Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (7/187)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

in which you hold a view different from that of the majority of jurists, there is no harm in giving him that legal opinion, so long as you trust that he respects the law of Allah. Here, then, a distinction is made between a public legal opinion and a private legal opinion, and between theoretical knowledge and educational instruction. Some scholars would give legal opinions on certain matters privately—for example, the issue of a triple divorce—such as the grandfather of Shaykh al-Islam, Abu al-Barakat. This is the way of the godly scholars, who cultivate people until they adhere to the law of Allah.

His statement: “If his wife willingly complies with him, it is binding upon her.” In another version: “It is binding upon them both.” That is, if she agrees with him to have intercourse during Hajj or Umrah, then it is binding upon them both: a camel in Hajj and a sheep in Umrah. Or, “it is binding upon her,” meaning that the ruling applies to her.

If he coerces her, the apparent meaning of the author’s words is that, if he coerces her, this is not binding upon her. But is the husband required to offer expiation on behalf of his wife because he coerced her, or not?

The answer: There are two views on this issue.

According to the madhhab, no compensatory sacrifice is due from a woman who is coerced, nor from the one who coerced her, due to the saying of Allah, Most High:

“There is no blame upon you for what you do by mistake, but only for what your hearts deliberately intend.” [al-Ahzab 33:5]

And His saying:

“Whoever disbelieves in Allah after having believed—except one who is forced while his heart is secure in faith—but whoever willingly opens his heart to disbelief: upon them is wrath from Allah, and for them is a tremendous punishment.” [al-Nahl 16:106]

The second view is that the one who coerced her must offer the compensatory sacrifice. The first view is apparently the stronger one.

Does her Hajj become invalid?

The answer: No, because she was coerced.

Issue: It says in al-Rawd: “The sacrificial blood required for missing Hajj or for omitting an obligatory rite is like that of tamattuʿ,” that is, like the sacrifice required for tamattuʿ.

ترى فيها خلاف ما يراه جمهور الفقهاء، فلا بأس أن تفتيه ما دمت تثق أن الرجل عنده احترام لشرع الله، فهنا يفرق بين الفتوى العامة والفتوى الخاصة وبين العلم النظري والعلم التربوي، وقد كان بعض أهل العلم يفتي في بعض المسائل سراً كمسألة الطلاق الثلاث كجد شيخ الإسلام أبي البركات، وهذه طريقة العلماء الربانيين الذين يربون الناس حتى يلتزموا بشريعة الله. قوله: «وإن طاوعته زوجته لزمها»، وفي نسخة: «لزماها»، أي وافقته على الجماع في الحج، أو في العمرة لزماها، أي: البدنة في الحج والشاة في العمرة، أو لزمها، أي: لزمها الحكم. وإن أكرهها، فظاهر كلام المؤلف أنه إذا أكرهها لا يلزمها ذلك، وهل يلزم الزوج أن يكفر عن زوجته؛ لأنه أكرهها أو لا؟ الجواب: في المسألة قولان. المذهب: لا فدية على مكرهة، ولا على من أكرهها؛ لقوله تعالى: ﴿وَلَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ فِيمَا أَخْطَأْتُمْ بِهِ وَلَكِنْ مَا تَعَمَّدَتْ قُلُوبُكُمْ﴾ [الأحزاب: ٥]، وقوله: ﴿مَنْ كَفَرَ بِاللَّهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِيمَانِهِ إِلاَّ مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالإِيمَانِ وَلَكِنْ مَنْ شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْرًا فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ *﴾ [النحل: ١٠٦]. والقول الثاني: أن على مكرهها الفدية، والظاهر القول الأول. وهل يفسد حجها؟ الجواب: لا؛ لأنها مكرهة. مسألة: قال في الروض: «والدم الواجب لفوات، أو ترك واجب كمتعة»، أي: كدم المتعة.