—may Allah have mercy on him—when a man once asked about one of his students, “Where is so-and-so?” Imam Ahmad answered, “So-and-so is not here; what would he be doing here?” while at the same time touching his own hand, meaning, “He is not in my hand; what business would he have in my hand?” This is a form of tawriyah (equivocation).

Hence, if that oppressor who intends to kill an innocent person comes to you and says, “Is so-and-so here?” you reply, “No,” while clasping one hand with the other, intending, “He is not in my hand.”

Or suppose someone keeps pressuring you for money that he will only squander: you say, “By Allah, I have nothing in my hand,” and indeed your hand holds nothing—no coins, nothing at all. You are speaking the truth, although he assumes you own no money whatsoever.

Likewise, a man may have entrusted you with a deposit—some cash, for example—and a tyrant arrives demanding, “Where is the deposit so-and-so placed with you? Hand it over!” You say, “By Allah, I do not have a deposit of his.” In your heart you mean: “By Allah, that which I have is a deposit that belongs to him,” treating the word ma (“that which”) as a relative pronoun. This makes your statement factually correct, while the listener understands ma as a negation and thinks you hold nothing for him.

The conclusion is that when injustice is involved and a person repels it by lying, there is no sin; however, the preferable and more virtuous course is to resort to tawriyah—formulating a truthful intention that involves no real lie, even if the hearer imagines you have lied.

The same applies when the benefit is great, as with lying in war: it is permitted because of the significant advantage it brings. For instance, if enemy scouts—spies—approach and ask, “Is your army large? Is it well supplied? Is it strong?” you simply answer, “Yes.”