21.1 Urush paytida yolg‘on gapirish - Islomiy shaxsiyat | Quran Course

21.1 Urush paytida yolg‘on gapirish - Islomiy shaxsiyat | Quran Course

Bu ham urush vaziyatida edi. Hadisning so'zlari Muhammad ibn Maslama aytgan gaplar rost bo'lib, yolg'on emas edi, chunki bu faqat ishora edi, deb bayon qilgan bo'lsa-da, Muhammad ibn Maslama hamma narsani aytishga ruxsat so'radi va unga ruxsat berildi. Demak, bunga ochiq va majoziy ravishda yolg'on gapirishga ruxsat ham kiradi va bu urush vaziyatiga taalluqlidir. Ahmad va An-Nasoiy Hajjoj ibn Ilot haqidagi rivoyatdan naql qilgan hadisga kelsak: u Makka aholisidan o'z mulkini qutqarish uchun o'zi xohlagan narsani, o'z foydasi yo'lida, ular haqida aytishga ruxsat so'radi. Nabiy ﷺ unga ruxsat berdi va u Makka aholisiga Xaybar Muslimlarni mag'lub etgani haqida xabar qildi. Bu ham urush vaziyatiga kiradi, chunki Makka aholisi Muslimlar bilan faol urush holatida edi. Hajjoj ibn Ilot Muslimlardan edi va faol urush holatidagi dushman kofirlar tomon borayotgan edi, shuning uchun ularga qarshi yolg'on gapirish ruxsat etilgan edi. Yolg'on gapirishning ruxsati jang maydoni yoki jangchilar bilan cheklanmaydi; balki Muslimlarga, agar ular dushman kofirlar bilan faol urush holatida bo'lsa, ularga qarshi yolg'on gapirish ruxsat etilgan. At-Tabaroniy "al-Avsat"da naql qilgan narsaga kelsak:

This was also in the situation of war. Even if the words of the hadith state that the words which Muhammad bin Maslamah said were true, not false, as it was only allusion but Muhammad bin Maslamah asked permission to say everything and it was permitted to him. So it enters within it the permission to lie explicitly and metaphorically, and it enters into the situation of war. As for what Ahmad and An-Nisai narrated from the tale of Al-Hajjaj bin ‘Ilat in his seeking permission to say about him whatever he wished for his benefit in rescuing his property from the people of Makkah. The Prophet (saw) gave him permission and he informed the people of Makkah that Khayber had defeated the Muslims; this also enters into the situation of war because the people of Makkah were in a situation of active war with the Muslims. Al-Hajjaj bin ‘Ilat was from the Muslims and he was going to the enemy disbelievers who were in the situation of active war, so lying was allowed against them. The permission of lying is not restricted to the battlefield nor to fighters; rather it is allowed for the Muslims to lie against their enemies, the disbelievers, if they are in the situation of active war with them. As for was extracted by At-Tabarani in Al-Awsat:

Yolg'on bo'lmagan hollarda, urushdan boshqa vaziyatlarda ikkimanolilik (tavriya) haqida: agar tinglovchi so'zni haqiqatga zid tushunsa, ya'ni so'z haqiqatni bildirmasa va boshqa narsani lug'aviy yoki odatdagi istilohiy ma'noda, gapiruvchi va tinglovchi o'rtasida anglatsa, bu ruxsat etilmagan yolg'ondir. Masalan, muayyan guruh biror so'zga o'zining maxsus istilohiy ta'rifini bersa-yu, bu ta'rifni bilmaydigan kishiga shu so'zni aytsa, yoki gapiruvchi uchun bu istilohiy ta'rif bo'lsa-yu, tinglovchi uni bilmasa, bularning barchasi ruxsat etilmagan yolg'ondir. Hatto gapiruvchi ikkimanolilik qilgan bo'lsa-da, tinglovchi so'zdan haqiqatga teskari ma'noni tushunsa, bu ikkimanolilik turiga kirmaydi va ruxsat etilmaydi. Agar so'zdan tushuniladigan ma'no haqiqat bo'lib, boshqa ma'no ham bo'lsa, bu balog'at (notiqlik san'ati) turiga kiradi. Bu haqiqat bo'lib, yolg'on emas. Masalan, ko'zi qiyshiq kishiga: «Uning ikki ko'zi teng bo'lganida edi», deyish, uning foydasiga yoki zarariga duo sifatida ham mos keladi. Ikkimanolilik shundan iboratki, so'zning ikki ma'nosi bor: biri yaqin, ikkinchisi uzoq. Gapiruvchi uzoq ma'noni nazarda tutadi, tinglovchi esa yaqin ma'noni tushunadi. Bunday holatda tinglovchi gapiruvchi nazarda tutgan narsaga teskari tushunsa ham, u jumlaning ko'rsatgan haqiqatiga teskari tushunmaydi. Payg'ambar ﷺ ikkimanolilikdan foydalanganlar. Sahihi Buxoriyda Anas ibn Molik (roziyallohu anhu) rivoyat qilishicha:

As for dissimulation/double entendre in other than war, if the listener understands it contrary to the reality such as where the word does not indicate the reality and something else linguistically or in technical usage generally with the speaker and listener, it is lying which is not allowed. Such as where a specific group gives a technical definition for a word and then say it to someone who does not know this technical definition or where it is a technical definition for a speaker but the listener does not know it, all of this is lying which is not allowed. Even if it were dissimulation/double entendre by the speaker but the listener understands from the word the opposite to the reality, so it is not considered from the type of double entendre (tawriyya) and is not allowed. As for where it is understood from the word is the reality and something else, this is from the species of eloquence (balagha). It is truth and not lying like their saying to the squint eyed: ‘If only both his eyes were equal’, it is suitable as an invocation for or against him. Dissimulation is that the word has two meanings, one which is near and the other remote; the speaker intends the remote meaning while the listener understands (it as) the near meaning. In this situation, even though the listener understands contrary to what the speaker intends nevertheless he does not understand contrary to the reality indicated by the sentence. The Prophet (saw) used dissimulation. In Sahih Al-Bukhari that Anas bin Malik (ra) said: