4.7 Wane ne ke naɗa Khalifa? - Tsarin Mulki a Musulunci | Quran Course

4.7 Wane ne ke naɗa Khalifa? - Tsarin Mulki a Musulunci | Quran Course

Duk da cewa ba sharadi ba ne ga dukkan Musulmai su yi amfani da wannan hakki, ko da yake haƙƙinsu ne. Duk da cewa wajibi ne a kansu, tunda bai'ah wajibi ce, wajibci ne na isa (Fard Kifayah) ba wajibci ne na kowane mutum (Fard 'Ayn) ba. Saboda haka, idan wasu Musulmai suka aiwatar da shi, sauran al'ummah za su sami sauƙi daga gare shi. Duk da haka, dukkan al'ummah ya kamata a ba su dama su yi amfani da haƙƙinsu na naɗa Khaleefah, ko sun yi amfani da wannan haƙƙi ko ba su yi ba. A wata ma'ana, kowane Musulmi ya kamata ya iya shiga cikin naɗa Khaleefah, ta hanyar ba shi damar yin hakan da gaske. Saboda haka, abin da ake magana a kansa shi ne bai wa Musulmai damar aiwatar da abin da Allah (swt) ya umarce su da shi na naɗa Khaleefah ta hanyar da za ta kuɓutar da su daga wannan aiki, ba aiwatar da wannan aiki da dukkan Musulmai da kansu ba. Wannan saboda wajibcin da Allah (swt) ya ɗora musu shi ne naɗa Khaleefah ta hannun Musulmai da yardarsu, ba wajibi ne a kan dukkan Musulmai su naɗa shi ba. Abubuwa biyu na iya tasowa daga wannan al'amari: Ɗaya shi ne yardar dukkan Musulmai ga naɗinsa ta tabbata; ɗayan kuma shi ne yardar dukkan Musulmai ga wannan naɗi ba ta samu ba, ko da yake, a dukkan lokuta biyu, an ba Musulmai damar yin amfani da wannan haƙƙi da gaske.

Although, it is not a condition for all the Muslims to exercise this right, eventhough it is their right. Although it is an obligation on them, since the Bay’ah is obligatory, the obligation is one of sufficiency (Fard Kifayah) and not an individual obligation (Fard ‘Ayn). Accordingly, if some of the Muslims performed it the rest of the Ummah would be exempted. Nevertheless, the whole of the Ummah should be enabled to exercise their right of appointing the Khaleefah, regardless of whether they utilised this right or not. In other words, every Muslim should be able to participate in appointing the Khaleefah, by genuinely enabling him to do so. Therefore, the point at issue is in enabling the Muslims to perform that which Allah (swt) has ordained upon them of appointing the Khaleefah in a way that would exempt them of this duty and not the actual exercise of that duty by all the Muslims. This is because the obligation that Allah (swt) ordained on them is to appoint the Khaleefah by the Muslims and by their consent, and not obliged upon all Muslims to appoint him. Two issues could actually arise from this matter: One is that the consent of all the Muslims of his appointment was realised; the other is that the consent of all the Muslims of this appointment was not achieved, although, in both cases, the Muslims were genuinely enabled to exercise this right.

Dangane da batun farko, ba a sanya takamaiman adadin mutanen da za su nada Halifa ba. A zahiri, duk wani adadin Musulmi da suka ba da Bay'ah ga Halifa, inda yardar Musulmi ke tabbata ta hanyar yin shiru, ko ta hanyar rantsuwar biyayya gare shi, ko ta duk wata alamar makamanciyar wannan da ke nuna amincewarsu, za su iya nada Halifa. Saboda haka, Halifan da aka nada ya zama Halifan dukkan Musulmi, kuma shi ne Halifa halastacce bisa Shari'ah, koda kuwa mutum biyar ne kawai suka nada shi. Wannan saboda za a dauke su a matsayin rukunin da ya cancanta ya nada Halifa. Yardar za ta tabbata ta hanyar Musulmi suna yin shiru da rantsuwar biyayya ko makamancinta, bisa sharadin cewa a aiwatar da hakan cikin cikakken 'yanci na zaɓi, kuma a dauki matakan da suka dace domin kowa ya samu damar bayyana ra'ayinsa idan yana so. Idan ba a samu yardar dukkan Musulmi ba, to ba za a nada Halifa ba sai dai idan wani rukunin Musulmi ya dauki nauyin nada shi, kuma ta haka ne yardar al'umma, watau mafi rinjaye, za ta tabbata, ba tare da la'akari da yawan wannan rukuni ba. A wannan fage, wasu malamai sun yanke hukunci cewa: Ana iya nada Halifa idan Ahlul Hall Wal Aqd suka ba shi Bay'ah, domin malaman sun dauke su a matsayin rukunin da ke wakiltar ra'ayin Musulmi baki daya, kuma su ne suke iya ba da Bay'ah ga duk wanda ya cika sharuddan kwangilar. Sai dai Bay'ar Ahlul Hall Wal 'Aqd ba ta sa nadin Halifa ya zama tabbatacce ba. Bay'arsu ba sharadi ne da ke sa nadin Halifa ya halatta ba ko kadan. Bai'ah kawai alama ce da ke nuna cewa an samu yardar Musulmai, tun da su ne wakilai na Musulmai. Duk wata alama da ke nuna cewa an samu yardar Musulmai ta hanyar Bai'ah ga Khalifa, to nadin nasa halal ne kuma yana da ƙarfi.

As far as the first issue is concerned, it is not stipulated to have a specific number of those who appoint the Khaleefah. In Actuality any number of Muslims who give their Bay’ah to the Khaleefah, whereby the consent of the Muslims is achieved by their remaining silent, or by pledging allegiance and obedience to him, or by any other similar sign which indicates their approval, can appoint the Khaleefah. Thereupon, the appointed Khaleefah becomes the Khaleefah of all the Muslims and He would be the lawful Khaleefah according to the Shari’ah, even if only five people appointed him. This is because they would be regarded as a valid group able to appoint a Khaleefah. Consent would be achieved through the Muslims remaining silent and pledging obedience or the like, on condition that this should be carried out with absolute flexibility of choice and with the necessary steps taken to enable everyone to voice his (or her) opinion should they wish to do so. If the consent of all the Muslims was not achieved then the appointment of the Khaleefah would not take place unless a group of Muslims undertook the task of appointing him and in so doing the consent of the populace is achieved, i.e. the majority, regardless of the number of that group. In this context, some learned scholars have concluded that: The appointment of the Khaleefah can be carried out if He is given the Bay’ah by the Ahlul Hall Wal Aqd because they - the scholars - regard them as being the group which represents the opinion of the Muslims at large, and those who are able to give the Bay’ah to any man who satisfies the contractual conditions. However, the Bay’ah of the Ahlul Hall Wal ‘Aqd does not actually make the appointment of the Khaleefah a forgone conclusion. Their Bay’ah is by no means a precondition which makes the appointment of the Khaleefah lawful. The Bay’ah is merely a sign indicating that the consent of the Muslims has to be achieved, since they are regarded as the representatives of the Muslims. Any indication that the consent of the Muslims has been realised by the Bay’ah of a Khaleefah makes the appointment legal and binding.

Saboda haka, hukuncin Shari'a yana aiki idan wani rukuni na mutane ya naɗa Khalifa, kuma ta hanyar haka aka samu amincewar Musulmai ta kowace alama. Hakanan yana iya kasancewa ta hanyar Bai'ar mafi yawan Ahlul Hall Wal 'Aqd, ko kuma ta hanyar su da kansu su zama wakilan Musulmai, ko kuma ta hanyar shirun Musulmai game da Bai'ar Khalifan da suka ba wa Bai'a. Haka kuma yana iya kasancewa ta hanyar Musulmai suna gaggawar yin mubaya'a da biyayya bisa ƙarfin irin wannan Bai'a, ko kuma ta kowace hanya ko alama, muddin an ba su cikakken damar bayyana ra'ayinsu. Hukuncin Shari'a bai ƙunshi wani sharaɗi cewa dole ne a cimma wannan alama ta hanyar Ahlul Hall Wal 'Aqd, ko cewa su zama mutum biyar ko ɗari biyar ko fiye ko ƙasa da haka, ko kuma cewa dole ne su zama mazauna babban birni ko lardunan ƙasar. Dokar Shari'a kawai ta ce da Bai'arsu ana samun amincewar mafi yawan Musulmai bisa kowace alama da ke nuna wannan amincewa. Wannan yana nufin an tabbatar da haƙƙin kaɗa ƙuri'a, kuma ba a takaita ikonsu na bayyana ra'ayi ba.

Therefore, the Shar’ai verdict is executed if a group of people appointed a Khaleefah and in so doing the consent of the Muslims was achieved by any indication. It could also be by the Bay’ah of the majority of the Ahlul Hall Wal ‘Aqd or by themselves being the representatives of the Muslims, or by the silence of the Muslims about the Bay’ah of the Khaleefah whom they had given the Bay’ah to. It could also be by the Muslims rushing to pledge allegiance and obedience on the strength of such a Bay’ah, or by any other means or indications so long as they had been fully enabled to voice their opinion. The Shari’ah verdict does not contain any provisions maintaining that such an indication must be arrived at through the Ahlul Hall Wal’Aqd or that they should constitute five or 500 people or more or less, nor that they need be the inhabitants of the capital or the provinces. The Shari’ah rule merely states that with their Bay’ah the consent of the majority of the Muslims is achieved according to any indication that reflects such consent. This means that the right to vote has been guaranteed, and their ability to voice an opinion has not been curtailed.

A cikin wannan mahallin, "dukkan Musulmai" na nufin waɗancan Musulmai da ke zaune a cikin wannan ƙasa a ƙarƙashin mulkin Daular Musulunci, watau waɗanda suke a matsayin rayuwar Khaleefah na baya, idan Khilafah ta riga ta kafu, ko kuma waɗanda ta hannunsu Daular Musulunci za ta sake kafuwa, kuma ta hannun bai'arsu ne za a kafa Khilafah idan Daular Musulunci ba ta kafu ba kuma sun yi aiki don kafa ta domin komawa ga tsarin rayuwar Musulunci. Bai'ar sauran Musulmai ba za a ɗauke ta a matsayin sharaɗi ba, haka kuma yardarsu ba za a ɗauke ta a matsayin sharaɗi ba. Wannan saboda ko dai suna wajen ikon Musulunci, ko kuma suna zaune a Dar-ul Kufr ba tare da iya shiga Dar-ul Islam ba. A kowane hali, ba su da haƙƙin bayar da bai'ar kafa kwangila, amma ya kamata su bayar da bai'ar biyayya. Waɗanda ba sa mika wuya ga ikon Musulunci za a ɗauke su a matsayin 'yan tawaye (Bughat). Waɗanda ke zaune a Dar-ul Kufr a fili suke cewa ba su iya cimma kafa ikon Musulunci ba, saboda haka ba za su iya kafa shi a aikace ko shiga cikinsa nan take ba. Don haka, Musulmai waɗanda suke da haƙƙin aiwatar da bai'ar kwangila, da kuma waɗanda yardarsu ta zama sharaɗi domin naɗa Khaleefah bisa doka, su ne waɗanda ta hannunsu ikon Musulunci ke samun kafuwa a zahiri. Zai zama kuskure a ce wannan al'amari ne na ra'ayi kawai wanda ba shi da dalili daga Shari'a da zai tallafa masa. Ba za a iya faɗin haka ba, domin wannan yana da alaƙa da maudu'in hukunci (Manat-ul Hukm) ba da hukuncin kansa ba. Saboda haka, wajibi ne a bayyana hakikanin lamarin, maimakon kawo dalilin Shari'a a kansa. Misali, cin naman mushe haramun ne; wannan shi ne hukunci (Hukm). Bincike da tabbatar da abin da ya zama naman mushe shi ne maudu'in hukuncin, watau Manat ko abin da hukuncin ke da alaƙa da shi. Saboda haka, cewa Musulmi wajibi ne su kafa Khalifa, hukuncin Shari'a ne, kuma cewa wannan nadin dole ne a yi shi ta hanyar yarda da zaɓi, shi ma hukunci ne; waɗannan kuma su ne abubuwan da ke bukatar hujja. Amma idan muka tambaya, su waye Musulmin da za a yi naɗin ta hannunsu, kuma menene al'amarin da ke sa yarda da zaɓi su yiwu, to waɗannan su ne ainihin batun hukuncin (Manat-ul Hukm), watau batun da hukuncin ya zo don ya yi magana a kansa. Dacewar hukuncin Shari'a da batun ne ke sa hukuncin ya zama mai yiwuwa kuma ya cika. Don haka, batun da hukuncin Shari'a ya zo domin shi dole ne a bincika shi ta hanyar bayyana hakikaninsa.

In this context, “all the of Muslims” means those Muslims living in that country under the rule of the Islamic State, i.e. those who were the subjects of the previous Khaleefah, if the Khilafah was (already) established, or those through whom the Islamic State would be reestablished, and by whose Bay’ah the Khilafah would be contracted if the Islamic State was not established and they had worked towards establishing it so as to resume the Islamic way of life. The Bay’ah of the other Muslims would not be considered as a condition, nor would their consent be considered as such. This is because they would either be outside the authority of Islam, or living in Dar-ul Kufr and unable to join Dar-ul Islam. In either case, they would not have the right to give the Bay’ah of contract but they should give the Bay’ah of obedience. Those who do not submit to the authority of Islam would be considered rebels (Bughat). Those living in Dar-ul Kufr were thus evidently unable to achieve the establishment of the Islamic authority and therefore they cannot now establish it practically or join it immediately. Thus, the Muslims who possess the right to excercise the Bay’ah of contract and those whose consent is conditional for the Khaleefah to be lawfully appointed are the ones through whom the authority of Islam effectively gains its establishment. It would be wrong to say that this is an intellectual matter that has no Shari’ah evidence to back it up with. One cannot say this because this is related to the subject of the verdict (Manat-ul Hukm) and not the verdict itself. Therefore, it is necessary to explain its reality, rather than bring a Shari’ah evidence for it. For instance, the eating of carrion meat is forbidden, now that is the verdict (Hukm). To investigate and determine what constitutes carrion meat would be the subject of the verdict, i.e. the Manat or the subject that the verdict is related to. Thus the Muslims have to establish a Khaleefah constitutes the Shari’ah verdict, and this appointment has to be carried out by consent and choice would be the verdict too, these are what require evidence. Whereas, if we were to ask who constitutes the Muslims by whom the appointment would be carried out and what constitutes the matter which makes consent and choice achievable these would constitute the subject of the verdict (Manat-ul Hukm), i.e. the subject for which the ‘Hukm’ (verdict) had come to deal with. The conformity of the Shari’ah verdict with the subject makes the verdict achievable and accomplished. So the subject that the Shari’ah verdict came for should be investigated by explaining its reality.

Ba daidai ba ne a ce Manaṭ al-Ḥukm ita ce dalilin hukuncin (‘Illatul Hukm), don haka take buƙatar dalili. Wannan kuskure ne domin mahallin hukunci (Manaṭ) ya bambanta da dalilin hukuncin (‘illah); a zahiri akwai babban bambanci tsakanin mahallin da dalili. Dalili shi ne abin da yake sa a fara hukuncin, wato shi ne abin da yake nuna manufar Mai Shari’a a bayan hukuncin. Babu shakka, wannan yana buƙatar dalilin Shari’a domin nuna da fahimtar manufar Mai Shari’a wajen fara hukuncin. Amma mahallin hukunci, shi ne abin da hukuncin ya shafa ko kuma abin da hukuncin yake da alaƙa da shi. A wasu kalmomi, shi ne al’amarin da hukuncin ya dace da shi, ba dalilinsa ba kuma ba ‘illarsa ba. Don haka, ya biyo baya cewa Manaṭ shi ne abin da hukuncin yake manne da shi, wato an kawo hukuncin ne domin ya yi magana a kansa, ko ya warware shi. Ba daidai ba ne a ce an kawo hukuncin saboda shi, har a ce shi ne dalilin hukuncin. Saboda haka, Manaṭ na hukuncin shi ne ɓangaren hukuncin Shari’a wanda ba na nassi ba. Sanin shi ba shi ne sanin dalili ba, domin sanin dalili yana nufin fahimtar nassin da ya zo domin tabbatar da dalilin, kuma wannan shi ne ainihin fahimtar nassi (Naqliyyat). Haka kuma ba shi ne Manaṭ ba, domin Manaṭ ya bambanta gaba ɗaya da Naqliyyat, domin shi (watau Manaṭ) ita ce hakikanin abin da hukuncin Shari’a ya dace da shi.

It would be incorrect to say that the ManaT-ul Hukm is the reason behind the Hukm (‘illatul Hukm) therefore requiring evidence. This is incorrect because the subject (ManaT) of the verdict is different from the reason (‘illah) behind the verdict; in fact there is a big difference between the subject and the reason. The reason is what initiates the verdict to be initiated, i.e. it is the thing that indicates the intention of the Legislator behind the verdict. Without any doubt, this requires a Shari’ah evidence to indicate and understand the intention of the Legislator for initiating the verdict. As for the subject of the verdict, this is the subject upon which the verdict applies or to which the verdict is related. In other words, it is the issue that the verdict conforms and not its evidence nor its reason (‘illa). It therefore, follows that the ManaT is the thing that the verdict is attached to, i.e. the verdict is brought to deal with it, or solve it. It is not true to say that the verdict is brought because of it, so as to say that it is the reason behind the verdict. Thus, the ManaT of the verdict is the nontextual aspect of the Shari’ah verdict. To realise it would be other than to realise the reason, for realising the reason would be to understand the text that had come to justify the reason, and this is to actually understand the text (Naqliyyat). This is not the ManaT either, because the ManaT is completely different from the Naqliyyat, as it (ie. the ManaT) is the reality to which the Shari’ah verdict conforms.