Majmu' al-FatawaIbn Taimiya

As for someone who finds himself in the middle of unlawfully seized land, his departure with the intention of vacating the place and restoring it to its rightful owner is neither prohibited nor unlawful. Indeed, the jurists agree that if someone seizes a house and leaves his belongings and wealth there, then is ordered to restore it to its rightful owner, he must leave and remove his family and possessions. Although this involves a form of use of the property, its purpose is to vacate it. Likewise, a polytheist who enters the Sacred Precinct is ordered to leave, even though doing so involves passing through it.

A similar example is the hadith of the Bedouin, whose authenticity is agreed upon. When he urinated in the mosque, the people rose to stop him, but the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“Do not interrupt him”—that is, do not interrupt his urination—and instructed them to pour a bucket of water over his urine.

Once he had begun urinating, it was better for him to finish than for them to interrupt him and thereby cause him to soil his clothes and body. Likewise, if a man were to have unlawful intercourse with a woman and then repent, he would withdraw and would not be sinning by withdrawing. But is withdrawal itself considered intercourse? There are two views on this, both transmitted from Ahmad.

Suppose, then, that a man swears not to have intercourse with his wife, making a threefold divorce conditional upon doing so. Those who hold that a threefold divorce takes effect if he has intercourse with her disagree over whether he may lawfully do so. There are two views, both transmitted from Ahmad.

The first is that it is permissible, as al-Shāfiʿī holds. The second is that it is not permissible, as Mālik holds. He argues: “If you permit intercourse, it follows that he will have intimate contact with her while withdrawing, when she is forbidden to him. This is permitted only out of necessity; it does not make initiating intercourse permissible.” The proponent of the other view maintains that withdrawal is not forbidden.

أَمَّا مَنْ تَوَسَّطَ الْأَرْضَ الْمَغْصُوبَةَ فَهَذَا خُرُوجُهُ بِنِيَّةِ تَخْلِيَةِ الْمَكَانِ وَتَسْلِيمِهِ إلَى مُسْتَحَقِّهِ لَيْسَ مَنْهِيًّا عَنْهُ وَلَا مُحَرَّمًا؛ بَلْ الْفُقَهَاءُ مُتَّفِقُونَ عَلَى أَنَّ مَنْ غَصَبَ دَارًا وَتَرَكَ فِيهَا قُمَاشَهُ وَمَالَهُ إذَا أُمِرَ بِتَسْلِيمِهَا إلَى مُسْتَحِقِّهَا فَإِنَّهُ يُؤْمَرُ بِالْخُرُوجِ مِنْهَا وَبِإِخْرَاجِ أَهْلِهِ وَمَالِهِ مِنْهَا وَإِنْ كَانَ ذَلِكَ نَوْعُ تَصَرُّفٍ فِيهَا لَكِنَّهُ لِأَجْلِ إخْلَائِهَا. وَالْمُشْرِكُ إذَا دَخَلَ الْحَرَمَ أُمِرَ بِالْخُرُوجِ مِنْهُ وَإِنْ كَانَ فِيهِ مُرُورٌ فِيهِ وَمِثْلُ هَذَا حَدِيثُ الْأَعْرَابِيِّ الْمُتَّفَقُ عَلَى صِحَّتِهِ لَمَّا بَالَ فِي الْمَسْجِدِ فَقَامَ النَّاسُ إلَيْهِ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ {لَا تَزْرِمُوهُ أَيْ لَا تَقْطَعُوا عَلَيْهِ بَوْلَهُ وَأَمَرَهُمْ أَنْ يَصُبُّوا عَلَى بَوْلِهِ دَلْوًا مِنْ مَاءٍ} . فَهُوَ لَمَّا بَدَأَ بِالْبَوْلِ كَانَ إتْمَامُهُ خَيْرًا مِنْ أَنْ يَقْطَعُوهُ فَيُلَوِّثَ ثِيَابَهُ وَبَدَنَهُ وَلَوْ زَنَى رَجُلٌ بِامْرَأَةٍ ثُمَّ تَابَ لِنَزْعِ وَلَمْ يَكُنْ مُذْنِبًا بِالنَّزْعِ وَهَلْ هُوَ وَطْءٌ؟ فِيهِ قَوْلَانِ هُمَا رِوَايَتَانِ عَنْ أَحْمَد. فَلَوْ حَلَفَ أَنْ لَا يَطَأَ امْرَأَتَهُ بِالطَّلَاقِ الثَّلَاثِ فَاَلَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ: إنَّهُ يَقَعُ بِهِ الطَّلَاقُ الثَّلَاثُ إذَا وَطِئَهَا تَنَازَعُوا هَلْ يَجُوزُ لَهُ وَطْؤُهَا؟ عَلَى قَوْلَيْنِ: هُمَا رِوَايَتَانِ عَنْ أَحْمَد. " أَحَدُهُمَا " يَجُوزُ كَقَوْلِ الشَّافِعِيِّ. و " الثَّانِي " لَا يَجُوزُ كَقَوْلِ مَالِكٍ فَإِنَّهُ يَقُولُ: إذَا أَجَزْت الْوَطْءَ لَزِمَ أَنْ يُبَاشِرَهَا فِي حَالِ النَّزْعِ وَهِيَ مُحَرَّمَةٌ وَهَذَا إنَّمَا يُجَوَّزُ لِلضَّرُورَةِ لَا يُجَوِّزُهُ ابْتِدَاءً وَذَلِكَ يَقُولُ النَّزْعُ لَيْسَ بِمُحَرَّمِ.

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies