Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (3/110)

beyond human control; the ruling is the same in all these cases. This is Ibn al-Qāsim’s position in al-Mudawwana.

The third opinion, held by Ashhab and Sahnūn, is that, when a third party establishes title to property allotted in a partition, the partition does not make a co-sharer liable for property that has perished through an event beyond human control. This accords with Ashhab’s report from Mālik concerning three brothers who divided three slaves among themselves, each taking one. One brother’s slave died, and another brother’s slave was recovered by its rightful owner. The brother from whom the slave was recovered may claim one-third of the slave still in the remaining brother’s possession, thereby becoming his co-owner. He has no recourse against the brother whose slave died, because the partition is annulled only as between the other two, while remaining valid as between them and the brother whose slave died.

Although Ashhab and Sahnūn agreed that the brother whose slave died incurs no liability on account of the death, and that the brother from whom the slave was recovered has no claim against him, they differed over whether liability arises from subsequent disposal, such as a gift, a charitable donation, emancipation, sale, or the like.

Sahnūn held that none of these acts gives rise to liability. In the case of a sale, the brother from whom the slave was recovered may therefore claim the proportionate amount due to him from the price the seller received. If the slave was given away, he may claim his share in the slave himself, becoming a co-owner with the recipient in the proportion due to him. He may likewise claim his share in the emancipated slave, with the value of that share charged to the person who emancipated him, if he is solvent.

Ashhab held that all these acts give rise to liability. Thus, the brother from whom the slave was recovered may claim against the brother who sold, gave away, donated, or emancipated his slave for the proportionate share due to him of the value of the property thus disposed of, assessed as of the day it came into that brother’s possession through partition.

Success comes only through Allah Most High, who has neither partner nor equal.

من السماء، الحكم في ذلك سواء، وهو مذهب ابن القاسم في المدونة. والثالث: وهو مذهب أشهب وسحنون أن القسمة لا يضمن بها في الاستحقاق لهلاك بأمر من السماء على رواية أشهب عن مالك في الإخوة الثلاثة الذين اقتسموا الثلاثة الأعبد فأخذ كل واحد منهم عبدا فمات عبد أحدهم واستحق عبد الثاني، أن المستحق منه يرجع على الذي بقي عبده بيده بثلثه فيشاركه فيه، ولا رجوع له على الذي مات عبده بيده لأن القسمة إنما تنتقض فيما بينهما خاصة، وتصح فيما بينهما وبين الذي مات عبده. ثم إن أشهب وسحنون بعد اجتماعهما على أن الذي مات عبده لا يضمن في الموت ولا يجب للمستحق منه الرجوع عليه بشيء، اختلفا هل يضمن بالإحداث كالهبة والصدقة والعتق والبيع وما أشبه ذلك. فذهب سحنون إلى أنه لا يضمن بشيء من ذلك فيكون للمستحق منه الرجوع عليه في البيع بما ينوب المستحق من الثمن الذي قبض، ويرجع في عين العبد الموهوب فيشارك الموهوب له فيه بما ينوبه، وفي عين العبد المعتق، فيقوم ذلك الحظ على المعتق إن كان موسرا. وذهب أشهب إلى أنه يضمن بجميع ذلك فيكون للمستحق منه أن يرجع على الذي باع أو وهب أو تصدق أو أعتق بما ينوب المستحق من قيمة ما فوت بشيء من ذلك يوم صار إليه بالقسمة، وبالله تعالى التوفيق لا شريك له ولا ند.