هجرت یعنی ترک کردن دار الکفر و رفتن به دار الإسلام. خداوند (سبحانه و تعالی) فرموده است:

Emigration (hijrah) is leaving from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam. Allah (swt) said:

و ابوداود از طریق جریر بن عبدالله روایت کرده که پیامبر ﷺ فرمود:

And Abu Dawud narrated via the way of Jareer bin Abdullah from the Prophet (saw) who said:

هجرت از دار الکفر به دار الاسلام تا پایان جهان همچنان ادامه دارد. اما در مورد آنچه البخاری از سخن پیامبر ﷺ روایت کرده است:

The emigration from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam remains without termination. As for what Al Bukhari narrated of his (saw) statement

و گفتار او (ﷺ):

And his (saw) statement:

و گفتار او (ﷺ):

And his (saw) statement:

و آنچه درباره صفوان بن امیه روایت شده این است که وقتی او مسلمان شد، به او گفته شد: کسی که هجرت نکند، دینی ندارد. پس او به مدینه آمد، و پیامبر ﷺ به او فرمود:

And what was narrated about Safwan bin Umayya that when he became Muslim, it was said to him there is no deen for the one who does not emigrate so he came to Madinah and the Prophet (saw) said to him:

تمام این [سخنان] نفیِ هجرت پس از فتح مکه است۔ با این حال، این [نفی] با دلیلی شرعی استنباط‌شده از خودِ حدیث تعلیل شده است، زیرا گفته‌اش: «پس از فتح مکه» به‌گونه‌ای آمده که شامل تعلیلی همانند سخنِ ایشان ﷺ می‌شود

All this is negating emigration after the conquest of Makkah. However this is reasoned with a Shari’ah reason deduced from the hadith itself since his statement: “after the conquest of Makkah” came in a way including reasoning similar to his (saw) statement:

his statement «together» came in a way that includes a reason, so the reason was the prohibition of making [something] into wine. This means that the conquest of Makkah is the reason for negating the emigration, which means that the reason revolves around the reasoned matter in existence and in absence. Nor is it restricted to Makkah, but rather [it applies to] conquering any land, by the evidence of another narration: «there is no emigration after the conquest.» This is strengthened by what al-Bukhari narrated from Aisha (ra), who was asked about the emigration and said: «There is no emigration. The believer would flee with his religion to Allah (swt) and His Messenger ﷺ for fear of being persecuted. As for today, Islam has become dominant, and the believer worships his Lord wherever he wishes.» This indicates that the emigration was obligatory upon the Muslim before the conquest, fleeing with his religion for fear that he would be persecuted. It was negated after the conquest, as he became able to display his religion and perform the rules of Islam. So the conquest which resulted in that became the reason for negating the emigration; nor is it the conquest of Makkah alone. Therefore, that means there is no emigration after the conquest from the land which was conquered. His ﷺ statement to Safwan, «it has ended,» means [emigration] from Makkah after it was conquered, since emigration is leaving the land of disbelievers, the Dar al-Kufr. So if a land is conquered and becomes Dar al-Islam, it no longer remains a land of disbelievers or Dar al-Kufr, and so emigration no longer remains. Similarly, there remains no emigration from all conquered lands. This is strengthened by what Ahmad narrated through the route of Muawiya, who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saying:

His statement “together” came in a way including reasoning so the reason was the prohibition of making into wine. This means that the conquest of Makkah is the reason for negating the emigration which means that the reason revolves around the reasoned (matter) in existence and absence, nor is it specified to Makkah but rather conquering any land by the evidence of another narration “no emigration after conquest.” This is strengthened by what Al-Bukhari narrated from Aisha (ra) who was questioned about the emigration and said: “There is no emigration. The believer would flee with his deen to Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) for fear of being persecuted. As for today, Islam has become dominant and the believer worships his Lord wherever he wishes.” This indicates that the emigration was upon the Muslim before the conquest fleeing with his deen fearing he would be persecuted. It was negated after the conquest as he become able to show his deen and perform the rules of Islam. So the conquest which resulted in that became the reason for negating the emigration; nor is it the conquest of Makkah alone. Therefore that means there is no emigration after conquest from the land which was conquered. His (saw) statement to Safwan “it has ended” means from Makkah after it was conquered since emigration is leaving from the land of disbelievers and the Dar al-Kufr, so if the land is conquered and becomes Dar al-Islam it no longer remains a land of disbelievers or a Dar al-Kufr so emigration no longer remains. Similarly there remains no emigration from all conquered lands. This is strengthened by what Ahmad narrated via the way of Muawiya who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) saying:

امام احمد نیز روایت کرده‌اند که پیامبر ﷺ فرمود:

Ahmad also narrated that the Prophet (saw) said:

و در روایتی دیگر:

And in another narration:

این بیانگر آن است که هجرت از دارالکفر به دارالاسلام همچنان باقی است و پایان نیافته است. اما حکم هجرت، در رابطه با کسی است که توانایی آن را دارد؛ در برخی موقعیت‌ها واجب و در موقعیت‌های دیگر مستحب است. و اما کسی که توانایی آن را ندارد، پس همانا الله (سبحانه و تعالی) او را بخشیده است و هجرت از او خواسته نمی‌شود. این به سبب ناتوانی او از هجرت است، خواه به دلیل بیماری، یا اجبار به ماندن، یا ضعف، مانند زنان، کودکان و مانندِ ایشان، چنان‌که در پایان آیه هجرت آمده است.

This indicates that emigration from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam remains and has not ended. As for the rule of emigration, it is in relation to the one capable of it, obligatory in some situations and recommended in other situations. As for the one not capable, verily Allah (swt) forgave him and it is not required from him. That is due to his inability to emigration either due to illness, compulsion to stay or weakness like women, children and their like as it came at the end of the ayah of emigration.

هر کس که توانایی هجرت را دارد و نمی‌تواند دین خود را آشکار کند و نه می‌تواند احکام اسلامی را که بر او واجب است به جای آورد، پس هجرت بر او واجب است به سبب آنچه در آیه‌ی هجرت آمده است. الله (سبحانه و تعالی) فرموده است:

Whoever is capable of emigration and unable to show his deen and neither is he able to perform the Islamic rules required from him, then emigration is obligatory upon him due to what came in the ayah of emigration. Allah (swt) said:

اطلاعات اینجا به معنای امر است و از زبان درخواست است، گویی او (سبحانه و تعالی) فرموده است: «در آن هجرت کنید». درخواست در این آیه با تأکید و همراه با تهدیدی شدید نسبت به ترک هجرت پیوند خورده است. پس این درخواستی قاطع است که نشان می‌دهد هجرت در این وضعیت بر مسلمان واجب است و اگر هجرت نکند گناهکار است. اما کسی که توان هجرت دارد ولی می‌تواند دین خود را آشکار سازد و احکام شریعتی را که از او خواسته شده به جا آورد، هجرت مستحب است نه واجب. و اینکه مستحب است، به این دلیل است که پیامبر ﷺ پیش از فتح مکه، هنگامی که آنجا دارالکفر بود، به هجرت از مکه ترغیب می‌کرد و آیه‌ای صریح در این باره نازل شد. خداوند (سبحانه و تعالی) فرموده است:

The information here means the command and it is from the language of request as if He (swt) said: Emigrate therein. The request in this ayah is linked with emphasis and linked with a severe threat upon leaving emigration. So it is a decisive request which indicates that emigration in this situation is obligatory upon the Muslim and he sins if he does not emigrate. As for the one able to emigrate but is capable to manifest his deen and perform the Shar’a rules requested from him, emigration is recommended not obligatory. As for it being recommended, this is because the Messenger (saw) would encourage emigration from Makkah before the conquest when it was Dar al-Kufr and there came explicit ayah about that. Allah (swt) said:

و آن‌گاه فرمود (سبحانه و تعالی):

And He (swt) said:

و فرمود (سبحانه و تعالی)

And He (swt) said

و آن‌گاه فرمود (سبحانه و تعالی):

And He (swt) said:

تمام این موارد صراحتاً بر لزوم هجرت دلالت دارد. اما اینکه هجرت واجب نیست، از آن روست که پیامبر ﷺ به مسلمانانی که در مکه باقی ماندند رضایت داد. روایت شده است که وقتی نُعَیم النَّحَّام قصد داشت همراه قومش، بنی عدی، هجرت کند، آنان نزد او آمدند و به او گفتند

All this is explicit in requesting emigration. As for it not being obligatory, the Messenger (saw) did consent to those who remained in Makkah of the Muslims. It is narrated that when Nu’aim An-Nahham intended to emigrate his people, Banu Adiyy, came and said to him

تمام این بحث مربوط به دار الکفر است، یعنی سرزمین جنگ به همان شکلی که هست، صرف‌نظر از اینکه ساکنانش مسلمان باشند یا کافر، زیرا حکم سرزمین با ساکنانش تفاوت نمی‌کند، بلکه با نظامی که بر آن حکم می‌راند و با امنیتی که مردمش به آن تأمین می‌شوند، متفاوت است. بر این اساس، میان اندونزی و قفقاز، یا میان سومالی و یونان تفاوتی نیست. تنها استثنا کسی است که بتواند دین خود را آشکار کند و احکام شرعی مورد نظر را در آنجا به جا آورد؛ او می‌تواند دار الکفری را که در آن ساکن است به دار الاسلام تبدیل کند. در این صورت، برای او جایز نیست که از دار الکفر به دار الاسلام هجرت کند. این حکم یکسان است، خواه خود این توانایی را داشته باشد، خواه گروهی از مسلمانان در سرزمینش با او همکاری کنند، خواه با کمک مسلمانان خارج از سرزمینش، خواه با همکاری دولت اسلامی و خواه از هر راه دیگری. بر او واجب است که برای تبدیل دار الکفر به دار الاسلام تلاش کند، و در آن هنگام هجرت از آن برایش حرام است. دلیل این مطلب آن است که اگر در سرزمینی که او در آن زندگی می‌کند کافرانی ساکن باشند و آن سرزمین با کفر اداره شود، بر مسلمانان واجب است با مردمش بجنگند تا مسلمان شوند یا جزیه بپردازند و تحت حکم اسلام درآیند. این وظیفه بر او نیز به عنوان یک مسلمان واجب است، و همچنین به اعتبار اینکه او از کسانی است که در کنار کافران زندگی می‌کند و به دشمن نزدیک‌تر است. و اگر ساکنان آنجا مسلمان باشند اما بر آنان غیر از اسلام، یعنی با نظام کفر، حکم رانده شود، بر مسلمانان واجب است با حاکمانشان بجنگند تا به اسلام حکم کنند. این وظیفه بر او نیز به اعتبار اینکه یکی از مسلمانانی است که با کفر اداره می‌شود واجب است. پس در هر حال، جهاد بر او واجب است و اگر توانایی آن را داشته باشد، باید برای آن آماده شود. وضعیت مسلمانی که در دار الکفر زندگی می‌کند از یکی از این دو حالت خارج نیست: یا از کسانی است که جهاد علیه کافران نزدیک به او بر او واجب است، یا از کسانی است که جنگ با حاکمی که به کفر حکم می‌راند بر او واجب است. در این دو حالت، ترک دار الکفر که به غیر اسلام، یعنی به کفر، حکم می‌راند و فرار کردن از جهاد در جایی که جهاد بر او واجب است، یا فرار از جنگ با کسی که به کفر حکم می‌راند، به حساب می‌آید؛ و هر دو از گناهان بزرگ نزد خداوند (سبحانه و تعالی) هستند. بنابراین برای کسی که توانایی تبدیل دار الکفر به دار الاسلام را دارد، هجرت از آن جایز نیست، تا زمانی که توانایی تبدیل آن به دار الاسلام را دارد. این حکم در ترکیه، اسپانیا، مصر و آلبانی یکسان است و میان آنها تفاوتی نیست، تا زمانی که به نظام کفر حکم رانده می‌شوند.

All this is in relation to Dar al-Kufr i.e. a land of war as it is irrespective of its residents being Muslims or disbelievers since the rule of the land does not differ according to the residents but rather differs by the system which it rules with and the security by which its people are secured. Accordingly there is no difference between Indonesia and the Caucasus or between Somalia and Greece. Except for the one able to manifest his deen and perform the requested Shar’a rules where he is able to change the Dar al-Kufr wherein he resides to Dar al-Islam; it is forbidden for him in this situation to emigrate from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam. This is the same whether he possesses the ability himself or his group structure with the Muslims in his land or by seeking assistance of Muslims outside his land or by cooperation with the Islamic State or any (other) means. It is obligatory upon him to work to make Dar al-Kufr into Dar al-Islam and at that point it is forbidden for him to emigrate from it. The evidence for this is that if there reside disbelievers in the land within which he lives and is ruled by kufr, it is obliged upon Muslims to fight its people until they become Muslims or pay the jizyah and be ruled by Islam. This is also obliged upon him in his attribute as a Muslim and in his consideration as one whom the disbelievers are next to and of those who are closer to the enemy. If those residing therein are Muslims and they are ruled by other than Islam i.e. by the system of kufr, it is obliged upon Muslims to fight their rulers until they rule by Islam. This is also obliged upon him in his consideration as one of the Muslims who is ruled by kufr. So in any case, fighting is obliged upon him and preparing for fighting if he is capable of it. The situation of the Muslim who lives in Dar al-Kufr does not go out of one of these two situations, so he is either of those upon whom jihad is obliged against the disbelievers near him or of those upon whom fighting the ruler ruling by kufr is obliged. In these two situations, it is considered that his leaving the Dar al-Kufr which rules by other than Islam i.e. by kufr as fleeing from the jihad from a place wherein it is obliged upon him or fleeing from fighting the one who rules by kufr, both of which are great sins before Allah (swt). Accordingly it is not allowed for the one capable of changing Dar al-Kufr into Dar al-Islam to emigrate from it as long as he possesses the capability to change it into Dar al-Islam; this is the same in Turkey, Spain, Egypt and Albania without difference between them as long as they are ruled by the system of kufr.