testator’s wealth, and the testator’s death is a condition for this entitlement to become established. As for the cause establishing it—the wrongful act—it preceded death, since the wrongful act occurred before death. This is the correct view: blood money is included in the bequest.

For example, a man bequeaths one-third of his wealth when he possesses two hundred thousand, then is killed accidentally and becomes entitled to blood money of one hundred thousand. The total will then be three hundred thousand, and the beneficiary of the bequest will receive one hundred thousand. If we were to say that the blood money is not included, the beneficiary would receive one-third of the two hundred thousand—that is, sixty-six and two-thirds thousand. But we say that he receives one hundred thousand, because the blood money is considered part of his wealth, as it is compensation for his life.

Accordingly, when judges record the heirs’ waiver of the blood money, they should first ask whether he made a bequest or not. If he had made a bequest, then it is not

سائغ في اللغة العربية، قال الله تعالى: ﴿اعْدِلُوا هُوَ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَى﴾ [المائدة: ٨]، فقوله: (هو) أي: العدل المفهوم من كلمة «اعدلوا»، فإذا أوصى موصٍ بثلثه فاستحدث مالاً دخل في الوصية؛ لأن المعتبر الثلث عند الموت لا عند الوصية. مثال ذلك: رجل أوصى بثلثه وعنده ثلاثة آلاف، فالثلث حين الوصية يساوي ألفاً، لكن الرجل أغناه الله، وصار عنده ثلاثة ملايين عند الوفاة، فتكون الوصية مليوناً، ولهذا قال: «فاستحدث مالاً دخل في الوصية». وقوله: «ولو دية» إشارة خلاف لكنه خلاف ضعيف، فقيل: إن الدية لا تدخل في الوصية؛ لأنها إنما وجبت بعد موته فتكون للورثة خاصة، والذين قالوا تدخل في الوصية قالوا: لأن الموصى له صار مستحقاً لمال الموصي، وموته شرط لثبوتها، أما سبب الثبوت ـ وهو الجناية ـ فهو سابق على الموت؛ لأن الجناية حدثت قبل الموت، وهذا هو الصحيح أن الدية تدخل في الوصية. مثال ذلك: رجل أوصى بثلث ماله وعنده مائتا ألف، ثم قُتِلَ خطأً فاستحق الدية مائة ألف، فيكون الجميع ثلاثمائة ألف فيكون للموصى له مائة ألف، ولو قلنا: إن الدية لا تدخل لكان للموصى له ثلث المائتين، أي: ستة وستون وثلثان، لكن نقول: له مائة ألف؛ لأن الدية تعتبر من ماله؛ لأنها عوض نفسه. وبناءً على هذا ينبغي للقضاة إذا كتبوا تنازل الورثة عن الدية، أن يسألوا أولاً هل أوصى أو لا؟ فإن كان قد أوصى فليس

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies