Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (14/265)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

As for the sunnah, they said: The Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, said to Unays, may Allah be pleased with him: “Go to this man’s wife, and if she confesses, then stone her.” (1) He did not say, “unless she retracts.” Since he did not state this despite the need for it to be stated, it is known that it is not a condition that she must not retract her confession before the prescribed punishment is carried out on her. For a condition must be fulfilled; otherwise, the ruling cannot be implemented without its fulfillment.

They said: As for your claim that Māʿiz, may Allah be pleased with him, retracted his confession, this is a statement made without knowledge. Māʿiz, may Allah be pleased with him, never retracted his confession. His fleeing does not in any way indicate that he retracted his confession. Whoever claims that this constituted a retraction of his confession has spoken without knowledge. Allah, Exalted is He, has forbidden us to speak without knowledge, as He says:

“Do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge.” [Quran 17:36]

Yes, Māʿiz’s flight may have been a retraction of his request for the prescribed punishment to be carried out on him. At first, he wanted the prescribed punishment to be carried out on him, but later he wanted it not to be carried out, with his repentance being between him and Allah. This is why the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Why did you not leave him, so that he might repent and Allah would accept his repentance?” (2) This indicates that the ruling of the confession remained in force, for one repents only from zina. The Messenger did not say, “Why did you not leave him, because his confession had been nullified?” Rather, he said: “Why did you not leave him, so that he might repent and Allah would accept his repentance?”

Accordingly, the hadith contains no evidence for what you have claimed; rather, it—

(1) Its sourcing has already been given on p. 225. (2) Recorded by Abu Dawud, Kitab al-Hudud, chapter: “The Stoning of Ma'iz ibn Malik” (3836), and by Ahmad (5:216-217), on the authority of Nu'aym ibn Hazzal. It was also narrated in abbreviated form by al-Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Hudud, chapter: “What Has Been Reported Regarding Averting the Prescribed Punishment ...” (1348), on the authority of Abu Hurayrah; he graded it hasan (sound).

وأما السنة قالوا: لأن الرسول ﷺ قال لأنيس ﵁: «واغدُ إلى امرأة هذا فإن اعترفت فارجمها» (١)، ولم يقل: ما لم ترجع، وإذا كان لم يقله مع أن الحاجة تدعو إليه عُلم أنه ليس بشرط ألاَّ يرجع في إقراره حتى يتم عليه الحد؛ لأن الشرط لا بد أن يتم، وإلا لا يمكن أن يطبق الحكم بغير تمام الشرط. قالوا: وأما قولكم: إن ماعزاً ﵁ رجع عن إقراره، فهذا قول بلا علم، وماعز ﵁ ما رجع عن إقراره أبداً، وهربُهُ لا يدل على رجوعه عن إقراره إطلاقاً، ومن ادعى أن ذلك رجوع عن إقراره فقد قال قولاً بلا علم، وقد حرَّم الله ﷿ علينا أن نقول بلا علم في قوله: ﴿وَلَا تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ﴾ [الإسراء: ٣٦]، نعم، ماعز هربه قد يكون رجوعاً عن طلب إقامة الحد عليه، فهو في الأول يريد أن يقام عليه الحد، وفي الثاني أراد ألاَّ يقام عليه الحد، وتكون التوبة بينه وبين الله، ولهذا قال الرسول ﷺ: «هلاّ تركتموه يتوب فيتوب الله عليه» (٢)، فدل هذا على أن حكم الإقرار باقٍ؛ لأنه لا توبة إلا من زنا، ما قال الرسول: هلا تركتموه؛ لأنه ارتفع إقراره، بل قال: «هلا تركتموه يتوب فيتوب الله عليه». وحينئذٍ لا يكون في الحديث دليل على ما زعتمم، بل إن

(١) سبق تخريجه ص (٢٢٥). (٢) أخرجه أبو داود في الحدود/ باب رجم ماعز بن مالك (٣٨٣٦)، وأحمد (٥/ ٢١٦ ـ ٢١٧) عن نعيم بن هزال ﵁. ورواه الترمذي مختصراً في الحدود/ باب ما جاء في درء الحد … (١٣٤٨)، عن أبي هريرة ﵁ وحسّنه.