Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (1/408)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

Forbidden oaths are those sworn by al-Lāt, al-‘Uzzā, false gods, or anything worshipped besides Allah Most High. Swearing by something entails venerating it, and venerating these things constitutes disbelief in Allah Most High.

Section

Binding oaths that require expiation if broken, unless the swearer makes an exception, are those concerning future matters, such as saying, “By Allah, I will not do it,” or “By Allah, I will certainly do it.” Oaths concerning the past require no expiation, whether a person swears to something he knows to be true, to something he believes certain but which proves otherwise, deliberately to a falsehood, or to something about which he is uncertain. However, some of these cases entail sin while others do not, as will be explained in the appropriate place, if Allah Most High wills.

Section

The swearer’s intended meaning, upon which he based his oath, is what counts, even when it differs from the apparent meaning of his words. There is no disagreement on this in the statements of Mālik or any of his disciples. Their evidence is the saying of Allah, Almighty and Majestic:

“Whether you reveal what is within yourselves or conceal it, Allah will bring you to account for it.” [al-Baqarah: 284]

And the Prophet’s saying—peace and blessings be upon him—“Actions are judged only by intentions.”

They differed only where the swearer had no particular intention, but the circumstances surrounding his oath or people’s customary purposes in swearing oaths indicated a meaning contrary to the apparent meaning of his words. Should his oath be interpreted according to those circumstances, according to people’s customary purposes in their oaths, or according to the apparent meaning of his words? There are three established opinions within the school.

The first, which is the best-known, takes account of the circumstances and people’s purposes in swearing oaths. According to this opinion, an oath is interpreted according to the swearer’s intention. If he had no particular intention, it is interpreted according to the circumstances surrounding his oath. If he had neither a particular intention nor circumstances underlying his oath, it is interpreted according to people’s customary purposes in swearing oaths. If no customary purpose is known in the matter, his oath is understood according to the apparent meaning of his words in their literal linguistic sense. If the wording admits two or more interpretations, the most apparent is adopted. If neither is more apparent than

والمحظورة أن يحلف باللات والعزى والطواغيت أو بشيء مما يعبد من دون الله تعالى؛ لأن الحلف بالشيء تعظيم له، والتعظيم لهذه الأشياء كفر بالله تعالى. فصل والأيمان التي تنعقد وتلزم فيها الكفارة إن حنث ما لم يستثن هو ما كان على المستقبل من الأمور، مثل قوله والله لا أفعل ووالله لأفعلن. وأما ما كان على الماضي فلا كفارة فيه حلف على حق يعلمه أو على شيء يستيقنه فانكشف على غير ما حلف عليه، أو على الكذب متعمدا، أو على الشك إلا أنه يأثم في بعض هذه الوجوه ولا يأثم في بعضها على ما سيأتي في موضعه إن شاء الله تعالى. فصل وللحالف نيته التي أرادها وعقد عليها يمينه وإن كانت مخالفة لظاهر لفظه، لا اختلاف في ذلك من قول مالك ولا من أحد من أصحابه. ودليلهم قول الله ﷿: ﴿وَإِنْ تُبْدُوا مَا فِي أَنْفُسِكُمْ أَوْ تُخْفُوهُ يُحَاسِبْكُمْ بِهِ اللَّهُ﴾ [البقرة: ٢٨٤]، وقول النبي ﷺ: «إنما الأعمال بالنيات». وإنما اختلفوا إذا لم تكن له نية وكان ليمينه بساط أو عرف من مقاصد الناس في أيمانهم خلاف ظاهر لفظه هل تحمل يمينه على البساط أو ما عرف من مقاصد الناس في أيمانهم أو على ظاهر لفظه على ثلاثة أقوال معلومة في المذهب. أحدها: وهو الأشهر منها، مراعاة البساط ومقصد الناس بأيمانهم. فاليمين على هذا القول تحمل على نية الحالف، فإن لم تكن له نية فبساط يمينه، فإن لم تكن له نية ولا كان ليمينه بساط فما عرف من مقاصد الناس بأيمانهم. وإن لم يعلم في ذلك للناس مقصد حملت يمينه على ما يوجب ظاهر لفظه في حقيقة اللغة. فإن كان محتملا لوجهين فأكثر فعلى أظهر محتملاته، فإن لم يكن أحدهما أظهر من