The buyer, and the statement is that of the denier. Al-Sha'bi said: The statement is that of the seller, or they shall rescind the sale. Ibn al-Mundhir narrated this from our Imam, may Allah have mercy on him, because Ibn Mas'ud narrated from the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that he said: "If the two parties to a sale disagree, and there is no evidence between them, then the statement is what the seller says, or they shall rescind the sale." Narrated by Sa'id, Ibn Majah, and others. The famous position in the school is the first one. It is possible that the meaning of the two statements is one, and that the statement is that of the seller with his oath; so if he swears and the buyer is satisfied with that, he takes it; and if he refuses, he [the buyer] also swears, and the sale is rescinded between them, because in some versions of the hadith of Ibn Mas'ud, the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: "If the two parties to a sale disagree while the item is still in existence, and neither of them has evidence, they shall perform mutual swearing (tahaluf)." This is because each one of them is both a claimant and a respondent. The seller claims a contract for twenty, which the buyer denies, and the buyer claims a contract for ten, which the seller denies, and a contract for ten is not the same as a contract for twenty; thus, the oath was legislated for both of them, and this is the answer to what they mentioned.
Second section: The one who initiates the oath is the seller. He swears: "I did not sell it for ten, and I only sold it for twenty." If the buyer wishes, he takes it for what the seller said; otherwise, he swears: "I did not buy it for twenty, and I only bought it for ten." This is the view of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifah said: The buyer initiates the oath because he is the denier, the oath is stronger on his side, and judgment is passed by his refusal (nukul) and the ruling is concluded, and that which is closer to resolving the dispute is more appropriate. Our evidence is the statement of the Prophet...
(1) In MS M: "wa-ruwiya" (and it was narrated). (2) Reported by Ibn Majah, in: The Chapter of The Two Parties to a Sale Disagreeing, from the Book of Commerce. Sunan Ibn Majah 2/737. It was also reported by Abu Dawud, in: The Chapter of If the Two Parties to a Sale Disagree and the Sold Item Is Still in Existence, from the Book of Sales. Sunan Abi Dawud 2/255. Al-Darimi, in: The Chapter of If the Two Parties to a Sale Disagree, from the Book of Sales. Sunan al-Darimi 2/250. Imam Malik, in: The Chapter of Sales with Option, from the Book of Sales. Al-Muwatta 2/671. And Imam Ahmad, in: Al-Musnad 1/466. (3) This version with this wording is not found in any of the hadith books that are available to us. Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: As for the narration of mutual swearing (tahaluf), al-Rafi'i admitted in Al-Tadhnib that it is not mentioned in any of the hadith books. Al-Talkhis al-Habir 3/31. (4) Omitted from the original (al-asl).
المُشْتَرِى، والقولُ قولُ المُنْكِرِ. وقال الشَّعْبِىُّ: القولُ قولُ البائِعِ، أو يَتَرادَّانِ البَيْعَ. وحَكاه ابنُ المُنْذِرِ عن إمامِنا، رَحِمَهُ اللهُ، [لما رَوَى] (١) ابنُ مَسْعُودٍ، عن رسولِ اللَّه -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ-، أنَّه قال: "إذَا اخْتَلَفَ الْبَيِّعانِ، ولَيْسَ بَيْنَهُمَا بَيِّنَةٌ، فَالْقَوْلُ مَا قَالَ الْبَائِعُ، أوْ يَتَرَادَّانِ الْبَيْعَ". رَواه سَعِيدٌ، وابنُ ماجَه، وغيرُهما (٢). والمَشْهُورُ فى المذهبِ الأوَّلُ. ويَحْتَمِلُ أنْ يكونَ مَعْنَى القَوْلَيْنِ واحِدًا، وأنَّ القولَ قولُ البائِعِ مع يَمِينِه، فإذا حَلَفَ فرَضِىَ المُشْتَرِى بذلك، أخَذَ به، وإنْ أَبَى، حَلَفَ أيضًا، وفُسِخَ البَيْعُ بينهما، لأنَّ فى بعضِ ألفاظِ حَدِيثِ ابن مَسْعُودٍ، أنَّ النَّبِىَّ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- قال: "إذَا اخْتَلَفَ الْمُتَبَايِعَانِ، والسِّلْعَةُ قائِمَةٌ. ولَا بَيِّنَةَ لأحَدِهِمَا، تَحَالَفا" (٣). ولأنَّ كلَّ واحدٍ منهما مُدَّعٍ ومُدَّعًى عليه، فإنَّ البائِعَ يَدَّعِى عَقْدًا بِعِشْرِينَ، يُنْكِرُه المُشْتَرِى، والمُشْتَرِى يَدَّعِى عَقْدًا بِعَشَرَةٍ، يُنْكِرُه البائِعُ، والعَقْدُ بِعَشَرَةٍ غيرُ العَقْدِ بِعِشْرِينَ، فَشُرِعَت اليَمِينُ فى حَقِّهِما، وهذا الجَوَابُ عمَّا ذَكَرُوه.
الفصل الثانى، أنَّ المُبْتَدِىءَ باليَمِينِ البائِعُ، فيَحْلِفُ ما بِعْتُه [بِعَشَرَةٍ، وإنَّما بِعْتُه] (٤) بِعِشْرِينَ. فإنْ شاءَ المُشْتَرِى أخَذَه بما قال البائِعُ، وإلَّا يَحْلِفُ ما اشْتَرَيْتُه بِعِشْرِينَ، وإنَّما اشْتَرَيْتُه بِعَشَرَةٍ. وبهذا قال الشَّافِعىُّ، وقال أبو حنيفةَ: يَبْتَدِىءُ بِيَمِينِ المُشْتَرِى؛ لأنَّه مُنْكِرٌ، واليَمِينُ فى جَنَبَتِه أقْوَى، ولأنَّه يُقْضَى بِنُكُولِه، ويَنْفَصِلُ الحُكْمُ، وما كان أقْرَبَ إلى فَصْلِ الخُصُومَةِ كان أوْلَى. ولَنا، قولُ النَّبِىِّ
(١) فى م: "وروى".(٢) أخرجه ابن ماجه، فى: باب البيعان يختلفان، من كتاب التجارات. سنن ابن ماجه ٢/ ٧٣٧.كما أخرجه أبو داود، فى: باب إذا اختلف البيعان والمبيع قائم، من كتاب البيوع. سنن أبى داود ٢/ ٢٥٥. والدارمى، فى: باب إذا اختلف المتبايعان، من كتاب البيوع. سنن الدارمى ٢/ ٢٥٠. والإمام مالك، فى: باب بيع الخيار، من كتاب البيوع. الموطأ ٢/ ٦٧١. والإمام أحمد، فى: المسند ١/ ٤٦٦.(٣) الرواية بهذا اللفظ غير موجودة فى شىء من كتب الحديث التى بين أيدينا. وقال الحافظ ابن حجر: أما رواية التحالف فاعترف الرافعى فى التذنيب أنه لا ذكر لها فى شىء من كتب الحديث. التلخيص الحبير ٣/ ٣١.(٤) سقط من: الأصل.
