Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (7/191)

with a single shot. Thus, if he shoots once and strikes five doves, he must offer five sheep. It cannot be said that the act is one and the prohibited matter is one, because Allah has stipulated that the compensation for game must be its equivalent, and equivalence includes both quantity and quality. If we were to suppose that he compensated for five with a single sheep, he would not have compensated with their equivalent. This is why hunting game is excepted.

His statement, “Whoever commits prohibited acts of different kinds must offer a compensation for each,” means, for example, that he wears a shirt, applies perfume to his head, shaves, and trims his nails. These are four different categories, so he must offer four compensations, even though the prescribed compensation in each case is the same: slaughtering a sheep, feeding six needy persons—half a sa' for each person—or fasting three days. Nevertheless, we say that a separate compensation is due for each one. There are two points to consider in this matter:

First: It is known that there is room for consideration regarding the obligation of compensation in cases other than those established by textual evidence.

Second: The legal principle in this regard is that when the required expiation is one, variation in the categories does not matter. Thus, if a man invalidates his ablution by urinating, defecating, passing wind, eating camel meat, and touching his penis with desire—these are five causes requiring ablution—do we say that he must perform ablution five times? No, because what is required is one. The principle, therefore, is that when what is required is one, the expiation or compensation is not repeated. However, perhaps the jurists said that, out of reverence for ihram and the rites, and in veneration of the sacred symbols of Allah, he must offer an expiation for each category.

His statement, “whether he abandons his state of ihram or not,” means that whether he commits the prohibited act after renouncing his ihram and intending to leave it, or not, the compensation is not waived.

برمية واحدة، فإذا رمى رمية واحدة وأصاب خمس حمامات، فإن عليه خمس شياه، فلا يقال إن الفعل واحد والمحظور واحد؛ لأن الله اشترط في جزاء الصيد أن يكون مثله، والمماثلة تشمل الكمية والكيفية، فلو قدرنا أنه فدى بشاة واحدة عن خمس لم يكن فدى بمثلها، وهذا وجه استثناء الصيد. قوله: «ومن فعل محظوراً من أجناس فدى لكل مرة»، مثاله: أن يلبس القميص، ويطيب رأسه، ويحلق، ويقلم، هذه أربعة أجناس، فعليه أربع فدى، مع أن موجَبها واحد، وهو: ذبح شاة، أو إطعام ستة مساكين لكل مسكين نصف صاع، أو صيام ثلاثة أيام، ومع ذلك نقول: عليه لكل واحد فدية، وهذه المسألة: أولاً: معلوم أن في إيجاب الفدية في غير ما ورد به النص نظراً. ثانياً: أن القاعدة الشرعية في هذا أنه إذا كان الموجَبُ واحداً فلا يضر اختلاف الأجناس، ولذلك لو أحدث رجل ببول وغائط وريح وأكل لحم إبل ومس ذكر لشهوة، فهذه خمسة موجِبات فهل نقول: توضأ خمس مرات؟ لا؛ لأن الموجَبَ واحد، فالقاعدة: أنه إذا كان الموجَبُ واحداً، فلا تتكرر الكفارة أو الفدية، لكن لعل الفقهاء ﵏ قالوا: احتراماً للإحرام والنسك وتعظيماً لشعائر الله نلزمه عن كل جنس بكفارة. قوله: «رفض إحرامه أو لا»، أي: سواء فعل المحظور بعد أن رفض الإحرام، ونوى الخروج أم لا، فلا تسقط الفدية.