Islom nuqtayi nazaridan muhim masalalar - Xilofat qanday barbod qilindi | Quran Course

Islom nuqtayi nazaridan muhim masalalar - Xilofat qanday barbod qilindi | Quran Course

0% read · 7 min left

Xilofat qanday barbod qilindi Bookmark

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

Show original

Islom nuqtayi nazaridan muhim masalalar

The Vital Issues According To Islam

by Abdul Qadeem Zallum7 min readViewed 179 times

Agar Kitob va Sunnatni ko'rib chiqsak, Islom bu muhim masalalarni aniq tarzda belgilab qo'yganini, ularga nisbatan majburiy choralarni ham hayot-mamot masalasi sifatida belgilaganini ko'ramiz. Masalan, Islom dinidan qaytishni, u yakka shaxs tomonidan bo'lsinmi yoki guruh tomonidan bo'lsinmi, muhim masala deb hisoblagan va unga nisbatan ko'riladigan chorani hayot-mamot masalasi qilib qo'ygan: ya'ni gunohkor tavba qiladi yoki o'lim jazosiga duchor bo'ladi. Demak, Islom masalani ham, chorani ham belgilab bergan. Allohning Elchisi ﷺ shunday degan: "Kim o'z dinini almashtirsa, uni o'ldirish kerak". Ibn Mas'ud rivoyat qilishicha, u kishi aytgan: Allohning Elchisi ﷺ dedilar: "Lo ilaha illallohu va annee rasulullohni iqror qilgan musulmonning qoni uchta holatdan boshqa hollarda halol emas: zino qilgan kishi, boshqa odamni o'ldirgan kishi va jamoadan ajralib ketgan murtad". Bu masala musulmonlar uchun hukmron tushuncha va ular mahkam yopishib olgan haqiqat bo'lgan.

If one were to review the Book and the Sunnah, one would find that Islam has determined these vital issues in an explicit manner and that it has also determined the compulsory measures towards them as being a matter of life and death. Islam has for instance considered apostasy from Islam, be it by an individual or a group, as a vital issue and has made the measure undertaken towards it one of life and death, that is either the guilty would repent or face death. Hence, Islam has determined the issue and also the measure. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: He who changes his Deen must be killed. It is also reported on the authority of ibn Masud who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: The blood of a Muslim person who professes that there is no god but Allah and that I am the messenger of Allah is not violable except in three instances: the adulterer, the slayer of another person and the apostate who abandons the group. This issue was to the Muslim a dominant concept and a fact which they firmly adhered to.

Yamanga boring! Keyin u (saw) Muoz ibn Jabalni unga qo'shilish uchun yubordi. U yetib borganida Abu Muso unga yostiq tashladi va dedi: Tushing. Muoz otdan tushmoqchi bo'lganida, bog'langan bir odamni ko'rdi; shuning uchun so'radi: Bu nima? Abu Muso javob berdi: U yahudiy bo'lgan, keyin Islomni qabul qilgan, so'ngra yana yahudiy bo'lib qolgan. Shunda Muoz unga dedi: U o'ldirilmaguncha men o'tirmayman. Dinidan qaytgan kishi o'ldirilishi kerak. Abu Dovud buni quyidagicha rivoyat qilgan: Islomdan murtad bo'lgan bir kishi Abu Musoning oldiga keltirildi, shunda u uni yigirma kecha atrofida tavba qilishga chaqirdi; so'ngra Muoz kelib uni tavba qilishga chaqirdi, lekin u rad etdi, shunda u uning bo'yniga urdi. Ad-Doraqutniy va Al-Bayhaqiy quyidagini keltirgan: Abu Bakr Islomni qabul qilib, so'ngra murtad bo'lgan Umm Qarfa ismli ayolni tavba qilishga chaqirdi, lekin u tavba qilishdan bosh tortdi, shuning uchun uni o'ldirdi. Shuningdek, arab qabilalarining ko'pchiligi zakot berish majburiyatini rad etganda, Abu Bakr buni Islomdan murtad bo'lish deb hisobladi. Shunday qilib, u ularga qarshi qilichini yalang'ochladi va ularni Islom jamoasiga qaytarguncha ular bilan urushdi.

Go to Yemen! Then he (saw) sent Muath ibn Jabal to join him. When he reached him Abu Moussa threw him a pillow and said to him: Get down. As Muath was about to dismount, he noticed a man who was tied up; so he asked: What is this. Abu Moussa replied: He had been a Jew, he then embraced Islam and then he became a Jew again. Upon this Muath said to him: I shall not sit until he is killed. He who revokes his Deen must be killed. Abu Dawood reported this as follows: A man who apostatised from Islam was brought to Abu Moussa, so he invited him to repent for twenty nights or so; then Muath came and invited him to repent but he refused so he struck his neck. Al-Darqutni and Al-Bayhaqi extracted the following: Abu Bakr invited a woman called Umm Qarfah to repent, having embraced Islam and then apostatised, but she refused to repent, so he killed her. Also, when many of the Arab tribes rejected the obligation of Zakat, Abu Bakr considered this to be apostasy from Islam. Thus, he brandished the sword against them and fought them until he brought them back to the fold of Islam.

U bizning xudoyimiz, yaratuvchimiz va rizq beruvchimizdir. U (kishi) aytdi: "Voy sizlarga, men ham sizlar kabi bir bandaman. Men ham sizlar yeganday yeyman, sizlar ichganday ichaman. Agar Allohga itoat qilsam, xohlasa, meni mukofotlaydi, agar Unga isyon qilsam, meni jazolashidan qo'rqaman. Shunday ekan, Allohdan qo'rqing va tavba qiling." Ular yana tavba qilishdan bosh tortdilar. Ertasiga ularni (Ali oldiga) olib kelishdi. Qanbar kelib dedi: "Allohga qasamki, ular yana o'sha gapni aytishmoqda." Shunda Ali dedi: "Ularni kiritinglar." Ular yana o'sha gapni takrorladilar. Uchinchi kuni Ali ularga dedi: "Agar yana o'sha gapni takrorlasanglar, sizlarni eng dahshatli usulda o'ldiraman." Ular yana bosh tortdilar. Shunda Ali masjid kirish joyi bilan saroy orasida ular uchun chuqur kovlashni buyurdi; so'ngra chuqurga o'tin tashlab yoqishni buyurdi. Keyin ularga dedi: "Agar tavba qilmasanglar, sizlarni ana shunga tashlayman." Ular yana rad etdilar va u ularni chuqurga tashladi. Ibn Abbos ularning yoqib yuborilganini eshitib, bu ishga norozilik bildirdi va ularni o'ldirish kerak edi, dedi. Ikrima rivoyat qiladi: "Mo'minlarning amiri Aliga bir guruh murtadlar keltirildi, u ularni yoqib yubordi. Ibn Abbos buni eshitib dedi: 'Agar men uning o'rnida bo'lganimda, ularni yoqmagan bo'lardim, chunki Allohning Elchisi ﷺ'

You are our god, our creator and our provider. He said: Woe to you, I am but a servant like you. I eat just like you do and I drink just like you do. If I obeyed Allah He would reward me if He wished, and if I disobeyed Him I feared that He would punish me. So fear Allah and repent. They still refused to repent. On the following day, they were brought to him and Qanbar came and said: By Allah they went back to saying the same thing. So Ali said: Let them in. So they again said the same thing. On the third day Ali said to them: If you were to say the same thing again I shall kill you in the worst possible way. They still refused. So Ali ordered for a hole to be dug for them between the entrance of the mosque and the palace; then he ordered for wood to be thrown in the hole and lit up. He then said to them: I shall throw you in if you do not repent. They still refused, so he threw them in. When ibn Abbas heard of their burning, he expressed his disagreement over their burning and said that they should have been killed. Akrama reported: A group of apostates were brought to the Amir of the believers, Ali so he burnt them. Ibn Abbas heard of this and said: If I had been him, I would not have burnt them because the Messenger of Allah (saw)

Bu ikki holatda namoyon bo‘ladi: biri xalifalar ko‘pligi masalasi, ikkinchisi isyonkorlar masalasi. Abdulloh ibn Amr ibn al-Os rivoyat qilishicha, u Allohning Elchisi ﷺ ning shunday deganlarini eshitgan: "Kim imomga qo‘l berib, qalbining mevasini bergan bo‘lsa, u qodir bo‘lgancha unga itoat etsin. Agar boshqa biri unga talashib kelsa, o‘sha odamning bo‘yniga urib tashlanglar." Shuningdek, Abu Said al-Xudriy rivoyat qilishicha, Allohning Elchisi ﷺ shunday degan: "Agar ikki xalifa uchun bay’at olingan bo‘lsa, ulardan keyingisini o‘ldiringlar." Shunday qilib, u zot ﷺ davlat birligini hayotiy masala qilib qo‘ydilar: xalifalar ko‘pligini man etdilar va xalifalikda ko‘plikni o‘rnatishga urinuvchini, tavba qilmasa, o‘ldirishni buyurdilar. Ajrafa rivoyat qilishicha, u aytadi: "Men Allohning Elchisi ﷺ ning shunday deganlarini eshitdim: «Ishingiz bir kishi atrofida birlashgan paytda, sizlar orasiga ixtilof solish yoki jamoangizni parchalash niyatida huzuringizga kelgan kishini o‘ldiringlar»." Demak, u zot ﷺ ummat birligi va davlat birligi masalasini hayotiy masala qilib qo‘ydilar: jamoaning parchalanishini man etdilar va uni keltirib chiqarishga urinuvchini, tavba qilmasa, o‘ldirishni buyurdilar.

This is manifested in two cases: one is the issue of the plurality of Khulafa and the other is the issue of the rebels. It has been reported on the authority of Abdullah ibn Amr ibn ul-Aas that he heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: He who pledged his Baya to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart shall obey him as long as he can, and if another comes to dispute with him, you must strike the neck of that man. It has also been reported on the authority of Abu Said Al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: If a Baya has been taken for two Khalifahs, kill the latter of them. Hence, he (saw) made the unity of the State a vital issue when he prohibited the plurality of the Khulafa and ordered the killing of the one who attempts to establish a plurality in the Khilafah, unless he retracts. It has also been reported on the authority of Ajrafa who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: He who comes to you while your affair has been united under one man, intending to drive a wedge between you or fragment your group, kill him. Hence, he (saw) made the issue of the Ummahs unity and the issue of the States unity a vital issue when he prohibited the fragmentation of the group and ordered the killing of he who attempts to cause it, unless he retracts.

Shariat tomonidan davlatning birligiga qarshi chiqish va davlatga isyon ko'tarishning, shuningdek, Ummatning bo'linishining man etilishi bilan davlatning birligi va Ummatning birligi hayotiy masalaga aylanadi, chunki Shoriy' (swt) ularga nisbatan qabul qilinadigan chora hayot-mamot masalasi ekanligini belgilab qo'ygan. Shuning uchun bunday ish qilgan kishi yo tavba qilishi yoki o'ldirilishi kerak. Musulmonlar bunga amal qilganlar va uni eng muhim va eng keskin masalalardan biri deb bilganlar. Ular hech qachon, qaysi musulmon bo'lishidan qat'i nazar, bunga nisbatan yumshoqlik qilmaganlar. Ali Muoviya bilan yumshoqlik qilmagan, Ali, Umaviylar va Abbosiylar ham Xorijiylarga nisbatan yumshoqlik qilmaganlar, bu borada ma'lum bo'lgan dalillar esa sanoqsizdir. Biroq, xalifalik zaiflashib, Islomni tushunish pasaygan vaqtda, musulmonlar Islom yerlarining xalifalik tanasidan ajralib chiqishiga jim qaradilar. Shunday qilib, musulmonlar orasiga ziddiyat solindi va ular bir necha davlatga bo'linib ketdilar, holbuki, biron-bir mamlakatning davlat tanasidan ajralib chiqishi hayotiy masala bo'lib, isyonkorlarning tavba qilishini yoki ularga qarshi urush olib borishni talab qiladi, jonu mol qanchalik talofat ko'rishidan qat'i nazar.

By prohibiting the plurality of the state and the rebellion against it and by prohibiting the division of the Ummah, the unity of State and that of the Ummah becomes a vital issue, because the Legislator (swt) has decreed that the measure to be undertaken towards them is a measure of life and death. Hence, he who perpetrates such an act should either repent or be killed. The Muslims had implemented this and used to consider it to be amongst the most important and most critical of matters. They never used to be lenient in this towards any Muslim whoever he might have been. Ali was never lenient with Muawiyyah, nor were Ali, the Ommayyads or the Abbasids lenient with the Khawarij, and the established facts pertaining to this are innumerable. However, when the Khilafah became weak and the understanding of Islam declined, Muslims kept silent over the breakaway of Islamic lands from the body of the Khilafah. Thus, a wedge was driven between the Muslims and they dissembled into several states, despite the fact that the breakaway of any country from the body of the State is a vital issue that stipulates either the repentance of the rebels or the waging of war against them, regardless of the cost in lives or in wealth.

Vaziyat shu darajaga yetdiki, musulmonlar bir necha davlatlarda yashay boshladilar va Xilofat ulardan biriga aylandi. Vaziyat yanada og'irlashib, ba'zi musulmonlar Islom ligasi tuzishga chaqira boshladilar, unga ko'ra Xilofat davlati o'zidan ajralib chiqqan davlatlar bilan shartnomalar tuzadigan bo'lardi. Shu tarzda Xilofat davlati ularning ajralib chiqishini va bir necha davlatga bo'linishini ma'qullagan bo'lardi. Bu esa musulmonlarning parchalanishini qo'llab-quvvatlab, ularni bir necha xalq va millatga aylantirardi, holbuki bu hayotiy masala edi va tavba yoki o'lim haqidagi hadislar buni aniq ko'rsatardi. Shuning uchun Mustafo Kamol Turkiyaning Islom yerlarining qolgan qismidan ajratilganini e'lon qilganida hayron bo'lishga hojat yo'q edi, hatto u Islom yerlarini kufr davlatlariga ularning taqdirini hal qilish uchun topshirishni ma'qullaganida ham. Chunki masala hayotiy masala darajasidan tushirilgan edi. Shunday qilib, falokat yuz berdi va musulmonlar bir necha davlatda yashashga, bir necha xalq va millatga bo'linishga befarq bo'lib qoldilar. Buning sababi shu ediki, ummatning birligi va davlatlarning birligi masalasi endi hayotiy masala sanalmas edi va ular yo'lida qilinadigan choralar hayot-mamot choralari bo'lmay qoldi.

The situation reached the point where Muslims lived in several states and the Khilafah became one of these states. The situation even worsened to the point where some Muslims started to call for an Islamic league, where the Khilafah state would enter into agreements with the states which broke away from her. In this way the Khilafah State would approve of their separation and of it becoming several states. This would support the disunity of the Muslims so that they turn into several peoples and nations, despite the fact that this was a vital issue and despite the explicitness of the ahadith about repentance or death. Hence, it came as no surprise when Mustafa Kemal declared the dismemberment of Turkey from the rest of the Islamic lands, and even when he declared his approval of surrendering the Islamic lands to the Kufr states to decide their fate because the issue was relegated from the level of being a vital issue. So, the calamity took place and the Muslims became indifferent towards having to live in several states, and being divided into several peoples and nations. This was only because the issue of the Ummahs unity and the issue of the states unity were no longer regarded as vital issues and the measure undertaken towards them was no longer a measure of life and death.

Qarshi qilish, ya'ni hokimiyatga qarshi chiqish, hatto bu ular bilan jang qilishga olib kelsa ham, qarshi chiqishni boshlashni anglatadi. Bu al-Fath kitobida zikr qilingan: Ulamolar hukmron sultonga itoat qilish va u bilan birga jihod qilish vojib ekanligiga ittifoq qilganlar. Uning itoati unga qarshi isyon qilishdan yaxshiroqdir, chunki bu jonlarni asraydi va xalqni tinchlantiradi. Lekin ular bundan ochiq kufr namoyon qilgan sultonni istisno qilganlar: bunday holda unga itoat qilish harom bo'ladi, balki hadisda zikr qilinganidek, qodir bo'lganlar tomonidan unga qarshi jang qilinishi kerak. Ash-Shavkoniy o'zining "Nayl al-Avtor" kitobida yozadi: Zolimlarga qilich bilan qarshilik ko'rsatish va ular bilan kurashish vojib deb hisoblaganlar, dalil sifatida Kitob va Sunnatdagi umumiy matnlarni keltirganlar. Demak, Islom bilan hukm qilish va kufr bilan hukm qilishning oldini olish masalasi hayotiy masaladir, chunki Shoriy (swt) unga nisbatan qilinadigan choraning hayot va o'lim darajasida ekanligini belgilagan. Shunday ekan, Islom bilan hukm qilmaydigan va kufr tizimi bilan hukm qilgan kishi yo tavbaga kelishi, yoki o'ldirilishi kerak.

Challenging them means generating the challenge even if this led to fighting them. It is mentioned in Al- Fatah: The scholars have agreed upon the obligation of obeying the dominant Sultan and of performing Jihad alongside him. His obedience is better than rebellion against him, for this would spare lives and appease the populace. However, they excluded from this the case where flagrant Kufr is displayed by the Sultan, in which case it would be forbidden to obey him, he should rather be fought by those who are capable, as mentioned in the Hadith. Al-Shawkani wrote in his book entitled Nayl-ul-Awtar : Those who hold the opinion that it is obligatory to resist the wrongdoers with the sword and struggle against them, they used as evidence the general texts in the Book and the Sunnah . Hence, the issue pertaining the obligation of ruling by Islam and preventing the rule by Kufr is a vital issue, because the Legislator (swt) has made the measure that should be undertaken towards it a measure of life and death; thus, he who does not rule by Islam and rules by a Kufr system should either retract or be killed.

Musulmonlarga Alloh (SWT) nozil qilgan narsadan boshqa bilan hukm qilishga sukut saqlamaslik buyurilgan, chunki bu hayotiy masala. Ammo musulmonlarning qalbida taqvo (taqvodorlik) susaygan va Islomni tushunishlari ham zaiflashgan paytda, xalifalar va hokimlar bitta masalada kufr bilan hukm qilsa ham ularga nisbatan sukut saqlash ularga oson bo‘lib qoldi; zaiflik ortgach esa, hokimlar bir necha masalada kufr bilan hukm qilganda ham ularga nisbatan sukut saqlash osonlashdi. Bu sukutning uzoq muddatli oqibati shu bo‘ldiki, hokimlar kufrni ochiq-oydin joriy etishga jur’at qildilar. Misrdagi musulmonlar hokim frantsuz fuqarolik qonunini joriy etib, Shariat hukmlarini bekor qilganda sukut saqladilar. Islom davlatida musulmonlar uchun kufr qoidalari 1909-yilda konstitutsiya sifatida o‘rnatilganda ham musulmonlar sukut saqladilar. Dastlab ularga qarshi qo‘zg‘olon ko‘targan bo‘lsalar-da, keyinchalik jim qoldilar. Shu sababli Mustafo Kamol Xilofatni va Islomning barcha hukmlarini yo‘q qilib, kufr hukmronligini e’lon qilganida hech kimni ajablantirmadi. Buning sababi shu ediki, musulmonlar bu masalani endi hayotiy deb hisoblamas edilar; shu tariqa balo yuz berdi va musulmonlar ochiq kufrni qilichni yalang‘ochlamasdan kuzatishlari osonlashdi; hatto kufr bilan hukm qilinishini qoralamasdan turishlari ham osonlashdi. Undan ham yomoni, musulmonlarning aksariyati kufr qoidalarini qabul qilib, ularga o‘rganib qoldi va Islom hukmlaridan o‘z ixtiyori bilan voz kechdi. Bu holat shu darajaga yetdiki, musulmonlar kufrni qabul qildilar va unga chaqirdilar, unga sukut saqlash va unga qarshi kurashmaslik bilan birga. Bularning hammasi faqat kufr tizimi bilan hukm qilish masalasi endi hayotiy masala deb hisoblanmagani va unga nisbatan qilinadigan chora endi hayot-mamot darajasida bo‘lmagani uchun sodir bo‘ldi.

The Muslims are ordered not to keep silent over the rule by other than what Allah (swt) has revealed, because it is a vital issue. However, when Taqwa (piety) weakened in the souls of the Muslims and their understanding of Islam also weakened, it became easy for them to keep silent over the Khulafa and the rulers if they ruled by Kufr in one single matter; and when their weakness increased, they found it easy to keep silent over the rulers if they ruled by Kufr in several matters. The long term consequence of this silence was that the rulers had the audacity to implement Kufr in a flagrant manner. The Muslims in Egypt kept silent when the ruler implemented the French civil law and abolished the Shariah rules. The Muslims kept silent in the Islamic State when the rules of Kufr were established as a constitution for the Muslims in 1909. Though they revolted against them at first, they remained silent afterwards. Hence, it came as no surprise when Mustafa Kemal destroyed the Khilafah and all the rules of Islam and declared the rule of Kufr. This was so because the Muslims no longer regarded this issue as a vital one, thus the calamity occurred and it became easy for the Muslims to witness the flagrant Kufr without brandishing the sword to remove it; it even became easy for them to be ruled by Kufr without condemning it. Worse still, the majority of Muslims accepted the rules of Kufr, became accustomed to them and relinquished the rules of Islam by choice. This situation reached such a point that Muslims accepted Kufr and called for it, in addition to keeping silent over it and not fighting against it. All this was only because the issue of ruling by a Kufr system was no longer considered to be a vital issue, and the measure undertaken towards it was no longer that of life and death.

had outlined and determined and for which He made the measure to be undertaken towards them one of life and death, had weakened. The linkage of these issues to the Islamic Aqeedah had weakened, and they were relegated from their position to the point where they were no longer perceived as being very critical Shariaah rules, for which arms should be taken up; thus they were relegated from the position in which the Legislator (swt) had placed them, i.e. they were relegated from the position of the vital issue. Consequently, the measure which the Shariah had decreed towards them was no longer deemed to be resistance by force to remove the rule of Kufr and restore the rule of Islam. Therefore the issue of destroying the Khilafah and removing the system of Islam was not perceived as a vital issue, and the fact that the issue was a vital one was not dominant consideration. So Mustafa Kemal went ahead with his action, destroyed the Khilafah and wiped out Islam from the political map without anyone taking up arms against him and fighting him. Therefore, the Kuffar's destruction of the Khilafah and their removal of the system of Islam from existence occurred with ease and simplicity, before the eyes of millions of Muslims. Had the Muslims been at the time aware of the fact that this issue was a vital one, upon which the fate of the Muslims and the fate of Islam depended and that the necessary measure towards it was to take up arms and fight Mustafa Kemal, the Muslims would not have been dealt this tragic blow. Hence, the Muslims failure to perceive that this issue was a vital issue which necessitated a measure of life and death, was the cause of the calamity that befell them.

had outlined and determined and for which He made the measure to be undertaken towards them one of life and death, had weakened. The linkage of these issues to the Islamic Aqeedah had weakened, and they were relegated from their position to the point where they were no longer perceived as being very critical Shariaah rules, for which arms should be taken up; thus they were relegated from the position in which the Legislator (swt) had placed them, i.e. they were relegated from the position of the vital issue. Consequently, the measure which the Shariah had decreed towards them was no longer deemed to be resistance by force to remove the rule of Kufr and restore the rule of Islam. Therefore the issue of destroying the Khilafah and removing the system of Islam was not perceived as a vital issue, and the fact that the issue was a vital one was not dominant consideration. So Mustafa Kemal went ahead with his action, destroyed the Khilafah and wiped out Islam from the political map without anyone taking up arms against him and fighting him. Therefore, the Kuffar's destruction of the Khilafah and their removal of the system of Islam from existence occurred with ease and simplicity, before the eyes of millions of Muslims. Had the Muslims been at the time aware of the fact that this issue was a vital one, upon which the fate of the Muslims and the fate of Islam depended and that the necessary measure towards it was to take up arms and fight Mustafa Kemal, the Muslims would not have been dealt this tragic blow. Hence, the Muslims failure to perceive that this issue was a vital issue which necessitated a measure of life and death, was the cause of the calamity that befell them.