If the heir is a group, acceptance or rejection is considered from all of them; if some reject and others accept, it is established for those who accepted their share, and the bequest becomes void regarding those who rejected. If among them is someone who is not legally competent, their guardian stands in their place regarding acceptance and rejection. He must not do anything except that which is to the benefit of the person under his guardianship; if he does otherwise, it is not valid. If the benefit lies in accepting it but he rejects it, his rejection is not valid, and he may accept it afterwards. If the benefit lies in rejecting it but he accepts it, his acceptance is not valid, because the guardian does not possess the right to dispose of the right of the person under his guardianship except in what is to their benefit. So if someone bequeaths to a boy a relative of his who would be emancipated upon being owned by him, and it is harmful to the boy—such as him being obligated to provide maintenance for the bequeathed person because the latter is poor with no earnings, while the person under guardianship is wealthy—then he is not to accept the bequest. But if it is not harmful to him because the bequeathed person has earnings, or because the person under guardianship is poor and not obligated to provide maintenance for him, then acceptance of the bequest becomes necessary; because there is a benefit to the person under guardianship in that, due to the emancipation of his relative and setting him free, without any harm returning to him, so it becomes necessary. And Allah knows best.

Section: The legatee does not possess the bequest except upon acceptance, according to the majority of jurists, if it is for a specific person from whom acceptance is possible; because it is the transfer of property to someone who is a specific subject of ownership, so their acceptance is considered, like a gift and a sale. Ahmad said: "A gift and a bequest are one and the same." As for if it were for a non-specific party, such as the poor, the needy, and those who cannot be enumerated—such as the Banu Hashim and Banu Tamim—or for a charitable purpose, such as a mosque or Hajj, it does not require acceptance, and it becomes binding merely upon death; because considering acceptance from all of them is impossible, so its consideration is dropped, like an endowment (waqf) for them. No one among them is specified to suffice with his acceptance, and for this reason, if among them there was a relative of the bequeathed person, such as if he bequeaths a slave to the poor and his father is poor, he does not become emancipated for him. And because ownership is not established for the legatees, according to the evidence of the issue we mentioned; rather, it is established for each one of them upon taking possession, so his taking possession stands in the place of his acceptance. As for the specific human being, ownership is established for him, so his acceptance is considered, but acceptance is not limited to words; rather, it suffices...