Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (9/404)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

work receives the full profit attributable to his capital, whereas the one who contributed capital and worked receives only the profit attributable to his capital. His labor would thus be in vain, bringing him no benefit whatsoever.

In my view, there is no objection to this arrangement: he may receive an amount equal to the profit attributable to his capital. For if the owner of the capital who did not work is given the full profit attributable to his capital, this is an act of generosity on the part of the one who worked—and who can forbid generosity? Is it not permissible for me to give him my wealth to invest, with all the profit belonging to me, while he volunteers his labor for my benefit?

The correct view, then, is that he may be given a share of the profit commensurate with his capital, because in doing so he is acting generously toward his partner.

“Each of them may validly dispose of both shares: by virtue of ownership with respect to his own share, and by agency with respect to his partner’s share.”

His statement, “Each of them may validly dispose of both shares: by virtue of ownership with respect to his own share, and by agency with respect to his partner’s share,” means that once they enter into partnership, each of them may dispose of both amounts of capital. With regard to his own property, he acts in his own right by virtue of ownership; with regard to his partner’s property, he acts as an agent, since he acts on his partner’s behalf. Although his partner has not expressly appointed him as an agent, the nature of the partnership contract entails that he may dispose of this jointly owned property. Agency is established by whatever indicates it, whether words or actions. Thus, the partnership contract itself suffices in place of an explicit authorization to act as an agent, because it is inherent in a partnership contract that each partner disposes of the jointly owned property in his own right with respect to his share, and as an agent with respect to his partner’s share.

For example, two people enter into an ‘inan partnership: one sells textiles and the other sells foodstuffs. The seller of foodstuffs may sell some of the

يعمل أتاه ربح ماله كاملاً، والذي دفع وعمل لم يأته إلا ربح ماله فقط، فيكون عمله هباء لا ينتفع منه بشيء. وعندي أنه لا مانع من هذا العمل، أن يكون له بمقدار ماله؛ لأن صاحب المال الذي لم يعمل إذا أعطي ربح ماله كاملاً فهو إحسان من العامل، ومن يمنع الإحسان؟! أليس يجوز أن أعطيه مالي ليعمل فيه ويكون الربح كله لي؟! ويكون هو متبرعاً لي بالعمل. فالصواب أنه يجوز أن يعطى من الربح بقدر ماله؛ وذلك لأنه يكون بهذا محسناً إلى صاحبه. فَيَنْفُذُ تَصَرُّفُ كُلٍّ مِنْهُما فِيهِمَا، بِحُكْمِ المِلْكِ في نَصِيبِهِ وبِالوَكَالةِ فِي نَصِيبِ شَرِيكِهِ. قوله: «فينفذ تصرف كل منهما فيهما، بحكم الملك في نصيبه وبالوكالة في نصيب شريكه» لما اشتركا أصبح كل واحد ينفذ تصرفه في المالين جميعاً، بالنسبة لملكه يتصرف بالأصالة بحكم الملك، وبالنسبة لشريكه يتصرف بالوكالة؛ لأنه فرع عنه، وكونه يتصرف بالوكالة وهو لم يوكله؛ لأن مقتضى عقد الشركة أن يتصرف في هذا المال المشترك، والوكالة تنعقد بما دل عليها من قول أو فعل، فعلى هذا يغني عقد الشركة عن الإذن الصريح في التوكيل؛ لأنه من لازم عقد الشركة أن يتصرف في المال المشترك بطريق الأصالة في نصيبه، وطريق الوكالة في نصيب شريكه. مثال ذلك: اشترك اثنان في شركة عنان أحدهما يبيع أقمشة، والآخر يبيع أطعمة، فيجوز لبائع الأطعمة أن يبيع شيئاً من