As for the word “guaranteed”: those who maintain that a loaned item entails liability in all circumstances say that “guaranteed” is an explanatory description, not a restrictive qualifier. An explanatory description does not exclude anything from the ruling by implication. It is as though he said: “A loaned item”—and every loaned item entails liability. Those who say that it entails liability only when this is stipulated say that the description “guaranteed” is restrictive, not explanatory.

When the two possibilities conflict—whether the description is restrictive or explanatory—the basic presumption is that it is restrictive. This is because, if an explanatory description were omitted, the statement would remain complete without it, whereas a restrictive qualifier is necessary for the statement to be complete. The basic presumption is that whatever is mentioned must be mentioned. Accordingly, the description here is restrictive—and this is the correct view. Thus, it indicates that a loaned item entails liability if liability is stipulated; otherwise, it does not.

If someone were to ask: How do you answer their use of the two preceding proofs as evidence?

The answer is that Allah says:

“Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due.” [al-Nisāʾ 4:58]

Trusts are returned when they remain intact. But if they perish, the verse contains no evidence that they must be returned, because the trusts have ceased to exist and perished.

Likewise, regarding the hadith, “The hand is liable for what it takes until it returns it” (1), we say: this indicates that the item still exists and that it must be returned to its owner when returning it to him is required.