Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (13/51)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

until this time is forbidden, so you face a dilemma: which view do you deem preponderant? In such matters, adopting a precautionary approach is not feasible. The student of knowledge therefore has no option but to follow one course, exerting himself as much as he can to determine which of the two views is correct, seeking Allah’s guidance and acting upon it. If he follows that view for a period of time on the basis that it is correct, then it later becomes clear to him that the truth lies in the contrary view, there is no objection to his returning to it; rather, he must return once the truth has become clear to him.

Then, if he issues a legal verdict contrary to what he had previously held, is his latter verdict considered a retraction or not? The answer is that it is not considered a retraction, and he is regarded as having two positions on the issue—unless he explicitly states that he has retracted his former view, or explicitly confines his position, for example, to this latter view. In that case, it is considered a retraction. Thus, if an independent jurist issues one legal verdict and subsequently issues another contrary to it, we say that this falls under one of three cases:

The first: he issues the latter verdict and remains silent regarding the former.

The second: he issues the latter verdict and explicitly states that he has retracted the former.

The third: he issues the latter verdict and provides an indication that his position is confined to it.

In the first case, he has two positions on the issue, and we do not say that he has retracted. This is because, as is well known, at one time an independent jurist may consider one view to be correct; then, for example, evidences that had not previously become clear to him may come to his attention, or the issue may be discussed, and through that discussion certain matters emerge and become clear, causing his independent judgment to change. Yet, as the scholars have said: one exercise of independent reasoning is not overturned by another. For this reason, Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, has

إلى هذا الوقت حرام، فأنت في مشكلة، فما ترجح؟ فمثل هذه المسائل جانب الاحتياط فيها يكون متعذراً، فلا يبقى أمام طالب العلم إلا أن يسلك طريقاً واحداً، ويجتهد بقدر ما يستطيع في معرفة الصواب من القولين، ويستخير الله ويمشي عليه، وإذا مشى على هذا برهة من الزمن بناء على أن هذا القول هو الصواب، ثم تبين له أن الصواب في خلافه فلا مانع أن يرجع، بل يجب أن يرجع إذا تبين له الحق. ثم إذا أفتى بخلاف ما كان يقوله من قبل، فهل تعتبر الفتوى الأخيرة رجوعاً أو لا؟ الجواب: لا تعتبر رجوعاً، ويكون له في المسألة قولان، إلا إذا صرح بالرجوع، أو صرح بحصر قوله في هذا الأخير مثلاً، فإنه يعتبر رجوعاً، فإذا أفتى المجتهد بفتوى ثم أفتى بخلافها أخيراً، نقول: هذه لا تخلو من ثلاث حالات: الأولى: أن يفتي بالأخير ويسكت عن الأول. الثانية: أن يفتي بالأخير ويصرح بأنه رجع عن الأول. الثالثة: أن يفتي بالأخير، ويأتي بما يدل على انحصار قوله فيه. ففي الحال الأولى: يكون له في المسألة قولان، ولا نقول: إنه رجع؛ لأن المجتهد كما هو معلوم يرى في وقت من الأوقات أن الصواب في هذا، ثم ـ مثلاً ـ ترد عليه أدلة ما بانت له من قبل، أو يأتي في المسألة مناقشة، ثم مع المناقشة تحصل أشياء وتتبين فيختلف اجتهاده، ولكن كما قال العلماء: الاجتهاد لا ينقض بالاجتهاد، ولهذا فالإمام أحمد ﵀ يكون عنه