سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) وَ سُئِلَ مَا بَالُ الزَّانِي لَا تُسَمِّيهِ كَافِراً وَ تَارِكُ الصَّلَاةِ قَدْ سَمَّيْتَهُ كَافِراً وَ مَا الْحُجَّةُ فِي ذَلِكَ فَقَالَ لِأَنَّ الزَّانِيَ وَ مَا أَشْبَهَهُ إِنَّمَا يَفْعَلُ ذَلِكَ لِمَكَانِ الشَّهْوَةِ لِأَنَّهَا تَغْلِبُهُ وَ تَارِكُ الصَّلَاةِ لَا يَتْرُكُهَا إِلَّا اسْتِخْفَافاً بِهَا وَ ذَلِكَ لِأَنَّكَ لَا تَجِدُ الزَّانِيَ يَأْتِي الْمَرْأَةَ إِلَّا وَ هُوَ مُسْتَلِذٌّ لِإِتْيَانِهِ إِيَّاهَا قَاصِداً إِلَيْهَا وَ كُلُّ مَنْ تَرَكَ الصَّلَاةَ قَاصِداً إِلَيْهَا فَلَيْسَ يَكُونُ قَصْدُهُ لِتَرْكِهَا اللَّذَّةَ فَإِذَا نُفِيَتِ اللَّذَّةُ وَقَعَ الِاسْتِخْفَافُ وَ إِذَا وَقَعَ الِاسْتِخْفَافُ وَقَعَ الْكُفْرُ قَالَ وَ سُئِلَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) وَ قِيلَ لَهُ مَا الْفَرْقُ بَيْنَ مَنْ نَظَرَ إِلَى امْرَأَةٍ فَزَنَى بِهَا أَوْ خَمْرٍ فَشَرِبَهَا وَ بَيْنَ مَنْ تَرَكَ الصَّلَاةَ حَتَّى لَا يَكُونَ الزَّانِي وَ شَارِبُ الْخَمْرِ مُسْتَخِفّاً كَمَا يَسْتَخِفُّ تَارِكُ الصَّلَاةِ وَ مَا الْحُجَّةُ فِي ذَلِكَ وَ مَا الْعِلَّةُ الَّتِي تَفْرُقُ بَيْنَهُمَا قَالَ الْحُجَّةُ أَنَّ كُلَّمَا أَدْخَلْتَ أَنْتَ نَفْسَكَ فِيهِ لَمْ يَدْعُكَ إِلَيْهِ دَاعٍ وَ لَمْ يَغْلِبْكَ غَالِبُ شَهْوَةٍ مِثْلَ الزِّنَى وَ شُرْبِ الْخَمْرِ وَ أَنْتَ دَعَوْتَ نَفْسَكَ إِلَى تَرْكِ الصَّلَاةِ وَ لَيْسَ ثَمَّ شَهْوَةٌ فَهُوَ الِاسْتِخْفَافُ بِعَيْنِهِ وَ هَذَا فَرْقُ مَا بَيْنَهُمَا .
Translation
Haroun, from Mas’ada Bin Sadaqa who said, ‘I heard Abu Abdullah<sup>asws</sup> and he<sup>asws</sup> had been asked, ‘What is the matter that the adulterer is not named as an Unbeliever (<span class="iTxt">Kafir</span>) and the neglector of the <span class="iTxt">Salāt</span> has been named as a Unbeliever (<span class="iTxt">Kafir</span>), and what is the proof with regards to that?’ So he<sup>asws</sup> said: ‘Because the adulterer and whoever resembles him, rather does that under the influence of the lustful desire, because it overcomes him, while the neglector of the <span class="iTxt">Salāt</span> does not neglect it except considering it as insignificant, and that is because you will never find the adulterer going to the woman except for deriving the pleasure of going to her, and everyone who neglects the <span class="iTxt">Salāt</span> is aiming to it, but his aim of neglecting it is not for the (sake of) pleasure. So when the pleasure is negated, the insignificance sets in, and when the insignificance occurs, the disbelief (<span class="iTxt">Kufr</span>) occurs’. He (the narrator) said, ‘And Abu Abdullah<sup>asws</sup> was asked and it was said to him<sup>asws</sup>, ‘What is the difference between the one who looks at a woman so he commits adultery with her, or (looks) at wine, so he drinks it, and the one who neglects the <span class="iTxt">Salāt</span>, to the extent that the adulterer and the drinker of wine are not deemed to be as ones who are considering it as insignificant like the neglector of the <span class="iTxt">Salāt</span> is deemed to consider it as insignificant, and what is the proof with regards to that, and what is the reason which differentiates between the two?’ He<sup style="font-weight: normal">asws</sup> said: ‘The proof is that every time you enter yourself into it, it is not inviting you with an invitation, and a lustful desire does not overcome you like the adultery and drinking of the wine, and you are inviting yourself to the neglecting of the <span class="iTxt">Salāt</span>, and there is no desire then. So it is considering it insignificant exactly, and this is the difference what is between the two’.
Compiled by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni
Source
License: Free for educational and research use (Thaqalayn Data API)
Provided for research and educational purposes. Original source: Thaqalayn Project. Open License.