Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (12/166)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

But this view is weak, because this analogy is set against an explicit text; and reasoning in opposition to a transmitted report is blindness, not reasoning. For everything that contradicts the textual evidence is false. It contradicts the saying of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him: “A woman should not ask for her sister to be divorced so that she may empty what is in her dish.” (1) He referred to sisterhood, which entails that one must not infringe upon her rights, and then gave the reason: “so that she may empty what is in her dish.” That is, this condition entails cutting off her provision from this husband who supports her. Yet this is the least of what it entails; otherwise, the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, mentioned the lesser harm so that the greater harm might be inferred from it. For her husband’s separation from her means the loss of marital companionship; and if she has children, it means separation from her children and their dispersal. This is more serious. Thus, the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, drew attention to the greater harms by mentioning the lesser one.

If we were to say that it is permissible, this would mean that we have contradicted the textual evidence and allowed a woman to stipulate it. Therefore, this condition falls under invalid conditions, not valid ones, because it contradicts the textual evidence.

As for their claim that she has a legitimate objective in this, we say: that is true, but it involves infringing upon the rights of another woman who is more firmly established with the husband than she is. Thus, their reasoning is countered by both a transmitted report and rational consideration. If he marries her on this condition, then consummates the marriage with her while retaining the first wife, she has no right to demand that he divorce her, because an invalid condition is as though it never existed.

His statement: “or that he not take a concubine or marry another woman.” The difference between taking a concubine and marrying is that the former means sexual relations by virtue of ownership of a female slave, whereas marriage is through a marriage contract. Thus, if a woman stipulates that her husband not take a concubine, and he accepts, then

(1) Its source has previously been cited on p. 32.

لكن هذا القول ضعيف؛ لأن هذا القياس في مقابلة النص، والنظر في مقابلة الأثر عمًى وليس بنظر؛ لأن كل شيء يخالف النص فهو باطل، يخالف قول رسول الله ﵊: «لا تسأل المرأة طلاق أختها» فأتى بالأخوة التي تستوجب عدم الاعتداء على حقها، ثم علل فقال: «لتكفأ ما في صحفتها» (١)، يعني فإن هذا الشرط موجب لقطع رزقها من هذا الزوج الذي ينفق عليها، وهذا أدنى ما يوجبه، وإلا فالرسول ﷺ ذكر الأدنى ليُستدل به على الأعلى، ففراق زوجها لها فراق العشرة، وإن كانت ذات أولاد ففراق أولاد، وتشتتهم، وهذا أعظم، فالرسول ﵊ نبه بأدنى المفاسد على أعلاها. فإذا قلنا بجوازه، فمعنى ذلك أننا خالفنا النص، وأبحنا للمرأة أن تشترطه، إذاً هذا الشرط يدخل في الشروط الفاسدة لا في الشروط الصحيحة؛ لمخالفته للنص. وقولهم: إن لها في ذلك غرضاً مقصوداً، نقول: صحيح لكن فيه اعتداء على غيرها ممن هي أمكن منها بزوجها، فيكون هذا النظر الذي قالوه مقابَلاً بأثر ونظر، فلو تزوجها على هذا الشرط، ثم دخل بها وأمسك الأولى فليس لها أن تطالبه بطلاقها؛ لأن الشرط الفاسد كأن لم يكن. قوله: «أو أن لا يتسرى أو لا يتزوج عليها» الفرق بين التسري والتزوج، أن التسري الوطء بملك اليمين، والتزوج عقد النكاح، فإذا اشترطت امرأة أن لا يتسرى عليها زوجها، فقبل فإن

(١) سبق تخريجه ص (٣٢).