[...He said:] "Divide it, observe the truth, then cast lots, then absolve one another." Narrated by Abu Dawood (33). Furthermore, because it is a release [of liability], it is valid regarding an unknown amount, like manumission and divorce, and like if he were to say: "[I acquit you of any amount] from one dirham to a thousand." Also, because the need is compelling to acquit the liability, and there is no way to know what is in it; if one were to condition the validity of the acquittal on knowledge [of the amount], it would be blocking the door to a person pardoning their Muslim brother and acquitting his liability, so that would not be permissible, just as it is not permitted to prevent manumission. As for if the one upon whom the right is held knows it, and the one entitled to it conceals it, fearing that if he knew it he would not consent to acquitting him of it, then the acquittal should not be valid; because there is deception towards the purchaser, and it was possible to guard against it. Our companions said: If he acquitted him of a hundred, while he believed that he owed him nothing, yet he actually owed him a hundred, there are two views regarding the validity of the acquittal: one is its validity, because it coincided with his property right and extinguished it, as if he had known it. The second is that it is not valid, because he acquitted him of that which he did not believe he owed him, so it was not an acquittal in reality. The basis of these two views is the case of one who sells property that belonged to his inheritor, believing it to remain with the inheritor, while the inheritor had already died and his ownership had transferred to him; does it hold? There are two views. Al-Shafi'i has two views regarding sale, and two views regarding the validity of acquittal.

933 - Issue: He said: "And his father, or his successor after him (1), or the judge, or his trusted agent by his order, may take possession on behalf of the child."

The entirety of this is that the child cannot validly take possession for himself, nor can he accept [a gift], because he is not among those of legal capacity (ahl al-tasarruf), and his guardian acts in his place in that regard. If he has a trustworthy father, he is his guardian, because he is the most compassionate towards him and the closest to him. If his trustworthy father dies and he has a successor (wasi), then his guardian is his successor, because the father established him in his own place, so he runs in the same vein as his agent. If the father is not trustworthy due to immorality or insanity, or he dies without a successor, then his trusted agent is the judge, and no one other than these three may have authority over his wealth. The judge's trusted agent stands in his stead.