the inheritance, he is not permitted to hand it over. If the insane person is the mortgagee, his guardian takes possession if the pledger chooses, and if he refuses, he is not compelled. When he dies, his heir stands in his place regarding possession. If the pledger dies, his heirs are not bound to hand it over; for they stand in the place of the pledger, and he was not bound by that. If there is no debt on the deceased other than this debt, and the heirs wish to hand over the pledge, it is permissible. If there is another debt upon him, the apparent view of the Madhhab is that the heir has no right to prioritize the mortgagee with the pledge. Ahmad explicitly stated this in the narration of Ali ibn Sa'id, and it is the view of Al-Shafi'i. The Qadi mentioned another narration regarding it, that they do have that right, deriving it from what Ibn Mansur and Abu Talib reported from Ahmad, that he said: "If the pledger dies or goes bankrupt, the mortgagee is more entitled to it than the creditors." He did not consider the presence of possession after or before death. This does not contradict what Ali ibn Sa'id reported, because that is specific and this is general, and drawing an inference from it for this scenario is very weak due to its rarity, so how could it contradict the specific! However, it is possible that this ruling is built upon the narration in which possession is not considered for items other than what is measured by volume or weight, so the pledge becomes binding before possession, and it becomes mandatory for the pledger to hand it over, and likewise for his heir. This is exclusive to things other than what is measured by volume or weight. As for that in which the pledge did not become binding, the heirs have no right to hand it over, because the creditors' debts attached to the estate before his right in the pledge became binding, so it is not permissible to prioritize him with it without their consent, as in the case if the pledger goes bankrupt, unless we say that the heirs have the right to dispose of the estate and pay off the debt from their own wealth. If it is said: What is the benefit of saying the pledge is valid if the mortgagee is not prioritized by it? We say: Its benefit is that it is possible the creditors may consent to delivering it to him, so the pledge is completed. There is no difference in all that we have mentioned between what is before permission for possession and what is after it, because permission becomes void through insanity, death, fainting, and interdiction.

Section: If the pledger is interdicted due to bankruptcy before delivery, he has no right to deliver it, because in that is