Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (15/63)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

and his son were to embrace, for example, the Jewish faith or Christianity, then—according to the stronger view—his slaughtered animal would be lawful, because he falls under the general import of Allah’s saying:

“And the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you.” [al-Ma'idah 5:5]

Some people in our time have cast doubt on the lawfulness of the slaughtered animals of Jews and Christians, saying that Jews and Christians today do not profess Judaism or Christianity. This is incorrect. Yes, if they were to say, “We do not profess these religions, nor do we regard them as religions,” then their apostasy would be clear. But if they say that they profess them, while holding beliefs of polytheism, that does not prevent this ruling. The evidence is that Allah, Most High, revealed Surat al-Ma'idah, in which He related what He related of the Christians’ assertion of the Trinity and declared them disbelievers on account of it. He, Glorified be He, said:

“Those who say, ‘Allah is the third of three,’ have certainly disbelieved.” [al-Ma'idah 5:73]

Yet, in this very surah, He, Glorified be He, says:

“And the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you.” [al-Ma'idah 5:5]

Thus, the Quran was revealed after they had altered and changed their religion—indeed, after they had disbelieved—yet it still declared their slaughtered animals and their women lawful. Accordingly, so long as these people say that they profess Christianity or Judaism, they are subject to the rulings applicable to Jews and Christians, even if they have introduced alteration and change, unless they say that they are apostates.

His statement: “even if he is an adolescent.” An adolescent is one who has approached puberty. The apparent sense of the author’s words is that the slaughtered animal of a discerning child—one younger than an adolescent—is not lawful. However, the established school’s position differs: the slaughtered animal of a discerning child is lawful, because he is rational and capable of intentional action; hence, his slaughter is lawful.

A discerning child has been said to be one who has reached seven years of age, and it has also been said: one who understands speech

وأن ابنه اعتنق دين اليهود مثلاً، أو دين النصارى، فإن ذبيحته ـ على القول الراجح ـ حلال؛ لأنه داخل في عموم قوله تعالى: ﴿وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَكُمْ﴾ [المائدة: ٥]. وقد شكك بعض الناس في عصرنا في حل ذبيحة اليهودي والنصراني، وقال: إنهم الآن لا يدينون بدين اليهود، ولا النصارى، وهذا ليس بصواب، نعم إن قالوا: نحن لا ندين بهذه الأديان، ولا نعتبرها ديناً، فإن ردتهم واضحة، أما إذا قالوا: إنهم يدينون بها، ولكن عندهم شركاً، فإن ذلك لا يمنع، بدليل أن الله ـ تعالى ـ أنزل سورة المائدة، وحكى فيها عن النصارى ما حكى من القول بالتثليث، وكفَّرهم بذلك، فقال سبحانه: ﴿لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلَاثَةٍ﴾ [المائدة: ٧٣]، وفي نفس هذه السورة قال سبحانه: ﴿وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَكُمْ﴾ [المائدة: ٥]، فالقرآن نزل بعد أن غيَّروا وبدَّلوا، بل بعد أن كفروا، ومع ذلك أحل ذبائحهم ونساءهم، وعلى هذا، فما دام هؤلاء يقولون: إنهم يدينون بدين النصارى، أو بدين اليهود فإن لهم حكم اليهود والنصارى، ولو كان عندهم تبديل وتغيير، ما لم يقولوا: إنهم مرتدون. قوله: «ولو مراهقاً» المراهق من قارب البلوغ، فظاهر كلام الماتن أن المميز ـ الذي دون المراهقة ـ لا تحل ذبيحته، ولكن المذهب خلاف ذلك، وأن المميز تحلّ ذبيحته؛ لأنه عاقل يصح منه القَصْد، فتحل ذبيحته. والمميز قيل: مَن بلغ سبع سنين، وقيل: من فهم الخطاب