Minhaj as-Sunnah - Ibn Taimiya - (4/220)

Minhaj as-SunnahIbn Taimiya

is general with respect to persons and unrestricted as to place and circumstances. A text qualifying this unrestricted wording would therefore be an independent text setting forth a legal ruling that had not been preceded by anything contradicting it (1). It would not (2) be overturning the apparent meaning of a revealed text and would thus not depart from the established principle.

The Ninth Aspect:

It may be said that the fact that the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—leaves no inheritable estate is established by the sunna known with certainty and by the consensus of the Companions. Each of these constitutes definitive evidence. This cannot therefore be opposed by wording presumed to be general. Even if it is general, its scope has been restricted, for even if that wording constituted evidence, it would only be probabilistic, and probabilistic evidence cannot oppose definitive evidence.

This is because the report was narrated by more than one Companion on various occasions and in various gatherings, without anyone among them denying it. Rather, they all received it with acceptance and affirmed its truth. Consequently, none of his wives persisted in claiming an inheritance, nor did his paternal uncle persist in claiming one. Whenever anyone claimed any part of it and was informed (3) of the Prophet’s statement—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—he withdrew his claim. This remained the established practice throughout the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, down to Ali. He changed none of it, [nor did he] distribute the Prophet’s estate.

The Tenth Aspect:

It may be said that Abu Bakr and Umar gave Ali and his children wealth many times greater than the wealth left by the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace. As for the wealth left by the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—not one [of the two] (4) benefited from any of it. Rather,

(1) A, B: “nothing contradicting it had preceded.” (2) B only: “and it would not be.” (3) A: “anything, he was informed”; B: “anything and was informed”; S: “anything, then when he was informed.” (4) The phrase “of the two” is omitted from N.

عَامٌّ فِي الْأَشْخَاصِ، مُطْلَقٌ فِي الْمَكَانِ وَالْأَحْوَالِ. فَالْخِطَابُ الْمُقَيِّدُ لِهَذَا الْمُطْلَقِ يَكُونُ خِطَابًا مُبْتَدَأً مُبَيِّنًا لِحُكْمٍ شَرْعِيٍّ لَمْ يَتَقَدَّمْ مَا يُنَافِيهِ (١) ، لَا يَكُونُ (٢) رَافِعًا لِظَاهِرِ خِطَابٍ شَرْعِيٍّ، فَلَا يَكُونُ مُخَالِفًا لِلْأَصْلِ. الْوَجْهُ التَّاسِعُ: أَنْ يُقَالَ: كَوْنُ النَّبِيِّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - لَا يُورَثُ ثَبَتَ بِالسُّنَّةِ الْمَقْطُوعِ بِهَا وَبِإِجْمَاعِ الصَّحَابَةِ، وَكُلٌّ مِنْهُمَا دَلِيلٌ قَطْعِيٌّ، فَلَا يُعَارَضُ ذَلِكَ بِمَا يُظَنُّ أَنَّهُ عُمُومٌ، وَإِنْ كَانَ عُمُومًا فَهُوَ مَخْصُوصٌ؛ لِأَنَّ ذَلِكَ لَوْ كَانَ دَلِيلًا لَمَا كَانَ إِلَّا ظَنِّيًّا، فَلَا يُعَارِضُ الْقَطْعِيَّ؛ إِذِ الظَّنِّيُّ لَا يُعَارِضُ الْقَطْعِيَّ. وَذَلِكَ أَنَّ هَذَا الْخَبَرَ رَوَاهُ غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنَ الصَّحَابَةِ فِي أَوْقَاتٍ وَمَجَالِسَ، وَلَيْسَ فِيهِمْ مَنْ يُنْكِرُهُ، بَلْ كُلُّهُمْ تَلَقَّاهُ بِالْقَبُولِ وَالتَّصْدِيقِ. وَلِهَذَا لَمْ يُصِرَّ أَحَدٌ مِنْ أَزْوَاجِهِ عَلَى طَلَبِ الْمِيرَاثِ، وَلَا أَصَرَّ الْعَمُّ عَلَى طَلَبِ الْمِيرَاثِ، بَلْ مَنْ طَلَبَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ شَيْئًا فَأُخْبِرَ (٣) بِقَوْلِ النَّبِيِّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - رَجَعَ عَنْ طَلَبِهِ. وَاسْتَمَرَّ الْأَمْرُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ عَلَى عَهْدِ الْخُلَفَاءِ الرَّاشِدِينَ إِلَى عَلِيٍّ، فَلَمْ يُغَيِّرْ شَيْئًا مِنْ ذَلِكَ وَقَسَّمَ لَهُ تَرِكَةً. الْوَجْهُ الْعَاشِرُ: أَنْ يُقَالَ: إِنَّ أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ قَدْ أَعْطَيَا عَلِيًّا وَأَوْلَادَهُ مِنَ الْمَالِ أَضْعَافَ أَضْعَافِ مَا خَلَّفَهُ النَّبِيُّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - مِنَ الْمَالِ. وَالْمَالُ الَّذِي خَلَّفَهُ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ سَلَّمَ - لَمْ يَنْتَفِعْ وَاحِدٌ [مِنْهُمَا] (٤) مِنْهُ بِشَيْءٍ، بَلْ

(١) أ، ب: لَمْ يَتَقَدَّمْ مُنَافِيهِ. (٢) ب (فَقَطْ) : وَلَا يَكُونُ. (٣) أ: شَيْئًا أُخْبِرَ؛ ب: شَيْئًا وَأُخْبِرَ؛ ص: شَيْئًا فَلَمَّا أُخْبِرَ. (٤) مِنْهُمَا: سَاقِطَةٌ مِنْ (ن) .