Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (3/235)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

The fourth: which legal consequences are removed by repentance.

As for the first point, namely whether his repentance is accepted, there are two basic views:

The first: his repentance is not accepted and neither extinguishes any claim nor sets aside any ruling. This was maintained by those who held that the verse was revealed concerning polytheists belonging to peoples at war with the Muslims. It is the position of al-Hasan, and we have already explained its weakness.

The second: his repentance is accepted. This is the position of the great majority of scholars. They then differed concerning the circumstances of the brigand whose repentance is accepted, holding three views:

The first: his repentance is accepted only if, in the course of his brigandage, he leaves Muslim territory and joins enemy territory.

The second: his repentance is accepted only if he has joined enemy territory or has a band supporting him within Muslim territory, even if he has not joined enemy territory.

The third: his repentance is accepted in all circumstances, whether he is alone with no supporting band, has a supporting band but has not joined enemy territory, or has joined enemy territory in the course of his brigandage.

They also differed concerning the nature of the repentance accepted from him, holding several views:

The first view: his repentance may take either of two forms. The first is that he abandons his activities, even if he does not come to the ruler. The second is that he lays down his weapons and then comes voluntarily to the ruler. This is the position of Ibn al-Qāsim.

The second view: his repentance consists only in abandoning his activities, remaining where he is, and living openly among his neighbors. If, however, he lays down his weapons and comes voluntarily to the ruler, the ruler imposes the prescribed punishment for brigandage upon him—unless, before coming to him, he had already abandoned his activities and remained where he was, such that, were the ruler to learn of his circumstances, he would not impose the prescribed punishment for brigandage upon him. This is the position of Ibn al-Mājishūn.

The third view: his repentance consists only in coming to the ruler. Merely abandoning his activities does not exempt him from any legal consequence if he is apprehended before coming to the ruler.

They also differed concerning which legal consequences are removed by repentance, holding four views:

والرابع: فيما تسقط عنه التوبة من الأحكام. فأما الموضع الأول وهو قبول التوبة منه فإن الأصل في ذلك قولين: أحدها: أن توبته لا تقبل منه ولا تسقط حقا من الحقوق ولا حكما من الأحكام. قال ذلك من ذهب إلى أن الآية نزلت في المشركين من أهل الحرب، وهو قول الحسن، وقد بينا ضعف هذا القول. والثاني: أن توبته تقبل منه، وهو قول جل أهل العلم. ثم اختلف هؤلاء في صفة المحارب الذي تقبل منه التوبة على ثلاثة أقوال: أحدها: أنه لا تقبل منه إلا أن يخرج في حرابته من دار الإسلام ويلحق بدار الحرب. والثاني: أنها لا تقبل منه إلا أن يكون قد لحق بدار الحرب أو كانت له فئة في بلد الإسلام وإن لم يلحق بدار الحرب. والثالث: أنها تقبل منه في جميع الأحوال كان وحده لا فئة له أو كانت له فئة ولم يلحق بدار الحرب أو كان قد لحق في حرابته بدار الحرب. واختلفوا أيضا في صفة توبته التي تقبل منه على أقوال: أحدها: أن توبته تكون بوجهين: أحدهما: أن يترك ما هو عليه وإن لم يأت الإمام. والثاني: أن يلقي سلاحه ثم يأتي الإمام طائعا وهو مذهب ابن القاسم. والقول الثاني: أن توبته إنما تكون بأن يترك ما هو عليه ويجلس في موضعه ويظهر لجيرانه. وأما إن ألقى سلاحه وأتى الإمام طائعا فإنه يقيم عليه حد الحرابة إلا أن يكون قد ترك قبل أن يأتيه ما هو عليه وجلس في موضعه حتى لو علم الإمام حاله لم يقم عليه حد الحرابة، وهذا قول ابن الماجشون. والقول الثالث: أن توبته إنما تكون بالمجيء إلى الإمام، وإن ترك ما هو عليه لم يسقط ذلك عنه حكما من الأحكام إن أخذ قبل أن يأتي الإمام. واختلفوا أيضا فيما تسقط عنه التوبة من الأحكام على أربعة أقوال: