Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (8/382)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

and accordingly, his statement, “other than what is sold by measure and the like,” is incomplete. The correct wording should add three things: what is sold after prior inspection, what is sold by description, and fruit still growing on the trees.

His statement, “unless the seller prevents him from taking possession of it”: the pronoun in “prevents him” refers to the purchaser. That is, unless the seller prevents the purchaser from taking possession of it, in which case it remains under the seller’s liability.

An example is where he sells him a car. A car is not sold by measure, weight, count, or length, nor on the basis of prior inspection or description. If the purchaser wishes to take it but the seller says, “No,” and prevents him, then liability rests upon the seller. However, he is liable for it as an usurper. Liability as an usurper means that he must pay its rental value for the period during which he prevented the purchaser from taking it, and that if it is destroyed, he must compensate for it according to its value at the time of its destruction, not according to the price agreed upon in the contract.

If he is liable for it as an usurper, based on its value at the time of destruction, then he must compensate for its value, whether it has risen above its purchase price or fallen below it. If its value has increased, the matter is clear, because its gain belongs to the purchaser, and an increase in its price is to his benefit. Thus, if we assume that he bought it for fifty thousand, the seller prevented him from taking possession of it, and it burned while worth sixty thousand, then the seller must compensate sixty thousand. This is clear, because its gains belong to the purchaser and its losses are his responsibility, while this man is liable for it as an usurper.

But if, when it burned, it was worth only forty thousand, is he liable for forty thousand or fifty thousand?

The answer is: if we say that this is liability as an usurper, the scholars have differed as to whether a decrease in value is compensable by the usurper or not. If we hold that it is

وعليه فيكون قوله: «ما عدا المبيع بكيل ونحوه» فيه قصور، والصواب أن يزاد ثلاثة أشياء المبيع برؤية سابقة، أو بصفة، والثمر على الشجر. قوله: «ما لم يمنعه بائع من قبضه» «يمنعه» الهاء تعود على المشتري، أي: إلا إذا منع البائعُ المشتريَ من قبضه، فإنه يكون من ضمان البائع. مثال ذلك: باع عليه سيارة، والسيارة ليست بكيل، ولا وزن، ولا عد، ولا ذرع، ولا برؤية سابقة ولا صفة، فأراد المشتري أن يأخذها فقال البائع: لا، فمنعه، فهنا الضمان على البائع، لكنه يضمنها ضمان غصب، ومعنى ضمان الغصب أن عليه أجرتها مدة منعه إياها، وأنها لو تلفت ضمنها بقيمتها وقت التلف، لا بما وقع عليه العقد، وإذا ضمنها ضمان غصب بما تساوي وقت التلف فإنه يضمنها بقيمتها، سواء زادت على ثمنها أم نقصت، فإن زادت فالأمر ظاهر؛ لأن الغنم للمشتري فزيادة سعرها من مصلحته، فإذا قدرنا أنه اشتراها بخمسين ألفاً ومنعه البائع من قبضها واحترقت وكانت تساوي حين الاحتراق ستين ألفاً، فإن البائع يضمن ستين ألفاً وهذا واضح؛ وذلك لأن المشتري له غنمها وعليه غرمها، وهذا الرجل يضمنها ضمان غصب. فإن كانت حين احتراقها لا تساوي إلا أربعين، فهل يضمنها بأربعين أو بخمسين؟ الجواب: إذا قلنا: ضمان غصب، فإنه قد اختلف العلماء هل نقص السعر مضمون على الغاصب أو لا؟ فإن قلنا: إنه