ضمان المنافع في الفقه الإسلامي، منافع الوقف أنموذجا

Abstract

كان اختلاف الحنفية مع الجمهور في مسألة ضمان المنافع ثمرة لخلافهم في مسألة مالية المنافع، جاء هذا البحث ليبيّن أهم الأدلة التي اعتمدها كل فريق للتدليل على صحة ما ذهب إليه، ثم تطرق البحث إلى موضوع ضمان منافع الوقف حال غصبها، ومناقشة ونقد الأدلة التي سوغ بها الحنفية تحولهم عن رأيهم المشهور بعدم الضمان إلى القول بضمان منافع الوقف، هدفت الدراسة إلى بحث أدلة كل فريق ومحاولة معرفة أصل الخلاف، والسعي لتقريب الآراء ووجهات النظر، تمثلت أهمية الموضوع بأنه يتعلق بحفظ أموال الناس عموما ومال الوقف خصوصا، الوقف الذي يعول فئة معتبرة من المجتمع، تتضرر بتضرره، اعتمد البحث على عدة مناهج منها الاستقرائي والتحليلي والمقارن، من النتائج المتوصل إليها: أن الأسباب التي من أجلها استثنى الحنفية مال الوقف من عدم الضمان هي موجودة في منافع الأموال الأخرى التي قالوا فيها بعدم الضمان فلا يوجد مسوغ واضح يجعل الأحناف يضمّنون غاصب منافع الوقف ولا يضمّنون غيره. Abstract: Islamic scholars had differences in understanding the financial value of services, or benefits, so the Hanafi School scholars argued that services aren't existent possessions, and that it is not possible to document a contract over things that are non-existing. On the other side, the majority of islamic scholars argued that services are actually the purpose of having a property, and that saying otherwise contradicts with the purposes of the islamic rules. One of the problems that resulted out of this disagreement was the returning of the financial value of the service of a property that was stolen or taken over, which is called (Guaranteeing Benefits). The difference between the Hanafi School scholars and the other majority of scholars in the matter of Guaranteeing Benefits was the essence of their difference in the matter of the Fanancial Value of Benefits. This paper came to explain the main sources that each party used to show their point of view, then, the paper talked about Guaranteeing Benefits of a public service (Waqf) in a situation where it was taken over, the paper then discusses the sources and proofs that the Hanafi School scholars used to switch their opinion from being against guaranteeing benefits of a public service to being on the side of guaranteeing it. The purpose of this paper was to study the sources of each party and trying to know the origin of the disagreenment. The paper also tried to get the two parties closer by finding the cross-overs in their opinions. The importance of the matter is that it is directly related to people's money in general, and public services in particular, since many types of people in society benefit from them. Many methods were used in the research process, such as analyzing, induction and comparing. One of the results of this paper: the reasons that the Hanafi Scholars used to prove that the benefits of a public service should be guaranteed are similar to the ones for a private property, so there is no clear reason for them to be on the side of guaranteeing public benefits only without the private ones.