Ḍamān mā lam yajib—a commitment to pay a debt whose cause will arise in the future—is a complex subject in Islamic jurisprudence and legal theory. Traditional doctrine invalidates it due to the absence of a subject matter (mawḍūʿ) at the time of contracting. This view primarily relies on two arguments: (1) treating the surety contract (ḍamān) as intrinsically subordinate/derivative (tabʿī), and (2) the claim of a juristic consensus (ijmāʿ) on its invalidity.

Nevertheless, practical cases—such as guaranteeing the māl al-jaʿāla before the contracted work is performed, or guaranteeing a wife’s future maintenance (nafaqah) and similar examples—show significant disagreement among jurists regarding the application of this rule.Such divergence weakens the assertion of consensus and also suggests that the traditional framework is not sufficiently effective for addressing intricate legal and economic circumstances. Critical analysis indicates that “subordinateness” is not an essential attribute of ḍamān itself, but rather a description of its common historical pattern; within modern legal conditions, an “independent commitment to pay future debts” may be accepted as the proper subject of a valid contract.

In contrast, stronger grounds support validity. Most importantly, sīrah ʿuqalāʾī (rational commercial practice) in contemporary transactions—appearing through insurance and guaranteeinstruments—has been implicitly confirmed (taqrīr) by the Lawgiver. Furthermore, general sharʿī directives to honor commitments, recognized juristic precedents such as ḍamān jarīrah, and the necessity of adapting fiqh to present economic realities all indicate the possibility and legitimacy of ḍamān mā lam yajib.

Accordingly, it seems defensible to recognize ḍamān mā lam yajib as an independent and valid contract, reducing tensions in juristic rulings and enhancing the compatibility between Islamic law and modern financial systems while demonstrating the flexibility of fiqh in meeting contemporary needs.

کلیدواژه‌ها / English