Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (15/156)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

Chapter

Whoever is required to offer expiation for an oath may choose between feeding ten needy persons, clothing them, or freeing a slave.

His statement, “may choose,” means that he may do whichever he wishes, or whichever of the two options is better. Is this a choice based on personal preference and desire, or a choice based on what serves the greater interest? The matter requires detail: if its purpose is to make matters easier for the legally accountable person, then it is a choice based on preference and desire; but if its purpose is to observe what serves the greater interest, then it is a choice based on the greater interest.

Allah, exalted is He, has given the one who breaks his oath a choice between several matters. Is this choice based on what serves the greater interest, or is it intended to make matters easier and more accommodating?

The answer is that it is intended to make matters easier and more accommodating, as indicated by His saying, exalted is He: “But whoever cannot find [the means]—then a fast…” If it is intended to make matters easier and more accommodating, then I may do what is easiest and most convenient for me.

Allah, exalted is He, also says concerning the compensation for harm: “Then a ransom of fasting, charity, or sacrifice.” [al-Baqarah: 196] This is a choice based on preference and desire. Thus, even if the greater interest lies in slaughtering a sheep, he is not required to do so; the matter is left to him.

And His saying, exalted is He: “Indeed, the recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive throughout the land spreading corruption is that they be killed, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or be banished from the land.” [al-Ma'idah: 33] This choice is one based on the greater interest, according to the view that the verse establishes a choice. Some scholars say that the verse is for specifying different categories; but according to the view that it establishes a choice, it is a choice based on the greater interest—that is, what is most suitable and most deterrent is to be followed.

If the guardian of an orphan is told, “You may choose between lending out his wealth, investing it through a profit-sharing partnership, or keeping it in your custody,” then the choice here is based on the greater interest. The evidence is His saying, exalted is He: “And do not approach the property of the orphan except in the way that is best.” [al-An'am: 152]

فَصْلٌ يُخَيَّرُ مَنْ لَزِمَتْهُ كَفَّارَةُ يَمِينٍ بَيْنَ إِطْعَامِ عَشَرَةِ مَسَاكِينِ، أَوْ كِسْوَتِهِمْ، أَوْ عَتْقِ رَقَبَةٍ. قوله: «يخير» أي: يفعل ما يشاء، أو خير الأمرين، وهل هو تخيير إرادة وتشهٍّ، أو هو تخيير مصلحة؟ فيه تفصيل: إذا كان المقصود به التيسير على المكلف فهو تخيير إرادة وتشهٍّ، وإذا كان المقصود به مراعاة المصلحة فهو تخيير مصلحة. خيَّر الله ﷿ الحانث في يمينه بين أمور، فهل هو للمصلحة أو للتيسير والتسهيل؟ الجواب: للتيسير والتسهيل؛ بدليل قوله تعالى: ﴿فَمَنْ لَمْ يَجِدْ فَصِيَامُ﴾ الآية، فإذا كان للتيسير والتسهيل فأنا أفعل ما هو أسهل وأيسر لي. وقال ـ تعالى ـ في فدية الأذى: ﴿فَفِدْيَةٌ مِنْ صِيَامٍ أَوْ صَدَقَةٍ أَوْ نُسُكٍ﴾ [البقرة: ١٩٦]، فهذا تخيير تشهٍّ وإرادة، حتى لو كانت المصلحة في ذبح الشاة فلا يلزمه ذلك، والأمر موكول إليه. وقوله تعالى: ﴿إِنَّمَا جَزَاءُ الَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الأَرْضِ فَسَادًا أَنْ يُقَتَّلُوا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُمْ مِنْ خِلَافٍ أَوْ يُنْفَوْا مِنَ الأَرْضِ﴾ [المائدة: ٣٣]، فهذا التخيير تخيير مصلحة على القول بأن الآية للتخيير، وبعض العلماء يقول: الآية للتنويع، لكن على القول بأنها للتخيير، فهو تخيير مصلحة، يعني يتبع في ذلك ما هو أصلح وأردع. وإذا قيل لولي اليتيم: أنت بالخيار بين أن تقرض ماله، أو تدفعه مضاربة، أو تحفظه عندك، فالتخيير هنا مصلحة، والدليل قوله تعالى: ﴿وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا مَالَ الْيَتِيمِ إِلاَّ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أْحْسَنُ﴾ [الأنعام: ١٥٢].