another woman. If the children are daughters who inherit alongside the agnatic heirs, then, whether one or several, young or grown, born to her, I consider that two opinions may be derived:
The first is that his acknowledgment is valid.
The second is that it is invalid. These derive from their disagreement concerning his acknowledgment in favour of some of the agnatic heirs when he leaves a daughter and agnatic heirs. If the daughters are young and born to her, however, his acknowledgment in her favour is invalid without disagreement.
If the child is a single son, his acknowledgment in her favour is valid, whether the son is young or grown, and whether born to her or to another woman. If there are several sons, his acknowledgment in her favour is valid unless some are young and born to her while others are grown and born to another woman; in that case, it is invalid. If the grown child whose presence would otherwise remove suspicion from the father regarding his acknowledgment in favour of his wife is undutiful towards him, suspicion is not removed and the acknowledgment is invalid. This is stated in Asbagh’s transmission in al-ʿUtbiyya and in one of the two reports in al-Mudawwana. If some are undutiful towards him and others dutiful, the ruling may be derived from the disagreement already mentioned concerning his acknowledgment in favour of some of the agnatic heirs when he leaves a daughter and agnatic heirs.
Exactly the same ruling applies to a wife’s acknowledgment in favour of her husband. Nor is there any difference between one spouse acknowledging a debt owed to the other and acknowledging having received repayment of a debt owed by the other. And Allah grants success.
Section
After he has been declared insolvent, however, he may neither buy nor sell, receive nor give anything involving his property. Nor is his acknowledgment of a debt binding upon him valid, whether in favour of a relative or an unrelated person. There are three opinions concerning his acknowledgment that specific property belongs to someone else—for example, his saying, “This property in my possession belongs to so-and-so as a deposit or a qirād investment,” or something similar:
The first is that his acknowledgment is valid. This is Mālik’s opinion as transmitted by ʿĪsā in the Book of Debtors.
The second is that his acknowledgment is invalid. This is Ibn al-Qāsim’s opinion in the second Book of Bequests in al-Mudawwana, and Mālik’s opinion as transmitted by Ibn al-Qāsim and by Ashhab from him in