or "I swear," or "I pledge," it is not considered valid. Abu al-Khattab said: There is another view that it is considered valid, because he has brought the meaning, similar to if he replaced "I am among the truthful" with his saying, "She has indeed committed adultery." Al-Shafi'i has two views on this. The correct view is that it is not valid, because that for which the wording of testimony is considered, nothing else can stand in its place, just as with testimonies in matters of rights. Furthermore, in lian, emphasis is intended, and considering the wording of testimony is more emphatic; therefore, it is not permissible to abandon it. For this reason, it is not permissible for him to swear by Allah without a word that stands in the place of "I testify." The second [view] is that it is considered valid, because he has brought the meaning, similar to what came before it. Al-Shafi'i has two views like these two. If he replaces the word "curse" with "banishment," it is not permissible, because the word "curse" is more emphatic in deterring and more severe in people's souls, and because he has deviated from the text. It has been said: It is permissible, because their meaning is one and the same. If the woman replaces the word "wrath" with "curse," it is not permissible, because wrath is more severe, and for this reason the woman is specifically associated with it; for the woman who is shamed for her adultery is in a worse state, and her sin for the act of adultery is greater than his sin for the accusation (qadhf). If she replaces it with "displeasure" (sakhat), it is deduced based on the two views regarding when the man replaces the word "curse" with "banishment." If the man replaces the word "curse" with "wrath," it is possible that it is permissible, because it is more emphatic; and it is possible that it is not permissible, due to his deviation from the text. The Wazir Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Hubayra, may Allah the Exalted have mercy on him, said: Some jurists have stipulated that one must add after his saying "among the truthful": "regarding what I have accused her of regarding adultery." And they stipulated regarding her negating it from herself: "regarding what he has accused me of regarding adultery." I do not see that there is any need for that, because Allah, the Glorified, revealed this and clarified it, and He did not mention this stipulation. As for the admonition of the Imam
(26) Omitted from: The original. (27) Omitted from: (M). (28) In (M): "for the accusation". (29) In (A) and (M): "two views". (30) In (B) and (M): "the word". (31) In the original: "due to the contradiction of". (32) Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Hubayra al-Shaybani al-Hanbali, the Wazir of al-Muqtafi and his son; his gatherings were filled with scholars and jurists. He authored works and died a martyr, poisoned, in the year 560 AH. See: al-'Ibar 4/172-173, Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila 1/251-289.
أو أُقْسِمُ أو أُولِى. لم يُعْتَدَّ به. وقال أبو الخَطَّابِ: فيه وجهٌ آخرُ، أنَّه يُعْتَدُّ به؛ لأنَّه أَتَى بالمَعْنَى، فأشْبَهَ ما لو أبْدَلَ: إنَّى لمن الصادقينَ. بقولِه: لقد زَنَتْ. وللشافعىِّ وَجْهان فى هذا. والصحيح أنَّه لا يَصِحُّ؛ لأنَّ ما اعْتُبِرَ فيه لفظُ الشهادةِ، لم يَقُمْ غيرُه مَقامَه، كالشهاداتِ فى الحُقُوقِ، ولأنَّ اللِّعانَ يُقْصَدُ فيه التَّغْليظُ، واعْتبارُ لَفْظِ الشهاداتِ أبْلَغُ فى التَّغْليظِ، فلم يَجُزْ تَرْكُه، ولهذا لم يَجُزْ أن يُقْسِمَ باللَّهِ من غيرِ كلمةٍ تقومُ مقامَ أشْهَدُ. والثانى، يُعْتَدُّ به؛ لأنَّه أُتَى بالمَعْنَى، أشْبَهَ ما قبلَه. وللشافعىِّ وَجْهان كهذَيْن. وإن أبْدَلَ لفظةَ اللَّعْنةِ بالإِبْعادِ، لم يَجُزْ؛ لأنَّ لفظَ اللعنةِ أبْلَغُ فى الزَّجْرِ وأشَدُّ فى أَنْفُسِ الناسِ، ولأنَّه عَدَلَ عن المنَصْوُصِ. وقيل: يجوزُ؛ لأنَّ معناهما واحدٌ. وإن أبْدلَتِ المرأةُ لفظةَ الغَضَبِ باللَّعْنةِ، لم يَجُزْ؛ لأنَّ الغضبَ أغْلَظُ، ولهذا خُصَّتِ المرأةُ به؛ لأنَّ المرأةَ (٢٦) المُعَيَّرة (٢٧) بزِنَاها أقْبَحُ، وإثْمُها بفِعْلِ الزِّنَى أعظمُ من إثْمِه بالقَذْفِ (٢٨). وإن أبْدَلَتْها بالسَّخَطِ، خُرِّجَ على الوَجْهينِ (٢٩) فيما إذا أبْدَلَ الرجلُ لَفْظَ (٣٠) اللَّعْنةِ بالإِبْعادِ. وإن أبْدَلَ الرجلُ لَفْظَ (٣٠) اللعنةِ بالغَضَبِ، احْتَمَل أن يجوزَ؛ لأنَّه أبْلَغُ، واحْتَمَلَ أن لا يجوزَ؛ لمخالفتِه (٣١) المنصوصَ. قال الوزيرُ يَحيى بن محمدِ بن هُبَيْرةَ (٣٢) رحمه اللَّهُ تعالى: من الفُقهاءِ مَن اشْتَرطَ أن يُزادَ بعد قولِه: من الصادقينَ: فيما رَمَيْتُها به من الزِّنَى. واشترطَ فى نَفْيِها عن نَفْسِها: فيما رَمانِى به من الزِّنَى. ولا أراه يحتاجُ إليه؛ لأنَّ اللَّه سبحانه أنْزَلَ ذلك وبَيَّنَه، ولم يذكر هذا الاشْتراطَ. وأمَّا مَوْعِظةُ الإِمامِ
(٢٦) سقط من: الأصل.(٢٧) سقط من: م.(٢٨) فى م: "للقذف".(٢٩) فى أ، م: "وجهين".(٣٠) فى ب، م: "لفظة".(٣١) فى الأصل: "لمخالفة".(٣٢) يحيى بن محمد بن هبيرة الشيبانى الحنبلى، وزير المقتفى وابنه، كان مجلسه معمورا بالعلماء والفقهاء، وألَّف، ومات شهيدا مسموما. سنة ستين وخمسمائة. العبر ٤/ ١٧٢، ١٧٣، ذيل طبقات الحنابلة ١/ ٢٥١ - ٢٨٩.
