Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (2/207)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

the date on which the hire charge falls due. If the additional payment consists of silver dirhams, it is impermissible whether paid immediately or deferred, because this would involve deferred currency exchange. All this accords with Ibn al-Qāsim’s position, which treats the discharge of obligations differently from their creation, and also with Ashhab’s position, which treats their discharge in the same way as their creation but permits exchanging a debt for the hire of a specified item. However, according to those who treat the discharge of obligations in the same way as their creation and adopt Ibn al-Qāsim’s view that a creditor may not exchange a debt owed to him for the use of a specified riding animal, rescission is impermissible under any circumstances. This is because the owner exchanges the hire charge owed to him by the hirer for the use of a riding animal, which cannot be received immediately, thus replacing one debt with another.

Section

If the hirer seeks rescission from the owner with an additional payment, and that payment consists of goods, it is permissible if they are delivered immediately, but not if their delivery is deferred, because this would involve replacing one debt with another. Likewise, if the additional payment is in gold and the hire charge is also in gold, it is permissible if paid immediately, but not if deferred. If it is paid immediately, the hirer exchanges his entitlement to ride, owed to him by the owner, for release from the hire charge he owes and for the gold that the owner pays him immediately as an additional payment. There is no harm in this. If the additional payment is deferred, however, this involves replacing one debt with another, because the hirer exchanges his entitlement to ride, owed to him by the owner, for release from the hire charge owed to the owner and for the deferred additional payment the owner undertakes to pay him.

This accords with Ibn al-Qāsim’s position, which treats the discharge of obligations differently from their creation, and also with Ashhab’s position, which treats their discharge in the same way as their creation but permits exchanging a debt for the hire of a specified item. However, according to those who treat the discharge of obligations in the same way as their creation and do not permit exchanging a debt for the hire of a specified item, rescission is impermissible under any circumstances, even if neither party pays the other anything additional. This is because each exchanges what the other owes him for something that cannot be received immediately.

محل أجل الكراء، وإن كانت الزيادة دراهم لم يجز نقدا ولا إلى أجل؛ لأنه يدخله الصرف المتأخر وهذا كله على مذهب ابن القاسم الذي يرى انحلال الذمم بخلاف انعقادها، وعلى مذهب أشهب أيضا الذي يرى انحلال الذمم بمنزلة انعقادها، ويجيز التحول من الدين في كراء شيء بعينه، وأما على مذهب من يرى انحلال الذمم بمنزلة انعقادها ويقول بقول ابن القاسم إن من كان له دين على رجل، لا يجوز له أن يحوله في ركوب دابة بعينها؛ فلا تجوز الإقالة على حال؛ لأن المكري تحول من الكراء الواجب له على المكتري هي ركوب لا يتنجز قبضه، فيدخله فسخ الدين في الدين. فصل فإن استقاله المكتري بزيادة وكانت الزيادة عرضا جاز إن كان معجلا ولم يجز إن كان مؤجلا؛ لأنه يدخله فسخ الدين في الدين، وكذلك إن كانت الزيادة ذهبا والكراء بذهب، يجوز إن كانت معجلة ولا يجوز إن كان مؤجلة؛ لأنه إن كانت معجلة فالمكتري تحول من الركوب الذي له على المكري إلى الكراء الذي عليه وإلى الذهب الذي يزيده إياها المكري معجلة، فلم يكن بذلك بأس، وإن كانت مؤجلة دخله فسخ الدين في الدين؛ لأن المكتري تحول من الركوب الذي له على المكري إلى الكراء الذي له عليه، وإلى الزيادة المؤجلة التي يزيده إياها، وهذا على مذهب ابن القاسم الذي يرى انحلال الذمم بخلاف انعقاد، وعلى مذهب أشهب أيضا الذي يرى انحلال الذمم بمنزلة انعقادها ويجيز التحول من الدين في كراء شيء بعينه، وأما على مذهب من يرى انحلال الذمم كانعقادها ولا يجيز التحول من الدين في كراء شيء بعينه، فلا تجوز الإقالة بحال، وإن لم يزد أحدهما صاحبه شيئا؛ لأن كل واحد منهما يتحول بماله على صاحبه في شيء لا يتنجز قبضه.