Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (12/436)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

remained among the Mothers of the Believers, nor would she have been his wife in the Hereafter. As for its being an act of compassion toward the Messenger, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, it was because she gave it to the most beloved of his wives to him.

In the second case, she gives her allotted turn to the husband, and he himself designates whomever he wishes.

If someone were to ask: Why do you not say that, if she gives her allotted turn to the husband, her own right lapses while the rights of the other wives remain? For example, if she is the fourth wife and gives her allotted turn to the husband, he must divide his time over three nights, because he may not single out one of the remaining wives for it. If he were to single out one of the remaining wives, that would mean that he had shown preference toward her.

We would answer: If she gives her allotted turn to the husband, what ought to follow is that her right lapses, as though the husband had only the three remaining wives. In this way, fairness is maintained among the other wives—unless he gives them a choice, saying: “Do you choose for her right to lapse, so that the division of time is among you; or do you choose that we draw lots, and whichever of you receives the lot will have that day?” If they choose this, there is no problem. Thus, we say: if they choose to draw lots, there is no problem; otherwise, the stronger view is that, when she gives her allotted turn to him, her right lapses and the division of time remains among the wives who remain. The author, however, holds that if she gives her allotted turn to him, he may assign it wherever he wishes.

His statement, “If she retracts it, he must allot her a turn thereafter,” means that after giving her allotted turn to him or to another wife, she may retract it, and he must allot her a turn in the future, without making up for what has passed. This is the significance of his saying, “thereafter.” If someone were to ask: Does not a gift become binding upon possession?

We reply: Yes, but they say that possession has not taken place here, because the days

تبقَ من أمهات المؤمنين، ولم تكن زوجة له في الآخرة، وأما كونه شفقة على الرسول ﷺ فلأنها وهبته لأحب نسائه إليه. أما الصورة الثانية فتهب القسم للزوج، والزوج هو الذي يعين من شاء. فإن قال قائل: لماذا لا تقولون: إذا وهبت قسمها للزوج سقط حقها، وبقي حق الزوجات؟ فمثلاً إذا كانت هي الرابعة ووهبت قسمها للزوج يجب عليه القسم ثلاث ليالٍ؛ لأنه ليس له أن يخص به إحدى الزوجات الباقيات؛ لأنه إذا خص به إحدى الزوجات الباقيات فمعناه أنه مال إليها، فنقول: إذا وهبت قسمها للزوج، فالذي ينبغي أن يسقط حقها، وكأن الزوج ليس له إلا الثلاث الباقيات، وبهذا يكون العدل بين بقية الزوجات، إلا أن يخيرهن، فيقول: هل تخترن أن نسقط حقها، ويكون القسم بينكن، أو تخترن أن نضرب القرعة فمن خرجت لها القرعة، فيوم تلك لها؟ فإذا اخترن ذلك فلا حرج، وعلى هذا فنقول: إذا اخترن القرعة فلا حرج، وإلا فإن المتوجه أنها إذا وهبت قسمها له سقط حقها، وبقي القسم بين الموجودات الباقيات، أما المؤلف فيرى أنها إذا وهبت قسمها له فإنه يضعه حيث شاء. قوله: «فإن رجعت قسم لها مستقبلاً» يعني بعد أن وهبت القسم له، أو لزوجةٍ أخرى فإن لها أن ترجع، ويقسم لها في المستقبل، ولا يقضي ما مضى، وهذا فائدة قوله «مستقبلاً»، فإن قال قائل: أليست الهبة تلزم بالقبض؟ قلنا: بلى، لكنهم قالوا: هنا ما حصل القبض؛ لأن الأيام