report, a woman who has reached the age of spinsterhood and whose condition is unknown is presumed neither to lack nor to possess sound financial judgment; rather, her father’s statement on the matter is accepted. Thus, this third view subdivides into three views—as we have explained—bringing the total to five.

The sixth view is that she remains under her father’s guardianship until one year has elapsed after her husband consummates the marriage. This is Mutarrif’s view in al-Wādiha and the apparent meaning of Yahyā ibn Saʿīd’s statement in al-Mudawwana. According to this view, her transactions before consummation are to be set aside even if her sound financial judgment is known. After consummation and until the year has elapsed, they are to be set aside unless her sound financial judgment is known. Once the year has elapsed, her transactions are valid unless she is known to lack sound financial judgment. Ibn al-Mājishūn agreed with him on the one-year limit but disagreed with his disregarding the age of spinsterhood. He held that, once she reaches that age and her property is known to be well managed, she leaves the guardianship of her father and her testamentary guardian.

The seventh view is that she remains under her father’s guardianship until two years have elapsed. This is Ibn Nāfiʿ’s view in the Book of Charitable Donations and Gifts in al-ʿUtbiyya. The eighth view is that she remains under her father’s guardianship until seven years have elapsed. This view is attributed to Ibn al-Qāsim, and it is the practice followed in our region. Ibn Abī Zamanīn said that the prevailing practice among the scholars he had known was that her transactions become valid and she leaves her father’s guardianship once she has spent six to seven years in her husband’s home, unless her father has renewed the declaration of her lack of sound financial judgment before then. This is close to the eighth view. Thereafter, she is presumed to possess sound financial judgment until the contrary is known, as we have explained.

Ibn Abī Zamanīn’s statement, “unless her father has renewed the declaration of her lack of sound financial judgment before then,” was the basis on which Judge Ibn Zarb, may Allah have mercy on him, issued his legal opinions. Ibn al-ʿAttār also adopted this position in his work on legal documents. The matter is, however, disputed. Abū ʿUmar al-Ishbīlī, may Allah have mercy on him, held that such a renewal is neither valid nor binding upon her unless the deed renewing the declaration records that its witnesses know her to lack sound financial judgment. Abū ʿUmar ibn al-Qattān, may Allah have mercy on him, likewise issued legal opinions to this effect. This accords with analogical reasoning on the position of those who fix a threshold after which her transactions become valid: upon her reaching that threshold, they presume her to possess sound financial judgment and recognize her transactions as valid. Her father’s claim that she lacks sound financial judgment therefore cannot be accepted as grounds for overturning this ruling in her favour unless his statement is known to be true.

The position of Ibn Abī Zamanīn and those who share his view can be derived from the report transmitted from Mālik that her acts of manumission, gifts, and charitable donations are valid after she reaches the age of spinsterhood, provided her father approves them. We have already discussed the meaning of that report in a way that supports this interpretation of it.