...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﻲ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
اﺑﺣث ﻓﻲ اﻷﻟوﻛﺔ
ﺷﺒﻜﺔ اﻷﻟﻮﻛﺔ /ﻣﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﺸﯿﺦ دﺑﯿﺎن ﻣﺤﻤﺪ اﻟﺪﺑﯿﺎن /ﻣﻘﺎﻻت
ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﰲ ﺻﻴﻎ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ )(word
اﻟﺸﯿﺦ دﺑﯿﺎن ﻣﺤﻤﺪ اﻟﺪﺑﯿﺎن
ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ اﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ 25/1/2011 :ﻣﯿﻼدي 19/2/1432 -ھﺠﺮي زﻳﺎرة777 :
ﺗﻌﺪ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔﹸ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺃﺣﺪ ﺃﻫﻢ ﺻﻴﻎ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻮﻳﻞ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ ،ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ
ﲤﻠِﻚ ﻓﺎﺋﻀﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﻴﺎ ،ﻭﻓﺌﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ ﻟﺪﻳﻬﺎ ﻋﺠﺰ ﻣﺎﱄ ،ﻭﺣﱴ ﻳﻨﻬﺾ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺑﻮﻇﻴﻔﺘﻪ ﳛﺘﺎﺝ ﺇﱃ ﺻِﻴﻎ ﺑ
ﺍﻹﻗﺮﺍﺽ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﺎﺋﺪﺓ ،ﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻮﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ.
ﻭﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻎ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻳﻠﺠﺄ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺇﱃ ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺘﲔ ﺭﺋﻴﺴﻴﺘﲔ:
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 1 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
اﻟﺴﯿﺮة اﻟﺬاﺗﯿﺔ
ﺍﻷﻭﱃ :ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻎ ﺍﳌﻌﺘﻤﺪﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙِ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﻭﺍﳋﹶﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﻛﺎﳌﻀﺎﺭﺑﺔ ،ﻭﺍﳌﺸﺎﺭﻛﺔ ،ﻭﻫﺬﻩ ﻻ ﺗﺰﺍﻝ ﺿ
ﻣﻘﺎﻻت
ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻳﻨﺒﲏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﳐﺎﻃﺮ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ.
ﺑﺤﻮث ودراﺳﺎت
ﻛﺘﺐ
ﻗﺎﺋﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻊ
اﻟﺸﺨﺼﯿﺔ
ﺣﻘﻮق اﻟﻨﺸﺮ ﻣﺤﻔﻮﻇﺔ © 1432ھـ 2011 /م ﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻷﻟﻮﻛﺔ
ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ :ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻎ ﺍﳌﻌﺘﻤﺪﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻮﻥ ،ﻭﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺎ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﺘﻤﺨﺾ ﰲ ﺩﻓﺎﺗﺮِ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺰﺍﻣﺎﺕ ﻣﻄ
ﻣِﻦ ﻗِﺒﻞ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻔﻴﺪﻳﻦ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻮﻳﻞ ،ﻭﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﳌﺼﺮِﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺷﺒﻴﻬﺔﹲ ﺑﺄﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ
ﻣﻬﻢ:
ﺍﻷﻭﻝ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﳏﻠﱡﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﹶﻊ ،ﻭﻟﻴﺴﺖِ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﻮﺩ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻮﻙ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ.
ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﰲ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺇﻥﹾ ﺃﻋﺴﺮ ﺍﳌﺪﻳﻦ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﻗِﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺘﻀﺎﻋﻒ ،ﺑﻞ ﻳﺆﺟﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﻦ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻴﺴﺮﺓ ﰲ
ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺽ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻓﺎﺭﻕ ﻣﻬﻢ.
ﻭﺃﻫﻢ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻎ ﺍﳌﻌﺘﻤﺪﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﻫﻲ ﺻﻴﻐﺔﹸ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ.
ﻭﺻﻮﺭﺗﻪ :ﺃﻥ ﻳﻄﻠﺐ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ )ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ( ﺳﻠﻌﺔﹰ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ،ﺳﻮﺍﺀ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺃﻡ ﻣﻮﺻ
ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺋﻬﺎ ﻧﺴﻴﺌﺔﹰ ﻣﻊ ﺭِﺑﺢ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ،ﻓﻴﻘﻮﻡ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺋﻬﺎ ﰒ ﻳﺒﻴﻌﻬﺎ ﺇﻳﺎﻩ.
ﻭﻫﻲ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺗﺘﻢ ﺑﲔ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﺃﻃﺮﺍﻑ:
• ﻋﻤﻴﻞ ﻳﺮﻳﺪ ﺷﺮﺍﺀَ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ.
• ﻭﺑﻨﻚ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﺪﻳﻪ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ.
• ﻭﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﳝﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ.
ﻭﺗﺒﺪﺃ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻣِﻦ ﺗﻘﺪﻡِ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺮﻑ ،ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﺍﳊﺼﻮﻝﹶ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﻠﻌﺔ ﻻ ﳝﻠﻚ ﲦﻨﻬﺎ ،ﻓﻴﻌﻘﺪ
ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻧﺴﻴﺌﺔﹰ ﺑﺮﺑﺢ ﻳﺘﺤﺪﺩ ﻛﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻣﺌﻮﻳﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻜﺎﻟﻴﻒِ ﺍﳊﺼﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻗﺎﻡ ﺍﳌﺼﺮ
ﻣﻼﺀَﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ،ﻭﻃﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﻀﻤﺎﻧﺎﺕِ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻓﻴﺔ ،ﻗﺎﻡ ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﹾﻌﺔ ،ﻭﻋﻨﺪ ﻭﺭﻭﺩ ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪﺍﺕ ﻣ
ﻳﻮﻗﱢﻊ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﻋﻘﺪ ﺑﻴﻊ ﻳﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻲ ،ﻭﺍﳌﺼﺎﺭﻳﻒ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ﻛﺎﻓﱠﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﺍﳌﺘﻔﻖ ﻋ
ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞﹸ ﻟﻴﺘﺴﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﻮﺭﺩ.
ﻭﺍﻷﺻﻞ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺃﻥﹾ ﺗﻜﻮﻥﹶ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﺍﳌﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺣﺎﺿﺮﺓﹰ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻟﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻏﲑ ﻣﺘ
ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺮﻑ؛ ﻷﻧﻪ ﲝﻜﻢ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺳﺎﻃﺔ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻳﺘﻤﻴﺰ ﺎ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺟﺮ -ﻻ ﻳﺘﻤﻜﱠﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺇﳚﺎﺩ ﺍﳌ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 2 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻠﻊ ﻭﺍﻷﺻﻮﻝ ﻛﺎﻟﺴﻴﺎﺭﺍﺕ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻄﺎﺋﺮﺍﺕ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻔﻦ ،ﻭﺍﳌﻨﺎﺯﻝ ،ﻭﺍﻷﺛﺎﺙ ﻭﳓﻮﻫﺎ؛ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﺃﹸﺩﺧِﻠﺖ ﰲ
)ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ(؛ ﺃﻱ :ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻻ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﺇﻻﱠ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻣﺮﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ.
ﻭﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺳﻴﺘﻌﺮﺽ ﳌﺨﺎﻃﺮﺓ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻮ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﺠﺎﺏ ﻷﻣﺮِ ﻛﻞﱢ ﻋﻤﻴﻞ ﻳﻄﻠﺐ ﺳﻠﻌﺔ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ ،ﻻ ﺳﻴﻤﺎ ﺃ
ﻟﻴﺲ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﻳﻔﺼﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺃﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﻭﺇﲤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔِ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻭﺗﻮﻓﲑ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ؛ ﻭﻟﺬﻟﻚ
ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﻓِﻜﺮﺓﹸ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ،ﻭﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﻌِﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﳚﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺟﺎﺩﺍ ﻣﻠﺘﺰﻣﺎ
ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﺃﺟﺎﺯ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻠﺰﻡ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻌﻮﻳﺾِ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﺍ
ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻣِﻦ ﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﻮﻓﺎﺀ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﻳﺘﻤﺜﱠﻞ ﰲ ﺍﳋﹶﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﻟﹶﺤِﻘﹶﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻋ
ﻋﻤﻴﻞ ﺁﺧﺮ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻋﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺑﺮِﺑﺢ ،ﻓﻠﻴﺲ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺑﺄﻱ ﺗﻌﻮ
ﻻ ﻳﻄﺎﻟﺒﻪ ﺇﻻ ﺑﺎﳋﹶﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ.
ﻫﺬﻩ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺋﻌﺔ ﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻓﻴﺔ ،ﻭﻓِﻜﺮﺓ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖِ ﲢﻤﻞِ
ﺍﳊﻜﻢ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﻲ ﻟﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ:
ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﻳﺘﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﲔ:
ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ:
ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻠﺰﻡ ﻷﺣﺪٍ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻓﲔ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﺩﺧﻠﺖ ﻣﻠﻜﹶﻪ ،ﺃﹶﺧ
ﻭﺧﻴﺮﻩ ،ﺇﻥﹾ ﺷﺎﺀ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻯ ،ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﺷﺎﺀ ﺗﺮﻙ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺎ ﺗﻄﺒﻘﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺟﺤﻲ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻓﻴﺔ.
ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﹶﻒ ﻓﻴﻪ:
ﻓﻘﻴﻞ :ﳚﻮﺯ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳊﻨﻔﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﳊﻨﺎﺑﻠﺔ.
ﻭﺫﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﺇﱃ ﲢﺮﱘِ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻣﻄﻠﻘﹰﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺫﻛﺮ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ،
ﺍﳌﺴﺎﺋﻞ" )ﺍﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﺹ ،(226 - 225 :ﻭﺭﺟﺤﻪ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺜﻴﻤﲔ -ﺭﲪﻪ ﺍﷲ.
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺩﻳﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﰲ "ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﲑ"" :ﻭﻛﹸﺮِﻩ :ﺍﺷﺘﺮِﻩ ،ﻭﻳﻮﻣﺊ ﻟﺘﺮﺑﻴﺤﻪ ،ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﺻﺮﺡ ﺑ
ﺣﺮﻡ ،"...ﻓﺤﺮﻡ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﺫِﻛﺮ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ،ﻭﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﳜﺘﻠﻒ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺴﺎﻭﻣﺔ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 3 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻭﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻳﺪﻭﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧِﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ؛ ﳑﺎ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺓﹶ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺘﺮﻱ
ﺃﻭ ﺃﻱ ﺗﻜﺎﻟﻴﻒ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ )ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﻞ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺨﺰﻳﻦ( -ﺇﻥﹾ ﻭﺟِﺪﺕ.
ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﳉﻤﻬﻮﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳉﻮﺍﺯ:
ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻠﺰﻡ ،ﻭﺟﻌﻞ ﺍﳋﻴﺎﺭ ﳍﻤﺎ ،ﲢﻘﱠﻘﺖ ﻋِﺪﺓﹸ ﻣﺼﺎﱀ:
ﺍﻷﻭﱃ :ﺧﺮﺟﺖ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔﹸ ﻣِﻦ ﻛﻮﺎ ﻗﺮﺿﺎ ﺑﻔﺎﺋﺪﺓ ،ﺇﱃ ﻛﻮﺎ ﺑﻴﻌﺎ ﻭﲡﺎﺭﺓ ،ﻭﻣِﻦ ﻛﻮﻥ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﳎﺮﺩ ﳑﻮﻝ
ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ.
ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ :ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬٍ ﻗﺪ ﺑﺎﻉ ﻣﺎ ﳝﻠﻚ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﱂ ﻳﻨﻌﻘﺪ ﺇﻻ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻟﻠﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﻛ
ﻭﺍﻟﻘﹶﺒﻮﻝ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻴﺎ ،ﻭﻟﻴﺲ ﺻﻮﺭﻳﺎ.
ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺜﺔ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺭﺑِﺢ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻗﺪ ﺭﺑِﺢ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺿﻤﺎﻧﻪ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻫﻠﻜ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻠﹾﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ )ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ(.
ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺮﱘ:
ﺍﻋﺘﱪ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔﹸ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣِﻦ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺳﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﺭﺍﺋﻊ؛ ﺣﱴ ﻻ ﻳﻜﻮﻥﹶ ﺣِﻴﻠﺔﹰ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺩﺭﺍﻫﻢ ﺑﺪﺍﺭﻫﻢ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻨ
ﺳِﻠﻌﺔﹲ ﻣﺤﻠﱢﻠﺔ.
ﻭﻋﻠﱠﻞ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺮﱘ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻁ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﻗﺒﻞﹶ ﺷِﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﳚﻌﻞ ﺍﳌﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﺩﺭﺍﻫﻢ ﺑﺪﺭﺍﻫ
ﻭﺍﺷﺘﺮﻁ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺜﻴﻤﲔ ﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺗﺎﺟﺮﺍ ﻟﺪﻳﻪ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻊ ﳑﻠﻮﻛﺔﹰ ﻟﻪ
ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ،ﻓﺈﻥِ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﺑﻨﺎﺀً ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻏﺒﺔ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺣﻴﻠﺔﹲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺎ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ -ﺭﲪﻪ ﺍﷲ -ﻛﻤﺎ ﰲ "ﺍﻟﻠﻘﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺛﲔ ﻣﻦ ﻟﻘﺎﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﳌﻔﺘﻮﺡ"" :ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻧﺖِ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺭﺓ
ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺑﺎﻉ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ ﺳﻴﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻳﻬﺎ ﻟﻚ ﰒ ﻳﺒﻴﻌﻬﺎ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻨﱯ -
ﻭﺳﻠﱠﻢ -ﻗﺎﻝ ﳊﻜﻴﻢ ﺑﻦ ﺣﺰﺍﻡ)) :ﻻ ﺗﺒِﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻙ((.
ﺃﻣﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻭﻋﺪﺍ ﻭﱂ ﻳﻌﻘِﺪ ﻣﻌﻚ ﻋﻘﺪﺍ ﺇﻻ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺃﻥِ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﺑﺎﻋﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ ﲟﺎ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ،ﻓﻼ ﺑﺄﺱ
ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺭِﺑﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻋﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺃﺱ ﻣﺎﻟﻪ ،ﺃﻣﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻋﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ ﺑﺮِﺑﺢ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﺭﺑﺎ ،ﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺭﺑﺎ ﺻﺮﳛﺎ،
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 4 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻣﻐﻠﱠﻒ ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﻋﻘﺪ ﻟﻴﺲ ﲟﻘﺼﻮﺩ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﱂ ﻳﻘﺼﺪِ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀَ ﻟﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺻﻞ؛ ﺇﳕﺎ ﻗﺼﺪ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ
ﻛﺎﻟﺬﻱ ﺃﻗﹾﺮﺿﻚ ﺍﻟﻘِﻴﻤﺔﹶ ﺑﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺎ ﺑﻌﻴﻨﻪ ...ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ :ﺇﱐ ﻻ ﺃﹸﻟﺰﻣﻚ ﺑ
ﻓﺎﺗﺮﻛﻬﺎ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﻛﻼﻡ ﻓﺎﺭﻍ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﱂ ﻳﺄﺕِ ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﺃﺭﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺭﺓ ﺑﻌﻴﻨﻬﺎ ،ﰒ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﺘﺮﺍ
ﻓﺎﻟﺬﻱ ﻧﺮﻯ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ ،ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﺭﺩﺕ ﺑﺪﳍﺎ ،ﻓﺎﺫﻫﺐ ﺇﱃ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﺳﻴﺎﺭﺍﺕ،
ﺃﺭﻳﺪ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺒﻴﻊ ﱄ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﻘﺴﻄﺔ ،ﻭﺁﰐ ﻟﻚ ﺑﻜﻔﻴﻞٍ ﻳﻐﺮﻡ ﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﻦ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺣﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﻷﺟﻞ ،ﻭﺇﻥ ﺷ
ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺭﺓ ،ﻭﻫﻜﺬﺍ ﺗﺴﻠﹶﻢ ﻣِﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳊﻴﻞ؛ ﺍ.ﻫـ ﻛﻼﻡ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﳏﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺜﻴﻤﲔ -ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺭﲪﺔ ﺍﷲ.
ﻭﻳﻨﺎﻗﺶ:
ﺑﺄﻧﻨﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﻋﺘﱪﻧﺎ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ،ﻭﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﺃﻥﱠ
ﺑﺎﳋﻴﺎﺭ ،ﺍﻧﺘﻔﹶﺖِ ﺍﳊﻴﻠﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭ ﻛﻠﻬﻢ ﺑﻼ ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﻻ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻊ ﻷﻧﻔﺴﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺇﳕﺎ ﻳﺸﺘﺮ
ﺑﻴﻌﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﺭِﺑﺢ ،ﻓﻬﻢ ﻳﻘﺼﺪﻭﻥ ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺀِ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﻫﻢ ،ﻭﻻ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻏﲑ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﻫﻢ ،ﻳﺸﺘﺮ
ﺑﺄﻛﺜﺮ ،ﻭﻻ ﻓﺮﻕ ﻋﻨﺪﻱ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺗﺎﺟﺮ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ،ﻓﻴﻜﻮﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺣﻼﻻﹰ ﺑﻼ ﺧﻼﻑ،
ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔﹶ ﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﲔ ،ﺍﳌﻬﻢ ﺃﻻﱠ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﳌﺒﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺩﺭﺍﻫﻢ ﻭﺩﺭﺍﻫﻢ ،ﻭﻟﻮ ﻛﺎﻥ
ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﺑﻌﻴﻨﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻣﻠﻐﺎﺓ ،ﻓﻜﺄﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﻉ ﺩﺭﺍﻫﻢ ﺑﺪﺭﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﺿﻞ
ﳚﻮﺯ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ،ﻭﻟﻮ ﻛﺎﻥ ﲟِﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻧﺴﻴﺌﺔ؛ ﻷﻧﻨﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻟﻐﻴﻨﺎ
ﺩﺭﺍﻫﻢ ﺑﺪﺭﺍﻫﻢ ،ﺣﺮﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺄ ﻭﻟﻮ ﱂ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺗﻔﺎﺿﻞ ،ﻭﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﻗﺪ ﻧﺺ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﳑ
ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ،ﻭﺍﷲ ﺃﻋﻠﻢ.
ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ:
ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻣﻠﺰﻣﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪﻳﻦ ،ﻭﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺗﺎﺭﺓﹰ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺑﻠﺰﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ،ﻭﺗﺎﺭﺓﹰ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ
ﳊِﻘﹶﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻧﻜﻮﻝ ﺍﻵﻣِﺮِ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺳﻠﻌﺘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤﻴﻞٍ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻭﻳﺘﻌ
ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﻣﻨﻌﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀُ ﺍﳌﺘﻘﺪﻣﻮﻥ ﻛﺎﳊﻨﻔﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﳊﻨﺎﺑ
ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ ،ﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﲰﺎﺣﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺑﺎﺯ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﳏﻤﺪ ﺍﻷﺷﻘﺮ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻳ
ﺑﻜﺮ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺯﻳﺪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺗﺮﻛﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﻛﻲ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺭﻓﻴﻖ ﺑﻦ ﻳﻮﻧﺲ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻱ ،ﻭﻏﲑﻫﻢ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻠﺠ
ﻟﻠﺒﺤﻮﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﻓﺘﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ؛ ﺍﻧﻈﺮ :ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻮﺙ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻊ )ﺹ:
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 5 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﳎﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺑﻊ ﳌﻨﻈﻤﺔ ﺍﳌﺆﲤﺮ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ.
ﺟﺎﺀ ﰲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﳎﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺭﻗﻢ )" :(3.2ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ )ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﺼﺪﺭ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻓﲔ
ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺍﳋﻴﺎﺭ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪﻳﻦ ﻛﻠﻴﻬﻤﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺣﺪﳘﺎ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﱂ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺧﻴﺎﺭ ﻓﺈﻧﻬﺎ ﻻ ﲡﻮﺯ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋ
ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﺗﺸﺒِﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻧﻔﹾﺴﻪ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻁ ﻋﻨﺪﺋﺬٍ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﻣﺎﻟﻜﹰﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺒﻴﻊ؛ ﺣﱴ ﻻ ﺗﻜﻮ
ﺍﻟﻨﱯ -ﺻﻠﱠﻰ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﱠﻢ -ﻋﻦ "ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ".
ﻭﺃﺣﺴﺐ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﻌﻬﺎ ،ﻟﻮﻻ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻟﺒﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ.
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺳﺒﻘﲏ ﺇﱃ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﳏﻤﺪ ﺍﻷﺷﻘﺮ ،ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ -ﻭﻓﻘﻪ ﺍﷲ " :-ﻭﱂ ﳒِﺪ ﺃﺣﺪﺍ
ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﲔ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺤﻴﺺ ،ﻭﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺐ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ،ﻭﻧﺴﺐ ﺇﱃ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻭﺇﱃ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺷﺒ
ﻭﻻ ﺗﺼﺢ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ".
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻧﺰﻳﻪ ﲪﺎﺩ" :ﱂ ﻳﻨﻘﹶﻞ ﻋﻦ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻣﻨﻬﻢ -ﻳﻌﲏ :ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ -ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ
ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪﻳﻦ ،ﺃﻭ ﻟﻜﻠﻴﻬﻤﺎ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﻧﺸﺎﺀ ﻋﻘﹾﺪ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻘﺒﻞ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻘﺪﺍ.
ﻭﺫﹶﻫﺐ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﲜﻮﺍﺯ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ،ﻣِﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ :ﺍﻟ
ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺿﺎﻭﻱ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﺣﺴﻦ ﲪﻮﺩ ،ﻭﻓﻀﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﷲ ﺑﻦ ﻣﻨﻴﻊ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟ
ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ :ﺇﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻓﺎﺿﻞ ﺍﻟﺪﺑﻮ.
ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺰﻣﺖ ﺑﺎﻷﺧﺬِ ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ ،ﻣِﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ :ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺩﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﱪﻛﺔ ،ﻭﺑﻴﺖ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻮﻳﻞ
ﻭﻣﺼﺮﻑ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻷﻛﺜﺮﻳﺔ ﰲ ﻣﺆﲤﺮ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺑﺪﰊ ،ﻭﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﳌﺆﲤﺮ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﻮﻳﺖ.
ﺍﻷﺩﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲢﺮﱘ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ:
ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﳚﻌﻠﻨﺎ ﻧﺘﺴﺎﺀَﻝ :ﻣﱴ ﺍﻧﻌﻘﹶﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ؟ ﻓﻤِﻦ ﺍﳌﺘﻔﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﲔ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴ
ﻭﻗﹶﺒﻮﻝ ،ﻭﳘﺎ ﺭﻛﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺘﻔﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ.
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 6 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻓﻬﻞ ﺍﻧﻌﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﲟﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ،ﻭﻗﺒﻞ ﺷﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﺃﻭ ﺍﻧﻌﻘﹶﺪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺷﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ؟
ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﻗﻠﻨﺎ :ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻧﻌﻘﺪ ﲟﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻭﻗﹶﺒﻞ ﺷﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﻻ ﻳﺼﺢ ،ﻭﺍﻷﺩﻟﱠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻄﻼﻥِ ﻫﺬ
ﻳﻠﻲ:
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ:
ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺒﻴﻊ ﺇﻥﹾ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺎ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻟﻮ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ :ﺃﺭﻳﺪ ﺃﻥ ﺃﺷﺘﺮﻱ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺖ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﺑﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ
ﻧﻔﹾﺴﻪ؛ )ﺍﺣﺘﺮﺍﺯﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻮﱄ( ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻻ ﳚﻮﺯ ،ﺑﻞ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻄﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﻣِﻦ ﺷﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ
ﺍﳌﺒﻴﻊ ﳑﻠﻮﻛﹰﺎ ﻟﻠﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﺃﻭ ﻣﺄﺫﻭﻧﺎ ﻟﻪ ﻓﻴﻪ.
ﻭﻧﻘﹶﻞ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﻉ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﻠﻌﻲ ،ﻭﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﳍﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳊﻨﻔﻴﺔ.
ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﱪ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﺑﻴﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻷﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﺘﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲢﺮﳝﻬﺎ.
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ -ﺭﲪﻪ ﺍﷲ " :-ﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻋﻪ ﺷﻴﺌﹰﺎ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺎ ،ﻭﻟﻴﺲ ﰲ ﻣﻠﹾﻜﻪ ،ﰒ ﻣﻀﻰ ﻟﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻪ ﻭﻳﺴ
ﺑﲔ ﺍﳊﺼﻮﻝ ﻭﻋﺪﻣﻪ ،ﻓﻜﺎﻥ ﻏﹶﺮﺭﺍ ﻳﺸﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﻤﺎﺭ ،ﻓﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻨﻪ".
ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﳌﺒﻴﻊ ﻣﻮﺻﻮﻓﹰﺎ ،ﻭﻟﻴﺲ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺎ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﻟﻮ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﺃﺭﻳﺪ ﺳﻴﺎﺭﺓﹰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﺓ ،ﺻِﻔﺘﻬﺎ ﻛﺬﺍ ﻭﻛﺬ
ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﳌﹸﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﻌﻬﺎ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺒﻴﻊ ﻣﻮﺻﻮﻑ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺬﻣﺔ ﻏﲑ ﳑﻠﻮﻙ ﻟ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﱂ ﻳﺴﻠﱠﻢ ﰲ ﳎﻠﺲ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﺣﱴ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺳﻠﹶﻤﺎ ،ﺑﻞ ﺳﻮﻑ ﻳﺴﻠﱠﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺃﻗﺴﺎﻁ ،ﻭﻳﺴ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﻳﻦ.
ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲢﺮﳝﻪ؛ ﺣﻴﺚ ﱂ ﳜﺘﻠﻒ ﺃﺣﺪ ﰲ ﻣﻨﻌﻪ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ" :ﺍﳌﺴﻠﻤﻮﻥ ﻳﻨﻬﻮﻥ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﻳﻦ".
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﲪﺪ" :ﱂ ﻳﺼﺢ ﻣﻨﻪ -ﺃﻱ :ﰲ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻟﺊ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﺎﻟﺊ -ﺣﺪﻳﺚ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﻮ ﺇﲨﺎﻉ ،ﻭﻫ
ﻳﺴﻠﻒ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻣﺆﺟﻞ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻻ ﳚﻮﺯ ﺑﺎﻹﲨﺎﻉ" ،ﰒ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ" :ﻭﺍﻹﲨﺎﻉ ﺇﻧﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﺑﺎﻟ
ﻛﺎﻟﺴﻠﻒ ﺍﳌﺆﺟﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻓﲔ".
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 7 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ:
ﺃﻧﻨﺎ ﻟﻮ ﺻﺤﺤﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻗﺒﻞ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﻗﹶﻌﻨﺎ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺭِﺑﺢ ﻣﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻀﻤﻦ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﻰ
ﺃﺑﻮ ﺩﺍﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻄﻴﺎﻟﺴﻲ ﻣﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﲪﺎﺩ ﺑﻦ ﺯﻳﺪ ،ﻋﻦ ﺃﻳﻮﺏ ،ﻋﻦ ﻋﻤﺮﻭ ﺑﻦ ﺷﻌﻴﺐ ،ﻋﻦ ﺃﺑﻴﻪ ،ﻋﻦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍ
ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻰ ﺭﺳﻮﻝﹸ ﺍﷲ -ﺻﻠﱠﻰ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﱠﻢ " -ﻋﻦ ﺳﻠﹶﻒ ﻭﺑﻴﻊ ،ﻭﻋﻦ ﺷﺮﻃﹶﻴﻦ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ،ﻭﻋﻦ ﺑ
ﻋﻨﺪﻙ ،ﻭﻋﻦ ﺭِﺑﺢ ﻣﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻀﻤﻦ"؛ ﺇﺳﻨﺎﺩﻩ ﺣﺴﻦ.
ﻭﺍﳌﻘﺼﻮﺩ" :ﻧﻬﻰ ﻋﻦ ﺭِﺑﺢ ﻣﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻀﻤﻦ" ،ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻩ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﻳﺴﺘﺤﻘﱡﻪ ﻣﻦ ﻳﻠﺰﻣﻪ ﺿﻤﺎﻥﹸ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻟﻮ ﻫﻠﻜ
ﻳﺪﺧﻞ ﰲ ﺿﻤﺎﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﺴﺘﺤﻖ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻌﻪ ،ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺤﻘﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞﹶ ﲢﻤﻞ ﺧﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻼﻛﻪ.
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ:
ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻋﻘﹾﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﺎﺋﺮِ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻋﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﻄﱠﻼﻕ ﻻ ﻳﻘﹶﻊ ﲟﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﻪ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻠﺰﻡ
ﻋﻘﹾﺪ ﺍﻟﻨﻜﺎﺡ ﻻ ﻳﻘﻊ ﲟﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﻪ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻠﺰﻡ ،ﻓﻜﺬﻟﻚ ﻻ ﻳﻘﹶﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﲟﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﻪ.
ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﻗﻠﻨﺎ :ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻗﺪ ﺍﻧﻌﻘﹶﺪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺷِﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺍﳌﻠﺰِﻡ ﺍﳌﺘﻘﺪﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ
ﻳﺼﺢ ﺃﻳﻀﺎ؛ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺎﻟﻴﻞِ ﺍﻵﺗﻴﺔ:
ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ:
ﺇﺫﺍ ﺗﻢ ﺍﻻﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﻮﻥ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﻣﻠﺰِﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻓﲔ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﻳﺼﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻋﻘﺪﺍ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻹﻟ
ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ،ﻭﻗﺪ ﺻﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻻ ﻳﻌﺘﱪ ﻋﻘﺪﺍ.
ﻭﰲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺣﺰﻡ" :ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺐ ﺑﺎﻟﺬﻫﺐ ،ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻀﺔ ،ﻭﰲ ﺳﺎﺋﺮِ ﺍﻷﺻﻨ
ﺑﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﺑﺒﻌﺾٍ ﺟﺎﺋﺰ ،ﺗﺒﺎﻳﻌﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻭ ﱂ ﻳﺘﺒﺎﻳﻌﺎ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺑﻴﻌﺎ".
ﻭﰲ ﻣﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳊﻨﻔﻴﺔ :ﺟﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺎﺩﺓ ) (171ﻣﻦ ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻷﺣﻜﺎﻡ" :ﺻِﻴﻐﺔ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻘﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻫﻲ ﲟﻌﲎ ﺍﻟﻮ
ﻣﺜﻞ :ﺳﺄﹶﺑﻴﻊ ،ﻭﺃﺷﺘﺮﻱ ،ﻻ ﻳﻨﻌﻘﺪ ﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ".
ﻗﺎﻝ ﰲ ﺷﺮﺣﻬﺎ" :ﺻِﻴﻐﺔ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻘﺒﺎﻝ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻠﱡﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﳌﻀﺎﺭﻉ ﺍﳌﻘﺘﺮﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﲔ ﺃﻭ ﺳﻮﻑ ،ﻛﺄﻥ ﻳ
ﺃﻭ ﺳﻮﻑ ﺃﺑﻴﻌﻚ ،ﻭﺇﳕﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻨﻌﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺎ؛ ﻷﺎ ﻭﻋﺪ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ".
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 8 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ "ﻛﺸﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﻨﺎﻉ"" :ﻟﻮ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ :ﺑﻌﺘﻚ ﺑﻜﺬﺍ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ :ﺃﻧﺎ ﺁﺧﺬﹸﻩ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ،ﱂ ﻳﺼ
ﻳﻨﻌﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻭﻋﺪ ﺑﺄﺧﺬﻩ".
ﻓﺎﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ،ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﱂ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺇﻻ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﻚ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻟﻠﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ -ﻗﻮﻝﹲ ﻳﻨ
ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺃﻟﺰﻣﻨﺎ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻖ ،ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻖ ،ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻣﻨﻌﻘﺪﺍ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ؛ ﻷﻧ
ﺇﺣﺪﺍﺙِ ﺇﳚﺎﺏ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ،ﻭﺳﻌﺮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻹﳚﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﹶﺒﻮﻝ ﺍﳊﺎﺩﺙ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻻ ﺣﺎﺟﺔﹶ
ﺇﳚﺎﺏ ﻭﻗﹶﺒﻮﻝ ﺻﻮﺭﻳﺎﻥ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻌِﱪﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﳌﻘﺎﺻِﺪ ﻭﺍﳌﻌﺎﱐ ،ﻻ ﻟﻸﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﻭﺍﳌﺒﺎﱐ.
ﻭﰲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻧﺰﻳﻪ ﲪﺎﺩ" :ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪﻳﻦ ﻟﻮ ﺍﺗﻔﻘﹶﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﻮ
ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻘﺒﻞ ﻣﻠﺰﻣﺎ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻓﲔ ﻣﻦ ﻭﻗﺖِ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ،ﻓﺈﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻨﻘﻠﺐ ﺇﱃ ﻋﻘﺪ ،ﻭﺗﺴﺮِﻱ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺃﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺫﻟﻚ
ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﺻِﺪ ﻭﺍﳌﻌﺎﱐ ،ﻻ ﻟﻸﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﻭﺍﳌﺒﺎﱐ".
ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ:
ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﻓﺮﻕ ﻣﺆﺛﱢﺮ ﺑﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥﹸ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﳝﻠﻜﻪ ،ﺃﻭ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻌِﺪ ﺷﺨﺼﺎ ﻭﻋﺪﺍ ﻻﺯﻣﺎ
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻳﺮ" :ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻣﻊ ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﺑﻮﻋﺪﻩ ،ﻳﺆﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ
ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ؛ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻓﺮﻕ ﺑﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻵﺧﺮ :ﺑﻌﺘﻚ ﺳﻠﻌﺔ ﻛﺬﺍ ﲟﺒﻠﻎ ﻛﺬﺍ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻵﺧﺮ :ﺍﺷﺘﺮِ ﺳﻠﻌﺔ ﻛﺬﺍ ،ﻭﺃﻧﺎ ﻣﻠﺘﺰﻡ ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺋﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﻚ ﲟﺒﻠﻎ ﻛﺬﺍ ،ﻭﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻟﻴﺲ
ﻋﻨﻪ ﲝﺪﻳﺚ)) :ﻻ ﺗﺒِﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻙ(( ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻛﻮﻥﹸ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻭﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ
ﻣﻦ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺷﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻭﺗﻘﺪﳝﻬﺎ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ ،ﻣﺎ ﺩﺍﻡ ﻛﻞﱡ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻣﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻣﻠﺰﻣﺎ ﺑﺈﻧﺸﺎﺀ
ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻀﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ".
ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ:
ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻟﺰﻣﻨﺎ ﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻗﺪ ﺍﻧﻌﻘﹶﺪ ﻗﺒﻞ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﺑﺎﻉ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻠِﻚ ،ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﺃﻛﺮﻫ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚِ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﺑﻄﹶﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻻ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺇﻻ ﻋﻦ ﺭِﺿﺎ ﻭﻃِﻴﺐ ﻧﻔﹾﺲ ﻣﻦ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 9 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻻﺯﻡ ﲟﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ:
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ :ﺍﻷﺻﻞﹸ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺑﺎﺣﺔ ،ﻓﻼ ﳛﺮﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺷﻲﺀٌ ﺇﻻ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞٍ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﺻﺮﻳﺢ ،ﻭﻻ ﺩﻟﻴ
ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺮﱘ.
ﻭﻳﻨﺎﻗﺶ :ﻻ ﺧﻼﻑ ﰲ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻷﺻﻞ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺑﺎﺣﺔ؛ ﻗﺎﻝ -ﺗﻌﺎﱃ ﴿ :-ﻭﺃﹶﺣﻞﱠ ﺍﻟﻠﱠﻪ ﺍﻟﹾﺒﻴﻊ
،[275ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥﱠ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ )ﺃﻋﲏ :ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ( ﻗﺪ ﻗﺎﻣﺖِ ﺍﻷﺩﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﻌﻬﺎ -ﻛﻤﺎ ﺫﻛﺮﻧﺎ ﺫﻟ
ﺑﻔﹶﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﺘﻘﺪﻣﲔ.
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ )ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ( ﻻ ﻳﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔﹶ ﺇﻻ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻜﻬﺎ ،ﻓﺮِﺑﺤﻪ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻗﺪ ﺭﺑِﺢ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ
ﺿﻤﺎﻧﻪ.
ﻭﻳﺠﺎﺏ :ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻻ ﻳﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔﹶ ﺇﻻ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﻜﻬﺎ ﻗﻮﻝﹲ ﻏﲑ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻻﺯ
ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻭﻗﺒﻞ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﳚﻌﻞ ﺍﻻﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﳉﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﺻﻮﺭﻳﺎ؛ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻻ ﺃﺛﹶﺮ ﻟﻪ ﰲ
ﺃﺛﹶﺮ ﻟﻪ ﰲ ﻗِﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻭﺇﳚﺎﺏ ﻭﻗﹶﺒﻮﻝ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺷﺄﻧﻬﻤﺎ ،ﻻ ﻗِﻴﻤﺔ ﳍﻤﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﺍﻹﳚﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﹶﺒﻮﻝ
ﻳﺤﺪﺩﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻭﳛﺪﺩﺍﻥ ﻗﻴﻤﺘﻬﺎ ،ﻭﻳﻌﺒﺮﺍﻥ ﻋﻦ ﺭﺿﺎ ﺍﳌﺘﻌﺎﻗﺪﻳﻦ ،ﻭﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﳋﻴﺎﺭ ﻗﺒﻞﹶ
ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﰲ ﺍﻹﳚﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮﻝ ﺍﳊﺎﺩﺛﲔ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻟﻠﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ.
ﻭﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﻋﺘﱪ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ -ﺭﲪﻪ ﺍﷲ -ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓﹶ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﻴﻌﺎ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﰲ ﺍﻷﻡ )3/93
ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞﹶ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﺍﺷﺘﺮِ ﻫﺬﻩ ،ﻭﺃﹸﺭﲝﻚ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻛﺬﺍ ،ﻓﺎﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ،ﻓﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺟﺎﺋﺰ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺬ
ﺑﺎﳋﻴﺎﺭ ،ﺇﻥﹾ ﺷﺎﺀ ﺃﺣﺪﺙ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺑﻴﻌﺎ ،ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﺷﺎﺀ ﺗﺮﻛﹶﻪ ...ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﺟﺪﺩﺍﻩ ﺟﺎﺯ ،ﻭﺇﻥ ﺗﺒﺎﻳﻌﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥﹾ ﺃﻟﺰﻣﺎ ﺃﻧﻔ
ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ،ﻓﻬﻮ ﻣﻔﺴﻮﺥ".
ﻓﺠﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﺑﻴﻌﺎ ،ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﳝﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ.
ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻗﺪ ﺟﺮﻯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﺇﲤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﺳﻴﺘﻢ ﲢﺖ ﺿﻐﻂ ﺍﻹﻟ
ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺋﻴﺔ ،ﻓﻼ ﻳﺘﺤﻘﱠﻖ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺍﻟﺮﺿﺎ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺟِﺐ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ.
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 10 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ:
ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺭﻉ ﱂ ﳝﻨﻊ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺇﻻﱠ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻼﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻇﹸﻠﻢ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﲢﺮﱘ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺎ ،ﻭﺍﻻﺣﺘﻜﺎﺭ
ﺧﺸِﻲ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺆﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ ﻭﻋﺪﺍﻭﺓٍ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﲢﺮﱘ ﺍﳌﻴﺴِﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﻐﺮﺭ.
ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔﹲ ﻟﻠﻌﺎﻗﺪﻳﻦ :ﻣِﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﻃﻤﺌﻨﺎﻥ ﺇﱃ ﺇﲤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ،ﻭﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺼ
ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﻭﺿﺒﻄﻬﺎ ،ﻭﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﺰﺍﻉ ﻭﺍﳋﻼﻑ ،ﻭﻣﻊ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺼﻠﺤﺔ ،ﻓﻼ ﳏﻈﻮﺭ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰ
ﻭﻳﻨﺎﻗﺶ :ﻻ ﻧﺴﻠﱢﻢ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔﹲ ﻟﻠﻌﺎﻗﺪﻳﻦ ﻭﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻮﻕ ﻣِﻦ ﺟِﻬﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ
ﻭﺿﺒﻄﻬﺎ ،ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔﹰ ﻓﻘﺪ ﻋﺎﺭﺿﻬﺎ ﻣﺎ ﳚﻌﻠﻬﺎ ﻣﻠﻐﺎﺓﹰ ﰲ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺭﻉ ،ﻭﻫﻮ
ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﳝﻠﻜﻪ ،ﻭﻋﻦ ﺭِﺑﺤﻪ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻀﻤﻦ.
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺑﻊ:
ﺃﻥﱠ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻳﻌﺔ ﺟﺎﺀﺕ ﲟﻨﻊِ ﺍﻹﺿﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﻵﺧﺮﻳﻦ ،ﻭﺑﺮﻓﹾﻌﻪ ﺇﻥﹾ ﻭﻗﹶﻊ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻝ -ﺻﻠﱠﻰ ﺍﷲ
ﺿﺮﺭ ﻭﻻ ﺿِﺮﺍﺭ(( ،ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﻌﺪﻡِ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺇﺿﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﳌﺼﺮﻑ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﻳﺄﰐ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺑ
ﺍﻟﻮﺻﻒ ﺍﳌﺮﻏﻮﺏ ،ﰒ ﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﻟﻠﻮﺍﻋﺪِ ﺃﻻ ﻳﺄﺧﺬﻫﺎ ،ﻭﻻ ﳚﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻳﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﻪ؛ ﻟﻜﻮﺎ ﺟﺎﺀ
ﻣﻮﺍﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﳏﺪﺩﺓ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﳑﺎ ﻳﻮﻗِﻊ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﳌﺼﺮﻑ.
ﻓﺈﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺑﻮﻋﺪﻩ ،ﻻ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺇﻃﻼﻗﹰﺎ ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻣﻪ ﺑﺈﲤﺎﻡِ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻻ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺇﻻ
ﻳﻘﺘﻀﻲ ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﲜﺒﺮ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﺍﳌﺘﺮﺗﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻣِﻦ ﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺩﺧﻮﻝِ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ -ﺑﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺷِﺮﺍﺀٍ ،ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺪﺧﻞﹶ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﻮﻻ ﻭﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺋﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﻪ ،ﻭﰲ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻋﺪﻡِ ﺭﻏﺒﺔ
ﺑﻮﻋﺪﻩ ،ﻭﺇﲤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ،ﻳﻘﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺑﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﺇﱃ ﻃﺮﻑٍ ﺛﺎﻟﺚ ،ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺮ ﺍﳉﺎﺭﻱ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﻮﻕ،
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺧﺴﺎﺭﺓﹲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺸﺮﺍﺀ ،ﻓﻴﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞِ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬٍ ﺗﻌﻮﻳﺾ ﺍﻟﺒ
ﺍﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ؛ ﻋﻤﻼﹰ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻔِﻘﻬﻴﺔ :ﻻ ﺿﺮﺭ ﻭﻻ ﺿِﺮﺍﺭ ،ﺣﻴﺚ ﹶﺖِ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻳﻌﺔ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺇﺿﺮﺍﺭِ
ﻧﺎﻫِﻴﻚ ﻋﻦ ﺇﺿﺮﺍﺭِﻩ ﺑﻐﲑﻩ.
ﻭﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺟﻬﲔ:
ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻪ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ :ﺇﻥﹾ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻗﺪِ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﻤﻴﻞ ،ﻓﻬﻮ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻭﻛﻴﻞ ،ﻭﻣﺎ ﻳﺄﺧﺬﻩ ﻣِﻦ ﻓﺎﺋﺪﺓ ﻋ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 11 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻓﺈﻧﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣِﻦ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻹﻗﺮﺍﺽ ﺑﻔﺎﺋﺪﺓ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺻﺮﻳﺢ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺎ ،ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺳﻴﺘﻢ ﻟﻠﺒﻨﻚ ﻻ ﻟﻠﻌﻤ
ﻳﺘﺤﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞﹸ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻠﺤﻖ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻣِﻦ ﺧﺴﺎﺋﺮ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ؛ ﻟﻸﻣﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ:
)ﺃ( ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻮﻳﺾ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ ،ﳚﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﻦ ﺿﺮﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻲ ،ﻭﻟﻴﺲ ﲟﺎ ﺟﺮﺕ ﻋﺎﺩﺓﹸ ﺍﻟﺘﺠ
ﰲ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ،ﻓﻼ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﳎﺮﺩ ﻧﻜﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺿﺮﺭﺍ ﻳﺴﻮﻍ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﻟﺒﺔﹶ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻌﻮﻳﺾ ،ﻭ
ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻧﻜﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺑﺴِﻌﺮ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺘﻔﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﺿﺮﺭﺍ ﻳﺴﻮﻍ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺮﻑ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺒ
ﻣﻦ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺔِ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺮﺽ ﻟﻠﺮﺑﺢ ﻭﺍﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ.
)ﺏ( ﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔﹶ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻧﻜﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤﻴﻞٍ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻭﺭﺑِﺢ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﺳﻴﻜﻮﻥ
ﻭﺣﺪﻩ ،ﻭﰲ ﺍﳌﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻋﻬﺎ ﲞﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻌﻠﹶﻴﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺘﺤﻤﻞ ﺫﻟﻚ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻐﻨﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻐﺮﻡ ،ﻭﺍﳋﺮﺍﺝ ﺑﺎﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ،ﻓﻤِﻦ
ﻳﺄﺧﺬ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﺑﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ،ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻳﺮﺟﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻴﻞِ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺗﻌﺮﺽ ﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ.
)ﺟـ( ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﺄﻥﱠ ﻣﺎ ﳊِﻖ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﻳﻌﺘﱪ ﺿﺮﺭﺍ ،ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﺰﺍﻝ ﲟﺜﻠﻪ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟ
ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺇﻛﺮﺍﻩ ﻟﻪ ،ﻭﰲ ﲢﻤﻴﻠﻪ ﻟﻠﺨﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﺿﺮﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﻳﻀﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻘﻞﱡ ﻋﻦ ﺿﺮﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ،ﻭﻻ ﺗﻘﺒﻞ ﺩﻋﻮ
ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺟﻬﺔﹲ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩﺓ ﳑﺎ ﳚﻌﻞ ﺳﻠﻌﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻈِﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﻭﺍﺝ.
)ﺩ( ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻻ ﻳﺘﻌﺮﺽ ﻷﻱ ﳐﺎﻃﺮ ،ﺃﺻﺒﺤﺖِ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﳎﺮﺩ ﺻﻴﻐﺔ ﲤﻮﻳﻞ ﻣﺎﱄ ﻳﻌﻮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ
ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﻱ ﳐﺎﻃﺮ ،ﻭﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﻣﺜﻞﹶ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻮﻛﱢﻞ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺑﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﻟﻪ ،ﻭﻳﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﻨﻪ
ﻟﻠﺒﺎﺋِﻊ ،ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻡ ﻫﻮ ﺑﺘﺴﺪﻳﺪِ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﻦ ﺑﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻗﺴﺎﻁ ،ﻓﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻕ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﻭ
ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﻧﻘﻠﺐ ﺇﱃ ﳎﺮﺩ ﲤﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ،ﻭﺑﻼ ﳐﺎﻃﺮ.
ﺇﻥﱠ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ :ﻫﻮ ﺗﻌﺮﺽ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻻﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﻭﺍﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ
ﺍﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺻﻮﺭﺍ ﻧﻘﻄﻊ ﻣﻌﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﰲ ﲨﻴﻊِ ﺍﻷﺣﻮﺍﻝ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﺘﺼﻮﺭ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺃﻱ ﳐﺎﻃﺮﺓ ،ﺍﻧﻘﻠﺒﺖ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌ
ﺭِﺑﻮﻱ.
ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻪ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ :ﺃﻱ ﻓﺮﻕ ﺑﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻄﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻮﻳﺾ ﻋﻦ ﺍﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ ،ﺃﻭ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻁﹶ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺟﺮ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺷﺘﺮ
ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺟﺮ ﻻ ﻳﺤِﻞﱡ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻁ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻓﻜﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﻻ ﳛﻞﱡ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻄﻠﺐ
ﺍﳋﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺷﺮﺍﺀ ﺑﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻥِ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻁﹶ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﻬﻮ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺑﺎﻃﻞ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺫﻟﻚ ﳜﺎﻟﻒ ﻣﻘﺘﻀﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻘ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 12 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺘﺤﻤﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﻟﻠﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﻡ ،ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻐﻨﻢ ﺣﻼﻻﹰ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺣﺼﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ" :ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻯ ﺟﺎﺭﻳﺔﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻻﱠ ﻳﺒﻴﻌﻬﺎ ،ﺃﻭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥﹾ ﻻ ﺧﺴﺎﺭﺓﹶ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻣِﻦ ﲦﻨﻬﺎ ،ﻓﺎ
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﰲ "ﻛﺸﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﻨﺎﻉ"" :ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺳﺪﺓ )ﺷﺮﻁﹶ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻨﺎﰲ ﻣﻘﺘﻀﺎﻩ ،ﳓﻮ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺸ
ﺧﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ(".
ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻚ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﺭﺍﺩ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺪﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﻋﻦ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ،ﻓﻠﻴﺘﺨﺬ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻋﻴﺔ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﺭﺷﺪ ﺇﱃ
ﺍﳊﺴﻦ ﻭﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻤﺎ -ﺭﲪﺔ ﺍﷲ -ﻓﻼ ﻳﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﹰﺎ ﻭﺣﻴﺪﺍ ﻟﺮﻓﻊ ﺍﻟﻀﺮ
ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺭ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﻗﻊ ﺑﻄﺮﻕ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻋﺔ ،ﻛﺄﻥ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺍﳋﻴﺎﺭ ﻟﻪ ﻭﺣﺪﻩ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎ
ﻣﺪﺓ ﻛﺎﻓﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺃﺛﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﺪﺓ ﻳﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻩ ،ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﱂ ﻳﺘﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺃﺑﻠﻎ ﺍﻟﺒﺎ
ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ،ﻭﺭﺩ ﺍﳌﺒﻴﻊ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺟﻴﺪ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻮﻉ ﺍﶈﻠﻴﺔ )ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ( ،ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻋﻰ ﰲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺑﺄﻥ ﻻ ﻳﺼﺪﺭ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺼ
ﻳﺴﻘﻂ ﺧﻴﺎﺭﻩ ،ﻭﺇﳕﺎ ﻳﺨﺒِﺮ ﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺑﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﺃﺻﺪﺭ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺇﳚﺎﺑﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﹶ
ﺑﻴﻌﺎ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺑﻌﺪ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﺳﻠِﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻄﺮ ﻧﻜﻮﻝ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻱ ،ﻭﺇﻻ ﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﺃ
ﲢﺘﺎﺝ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﲑﺍﺩ ،ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﳝﻜﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻠﱢﻒ ﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﻗﺒﻞﹶ ﺗﺼﺪﻳﺮﻫﺎ ،ﺇ
ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖِ ﻭﻛﻴﻠﻪ ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺭﺃﻯ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺗﺼﺪﻳﺮﻫﺎ ،ﻭﻭﺍﻓﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻛﺎﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﻴﻌﺎ ﻻﺯﻣﺎ ،ﻭﺗﻜﻮ
ﲟﱰﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﻣﺎﻧﺔ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﰲ "ﺇﻋﻼﻡ ﺍﳌﻮﻗﻌﲔ" )" :(4/23ﺭﺟﻞﹲ ﻗﺎﻝ ﻟﻐﲑﻩ :ﺍﺷﺘﺮِ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺭ -ﺃﻭ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻌﺔ -ﻣِﻦ
ﻭﻛﺬﺍ ،ﻭﺃﻧﺎ ﺃﹸﺭﲝﻚ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻛﺬﺍ ﻭﻛﺬﺍ ،ﻓﺨﺎﻑ ﺇﻥِ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﻓﻼ ﻳﺮﻳﺪﻫﺎ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﺘﻤﻜﱠﻦ
ﺃﻥ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻳﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﳋِﻴﺎﺭ ﺛﻼﺛﺔﹶ ﺃﻳﺎﻡ ،ﺃﻭ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ،ﰒ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ :ﻗﺪ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻳﺘﻬﺎ ﲟﺎ ﺫﻛﺮﺕ،
ﲤﻜﱠﻦ ﻣِﻦ ﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺋِﻊ ﺑﺎﳋﻴﺎﺭ."...
ﺟﺎﺀ ﰲ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺍﳊﻴﻞ" ﶈﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﳊﺴﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺒﺎﱐ )ﺹ (127 ،79 :ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺮﺧﺴﻲ ،ﻗﺎﻝ" :ﻗﻠ
ﺭﺟﻼﹰ ﺃﹶﻣﺮ ﺭﺟﻼﹰ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﺑﺄﻟﻒ ﺩﺭﻫﻢ ،ﻭﺃﺧﱪﻩ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺇﻥﹾ ﻓﻌﻞ ،ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﺑﺄﻟﹾﻒ ﺩﺭﻫﻢ ﻭﻣﺎﺋﺔ ﺩ
ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ ﺷﺮﺍﺀَ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺭ ،ﰒ ﺧﺎﻑ ﺇﻥِ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ ﻓﻼ ﻳﺄﺧﺬﻫﺎ ،ﻓﺘﺒﻘﹶﻰ ﰲ ﻳﺪِ ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ،
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 13 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﳋﻴﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺛﻼﺛﺔﹶ ﺃﻳﺎﻡ ،ﻭﻳﻘﻀﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻭﳚﻲﺀ ﺍﻵﻣِﺮ ،ﻭﻳﺒﺪﺃ
ﻣﻨﻚ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﺄﻟﻒ ﻭﻣﺎﺋﺔ ﺩﺭﻫﻢ ،ﻓﻴﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ :ﻫﻲ ﻟﻚ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ،ﻓﻴﻜﻮﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻟﻶﻣِﺮ ﻻﺯﻣﺎ ،ﻭﻳﻜﻮ
ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺘﺮﻱ؛ ﺃﻱ :ﻭﻻ ﻳﻘﹸﻞ ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ ﻣﺒﺘﺪﺋﹰﺎ :ﺑﻌﺘﻚ ﺇﻳﺎﻫﺎ ﺑﺄﻟﻒ ﻭﻣﺎﺋﺔ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺧﻴﺎﺭﻩ ﻳﺴﻘﻂ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ،
ﰲ ﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺖ ﺇﱃ ﺑﺎﺋﻌﻪ ،ﻭﺇﻥﹾ ﱂ ﻳﺮﻏﺐِ ﺍﻵﻣﺮ ﰲ ﺷﺮﺍﺋﻬﺎ ﲤﻜﱠﻦ ﺍﳌﺄﻣﻮﺭ ﻣﻦ ﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺍﳋﻴﺎﺭ،
ﺑﺬﻟﻚ"؛ ﺍ.ﻫـ ،ﻭﺍﻧﻈﺮ "ﺍﳌﺒﺴﻮﻁ" ).(30/237
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﳋﺎﻣﺲ:
ﺇﺫﺍ ﺳﻠﱠﻤﻨﺎ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻗﺒﻞ ﲤﻠﱡﻚ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻓﺈﻥﱠ ﲢﺮﱘ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻠﻚ ﺇﳕﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣِﻦ ﺧﺸﻴﺔ
ﻭﻗﺪ ﻻ ﳛﺼﻞ ،ﻭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﺭ ﻳﻐﺘﻔﹶﺮ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻐﺘﻔﺮ ﰲ ﻏﲑﻩ؛ ﻭﻟﺬﺍ ﺟﺎﺯ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺍﻟﻴﺴﲑ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺎﺑﻊ ،ﻭﻣ
ﻋﺎﻣﺔ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﻣﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﳑﺎ ﳛﺘﺎﺟﻮﻥ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺣﺎﺟﺔﹰ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ،ﺿﺮﺭﻩ ﺃﺷﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺿﺮﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻮﻉ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﺭ.
ﻓﺈﺫﹰﺍ ﺍﳊﺎﺟﺔﹸ ﺩﺍﻋﻴﺔﹲ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺩﻋﺖِ ﺍﳊﺎﺟﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﹶﻢ ،ﻭﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﻋ
ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﺘﺮﻳﻬﻤﺎ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﺭ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍ ﻟﻠﺤﺎﺟﺔ ،ﻭﺍﳊﺎﺟﺔ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺩﺍﻋﻴﺔﹲ ﻻﺗﺴﺎﻉ ﺭﻗﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ،ﻭﺗﻀﺨﻢ
ﻭﺣﺎﺟﺔ ﺍﳌﻨﺸﺂﺕ ﺇﱃ ﺩﻋﻤﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻵﻻﺕ ﻭﺍﳌﺒﺎﱐ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻻ ﻗِﻮﺍﻡ ﳍﺎ ﺇﻻ ﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﱂ ﺗﺘﻢ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻭ
ﻭﻣﺸﻘﱠﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻮﺍﺕ ﳌﺼﺎﱀ ﻳﺮﻳﺪ ﲢﻘﻴﻘﻬﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻥ ﱂ ﺗﻜﻦ ﻣِﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﺿﻄﺮ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺽ ﺑﻔﺎﺋﺪﺓ ،ﻭﺩِﻳ
ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺎ ﺍﶈﺮﻡ ،ﻓﻠﻴﻘﺮﺭ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﲢﺖ ﻭﻃﺄﺓ ﺍﳊﺎﺟﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻻﻧﺘﺸﺎﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﹸﺤﺮﻡ ،ﻭﲢﻘﻴﻖ ﻣﺼﺎﱀ ﺍﳌﺴﻠ
ﻭﳚﺎﺏ :ﻟﻮ ﱂ ﺗﻜﻦِ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻮﺹ ﺻﺮﳛﺔﹰ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺏ ﻟﻘِﻴﻞ ﰲ ﺟﻮﺍﺯﻩ ﺑﻨﺎﺀً ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳊﺎﺟﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﳌﺼﻠﺤﺔ،
ﻛﺎﻧﺖِ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻮﺹ ﺻﺮﳛﺔﹰ ﰲ ﻣﻨﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﳝﻠﻜﻪ ،ﻭﻣِﻦ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺼﻮ
ﻭﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺢ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻀﻤﻦ ،ﺩﻝﱠ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥﱠ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﻣﻠﻐﺎﺓﹲ ﰲ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺭﻉ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻥ
ﳊﹸﻜﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻉ ،ﻓﺄﻱ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔٍ ﳑﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻄﻠﺐ ﰲ ﳐﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﺍﳊﻜﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻋﻲ؟!
ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ:
ﺟﺎﺀﺕ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﺔﹸ ﻣﺆﲤﺮ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺑﺪﰊ 1399ﻫـ 1979ﲟﺎ ﻧﺼﻪ" :ﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﳌﺆﲤﺮ ﺃﻥﱠ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎ
ﻭﻋﺪﺍ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻤﻴﻞ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ...ﻭﻭﻋﺪﺍ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺑﺈﲤﺎﻡ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻊ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ،ﻃﺒ
ﺇﻥﱠ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻣﻠﺰﻡ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻓﲔ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً ،ﻃﺒﻘﹰﺎ ﻷﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻲ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﻠﺰِﻡ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻓﲔ ﺩِ
ﺍﳌﺬﺍﻫﺐ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ،ﻭﻣﺎ ﻳﻠﺰﻡ ﺩِﻳﺎﻧﺔﹰ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﻗﺘﻀﺖِ ﺍﳌﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﺃﻣﻜﻦ ﻟﻠﻘ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 14 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻓﻴﻪ".
ﻭﻳﻨﺎﻗﺶ :ﻟﻮ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﰲ ﺣﻜﹾﻢ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﱂ ﺃﻧﺒﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﻻﺳﻢ؛ ﺇﺟﻼﻻﹰ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺎﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻼﺀ ﺍﳌ
ﺍﳌﺆﲤﺮ ،ﻭﻷﻧﻪ ﻻ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻣﻌﺼﻮﻡ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ،ﻭﻷﻥﱠ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞﹶ ﺍﻻﺟﺘﻬﺎﺩ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﳊﹸﻜﻢ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ
ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺍﺏ ﺧﻼﻓﹶﻪ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﻯ ﰲ ﻧِﺴﺒﺔ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺇﱃ ﻏﲑ ﺃﻫﻠﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺫﻟﻚ
ﺟﻮﺍﺯِ ﻣِﺜﻞ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﺧﻄﺄﹲ ﻋِﻠﻤﻲ ﳚﺐ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺤﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺮﺟﻮﻉ ﻋﻨﻪ.
ﻓﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﳌﺸﺎﺭﻛﲔ" :ﺇﻥﱠ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻣﻠﺰﻡ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻓﲔ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً ﻃﺒﻘﹰﺎ ﻷﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻲ".
ﻓﺎﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻗﺪ ﻧﺼﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲢﺮﱘ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ،ﺑﻞ ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺷﺪ ﺍﳌﺬﺍﻫﺐ ﲢﺮﳝﺎ ﳍﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟ
ﻋﻨﻬﻢ ﻣِﻦ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﻢ ﺣﲔ ﻋﺮﺽ ﺍﻷﻗﻮﺍﻝ ،ﻣِﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﺎ ﺫﻛﺮﻩ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ ﰲ "ﺍﳌﻮﻃﺄ" )2/663
"ﺍﳌﻘﺪﻣﺎﺕ" ) ،(2/58ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺎﺟﻲ ﰲ "ﺍﳌﻨﺘﻘﻰ" ) ،(5/38ﻭﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﱪ ﰲ "ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺬﻛﺎﺭ" )
)ﺹ ،(325 :ﻭﺧﻠﻴﻞ ﰲ ﳐﺘﺼﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻭﺍﻓﻘﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﺡ ﺍﳌﺨﺘﺼﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﺜﺮﻢ ،ﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﺍﳊﻄﱠﺎﺏ ﰲ "
) ،(4/406ﻭﺍﳋﺮﺷﻲ ) ،(5/107ﻭﻏﲑﻫﻢ ،ﻭﻻ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﻣِﻦ ﻋﺮﺽ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺮﺓﹰ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ؛ ﻟﻴﺘﺒﲔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﺭ
ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺇﱃ ﺍﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻲ ﺧﻄﺄﹲ ﻋِﻠﻤﻲ.
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺟﺰﻱ" :ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻌِﻴﻨﺔ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﺃﻗﺴﺎﻡ :ﺍﻷﻭﻝ :ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺭﺟﻞ ﻵﺧﺮ :ﺍﺷﺘﺮِ ﱄ ﺳﻠﻌﺔﹰ ﺑﻌﺸﺮﺓ ،ﻭ
ﻋﺸﺮ ﺇﱃ ﺃﺟﻞ ،ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﺭِﺑﺎ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ".
ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺩﻳﺮ ﰲ "ﺍﻟﺸﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﲑ"" :ﻭﻛﺮﻩ :ﺍﺷﺘﺮِﻩ ،ﻭﻳﻮﻣﺊ ﻟﺘﺮﺑﻴﺤﻪ ،ﻓﺈﻥﹾ ﺻﺮﺡ ﺑﻘﺪﺭ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﺣﺮﻡ..
ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﻳﻘﺎﻝ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ :ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻣﻠﺰﻡ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻓﲔ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً ﻃﺒﻘﹰﺎ ﻷﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻲ؟ ﻭﻗﺪ ﺃﻧﻜﺮ ﻫﺬﻩ
ﻣِﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﻷﻓﺎﺿﻞ ﳑﻦ ﲝﺚ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ ،ﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﳏﻤﺪ ﺍﻷﺷﻘﺮ ،ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻘ
ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲢﺮﱘِ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ،ﻗﺎﻝ" :ﻓﻬﺬﻩ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﺻﺮﳛﺔ ﰲ ﲢﺮﱘ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﻉ ﻣ
ﻭﻣﻦ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﻣﺮﺍﺟﻌﺔﹸ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻨﺴﺐ ﺇﱃ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻣِﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳌﻘﺎﻝ ﰲ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣ
ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ،ﺳﻮﺍﺀ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺗﻨﺸﺮﻩ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻮﻙ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ ،ﺃﻭ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻜﺘﺐ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ؛ ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻟﺘﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳌﺴﲑ
ﺍﻟﺰﻟﹶﻞ ،ﻭﺍﳌﺆﻣﻨﻮﻥ ﺭﺟﺎﻋﻮﻥ ﺇﱃ ﺍﳊﻖ ،ﻭﻗﱠﺎﻓﻮﻥ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ،ﻭﺍﷲ ﻳﺘﻮﻟﱠﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﳊﲔ ،ﻭﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺘﻮﻟﱠﻰ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 15 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀُ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﳌﺆﲤﺮ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ"؛ ﺍﻧﻈﺮ :ﲝﻮﺙ ﻓﻘﻬﻴﺔ ﰲ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﻣ
.(96
ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺭﻓﻴﻖ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻱ ﰲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻪ "ﲝﻮﺙ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ" )ﺹ253 :
ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻣﻪ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً ﺣﺴﺐ ﻗﻮﺍﻋِﺪ ﺍﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻲ ...ﺍﳉﻮﺍﺏ :ﻻ؛ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﺃﻧﻔﺴﻬ
ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ ﰲ ﺣﺮﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺔ" ،ﰒ ﻧﻘﹶﻞ ﻟﻨﺎ ﻛﻼﻡ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺟﺰﻱ ﰲ "ﺍﻟﻘﻮﺍﻧﲔ ﺍﻟﻔِﻘﻬﻴﺔ"
ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ.
ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺭﺑﻴﻊ ﳏﻤﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺮﻭﰊ -ﻛﻤﺎ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻠﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﳌﻠﺰﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻮﻱ
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ )ﺹ" :- (21 :ﻳﻼﺣﻆ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺭ -ﻳﻌﲏ :ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﳌﺆﲤﺮ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ
ﺍﳌﺂﺧﺬ ،ﻓﺎﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ -ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﻨﺎ -ﻻ ﻳﺠﻴﺰﻭﻥ ﻭﻋﺪ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻠﺰﻣﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ،ﻓﻬﻮ ﳜﺮﺝ ﻣِﻦ ﺩﺍ
ﻋﻨﺪﻫﻢ ،ﻭﺛﺎﻧﻴﺎ :ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻴﺔ -ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻭﺿﺤﻨﺎ -ﻻ ﻳﻠﺰﻣﻮﻥ ﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺩِﻳﺎﻧﺔﹰ ﻭﻻ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً".
ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻳﺮ" :ﻻ ﻳﺼﺢ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭ
ﻏﲑﻫﻢ ،ﻭﻳﺆﻳﺪ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﻟﻜﹰﺎ ﻭﻓﻘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻣِﻦ ﺑﻌﺪﻩ ﻧﺼﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﻊ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻠ
ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ".
ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ :ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ،ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﻭﻗﹶﻊ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﰲ ﻧِﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﻟﻠﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺸﺎﻳﺦ
ﺟﻤﻊ ،ﻭﻫﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻫﻢ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻞ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ؟!
ﻭﺍﳉﻮﺍﺏ ﻋﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ:
ﺍﻟﹾﺘﺒﺲ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺸﺎﻳﺦ ﰲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﺎﳌﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﰲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﰲ ﺑﺎﺏ
ﻭﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﹶﻒ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ،ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﻌِﻬﺎ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺬﺍﻫﺐ.
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻳﺮ" :ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻭﻗﹶﻊ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﲑﻫﻢ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﳌﺎﻟ
ﺩِﻳﺎﻧﺔﹰ ﻭﻗﻀﺎﺀً ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻏﲑﻫﻢ :ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺩِﻳﺎﻧﺔﹰ ﻻ ﻗﻀﺎﺀً ،ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﺎﳌﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﻣِﻦ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻭﺍﺣ
ﺁﺧﺮ ﺑﺄﻥ ﻳﺪﻓﻊ ﻟﻪ ﻣﺒﻠﻐﺎ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ،ﻭﻣﺴﺄﻟﺘﻨﺎ ﻫﺬﻩ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻣِﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻴﻞ؛ ﻷﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻓﻴﻪ
ﻭﻋﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻑ ﺍﻵﺧﺮ ،ﻓﻬﻮ ﺃﻗﺮﺏ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ،ﻭﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻄﺒﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 16 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﰒ ﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺍﳌﻠﺰﻡ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﳚﺐ ﺍﻟﻮﻓﺎﺀُ ﺑﻪ ﺩِﻳﺎﻧﺔﹰ ﻭﻗﻀﺎﺀً ،ﺃﻭ ﺩِﻳﺎﻧﺔﹰ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻻ
ﳏﻈﻮﺭ ،ﻭﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪِ ﰲ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻳﺘﺮﺗﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﳏﻈﻮﺭ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﳝﻠﻚ".
ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺗﺮﻛﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﻛﻲ" :ﺑﻨﻰ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﲔ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝﹶ ﺑﺎﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻌﺎ
ﺳﺒﻖ ﻣِﻦ ﻣﺬﻫﺐ ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ ﰲ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺩﺧﻞ ﺍﳌﻮﻋﻮﺩ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﰲ ﻛﹸﻠﹾﻔﺔ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ
ﺍﳌﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻟﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﺘﻘﺪﻣﲔ ﻭﻣﺎ ﺳﺒﻖ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳋﻼﻑ ﰲ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺇﻧﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻮ
ﺍﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﺎﳌﻌﺎﻭﺿﺔ".
ﺟﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺳﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺘﲔ ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻮﻧﺸﺮﻳﺴﻲ" :ﺍﻷﺻﻞ ﻣﻨﻊ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﲟﺎ ﻻ ﻳﺼﺢ ﻭﻗﻮﻋ
ﲪﺎﻳﺔﹰ".
ﻭﺟﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺪﺓ" :ﻭﻣِﻦ ﺛﹶﻢ ﻣﻨﻊ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻋﺪﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﺓ ،ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻄﻌﺎﻡ ﻗﺒﻞ
ﺍﳉﹸﻤﻌﺔ ،ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻙ".
ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ،ﻓﻬﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣِﻦ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﳌﻌﺮﻭﻑ؛ ﻭﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﳊﻄﱠﺎﺏ -
"ﻣﺪﻟﻮﻝﹸ ﺍﻻﻟﺘﺰﺍﻡ ﻟﹸﻐﺔ :ﻫﻮ ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻻﺯﻣﺎ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺬﺍ ﺍﳌﻌﲎ ﺷﺎﻣﻞﹲ ﻟﻠﺒﻴﻊ
ﻭﺳﺎﺋﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ ،ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﰲ ﻋﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎﺀ :ﻫﻮ ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺺِ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺷﻴﺌﹰﺎ ﻣِﻦ ﺍﳌﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﻣﻄﻠﻘﹰﺎ،
ﻓﻬﻮ ﲟﻌﲎ ﺍﻟﻌﻄﻴﺔ ،ﻭﻗﺪ ﻳﻄﻠﻖ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ ﺃﺧﺺ ﻣِﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﻫﻮ :ﺇﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﳌﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﺑﻠﻔﻆ
ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻟِﺐ ﰲ ﻋﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻡ".
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺭﺃﻯ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺟﺎﺯ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﻋﺪ ﺑﺎﳌﻌﺮﻭﻑ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺑﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺗ
ﺍﳌﻮﻋﻮﺩ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺐ ،ﻣﻊ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺗﱪﻉ ﳏﺾ ،ﻓﻸﻥﹾ ﻳﻠﺰﻡ ﺑﻪ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻭﺿﺎﺕ ﺃﹶﻭﱃ ﻭﺃﹶﺣﺮﻯ.
ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝﹸ ﰲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻗﻠﺐ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻔِﻘﻬﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﻌﺮﻭﻓﺔ ،ﻭﻫﻲ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﺭ ﻳﻐﺘﻔﹶﺮ ﰲ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﱪ
ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻭﺿﺎﺕ؛ ﻭﳍﺬﺍ ﺍﻏﺘﻔِﺮ ﰲ ﻋﻘﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﱪﻋﺎﺕ ﻫﺒﺔﹸ ﺍﻬﻮﻝ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻮﺻﻴﺔ ﺑﻪ ،ﻭﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﹸﺪﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺴﻠﻴ
ﺍﻷﻣﻮﺭ ﻻ ﳚﻮﺯ ﺑﻴﻌﻬﺎ.
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 17 19
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺟﺢ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺴﺄﻟﺔ:
ﺃﺭﻯ ﺃﻥﱠ ﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺮﺍﲝﺔ ﻟﻠﻮﺍﻋِﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮﺍﺀ ﺟﺎﺋﺰﺓﹲ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻹﻟﺰﺍﻡ ،ﻭﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﳋﻴﺎﺭ ﻟﻠﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﻭ
ﺳﻮﺍﺀ ،ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺟﺮ ﺃﻭ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﻀﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﲢﻘﱠﻖ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻣِﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺘﻬﺎ ،ﻭﺭﻏِﺐ ﰲ ﺷﺮﺍﺋﻬ
ﺑﺈﳚﺎﺏٍ ﻭﻗﹶﺒﻮﻝ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻳﻦ.
-2ﲝﺚ ﺃﻧﻴﻖ ﻭﻣﻔﻴﺪ
ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺩﺭ ﺟﻼﻝ ﳏﻤﺪ -ﺍﻟﺴﻮﺩﺍﻥ
ﺃﺳﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻥ ﺃﻥ ﳜﺘﺼﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺑﲔ ﺧﻠﻘﻚ ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﻭﻋﺰﰐ ﻭﺟﻼﱄ ﻻ ﺃﺭﺩ ﻟﻚ ﺩﻋﺎﺀ..
-1ﲝﺚ ﻧﻔﻴﺲ
ﺃﺑﻮﻋﻤﺮ -ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻳﺖ
ﲝﺚ ﻧﻔﻴﺲ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺃﺟﺎﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻭ ﺃﻓﺎﺩ ﺟﻌﻠﻪ ﺍﷲ ﰲ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺣﺴﻨﺎﺗﻪ ﻭﻧﻔﻌﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻮﻡ ﻻ ﻳﻨﻔﻊ ﻣﺎﻝ ﻭﻻ ﺑﻨﻮﻥ.
1
ﺃﺿﻒ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﻚ:
إﻋﻼم ﻋﺒﺮ اﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ اﻹﻟﻜﺘﺮوﻧﻲ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻧﺸﺮ ﺗﻌﻠﯿﻖ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ
ﺍﻻﺳﻢ
ﺍﻟﱪﻳﺪ ﺍﻹﻟﻜﺘﺮﻭﱐ
)ﻟﻦ ﻳﺘﻢ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻟﻠﺰﻭﺍﺭ(
ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ
ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 18 19
http://www.alukah.net/Web/dbian/0/29248/
...ﻗﻀﺎﯾﺎ ﻣﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻘﮭﯿﺔ -ﻣﻮﻗﻊ (word) -اﻹﻟﺰام ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻋﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺻﯿﻎ اﻟﻤﺮاﺑﺤﺔ ﻟﻶﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮاء
ﻧﺺ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ
م 12/03/2011 07:04
ﻣﻦ 19 19
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz