Explanation of the Book of Inheritance, Fixed Punishments, and Blood Money-02b
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reciter: Abdan narrated to us, Abdullah informed us, Yunus informed us from Ibn Shihab, Abu Salama informed me from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) who said: Sahih al-Bukhari 6731.
The Shaykh : This hadith is explicit in that whoever leaves wealth, it belongs to his heirs. And wealth, according to the scholars, is any permissible item whose benefit is not needed for a specific necessity. This is wealth: any permissible item whose benefit is not needed for a specific necessity. So whatever is not permissible in benefit is not wealth, and whatever is permissible in benefit only for a specific necessity is also not wealth; rather, it must be permissible in benefit for other than a specific necessity.
The apparent meaning of the hadith is that whoever leaves something other than wealth, it is not for his heirs. This is understood to mean that it is not for his heirs in the sense of ownership transfer. However, in the sense of entitlement, it is undoubtedly for them. For example, if the deceased leaves a hunting dog, the hunting dog is not wealth because it is not sold, but whoever has it in his possession is more entitled to it than anyone else. Thus, the heirs are more entitled to this dog than others, even if they have no need for it and leave it.
I am more closer to the believers than their own selves, so whoever (of them) dies while being in debt and leaves nothing for its repayment, then we are to pay his debts on his behalf and whoever (among the believers) dies leaving some property, then that property is for his heirs.
أنا أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم، فمن مات وعليه دين ولم يترك وفاء فعلينا قضاؤه، ومن ترك مالا فلورثتهThe Shaykh : This hadith is explicit in that whoever leaves wealth, it belongs to his heirs. And wealth, according to the scholars, is any permissible item whose benefit is not needed for a specific necessity. This is wealth: any permissible item whose benefit is not needed for a specific necessity. So whatever is not permissible in benefit is not wealth, and whatever is permissible in benefit only for a specific necessity is also not wealth; rather, it must be permissible in benefit for other than a specific necessity.
The apparent meaning of the hadith is that whoever leaves something other than wealth, it is not for his heirs. This is understood to mean that it is not for his heirs in the sense of ownership transfer. However, in the sense of entitlement, it is undoubtedly for them. For example, if the deceased leaves a hunting dog, the hunting dog is not wealth because it is not sold, but whoever has it in his possession is more entitled to it than anyone else. Thus, the heirs are more entitled to this dog than others, even if they have no need for it and leave it.