embraced Islam before their enslavement. Abu al-Khattab said: It is possible that their enslavement is permissible, just as if they had embraced Islam after being captured, and the wealth remains according to what was judged regarding it. If he judged that the wealth belongs to the Muslims, it becomes spoils of war; because they seized it through force and siege.
1681 - Issue: He said: (And if a captive of ours is released, and he swears to send them something he specifies, or to return to them, but he is unable to do so, he shall not return to them.)
The summary of this is that when the captive is released by the disbelievers, and they make him swear an oath to send them his ransom or to return to them, you must consider: if they coerced him through torture, it is not binding upon him to fulfill the condition of returning or paying ransom; because he is under duress, and he is not bound by what he was forced to do, according to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "My nation is excused for mistakes, forgetfulness, and what they have been forced to do." If he was not under duress, and he is able to provide the ransom he committed to, it is binding upon him to fulfill it. This is the opinion of Ata, al-Hasan, al-Zuhri, al-Nakha'i, al-Thawri, and al-Awza'i. Al-Shafi'i said explicitly: It is not binding upon him; because he is a free man, and they do not deserve his exchange. Our evidence is the saying of Allah the Exalted: {And fulfill the covenant of Allah when you have made a covenant}. And when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) made a peace treaty with the people of al-Hudaybiyah on the condition of returning anyone who came to him as a Muslim, he fulfilled it for them and said: "Indeed, treachery does not befit our religion." Furthermore, there is a benefit for the captives in fulfilling this, and there is harm in treachery regarding their rights; because they would not be granted safety thereafter, and the need for this is pressing, so fulfillment of the condition is binding upon him, just as it is binding to fulfill a truce treaty. Also, he made a covenant with them to pay wealth, so it is binding upon him to fulfill it, like the price of a sold item, and what is stipulated in a truce treaty in a place where such a condition is permissible. What they mentioned is invalidated by the case where it is stipulated to return anyone who comes to him as a Muslim, or where wealth is stipulated for them in a truce treaty. As for being unable to pay the ransom, we consider: if the person being ransomed is a woman, she shall not be returned to them, and that is not permissible for her; because of the saying of Allah the Exalted: {So do not return them to the disbelievers}. Also, because in her return there is an empowering of them to have intercourse with her illicitly, and Allah has forbidden
(1) Its extraction was mentioned previously in: 1/146. (2) In (M): "alzahu" (it becomes binding upon him). (3) In (M): "aydan" (also). See: Al-Sharh al-Kabir 5/596. (4) Surah al-Nahl 91. (5) In (M), there is an addition: "bidhalika" (with that). (6) Mentioned previously on pages 161, 162. (7) Surah al-Mumtahanah 10.
أسْلَمُوا قبلَ اسْتِرْقاقِهم. قال أبو الخَطَّاب: ويَحْتَمِلُ جَوازَ اسْتِرْقاقِهم، كما لو أسْلَمُوا بعدَ الأسْرِ، ويكونُ المالُ على ما حَكَمَ فيه. وإن حَكَمَ بأنَّ المالَ للمسلمين، كان غنيمةً؛ لأنَّهُم أخَذُوه بالقَهْرِ والحَصْرِ.
١٦٨١ - مسألة؛ قال: (وإِذَا خُلِّىَ الْأَسِيرُ مِنَّا، وحَلَفَ أَنْ يَبْعَثَ إلَيْهِمْ بِشَىْءٍ يُعَيِّنُهُ، أو يَعُودَ إلَيْهِمْ، فَلَمْ يَقْدِرْ عَلَيْهِ، لَمْ يَرْجِعْ إلَيْهِمْ)
وجُمْلَتُه أَنَّ الأسيرَ إذا خَلَّاهُ الكُفَّارُ، واسْتَحْلَفُوه على أَنْ يبْعَثَ إليهم بفِدَائِه أو يعودَ إليهم، نَظَرْتَ؛ فإنْ أكْرَهُوه بالعذاب، لم يَلْزَمْه الوفاءُ لهم برُجوعٍ ولا فِدَاءٍ؛ لأنَّه مُكْرَهٌ فلم يَلْزَمْه ما أُكْرِهَ عليه، لقولِ النَّبِىِّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم-: "عُفِىَ لأُمَّتِى عن الخَطَأِ، والنِّسْيانِ، وما اسْتُكْرِهُوا عليه" (١) وإنْ لم يُكْرَهْ عليه، وقَدَرَ على الفداءِ الذى الْتزَمَه، لَزِمَه (٢) أداؤُه. وبهذا قال عطاءٌ، والحَسَنُ، والزُّهْرِىُّ، والنَّخَعِىُّ، والثَّوْرِىُّ، والأوْزَاعِىُّ. وقال الشافعِىُّ نَصًّا (٣): لا يَلْزَمُه؛ لأنَّه حُرٌّ لا يَسْتَحِقّونَ بَدَلَه. ولَنا، قَوْلُ اللَّه تعالَى: {وَأَوْفُوا بِعَهْدِ اللَّهِ إِذَا عَاهَدْتُمْ} (٤). ولمَّا صالَحَ النَّبِىُّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- أهْلَ الحُدَيْبِيَةِ على رَدِّ مَنْ جاءَهُ مُسْلِمًا وَفَّى لَهُمْ (٥)، وقال: "إنَّا لَا يَصْلُحُ فِى دِينِنَا الْغَدْرُ" (٦). ولأنَّ فى الوَفاءِ مَصْلحةً للأُسارَى، وفى الغَدْرِ مَفْسَدَةً فى حَقِّهِم؛ لأنَّهم لا يُؤَمَّنُونَ بَعْدَه، والحاجَةُ داعِيَةٌ إليه، فلَزِمَه الوَفاءُ به، كما يَلْزَمُه الوفاءُ بعَقْدِ الهُدْنَةِ، ولأنَّه عاهَدَهُم على أداءِ مالٍ، فلَزِمَه الوفاءُ به، كثَمَنِ الْمَبيعِ، والمشْرُوطُ فى عَقْدِ الهُدْنَةِ فى مَوْضِعٍ يجوزُ شَرْطُه، وما ذَكَرُوه باطِلٌ بما إذا شرطَ رَدَّ مَن جاءَه مُسْلِمًا، أو شَرَطَ لهم مالًا فى عَقْدِ الهُدْنَةِ. فأمَّا إنْ عَجَزَ عن الفِدَاءِ، نَظَرْنا؛ فإنْ كان المُفادَى امرأةً، لم تُرْجَعْ إليهم، ولم يَحِلَّ لها ذلك؛ لقولِ اللَّه تعالَى: {فَلَا تَرْجِعُوهُنَّ إِلَى الْكُفَّارِ} (٧). ولأنّ فى رُجُوعِها تَسْلِيطًا لهم على وَطْئِها حَرامًا، وقد مَنَعَ اللَّهُ
(١) تقدم تخريجه، فى: ١/ ١٤٦.(٢) فى م: "ألزمه".(٣) فى م: "أيضًا". وانظر: الشرح الكبير ٥/ ٥٩٦.(٤) سورة النحل ٩١.(٥) فى م زيادة: "بذلك".(٦) تقدم فى صفحة ١٦١، ١٦٢.(٧) سورة الممتحنة ١٠.
