Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (8/86)

consider this permissible. If he refuses to abide by the rulings of Islam, his covenant is nullified.

His statement, “or transgresses against a Muslim by killing”: If he transgresses against a Muslim by killing him, his covenant is nullified, even if the heirs of the slain person pardon him. This is because, if the heirs demand retaliation, he is executed in retaliation; otherwise, he is not executed. Yet with respect to the covenant, it is nullified, because if he kills this person, he may kill another.

His statement, “or adultery”: Likewise, if he transgresses against a Muslim through adultery, then if he commits adultery with a Muslim woman—even with her consent—his covenant is nullified, because he is required to abide by the rulings of Islam. The same applies if he transgresses against a boy through sodomy: his covenant is nullified.

It is understood from the author’s statement, “if he transgresses against a Muslim by killing or adultery,” that if he transgresses against a non-Muslim like himself by killing or adultery, his covenant is not nullified. But what should be done with him?

The answer is: If the conditions for retaliation in a case of killing are fulfilled, he is executed in retaliation. In the case of adultery, if the parties bring their dispute before us, we carry out the prescribed punishment upon him. It has previously been mentioned that adultery is forbidden in all revealed laws, and that its prescribed punishment in the Torah is the same as its prescribed punishment in the Quran.

His statement, “or highway robbery”: That is, he transgresses by committing highway robbery, such as by waylaying people on the roads and openly seizing their wealth while armed. Whoever comes across him, he says to him, “Hand over your wealth,” and fights him. Such a person is a highway robber, and this act of his is regarded as a breach of the covenant.

His statement, “or espionage”: This is among the most heinous acts when he transgresses against the Muslims by espionage, transmitting the Muslims’ news to the enemy, for then

يرون ذلك، فإذا أبى التزام أحكام الإسلام انتقض عهده. قوله: «أو تعدى على مسلم بقتل» إذا تعدى على مسلم بأن قتل مسلماً فإن عهده ينتقض حتى لو عفا أولياء المقتول فإن عهده ينتقض؛ لأن أولياء المقتول إن طالبوا بالقصاص اقتص منه وإلا لم يقتص منه، لكن بالنسبة للعهد ينتقض؛ لأنه إذا قتل هذا يمكن أن يقتل آخر. قوله: «أو زنا» وكذلك إذا اعتدى على مسلم بزنا، فلو زنا بمسلمة ولو برضاها فإنه ينتقض عهده؛ لأن الواجب عليه أن يلتزم أحكام الإسلام، ومثل ذلك لو اعتدى على غلام بلواط فإنه ينتقض عهده. وعلم من قول المؤلف: «فإن تعدى على مسلم بقتل، أو زنا» أنه لو تعدى على كافر مثله بقتل أو زنا فإن عهده لا ينتقض، ولكن ماذا نصنع به؟. الجواب: إذا تمت شروط القصاص في القتل قتل قصاصاً، وفي الزنا إذا تحاكما إلينا أقمنا عليه الحد، وقد سبق أن الزنا محرم في جميع الشرائع، وأن حده في التوراة كحده في القرآن. قوله: «أو قطع طريق» أي: تعدى بقطع طريق، بأن كان يعترض الناس في الطرقات فيغصبهم المال مجاهرة ومعه السلاح، فمن جاء إليه قال له: سلم المال، وقاتله، فإن هذا قاطع طريق ويعتبر فعله هذا نقضاً للعهد. قوله: «أو تجسُّس» وهذا من أشر ما يكون إذا تعدى على المسلمين بالتجسس، فصار ينقل أخبار المسلمين إلى العدو، فإن