ShamelaTranslate
بحث
تسجيل الدخول
ShamelaTranslate

© 2026 ShamelaTranslate. مشروع علمي مفتوح الوصول.

حولتواصلتبرّعبيانات النشرالخصوصيةشروط الاستخدامحق الانسحابإلغاء اشتراك
المغني لابن قدامة - ت التركي
مجلد 10 · صفحة 494فصل

الترجمة · EN

nothing, then only one divorce takes effect; because he did not bring between them a particle that necessitates distinction, so they cannot be distinct. If he says, "You are divorced and divorced and divorced," and says, "I intended by the second an emphasis," it is not accepted, because he distinguished between it and the first with a particle that necessitates conjunction and distinction, and this prevents emphasis. As for the third, it is like the second in its wording. If he says, "I intended by it emphasis," he is deemed truthful, but is it accepted in the legal ruling? It is derived from two narrations: the first is that it is accepted, which is the school of al-Shafi'i, because he repeated the word of divorce like the first, so his interpretation of it as emphasis is accepted, just as if he said, "You are divorced, you are divorced." The second is that it is not accepted, because the conjunction particle is for distinction, so that which contradicts that is not accepted from him, just as it is not accepted in the second instance. If he says, "You are divorced, then divorced, then [then divorced]" or "You are divorced, then divorced, [then divorced]," the ruling regarding them is the same as that in which he conjoined them with 'and' (wa). If he distinguishes between the particles, and says, "You are divorced and divorced, [then divorced]" or "Divorced then divorced and divorced" or "Divorced and divorced then divorced" and the like, the intention of emphasis is not accepted in any of them, because every word is distinct from what precedes it, differing from it in its wording, and emphasis only occurs by repeating the first in its form.

Section: If he says, "You are a divorcee, you are released, you are separated," and says, "I intended emphasis by the second and third," it is accepted, because he did not distinguish between them with particles designed to distinguish between words; rather, he repeated the word with its meaning, and such as this is repeated for emphasis. If he says, "You are a divorcee, and released, and separated,"

الحواشي

(16) In A: "al-taʾkīd" (the emphasis). (17) In B: "wa-huwa" (and it is). (18) Omitted from A, B, and M. (19) Omitted from the original. (20) In the original: "qāla" (he said). (21) Omitted from the original. (22) In the original: "wa-al-takrīr" (and the repetition).

السابقمجلد 10 · صفحة 494التالي
السابق10·494التالي