Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

a possibility. We may not state decisively that it is among the major sins; rather, we limit this to what has been specifically threatened with punishment. Whatever has not been specifically threatened with punishment falls under the general category of prohibited matters. This is its legal ruling. As for the consequential rulings, such as liability for compensation and the like, the author explains them in his statement:

“If he usurps a dog that may lawfully be kept, or the wine of a dhimmī, he must return them both; but he need not return the hide of a carcass …”

His statement, “a dog that may lawfully be kept,” means a dog which it is permissible to keep: namely, a dog for farming, hunting, or livestock. These are the dogs that may be kept; keeping any other kind is forbidden. Thus, if someone usurps a dog that may lawfully be kept and its owner demands it, he must return it, even though it is not property in the strict sense. Its owner nevertheless has an exclusive right to it, since he has the greatest claim to it and to its benefit.

If he usurps a dog that may not lawfully be kept, it is of no legal consequence, because its owner has no right to keep it; thus it is in the possession of one who has no entitlement to it.

Question: What is the ruling on keeping a dog that guards a person?

We say that it is permissible to keep a dog that guards a person. If keeping a dog to guard livestock is permissible, then guarding a person is even more deserving and appropriate. Likewise, if keeping a dog for hunting is permissible—although hunting is not a necessity, since a person can live without hunting—then keeping one for necessary purposes is even more justified.

As for keeping a dog in imitation of the disbelievers or out of pride, this is undoubtedly forbidden. A person’s reward is diminished every day by one or two qīrāṭs, in addition to the sin of imitating and following the disbelievers, and the baseness involved in it. For the dog is the filthiest of animals in terms of impurity: its impurity is not removed except by seven washings, one of them with soil, and there is no

احتمال، قد لا نجزم أنه من كبائر الذنوب ونقتصر على ما ورد فيه الوعيد، وما لم يرد فيه الوعيد يكون من المحرمات على وجه العموم، فهذا حكمه الشرعي، أما الأحكام الوضعية من ضمان ونحوه فبيَّنه المؤلف بقوله: وَإِنْ غَصَبَ كَلْباً يُقْتَنَى، أَوْ خَمْرَ ذِمِّيٍّ رَدَّهُمَا، وَلَا يَرُدُّ جِلْدَ مَيْتَةٍ ..... «وإن غصب كلباً يقتنى أو خمر ذمي ردهما» قوله: «كلباً يقتنى» أي: يحل اقتناؤه، وهو كلب الحرث، والصيد، والماشية، هذه هي الكلاب التي تقتنى وما عداها يحرم اقتناؤه، فإذا غصب كلباً يقتنى وطلبه صاحبه وجب رده، وإن لم يكن مالاً، لكن لصاحبه حق الاختصاص به؛ لأنه أولى الناس به، وأحق الناس بمنفعته. وإن غصب كلباً لا يقتنى فهدر؛ لأن صاحبه ليس له حق اقتنائه، فهو عند غير مستحق. مسألة: ما حكم اقتناء الكلب الذي يحرس الإنسان؟ نقول: إن الكلب الذي يحرس الإنسان يجوز اقتناؤه؛ لأنه إذا كان اقتناء الكلب لحراسة الماشية جائزاً فحراسة الإنسان أولى وأحرى، كذلك إذا كان اقتناء الكلب للصيد جائزاً ـ والصيد ليس أمراً ضرورياً؛ لأن الإنسان بإمكانه أن يعيش بدون صيد ـ فإن اقتناءه للأمور الضرورية من باب أولى. وأما اقتناء الكلب تشبهاً بالكفار وتفاخراً به فإن هذا لا شك حرام، ويَنقص من أجر الإنسان كل يوم قيراط أو قيراطان، مع ما في ذلك من إثم التشبه وتقليد الكفار، ومع ما في ذلك من الدناءة؛ لأن الكلب أخبث الحيوانات من حيث النجاسة، فإن نجاسته لا تطهر إلا بسبع غسلات إحداها بالتراب، ولا توجد

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies