Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (10/30)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

except for benefits; it cannot be made for discrete parts. A similar case is what people used to do in the past: a person would have guests, so he would lease his neighbour’s cow for a day or two in order to take its milk. According to the school, this is not permissible, because the milk is unknown, and milking it is likewise uncertain: some animals refuse to yield milk and will not allow themselves to be milked.

However, the wet nurse is excepted. A wet nurse is one who nurses another woman’s child. Thus, a person may hire a woman to nurse his child for a known wage, even though the object of the contract is the milk. The jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, faced an obvious objection: it was said to them, “Hiring a wet nurse is permissible by the explicit text of the Quran.” Allah, Exalted is He, says:

“Mothers may nurse their children two complete years for whoever wishes to complete the nursing period. Upon the father is the mothers’ provision and clothing according to what is acceptable.” [al-Baqarah: 233]

And He says:

“If they nurse your children, then give them their payment.”

And He says:

“And if you disagree, then another woman will nurse the child for him.” [al-Talaq: 6]

So what difference is there between human milk and the milk of other animals?

Some of them replied with an unsound answer, saying: “A human being is hired only so that she may take the child, place him in her lap, put the breast into his mouth, and the like; whereas an animal does not do this.” Yet it stands still for the one suckling from it, waits patiently, and spreads its legs; there is no doubt that it serves him. Is it conceivable that someone would hire a wet nurse to nurse his child merely so that she may take him, place him in her lap, and put the breast into his mouth, if there were nothing in the breast?! This is absolutely inconceivable. Thus, the intended object is undoubtedly the milk; these are merely means of obtaining the milk. The primary intended object is the milk. Since we are reasoning by analogy, we must say that leasing an animal in order to take its milk is permissible by analogy with the wet nurse, and this

إلا على منافع، لا تكون على أجزاء، ومثل ذلك ما كانوا يستعملونه قديماً، يكون عند الإنسان ضيوف فيستأجر من جاره بقرته لمدة يوم أو يومين من أجل أخذ اللبن، فعلى المذهب لا يجوز؛ لأن اللبن مجهول، ثم حلبها ـ أيضاً ـ مجهول، فبعض البهائم تمنع الحليب لا ترضى أن تحلب، لكن «الظئر» مستثنى، والظئر هي المرضعة لولد غيرها، فيجوز للإنسان أن يستأجر امرأة ترضع ولده بأجرة معلومة، مع أن المعقود عليه هو اللبن، والفقهاء ﵏ أورد عليهم إيراد واضح، قيل لهم: إن الظئر إجارتها جائزة بنص القرآن، قال الله ﵎: ﴿وَالْوَالِدَاتُ يُرْضِعْنَ أَوْلَادَهُنَّ حَوْلَيْنِ كَامِلَيْنِ لِمَنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يُتِمَّ الرَّضَاعَةَ وَعَلَى الْمَولُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ﴾ [البقرة: ٢٣٣] وقال: ﴿فَإِنْ أَرْضَعْنَ لَكُمْ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ﴾ وقال: ﴿وَإِنْ تَعَاسَرْتُمْ فَسَتُرْضِعُ لَهُ أُخْرَى﴾ [الطلاق: ٦] فأي فرق بين لبن الآدمية ولبن غير الآدمية؟! أجاب بعضهم بجواب ليس بسديد، فقال: لأن الآدمية إنما تستأجر لأجل أخذ الطفل ووضعه في حجرها وإلقامه الثدي وما أشبه ذلك، والحيوان لا يفعل هذا، لكنه يقف لما يرضعه ويتأنى ويفتح رجليه فلا شك أنه يخدمه، فهل من المعقول أن الإنسان يستأجر مرضعة ترضع ولده من أجل أن تأخذه وتضعه في حجرها وتلقمه الثدي، إذا لم يكن في الثدي شيء؟! ما يمكن أبداً، إذاً المقصود هو اللبن لا شك، لكن هذه وسائل إلى الحصول على اللبن، فالمقصود أولاً هو اللبن، وما دمنا قياسيين يجب أن نقول: إن استئجار الحيوان لأخذ لبنه جائز بالقياس على الظئر، وهذا