Continuation of the benefits of the verse: “Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters…”

Now, did we mention the seven criteria? In the benefits? We must mention it in the benefits. We mentioned it in the explanation. We can refer to what came before in the tafsir, because the important thing is to know that “mother” includes the mother, the grandmother, and those before her from the father’s side and from the mother’s side. Second: The establishment of prohibition through breastfeeding, based on His saying: . And among the benefits of this noble verse is that “mother,” when used in its general sense, does not include a mother through breastfeeding. The reason for this is that if a mother through breastfeeding were included in “mother” in its general sense, there would have been no need for His saying: , because she would be included in His saying: . Branching from this benefit is that the wife’s mother through breastfeeding is not included in His saying: . The wife’s mother through breastfeeding is not included in His saying: . Why? Because “mother” in its general sense does not include a mother through breastfeeding. So if someone says: “The wife’s mother through breastfeeding is forbidden because she is included in the generality of His saying: ?” We say: We do not accept this. Why? Because “mother” in its general sense does not include a mother through breastfeeding, as evidenced by His saying: . If “mother” in its general sense included a mother through breastfeeding, there would be a repetition in the verse that contradicts eloquence. And among its benefits is the establishment of motherhood through breastfeeding. Accordingly, it is valid for a person to say to the one who breastfed him, “You are my mother,” but it is not befitting for him to say it without qualification, because Allah qualified it, saying: . So you say, “My mother through breastfeeding,” qualifying it so that the listener does not assume she is a mother by blood relation. Branching from this benefit is what many people call the father’s wife an “aunt” (‘ammah), and some call her a “maternal aunt” (khalah) in a general sense. Likewise, what some people do by calling the wife’s father an “uncle” (‘amm) or “maternal uncle” (khal) is an error, because it is a designation that is not valid linguistically or religiously. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade calling the ‘Isha’ prayer “al-‘Utmah” and said: . So it is after the ‘Isha’ prayer, as in the Qur’an. Therefore, technical terms or religious realities should not be used in a way that contradicts religious realities. And among its benefits is that a woman who breastfeeds a child makes marriage to her forbidden through breastfeeding in general, based on His saying: . Breastfeeding is valid with one suck, indeed with one sip, because a sip from a woman’s breast… Accordingly, prohibition is established by a single suck. The Zahiris held this view, saying that prohibition through breastfeeding is established by a single breastfeeding, because it came in the Qur’an in a general form, and a general term is valid with a single instance. But the correct view is that this generality in the Qur’an was qualified by the Sunnah in what is authentic from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) in his saying: Three sicks make marriage forbidden by virtue of the implication of this hadith. The implication of is that what exceeds two is forbidden. Many scholars also held this view. The people of analogical reasoning, not the people of the apparent meaning, but the people of analogical reasoning, said that three sicks are forbidden by the implication of the hadith. Some scholars said that only five sicks make marriage forbidden, based on what is authentic in Muslim from ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), who said: Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) held this view, that the number of sicks that make marriage forbidden is five. He answered the hadith by saying that the prohibition of three sicks is by implication, and when the implication and the explicit text conflict, the explicit text takes precedence. Why? Because the implication is broad and is valid with a single instance, as in “does not make marriage forbidden.” Three, four, five, and ten are silent upon by the implication. If a child is breastfed five times, prohibition is established. So if we say that prohibition is established by five sicks, we are not contradicting the explicit text, meaning its implication is that two sicks make marriage forbidden. And what exceeds that? It is valid with a single instance. For this reason, we say that we give precedence to the indication of the explicit text. But some scholars criticized this hadith severely, saying this hadith is not authentic, even if it were in Muslim. How could the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) pass away while it was still being recited from the Qur’an, and we do not find it in the Qur’an now? Because what is obligatory, if it existed after the death of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and is present in the Qur’an, must not… If the door were opened, it would be a path to validating the claim of the Rafidah that something has been omitted from the Qur’an. Based on that, the text is denounced, and we take the hadith or we take the general term. But upon reflection, it does not appear that this is a criticism of the hadith, because ‘A’ishah explicitly stated abrogation, but it was still being recited from the Qur’an at the time of the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) because the reciter did not know of its abrogation. This is a real situation. So the hadith indicates that the abrogation occurred late, and some people did not know about it, so they continued to recite it as part of the Qur’an. And when the issue is resolved, one should not be bold in criticizing the narrators, because if you judge the text to be denounced, you are judging the error of whom? The error of the narrators and their mistake. This is a difficult thing. So whenever it is possible to accept the report of a trustworthy person, accept it. But if it is not possible and it contradicts the Qur’an, do not accept it. But if it does not contradict and reconciliation is possible, reconcile. And this is what Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) held, and it is the correct view: that it is five sicks. In the hadith, “known”, which is beneficial if there is doubt about the number, whether it is five or four, then it is not considered. These sicks are not considered, because the hadith qualified it with what? With “known.” And with doubt, the ruling is not established. This is what gives a person peace of mind regarding what a person issues as a ruling in this matter, because many people come to me and say, “Breastfeeding is established, but we do not know how many sicks.” We say, “Praise be to Allah, as long as the hadith is five known sicks, then what is in doubt is not known, and accordingly, the ruling is not established by it.”