Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (14/246)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

the private part of an animal is never lawful; thus, it is like sodomy. However, the hadith is weak. Therefore, when the scholars deemed the hadith weak, they adopted the lesser of the two measures: killing the animal. As for the human being, he is not to be killed, for his sanctity is greater; rather, he is to be subjected to discretionary punishment, because this is an act of disobedience. The general rule is that discretionary punishment is obligatory for every sin for which there is neither a prescribed punishment nor an expiation.

If someone were to ask: What is the evidence that intercourse with an animal is sinful?

We reply: Allah, Exalted is He, says:

“Those who guard their private parts, except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for then they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that, then they are the transgressors.” [al-Mu’minun 23:5–7]

Thus, anything beyond wives and those whom one’s right hand possesses is considered transgression and wrongdoing.

The apparent meaning of the author’s words is that there is no difference between fornication or adultery with women who are unmarriageable relatives and with others. However, the correct view is that fornication or adultery with an unmarriageable relative entails execution in every case, based on an authentic hadith reported concerning this (1). This is also one narration from Ahmad, and it is the sound position. Ibn al-Qayyim likewise preferred it in his book al-Jawab al-Kafi: whoever commits fornication or adultery with an unmarriageable relative is to be executed in every case, such as if he commits fornication or adultery

(1) Its wording is: “If a man says to another man, ‘O Jew,’ flog him twenty lashes; and if he says, ‘O mukhannath (effeminate man),’ flog him twenty lashes; and whoever has intercourse with a mahram relative, kill him.” Reported by Ahmad (1/300), al-Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Hudud, chapter on what has been reported regarding one who says to another, “O mukhannath” (1462), and Ibn Majah, Kitab al-Hudud, chapter on one who has intercourse with a mahram relative or with an animal (2564), on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him. Al-Hakim authenticated it (4/356). See: Nasb al-Rayah (3/343) and al-Irwa (2352).

فرج البهيمة لا يحل بحال، فيكون كاللواط، ولكن الحديث ضعيف؛ ولهذا عدل أهل العلم لمَّا ضَعُف الحديث عندهم إلى أخف الأمرين، وهو قتل البهيمة، وأما الآدمي فلا يقتل؛ لأن حرمته أعظم، ولكن يعزر؛ لأن ذلك معصية، والقاعدة العامة أن التعزير واجب في كل معصية لا حد فيها ولا كفارة. فإن قال قائل: ما الدليل على أن إتيان البهيمة معصية؟ قلنا: قوله تعالى: ﴿وَالَّذِينَ هُمْ لِفُرُوجِهِمْ حَافِظُونَ *إِلاَّ عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ غَيْرُ مَلُومِينَ *فَمَنِ ابْتَغَى وَرَاءَ ذَلِكَ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْعَادُونَ *﴾ [المؤمنون:٧]، فأيُّ شيء وراء الأزواج وملك اليمين، يعتبر عدواناً وظلماً. وظاهر كلام المؤلف: أنه لا فرق بين الزنا بذوات المحارم وغيرهم، ولكن الصحيح أن الزنا بذوات المحارم فيه القتل بكل حال لحديث صحيح ورد في ذلك (١)، وهو رواية عن أحمد وهي الصحيحة، واختار ذلك ابن القيم في كتاب الجواب الكافي أن الذي يزني بذات محرم منه فإنه يقتل بكل حال، مثل ما لو زنا

(١) ولفظه: «إذا قال الرجل للرجل: يا يهودي فاضربوه عشرين، وإذا قال: يا مخنث فاضربوه عشرين، ومن وقع على ذات محرم فاقتلوه»، أخرجه أحمد (١/ ٣٠٠)، والترمذي في الحدود باب ما جاء فيمن يقول لآخر: يا مخنث (١٤٦٢)، وابن ماجه في الحدود باب من أتى ذات محرم ومن أتى بهيمة (٢٥٦٤) عن ابن عباس ﵄ وصححه الحاكم (٤/ ٣٥٦)، انظر: نصب الراية (٣/ ٣٤٣)، والإرواء (٢٣٥٢).