or reject it for one of them, and authorize all or part of his bequest for the other, or authorize the entire bequest for one of them and part for the other—all of this is permissible, for the right belongs to him, so he may act upon it as he wishes.

956 - Issue: He said: "And whoever bequeaths to a non-heir more than a third [of his wealth], and the heirs authorize that after the death of the testator, it is valid; but if they do not authorize it, it is reduced to a third."

In summary, a bequest to a non-heir is binding in the third without authorization, and what exceeds the third is contingent upon their authorization. If they authorize it, it is valid, and if they reject it, it is void, according to the opinion of all scholars. The basis for this is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to Sa'd when he said: "May I bequeath all my wealth?" He replied: "No." He asked: "Then two-thirds?" He replied: "No." He asked: "Then a half?" He replied: "No." He asked: "Then a third?" He replied: "The third, and the third is a lot." And his saying (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Indeed, Allah has bestowed upon you a third of your wealth at the time of your death," indicates that he has no right to anything in excess of it. The hadith of Imran ibn Husayn concerning the slaves whom the sick man emancipated while he possessed no other wealth—and whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) summoned, divided into three parts, drew lots among them, emancipated two, kept four in bondage, and spoke sternly to him—also indicates that his disposal in what exceeds the third is not valid if the heirs do not authorize it, whereas it is valid with their authorization, because the right belongs to them. The opinion regarding the invalidity of a bequest exceeding a third is like the opinion regarding a bequest to an heir, as we have mentioned. Is their authorization an execution [of the original act] or an initial gift? There is a disagreement regarding this, which we mentioned under the bequest to an heir. The disagreement rests on whether the bequest of it, or the gift to him during a fatal illness, is valid but suspended pending authorization, or whether it is void. The apparent view of the Madhhab is that it is valid and that the authorization is a mere execution,