Mataki na 136 - Tsarin Mulki na Daular Khilafah (Daftarin Farko) | Quran Course

Mataki na 136 - Tsarin Mulki na Daular Khilafah (Daftarin Farko) | Quran Course

0% read · 3 min left

Tsarin Mulki na Daular Khilafah (Daftarin Farko) Bookmark

This chapter was translated automatically from English and may contain mistakes. Read the original

Show original

Mataki na 136

Article 136

by Sheikh Taqiuddin An-Nabahani3 min readViewed 204 times

Duk wanda ya mallaki fili yana da wajibi ya yi amfani da shi, kuma duk wanda ke buƙatar taimakon kuɗi ana ba shi kuɗi daga Baitul Mali domin ya samu damar yin amfani da filinsa. Duk wanda ya yi watsi da amfani da filin tsawon shekara uku a jere, ana karɓe shi daga hannunsa a ba wani.

Everyone that owns land is compelled to use it, and those that require financial help are given money from the Bayt Al-Mal to enable them to utilise their land. If anyone neglects utilising the land for three years continuously, it is taken from them and given to someone else.

Hujjar da ake amfani da ita ita ce abin da Abu Yusuf ya ruwaito a cikin Al-Kharaj daga Salim b. ‘Abd Allah (swt), cewa Umar b. Al-Khattab (ra) ya ce daga kan mimbari: “duk wanda ya raya wata ƙasa matacciya, to tana tasa ce, kuma wanda ya shinge ta ba shi da wani haƙƙi a cikinta bayan shekara uku (idan ba a noma ta ba).” Umar (ra) ya faɗi haka a gaban sahabbai da cikakken jin su, babu ɗaya daga cikinsu da ya yi masa tsawa, saboda haka wannan ijma’i ne. Wannan hujja ce bayyananniya cewa idan mutum ya raya wata ƙasa matacciya, ko ya sanya duwatsu ko wani abu da ke nuna mallakarsa a kanta, to ya mallake ta. Sai dai idan bai amfana da ƙasar ba tsawon shekaru uku a jere, to ana kwace ta daga hannunsa. Wanda ya raya ta da wanda ya shinge ta suna daidai ta fuskar mallaka, da ta fuskar kwace ta daga hannunsu. Ba za a ce maganar mallaka an takaita ta ga mai rayarwa ba: “duk wanda ya raya”, kuma maganar kwace ta idan an yi sakaci an takaita ta ga wanda ya shinge ta, banda mai rayarwa: “wanda ya shinge ta ba shi da…”, bisa fahimtar cewa mallaka ta mai rayarwa ce, kwace kuma idan an yi sakaci ga wanda ya shinge ta kawai. Wannan saboda maganar an yi ta ne bisa salon ɓoye sashi a cikin magana (Hadhf), don haka wanda ya shinge ta ma yana cikin mallaka, mai rayarwa kuma yana cikin hukuncin kwacewa: kamar dai Umar (ra) ya ce: “duk wanda ya raya wata ƙasa matacciya to tasa ce, kuma ba shi da haƙƙi a kanta bayan shekara uku, kuma duk wanda ya shinge wata ƙasa matacciya to tasa ce kuma ba shi da haƙƙi a kanta bayan shekara uku”.

Ba za a ce wannan yana shafar ƙasar da aka bayar kawai ba, domin lamarin ba tambaya ba ce ko wani abu da ya faru wanda nassin ke nufi da shi, a'a yana da faɗi ne, kuma yana shafar dukkan ƙasar da aka mallaka. Saboda haka, dalilin karɓe mallakar ƙasa idan an yi watsi da ita ba shi ne cewa ƙasa ce da aka fara bayarwa ba, sai dai saboda an yi watsi da ita. Wannan kuma an tabbatar da shi ta maganar Umar (ra): "Duk wanda ya yi watsi da wata ƙasa shekara uku bai gina a kanta ba, sannan wani ya zo ya gina a kanta, to tana nasa ne" (Yahya b. Adam ya ruwaito a cikin Al-Kharaj, da Ibn Zanjawaih a cikin Al-Amwal daga 'Amr b. Shu'ayb), kuma maganarsa: "wata ƙasa" kalma ce mai faɗi ba tare da takura ba, wadda ta hada dukkan nau'ikan ƙasar da aka mallaka, ko ta kasance ƙasa marar amfani da aka mallaka daga baya ta hanyar farfado da ita da shinge, ko ta kasance wadda aka gina a kanta aka mallake ta ta hanyar bayarwa ko gado ko saye ko kyauta... hukuncin yana shafarta: ana karɓe ta idan ba a amfani da ita tsawon shekara uku.

It cannot be said that this is only regarding land that has been granted, since the issue was not a question nor an event that occurred which the text was specific to, rather it is general, and is general for all possessed land. Therefore, the cause for taking away the possession of land if it was neglected is not because it was land that was originally granted but rather because it was neglected. This is confirmed by the words of Umar (ra): “whoever neglected a land for three years and did not build upon it, and then someone else came and built upon it then it is theirs” (reported by Yayha b. Adam in Al-Kharaj and Ibn Zanjawi in Al-Amwal from ‘Amr b. Shu’ayb), and his word: “a land” is an unrestricted term which encompasses all types of possessed land, irrespective of whether it was dead and then taken into ownership through revival and fencing, or if it was built upon and taken into ownership by being granted or inheritance or buying or a gift…the rule is applied to it – it is taken if it is not used for three years.

Wannan yana nuna cewa filin da mutum ya mallaka, ko ta hanyar rayar da ƙasa, ko shinge, ko bayarwa, ko saye, ana ƙwace shi daga hannun mai shi idan ya bar shi ba tare da noma ba tsawon shekara uku a jere, kamar yadda aikin Umar (ra) ya nuna a lamarin Amr bin Shu'aib, da kuma maganarsa: "Duk wanda ya yi sakaci da wata ƙasa", da kuma lamarin Bilal. Ba a san cewa wani daga cikin sahabbai ya tsawata masa a kan haka ba, duk da cewa yana daga cikin abubuwan da ake tsawatarwa a kansu, domin karɓar filin noma daga hannun mai shi da ƙarfi ba tare da bayar da wani abu a musanya ba, kuma wanda ya karɓa shi ne Khalifa. Saboda haka wannan ijma'in sahabbai ne. Wannan kuwa saboda ijma'i na sukuti (ijma'in shiru/yarda) shi ne idan wani daga cikin sahabbai ya yi wani aiki wanda da an saba tsawata masa a kansa a gaban rukuni daga cikinsu, sai babu ɗaya daga cikinsu da ya tsawata masa, to wannan hujja ce ta Shari'a. Bisa wannan, filin noma da mutum ya mallaka, ana ƙwace shi daga hannunsa da tilas ba tare da musanya ba idan ya bar shi ba a noma ba tsawon shekara uku a jere.

This indicates that the land which was possessed by an individual, irrespective of whether that was by revival, fencing, granting, or purchasing is taken away from the owner if he left it unutilised for three consecutive years, as was indicated by the action of Umar (ra) in the incident withAmrf Bin Shu’ayb and by his words: “whoever neglected a land”, and by the incident of Bilal, and it is not known that any of the companions rebuked him over that even though it is from the things that are rebukable, because it is forcefully taking a cultivated land from its owner without giving anything in exchange, and the one taking it is the Khalifah; it is accordingly Ijma’ of the companions. This is because the Ijma’ Sukuti (silent Ijma’/Ijma’ of consent) is when one of the companions does an action that would normally be rebuked in front of a group of them, and none of them rebuke it, and so it is a Shari’ah evidence. Based upon this the cultivated land that is owned by an individual, is taken from them by compulsion without exchange if they left it uncultivated for a period of three consecutive years.

Dangane da ba manoma taimako daga Bayt Al-Mal (baitul-mali) domin su iya noma filayensu, hujjarsa ita ce abin da Umar (ra) ya yi a Iraki. Lokacin da ya ci Iraki, ya bar ƙasar a hannun mazaunanta, bai raba ta tsakanin mayaƙa ba duk da cewa tana cikin ganima. Ya ba manoman kuɗi daga Bayt Al-Mal (baitul-mali) domin ya ƙarfafa su su noma ƙasarsu, duk da cewa ba su riga sun karɓi Musulunci ba, kuma duk da cewa manoma, bisa ga halinsu na manoma, ba sa cikin waɗanda suka cancanci wani abu daga Bayt Al-Mal (baitul-mali), domin muddin suna mallakar ƙasa ba za a ɗauke su a matsayin matalauta ba. Duk wani abu mai kama da waɗannan batutuwa biyu da ya faru, da an yi tsawatarwa a kansa saboda sabanin sa da ƙa'idojin ganimar yaƙi da ƙa'idojin Bayt Al-Mal (baitul-mali). Game da batu na farko, wato barin ƙasar da aka karɓa a matsayin ganima a hannun waɗanda suka noma ta, ba a raba ta tsakanin mayaƙa ba, akwai sahabbai da suka tsawatar wa Umar (ra), kuma an yi muhawara tsakaninsu. Game da batu na biyu, wato ba manoman Iraki kuɗi daga Bayt Al-Mal (baitul-mali) domin su noma ƙasarsu, babu ɗaya daga cikin sahabbai da ya tsawatar wa Umar (ra), saboda haka akwai ijma'i (yarjejeniya) a kan halascin ba manoma abin da ake buƙata daga Bayt Al-Mal (baitul-mali) domin su iya noma ƙasarsu.

As for giving the farmers help from Bayt Al-Mal (treasury) to enable them to cultivate their land, its evidence is what Umar (ra) did in Iraq. When he conquered Iraq he left the land in the hands of its inhabitants, and did not divide it amongst the fighters even though it was part of the booty. He gave the farmers money from the Bayt Al-Mal (treasury) in order to strengthen them to cultivate their land even though they had not yet embraced Islam, even though farmers in their characteristic as farmers are not from those who deserve anything from Bayt Al-Mal (treasury) since as long as they own land they cannot be counted as being poor. Anything similar to these two issues would normally be rebuked due to their contradiction with the rules regarding war booty and the rules regarding Bayt Al-Mal (treasury). As for the first issue which is leaving the land which was taken as booty with those who cultivated it, and not dividing it amongst the fighters, there were companions who rebuked Umar (ra), and a discussion took place between them. As for the second issue, which was giving the farmers in Iraq money from the Bayt Al-Mal (treasury) in order for them to cultivate their land, none of the companions rebuked Umar (ra), and so it is an Ijma’ (consensus) upon the permission of giving farmers what is required from Bayt Al-Mal (treasury) to enable them to cultivate their land.