Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (9/268)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

Chapter on Legal Restriction

Whoever is unable to repay any part of his debt is not to be pressed for it, and it is unlawful to imprison him. Whoever possesses wealth equal to his debt is not placed under legal restriction; rather, he is instructed to repay it. If he refuses, he is imprisoned at the request of his creditor. If he persists and does not sell his property, the judge sells it and settles his debt from it. Nor may he be pressed for a debt that has not yet fallen due.

His statement, “Chapter on Legal Restriction”: Linguistically, ḥajr means prevention and restriction. This is why the intellect is called ḥijr. Allah, Exalted is He, says:

“Is there in that an oath for one of intellect?” [al-Fajr 89:5]

That is, for one possessing reason. The intellect is called ḥijr because it prevents its possessor from doing what is unbecoming according to the Sacred Law or customary standards.

Technically, it means preventing a person from disposing of his property and incurring liabilities, or from disposing of his property alone.

It is of two kinds: either it is in a person’s own interest or in the interest of someone else. In other words, legal restriction may be imposed for the benefit of the person placed under restriction, or for the benefit of another. If it is for his own benefit, it applies to both his property and his liabilities; if it is for the benefit of another, it applies only to his property.

For example, when we say to a testator, “Do not bequeath more than one third,” meaning that we restrict him regarding anything beyond one third, this is for the benefit of others. He is therefore prevented from disposing of his property, but not from incurring liabilities. But when we place a prodigal under restriction, preventing him from disposing of either his property or his liabilities, this is for his own benefit. In short, legal restriction is sometimes for the benefit of others and sometimes for the benefit of the person under restriction himself. It has causes that will become clear in the explanation.

His statement: “Whoever is unable to repay any part of his debt is not to be pressed for it, and it is unlawful to imprison him.”

بَابُ الحَجْرِ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَقْدِرْ عَلَى وَفَاءِ شَيْءٍ مِنْ دَيْنِهِ لَمْ يُطَالَبْ بِهِ وَحَرُمَ حَبْسُهُ، وَمَنْ مَالُهُ قَدْرَ دَيِنِه لَمْ يُحْجَرْ عَلَيْهِ وَأُمِرَ بِوَفَائِهِ، فَإنْ أَبَى حُبِسَ بِطَلَبِ رَبِّهِ، فَإِنْ أصَرَّ وَلَمْ يَبِعْ مَالَهُ بَاعَهُ الحَاكِمُ وَقَضَاهُ وَلَا يُطَالَبُ بمُؤَجَّلٍ. قوله: «باب الحجر» الحجر في اللغة: المنع والتضييق، ومنه سمي العقل حِجْراً، قال: ـ تعالى ـ: ﴿هَلْ فِي ذَلِكَ قَسَمٌ لِذِي حْجِرٍ *﴾ [الفجر: ٥]، أي: لذي عقل، وسمي العقل حجراً؛ لأنه يمنع صاحبه من فعل ما لا يليق شرعاً أو عرفاً. أما في الاصطلاح: فهو منع إنسان من التصرف في ماله، وذمته، أو في ماله فقط. وهو قسمان: إما لمصلحته أو لمصلحة غيره، أي أن الحجر قد يكون لمصلحة المحجور عليه، وقد يكون لمصلحة غيره، فإن كان لمصلحته فهو حجر في المال والذمة، وإن كان لمصلحة الغير فهو حجر في المال فقط. فمثلاً إذا قلنا للموصي: لا توص بأكثر من الثلث، أي: حجرنا عليه فيما زاد على الثلث فهذا لمصلحة الغير، فيمنع من التصرف في ماله ولا يمنع من التصرف في ذمته، وإذا حجرنا على السفيه ألا يتصرف في ماله أو ذمته فهذا لمصلحة نفسه، فالمهم أن الحجر تارة يكون لمصلحة الغير، وتارة يكون لمصلحة المحجور عليه نفسه، وله أسباب تتبين في الشرح. قوله: «ومن لم يقدر على وفاء شيء من دَينه لم يطالب به وحرم حبسه».