Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (14/261)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

If someone were to adopt a middle position and say that, when the matter has become widely known and is clear, a single confession is sufficient, whereas when it has not become widely known, the confession must be repeated four times—then this view would incorporate both opinions: repetition would be required in one case but not in another.

His words, “in one sitting or several sittings”: this is the second condition. The author mentioned one sitting or several sittings because some scholars maintain that it must take place in a single sitting; if it occurs over several sittings, it is not valid, as will be discussed regarding testimony.

His words, “and he must explicitly mention the reality of intercourse”: the confessor must explicitly state the actual intercourse, rather than allude to it euphemistically. Thus, he should say that he penetrated her, using these explicit words. It is not sufficient for him to say, “I came to her,” “I was with her,” or “I committed illicit sexual intercourse with her.” His statement, “I came to her,” may merely mean that he visited her, and is therefore open to interpretation. Likewise, “I was with her” may mean that he met with her somewhere. This is why it is said, “The final -n ending does not accompany the construct state”—meaning that it does not go along with it or join it. Similarly, saying, “I committed illicit sexual intercourse with her,” is insufficient, for he may regard something that is not zina as zina—for example, he may think that kissing, looking, or enjoying what is short of intercourse constitutes zina, and the like. Therefore, he must state it explicitly.

When the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said to Ma'iz, “Perhaps you kissed, winked, or looked?” he replied, “No.” The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, then said to him, “Did you penetrate her?” (1) He used these explicit words rather than a euphemism. The Messenger did not use euphemistic language, even though it was not known of him, peace and blessings be upon him, that he spoke explicitly about intercourse except in this case. He said to him, “Do you know what

(1) Narrated by al-Bukhari in Kitab al-Hudud (Prescribed Punishments), chapter: “Should the imam say to one who confesses: ‘Perhaps you merely touched or winked’?” no. 6824, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both. Its source reference has previously been given on p. 258.

ولو قال قائل بقول وسط بأنه إذا اشتهر الأمر واتضح فإنه يُكتفى فيه بالإقرار مرة واحدة، بخلاف ما لم يشتهر فإنه لا بد فيه من تكرار الإقرار أربعاً، وعلى هذا يكون هذا القول آخذاً بالقولين، فيشترط التكرار في حال، ولا يشترط في حال أخرى. قوله: «فِي مَجْلِسٍ أَوْ مَجَالِسَ» هذا هو الشرط الثاني، وأشار المؤلف إلى مجلس أو مجالس؛ لأن بعض أهل العلم يقول: لا بد أن يكون ذلك في مجلس واحد، وأما إذا كان في مجالس فلا يصح، كما سيأتي في الشهادة. قوله: «وَيُصَرِّحَ بِذِكْرِ حَقِيقَةِ الوَطْءِ» فيصرح المُقِر بذكر حقيقة الوطء، لا كناية الوطء، فيقول: إنه ناكها بهذا اللفظ، ولا يكفي أن يقول: أتيتها، أو جامعتها، أو زنيت بها؛ لأن قوله: «أتيتها» يمكن أتاها زائراً، ففيه احتمال، و «جامعتها» يعني اجتمعت معها في مكان، ولهذا يقال: التنوين لا يجامع الإضافة، والمعنى أنه لا يصاحبها ولا يجتمع معها، كذلك «زنى بها» لا يكفي، فربما يظن أن ما ليس بزنا زنا، مثل أن يظن التقبيل زنا، والنظر زنا، والاستمتاع بما دون الفرج، وما أشبه ذلك، ولهذا لا بد أن يصرح، ولما قال الرسول ﷺ لماعز: «لعلك قبَّلت، أو نظرت، أو غمزت»، قال: لا، فقال له النبي ﷺ: «أنكتها؟» (١) بهذا اللفظ لا يكني، فالرسول ما كنَّى، مع أنه ما عُهد عنه أنه ﷺ تكلم بصريح الوطء، إلا في هذه المسألة، فقال له: «أتدري ما

(١) أخرجه البخاري في الحدود/ باب هل يقول الإمام للمقر: لعلك لمست أو غمزت (٦٨٢٤)، عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما، وقد مر تخريجه ص (٢٥٨).