Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (15/130)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

and expiation conceals the sin. Wrongfully taking another’s property is either by claiming something to which one has no right or by denying something one owes; and this concerns a past matter, not a future one.

If he knowingly swears falsely concerning a past matter, then it is the engulfing oath, ………………

His statement, “If he swears”: the subject is an implicit pronoun, understood as “he”—that is, the person.

His statement, “concerning a past matter”: this excludes the future, for it has already been mentioned that an oath concerning the future is a binding oath.

His statement, “falsely”: this excludes the case in which he is truthful. If he swears truthfully concerning a past matter, then nothing is due from him.

His statement, “knowingly”: this excludes the case in which he is unaware. For example, he may say, “By Allah, so-and-so was present yesterday,” when that person was not present; rather, someone else was present, but he thought that the one present was that person. In this case, he is unaware.

Or he may say, “By Allah, Allah has forbidden us such-and-such,” and the prohibition had occurred previously. We then ask him, “What is the evidence?” He replies, “The evidence is such-and-such,” but we later find that it is not as he said. His oath is not an engulfing oath.

The apparent meaning of the author’s words includes the case where he has forgotten, but this is not correct. Rather, if he has forgotten, he is like one who is unaware. For example, someone may swear concerning a past matter while having forgotten, saying, “By Allah, so-and-so never lent me anything,” having forgotten that he did lend him something. His oath is therefore not an engulfing oath, due to Allah’s saying:

“Our Lord, do not take us to task if we forget or make a mistake.” [al-Baqarah 2:286]

His statement, “then it is the engulfing oath”: that is, it is the engulfing oath. The word ghamūs (engulfing) is an intensive form; its original form is ghāmisah (one that plunges), an active participle, but it was changed to ghamūs for emphasis. It is called an engulfing oath because it plunges its maker into

والكفارة تستر الإثم والاقتطاع إما دعوى ما ليس له، وإما إنكار ما هو عليه، وهذا يكون أمراً ماضياً لا مستقبلاً. فَإِنْ حَلَفَ عَلَى أَمْرٍ مَاضٍ كَاذِباً عَالِماً فَهِيَ الْغَمُوسُ، ................ قوله: «فإن حلف» الفاعل ضمير مستتر تقديره هو، أي: الإنسان. قوله: «على أمر ماض» احترازاً من المستقبل، فقد سبق أنه من اليمين المنعقدة. قوله: «كاذباً» احترازاً من كونه صادقاً، فإن حلف على أمر ماضٍ صادقاً فلا شيء عليه. قوله: «عالماً» احترازاً مما لو كان جاهلاً، مثل أن يقول: والله لقد حضر فلان أمس، وفلان هذا لم يحضر، بل حضر شخص آخر، ولكنه ظن أنه هو الحاضر، فهو هنا جاهل. أو يقول: والله لقد حرم الله علينا كذا وكذا، والتحريم سابق ثم قلنا له ما هو الدليل، قال: الدليل كذا وكذا، ثم وجدنا أنه ليس كذلك، فيمينه ليست غموساً. وظاهر كلام المؤلف ولو كان ناسياً، وليس كذلك، بل إذا كان ناسياً فهو كالجاهل، مثل إنسان حلف على أمر ماضٍ ناسياً، كأن قال: والله ما أقرضني فلان شيئاً، ناسياً أنه أقرضه فلا تكون يمينه غموساً؛ لقوله تعالى: ﴿رَبَّنَا لَا تُؤَاخِذْنَا إِنْ نَسِيْنَا أَوْ أَخْطَأْنَا﴾ [البقرة: ٢٨٦]. قوله: «فهي الغموس» أي: فهي اليمين الغموس، و «غموس» على وزن فعول، وأصلها غامسة اسم فاعل، ولكن عُدل عن ذلك إلى غموس للمبالغة، وسميت غموساً؛ لأنها تغمس صاحبها في