Fiqh of Inheritance #3
Channel: Hatem al-Haj
File Size: 36.85MB
Fiqh of Inheritance – Ending of Bequests
A Commentary on a primary text of Hanbali Fiqh manual written by the great Hanbali jurist, Imam al-Muwaffaq ibn Qudamah, ‘Umdat al-Fiqh (The Reliable Source).
Bismillah Alhamdulillah wa salatu
salam, Salam Alikum Samia in order to proceed. So, today inshallah we will finish the book of requests and we will have three points to cover three topics to cover today. One is the when the bequests become void what happens? The other one is the executer bequests which is an NA E and the third one is the end of guardianship what happens when when people grow up or when you know insane people recover
and the guardianship ends. So,
the first one is basically what happens when the when the request or parts of the request becomes a void the she accepts
the American American law who died in the 620 after hedra seven his book on that in fact, first learn EVAP bottle that was a subsection if the request becomes a node in a bottle that was a bottle herrada fella wasa and you start deciding dimia for your attack format I will let me a beer Hussein you to the water we're in wasabi at in ferrocene hubbies Informatica here it was
a big quest or part of it becomes unknown, then it goes back to the IRS. So, if he instructed that zide slave be purchased for 100 and emancipated, but that slave dies before the execution of the will or his master refuses to sell him then the 100 goes back to the IRS, if he instructed that 100 be spent on a horse which was designated as an endowment, but the horse dies then it will be for the IRS. In other words, if the was a I was in was not executable and executable then the money goes back to the inheritors to the heirs, because they wherever you will go, right Make sense? So, that's it whenever there was a a becomes a void for any reason, you know, if there was a I will become void
if I make a once a year for you and before you be and then you need to accept it after I die before you accept it you die before you accept it you die then in this case, it goes back to the whatever to the inheritors. Okay.
so now, yeah, if there is no way that we can get to this, like, you know, if if your inheritors will accept it when it will be will be acceptable. But if you die before my death, then for sure, there was a we'll go back to the water. If you are rejected, I will say after my death, for sure it will go to the water. If there is no one to accepted after my death, for sure. It would go back to the water. Okay.
Yes, they can accept. Yes.
Then the sheikh said what a wasa anyhow john, who's a felony.
In Thailand, moussaka, oh, is a DA DA DA DA DA DA DA and if he instructs that say the makeup image on his behalf with an allocated fund of 1000 but they that does not,
does not do so. Then the 1000 will be for the heirs of the one designated for how to decide asks for the difference between the 1000 and the expenses that were actually necessary for Hajj, he should not be given anything. So if someone said this 1000 is for is it to make hot john might be half Zion, after he dies says I am not making hat but the hat costs only 800 he meant for me to get 200 for myself and spend 800 on hand is either does not get anything because the 1000 was given for her just to be made. If side refuses to make harder he will not get the 200 difference between
across the province and the designated one 1000.
He says what a metal cabinet mounted musi. There was a road the illawarra. Sir.
He said if the legacy dies and musala is the legacy of the legatee dies before that this theater or if he declines, accepted the bequest it is given back to the heirs. Is that clear? We said that before. If the legacy dies before the stater, that's the recipient of the bequest buys before the giver of the bequest
then that that money will go back to the inheritors of the dictator, the giver of the bequest
The same applies also have the legacy rejected the not accept the request Can someone do this Yes, they would not like to receive favors from somebody in particular you know, I you know, because someone acts pleases something to why why does not want to receive any favors from x after x dies? Why says I am not you know, interested in whatever he bequeath to me then that money or that property goes back to access inheritors.
Then what I was sorry Hi, in one minute in federal hyenas food was a if he bequeath something to both a living person and a dead person, the living person gets half of the bequest. So if he bequeathing a building to two people one is alive and one is that the living person gets half of the building and not the entire building gets half of the building, because the request became void concerning the one who died so the one who's living gets only share
when was Sally where is he gonna be sort of the family he is so this Why are people so the sort of virus
ages, if he pleases one third of his estate, to an heir and to someone who is not his kin, the non kin will get one sixth and the one sixth for the air will be pending the approval of the other heirs. Remember last time we said that he cannot give more than one third of his estate in he they cannot bequeath more than one third of his estate and he cannot be squeezed to inheritors, right, he cannot be quizzed inheritors, he cannot give more than one third of his estate, what if he did, then it will be pending the approval of the inheritors of the approve that it would go through if they did not approve it, it will not go through it that we will have to limit his request to one third
had only four non inheritors only for non inheritors. So if he says one third of my estate, one third of my estate goes to
and the Hassan is his neighbor.
Okay, so he dies, Hassan who's his neighbor, want to give his one sixth, he meant to say what to my father, equally shared equally by my father, handsome, handsome will get the 166 automatically because Hassan does not need to wait for the approval of the heirs. He will get this 166 automatically. But his father
cannot get the one sick. His one six until
the other heirs approve of this, because his father is one of the heirs he does not get any part of the year until the rest of the heirs are fine with it and approve of and as we said before, even if they approve it according to the Hanbury, it is still sinful to bequeath to an heir according to the authorized position in the mothership, although there are three different positions, you know, ehara mclanahan, MOBA, you know, impermissible,
dislike and permissible. So, but the authorized view of the mouth habit is that it is then had to be squeezed. And in this case, like we said so many times before, if someone is deserving of, you know, like one of your kids has a disability or something and you want to give them more, give them more during your life and if you
Wouldn't want to give them more but you do not want to give them more than they can dispose off, then you make a walk, fame, their name, you make a walk and surname make a trust for them during your life. And in this case, if that basically discrimination is justifiable, because one kid has this ability, so it is justifiable to give that kid a little bit more than inshallah you'll be safe with Allah subhanaw taala on the Day of Judgment, you won't have to answer to any injustice, you know, concerning any injustice, you have to answer to our last panel concerning any justice on the Day of Judgment. But if some kid, one of your kids does have a disability, and you give them one
third one half of your inheritance, you put it in a trust for them.
That is still allowable, and inshallah it is not.
It's not consumable, if there is there is justification. And in this case, there would be justification.
Okay, but you cannot be queasy to them. Because if you bequeath to them, first of all, it will be haram according to the authorized position in the humble manner, although it's controversial. Second,
when when the inheritors get to make up their mind concerning the approval or disapproval of this, not during your life, because they're in their life, they may tell you, yes, we will give our brother or sister You know, whatever it is that you want, we'll give them the, you know, building or that property because of their condition or because of their circumstances. And then you die and they take it back and they say no, we will not. Can they do that? Yes, they can. Because, you know, their approval or disapproval is consequential upon your this, not prior to it, because that is when they become deserving of the estate. And that is when they can make up their mind. Find them.
So the way to, to helping someone who has special circumstances or special needs, is by making a trust for them during your life.
started to talk about double Musa in a chapter on the executer of the bequest and we said before, that when we talk about requests, we're talking about five different things we're talking about that was a Yeah.
What is the act of big wesen?
We're talking about was say,
or Alamosa, in IE,
had one se or masa Li E, which is the executer of the bequest.
We're talking about how to mu C, which is the big ouiser or that the state or
the giver of the bequest
we're talking about an musala
which is the legacy or the receiver of the request.
And we're talking about
how Mousavi I think, yes, that's the only one that's left 1234 Yes, five, as long as left and Mousavi which is the bequeath property.
Do you remember that we finished everything except this?
We talked about that this data, do you remember what we did what we said about that this data, who can be at this theater?
Who can be at the stage or
the one who can give a gift to end
and children of the discerning children. You know, the who cannot give a gift but they can be squeezed and people under interdiction duraline suffer because of their financial imprudence. They cannot give a gift but they can be squeezed. So everyone who has the capacity to give a gift in addition to this discerning children and people who are interdicting for their financial improvements they can be squeezed although they cannot give a gift. And we said they can be squeezed because it is after the dust is what
not harm them is limited to one third of their estate. So it will not harm their inheritors. Okay. So remember we talked about how musala
remember we talked about musala? What did we say about musala? Oh,
So we said what what what what are the differences between, you know, Masada, who anyone who can receive a gift, but who else can again get, who else can get a bequest can be a legacy. In addition,
you know, one of the things we said the fetus in the womb, okay.
The if the if, if they were proven to be in the womb, you know, at the time of the dust. But we also said that there's like a little bit of difference between those who can inherit and those who can get their bequest, because you may not be able to inherit, but you can give a bequest such as what
you know, like, how to be for instance and work that the apostate and the citizen of warring state and so on. So, request is basically, a more flexible in this regard than inheritance they can get the you can bequeath to them, but they cannot inherit you. And we talked about the bequeath the property. And remember what we said about the bequeath the property, and I'm not going over everything, I'm just like, trying to refresh your memory. Remember what we said about the bequeath the property, what is the difference between the between the property and the sellable property?
You could bequeath certain things, you know, bequest is also more flexible here than selling you could be certain things that you cannot sell. Give me two examples. Dogs, yes. And impure substances that have some benefit. You Why is it because you cannot sell them.
Because they are not there, you don't have even ownership over them. There's not not Mataram that you have ownership of. It is not recognized property. It's not a recognized asset, that has a recognize the value by the Sharia doesn't have recognized the value by this idea. But it is called what it's not called.
It is called the sauce which means that you have rights to it.
You know, not ownership have a right to it, you have a right to your dog, even though it is that does not have variable. It's not a valuable asset, it doesn't have a value, at least according to the American shepherds. The hunter fees would allow the selling of dogs, the America is not allowed the selling of dogs. So we're talking about the gym warrior, who will not allow the selling of dogs. They say that you have exercise that this dog belongs to you. So if it's if you have this office, if it belongs to you, then you can pass it on as a bequest, although you cannot set it. So there are differences so we'll say is pretty flexible. And then we talked about the active bequeathing itself
and what did we say about the ruling of the quizzing? What is the ruling of the query? What is the default ruling of bequeathing? If we have to make, say a default, there is some default,
must have. When does it become magic? To bequeath to write your will, at least the writer will, when does it become magic? To it will.
When you have liabilities, whether to Allah or to the people, when you have debts, when you're liable
for debts to Allah or the people, then then you will have to write your will if you don't have liabilities that stays as Mr. hub, when does it become a guru to bequeath property?
When does it become this like yes, when you have dependents who are needy and you have limited estate or sort of the property to pass on, your assets are, you know little and you have the dependence, then it is disliked for you to take to basically
take out of that little property that you have and give to others when you have needy dependence. Now we're going to talk about the one that is left here. We talked about a movie or any data. We'll talk about the one that has left the hero
Which is the executer
The Big West and then you have, like, you don't have to but but but it would be nice, particularly the year and you know, where we live as minorities and then you don't necessarily go to El Shaddai court and so on, it is nice that you designate a executer have your bequest you say so and so will be the executer of my request. And sometimes also it is nice to designate Can you do this can you designate like an arbitration
entity like an entity for arbitration in case of dispute,
can you okay.
So, it is nice also to say that in case of dispute, this is the entity that will arbitrate
this account so lack of jurisprudence or fatwah what arbitrary
Okay, so the executer request, the chief will talk here about the excutive request. And then he says the user will see a law called a Muslim enacted in the middle of the query what enough demand usually musi fellow mencoba Dany waterfree afraid to show up whenever somebody applauded.
Okay, so it's about it to a point any sane, trustworthy, Muslim, sane, trustworthy Muslim, man or woman has an executed request to perform acts that are within the scope of legal capacity of the distributor, such as paying his debts, distributing his bequest and looking after his children's interests. So it is valid to appoint any sane, trustworthy Muslim man or woman as an executed of the request to perform acts that are within the scope of legal capacity of this data, such as paying his debts, distributing his bequest and looking after his children's interests. So your executer idex user of your web has to be trustworthy Muslim, man or woman,
trustworthy, sane, Muslim man or woman, woman matter, okay. But what else when it comes to
you know, when it comes to money, there has to be erosion, which is financial prudence as well. He has to be Rashid, meaning financially prudent, not savvy, which is financially imprudent. So, so these are the conditions and anyone who is like sane, prudent, trustworthy, Muslim, man or woman can be designated by the facilitator, as an executer. They will have after this, they will execute their well. They will pay off their debts, they will distribute their requests, and they will also look after their children's interests if they have children, or the look after their dependents interests in the sense that if some of the dependents also don't have the legal capacity to look after
themselves, like some of their children may not be children, but they may be adults, but they are insane.
In this case, he will appoint someone designate someone to look after their interests
will matter outside he be at Oxford, comma Johnny saboteur who they are to whom when
he did have the mental barrier was Shara Walker, Buddha, Buddha, Allah him
to be maruf what digerati modify emmalee modaraba because in minara, whenever he assigns the assigns to the executer, the guardianship to execute
whenever he assigns to the execute or the guardianship of his children are insane dependence that becomes effective, that guardianship becomes effective. The executors dealings on their behalf would be valid in all transactions that are in their interests such as setting gift buying, accepting gifts, spending on them and their dependents within reason and conducting trades on their behalf as well as investing their money in mudaraba. partnerships. So when you become the Guardian, when you become the executor of the will and the guardian of the dependents, whether they are children or insane of someone, you will have the capacity, the legal capacity to act on their behalf in anything
that is in their interest. If you were found to have acted against
Is there interest the your action will be voided by the court by the authorities if you have acted
against their interest, so you're only allowed to act in their interest.
Then the sheriff said
but but this acting in their interest that also includes includes transactions that are risky,
if you deem that to be in their interest, such as mudaraba, profit sharing, you know, sort of capital and labor, a profit sharing the modaraba partnerships that we talked about before. So, and it because we can tie your hands by you know, and tell you invest their money, but in something that is guaranteed, or how do you invest in something that's guaranteed if reverse Hara so any investment will have some degree of risk, therefore, we will allow you to take some risk, but we will not allow you to act against their interest. And then the sheikh said when
he say whatever and he akademin marry him in the Hagerty ricotta hamari, whatever, mahali mecanica DE LA County, la mechanical eternian for your staff if women can afford to run for the year, according to Bill Morrow, if the executer conducts any commercial transaction for them by himself, he will not be entitled to any part of the profit. However, if he is in need, he may sustain himself from their money taking compensation that is commensurate with his labor, and he will not be liable. If he is well off, he should not take compensation for a loss and whoever, when acting as a guardian is self sufficient, should refrain from taking a fee. And whoever is poor, let him take according to
what is acceptable, or what is reasonable. So the CFO saying here if you act on their behalf, but now you are the executor, someone left, who is acting on their behalf without designation, the Father, the father acts on behalf of his children without designation, because he is designated by God as the Guardian, then the Father, you know, dies, and then the father designates someone. So the father would have more flexibility as we will come to see. But the designated was, say the designated executer or the designated Guardian, that is not the original guardian. Because the original Guardian has greater capacity legal capacity than the designated Guardian, the father, who
is the original guardian of his children has greater capacity the father can sell their property to them to himself because of his bountiful compassion.
He can sell their property to himself, because of his bountiful compassion, but others may not as we will come to see.
But so the designated guardians, they can act on in their, on their behalf, they can basically trade on their behalf, they can establish partnerships and modaraba and otherwise, on their behalf. If they do and procure a profit for them, they don't take her share of the profit.
If they do and typically procure a profit for them, they don't take a share of the profit.
What they can take, if they are needy is what
compensation fixed compensation, basically, that suits their that meets their needs, but they cannot take so neat and so meets their needs and their what
their escape skills, so, or there's the required skills for the job, but whichever is what
lower. So let's say you are because sometimes they execute or have bequests, they could be manager of a multi million dollar multi billion dollar companies.
Right. Like if if if you know, a billionaire dies, and designate someone to execute to take care of their children, they have children, they will be taken care of so much money. So sometimes they need to dedicate their time for this job. So in in order for them to dedicate their time for this job.
We will we will have to
Allow them compensation, they cannot take a share of the profit, they will take compensation for the dedication of their fire.
And if they dedicate their time and they take compensation, then we have one of two things we have there. Basically, Mark market value of what they do are based on their skills and their needs.
Let's say they need seven t dollars a day or they need $70 a month, hand them their salary based on the market value and their skill set is 80. They take 70 let us say they're 70 is basically the market value of the labor they provide. But they need 80 for their needs. They take 70.
And they'll have to figure out how to get the difference. Because it says my eight is orphans, money and orphans money you just can't be sort of liberal in, huh?
Okay, if he is unable to handle all that stuff by himself, then he appoints someone
he would appoint a lot of people, let's say it's billion dollar company, he would have a lot of people working for them. So he will cut down basically. So that or you know,
yeah, so he would appoint other people to do the work.
Appoint other people to do the work, they would not be acting like I was it because he cannot appoint another was say unless he was permitted by the original
guardian to appoint other will say he would appoint workers labor's not otherwise say who would have the capacity of executer, or the capacity of Guardian, he will not be able to appoint other guardians unless he was permitted by the original guardian to appoint other guardians. But if he was not permitted, by the original guardians appoint other guardians, he would be appointing What?
employees, you know, workers.
Yeah. So then, then he will take the least of the two has compensation because of the money that he's dedicating. He is not getting a share of the profit, he is not getting a share of the profit, he is getting compensation.
He says he has something important. He says what are hormonal, a,
what are hormonal II and he will not be liable. He will not be liable, meaning if he
does whichever transaction on their behalf or gets into whichever partnership on their behalf and loses, will he be liable? Now he will not be liable. You're always liable if you submitted what that the author for his negligence or wrongdoing, transgression, negligence origin. In Islam, you're always liable if you committed that you're afraid. If you committed, you know, gross negligence or wrongdoing, you're going to be liable. When we talk when we talk about you not being liable. We're talking about if you have not committed gross negligence or transgression, you're not liable here, because you acted sort of in good faith on their behalf to invest their money, you're not liable for
any losses, okay.
Then he says when when Canada Canadian, whoever the loss of data says this is not him, he's one of
our staff. And whoever is self sufficient, should refrain from taking a fee. It is, you know, to look after the interests of the orphan is a huge
power. It's a huge virtue. It's a great virtue. It's a great good deed, to look after the interests of the of the orphans. And if you can do this without taking any compensation, because you you are you have enough, your honey you have enough, then you should you ought to do it without any compensation.
Someone will say to buy one up all the time I'm spending What is my incentive in this case? You know, be the be the overseer, but hire enough people to manage
The property or to manage the assets so that you are the overseer so that you're watching for the interests of the orphans, but without needing to spend too much time
because you hired the right people to manage the property or to manage a company or to manage whatever their well their assets.
Then the shift said what they said I will and you'll see
OCA e v one v rs 30, I mean marry him enough see where Jews will be that IQ
when I add the amount of civilian Majnoon
Abu Abu I will see you I will happen.
He the executer may not that I gave the guardianship to someone else nor May he be a party in sales transaction with them, his wards per digit for disease. However, all of this is permissible for the Father. Thus, the custodian of the wealth of the children and the insane may only be the father, his agent or the ruler, okay. So, he is saying that you, if you are the custodian of their assets of their wealth, you cannot be party to any transaction with them.
You cannot be party in any transaction with them. Because of the obvious conflict, the conflict of interest, you know, to parties in the same transaction, if you are, if you should be looking out for the interests of these orphans, is extremely hard to look out for their interest and look out for your own interest. At the same time. If you are parties to the same transaction, therefore, don't do it. It's not permissible for you to do that. Also, you cannot pass on that power of guardianship to someone else unless you are permitted by the original guardian.
These two caveats in being a guardian at designated Guardian do not apply to the Father who is the original Guardian, the father can get into partnership with them can sell to them can buy from them. Why? Because of the presumed bountiful compassion of the Father.
Now, the father also has the power to designate guardians to designate a guardian for physically The Guardian after Guardian, he has the power to do this, you don't have the power to do this as a guardian unless you are permitted. So who can be a guardian of people who need guardianship who needs guardianship, children, and insane people,
other people otherwise people act, you know, on behalf of themselves, on their own behalf, either they don't need someone to act on their behalf unless they designated a killer agent track on their behalf. But when it comes to guardianship, children and
and insane people, they need guardianship. And for those, for those whose Guardian, the father is called original guardian.
And then the executer,
which is the designated guardian. It is a designated guardian. It's not an original Guardian, he has these limited capacities.
He was the OB designated by the father, or designated Who's Who else is an original Guardian, in some sense, authorities ruler.
So the ruler in the absence of the Father, the authorities would be a guardian. And then the authorities will be able to designate an executer and another excuse or another excuse or authorities in the absence of the Father.
Let us say the Father Himself has been interdicted and the Father Himself does not have the legal capacity. What is the default?
The ruler, the authorities, when we talk about the ruler, we're talking about the community guys, because at the end of the day, the community is not going to act in they're not going to act all of them collectively all the time. So basically, it is very, it's a communal responsibility, and who will execute that responsibility, the authorities because the community shows that we have this hierarchy and that we have this as the owner and these are the as the judges and so on. So it is a communal responsibility in the absence of the Father. The responsibility to take good care of the orphans and the insane and so on becomes the responsibility of the community. The community is not
going to all its
Not going to be the sort of write of everybody in the community that doesn't make any sense. So the community chooses, you know, who acts on their behalf in this regard and that's the authorities the ruler of hacking, or the vice Roy's or the agents of the ruler, the judges.
Okay, the final thing, which is the end of guardianship, he said, she
said, First, when he when he
began, the sorrow of the tabula rasa, the who watereuse do Salah, COVID, mad, feminine Anissa, Rooster, De nada mela, who Isabella, West, la, la Quran, Ghana, how horn
subsection, The Guardian may permit the discerning children to conduct the business to death to their prudence rushed, rushed here means competence and money management, for those whom he feels to be competent, he should pass their money to them, once they reach puberty, he should have this transfer of wealth witnessed this applies to males and females alike. And for you know, you know, up until the common law in the 18th century and Britain
study the common law in the 18th century, females did not have the right to dispose of any property or manage any property or on anything, they were also on the hand wives were sold and things of that nature. So if, if you're talking about
you know, women's rights
and and, you know, the consistency of Sharia in this regard, this is not something that evolved in charity or did not basically conform to the whims of people and gave women the rights when when such became sort of a logical necessity or logistical necessity.
There's only I had done this at a time when this was pretty
strange in the world,
and pretty rare and uncommon. So he's saying that if you have a daughter and this daughter is financially prudent and she reaches puberty, give her her money, let her think, you know, let her manage her money.
Because she doesn't have the legal capacity to do that, keep in mind that nowadays, because people are a little bit you know,
people reach maturity take a little bit longer time to mature sometimes the you know, the tends to take them a little bit more than 50 or 60 years
to get to that point, but
you may say we will have a cut off of 21 or we will have a cut off of at the government may say this, well in Islam, puberty was basically the what we went by, but it was not only puberty, it was puberty and rushed and prudence. So, it was to you have to it is
it is two conditions here and the two are
basically necessary to pass on the property to conditions that have to be met to not one rushed prudence and puberty as they are received before they are adults, you know, discerning children that are Rashid, you still don't allow them because puberty is basically the
the floor, not the ceiling, the floor. So, if you have the have to have reached puberty and
and what is puberty
if you don't have the biological markers, which we will not talk about, then it is 15 according to the majority 18 for men and 17 for Women according to the HANA fees, and there are basically disagreements within the mazahub particularly the HANA fees, but that is basically an approximate figure. So if you have not reached the biological markers, if you reach the biological markers, we go by the biological markers, if you have not reached the biological markers, then what is puberty 15 according to the majority 17 for women
and 18 for men, according to the Hanafi Okay, so if you reach puberty and you have who you are prudent, financially prudent, then we give you your money, can the can the government's nowadays, established a cut off like an eight cut off that is across the board that because they can't really
it's it is hard to basically when you have like so much variety
ability and so on. And so if let's say governments would like to establish a cut off and say that violence age, and they chose 18, or they chose 21, can governments do this? Yes, governments have that flexibility to do that. According to some people, you know, I believe in that I believe that governments do have much flexibility in this regard, when it comes to a, you know, the these these issues. So, yes, I think the government's would have would have the flexibility to determine the age, so that they don't have to basically entertain each case separately, and examine each child separately. What the chief is saying is that as as a guardian, whether you are the original
Guardian, or you are the designated Guardian, what you will be doing is when your kids when the kids who own assets, reach them, the discerning gauge, there are more than seven, for instance, and they reach the discerning age, or let's say they are, you know, maybe seven. But more than seven, as you're already in, within that discerning age, you get lucky, give your child who was eight years old, you give them 1010 cents, and tell them go back for like 10 cents, nothing is free.
They give them $2. And you tell them go buy something from them, examine their financial prudence, and then you give them a little bit more and a little bit more. And once you feel comfortable that they are financially prudent, and they reach puberty, you give them their money, tell them here is your money. And then you have this what witness you get witnesses to basically see that you have given them passed on their money to them and their property to them. That used to be the case in the past, it used to be overseen by judges and and so on. But nowadays, governments may choose to have a certain age cutoff for passing on the property to children to manage it.
Then the chief said an hour or a dolly and had one young female he ended up hacking what I in fact would have helped me when I go to a cloud over the man to do what we're in
a locker room do happy then if they revert to financial improvements and incompetence, interdiction will be re imposed on them. No one would have control over their money this time except the ruler, authorities and the interdiction would only be lifted by a legal decree, their acknowledgement of financial liabilities will not be accepted. But their acknowledgement will be accepted regarding reduce designated penalties retribution and divorce. If he divorces a wife or emancipated a man spaces leave his divorce would count but not as emancipation because he does not have the legal capacity, the capacity to dispose of his property. So let us say that the child who are the insane
the insane now recovered, and after the insane recovery, that you gave them, their property, or the child grew up and after the child grew up, you gave them their property
a couple of years later, after you gave them their property.
They went back to foolishness or they became foolish and prudent. They started to spend their money and prudently what we do, what do we do now? Does the Guardian take the property back?
That should the Guardian take the property back? Yes. Make sense? No, he cannot.
Only the router the authorities will be able to take the property back in this case.
not the Guardian, but the authorities. So if they reverted to foolishness, foolishness, for imprudence, you know, they they are 21. And we give them their money. And by 23, we discovered No, they are actually not prudent at all. So we want to take the money back from them. That is not going to be the guardian anymore. That is going to be the authorities. So people around them who are who are concerned for them, they should report to this to the authorities. And this the it will be interdiction or legal seizure of their property by a legal decree. And it would only be lifted by a legal decree. It's not the guardian. Now who's doing any of this. It's all legal decrees. So
interdiction will happen by a legal decree. And it will be lifted by a legal decree. This is the business of the court. Now. It is not
The business of the Guardians
and he serves also
so we will apply the rulings of interdiction. And if we apply the rulings of interdiction, then your acknowledgement of liabilities and your any disposal or disposition of your wealth will not be accepted. Even if you acknowledge liability if we place interdiction of legal Caesar on someone's property. And they come and say, you know,
Holly, or Fatima
I borrowed money from Fatima last year by borrowed $100,000 from Fatima last year, Fatima comes in and says he borrowed $100,000 that means that this legal seizure will not apply to the $100,000. And we have to give this money to Fatima. It is very possible that he made an agreement was Fatima Jai will admit that I borrowed money from you, you tell them that you lent me money so that I can get that 100 the seizure lifted off the $100,000 and we can divide it I'll give you 10,000 take 90 give you 50. So, the judge will not allow this. That is why his acknowledgments of liabilities are not permitted permitted, when when the acknowledgement of liability be considered by the judge. If there
is if there is proof, if there is proof that actually he did borrow from him or you know, then certainly because of the proof, but not by his mere acknowledgement, because as mere acknowledgments could be sort of like a plot with someone else to get the seizure lifted off some of his properties so that he could use it in whichever way he pleases. And we're doing this for their best interest. So we're placing this legal seizure on their property or their assets for the best interest until they, you know, regained their prudence, their sanity or their prudence. And that's it with the book of bequests. inshallah, next time, we will start the book of inheritance, get up and leave. So
before you come in, you know, if if you need your cup of coffee, just should get your coffee on your way here. So the caffeine would have kicked in by the time you arrive.
For the cadaver