Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (9/275)

two thousand riyals. The property he possesses is insufficient to cover the debts currently due from him, so what should we do?

The author says: “He must be placed under legal interdiction,” meaning that the judge responsible for such matters must place under legal interdiction anyone whose property is insufficient to cover what he currently owes.

His statement, “upon the request of his creditors,” means: when the creditors request that he be placed under legal interdiction.

His statement, “or some of them,” means that if some of them request that he be placed under legal interdiction, their request must be granted. The evidence for this is that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, placed Mu'adh, may Allah be pleased with him, under legal interdiction and sold his property to settle a debt he owed (1). This is evidence from transmitted reports, although its chain has been subject to criticism.

From a rational perspective, placing him under legal interdiction safeguards the creditor’s right and protects the debtor from continuing liability: it safeguards the creditor so that he receives his right, or part of it; and it protects the debtor from having his liability remain perpetually encumbered by debt. This is a great and significant benefit for both creditor and debtor; thus, sound reasoning entails that legal interdiction be established.

Another rational consideration is that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, described the delaying of payment by a wealthy person as wrongdoing (2). Although this debtor is not sufficiently wealthy to repay the debt in full, he does possess something, and is therefore wrongfully withholding people’s rights; and wrongdoing must be

(1) Reported by Abd al-Razzaq (15177), al-Daraqutni (4/231), al-Hakim (2/58), and al-Bayhaqi (6/48) on the authority of Kab ibn Malik, may Allah be pleased with him. It was also reported by Abu Dawud in al-Marasil (171-172), on the authority of Abd al-Rahman ibn Kab ibn Malik. Abu Dawud and Abd al-Haqq regarded it as mursal (having a missing link in the chain). See Bayan al-Wahm wa al-Iham (311) and al-Talkhis (1233). (2) Its source has been cited previously on p. 271.

بألفين، فالمال الذي عنده لا يفي بما عليه حالًّا، فماذا نصنع؟ يقول المؤلف: «وجب الحجر عليه» أي: وجب على الحاكم الذي يتولى هذه الأمور الحجر على من ماله لا يفي بما عليه. قوله: «بسؤال غرمائه» يعني إذا سأل الغرماء الحجر عليه. قوله: «أو بعضهم» أي: أو سأل بعضهم الحجر عليه وجبت إجابته، ودليل ذلك أن النبي ﷺ حجر على معاذ ﵁ وباع ماله في دين عليه (١)، هذا من جهة الأثر، وإن كان فيه مقال. ومن جهة النظر؛ فلأنه في الحجر عليه حماية لحق الدائن وحماية لذمة المدين، فالدائن حتى يعطى حقه أو بعضه، وحماية لذمة المدين لئلا تبقى ذمته معلقة مشغولة بالدين دائماً، وهذه مصلحة كبرى عظيمة للدائن والمدين، فكان مقتضى النظر الصحيح أن يثبت الحجر. ومن جهة النظر ـ أيضاً ـ أن النبي ﷺ جعل مطل الغني ظلماً (٢)، وهذا وإن لم يكن غنيّاً الغناء التام الذي يوفي، لكن عنده بعض الشيء فيكون ظالماً بمنع الحقوق، والظلم يجب

(١) أخرجه عبد الرزاق (١٥١٧٧)؛ والدراقطني (٤/ ٢٣١)؛ والحاكم (٢/ ٥٨)؛ والبيهقي (٦/ ٤٨) عن كعب بن مالك ﵁، وأخرجه أبو داود في «المراسيل» (١٧١، ١٧٢)، عن عبد الرحمن بن كعب بن مالك، ورجح إرساله أبو داود وعبد الحق، انظر: «بيان الوهم الإيهام» (٣١١)؛ و «التلخيص» (١٢٣٣). (٢) سبق تخريجه ص (٢٧١).