Is the statement, 'To him is this dwelling, usufruct or loan,' considered an admission (Iqrār)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Acknowledgment of Rights
Primary text
There are two recorded narrations concerning this matter. The first narration, favored by Al-Qadi, asserts that this statement is not an admission. The second narration, preferred by Abu Al-Khattab and stated by Abu Hanifa, holds that the speaker is admitting the right (debt) but claiming its satisfaction. Therefore, the claimant must provide evidence of satisfaction (bayyinah) for the claimed payment; otherwise, the claimant swears an oath and takes the due amount. This is because the claim of satisfaction, when linked to the admission, functions as a mere assertion without proof, similar to an assertion made in separate phrasing, or because the negation (claiming payment) nullifies the entire initial affirmation, akin to excepting the whole.
Supporting text
The view favoring validity, aligning with Al-Kharqi's position, argues that since the subsequent phrase is connected, it is capable of being sound and contains no contradiction, thus it must be accepted like excepting a part. It differs from a separate statement because the initial ruling (the debt) is established by the silence preceding the payment claim, and part of it cannot be removed by exception or substitution. Therefore, the subsequent claim of payment is a mere assertion requiring proof. Conversely, excepting the whole is contradictory, as one cannot simultaneously owe a sum and owe nothing.