Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (3/28)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

had purchased her for himself with money he had borrowed from the partnership funds. He therefore held that she is sold to cover her assessed value if he has no means. Ibn al-Qāsim, by contrast, understood him to have purchased her for himself with money borrowed from the partnership funds and did not accept his claim that he had purchased her for the partnership, as recorded in Abū Zayd’s transmission. He therefore held that she is not sold. However, in that transmission and in Ibn Muzayyin’s commentary, he stated that the working partner remains liable for her assessed value. In my view, this means when her assessed value exceeds her purchase price: his intention is that the working partner remains liable for whichever is greater. If, however, evidence establishes that he purchased her for the partnership, she is sold to cover the assessed value for which he is liable, without disagreement. Likewise, if it is known that he purchased her for himself with partnership funds, she is not sold, and he remains personally liable for her purchase price, without disagreement. And Allah knows best.

Section
Disagreement Between the Provider and the Recipient of the Funds

If the provider and the recipient of the funds disagree, the provider saying, “I gave them to you for a profit-sharing partnership,” and the recipient saying, “They were entrusted to me for safekeeping,” there are three possible situations:

First: the funds are present.

Second: the funds are absent.

Third: the funds have been lost, either before the recipient put them to use or after he had used them and then restored them.

If the funds are present, there is no issue to resolve: their owner takes them back.

If the funds are absent, there are two opinions:

The first is Ibn al-Qāsim’s position, which he also transmitted from Mālik: the provider’s word is accepted.

The second is Ashhab’s position, also transmitted by Ibn ʿAbd al-Hakam from Mālik and Rabīʿa: the recipient’s word is accepted, because no one may be held liable for more than he has acknowledged against himself, and he has acknowledged no personal liability.

If, however, the funds were lost before he put them to use, or after he had used them and restored them to their proper place, with evidence establishing this, according to

اشتراها لنفسه بمال استسلفه من القراض، ولذالك قال إنها تباع في القيمة إذا لم يكن له مال، وحمله ابن القاسم على أنه اشتراها لنفسه بمال تسلفه من القراض ولم يصدقه أنه اشتراها للقراض على ما في سماع أبي زيد، ولذلك قال إنها لا تباع، إلا أنه قال في سماعه وفي تفسير ابن مزين يتبع بقيمتها. ومعناه عندي إن كانت القيمة أكثر من الثمن، فإرادته أنه يتبع بالأكثر من القيمة أو الثمن. وأما إن علم أنه اشتراها للقراض ببينة تقوم على ذلك فتباع فيما لزمه من قيمتها قولا واحدا. وكذلك إن علم أنه اشتراها لنفسه من مال القراض فلا تباع ويتبع بالثمن الذي اشتراها به في ذمته قولا واحدا والله أعلم. فصل في اختلاف دافع المال والمدفوع إليه إذا اختلف دافع المال والمدفوع إليه فقال الدافع دفعته قراضا وقال المدفوع إليه وديعة لا يخلو الأمر في هذه المسألة من ثلاثة أحوال: أحدها: أن يكون المال حاضرا. والثاني: أن يكون غائبا. والثالث: أن يكون قد تلف دون أن يحركه المدفوع إليه أو بعد أن حركه ثم صرفه. فأما إن كان حاضرا فليست بمسألة، يأخذ صاحب المال ماله. وأما إن كان المال غائبا ففي ذلك قولان: أحدهما: قول ابن القاسم وروايته عن مالك أن القول قول الدافع. والثاني: قول أشهب ورواية ابن عبد الحكم عن مالك وربيعة أن القول قول المدفوع إليه لأنه لا يؤخذ أحد بأكثر مما أقر به على نفسه وهو لم يقر في ذمته بشيء. وأما إن تلف قبل أن يحركه أو بعد أن حركه وصرفه في موضعه ببينة على