بررسي شرط ضمان عين مستاجره در فقه اماميه

The study of Lessee's Guarantee Condition as to the Substance of Lease in Imamiyya Jurisprudence

اين مقاله صحت اشتراط ضمان عين مستاجره را مورد بررسي قرار مي‌دهد و بيان مي‌كند اين شرط مخالف مقتضاي عقد اجاره نيست؛ زيرا حقيقت اين عقد مانند عقد وديعه استيمان نمي‌باشد. مخالفت اين شرط با كتاب و سنّت نيز از دو منظر مخالفت با ادله خاص اجاره و همچنين سببيت نداشتن شرط براي ضمان قابل بررسي است. اطلاق ادله عدم ضمان مستاجر حالت شرط و غير شرط را شامل مي‌شود. درصورت شك نيز اصل، استصحاب عدم ضمان است. همچنين از احكام اجاره وجوب تمكين مستاجر نسبت به عين براي استيفاء منافع و انتفاع است و وجوب تسلط مستاجر بر عين شرعاً ثابت مي‌شود؛ لذا شرط نمي‌تواند حق مالكي نشأت گرفته از عقد را كه شرعي است از او بگيرد. چنين حق مالكي، حكم محسوب مي‌شود؛ يعني مجعولي شرعي كه متعاملين نمي‌‌توانند برخلاف آن شرط كنند؛ بنابراين شرط ضمان عين مستاجره مخالف كتاب و سنّت مي‌شود. همچنين در تفسير ماده 493 قانون مدني كه در آن تنها تفريط يا تعدي سبب ضمان دانسته شده و متعرض شرط ضمان نشده است، مي‌توان از اين ديدگاه بصورت مدلل استفاده كرد و چنين شرطي را باطل دانست. روش تحقيق مقاله توصيفي ـ تحليلي از نوع اجتهادي است

This article studies the validity of providing for the lessee’s guarantee as to the substance of lease and proves that such a provision is not contrary to the requirements of lease; since unlike deposit, the nature of this contract is not entrustment (istīmān). The inconsistency of this provision with the Holy Qur’an and tradition is worth studying both from the viewpoint of its inconsistency with specific proofs of lease as well as lack of its causality for guarantee. The absoluteness of the lessee not being guarantor includes the case of provision and non-provision of such a condition in the contract. In case of doubt, the application of istiṣḥāb principle (presumption of continuity) results in nonexistence of guarantee. Also, one of the rules of lease is the requirement of making the substance of lease available for the lessee to exploit the profits and enjoy them and the requirement of lessee’s dominance as to the substance is proved from the Imamiyya jurisprudence viewpoint. Therefore, the condition may not deprive the owner from a proprietary right derived from contract which is based on Sharia. Such a proprietary right is considered to be an order i.e. a Sharia enactment against which the parties may not agree. Therefore, the provision of lessee’s guarantee as to the substance of lease is contrary to the Qur’an and tradition. Also, in interpreting article 493 of the Iranian Civil Code, in which merely excessive use or negligence are causes of guarantee and the guarantee provision has not been dealt with, one may use this viewpoint justifiably and treat such a condition as void. The method of this article is descriptive-analytic of ijtihādī (discretionary) type.