Abu Hanifa and his companions. This was also narrated from al-Qasim and Salim. 'Ata', al-Hasan, Ishaq, and Abu Thawr said: It is accepted, because whoever it is valid to make an acknowledgement for during health, it is also valid during illness, just like a stranger. There are two opinions for al-Shafi'i, parallel to the two schools of thought. Malik said: It is valid if he is not suspected, and it is void if he is suspected. For example, one who has a daughter and a paternal cousin, if he acknowledges for his daughter, it is not accepted, but if he acknowledges for his paternal cousin, it is accepted, because he is not suspected of withholding from his daughter and passing the wealth to his paternal cousin. The cause for prohibiting the acknowledgement is suspicion, so the prohibition is restricted to its locus.

Our view is that it is a transfer of his wealth to his heir by his word during his terminal illness, so it is not valid without the consent of the rest of his heirs, just like his gift. Furthermore, he is under interdiction regarding [the heir's] right, so his acknowledgement for him is not valid, like [the acknowledgement of] a child regarding the rights of all people. It differs from a stranger, as his gift to a stranger is valid. What Malik mentioned is not valid, for suspicion cannot be considered by itself; rather, it must be considered by its likely locus, which is inheritance, and it is likewise considered in wills, donations, and other such matters.

Section: If he acknowledges for his wife a dowry equal to her equivalent (mahr al-mithl) or less, it is valid according to all of them. We know of no dissenter regarding this except al-Sha'bi, who said: His acknowledgement for her is not permissible, because it is an acknowledgement for an heir. Our view is that it is an acknowledgement for something whose cause has been established, whose existence is known, and for which discharge has not been known; thus, it resembles the case where he owes a debt established by evidence and he acknowledges that he has not paid it. Likewise, if he purchases something from his heir and acknowledges for him the price equal to it, because the word is the word of the beneficiary of the acknowledgement, [affirming] that he has not received its price. If he acknowledges for his wife a debt other than the dowry, it is not accepted. If he acknowledges for her, then divorces her irrevocably, then remarries her, and dies during his illness, his acknowledgement for her is not accepted. Muhammad ibn al-Hasan said: It is accepted, because she has reached a state in which he is not suspected, so it resembles the case where a sick person acknowledges and then recovers. Our view is that it is an acknowledgement for an heir during terminal illness, so it resembles the case where he did not divorce her, and it differs from when he recovers from his illness, because that would not be considered a terminal illness.