Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (8/268)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

A question: If they did not waive it at the time of the contract, then after ten minutes one says, “So-and-so, let us terminate the option,” because he fears that his counterpart may rescind the sale, and they both terminate it, this is valid, because the right belongs to them both and they have waived it. But if one of them refuses, it is not valid. Yet does the option of the other party—the one who said, “Let us waive the option”—also lapse?

The answer: The hadith states, “or one of them gives the other the choice” (1). Thus, if one of them gives the other the choice—meaning, he makes the option exclusively the other’s—then the option of the one who waived his own option lapses. Apparently, merely requesting that the option be waived does not itself constitute a waiver of the option.

A question: If a person fears that the sale may be rescinded, is it permissible for him to leave his counterpart for fear that he may ask him to cancel the sale?

The answer: By leaving the place, he is nullifying his brother’s right, which the Sacred Law has granted him. This is like resorting to a legal device to nullify the right of pre-emption in the share that has been sold, and similar cases. In any event, it is a legal device to nullify his brother’s right.

If someone were to say: The hadith is general: “unless they separate,” and it makes no distinction.

We would reply: What is meant is a separation not intended to nullify the other party’s right. But if it is intended to nullify the other party’s right, then deeds are judged by intentions. For this reason, the hadith states: “It is not lawful for him to leave the other for fear that he may ask him to cancel the sale” (2).

(1) Its source reference has already been provided on p. 262. (2) Recorded by Imam Ahmad, 2/183; Abu Dawud, Book of Sales, chapter: “The option of the two parties to a sale,” no. 3456; al-Tirmidhi, Book of Sales, chapter: “The two parties to a sale retain the option as long as they have not parted,” no. 1247; and al-Nasai, Book of Sales, chapter: “The obligation of the option for the two parties to a sale before they physically separate,” 7/252, on the authority of Amr ibn Shuayb, from his father, from his grandfather. Al-Tirmidhi graded it hasan (sound), and Al-Irwa, 5/155, states: “Hasan.”

مسألة: فإن لم ينفياه في العقد، وبعد مضي عشر دقائق، قال: يا فلان فلنقطع الخيار؛ لأنه خاف أن يفسخ صاحبه البيع فقطعاه صح؛ لأن الحق لهما وقد أسقطاه، فإن أبى أحدهما لم يصح، لكن هل يسقط خيار الآخر الذي قال: سنسقط الخيار؟ الجواب: في الحديث «أو يخير أحدهما الآخر» (١)، فإن خير أحدهما الآخر، أي: جعل الخيار له وحده، سقط خيار الذي أسقط خياره، والظاهر أن طلب إسقاط الخيار ليس إسقاطاً للخيار. مسألة: لو أنه خاف أن يفسخ البيع، فهل يحل له أن يفارقه خشية أن يستقيله؟ الجواب: في مفارقته المكان إسقاط لحق أخيه الذي جعله الشرع له، فيكون هذا كالتحيل على إسقاط الشفعة في الشقص المبيع، وما أشبه ذلك، وعلى كل حال هو تحيل على إسقاط حق أخيه. فإن قال قائل: الحديث عام ما لم يتفرقا وليس فيه تفصيل. قلنا: المراد التفرق الذي لم يقصد به إسقاط حق الآخر، فإن قصد به إسقاط حق الآخر فالأعمال بالنيات، ولهذا جاء في الحديث: «ولا يحل له أن يفارقه خشية أن يستقيله» (٢).

(١) سبق تخريجه ص (٢٦٢). (٢) أخرجه الإمام أحمد (٢/ ١٨٣)؛ وأبو داود في البيوع/ باب في خيار المتبايعين (٣٤٥٦)؛ والترمذي في البيوع/ باب البيعان بالخيار ما لم يتفرقا (١٢٤٧)؛ والنسائي في البيوع/ باب وجوب الخيار للمتبايعين قبل افتراقهما بأبدانهما (٧/ ٢٥٢)؛ عن عمرو بن شعيب عن أبيه عن جده. وحسنه الترمذي، وفي «الإرواء» (٥/ ١٥٥): (حسن).