Majmu' al-Fatawa - Ibn Taimiya - (32/15)

Majmu' al-FatawaIbn Taimiya

Chapter: The Essential Elements and Conditions of Marriage

Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—said:

Section

Some hold that marriage is valid only through a formula using inkāh or tazwīj (giving in marriage), except for the formula, “I have freed you, and your freedom has been made your dower.” These include the followers of al-Shāfiʿī, Ibn Hāmid, and those of our school who agree with them, such as Abū al-Khattāb, al-Qādī, his followers, and those who came after him. Their principal argument is that any wording other than these two expressions is indirect, and indirect wording produces its legal effect only when accompanied by the corresponding intention. Intention resides in the heart and cannot be known. Thus, a marriage contract cannot validly be concluded through indirect wording, because its validity requires witnesses, whereas an intention cannot be witnessed. This differs from divorce, emancipation, and sale, which may validly be effected through indirect wording, since witnesses are not a condition of their validity.

Some regard this requirement as a matter of prescribed worship, on account of the acts of worship established through it. This is the position of those, both within our school and outside it, who consider marriage valid only when contracted in Arabic. This view is weak for several reasons.

First: We do not concede that every expression other than these two is indirect. Rather, some expressions refer literally to the marriage contract in customary usage and convey it more clearly than the word ankahtu (I have given in marriage). This word can refer either to intercourse or to the contract, whereas imlāk (contracting a marriage) refers exclusively to the contract. When someone says, “So-and-so has been married to so-and-so,” nothing but the contract is understood. Thus, the two Sahīh collections contain the wording:

“I have given her to you in marriage for what you know of the Quran.”

This holds whether the report preserves the exact wording or conveys its meaning.

بَابُ أَرْكَانِ النِّكَاحِ وَشُرُوطِهِ قَالَ شَيْخُ الْإِسْلَامِ ابْنُ تَيْمِيَّة - رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: فَصْلٌ: عُمْدَةُ مَنْ قَالَ: لَا يَصِحُّ النِّكَاحُ إلَّا بِلَفْظِ " الْإِنْكَاحِ " و " التَّزْوِيجِ " - وَهُمْ أَصْحَابُ الشَّافِعِيِّ وَابْنُ حَامِدٍ وَمَنْ وَافَقَهُمْ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا كَأَبِي الْخَطَّابِ وَالْقَاضِي وَأَصْحَابِهِ وَمَنْ بَعْدَهُ - إلَّا فِي لَفْظِ " أَعْتَقْتُك وَجُعِلَ عِتْقُك صَدَاقَك " أَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا: مَا سِوَى هَذَيْنِ اللَّفْظَيْنِ " كِنَايَةٌ " وَالْكِنَايَةُ لَا تَقْتَضِي الْحُكْمَ إلَّا بِالنِّيَّةِ وَالنِّيَّةُ فِي الْقَلْبِ لَا تُعْلَمُ فَلَا يَصِحُّ عَقْدُ النِّكَاحِ بِالْكِنَايَةِ لِأَنَّ صِحَّتَهُ مُفْتَقِرَةٌ إلَى الشَّهَادَةِ عَلَيْهِ وَالنِّيَّةُ لَا يُشْهَدُ عَلَيْهَا؛ بِخِلَافِ مَا يَصِحُّ بِالْكِنَايَةِ: مِنْ طَلَاقٍ وَعِتْقٍ وَبَيْعٍ؛ فَإِنَّ الشَّهَادَةَ لَا تُشْتَرَطُ فِي صِحَّةِ ذَلِكَ. وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ يَجْعَلُ ذَلِكَ تَعَبُّدًا؛ لِمَا فِيهِ مِنْ ثُبُوتِ الْعِبَادَاتِ. وَهَذَا قَوْلُ مَنْ لَا يُصَحِّحُهُ إلَّا بِالْعَرَبِيَّةِ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا وَغَيْرِهِ وَهَذَا ضَعِيفٌ لِوُجُوهِ. " أَحَدُهَا " لَا نُسَلِّمُ أَنَّ مَا سِوَى هَذَيْنِ كِنَايَةٌ؛ بَلْ ثَمَّ أَلْفَاظٌ هِيَ حَقَائِقُ عُرْفِيَّةٌ فِي الْعَقْدِ أَبْلَغُ مِنْ لَفْظِ " أَنْكَحْت " فَإِنَّ هَذَا اللَّفْظَ مُشْتَرَكٌ بَيْنَ الْوَطْءِ وَالْعَقْدِ وَلَفْظَ " الْإِمْلَاكِ " خَاصٌّ بِالْعَقْدِ لَا يُفْهَمُ إذَا قَالَ الْقَائِلُ: أُمْلِكُ فُلَانٌ عَلَى فُلَانَةٍ. إلَّا الْعَقْدُ كَمَا فِي الصَّحِيحَيْنِ: {أَمْلَكْتُكهَا عَلَى مَا مَعَك مِنْ الْقُرْآنِ} سَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ الرِّوَايَةُ بِاللَّفْظِ أَوْ بِالْمَعْنَى.