Musulmonlar dushmanidan urush asirlarini olganda, bu asirlar ustidagi ish Xalifaning bevosita buyrug'iga topshiriladi, ularni qo'lga olgan kishi, ya'ni jang maydonidagi qo'mondon yoki qo'shin boshlig'ining fikri bo'lmaydi. Sababi shundaki, jangchi urush asiriga aylangandan so'ng, uning haqidagi hukm Xalifaning ixtiyoridadir va Xalifa asirlarga oid Shariat hukmiga amal qiladi. Urush asirlari hukmi aniq Qur'on matni bilan belgilangan, ya'ni Allohning quyidagi so'zi sababli Xalifaga ozod qilish yoki fidya olish o'rtasida tanlov berilgan:

When the Muslims take their enemy as prisoners of war, the matter of these captives is delegated to the Khalifah’s direct command and their is no opinion for those who captured them, the battlefield commander or army leader. This is because once the fighter becomes a prisoner of war, the command regarding him is the Khalifah’s opinion and the Khalifah follows the Shari’ah rule concerning captives. The rule of the prisoners of war is established by a definite Qur’anic text which is that the Khalifah is given a choice between release and ransom due to Allah’s statement:

Bu harbiylar haqidagi hukmning aniq ko‘rsatilganligi va u ko‘p jihatlardan belgilanganligi: Shu jihatlarning biri shuki, bu aniq matn Muhammad surasida kelgan. Bu surа jihod masalasi haqida nozil bo‘lgan birinchi sura bo‘lib, uning nozil bo‘lishi Payg‘ambar ﷺ Makkadan Madinaga kelganlaridan keyin bo‘lgan va u “Jihod surasi” deb ataladi. U Al-Hadid surasidan keyin va Badr jangidan oldin nozil bo‘lgan. Hech qanday jang bo‘lmasdan va hech qanday harbiy asir qo‘lga olinmasdan oldin, u harbiylar hukmini aniqlab bergan. Agar bunga qo‘shilsa, bu harbiylarga nisbatan qilinadigan ishni aniq bayon qiluvchi oyat ekanligi, bu harbiylar hukmining matni va shu mavzuga oid boshqa barcha matnlar unga qaytariladigan asos ekanligi ayon bo‘ladi. Harbiylar hukmini belgilovchi yo‘llardan yana biri shuki, oyat “imma” so‘zi bilan kelgan, bu so‘z uchinchisiz ikki narsa orasidagi tanlovni bildiradi. Oyatda aytilgan: “Keyin ularni mahkam bog‘lang. Keyin esa yo ozod qilish, yo fidya (to‘lov) olish.” “Imma” ikki narsa orasida kelganda, u ular orasidagi tanlovni cheklaydi va ulardan boshqasining bo‘lishini, yoki ulardan biri bo‘lmagan narsaning bo‘lishini oldini oladi. Demak, “imma”da tanlovning belgilanishi tufayli, Qur’on harbiylar hukmida tanlov sifatida bergan narsalardan boshqasining joiz emasligi ma’lum bo‘ladi. Buni Payg‘ambar ﷺ Yamomaning boshlig‘i Sumama ibn Usol, shoir Abu Uzza, Abu al-As ibn ar-Rabi‘ni ozod qilganlarida va Badr jangidan olingan harbiylar haqida aytgan so‘zlarida yana mustahkamlaydi.

This is explicit in the rule of the prisoners of war and it is a specified rule in numerous ways: Of these (ways) is that this explicit text came in Surah Muhammad which is the first Surah revealed regarding the matter of fighting. Its revelation was after the Messenger (saw) arrived in Madinah from Makkah, and it is called the Surah of fighting. It was revealed after Surah Al-Hadeed and before the battle of Badr. It clarified the rule of prisoners of war before any battle had occurred or any prisoners of war had been captured. If added to this is that this is the ayah which clarifies explicitly what is done to prisoners of war, it becomes clear that it is the text of the rule of prisoners of war and the basis to which return all other texts regarding the subject. And from these ways which specify this rule on prisoners of war is that the ayah came with the language of “imma” which indicates the choice between two things without any third to them. It said: “Then bind strongly the fetters. Then afterwards either the release or the ransom.” When “imma” comes between two things, it restricts the choice between them and prevents there being other than them or that it is not one of them two. So there is specification due to specifying the choice in “imma” the impermissibility of there being other than what the Qur’an gave as a choice in the rule of captives. This is strengthened in when the Messenger (saw) released Thamama bin Wail, the chief of the people of Yamamah, Abu ‘Uzzah the poet, Abu Al-‘As bin Ar-Rabi’ and he said about the prisoners of war from the Battle of Badr:

U'ni Badr kuni asirlardan fidya evaziga ozod qildi, ular yetmish uch kishi edi va Badr kuni u bir kishi evaziga ikki kishini fidya olib ozod qildi. Oisha (r.a.) rivoyat qilishicha, u aytdi:

He ransomed the prisoners of war from Badr and they were seventy three men, and he ransomed the day of Badr two men for one man. It is narrated from Aisha (ra) who said:

Imron ibn Husayn rivoyat qilinadi

It has been narrated from Imran bin Hussein

Ibn Abbos (ra) rivoyat qilishicha, u kishi aytgan:

It has been narrated from ibn Abbas (ra) who said:

Ushbu hadislar hamda oyat birgalikda asir olingan kishilarning huquqi ozod qilish yoki fidya evaziga qo'yib yuborish ekanini aniq ko'rsatadi. Al-Hasan, 'Ato va Said ibn Jubayr asirlarni o'ldirishni yoqtirmaganlar va shunday degan: "Agar uni Badr asirlari bilan qilinganidek ozod qilsa yoki fidya evaziga qo'yib yuborsa edi", chunki Alloh (SWT) aytgan:

These ahadith together with the ayah indicate explicitly that the rule of prisoners of war is release or ransom. It is ascribed to Al-Hasan, ‘Ata and Said bin Jubayr that they disliked the killing of prisoners of war and said: If only he released or ransomed him as was done with the prisonsers of war of Badr, and because Allah (swt) said:

Shunday qilib, U (SWT) asirlikdan keyin ularni ikki narsa o'rtasida tanlov bilan qoldirdi va boshqa hech narsa yo'q. Bularning barchasi aniq ko'rsatadiki, xalifa urush asirlari masalasida faqat ikki ish o'rtasida tanlaydi, boshqa hech narsa yo'q: ozod qilish yoki fidya (to'lov). Banu Quraydha erkaklarini o'ldirgani haqida rivoyat qilinganga kelsak, bu hakamning hakamlik qarori tufayli bo'lgan, ular urush asirlari bo'lgani uchun emas. An-Nadr ibn al-Horis va Uqba ibn Abu Muayt ni Badr kuni asirlikda o'ldirgani, Abu Uzza ni esa Uhud kuni o'ldirgani haqida rivoyat qilinganga kelsak, bu barcha asirlar yoki har bir jangdagi qoida emasligini ko'rsatmaydi. Balki u bu ishni ba'zi janglarda, ba'zi kishilarga nisbatan qilgan, ozod qilish va fidya esa u barcha urush asirlariga, barcha jangларда qilgan ishdir. Bu kishilarning aynan o'ldirilishiga sabab shu bo'lganki, Rasulullah ﷺ ularning shaxsiyatida musulmonlar uchun aniq xavf ko'rgan; demak, bu alohida kishilarni, ularga xos sabablarga ko'ra o'ldirish bo'lgan, urush asirlarini o'ldirish emas. Ahmad va al-Bukhoriy Abu Hurayradan (ra) rivoyat qilganlar, u aytadi: Allohning Rasuli ﷺ bizni bir yurishga yuborib, dedi:

So He (swt) gave a choice between these two after the captivity and nothing else. All this is explicit that the Khalifah chooses in the prisoners of war between two matters nothing else, which is release or ransom. As for what is narrated that the Prophet (saw) killed the men of Banu Quraydha, all this is because of the ruling of the arbitrator in arbitration not that they were prisoners of war. As for what is narrated that he (saw) killed An-Nadhr bin Al-Harith and ‘Uqbah bin Abu Mu’ayt in custody on the day of Badr, and Abu ‘Uzzah on the day of Uhud, this does not indicate that this is the rule of prisoners of war as he did not do this for all captives or in every battle. Rather he did this in some battles with some persons, contrary to release and ransom which he did for all prisoners of war in all battles. What caused the killing of these persons specifically is that the Messenger (saw) saw in their personalities definite danger for Muslims; so it is the killing of specific persons for reasons specified to them, nor was it the killing of prisoners of war. Ahmad and Al-Bukhari narrated from Abu Hurairah (ra) who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) sent us on an expedition and said:

Shunga ko‘ra, shuni aniqlab qo‘yish kerakki, o‘ldirish urush asirlariga nisbatan Shar’iy hukmlardan emas; balki o‘ldirish Xalifa ulardan xavf borligini ko‘rgan muayyan kishilarga nisbatan Shar’iy hukm bo‘lib, u ularni asir bo‘lsalar ham o‘ldirishni buyuradi. Ushbu oyat nozil bo‘lganidan keyin Rasulullah {ﷺ} qullikka olganlari haqida rivoyat qilinganiga kelsak, bu sabāyā (asirlar, ya’ni qo‘lga olingan ayollar va bolalar)ni qullikka olish bo‘lgan, urush asirlarini emas, ya’ni jangohda qo‘shin bilan birga bo‘lgan, jang qilmayotgan ayollar va bolalarni qullikka olar edi. Agar erkak jangchilarni qullikka olish sobit bo‘lganida, bu Rasulullah {ﷺ}dan sodir bo‘lardi, lekin Rasulullah {ﷺ} davrida arablardan juda ko‘p asirlar olingani holda, bunga dalil yo‘q. Tarix kitoblarida Rasulullah {ﷺ} Quraysh qabilasining Banu Najiya qabilasini, ularning erkaklarini va ayollarini qullikka olgani haqida rivoyat qilingani esa hadis kitoblarida ham, Ibn Hishomning Sirasi kabi ba’zi sira kitoblarida ham rivoyat qilinmagan, shuning uchun u dalil sifatida ishlatilmaydi. Agar u sahih bo‘lganida ham, rivoyatda “U Banu Najiyani, ularning erkaklarini va ayollarini qullikka oldi” degan so‘zlar bor, ya’ni erkaklar va ayollar zikr qilingan. Rivoyatda “ularning erkaklari va ayollari” emas, balki “erkaklari va ayollari” deyilgan, shuning uchun bu sabāyā, ya’ni bolalar, erkak va ayol, degan ma’noni anglatadi va bu joiz. Shunga ko‘ra Rasulullah {ﷺ} hech bir erkakni qullikka olmagan; balki sabāyāni, erkak va ayollarni qullikka olgan. Dalil sifatida qabul qilinadigan hadislardagi sobit haqiqatlar buni mustahkamlaydi. Rasulullah {ﷺ}ning amallariga ergashgan kishi, u urush asiri sifatida olingan hech bir erkakni qullikka olmaganini ko‘radi, na arablardan, na ulardan boshqalardan. Balki undan rivoyat qilinganicha, u sabāyāni qullikka olgan. Badr jangida dushman tomonida ayollar bo‘lmagani uchun unda asirlar olinmagan. Aksincha, urush asirlari olingan va Rasulullah {ﷺ} ularga fidya (pul evaziga ozod qilish) bilan hukm qilgan. Hunayn jangida Hawozin qabilasi Elchi ﷺ bilan urushga chiqdi, ularning ayollari ham ular bilan birga chiqdi. Musulmonlar g'alaba qozonganda, Hawozin qochdi va orqasida ayollarini qoldirdi, shuning uchun ular asir (sabaya) qilib olindi va o'ljaga qo'shib qo'yildi. Banu Mustaliq jangida dushman orqasida ayollarini qoldirdi, shuning uchun ular asir (sabaya) qilib olindi. Xaybarda ular bilan jang qilindi va ularning qal'alari zabt etildi. Jangchilar bilan birga bo'lgan ayollar asir (sabaya) qilib olindi, qolganlar esa erkaklar qoldirilgani kabi qoldirildi. Bu voqealarning barchasi Elchi ﷺ jangchi erkaklarni asir olganini va jangchilar bilan birga bo'lgan ayollar hamda bolalar asir (sabaya) qilib olinganini ko'rsatadi. Jangda qatnashmagan boshqa erkaklar va ayollar esa harbiy asir yoki asir (sabaya) sifatida olinmagan. Bu shuni ko'rsatadiki, Elchi ﷺ harbiy asirlarni qul qilmagan. Bu, harbiy asirlarga nisbatan Elchi ﷺ qilgan ishlarning oyatning aytilgan matniga muvofiq bo'lganini aniqlaydi. Haqiqatan, u ularni ba'zan ozod qildi, ba'zan esa fidya oldi. U harbiy asirlarni qul qilmadi va o'ldirmadi; faqat ayollar va bolalarni asir qildi, musulmonlarga xavf tug'dirgani sababli ayrim kishilarni esa o'ldirdi. Harbiy asirlarga o'xshab qolgan asirlarni qamoqqa olish masalasiga kelsak, o'sha davr odamlari jangchilar bilan birga chiqqan ayollar va bolalarni urush texnik ta'rifidagi mol-mulk kabi ko'rib chiqdilar, arablar va boshqalar o'rtasida hech qanday farq qilmasdan. Urushning texnik ta'rifi o'ljalarni mol-mulk va qamoqqa olinganlarni esa mol-mulk deb hisoblardi. Elchi ﷺ kelib, o'sha ta'rifni tasdiqladi va jangchilar bilan birga chiqqan ayollar va bolalarni o'ljadagi mol-mulklar orasidagi o'lja mollari kabi hisobladi. Demak, ular qul qilingan va ularga o'ljaga oid hukm qo'llanilgan, asirlarga oid hukm emas. Asirlarga oid hukm saqlanib qoladi, bunda Xalifaga ozod qilish yoki fidya olish o'rtasida tanlov berilib, boshqa hech narsa berilmaydi. Bu hukm Qiyomat kunigacha amal qiladi. Agar Islom davlati o'z dushmanlari bilan urushsa, asirlar ozod qilish yoki fidya olish o'rtasida ko'riladi; agar urushlarga ular bilan birga ayollar chiqsa, jangda g'alaba qozonilgach, ayollar asir (sabaya) sifatida olinadi va ular o'ljaning mol-mulki kabi hisoblanadi.

Bu zaif hadis. Uning isnodida Al-Voqidiy bor, u juda zaifdir (da'if). At-Tabaroniy uni boshqa yo'l bilan rivoyat qilgan, unda esa Yazid ibn 'Iyadh bor, u Al-Voqidiydan ham zaifroqdir. Bunday hadis dalil bo'la olmaydi, shuning uchun u shar'iy dalil sifatida qabul qilinishi mumkin emas. Payg'ambar ﷺ arab ayollarini va ularning bolalarini qul qilgani, erkaklarini esa qul qilmagani haqida rivoyat qilinganiga kelsak, bu to'g'ri, ammo bu arab erkaklarini qul qilishning man etilganini va boshqalarni qul qilishning ruxsat etilganini bildirmaydi. Aksincha, bu hukm umumiy bo'lib, arablarni ham, boshqalarni ham qamrab oladi. Arablar bilan sodir bo'lgan voqea esa ma'lum vaziyatning haqiqatidir, va uning ma'nosi faqat ushbu vaziyat bilan cheklanmaydi, ya'ni vaziyat arablar bilan sodir bo'lgani uchun bu hukm faqat ularga xos, boshqalarga esa tegishli emas, degani emas. Bundan tashqari, shar'iy qoida shundaki, qadr-qimmat so'zlarning umumiyligidadir, sababning xususiyligida emas. Voqea bir shaxs yoki guruh bilan sodir bo'lgan bo'lsa ham, u ushbu shaxs yoki guruh bilan cheklanmaydi. Balki uning hukmi umumiy hukmdir.

This is a weak hadith. In its chain is Al-Waqidi who is very weak (dhaif). At-Tabarani narrated it via another way and within it is Yazid bin ‘Iyadh who is weaker than Al-Waqidi. This type of hadith does not stand as proof so it is not allowed to be Shari’ah evidence. As for what is narrated of the Messenger (saw) enslaving Arab women and their children, and not enslaving their men, this is correct but it does not indicate the non-permissibility of enslaving Arab men and the permissibility of enslaving others. Rather it is general, encompassing Arabs and others. As for the incident occurring with Arabs, this is a reality of a situation with no understanding for it i.e. the situation which occurred was with Arabs so it does not mean it is specific to them and is not for others. Moreover, the Shari’ah principle is that the value is in the generality of the words and not the specificity of the cause. The incident, even if it occurs with a person or a group, it is not specified with this person or group. Rather its rule is a general rule.

Xuddi shunday, erkaklarni qul qilmaslik holati arablar bilan bog'liq bo'lib qoldi, chunki haqiqatda Rasul (saw) arablar bilan urushayotgan edi, shuning uchun bu hukm faqat ularga xos emas; aksincha, u barcha xalqlar uchun umumiydir. Xuddi u Quraysh kabi muayyan bir qabilaga qarshi urush qilgan taqdirda ham, hukm faqat ularga xos bo'lmas edi. Biroq, bularning barchasi, ya'ni asirlikka olish va qamoqqa olinganlar haqidagi hukm arab mushriklaridan tashqari barcha xalqlarga umumiydir. Arab mushriklari esa hijriy to'qqizinchi yil, Zulhijja oyining to'qqizinchi kunidan boshlab to'rtinchi oydan e'tiboran va Qiyomat kunigacha bu hukmdan istisno qilinadi. Ulardan Islomdan yoki urushdan boshqa narsa qabul qilinmaydi va ulardan asirlar hamda qamoqqa olinganlar olinmaydi. Bu sanadan oldingi arab mushriklariga kelsak, hukm ularni ham o'z ichiga olgan edi. Xuddi shunday, arab bo'lmagan yahudiy va nasroniylar ham; bu hukm oyatlar nozil bo'lgan kundan to Qiyomat kunigacha ularni o'z ichiga oladi, chunki istisno faqat arab mushriklariga xos bo'lib, bu oyatlarni mushriklarga yetkazilgan kundan, ya'ni Zulhijja oyining to'qqizinchi kunidan va undan keyingi to'rt oydan boshlab amal qiladi. U arablar orasidagi boshqalarni o'z ichiga olmaydi, shuningdek, bu sanadan oldingi mushriklarni ham o'z ichiga olmagan. Arablardan bu mushriklarni dastlab yuqorida zikr qilingan sanadan istisno qilish esa Qur'onning aniq matni bilan sobit bo'lgan. Alloh (swt) aytadi:

U shunday dedi:

And He said:

U shunday dedi:

And He said:

Bu oyatlar umumiyligidan arab mushriklarini chiqarib tashlashni aniq ko'rsatadi. Shunday ekan, bu oyatlar nozil bo'lib, to'rt oylik muddat tugagandan so'ng, arab mushriklaridan Islomdan boshqa narsa, yoki urush qabul qilinmaydi. Payg'ambar ﷺning arablarni asirga olganligi haqida rivoyat qilinganiga kelsak, bu bu oyatlar nozil bo'lishidan oldin Yahudiy va Nasroniylarni hamda arab mushriklarini asirga olish edi. Undan keyin esa arab mushriklaridan Islomdan boshqa narsa yoki urush qabul qilinmaydi.

This is explicit in excluding Arab polytheists from the generality of ayat. So the Arab polytheists are not accepted, after the revelation of these ayat and finishing the new moon of four months, except Islam or war. As for what is narrated about the Messenger (saw)'s enslaving of Arabs, this is enslaving Jews and Christians and enslaving Arab polytheists before the revelation of these ayat. As for afterwards, it is not accepted from Arab polytheists except Islam or war.