Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

As for ignorance of one’s circumstances, it is established in al-Sahih that Asma’ bint Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with her, said: “We broke our fast on a cloudy day during the lifetime of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and then the sun appeared.” (1) They thus broke their fast during the daytime, on the assumption that the sun had set. They were ignorant not of the legal ruling, but of their circumstances: they did not think that it was still daytime. Yet the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, did not instruct them to make up the fast. Had making it up been obligatory, he would have commanded them to do so, for it would have been part of Allah’s law; and if it were part of the law, it would have been preserved and transmitted by the Ummah, since there would have been ample reason to transmit it. Since it has neither been preserved nor reported from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, the basic presumption is freedom from liability and that no make-up fast is due.

This is an important principle to which we have referred previously: when we are uncertain whether something is obligatory or prohibited, the basic presumption is that it is not—except in acts of worship, for the basic presumption regarding them is prohibition.

However, whoever breaks his fast before sunset, and it then becomes clear that the sun had not set, must refrain from eating and drinking, because he broke his fast on the basis of a presumed cause which was then shown not to exist. This leads us to an important issue: whoever bases his statement on a cause, and it later becomes clear that the cause did not exist, then his statement has no legal effect. This has many subsidiary applications, among the most important of which is what occurs with some people regarding divorce. For example, a man says to his wife, “If you enter so-and-so’s house, you are divorced,” on the assumption that he possesses forbidden instruments, such as musical instruments or the like. It then becomes clear that he has none of these things. If she enters, does the divorce take effect or not?

(1) Its source reference has been given previously (p. 333).
وأما الجهل بالحال: فقد ثبت في الصحيح عن أسماء بنت أبي بكر ﵄ قالت: «أفطرنا في يوم غيم على عهد النبي ﷺ ثم طلعت الشمس» (١) فأفطروا في النهار بناءً على أن الشمس قد غربت فهم جاهلون، لا بالحكم الشرعي ولكن بالحال، لم يظنوا أن الوقت في النهار، ولم يأمرهم النبي ﷺ بالقضاء، ولو كان القضاء واجباً لأمرهم به، لأنه من شريعة الله وإذا كان من شريعة كان محفوظاً تنقله الأمة؛ لأنه مما تتوافر الدواعي لنقله، فلما لم يحفظ، ولم ينقل عن النبي ﷺ، فالأصل براءة الذمة، وعدم القضاء. وهذه قاعدة مهمة أشرنا إليها من قبل وهي أننا إذا شككنا في وجوب شيء أو تحريمه فالأصل عدمه، إلا في العبادات فالأصل فيها التحريم. ولكن من أفطر قبل أن تغرب الشمس إذا تبين أن الشمس لم تغرب، وجب عليه الإمساك، لأنه أفطر بناءً على سبب، ثم تبين عدمه، وهذا يجرنا إلى مسألة مهمة وهي أن من بنى قوله على سبب، تبين أنه لم يوجد فلا حكم لقوله، وهذه لها فروع كثيرة من أهمها: ما يقع لبعض الناس في الطلاق، يقول لزوجته مثلاً: إن دخلت دار فلان فأنت طالق، بناءً على أنه عنده آلات محرمة مثل المعازف أو غيرها، ثم يتبين أنه ليس عنده شيء من ذلك، فهل إذا دخلت تطلق أو لا؟
(١) سبق تخريجه ص (٣٣٣).

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies