is valid, even if his sound financial judgment is known only through the guardian’s statement. It has also been held that the guardian may not release him without the judge’s permission unless he is known to possess sound financial judgment. When drawing up a deed to that effect, he must include in it the witnesses’ knowledge of his sound financial judgment. As for the father’s testamentary guardian, his release is valid, and his account of the ward’s circumstances is accepted, even if those circumstances are known only through his statement. It has also been held that his release is not valid unless the ward’s circumstances become clear and his sound financial judgment is known. This is Asbagh’s report from Ibn al-Qāsim in the Book of Bequests in al-ʿUtbiyya.
Section
Our statement that all his transactions are to be set aside—even if his sound financial judgment is known—until he is released from the constraints of the legal restriction imposed upon him represents the well-known position in the school upon which practice is based. It has also been held that his position under a testamentary guardian is the same as under his father: he leaves the guardian’s authority when his sound financial judgment is known, or when his circumstances are unknown, according to the disagreement already mentioned. This is the apparent meaning of the statement in the Book of Gifts and Charitable Donations in al-Mudawwana:
“Allah has withheld their property from them while they are under testamentary guardians, even after puberty, unless they possess sound financial judgment. How much more so, then, when they are under their fathers, whose authority over them is greater than that of testamentary guardians, since the guardians’ authority derives only from the fathers.”
Ibn al-Mājishūn makes a similar statement in al-Wādiha: “A virgin woman’s transactions become valid once she has remained unmarried beyond the usual marriageable age or has married, whether she has a father or a testamentary guardian.”
As for Ibn al-Qāsim, his position is that the existence of guardianship is not decisive when sound financial judgment is known, nor is its absence decisive when a lack of sound financial judgment is known—I mean in the case of an orphan boy, not a virgin woman. Ibn Wahb reported from Mālik a view agreeing with that of Ibn al-Qāsim. Zūnān, however, reported from Ibn al-Qāsim that anyone whose guardianship has been established may not validly transact until released from it, even if his sound financial judgment becomes apparent. This agrees with the position of Mālik and his leading companions.
Section
If the father dies without appointing anyone as the boy’s testamentary guardian, and the ruler appoints neither a guardian nor an overseer for him, there are four views:
First: the view of Mālik and his leading companions is that all his transactions after puberty are valid and effective, whether he possesses sound financial judgment or lacks it, whether his lack of sound judgment is overt or not, and whether it has persisted since puberty or arose after sound financial judgment had been discerned in him. No distinction is made between any of these circumstances.