Section
The Case
A man sold an item to six men for six hundred dirhams, on condition that each guaranteed the entire sum on behalf of his fellow purchasers, and stipulated that he could recover the whole amount owed to him from whichever of them he wished. If the seller encounters one of them, he may recover all six hundred from him: one hundred is that man’s own share of the original debt, while the remaining five hundred is recovered from him under his guarantee for the other five. If the seller recovers this sum from him, and that man then encounters one of the remaining five, he has recourse against him for three hundred. He says to him: “I paid six hundred. One hundred was my own obligation, for which I have no recourse against anyone. I paid the remaining five hundred on your behalf and on behalf of your four remaining fellow purchasers, one hundred for each of you. So repay me the hundred I paid on your own behalf, together with half of what I paid under the guarantee for your fellow purchasers, namely two hundred, since you share with me in guaranteeing their debt.” He thus recovers three hundred from him, so that the two bear equal amounts, both for their own shares and under their guarantee for their fellow purchasers.
Section
If the second man, from whom the three hundred was recovered, encounters a third man from among the remaining five, he has recourse against him for one hundred and twenty-five. He says to him: “I paid three hundred. One hundred was on my own behalf, for which I have no recourse against anyone. The remaining two hundred was on your behalf and on behalf of your three remaining absent fellow purchasers, fifty for each of you. So repay me the fifty I paid on your own behalf, together with seventy-five, which is half of the hundred and fifty I paid under the guarantee for your fellow purchasers, since you share with me in guaranteeing their debt.” All of this is clear and presents no difficulty in the book.
Then it states: “Likewise, if the one from whom the money was recovered meets the fourth, the third of those remaining, he recovers from him what he paid on his behalf towards the original debt, together with half of what he paid on behalf of his fellow purchasers.” This wording admits more than one interpretation and requires clarification. What is meant is that the third of those who had paid—the man from whom one hundred and twenty-five was recovered—encounters one of the remaining three. He calls this man the fourth because he is the fourth of those remaining. He therefore has recourse