Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (10/275)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

the heir acquires it through pre-emption. The demand is for him to say: “I wish to exercise pre-emption, and I have a right to it in this case.” Taking possession is for him to say: “I have taken it by pre-emption,” explicitly declaring that he has acquired ownership of it.

In some respects, this resembles a marriage proposal and the marriage contract. A proposal is the suitor’s expression of his desire to marry a particular woman, while the contract is his acquisition of her as a wife through the marriage contract. Thus, if the claimant of pre-emption dies before making the demand, he has no right of pre-emption, because he did not demand it; nor does his heir, because pre-emption is a right belonging to the claimant, since the choice rests with him. If he dies without having chosen, his heir has no right to choose, just as with an option stipulated by condition.

They say: This resembles one who makes an offer of sale and then dies before the buyer accepts, in which case the offer is void. Likewise, they say, the right of pre-emption is void if he dies before making the demand.

But this analogy is unsound. If the offeror dies before acceptance, the sale has not been concluded, since a contract is not complete except through offer and acceptance. In the present case, however, the right of pre-emption is established merely by the co-owner’s sale. It therefore becomes a right of the claimant of pre-emption, connected to the property rather than to his person; hence it remains for whoever inherits the property after him. A similar case is where a person purchases an item and discovers a defect in it, but dies before making a claim concerning it: his heirs may make the claim, even though the owner of the item—that is, the buyer—did not do so. This is because his right was not waived, and rescission on account of a defect is connected to his property, which those after him inherit.

Thus, the stronger view in this matter is that the right to demand pre-emption passes to the heir, because it follows ownership. If the claimant of pre-emption dies without making the demand, his heir may demand it, for this is among the rights attached to ownership. And if it is among the rights of ownership, then ownership passes along with its rights. Hence, we find

الوارث يأخذ بها، والمطالبة أن يقول: أنا أريد أن أشفع، ولي الحق في هذا، والأخذ أن يقول: أخذته بالشفعة، فيصرح بأنه تملكه. وهذا يشبه من بعض الوجوه الخِطبة والعقد، فالخطبة إبداء الخاطب الرغبة في هذه المرأة، والعقد تملكه إياها بعقد النكاح. فالشفيع إذا مات قبل أن يطالب فإنه لا شفعة له؛ لأنه لم يطالب، ولا لوارثه؛ لأن الشفعة حق للشفيع حيث إن الخيار له، فلما مات ولم يختر لم يكن لوارثه أن يختار، كخيار الشرط. قالوا: لأنه يشبه مَنْ أَوْجَبَ البيعَ ثم مات قبل قبول المشتري، فإن الإيجاب يبطل، قالوا: وكذلك الشفعة تبطل إذا مات قبل أن يطالب. ولكن هذا القياس ليس بصحيح؛ لأنه إذا مات الموجب قبل القبول لم يتم البيع، فإن العقد لا يتم إلا بإيجاب وقبول، أما هذه المسألة فإن الشفعة ثبتت بمجرد بيع الشريك، فصارت حقاً للشفيع، وهي متعلقة بالمال لا ببدنه فإنها تبقى لمن ورث المال بعده، ونظير ذلك لو اشترى الإنسان شيئاً وتبين فيه عيب، ولكنه مات قبل أن يطالب به، فللورثة المطالبة به، مع أن صاحب السلعة ـ المشتري ـ لم يطالب، ولكننا نقول: لمّا لم يسقط حقه فإن الرد بالعيب متعلّق بماله الذي ورث من بعده. فالقول الراجح في هذه المسالة أنه ينتقل حق المطالبة بالشفعة إلى الوارث؛ لأن هذا تابع للملك، فإذا مات الشفيع ولم يطالب فللوارث أن يطالب؛ لأن هذا من حقوق الملك، وإذا كان من حقوق الملك فإن الملك ينتقل بحقوقه، ولهذا نجد