Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (7/333)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

Note: If, in this issue, one cannot determine the evidence by which one view outweighs the other, then which position is more prudent: to say that he does not enter the first stage of release until he has stoned and shaved, or to say that the more prudent view is that he enters that stage upon stoning?

It may be more prudent to adopt the first view—that he enters the state of release upon stoning Jamrat al-Aqabah. Yet it may be said that the second is more prudent: if a man has intercourse with his wife after stoning Jamrat al-Aqabah but before shaving, then, if we hold that he enters the state of release upon stoning, his Hajj is not invalidated, because the intercourse occurred after the first stage of release. Intercourse invalidates the pilgrimage only when it occurs before the first stage of release. Moreover, we would require of him no expiation beyond a sheep. But if we hold that he has not entered the state of release, we would require him to offer a camel. So which view is more prudent now?

The answer is that the more prudent view is that he enters the state of release upon stoning, and that we do not impose upon him anything whose obligation has not become clear to us. However, if we say that he does not enter the state of release until he has both stoned and shaved, that is more prudent in the sense that we prevent him from the prohibitions of ihram until he shaves.

Perhaps we should say: so long as the matter has not become clear, let us follow the easier course. Thus, if a man comes asking about having intercourse after stoning Jamrat al-Aqabah but before shaving, we tell him: “Your Hajj has not been invalidated,” because we have no basis on which to burden him with hardship by saying, “Your Hajj is invalid; you must continue it, repeat it the following year, and expiate your act by offering a camel.” But if he comes asking whether he may wear ordinary clothing and apply perfume before shaving, we say: “No,” for this is more prudent and more certain in discharging one’s liability before Allah.

The jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, expanded the matter further, saying: if he performs two out of the three rites, he enters the first stage of release. Thus, if he has stoned and shaved, or has stoned

تنبيه: من لم يتبين له في هذه المسألة الدليل الذي يحصل به رجحان أحد القولين على الآخر، فأيهما أحوط أن نقول: إنه لا يحل حتى يرمي ويحلق، أو نقول إن الأحوط أن يحل بالرمي؟ قد يكون الأحوط أن نقول بالأول وهو أنه يحل برمي جمرة العقبة، وقد نقول: إن الأحوط الثاني فإذا جامع رجل امرأته بعد رمي جمرة العقبة وقبل الحلق، فإن قلنا إنه يحل بالرمي لم يفسد نسكه لأن الوطء وقع بعد التحلل الأول، والوطء لا يفسد النسك إلا إذا كان قبل التحلل الأول، وأيضاً لا نوجب عليه فدية إلا شاة، وإذا قلنا إنه لم يحل ألزمناه ببدنة، فأيهما الأحوط الآن؟ الجواب: الأحوط أن يتحلل بالرمي، وألا نلزمه بشيء لم يتبين لنا لزومه، ولكن إذا قلنا: إنه لا يتحلل إلا بالرمي والحلق صار أحوط من جهة أننا نمنعه من محظورات الإحرام حتى يحلق. ولعلنا نقول: ما دامت المسألة لم تتبين فلنتبع الأسهل، فإن جاءنا رجل يسأل أنه جامع بعد رمي جمرة العقبة وقبل الحلق نقول له حجك لم يفسد؛ لأنه ليس عندنا ما نستطيع به أن نجشمه المصاعب بأن نقول: حجك فاسد وعليك أن تمضي فيه وأن تقضيه من العام القادم وأن تفدي فعلك ببدنة، وأما إذا جاء يسأل هل يجوز أن يلبس ويتطيب قبل الحلق؟ قلنا: لا؛ لأن هذا أحوط وأبرأ للذمة. والفقهاء ﵏ توسعوا في ذلك، فقالوا: إذا فعل اثنين من ثلاثة حل التحلل الأول، فلو رمى وحلق، أو رمى