Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (13/257)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

of food sufficient for sixty needy persons to a single needy person, it would not suffice.

Likewise, if he fed thirty people twice, that would not suffice, because the number is explicitly stipulated and must therefore be observed—unless he can find only thirty needy persons. In that case, we say: there is no harm in doing so out of necessity.

If someone were to ask: What is the wisdom behind fasting two consecutive months or feeding sixty needy persons? We say: this question does not arise, for there is no scope here for human reason. Otherwise, we would say: Why were the prayers made five?! Rather, the believer’s duty is submission: to say, “We hear and we obey.”

If someone were to ask: Is feeding sixty needy persons linked to fasting two consecutive months, in the sense that feeding one needy person has been prescribed in place of each day’s fast? Apparently, it is not. The evidence is that if he fasted two consecutive months consisting of fifty-eight days, it would suffice, because Allah Most High says, “fasting for two consecutive months.” Thus, if the first month is incomplete and the second is incomplete, and he fasts fifty-eight days, it suffices.

A slave is not required except of one who owns one, or who is able to acquire one for its customary price, beyond what he permanently requires for his own maintenance, the maintenance of those whom he supports, and what he needs of housing, a servant, and a means of transport, ……………………

His statement, “A slave is not required except of one who owns one,” means that he has one presently in his possession and ownership.

His statement, “or who is able to acquire one,” means that he is able to own one. He does not have a slave, but he has money with which he can purchase one. However, the author stipulates:

“for its customary price.” Thus, if he can find a slave only for more than its customary price, it is not required of him.

بما يكفي ستين مسكيناً على مسكين واحد لا يجزئ. ولو أطعم ثلاثين مرتين لا يكفي؛ لأن العدد منصوص عليه، فلا بد من اتباعه، اللهم إلا ألا يجد إلا ثلاثين مسكيناً فهنا نقول: لا بأس للضرورة. فلو قال قائل: ما الحكمة في أن يصوم شهرين متتابعين، أو يطعم ستين مسكيناً؟ نقول: هذا السؤال غير وارد؛ لأن هذا لا مجال للعقل فيه، وإلا لقلنا: كيف صارت الصلوات خمساً؟! وإنما وظيفة المؤمن التسليم، وأن يقول: سمعنا وأطعنا. فإن قال قائل: وهل إطعام الستين مسكيناً مربوط بصيام الشهرين المتتابعين، بمعنى أنه جعل عن صيام كل يوم إطعام مسكين؟ الظاهر: لا، بدليل أنه لو صام شهرين متتابعين ثمانية وخمسين يوماً أجزأ؛ لأن الله تعالى قال: صيام شهرين، فإذا كان الشهر الأول ناقصاً، والثاني ناقصاً فصام ثمانية وخمسين يوماً لأجزأ. وَلَا تَلْزَمُ الرَّقَبَةُ إِلاَّ لِمَنْ مَلَكَها، أَوْ أَمْكَنَهُ ذلِكَ بِثَمَنِ مِثْلِهَا، فَاضِلاً عَنْ كِفَايَتِهِ دَائِماً، وَكِفَايَةِ مَنْ يَمُونُهُ، وَعَمَّا يَحْتَاجُهُ مِنْ مَسْكَنٍ وَخَادِمٍ وَمَرْكُوبٍ، ........................ قوله: «ولا تلزم الرقبة إلا لمن ملكها» يعني كانت عنده حاضرة تحت ملكه. قوله: «أو أمكنه ذلك» أي: أمكنه ملكها، فليس عنده رقيق، لكن عنده دراهم يمكنه أن يشتري بها رقبة، لكن اشترط المؤلف فقال: «بثمن مثلها» فلو لم يجد رقبة إلا بأكثر من ثمن مثلها لم تلزمه.