The ruling on arbitrating between disputing parties with a sacrificial animal offered by the wrongdoer
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
This is similar to that. He says: Honorable Shaykh, sometimes a verbal dispute arises between two of my friends, and one of them wrongs the other. Then they ask me to arbitrate between them. I ask the wrongdoer, “What will satisfy you?” He says, “That he slaughter a sacrificial animal for me.” So I rule between them with that sacrificial animal, and the other party is satisfied. Is this ruling permissible?
Answer:
No. If it is in the nature of compulsion, it is not permissible. If it is in the nature of reconciliation, if he wants it to be carried out, it is carried out; if he does not want it to be carried out, it is not carried out, and there is no compulsion.
This is similar to that. He says: Honorable Shaykh, sometimes a verbal dispute arises between two of my friends, and one of them wrongs the other. Then they ask me to arbitrate between them. I ask the wrongdoer, “What will satisfy you?” He says, “That he slaughter a sacrificial animal for me.” So I rule between them with that sacrificial animal, and the other party is satisfied. Is this ruling permissible?
Answer:
No. If it is in the nature of compulsion, it is not permissible. If it is in the nature of reconciliation, if he wants it to be carried out, it is carried out; if he does not want it to be carried out, it is not carried out, and there is no compulsion.
Source
قناة «العلامة الدكتور صالح الفوزان»، 116 من 123 / شرح كتاب زاد المستقنع / القضاء / صالح الفوزان / الفقه / كبار العلماء — youtube.com (48:26)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.