Chapter on Guarding the Tongue

(1) His statement: “If a man says, ‘People are ruined’”: meaning, they deserve the Fire due to their evil deeds. In Sharh As-Sunnah, it is added: If he says this out of self-admiration and belittling others, it is what is disapproved and prohibited. However, if he says it out of sorrow or warning about the state of people’s religion, I see no harm in it. [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(۱) قوله: إذا قال الرجل: هلك الناس: أي استوجبوا النار بسوء أعمالهم، وزاد في شرح السنة»: حيث قال: إذا قال ذلك عجبا بنفسه وتصاغرا للناس فهو المكروه الذي نهى عنه، وأما إذا قال ذلك تحزنا أو تحذيرا لما يرى في الناس من أمر دينهم، فلا أرى به بأسا. كذا في «المرقاة».

(1) His statement: “gloating”: meaning, rejoicing at your enemy’s misfortune. His statement: “over your brother” refers to a Muslim brother who has fallen into a religious or worldly calamity, whether physical or financial. [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(1) His statement: “he is more misguided than his camel…”: meaning, only an ignorant person would say this, unaware of Allah’s vast mercy, restricting what is boundless. In Al-Jazari’s Al-Hisn, it is said: Among the etiquettes of supplication is not to restrict it. [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(۱) قوله: هو أضل أم بعيره إلخ يعني لا يقول ما قال إلا جاهل بالله وسعة رحمته حيث يحجر الواسع. وفي «الحصن» للجزري: ومن جملة آداب الدعاء أن لا يتحجر. كذا في «المرقاة».

(1) His statement: “When you see the flatterers…”: Flatterers are those who make a habit of praising people, using it as a means to gain favor or sustenance, or excessively praising someone for qualities they lack, leading them to arrogance, thinking they truly possess such status. Thus, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “You have broken the man’s back when you describe him with what he does not have,” as it may lead to pride, self-admiration, neglecting good deeds, or abandoning further virtue. Scholars interpret “throw dust in their faces” as referring to those who falsely praise people to their faces with what they do not possess, not those who praise someone for their true qualities. The Prophet (ﷺ) was praised in poetry, speeches, and conversations, yet he did not throw dust in their faces or command it. Generally, praising a person is disliked, as the praiser rarely avoids lying, and the praised rarely escapes self-admiration. However, praising someone for a good deed or commendable act to encourage similar actions or inspire others to follow is not considered flattery. Abu Dawud narrated that Miqdad acted on the Hadith literally, throwing dust in a flatterer’s face. It may also be interpreted metaphorically as disappointment and deprivation, as dust symbolizes loss, like saying, “He has nothing but dust.” [Extracted from Al-Mirqat, Umdat al-Qari, and Badhl al-Majhud]

(۱) قوله: إذا رأيتم المداحين إلخ المداحون هم الذين اتخذوا مدح الناس عادةً وجعلوه بضاعة يستأكلون به الممددوح، أو أن يفرط في مدح الرجل بما ليس فيه، فيدخله من ذلك الإعجاب، ويظن أنه في الحقيقة بتلك المنزلة، فلذلك قال رسول الله ﷺ: قطعتم ظهر الرجل حين وصفتموه بما ليس فيه. فربما حمله ذلك على العجب والكبر، وعلى تضييع العمل وترك الإزدياد والفضل، ومن ذلك تأول العلماء في قوله : احثوا التراب في وجوه المداحين» أن المراد بهم المداحون الناس في وجوههم بالباطل، وبما ليس فيهم ولم يرد بهم من مدح رجلا بما فيه، فقد مدح رسول الله ﷺ في الأشعار والخطب والمخاطبة ولم يحث في وجوه المداحين التراب، ولا أمر بذلك، وفي الجملة المدح والثناء على الرجل مكروه؛ لأنه قلما يسلم المادح من كذب يقوله في مدحه، وقلما يسلم الممدوح من عجب يدخله، فأما من مدح الرجل على الفعل الحسن والأمر المحمود يكون منه ترغيبا في أمثاله وتحريضا للناس على الاقتداء في أشباهه، فليس بمداحوروى أبو داود أن المقدام استعمل الحديث على ظاهره، وحمله على وجه في تناول التراب بيده وحثه في وجه المادح، وقد يتأول أيضًا على وجه آخر، وهو أن يكون معناه الخيبة والحرمان أي من تعرض لكم بالثناء والمدح فلا تعطوه واحرموه كنى بالتراب عن الحرمان كقوله: ماله غير التراب وما في يده غير التراب. التقطته من «المرقاة» و«عمدة القاري» وبذل المجهود».

(1) His statement: “Woe to you, you have cut your brother’s neck…”: In Al-Mirqat, it is said: This was disliked to prevent the praised person from becoming conceited or arrogant, which is a harm to him, as if his neck was cut, leading to his ruin.

(۱) قوله : ويلك قطعت عنق أخيك إلخ : قال في «المرقاة»: وإنما كره ذلك لئلا يغتر المقول له فيستشعر الكبر والعجب وذلك جناية عليه، فيصير كأنه قطع عنقه فأهلكه.

(1) His statement: “When a transgressor is praised…”: This is a grave affliction, like many scholars, poets, and ostentatious reciters in our time. If this is the ruling for praising a transgressor, what of those who praise oppressors and incline toward them? Allah, Exalted is He, said: And do not incline toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire touch you [Hud: 113]. In Al-Kashshaf, it is said: The prohibition includes following their desires, associating with them, keeping their company, visiting them, flattering them, approving their actions, imitating them, adopting their appearance, or extolling them in a way that glorifies them. [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(۱) قوله : إذا مدح الفاسق إلخ : هذا هو الداء العضال كأكثر العلماء والشعراء والقراء المرائين في زماننا هذا، وإذا كان هذا حكم من مدح الفاسق، فكيف بمن مدح الظالم وركن إليه ركونًا، وقد قال تعالى: ﴿وَلَا تَرْكَنُوا إِلَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا فَتَمَسَّكُمُ النَّارُ (هود: (۱۱۳). وفي الكشاف النهي متناول للانحطاط في هواهم والانقطاع إليه ومصاحبتهم ومجالستهم وزيارتهم ومداهنتهم والرضا بأعمالهم والتشبه بهم والتزيي بزيهم ومد العين إلى زمرتهم وذكرهم بما فيه تعظيم لهم. كذا في «المرقاة».

(1) His statement: “Reviling a Muslim is an act of immorality”: because insulting without right is forbidden. [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(2) His statement: “and fighting him is disbelief”: The claim that this indicates abandoning fighting is part of faith or that doing so diminishes faith is flawed. The meaning is that arguing or fighting unjustly is disbelief in the sense of ingratitude for the blessing and brotherhood of Islam. It may lead to disbelief, resemble the actions of disbelievers, or is used for emphasis, warning, and severe threat. Earlier in this book, it was clarified that the correct view is that actions are not part of the essence of faith but its perfection. True faith, which is affirmation, is neither subject to increase nor decrease. It may strengthen with knowledge of evidence or weaken with its absence, producing the fruits of obedience or failing to do so, leading to sins. For further detail, refer to the beginning of this book. [Extracted from Al-Mirqat]

(۱) قوله : سباب المسلم فسوق : لأن شتمه بغير حق حرام. كذا في «المرقاة».

(۲) قوله : وقتاله كفر : ومن قال فيه دليل على أن ترك القتال من الإيمان وأن فعله ينقص الإيمان ليس بشيء فيه ما فيه؛ لأن المعنى مجادلته، ومحاربته بالباطل كفر بمعنى كفران النعمة والإحسان في أخوة الإسلام، وأنه ربما يؤل إلى الكفر، أو أنه فعل الكفرة، أو أراد به التغليظ والتهديد والتشديد في الوعيد، وقد سبق في أول الكتاب ما هو فصل الخطاب في هذا الباب من أن القول الصواب هو أن الأعمال ليست من أصل الإيمان بل من كماله، وأن حقيقة الإيمان، وهو التصديق غير قابل للزيادة والنقصان. نعم، قد يحصل له قوة بحسب معرفة الدليل وضعف بفقده، وقد يثمر ثمرته من ظهور الطاعات، وقد لا يثمر، فيقع صاحبه في السيئات، وإن شئت زيادة تفصيل في هذا المقام فارجع إلى صدر هذا الكتاب. التقطته من المرقاة».

(1) His statement: “Whoever calls a man a disbeliever…”: In Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, it is said: The one who insults with “O disbeliever” is disciplined. If he believes a Muslim is a disbeliever, he becomes one; otherwise, not, and this is the fatwa. [Sharh Wahbaniyyah] If he responds with “Labbayk,” he becomes a disbeliever. [Khulasah]

(۱) قوله: دعا رجلا بالكفر إلخ: قال في الدر المختار: وعزر الشاتم بـ«يا كافر. وهل يكفر إن اعتقد المسلم كافرا، نعم، وإلا لا، به يفتى، شرح وهباية». ولو أجابه «لبيك» كفر، «خلاصة».

(1) His statement: “No man accuses another of immorality…”: In Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, it is said: He is disciplined for slandering a Muslim with “O immoral one,” unless his immorality is known, like a tax collector, or the judge knows of his immorality, as the disgrace was brought upon himself before the accusation.

(۱) قوله : لا يرمي رجل رجلا بالفسوق إلخ : قال في الدر المختار»: فيعزر بقذف أي بشتم مسلم ما بـ«يا فاسق» إلا أن يكون معلوم الفسق، كمكاس مثلا، أو علم القاضي بفسقه؛ لأن الشين قد ألحقه هو بنفسه قبل قول القائل.

(1) His statement: “Do not curse one another with the curse of Allah…”: Al-Tayyibi said: This means do not invoke against people something that distances them from Allah’s mercy, whether explicitly, like saying, “May Allah’s curse be upon him,” or implicitly, like saying, “May Allah’s wrath be upon him,” or “May Allah make him enter the Fire.” The phrase “do not curse one another” is a general expression, as some instances are literal and others metaphorical. This applies to specific individuals, as it is permissible to curse generally, like saying, “May Allah’s curse be upon the disbelievers,” or specifically, like “May Allah’s curse be upon the Jews,” or a specific disbeliever who died in disbelief, like Pharaoh or Abu Jahl. [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(۱) قوله : لا تلاعنوا بلعنة الله إلخ : قال الطيبي: أي لا تدعوا الناس بما يبعدهم الله من رحمته، إما صريحا كما تقولون: لعنة الله عليه، أو كناية كما تقولون عليه غضب الله، أو أدخله الله النار، فقوله: «لا تلاعنوا» من باب عموم المجاز؛ لأنه في بعض أفراده حقيقة وبعضه مجاز. وهذا مختص بمعين؛ لأنه يجوز اللعن بالوصف الأعم، كقوله: لعنة الله على الكافرين، أو بالأخص كقوله: لعنة الله على اليهود، أو على كافر معين مات على الكفر كفرعون وأبي جهل. كذا في المرقاة».

(1) His statement: “All of my Ummah will be forgiven except those who publicize their sins”: Al-Tayyibi said: It is more appropriate to say: “All of my Ummah are spared from backbiting except those who publicize their sins,” as it is stated: “Whoever casts off the cloak of modesty has no backbiting.” Forgiveness here means being spared, implying negation, like Allah’s saying: But Allah would not allow except that His light should be perfected [At-Tawbah: 32]. The publicizers are those who openly commit and display their sins, uncovering what Allah has concealed. They say: He publicized, he openly declared, he announced. I say: Al-Ashraf’s statement that “All of my Ummah have no sin” is not correct absolutely. The meaning is: “All of my Ummah will not be held accountable or severely punished except the publicizers.” [As stated in Al-Mirqat]

(۱) قوله: كل أمتي معافى إلا المجاهرون قال الطيبي: والأظهر أن يقال: كل أمتي يُتْرَكُون عن الغيبة إلا المجاهرون، كما ورد من ألقى جلباب الحياء فلا غيبة له، والعفو بمعنى الترك، وفيه معنى النفي، ونحوه قوله تعالى: ﴿وَيَأْبَى الله إِلَّا أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ﴾ (التوبة: (۳۲)، والمجاهرون هم الذين جاهروا بمعاصيهم وأظهروها وكشفوا ما ستر الله عليهم منها فيتحدثون، يقال: جهر وجاهر وأجهر، أقول: قول الأشرف كل أمتي لا ذنب عليهم. لا يصح على إطلاقه، بل المعنى: كل أمتي لا يؤاخذون أو لا يعاقبون عقابا شديدا إلا المجاهرون. كذا في «المرقاة».

(1) His statement: “for he is a bad brother of the tribe…”: It is said this man, as described by the Prophet (ﷺ), apostatized after his death with the apostates and was brought as a captive to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him). In Fath al-Bari, it is said: Uyaynah apostatized during Abu Bakr’s time, fought, then returned and embraced Islam, and was called “the obeyed fool.” In Sharh As-Sunnah, it is said: This indicates that mentioning a transgressor’s faults to make his state known for caution is not backbiting. Perhaps the man was openly evil, and there is no backbiting for the publicizer. Al-Qurtubi said: It is permissible to backbite the openly transgressing or obscene, along with treating them courteously to avoid their harm, provided it does not lead to flattery. The difference between courtesy (mudarah) and flattery (mudahanah) is that courtesy is giving worldly things for the sake of worldly or religious benefit, or both, and is permissible or even recommended, while flattery is sacrificing religion for worldly gain. This is a valuable distinction to preserve, as most people are heedless of it and ignorant of the difference. [Extracted from Al-Mirqat] In Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar and Al-Alamgiriyyah, it is said: If a man prays and fasts but harms people with his hand or tongue, mentioning his faults is not backbiting. An-Nawawi said: Backbiting is among the ugliest and most widespread vices, from which few are safe. It is mentioning anything a person dislikes, whether about his body, religion, worldly affairs, self, character, wealth, children, parents, spouse, servant, clothing, walk, movements, cheerfulness, sternness, or the like, whether by speech, writing, gesture, or indication with the eye, hand, head, or otherwise. Its criterion is anything that conveys a Muslim’s deficiency to another, which is forbidden backbiting. This includes imitation, like walking limping or stooping to mock someone’s manner, intending to belittle them. [As stated in Al-Mirqat] In Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar and Sharh al-Wahbaniyyah, it is said: Backbiting is describing your brother in his absence with something he dislikes hearing.

(۱) قوله: فبئس أخو العشيرة إلخ : قيل : ذلك الرجل كما وصفه النبي ، فإنه ارتد بعد موته مع المرتدين، وجيء به أسيرا إلى أبي بكر الله. وفي فتح الباري: أن عيينة ارتد في زمن الصديق وحارب، ثم رجع وأسلم، وكان يقال له: الأحمق المطاع. وفي شرح السنة»: فيه دليل على أن ذكر الفاسق بما فيه؛ ليعرف أمره فيتقى لا يكون من الغيبة. ولعل الرجل كان مجاهرا بسوء أفعاله، ولا غيبة المجاهر. وقال القرطبي فيه جواز غيبة المعلن بالفسق أو الفحش ونحو ذلك مع جواز مداراتهم اتقاء شرهم ما لم يؤد ذلك إلى المداهنة. ثم قال تبعا للقاضي حسين والفرق بين المداراة والمداهنة أن المداراة بذل الدنيا لصلاح الدنيا أو الدين أو هما معا، وهي مباحة، وربما استحسنت والمداهنة: بذل الدين لصلاح الدنيا. وهذه فائدة جليلة، ينبغي حفظها والمحافظة عليها، فإن أكثر الناس عنها غافلون وبالفرق بينهما جاهلون التقطته من المرقاة». وقال في الدر المختار» و «العالمكيرية: وإذا كان الرجل يصوم ويصلي ويضر الناس بيده ولسانه، فذكره بما فيه ليس بغيبة إلخ، قال النووي: اعلم أن الغيبة من أقبح القبائح وأكثرها انتشارا في الناس، حتى لا يسلم منها إلا القليل من الناس، وذكرك فيه بما يكرهه عام، سواء كان في بدنه أو دينه أو دنياه أو نفسه أو خلقه أو ماله أو ولده أو والده أو زوجه أو خادمه أو ثوبه أو مشيه وحركته وبشاشته وعبوسته وطلاقته أو غير ذلك مما يتعلق به، سواء ذكرته بلفظك أو كتابك أو رمزت أو أشرت إليه بعينك أو يدك أو رأسك ونحو ذلك، وضابطه: أن كل ما أفهمت به غيرك نقصان مسلم فهو غيبة محرمة، ومن ذلك المحاكاة بأن يمشي متعارجًا أو مطأطئا أو على غير ذلك من الهيئات مريدا حكاية هيئة من ينقصه بذلك. كذا في المرقاة». وقال في الدر المختار»: وفي شرح الوهبانية: الغيبة أن تصف أخاك حال كونه غائبا بوصف يكرهه إذا سمعه.

(1) Her statement: “It is enough for you that Safiyyah is such-and-such…”: In Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, it is said: Backbiting can occur not only explicitly by speech but also by action, allusion, writing, movement, or gesture, like winking or pointing with the hand. Anything that conveys the intended meaning is backbiting and forbidden. Aishah said: A woman entered upon us, and when she left, I gestured with my hand, meaning short, and the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “You have backbitten her.” Similarly, imitation, like walking limping to mimic someone’s gait, is backbiting, and even worse due to its vivid depiction and clarity.

(2) Their statement: Al-Ayni and Ibn Al-Humam…: Mawlana Muhammad Abdul-Hayy Al-Lucknawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Nafi’ al-Mufti was-Sail: Question: Does backbiting invalidate a fasting person’s fast? Answer: According to us, it does not. [As stated in Al-Wiqayah] Hadiths on this matter include: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: “If a fasting person backbites, he breaks his fast,” narrated by Ishaq ibn Rahwayh in his Musnad. It is also narrated: “Five things break a fasting person’s fast and invalidate ablution: lying, talebearing, backbiting, lustful gazing, and false oaths.” Al-Ayni said: Ibn Al-Jawzi narrated it and said it is fabricated. It is also narrated: “Four things break a fasting person’s fast, invalidate ablution, and destroy deeds: backbiting, lying, talebearing, and looking at a woman’s beauty unlawfully.” Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated: “He who continues to eat people’s flesh has not fasted.” It is narrated that two men prayed Dhuhr and Asr with the Prophet (ﷺ) while fasting, and after he finished, he said: “Repeat your ablution and prayer, continue your fast, and make up another day.” They asked, “Why, O Messenger of Allah?” He said: “Because you backbitten so-and-so.” [Narrated by Al-Bayhaqi] Mujahid said: Two things invalidate fasting: backbiting and lying. It is narrated that a man was performing cupping on another, and they were backbiting, and the Prophet (ﷺ) passed by and said: “The cupper and the cupped have broken their fast.” From this, some assumed cupping invalidates fasting. Al-Ayni and Ibn Al-Humam said: All Hadiths about backbiting invalidating fasting are flawed, and if authentic, they are interpreted by consensus, as in Radd al-Muhtar and Al-Hidayah. In Al-Kifayah, it is said: There is no disagreement among scholars that fasting is not invalidated by this, and a fatwa against consensus is not valid. The Hadith stating, “Three things break a fasting person’s fast,” as mentioned by Imam Al-Mahbubi, is interpreted by consensus as referring to the loss of reward. The interpretations are two: First, as in Al-Binayah, it means the loss of reward. Second, as Al-Ghazali said: Fasting has three levels: the common fast, avoiding food, drink, and intercourse; the special fast, avoiding these plus what makes fasting disliked, like backbiting and lying; and the most special fast, focusing only on Allah. Backbiting and the like do not invalidate the first fast but do invalidate the other two, which is the Hadith’s intent. I say: Ibn Al-Humam’s claim of consensus is based on disregarding the Zahiri opinion, as it came after the early generations. In Radd al-Muhtar, it is said: No mujtahid except the Zahiris held that backbiting invalidates fasting, though Ali Al-Qari stated in Sharh Al-Mishkat and Al-Ghazali in Ihya Ulum ad-Din that Sufyan Ath-Thawri, a mujtahid, held this view, so their claim is incorrect. This doubt occurred to me in 1282 AH, and I recorded it in Radd al-Muhtar. The jurists’ claim that these Hadiths are interpreted by consensus means no Companion held this view, even if some later mujtahids did, so it refers to the consensus of the Companions or the majority, disregarding dissenters. Ibn Al-Humam and Ash-Shami’s restriction that only the Zahiris held this view is incorrect to me, as Ath-Thawri is counted among the mujtahids, not the Zahiris, unless it is said no authentic narration supports this from him. Allah knows the unseen. Question: If a man performs ablution then backbites a Muslim, must he repeat ablution? Answer: Backbiting does not invalidate ablution, and I have seen no disagreement on this. However, performing ablution afterward is recommended, as in Majma’ al-Barakat. Narrations and sayings include Ibrahim An-Nakha’i’s statement: “Ablution is for ritual impurity and harming a Muslim.” Aishah said: “Impurity is two: from your mouth and your sleep, and the mouth’s impurity—lying and backbiting—is worse.” It is narrated that two men performed ablution, went to a mosque to pray, and passed a hermaphrodite, backbiting him. They prayed and attended Ata’s session, who said: “Repeat your ablution and prayer.” These are rulings issued as warnings and statements for emphasis. I say: I authored a comprehensive treatise on backbiting in Urdu, titled “Zajr ash-Shabban wa Ahl ash-Shaybah an Irtikab al-Ghibah bil-Lisan al-Hindiyyah,” which is valuable and unparalleled in its field. I also have another Urdu treatise, “Umdat an-Nasa’ih bi-Tark al-Qaba’ih,” addressing this topic. Praise be to Allah for that.

(۱) قوله: حسبك من صفية كذا وكذا إلخ : قال في الدر المختار: وكما تكون الغيبة باللسان صريحا تكون أيضًا بالفعل، وبالتعريض وبالكتابة وبالحركة وبالرمز وبغمز العين والإشارة باليد، وكل ما يفهم منه المقصود فهو داخل في الغيبة، وهو حرام، ومن ذلك قالت عائشة : دخلت علينا امرأة، فلما ولت أومأت بيدي أي قصيرة، فقال ال: «اغتبتها». ومن ذلك المحاكاة كأن يمشي متعارجا أو كما يمشي فهو غيبة، بل أقبح لأجه أعظم في التصوير والتفهيم. وَقَالَ(۱) الْعَيْنِيُّ وَابْنُ الْهُمَامِ رَحِمَهُمَا اللهُ تَعَالَى : إِنَّ أَحَادِيثَ الْغِيْبَةِ فِي فَسَادِ الصَّوْمِ كُلَّهَا مَدْخُوْلَةٌ، وَعَلَى تَقْدِيرِ صِحَّتِهَا فَمُؤَوَّلَةٌ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ بِذَهَابِ الثَّوَابِ. وَقَالَ فِي مَجْمَعِ الْبَرَكَاتِ»: الْغِيْبَةُ لَيْسَتْ مِنْ نَوَاقِضِ الْوُضُوْءِ، وَلَمْ أَرَ فِيْهِ خِلَافًا، نَعَمْ يُسْتَحَبُّ الْوُضُوْءُ بَعْدَهَا.

(1) His statement: “Among the expiations for backbiting is to seek forgiveness for the one you backbit…”: Abu Al-Laith, the jurist, said: Scholars have discussed whether repentance for backbiting is valid without seeking forgiveness from the one wronged. Some said it is valid, others said it is not. In our view, it depends on two cases: If the backbiting reached the person, repentance requires seeking his forgiveness. If it did not reach him, one should seek Allah’s forgiveness and resolve not to repeat it. Does it suffice to say, “I backbit you, so absolve me,” or must the details be specified? Some of our scholars said in backbiting, do not inform him if it would cause discord, but seek Allah’s forgiveness for him. This is supported by the established principle that absolving unknown rights is permissible. It is recommended for the one backbitten to forgive to free his brother from sin and gain great reward from Allah for pardoning. In Al-Qunyah, it is said: Reconciling disputants for the sake of apology is absolution. An-Nawawi said: I saw in Al-Tahawi’s fatwas that remorse and seeking forgiveness suffice for backbiting, even if it reached the person. The way is to approach the backbitten and seek his forgiveness. If he is deceased or far away, seek Allah’s forgiveness, and the heirs’ absolution is not considered. [As stated in Al-Mirqat] In Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, it is said: If it did not reach him, remorse suffices; otherwise, specifying all that was said is required, along with seeking forgiveness and repentance.

(۱) قوله: أن من كفارة الغيبة أن تستغفر لمن اغتبته إلخ : وقال الفقيه أبو الليث : قد تكلم الناس في توبة المغتابين هل تجوز من غير أن يستحل من صاحبه ؟ قال بعضهم: تجوز. وقال بعضهم: لا تجوز، وهو عندنا على وجهين، أحدهما: إن كان ذلك القول قد بلغ إلى الذي اغتبابه فتوبته أن يستحل منه، وإن لم يبلغ فيستغفر الله ويضمر أن لا يعود لمثله. وهل يكفيه أن يقول: اغتبتك فاجعلني في حل أم لا بد أن يبين ما اغتاب ؟ قال بعض علماؤنا في الغيبة لا يعلمه بها، بل يستغفر الله له، إن علم أن إعلامه يثير فتنة، ويدل عليه ما هو المقرر في الأصول أن الإبراء عن الحقوق المجهولة جائز عندنا، ثم اعلم أنه يستحب لصاحب الغيبة أن يبرأه منها ليخلص أخاه من المعصية، ويفوز هو بعظيم ثواب الله في العفو. وفي القنية»: تصافح الخصمين لأجل العذر استحلال. وقال النووي: رأيت في فتاوى الطحاوي أنه يكفي الندم والاستغفار في الغيبة وإن بلغت، فالطريق أن يأتي المغتاب ويستحل منه، فإن تعذر لموته أو لغيبته البعيدة استغفر الله تعالى، ولا اعتبار بتحليل الورثة. كذا في المرقاة». وقال في الدر المختار»: وإذا لم تبلغه يكفيه الندم، وإلا شرط بيان كل ما اغتابه به، أي مع الاستغفار والتوبة.