Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (10/120)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

by an equivalent, whereas a non-fungible item is indemnified according to its value.” This is based on the Prophet’s saying, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him: “A vessel for a vessel, and food for food,” in a well-known incident. He was with one of his wives when another wife sent her servant with food in a dish. The servant entered, bringing the food and dish to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, in the home of the other wife. Overcome by jealousy, she struck the servant’s hand, causing the dish to fall and break. The Prophet, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, then took the food and dish of the wife in whose home he was and gave them to the servant, saying: “A vessel for a vessel, and food for food.” (1) Thus, compensation here was made with an equivalent, because this was a fungible item.

But regarding emancipation, when the Messenger, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, explained that whoever emancipates his share in a slave, his emancipation extends to the shares of his partners, he said: “Its fair value is assessed against him.” (2) Thus, he required payment of its value, because it is not fungible: an equivalent cannot be obtained for it, so it is a non-fungible item.

The difference between a non-fungible item and a fungible item is that the jurists define a fungible item as “everything measured by volume or weight, which has undergone no permissible manufacture, and for which a forward sale is valid.” This definition restricts fungible items very severely.

Their statement, “everything measured by volume or weight,” excludes everything else, despite

(1) Narrated by al-Tirmidhi in al-Ahkam (Legal Rulings), chapter: “What Has Been Related Regarding One Who Breaks Another’s Property and What Is Due from the Breaker’s Wealth” (1359), on the authority of Anas; he graded it hasan sahih (sound and authentic). It is also recorded by al-Bukhari, without the words: “Food for food, and vessel for vessel” (2481). (2) Narrated by al-Bukhari in al-Itq (Manumission), chapter: “If Two People Manumit a Slave” (2522), and by Muslim in al-Itq, chapter: “One Who Manumits His Share in a Slave” (1501), on the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar.

بمثله، والمتقوم يضمن بقيمته) لقول النبي ﷺ: «إناء بإناء، وطعام بطعام» في قصة معروفة، وهي أنه ﷺ كان عند إحدى زوجاته ﵅ فأرسلت الزوجة الأخرى خادمها بطعام في صحفة، فدخل الخادم بالطعام والصحفة على الرسول ﷺ في منزل الضرَّة، فأصابتها الغيرة، فضربت بيد الخادم حتى سقطت الصحفة وانكسرت، فأخذ النبي ﷺ طعام المرأة التي هو عندها وصحفتها وأعطاها الخادم، وقال: «إناء بإناء، وطعام بطعام» (١) فهنا ضُمِن بالمثل؛ لأن هذا مثلي. لكن في الإعتاق لما بيَّن الرسول ﷺ أن من أعتق شركاً له في عبد سرى عتقه إلى نصيب شركائه قال: «وقُوِّمَ عليه قيمة عدل» (٢) فأوجب القيمة، لأنه ليس مثلياً، يتعذر فيه تحصيل المثل فهو متقوم. والفرق بين المتقوم وبين المثلي: أن المثلي ضابطه عند الفقهاء (كل مكيل أو موزون ليس فيه صناعة مباحة، يصح السَّلَم فيه) وهذا الضابط يضيِّق المثليات تضييقاً بالغاً. فقولهم: (كل مكيل أو موزون) يخرج به ما سواهما، مع

(١) أخرجه الترمذي في الأحكام/ باب ما جاء فيمن يكسر له الشيء ما يحكم له من مال الكاسر … (١٣٥٩) عن أنس ﵁ وقال: حسن صحيح، والحديث في البخاري دون قوله: «طعام بطعام وإناء بإناء» (٢٤٨١). (٢) أخرجه البخاري في العتق/ باب إذا أعتق عبداً بين اثنين (٢٥٢٢)، ومسلم في العتق/ باب من أعتق شركاً له في عبد (١٥٠١)، عن عبد الله بن عمر ﵄.