Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

her sister through breastfeeding. Yet the judge rules that she is his wife, because the basic presumption is that the marriage remains in effect, while the claim of breastfeeding is a claim that invalidates the marriage. The presumption is validity unless evidence establishing invalidity is produced. This is one consideration.

A second consideration is that, if we accepted her statement, we would be nullifying her husband’s right; and no one’s statement can be accepted to nullify another person’s right without evidence.

The third consideration is that, if we accepted the statement of every woman who said to her husband, “You are my brother through breastfeeding,” much evil would result. Any woman who no longer wanted her husband could say, “He is my brother through breastfeeding.”

As for the reality before Allah, if she is indeed his sister through breastfeeding, then the marriage is invalid; but if she is not his sister, it is valid both outwardly and in reality.

With regard to the husband: if the man knows that this wife is upright, trustworthy, and loves him, but it becomes clear to her that she is his sister through breastfeeding, then he must believe her. But if he does not know her well, has doubts about her, or considers it more likely that she is lying, then he is not required to believe her.

His statement: “If there is doubt concerning the breastfeeding, or whether it was complete, or if the nursing woman herself is uncertain, and there is no evidence, then no prohibition is established”—these are very important issues. If there is doubt about the breastfeeding—that is, if the child’s family are uncertain whether he nursed from this woman or not—then no prohibition is established, because the basic presumption is that no breastfeeding took place. Likewise, if there is doubt as to whether it was complete—for example, they say, “Yes, the child nursed from this woman several times, but we do not know whether he nursed five times or fewer”—then no prohibition is established, because the basic presumption is permissibility. Here, nothing has been established with certainty except fewer than five feedings. This is among the most common occurrences, for those who always

أخته من الرضاع، لكن القاضي يحكم بأنها زوجته؛ لأن الأصل بقاء النكاح، ودعوى الرضاع دعوى إبطال النكاح، والأصل الصحة حتى يقوم الدليل على الفساد، هذا من جهة. ومن جهة أخرى أننا لو قبلنا قولها لأسقطنا حق زوجها، ولا يمكن لأحد أن يقبل قوله في إسقاط حق غيره إلا ببينة. والجهة الثالثة: أننا لو قبلنا قول كل امرأة قالت لزوجها: أنت أخي للرضاع لحصل شر كثير، فكل امرأة لا تريد زوجها تقول: هو أخي من الرضاع. أما في الباطن فإن كانت أخته من الرضاع فالنكاح باطل، وإن لم تكن أخته فهو صحيح ظاهراً وباطناً. أما بالنسبة للزوج فإن كان الرجل يعرف أن هذه الزوجة صالحة، وأمينة، وأنها تحبه، لكن تبين لها أنها أخته من الرضاع فالواجب عليه أن يصدقها، وإذا كان لا يدري عنها، أو يشك، أو يغلب على ظنه أنها كاذبة فإنه لا يلزمه أن يصدقها. قوله: «وَإِذَا شُكَّ في الرَّضَاعِ أَوْ كَمَالِهِ أَوْ شَكَّتِ المُرْضِعَةُ وَلَا بَيِّنَةَ فَلَا تَحْرِيمَ» هذه مسائل مهمة جداً، إذا شُك في الرضاع، يعني أن أهل الطفل شَكُّوا هل رضع من هذه المرأة أم لا؟ فلا تحريم؛ لأن الأصل عدم الرضاع، وإذا شُك في كماله، بأن قالوا: نعم الطفل رضع من هذه المرأة عدة مرات، لكن لا ندري أرضع خمساً أم دون ذلك؟ فلا تحريم؛ لأن الأصل الحل، وهنا لم نتيقن إلا ما دون الخمس، وهذا من أكثر ما يقع، فدائماً الذين

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