Wednesday, 29 April 2026 (12 Dhuʻl-Qiʻdah 1447 AH)
Question: A man had no children except three daughters. At his death he bequeathed two pilgrimages (ḥajjatayn) on behalf of his two brothers who had died before him, and other [bequests besides that]. These bequests amounted to more than one-third by far, almost consuming the entire estate. Then the daughters were summoned to authorize (ijāzah) the will, and they authorized it. If the daughters did not know what authorization is nor what is meant by it, and did not know that it is their right to refuse authorization and that they have the right to prevent it, and did not know that it is not permissible for the deceased to bequeath more than one-third except with permission and authorization – are they nonetheless bound by the ruling of authorization or not? And is the bequest for pilgrimage for the two brothers valid and accepted? And if the two deceased brothers did not accept it and did not request it, does the reward of that [pilgrimage] reach them? And is reliance placed on circumstantial indicators in [establishing] taḥwīz (delivery of possession)?
Answer – and Allah is the One who grants success: Authorization, if it is as stated in the question, is of no consequence. The evidence for that is His, the Exalted’s, saying: “Do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly” [al-Baqarah:188], and his, may Allah bless him and his family and grant them peace, saying: “The property of a Muslim is not lawful except by his willing consent.” And if the matter is as mentioned in the question, it does not indicate willing consent.
- As for the bequest of pilgrimage for the two brothers, it is valid and accepted, and its good deeds reach them, by virtue of the hadith of the one who pronounced the talbiyah on behalf of Shubrumah – even if the two deceased brothers did not accept it and did not request it – for the Prophet (may Allah bless him and his family and grant them peace) did not ask the one pronouncing the talbiyah about Shubrumah whether Shubrumah had bequeathed that or not.
- As for taḥwīz, the way to know it is through the acknowledgment of the testator and testimony to his acknowledgment, or what takes its place. For example, that he threatens the heirs by saying to them: “You will not take after me anything, little or much, and I will acknowledge [a right] for so-and-so, and I will admit [a right] for so-and-so, and I will assign [something] to so-and-so, to spite you and out of dislike for you; and if I knew that anything of my right would reach you, my grave would not accommodate me.” Then if he acts in his property in accordance with what he threatened, that is taḥwīz without doubt, and when it is such it is called tawlīj.
Many scholars have chosen that nothing falls under it except acknowledgment, and that other transfers of ownership and legal acts remain effective. Others have chosen that it includes acknowledgment and other [acts] as well.
Source: Min Thimār al-ʿIlm wa al-Ḥikmah vol.2