And because (78) whoever is validly divorced by, it is valid for him to perform Ila', such as the Muslim, and whoever's oath is valid before the judge, it is valid for him to perform Ila', such as the Muslim.
Section: In Ila', anger is not a condition, nor is the intention of causing harm. This is narrated from Ibn Mas'ud, and it is the opinion of al-Thawri, al-Shafi'i, the people of Iraq, and Ibn al-Mundhir. It is narrated from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him: "There is no Ila' in reconciliation" (79). From Ibn Abbas, he said: "Ila' is only in anger" (80). A similar view is narrated from al-Hasan, al-Nakha'i, and Qatadah. Malik, al-Awza'i, and Abu 'Ubayd said: Whoever swears not to have intercourse with his wife until she weans their child, it is not considered Ila' if he intends the welfare of his child. Our position is the generality of the verse, and because he is preventing [himself from] having intercourse with her by his oath, so he is a mu'li, like the state of anger. This is confirmed (82) by the fact that the ruling of Ila' is established for the right of the wife, so it must be established regardless of whether he intended harm or did not intend it, just like the fulfillment of her debts and the destruction of her property. Also, divorce, Dhihar, and all other oaths are the same in both anger and pleasure, so Ila' is the same. Furthermore, the ruling of an oath regarding expiation and other matters is the same in anger and pleasure, so it is the same in Ila'. As for when he swears not to have intercourse with her until she weans their child, if he intends the time of weaning and its duration exceeds four months, he is a mu'li. If he intends the act of weaning, he is not a mu'li, because it is possible before four months, it is not prohibited, nor does it involve depriving her of a right, so he is not a mu'li, just as if he swore not to have intercourse with her until she enters the house.
Section: Regarding the expressions by which one becomes a mu'li, there are three categories; the first of which is what is explicit
(78) In the original and M: "wa-li-annahu" (and because he). (79) Al-Bayhaqi recorded something similar in: The Chapter on Ila' in Anger, from the Book of Ila', al-Sunan al-Kubra 7/381, 382; Sa'id ibn Mansur in: The Chapter on what has been narrated regarding Ila', from the Book of Divorce, al-Sunan 2/25; and Ibn Abi Shaybah in: The Chapter on the one who said: Ila' is [valid] in pleasure and anger..., from the Book of Divorce, al-Musannaf 5/141. (80) Recorded by Sa'id ibn Mansur in: The Chapter on what has been narrated regarding Ila', from the Book of Divorce, al-Sunan 2/25. (81) In A: "li-nafsihi min" (for himself from). (82) In B and M: "bi-haqqihi" (by his right).
ولأنَّ (٧٨) مَنْ صَحَّ طَلاقُه، صَحَّ إِيلاؤُه، كالمُسْلِمِ، ومَنْ صَحَّتْ يَمِينُه عندَ الحاكِمِ، صَحَّ إِيلاؤُه كالْمُسْلِمِ.
فصل: ولا يُشْتَرَطُ فى الإِيلاءِ الغَضَبُ، ولا قَصْدُ الإِضْرارِ. رُوِىَ ذلك عن ابنِ مَسْعُودٍ. وبه قال الثَّوْرِىُّ، والشَّافِعِىُّ، وأهْلُ العِراقِ، وابنُ المُنْذِرِ. ورُوِىَ عن علىٍّ رَضِىَ اللَّهُ عنه: ليس فى إِصْلاحٍ إِيلاءٌ (٧٩). وعن ابنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قال: إنَّما الإِيلاءُ فى الغَضَبِ (٨٠). ونحوُ ذلك عن الحسنِ، والنَّخَعِىِّ، وقَتادَةَ. وقال مالِكٌ، والأَوْزَاعِىُّ، وأبو عُبَيْدٍ: مَنْ حَلَفَ لا يَطَأُ زَوْجَتَه حتى تَفْطِمَ وَلَدَه، لا يكونُ إِيلاءً، إِذا أرادَ الإِصْلاحَ لِوَلَدِه. ولَنا، عُمُومُ الآيَةِ، ولأنَّه مانِعٌ [نَفْسَه عن] (٨١) جِماعِها بِيَمِينِه، فكان مُولِيًا، كحالِ الغَضَبِ، يُحَقِّقُه (٨٢) أَنَّ حُكْمَ الإِيلاءِ يَثْبُتُ لِحَقِّ الزَّوْجَةِ، فيجبُ أَنْ يَثْبُتَ سَواءٌ قَصَدَ الإِضْرارَ أو لم يَقْصِدْ، كاسْتِيفاءِ دُيُونِها، وإتْلافِ مالِها، ولأنَّ الطَّلاقَ والظِّهارَ وسائِرَ الأيْمانِ سَواءٌ فى الغَضَبِ والرِّضَى، فكذلك الإِيلاءُ، ولأنَّ حُكْمَ اليَمِينِ فى الكَفَّارَةِ وغيرِها سَواءٌ فى الغَضَبِ والرِّضَى، فكذلك فى الإِيلاءِ. وأمَّا إذا حَلَفَ أَنْ لا يَطَأَها حتى تَفْطِمَ وَلَدَه، فإنْ أرادَ وَقْتَ الفِطامِ، وكانتْ مُدَّتُه تَزِيدُ على أَرْبَعَةِ أَشْهُرٍ، فهو مُولٍ، وإِنْ أَرادَ فِعْلَ الفِطامِ، لم يكنْ مُولِيًا؛ لأَنَّه مُمْكِنٌ قبلَ الأرْبَعَةِ الأشْهُرِ، وليس بِمُحَرَّمٍ، ولا فيه تَفْوِيتُ حَقٍّ لها، فلم يكنْ مُولِيًا، كما لو حَلَفَ لا يَطَأُها حتى تَدْخُلَ الدَّارَ.
فصل: فِى الألْفاظِ التى يكونُ بها مُولِيًا، وهى ثلاثةُ أقْسامٍ؛ أحدُها، ما هو صَرِيحٌ
(٧٨) فى الأصل، م: "ولأنه".(٧٩) أخرج نحوه البيهقى، فى: باب الإيلاء فى الغضب، من كتاب الإِيلاء. السنن الكبرى ٧/ ٣٨١، ٣٨٢. وسعيد بن منصور، فى: باب ما جاء فى الإِيلاء، من كتاب الطلاق. السنن ٢/ ٢٥. وابن أبى شيبة، فى: باب من قال: الإِيلاء فى الرضى والغضب. . .، من كتاب الطلاق. المصنف ٥/ ١٤١.(٨٠) أخرجه سعيد بن منصور، فى: باب ما جاء فى الإِيلاء، من كتاب الطلاق. السنن ٢/ ٢٥.(٨١) فى أ: "لنفسه من".(٨٢) فى ب، م: "بحقه".