Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (2/399)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

for the money owed to him; but if the heirs refuse to swear, the two partners swear that they paid it to the deceased and, in support of the witness’s testimony, swear that the deceased paid it to the seller. They are then discharged from liability for their respective shares. The seller swears that the deceased paid him nothing and recovers the deceased’s share from the heirs.

Section

Likewise, if the deceased was insolvent, the matter falls under the same three possibilities already mentioned.

The first possibility is that the two partners acknowledge the heirs’ claim that the deceased paid the seller the entire debt from his own funds, on behalf of himself and the two partners, intending to recover their respective shares from them. Ibn Abī Zayd held that the two partners may swear in support of the witness’s testimony to discharge themselves from their liability as guarantors for the one-third share that the deceased is unable to pay. He said: “If they swear, they must pay two-thirds to the heirs. The seller may then recover one-third from the heirs out of that sum, provided he swears that he received nothing from the deceased.”

Abū Ishāq al-Tūnisī held that, if the two partners swear in support of the witness’s testimony to discharge themselves from their liability as guarantors for the one-third share that the deceased is unable to pay, they do not pay the two-thirds to the heirs. Rather, they pay that amount to the seller after he swears. This is the correct position, as we have explained: they owe the heirs nothing for what the deceased paid on their behalf from his own funds, since he himself caused its loss by failing to have the payment witnessed.

The second and third possibilities have already been discussed in the case where the deceased was solvent. In these two cases, there is no difference between his having been solvent or insolvent, except with regard to pursuing his outstanding liability should assets subsequently become available. Success comes from Allah.

Section

As for guaranteeing a person’s appearance, this is permissible when the person guaranteed faces a financial claim, but not when he faces a claim entailing a bodily punishment, whether execution, a prescribed punishment, retaliation, or a discretionary punishment. This is

بماله؛ وإن نكلوا عن اليمين، حلف الشريكان لقد دفعا ذلك إلى الميت، وحلفا مع الشاهد لقد دفع ذلك الميت إلى البائع وبرئا من نصيبهما، وحلف البائع ما دفع إليه شيئا، ورجع على الورثة بما ينوبه. فصل وكذلك إذا كان الميت معدما لا يخلو الأمر أيضا من الثلاثة الوجوه المذكورة: فأما الوجه الأول منها، وهو أن يصدق الشريكان الورثة فيما ادعوا من أن الميت دفع جميع الحق من ماله إلى البائع عن نفسه وعنهما ليرجع عليهما بما ينوبهما منه، فذهب ابن أبي زيد إلى أن للشريكين أن يحلفا مع الشاهد ليبرآ من حمالة الثلث الذي الميت به عديم، قال: فإذا حلفا غرما للورثة الثلثين ورجع البائع عليهم في ذلك بالثلث إذا حلف أنه لم يقبض من وليهم شيئا، وذهب أبو إسحاق التونسي إلى أن الشريكين إذا حلفا مع الشاهد ليبرآ من حمالة الثلث الذي الميت به عديم لا يغرمان الثلثين للورثة وإنما يغرمان ذلك للبائع بعد يمينه وهو الصحيح على ما بيناه من أنهما لا يلزمهما للورثة ما دفع الميت عنهما من ماله، لأنه أتلف ذلك على نفسه بتضييعه الإشهاد، وقد مضى القول على الوجه الثاني والثالث إذا كان الميت مليا ولا فرق فيهما بين أن يكون مليا أو معدما إلا في اتباع ذمته بما يلزمه إن طرأ له مال وبالله التوفيق. فصل وأما الحمالة بالوجه فإنها جائزة إذا كان المتحمل به مطلوبا بمال ولم يكن مطلوبا بشيء يجب عليه في بدنه من قتل أو حد أو قصاص أو تعزير، هذا