Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (8/383)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

compensable by the usurper, then he must compensate fifty thousand; but if we say that it is not compensable, then he need only compensate forty thousand. However, it should be said that he must compensate fifty thousand in all cases, because he has wrongfully withheld it.

His statement, “unless the seller prevents him from taking possession of it,” applies whether or not the purchaser is able to take possession of it. Shaykh al-Islam, may Allah have mercy on him, held that the determining factor is the ability to take possession: whatever the purchaser is able to take possession of is at his risk, and whatever he is unable to take possession of is at the seller’s risk. He said that this is explicitly stated by Imam Ahmad, and his view is more sound by analogy. For fruit still on the tree remains at the seller’s risk only because the purchaser is unable to take possession of it; the purchaser will not take it all at once, but will eat from it and take it little by little. Likewise, an item sold by measure or the like remains at the seller’s risk so long as it has not been measured and its quantity is unknown, because the purchaser is unable to take possession of it. Accordingly, if an item is sold as an unmeasured bulk lot, the sale is not valid; but if it is destroyed, it is at the purchaser’s risk, because he is able to take possession of it.

His statement, “unless the seller prevents him from taking possession of it,” indicates that whenever an item is at one party’s risk and the other prevents him from taking possession of it, liability returns to the one who prevented him. Thus, in matters other than what is sold by measure and the like, liability rests with the purchaser unless the seller prevents him from taking possession. The reverse also applies: in the cases mentioned earlier where liability rests with the seller, if the seller hands it over to the purchaser but the purchaser refuses and says, “I will not take it,” until it is destroyed, then liability rests with the purchaser. This is because the seller offered it to him, but he refused; and the seller may say, “You have now left it with me as a trust. Its liability is yours, for I have offered it to you.” This occurs frequently,

مضمون على الغاصب فإنه يضمنها بخمسين، وإن قلنا: ليس بمضمون فإنه لا يضمنها إلا بأربعين، لكن ينبغي أن يقال: إنه يضمنها بخمسين على كل حال؛ لأنه معتد بمنعها. وقوله: «ما لم يمنعه بائع من قبضه» سواء تمكن من قبضه أم لم يتمكن، واختار شيخ الإسلام ﵀ أن المدار على التمكن من القبض، فما تمكن المشتري من قبضه فعليه، وما لم يتمكن من قبضه فعلى البائع. وقال: إن هذا هو منصوص الإمام أحمد، وكلامه أقيس؛ لأن الثمرة على الشجرة إنما كانت من ضمان البائع؛ لأن المشتري لا يتمكن من قبضها، لأن المشتري لن يأخذها جملة بل سيتفكه ويأخذها شيئاً فشيئاً، والمبيع بكيل أو نحوه ما دام لم يكل ولم يعرف مقداره فضمانه على البائع؛ لأن المشتري لا يتمكن من قبضه، وعلى هذا فإن بيع الشيء جزافاً فإنه لا يصح بيعه، ولكن إن تلف فمن ضمان المشتري؛ لتمكنه من قبضه. وقوله: «ما لم يمنعه بائع من قبضه» يفهم منه أن ما كان ضمانه على شخص فمنع منه عاد الضمان على المانع؛ لأن الضمان فيما عدا ما بيع بكيل ونحوه من ضمان المشتري إلا إذا منعه البائع، والعكس كذلك، أي: فيما سبق أنه من ضمان البائع إذا سلمه البائع المشتري، ولكن المشتري أبى قال: لا أستلم حتى تلف، فإن الضمان حينئذٍ يكون على المشتري؛ لأن البائع قد بذله ولكنه امتنع، والبائع يقول: أنت الآن وضعته عندي على سبيل الوديعة، فضمانه عليك وأنا قد بذلته، وهذه تجري كثيراً،