If he makes a will with a bequest for which a similar one would be valid from an adult, it is valid from him; otherwise, it is not. Shurayh and Abdullah ibn Utbah, both of whom were judges, said: "Whoever hits upon the truth, we permit his will."

Section: As for the child—who is someone under seven years of age—the insane, and the delirious (al-mubarsam), there is no will for them. This is the opinion of most scholars, including Humayd ibn Abd al-Rahman, Malik, al-Awza'i, al-Shafi'i, the proponents of ra'y, and those who followed them. We do not know of anyone who disagreed with them except Iyas ibn Mu'awiyah, who said regarding the boy and the insane person: "If their will conforms to the truth, it is permitted." This is not correct; for their speech has no legal status, their acts of worship are not valid, and none of their dispositions are valid, so it is the same with a will—and indeed, it is even more deserving of being invalid. For if his Islam and his prayer, which are purely beneficial and contain no harm, are not valid, then it is more appropriate that his expenditure of wealth, by which his heir is harmed, is not valid. Furthermore, it is a disposition that requires an offer and acceptance, so it is not valid from them, just like sales and gifting.

Section: As for the person under legal interdiction due to spendthriftiness (safah), his will is valid according to the analogy of Ahmad's opinion. Al-Khabri said: This is the opinion of the majority. Abu al-Khattab said: There are two views regarding his will. We argue that he is a person of discernment whose will is valid, like the discerning child, and because his will is purely beneficial to him without any harm, so it is valid like his acts of worship. As for the one who is occasionally insane and occasionally lucid, if he makes a will while insane, it is not valid; but if he makes a will while lucid, his will is valid, for he is in the position of the sane in terms of his testimony and the obligation of worship upon him; thus it is the same for his will and his dispositions. The will of an intoxicated person is not valid. Abu Bakr said: There are two opinions on this. He means two views. We argue that he is not a person of sound mind, so his will is not valid, like the insane person. As for the execution of his divorce, those who upheld it did so as a disciplinary measure against him for committing a sin, so this does not extend to his will, for there is no harm to him in it; rather, the harm is to his heir. As for