What is the legal implication when a person acknowledges a debt using both a generalized amount and a specified item (e.g., 'A thousand and a dirham,' or 'A thousand and a measure of wheat')?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Acknowledgment of Rights
Primary text
The generalized amount is interpreted as being of the same genus as the specified item. This view is held by Al-Qadi, Ibn Hamid, and Abu Thawr. The evidence for this is derived from the linguistic practice where an unspecified term is clarified by an immediately following specified term, similar to how the Quran clarifies the unspecified count in Quran 2:234 (Four months and ten days), and based on the principle that when an unspecified term is paired with a specified one without evidence suggesting a different category, the unspecified term takes the nature of the specified one. This interpretation upholds the clarity of the declarant's speech.
Supporting text
Al-Tamimi and Abu al-Khattab argue that the generalized term should revert to its meaning based on what the declarant specifies, supporting this by citing Quran 2:234 and asserting that since the thousand is ambiguous, its clarification should be derived from the declarant, as if no conjunction occurred. Abu Hanifa posits a distinction: if the conjunction is a measure or weight, it clarifies the generalized term; however, if it is a measured item (like cloth) or a countable item, it does not serve as clarification, because debt obligations (stated via 'alaayya - upon me) that establish themselves in the personal liability (dhimma) clarify the preceding ambiguous sum.