Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (9/441)

and invalidates the partnership. According to the school, if the partnership was concluded on this condition and the two partners conducted business through it for a year, then they were told that the partnership was invalid, each of them would be entitled to the profit generated by his own capital, without the other sharing in it, because the partnership is invalid. Each would also be entitled from the other to the customary wage for the work he performed with the other’s capital.

The second view is that, when the partnership is invalid, the matter reverts to the customary share, not the customary wage. This is because each received the other’s capital with its owner’s consent, on the basis of a partnership and as a partner rather than an employee. Therefore, when the partnership is invalid, the matter reverts to the customary share, and each is entitled to a share of the profit equivalent to that customarily due to someone in his position. As for loss of capital or profit generated by capital, this is included within the partnership, because it is not exceptional.

If they were to include an inheritance received by one of them—for example, if his relative died and he acquired one billion riyals through him, and he said, “Let us include it in the partnership”—then it is not included, because it is exceptional and has no connection to the partner’s work. A gift, likewise, is exceptional; therefore, they say that this is not valid and invalidates the partnership.

But one might say: exceptional matters fall into categories:

The first is that in which a person has no part to play. This is indeed not included in the partnership, such as an inheritance.

The second is what a person acquires through his own effort, such as finding lost property and similar matters. There is no objection to including this in the partnership, even if it is exceptional. A person’s finding lost property is unusual, but he acquires ownership of it by his own choice.

The third is what occurs by a person’s choice but not through his own action, such as a gift, for example,

مفسد لها، وعلى المذهب لو تمت الشركة على هذا الشرط واشتغلا في الشركة لمدة سنة ثم قيل لهما: إن الشركة فاسدة، يقولون حينئذٍ يكون لكل واحد منهما ربح ماله، ولا يشاركه الآخر فيه؛ لأن الشركة فاسدة، ويكون لكل واحد منهم على الآخر أجرة مثله بما عمله في ماله. والقول الثاني: أنها إذا فسدت الشركة فإنه يرجع إلى سهم المثل لا أجرة المثل؛ لأن هذا إنما أخذ المال برضا صاحبه على أساس الشركة وعلى أنه شريك لا أجير، فإذا فسدت الشركة فإننا نرجع إلى سهم المثل، فيكون لكل واحد منهما من الربح سهم مثله، أما خسارة المال أو ربح المال فهو ضمن الشركة؛ لأنه ليس بنادر. ولو أدخلا فيها ميراثاً لأحدهما بأن مات قريبه، وكسب من ورائه ألف مليون ريال، وقال: ندخلها في الشركة فهنا لا يدخل؛ لأنه من النادر، ولا علاقة له بعمل الشريك، والهبة ـ أيضاً ـ نادرة، فيقولون: لا يصح وتفسد الشركة. لكن لو قال قائل: النوادر أقسام: الأول: لا أثر للإنسان فيه، فهذا نعم لا يدخل في الشركة كالميراث. الثاني: ما كان بكسب من الإنسان كالتقاط وشبهه، فهذا لا بأس أن يدخل في الشركة وإن كان نادراً، فكون الإنسان يجد لقطة هذا أمر نادر لكن الإنسان يتملكه باختياره. الثالث: ما كان باختيار الإنسان لا فعله كالهبة ـ مثلاً ـ،