Majmu' al-FatawaIbn Taimiya

He—may Allah have mercy on him—was asked:

Concerning a man lawfully placed under legal guardianship, whose executor passed away to the mercy of Allah Most High, leaving a son. The son took possession of what his father had left, including the ward’s property that had been in his father’s possession. The orphan requested an accounting from the executor’s son. Is he entitled to this?

The son claims that his father handed over some of his ward’s property to Zayd, who was not legally entitled to receive it, and that witnesses were called to attest to the transaction between them. The recipient to whom the executor handed over the property then claimed that he had delivered it to the orphan. Is this testimony admissible against the orphan under legal guardianship in the circumstances described, or not? May the orphan seek recovery from the executor’s estate for the property he handed over to someone not legally entitled to receive it? May the executor’s son recover what his father handed over without lawful grounds? What is the ruling on this?

He—may Allah have mercy on him—replied:

If the executor dies and it is not known that the orphan’s property was lost without negligence, it is legally presumed to remain and must therefore be accounted for in the deceased’s estate. But is it treated as a debt, sharing proportionately with the claims of other creditors, or as property held in trust, to be recovered from the estate itself? There is disagreement on this. If the heir claims that he returned it to the orphan, his unsupported statement is not accepted.

If, however, the executor handed it over to someone else, who then delivered it to the orphan, and this is established and the transfer was permissible, then the executor is absolved of liability in this matter—for example, if

وَسُئِلَ - رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ -: عَنْ رَجُلٍ تَحْتَ حِجْرٍ بِطَرِيقِ شَرْعِيٍّ وَأَنَّ الْوَصِيَّ تُوُفِّيَ إلَى رَحْمَةِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى وَتَرَكَ وَلَدَهُ وَأَنَّ وَلَدَهُ قَدْ وَضَعَ يَدَهُ عَلَى مَا تَرَكَ وَالِدُهُ وَعَلَى مَا كَانَ وَالِدُهُ وَضَعَ يَدَهُ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ مَالِ الْمَحْجُورِ عَلَيْهِ وَأَنَّ الْيَتِيمَ طَلَبَ الْحِسَابَ مِنْ وَلَدِ الْوَصِيِّ فَهَلْ لَهُ ذَلِكَ وَأَنَّ وَلَدَهُ ادَّعَى أَنَّ وَالِدَهُ أُقْبِضَ بَعْضَ مَالِ مَحْجُورِهِ لِزَيْدِ وَهُوَ لَا يَسْتَحِقُّ إقْبَاضَ ذَلِكَ شَرْعًا وَأَنَّهُ بِإِشْهَادِ عَلَيْهِمَا ثُمَّ إنَّ ذَلِكَ الْقَابِضَ الَّذِي أَقْبَضَهُ الْوَصِيُّ ادَّعَى أَنَّهُ أَقَبَضَ ذَلِكَ الْمَالَ لِلْيَتِيمِ. فَهَلْ تَجُوزُ هَذِهِ الشَّهَادَةُ عَلَى الْيَتِيمِ الْمَحْجُورِ عَلَيْهِ مَا ذُكِرَ؟ أَمْ لَا؟ وَهَلْ لَهُ أَنْ يَرْجِعَ عَلَى مَالِ الْوَصِيِّ بِمَا أَقْبَضَهُ مِنْ مَالِهِ لِمَنْ لَا يَسْتَحِقُّ إقْبَاضَهُ شَرْعًا؟ وَهَلْ لِوَلَدِ الْوَصِيِّ الرُّجُوعُ عَمَّا أَقْبَضَهُ وَالِدُهُ بِغَيْرِ مُسْتَنَدٍ شَرْعِيٍّ؟ وَمَا الْحُكْمُ فِي ذَلِكَ؟ فَأَجَابَ - رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ -: إذَا مَاتَ الْوَصِيُّ وَلَمْ يُعْرَفْ أَنَّ مَالَ الْيَتِيمِ قَدْ ذَهَبَ بِغَيْرِ تَفْرِيطٍ فَهُوَ بَاقٍ بِحُكْمِ يُوجِبُ إبْقَاءَهُ فِي تَرِكَةِ الْمَيِّتِ؛ لَكِنْ هَلْ يَكُونُ دِينًا يُحَاصُّ الْغُرَمَاءَ؟ أَوْ يَكُونُ أَمَانَةً يُؤْخَذُ مِنْ أَصْلِ الْمَالِ؟ فِيهِ نِزَاعٌ. وَإِذَا ادَّعَى الْوَارِثُ رَدَّهُ إلَيْهِ لَمْ يَقْبَلْ بِمُجَرَّدِ قَوْلِهِ. وَأَمَّا إذَا كَانَ الْوَصِيُّ قَدْ أَقْبَضَهُ لِغَيْرِهِ وَذَلِكَ الْغَيْرُ أَقْبَضَهُ لِلْيَتِيمِ فَإِنْ ثَبَتَ ذَلِكَ وَكَانَ الْإِقْبَاضُ مِمَّا يُسَوِّغُ: فَقَدْ بَرِئَتْ ذِمَّةُ الْوَصِيِّ فِي ذَلِكَ: مِثْلَ أَنْ

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