ShamelaTranslate
بحث
تسجيل الدخول
ShamelaTranslate

© 2026 ShamelaTranslate. مشروع علمي مفتوح الوصول.

حولتواصلتبرّعبيانات النشرالخصوصيةشروط الاستخدامحق الانسحابإلغاء اشتراك
المغني لابن قدامة - ت التركي
مجلد 9 · صفحة 172

الترجمة · EN

The inheritance belongs to him, as is the case in all other rights, unlike when they agree upon ignorance, in which case an oath is not directed [at anyone]; for an oath is not prescribed in a situation where they agree upon ignorance regarding it. Those who argued for the non-inheritance of some from others relied upon what Sa'id (6) narrated, [saying] that Isma'il ibn 'Ayyash informed us, from Yahya ibn Sa'id: That the slain of al-Yamama, the slain of Siffin, and the slain of al-Harra did not inherit from one another, and they made their living agnates (asaba) inherit. And he said (6): 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Muhammad informed us, from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, from his father: That Umm Kulthum bint 'Ali died, and her son Zayd ibn 'Umar [died as well], and the two shouts (the news of their deaths) met on the road, so it was not known which of them died before the other, so she did not inherit from him, and he did not inherit from her. And [the fact] that the people of Siffin and the people of al-Harra did not inherit from one another. [This is also] because the condition for inheritance is the life of the heir after the death of the one being inherited from, which is unknown, and inheritance cannot be established with doubt regarding its condition; and because his life at the time of the death of the one being inherited from was not known, so he does not inherit from him, like a fetus if she delivers it stillborn. And because the original state is the absence of inheritance, so we do not establish it through doubt. And because inheriting from each one of them is certainly an error; for it must be that either they both died together, or one of them preceded the other [in death], and inheriting [from the perspective of] the one who preceded in death and the deceased with him is certainly an error and contradicts consensus; so how could it be acted upon! If it is said: Then the cutting off of inheritance is [also] the cutting off of the inheritance of the one who was preceded in death, which is also an error. We say: This is not certain, because it is possible that they died together, so there is no 'preceded' one among them. Some of our companions have argued using what Iyas ibn 'Abd (7) al-Muzani narrated: That the Prophet - peace and blessings of Allah be upon him - was asked about people upon whom a house collapsed, and he said: 'They inherit from one another.' The correct view is that this is only from Iyas himself, and that he is the one who was asked, and it is not a narration from the Prophet - peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. This is how Sa'id narrated it in his "Sunan" (8), and Imam Ahmad recounted it from him. Abu Thawr, [Ibn Surayj] (9), and a group of the Basrians said: Each heir is given

الحواشي

(6) In: Kitab al-Gharqa wa al-Harqa, Sunan Sa'id ibn Mansur 1/86. The second hadith was also recorded by al-Bayhaqi, in: Bab Mirath man 'amiya mawtuhu, from Kitab al-Fara'id. Al-Sunan al-Kubra 6/222. (7) In M: "Abd Allah". And it was mentioned previously on page 171. (8) In: Bab al-Gharqa wa al-Harqa. Al-Sunan 1/85. It was also cited by al-Bayhaqi, in: Bab Mirath man 'amiya mawtuhu, from Kitab al-Fara'id. Al-Sunan al-Kubra 6/223. And by al-Daraqutni, in: Kitab al-Fara'id. Sunan al-Daraqutni 4/74. (9) In M: "wa Shurayh".

العربية (المصدر)

الميراثُ له، كما فى سائرِ الحُقوقِ، بخِلافِ ما إذا اتَّفقُوا على الجهلِ، فلا تتَوَجَّهُ يَمينٌ؛ لأن اليمينَ لا يُشْرَعُ فى مَوْضِعٍ اتَّفقوا على الجَهْلِ به. واحتجَّ مَنْ قال بعَدمِ تَوْريثِ بعضِهم مِن بعضٍ، بما روَى سعيدٌ (٦)، حدَّثَنا إسماعيلُ بنُ عَيَّاشٍ، عن يحيى بن سَعيدٍ: أَنَّ قَتْلَى الْيَمامَةِ، قتْلَى صِفِّينَ والْحَرَّةِ، لَمْ يُوِّرثُوا بَعْضَهُمْ مِنْ بَعْض، وَوَرَّثُوا عَصَبَتَهُم الأَحْيَاءَ. وقال (٦): حَدّثَنا عبدُ العزيزِ بنُ محمدٍ، عن جَعْفرِ بنِ محمدٍ، عن أبيه: أَنَّ أُمَّ كُلْثوم بنتَ علىٍّ تُوُفِّيَتْ هى وابنُها زيدُ بنُ عمَرَ، فالْتَقَتِ الصَّيْحَتانِ فى الطَّريقِ، فلم يُدْرَ أيُّهُما ماتَ قَبْلَ صاحِبه، فلمْ تَرِثْه ولم يَرِثْها. وأنَّ أهْلَ صِفِّينَ، وأهْلَ الْحَرَّةِ لم يتَوارَثوا. ولأنَّ شَرْطَ التَّوْريثِ حياةُ الوارِثِ بعْدَ مَوْتِ الموْرُوثِ، وهو غيرُ مَعْلومٍ، ولا يَثْبُتُ التَّوريثُ مع الشَّكِّ فى شَرْطِه، ولأنَّه لم تُعْلَمْ حياتُه حينَ مَوْتِ مَوْرُوثِه، فلم يَرِثْه، كالْحَمْلِ إذا وَضَعَتْه مَيِّتًا، ولأنَّ الأصْلَ عَدَمُ التَّوْريثِ فلا نُثبِتُه بالشَّكِّ، ولأنَّ تَوْريثَ كُلِّ واحدٍ منهما خَطَأٌ يَقِينًا؛ لأَنَّه لا يَخْلُو من أنْ يكونَ مَوْتُهما معًا، أو سَبَقَ أحَدُهما به، وتَوْريثُ السّابقِ بالموْتِ والميِّتِ معه خطأٌ يقينًا، مخالفٌ للإِجْماعِ، فكيفَ يُعْمَلُ به! فإنْ قيلَ: فمى قَطْعِ التَّوْريثِ قَطْعُ تَوْريثِ المَسْبوقِ بالمَوْتِ، وهو خَطَأٌ أيضًا. قُلْنا: هذا غيرُ مُتَيقَّن؛ لأنَّه يَحْتَمِلُ مَوْتَهُما جيعًا، فلا يكونُ فيهما مَسْبوقٌ. وقد احتجَّ بَعْضُ أصْحابِنا بما رَوى إياسُ بنُ عَبْدٍ (٧) المُزَنىُّ، أنّ النَّبِىَّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- سُئِلَ عَنْ قَوْمٍ وَقَعَ عَلَيْهِم بَيْتٌ. فقال: يَرِثُ بَعْضُهُمْ بَعْضًا. والصَّحيحُ أَنَّ هذا إنَّما هو عن إياسٍ نَفْسِه، وأنَّه هو المسئولُ، وليس بروايةٍ عنِ النّبىِّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم-. هكذا رواه سعيدٌ فى "سُنَنِه" (٨). وحَكاهُ الإِمامُ أحْمدُ عنه. وقال أبو ثَوْرٍ، [وابن سُرَيْجٍ] (٩)، وطائِفةٌ مِنَ البَصْرِيِّينَ: يُعْطَى كُلُّ وارثٍ

الحواشي

(٦) فى: باب الغرقى والحرقى، سنن سعيد بن منصور ١/ ٨٦. والحديث الثانى أخرجه أيضًا البيهقى، فى: باب ميراث من عمى موته، من كتاب الفرائض. السنن الكبرى ٦/ ٢٢٢.(٧) فى م: "عبد اللَّه". وتقدم فى صفحة ١٧١.(٨) فى: باب الغرقى والحرقى. السنن ١/ ٨٥.كما أورده البيهقى، فى: باب ميراث من عمى موته، من كتاب الفرائض. السنن الكبرى ٦/ ٢٢٣. والدارقطنى، فى: كتاب الفرائض. سنن الدارقطنى ٤/ ٧٤.(٩) فى م: "وشريح".

السابقمجلد 9 · صفحة 172التالي
السابق9·172التالي