Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (9/179)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

from him, because he authorized him; thus, he is acting as his agent. But if he did not authorize him, is it impossible to seek his permission?

The answer is: if it is impossible, then he may also recover the expense, because repairing it is something needed, while its owner is now far away and cannot be consulted. But if he can be consulted and the depositary repairs it without permission, then he may not recover from the depositor, because he was able to seek his permission but did not do so.

His statement, “and hired animals whose owner has fled”: an example is a person who has a she-camel which he rents out to someone to travel upon to Mecca. The owner then flees in order to put him in a difficult position and force him to spend on it. Animals require maintenance: they need fodder and water. Thus, the person who hired the animal has been authorized by its owner to spend on it. So he spends on it, buying it fodder and water and caring for it, and he may recover the expense from its owner, because the owner authorized him, making him his agent.

But if its owner did not authorize him, and it is impossible to seek his permission while there is an urgent need to spend on it immediately, then he may recover from him. If, however, the owner is present and can readily be consulted, and he spends on it without his permission, then he is liable—in other words, he may not recover from the owner of these animals what he spent on them.

But suppose that this hirer slaughtered it and preserved its meat for its owner, and its owner claimed that it had not reached a state in which slaughtering it was necessary. He says, “You slaughtered it while it was healthy and sound.” The hirer replies that he slaughtered it only after fearing that it would die and thus be lost. In that case, the hirer’s statement is accepted, because he is entrusted with it. The principle is: “The statement of every person entrusted with something is accepted regarding that with which he was entrusted.” Otherwise, many disputes would arise if we did not accept his statement.

His statement, “whose owner has fled,” means: its owner. The term rabb may mean

عليه؛ لأنه أذن له فهو وكيل، وإن لم يأذن له فهل يتعذر استئذانه؟ الجواب: إن كان يتعذر فإنه يرجع ـ أيضاً ـ لأن تعميرها مما تدعو الحاجة إليه، وصاحبها الآن بعيد لا يمكن استئذانه، وإن كان يمكن وعمرها بلا إذن، فلا يرجع على المودِع؛ لأنه تمكن من استئذانه ولم يفعل. قوله: «ودواب مستأجرة هرب ربها» مثاله: إنسان عنده ناقة أجرها شخصاً يسافر عليها إلى مكة، وهرب المالك من أجل أن يورطه وينفق عليها، والدواب تحتاج إلى نفقة فهي تريد علفاً وشراباً، فهذا الرجل الذي استأجر الدواب قد أذن له ربها بأن ينفق عليها، فأنفق عليها فصار يشتري لها علفاً وماءً ويقوم برعايتها، فيرجع على ربها؛ لأنه أذن له فيكون وكيلاً عنه، وأما لو لم يأذن له ربها وتعذر استئذانه؛ والحاجة ملحة في الإنفاق عليها عاجلاً فيرجع عليه، فإن كان موجوداً وتسهل مراجعته وأنفق عليها بدون إذنه، فإنه يضمن، بمعنى أنه لا يرجع بما أنفق على صاحب هذه الدواب. لكن لو فرض أن هذا المستأجر ذبحها واحتفظ بلحمها لصاحبها، وادعى صاحبها أنها لم تصل إلى حال يضطر فيها إلى ذبحها، وقال: أنت ذبحتها وهي صحيحة معافاة، فقال: إنه ذبحها بعد أن خاف أن تموت فتفوت، فالقول قول المستأجر؛ لأنه أمين والقاعدة: «أن كل إنسان أمين فإنه يقبل قوله فيما ائتمن فيه»، وإلا لحصلت مشاكل كثيرة إذا لم نقل بقبول قوله. وقوله: «هرب ربها» أي: مالكها، والرب يكون بمعنى