Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (12/45)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

Such a comprehensible gesture must be known to the two witnesses, so that they may testify to what took place.

“If the acceptance precedes the offer, it is invalid, …”

His statement, “If the acceptance precedes the offer, it is invalid”: if he says, “I accept,” before saying, “I marry you [to her],” it is invalid, because a contract cannot exist without an offer. Acceptance is the acceptance of something that has been offered; so how can acceptance precede the offer when nothing has yet been offered? The offer must therefore precede the acceptance. If the acceptance comes first, it is invalid. The way to validate it is for the acceptance to be repeated after the offer, since the prior acceptance occurred out of place. Once the offer is made and followed by acceptance, the contract is valid. The preponderant view, however, is that if acceptance precedes the offer in a manner that makes its meaning clear, it is valid.

The apparent meaning of the author’s words is that this applies whether the acceptance is expressed in the past tense or as a command. Yet, in the chapter on sales, it was previously stated that it is valid when expressed as a command, such as when one says, “Sell me this house for ten thousand,” and the other replies, “I have sold it to you”; the sale is valid. Thus, if he says here, “Marry your daughter to me,” and the other replies, “I marry my daughter to you,” the apparent meaning of the author’s words is that it is invalid, and that the offer must precede the acceptance.

Based on what we have established—that what counts in all contracts is what is indicated by the particular custom—we say that it is valid. Indeed, this occurred in the hadith of the man who said, “Marry her to me,” and the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, replied, “I marry her to you in return for what you possess of the Quran” (1). The report that the man said, “I accept,” likewise proves that if acceptance precedes the offer in a manner that makes the acceptance clear, it is valid—as when it is expressed as a request: “Marry her to me,” and the other replies, “I marry her to you.”

(1) Its source has been cited above on p. 39.

والإشارة المفهومة لا بد أن يعرفها الشاهدان حتى يشهدا على ما وقع. فَإِنْ تَقَدَّمَ القَبُولُ لَمْ يَصِحَّ، ........... قوله: «فإن تقدم القبول لم يصح»، لو قال: قبلت قبل أن يقول: زوجتك، لم يصح؛ لأن العقد لا يكون إلا به، ولأن القبول قَبولُ شيءٍ بُذِلَ، فكيف يتقدم القبول على الإيجاب، ولم يبذل شيء حتى الآن؟! فلا بد أن يتقدم الإيجاب على القبول، فإن تأخر فإنه لا يصح، والطريق إلى تصحيحه أن يعاد القبول بعد الإيجاب؛ لأن القبول المتقدم وقع في غير محله، فإذا جاء الإيجاب وأردفناه بالقبول صح، والقول الراجح أنه إذا تقدم القبول على وجه يحصل به فإنه يصح. وظاهر كلام المؤلف سواء وقع القبول بلفظ الماضي أو الأمر، مع أنه في باب البيع تقدم أنه يصح إذا كان بلفظ الأمر، مثل: بعني هذا البيت بعشرة آلاف، فقال: بعتك، صح البيع، فهنا لو قال: زوجني ابنتك، فقال: زوجتك بنتي، ظاهر كلام المؤلف أنه لا يصح، وأنه لا بد أن يتقدم الإيجاب. وبناء على ما قررناه من أن المعتبر في كل العقود ما دلت عليه بالعرف الخاص، نقول: إنه يصح، بل إنه وقع في حديث الرجل الذي قال: «زوِّجنيها»، فقال: «زوَّجتكها بما معك من القرآن» (١)، وما ورد أن الرجل قال: قبلت، فهذا دليل على أنه إذا تقدم القبول على وجه يتضح به القبول فإنه يصح، كما لو وقع ذلك بلفظ الطلب: زوِّجني، فقال: زوَّجتك.

(١) سبق تخريجه ص (٣٩).