what stands in its place, such as taking possession and actions that indicate consent, as we said regarding gift and sale. Acceptance is permissible immediately or after a delay. It cannot occur except after the death of the testator, because before that, no right is established for the legatee, and for this reason, rejection is not valid. When he accepts, ownership is established for him from the time of acceptance, according to the correct view of the Madhhab. This is the opinion of Malik and the people of Iraq, and it has been narrated from al-Shafi'i. Abu al-Khattab mentioned another view in the issue: that when he accepts, it becomes clear that ownership was established at the time of the testator's death. This is the apparent view of the Shafi'i Madhhab; because whatever is obligated to transfer upon acceptance, it is obligatory for it to transfer from the side of the offeror at the time of the offer, like a gift and a sale. Furthermore, it is not permissible for ownership of it to be established for the heir, because Allah the Almighty said: "after the fulfillment of any bequest that might have been made, or debt." And because inheritance comes after the bequest, and it does not remain for the deceased, as he has become inanimate and possesses nothing. Al-Shafi'i has a third, less well-known opinion, that the bequest is owned upon death, and is judged as such before acceptance, due to what we have mentioned. Our argument is that it is the transfer of a specific asset to a specific person which requires acceptance, so ownership does not precede acceptance, like other contracts. And because acceptance is part of the completion of the cause, and the legal ruling cannot precede its cause. And because acceptance is either a condition or a part of the cause, and the legal ruling cannot precede its cause or its condition. And because ownership in the past cannot be suspended upon a future condition. If it is said: "If he said to his wife: 'You are divorced one month before my death,' then he dies, it becomes clear that the divorce occurred one month before his death." We say: This is not a condition for the occurrence of the divorce, rather, the time at which the divorce occurs is clarified by it. If he said: "If I die, you are divorced a month before it," it would not be valid. As for its transfer from the side of the offeror in other contracts, it does not transfer except after acceptance, so it is like our issue, except that the time between the offer and acceptance there is brief.