Tashqi savdo

Tashqi savdo - Islomning iqtisodiy tizimi | Quran Course

0% read · 10 min left

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

Show original

Tashqi savdo

25 Foreign Trade

by Taqiuddin an-Nabhani10 min readViewed 87 times

Savdo-sotiq munosabatlari mahsulotlarni almashtirish (barter) usulidan pul vositasidan foydalanishga o‘tgach, odamlar o‘rtasidagi savdo rivojlanib, kengaydi. Mehnat taqsimoti kuchaydi: bu shaxs darajasida, milliy darajada va xalqaro miqyosda ham sezildi. Shu tariqa inson yakka o‘zi yashaydigan davr tugadi. Shuningdek, har bir millat yoki xalq boshqa millat va xalqlardan ajralib, izolyatsiyada yashaydigan davr ham tugadi. Shu sababli ichki va tashqi savdo dunyo miqyosida hayotning zarur ehtiyojlaridan biriga aylandi.

Since trade transactions moved from the bartering of commodities to using money as a medium of exchange, business between individuals flourished and grew.Work became more specialised at an individual level, at a national level as well as internationally. This marked the end of an era when the individual used to live by himself. It also marked the end of the era when generations in each nation or people lived within a nation in isolation from other nations and peoples, and domestic and foreign trade have therefore become one of life’s necessities world-wide.

Ichki savdo bilan tashqi savdo o'rtasida farq bor. Ichki savdo ma'lum bir millatga mansub shaxslar tomonidan amalga oshiriladigan savdo bitimlarini ifodalaydi. Bunday bitimlar fuqaholar tomonidan zikr qilingan savdo qoidalariga rioya qilishi kerak. U davlatning tashabbusini talab qilmaydi va to'g'ridan-to'g'ri nazoratni ham talab qilmaydi, balki xuddi ijara, nikoh va boshqa bitimlar kabi, odamlarga Islomning savdo qoidalarini joriy etish va bu qoidalarni buzganlarni jazolashga qaratilgan umumiy nazoratni talab qiladi. Tashqi savdo xalqlar va millatlar o'rtasida amalga oshiriladigan savdo bitimlarini aks ettiradi, bir davlat fuqarolari o'rtasida emas, balki ikki davlat o'rtasida yoki har biri turli davlatga mansub bo'lgan va har biri tovarlarni o'z mamlakatiga olib ketish maqsadida sotib olayotgan ikki shaxs o'rtasida amalga oshiriladigan bitimlarni. Bunday barcha bitimlar bir mamlakatning boshqa mamlakat bilan munosabatlarini tartibga soluvchi qoidalarning bir qismini tashkil etadi.

Davlatlar o‘rtasidagi tashqi savdo avvallari alohida savdogarlar orqali olib borilardi. Savdogar boshqa mamlakatga borib, biror tovarni sotib olar va uni o‘z mamlakatiga olib qaytardi yoki boshqa mamlakatga tovar olib borib sotar va uning evaziga pul yoki boshqa tovarni o‘z mamlakatiga olib kelardi. Bunday barcha hollarda bu savdoning jihatlarini tashkil etuvchi va uni bevosita nazorat qiluvchi davlat edi. Davlat chegaralarda nazorat markazlariga ega bo‘lardi, faqihlar bu markazlarni Masolih deb atashadi. Xalifa kofir mamlakatlarga chiqish imkonini beruvchi barcha yo‘llarda ushbu nazorat markazlari (Masolih) bo‘lishi kerak. Bu markazlarda xizmat qiluvchi kishilar barcha savdogarlarni tekshirardi. Shunday qilib, markazlar importni va eksportni bevosita nazorat qilardi, ya’ni xaridorlar va sotuvchilar, barcha savdogarlarni nazorat qilardi. Chegaradagi bu nazorat markazlari savdoni tashkil etadi, ya’ni savdogarlarning harakatlarini hamda davlatga kiritilayotgan yoki chegaralari orqali olib chiqilayotgan valyutalarni bevosita nazorat qiladi.

Foreign trade between states used to be conducted through individual traders. A trader would travel to another country, buy a commodity and transfer it back to his country, or He might take a commodity to another country to sell it and bring the money or another commodity back to his country. In all such cases, it is the State who would organise the aspects of this trade and directly monitor it. She would have control centres at the frontiers, these centres are referred to by the jurists as Masalih. The Khalifah should have these control centres (Masalih) on all the routes which give access to non-Muslim countries. People manning these centres would check all the traders. The centres would therefore directly control the imports and exports i.e. control all the traders, buyers and sellers alike. These control centres at the frontiers organise trade i.e. control directly the movements of traders and the currencies being brought into the State or taken out via her frontiers.

Shunga ko'ra, Islom davlatidan hech bir shaxsga — musulmon bo'lsin yoki zimmiy bo'lsin — bunday tovarlarni chet elga olib chiqishga ruxsat berilmaydi, agar bu tovarlarni eksport qilish musulmonlarga qarshi urush olib borayotgan harbiy dushman kofirlarga yordam beradigan bo'lsa. Ammo agar bu ularga musulmonlarga qarshi yordam bermasa, ularga eksport qilish ruxsat etiladi. Kiyim-kechak va oziq-ovqat mahsulotlari yoki boshqa shunga o'xshash tovarlarni eksport qilishga kelsak, bu ruxsat etiladi, chunki Allohning Elchisi ﷺ Samomaga Makka aholisini oziq-ovqat bilan ta'minlashni buyurgan edilar, holbuki ular Payg'ambar ﷺ ga qarshi harbiy dushman edilar, hamda bunday hududlarda dushmanlarga ularning urush salohiyatiga yordam berish hukmi qo'llanmagan edi. Shuningdek, sahobalar davrida musulmon savdogarlar harbiy dushman davlatlarga savdo qilish uchun borar edilar, bu sahobalarning huzurida va ularning to'liq xabari bilan sodir bo'lar edi. Sahobalar bunga e'tiroz bildirmadilar va bunday ishni qoralamadilar, garchi agar bu harom bo'lganida, ular jim turmasligi kutilgan bo'lardi. Shuning uchun, ularning buni to'liq bilgan holda jim turishlari faqat sukutiy ijmo sifatida qaralishi mumkin. Shunga ko'ra, musulmon va zimmiy savdogarlarga oziq-ovqat va mollarni eksport qilishga ruxsat beriladi, faqat bu mollar jamoaga kamchilik tufayli zarur bo'lsa, bunday holda ularni eksport qilishga ruxsat berilmaydi.

Therefore, no person, Muslim or Dhimmi alike, would be allowed to export such commodities from the Islamic State where the exporting of such commodities would assist the belligerent disbelievers in their war against the Muslims. However, if it does not assist them against the Muslims, exporting to them would be allowed. As for the export of other commodities such as clothing and foodstuffs or any such commodity, this is permitted because the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) ordered Thamama to supply the people of Makkah with provisions while they were belligerent enemies to him, and because assisting the enemies in their war effort did not apply in such areas. Also, because Muslim businessmen used to travel to the belligerent countries to trade with them in the times of the Sahaba, in their presence and with their full knowledge. The Sahaba did not object nor did they condemn such actions, despite the fact that they would not have been expected to keep silent over such an action had it been unlawful. Therefore, their silence over this, with their full knowledge of it, could only be considered as a silent consensus. The Muslim and the Dhimmi traders would therefore be allowed to export foodstuffs and goods, unless these are needed by the community due to their shortage, in which case their export would not be allowed.

Shu bilan birga, ahdli savdogarlar (Davlat bilan sulh shartnomasi asosida bo'lganlar) Davlat ular bilan imzolagan tashqi savdo shartnomasi bandlari asosida muomala qilinadi, import bo'lsinmi yoki eksport. Biroq ularga hech qanday qurol yoki urush ishiga xizmat qilishi mumkin bo'lgan boshqa harbiy jihozlarni sotib olishga ruxsat berilmaydi. Agar ular shunday mollarni sotib olsalar, ularni chet elga eksport qilishga yo'l qo'yilmaydi, chunki bu ularga yordam bergan bo'ladi va ular ahdli savdogarlar bo'lishsa-da, bu ularning bir kun kelib urushayotgan dushmanga aylanishi mumkinligini o'zgartirmaydi. Dushman urush salohiyatiga yordam deb hisoblanmaydigan boshqa har qanday mahsulotni eksport qilishga ruxsat etiladi. Bundan tashqari, agar musulmonlar manfaatiga mos bo'lsa, ularga samarasiz deb topilgan va harbiy yordam darajasiga yetmaydigan ayrim qurollarni yetkazib berish ham mumkin, ularni eksport qilishga ruxsat beriladi. Buning sababi shundaki, urush yordami sifatida ishlatiladigan qurol yoki boshqa harbiy jihozlarni sotishni taqiqlashning shar'iy illati dushmanni ta'minlash va unga yordam berishning oldini olishdir. Shuning uchun, agar bu illat yo'qolsa, hukm ham qo'llanmaydi.

As for the traders under covenant (with the State), they would be treated in accordance with the foreign trade clauses of the treaty which the State has signed with them, whether in imports or exports. However, they would not be allowed to purchase any weapons or any other military hardware that may be used in the war effort. If they bought such commodities, they would be prevented from exporting them abroad, for this would assist them, and although they are traders under covenant, this would not alter the fact that they could one day become belligerent enemies. Any other commodity, which is not deemed an aid in their war effort, is allowed to be exported. Furthermore, if it were in the Muslims’ interest to supply them with certain weapons, those considered noneffective and which do not reach the level of military assistance, they would also be allowed to be exported. This is because the Shari’ah reason (Illah) for prohibiting the sale of weapons or any other military hardware, used as war aid, is to prevent the supply and help of the enemy. Therefore, if the reason vanishes, the rule would not apply.

Harbiy dushman Islom xonadoniga himoya, ya'ni maxsus kirish vizasi berilmagan holda kira olmaydi. Unga himoya berish kirishga ruxsat berish demakdir. Agar u himoyasiz kirgan bo'lsa, bu holat tekshirilishi kerak. Agar u Islom yurtida sotish uchun tovarlar bilan kirgan bo'lsa va davlatning odatiy amaliyoti savdogarlarning himoyasiz kirishiga ruxsat bergan bo'lsa, ularga zarar yetkazilmaydi, lekin ularning tovarlariga barcha xorijiy tovarlarga qo'llaniladigan xuddi shunday cheklovlar va soliqlar qo'llanadi. Bu cheklov va soliqlar bizning savdogarlarimizga nisbatan qo'llanadigan talablarga asoslanadi; boshqacha aytganda, ular bizning savdogarlarimizga qanday munosabatda bo'lsa, ularga ham shunday munosabatda bo'linadi. Odatiy amaliyotga ko'ra kirishga ruxsat berilgan kishilar, masalan, davlat chegaralari yaqinida yashovchilar kabi, savdo qilishga ruxsat etiladi. Bunday savdogarlar kirish vizasisiz, ya'ni himoyasiz kirishga ruxsat etiladi. Ammo agar savdogar sifatida kirishga oldindan ruxsat beruvchi odatiy amaliyot bo'lmasa, yoki bunday amaliyot mavjud bo'lsa-yu, kishi savdo qilish niyatisiz kirgan bo'lsa, u savdo qilmaydigan harbiy dushman kabi muomalaga olinadi va uning qoni hamda mol-mulki davlat hududida himoyalanmaydi. Agar u himoya so'rab kelganini da'vo qilsa, bu uning foydasiga qabul qilinmaydi. Chunki harbiy dushmanga himoya berish uning yurtimizda qoni va mol-mulkining himoyalanishga loyiq bo'lishining shartidir, shuning uchun unga himoya berilmasa, davlat uning xavfsizligi uchun javobgar bo'lmaydi. Himoya faqat amalda bo'lgan odatiy amaliyotga muvofiq, faqat savdogarlarga nisbatan va ular savdo qilish niyatida olib kelgan tovarlar bo'lgan taqdirdagina beriladi. Harbiy dushmanga himoya berish uning mol-mulkini himoya qilishni ham nazarda tutadi. Agar u Islom davlatida yashashni xohlab, unga yashash huquqi berilgan bo'lsa, so'ngra harbiy-dushman mamlakatga ketishga qaror qilib, molini musulmon yoki zimmiy kishiga qarash uchun qoldirsa yoki ulardan biriga qarz bersa, bu holatda uning nima sababdan ketganini tekshirish kerak bo'ladi. Agar u shaxsiy sabablar bilan, yoki savdogar, elchi, sayyoh bo'lib yoki shoshilinch ish yuzasidan ketgan va so'ngra Islom yurtiga qaytgan bo'lsa, unga o'ziga va moliga berilgan himoya kuchida qoladi. Chunki agar u harbiy-dushman mamlakatga ketgan bo'lsa-da, Islom davlatining doimiy fuqarosi bo'lib qolish niyatida bo'lsa, u xuddi harbiy-dushman mamlakatga ketgan zimmiyga o'xshaydi, shuning uchun ikkisiga ham bir xil hukm qo'llanadi. Uning harbiy-dushman mamlakatga ketishi, agar niyati Islom yurtida yashash bo'lsa, himoyasini bekor qilmaydi. Biroq agar u harbiy-dushman mamlakatga doimiy yashash uchun qaytgan bo'lsa, o'zi uchun berilgan himoya bekor bo'ladi va Islom yurtiga qaytmoqchi bo'lsa, yangidan himoya so'rashi shart bo'ladi. Molga berilgan himoyaga kelsak, uni tekshirish kerak. Agar u molini Islom yurtida, musulmon yoki zimmiy kishining qaramog'ida qoldirgan bo'lsa, uning moli himoyada qoladi. Chunki u Islom yurtiga yetib, himoya olgach, bu himoya uning shaxsini ham, molini ham qamrab oladi. Agar moli qoldirilgan bo'lsa-yu, u o'zi yolg'iz harbiy-dushman mamlakatga qaytgan bo'lsa, unga berilgan himoya harbiy-dushman mamlakatga yetganida bekor bo'ladi, lekin Islom yurtida qoldirgan molining himoyasi kuchida qoladi, chunki bekor qiluvchi sabab faqat uning shaxsiga tegishli. Agar u vafot etsa, uning moli merosxo'rlariga o'tadi, chunki himoya moliga bog'liq bo'lgan majburiy huquqdir. Shunday ekan, agar bu mol-mulk uning merosxo'rlariga o'tgan bo'lsa, himoya huquqi ham uning merosxo'rlariga berilishi kerak. Biroq, agar u o'z mol-mulkini o'zi bilan olib ketgan bo'lsa, u ham o'zi, ham mol-mulki uchun berilgan himoyani yo'qotgan bo'lar edi.

A warring belligerent could not enter the Islamic household unless He is given protection i.e. a special entry visa. Giving Him protection means a permission to enter. If He entered without protection it has to be examined. If He entered with commodities to sell in the Islamic land, and the State’s common practice happened to allow traders to enter without protection, they would not be harmed, but their commodities would be subjected to the same restrictions and levies imposed on all foreign commodities, these would be based on what they impose on our traders; in other words, they would be treated the same way they treat our traders. Those who enter would be allowed to trade according to the common practices, as is the case for instance with those who live near the State’s frontiers. These traders would be allowed to enter without an entry visa i.e. without protection. However, if there were no prior common practice allowing them to enter as traders, or such common practice were in force but a person happened to enter with no intention to trade, He would be treated like the non-trading warring belligerent, and his blood and his wealth would not be protected within the State’s territories. If He claimed to have come seeking protection, this would not be accepted of him. This is because giving protection to the belligerent is a condition for Him to deserve the safeguarding of his blood and wealth in our land, so if He were not given protection, the State would not be responsible for his safety. Protection would be given based on the common practice in force concerning and exclusively for the traders, provided they were carrying goods they intended for trade. Giving the belligerent protection would also entail protecting his wealth. If He decided to settle in the Islamic State and were given the right of abode, then He decided to leave to the belligerent country, leaving his wealth behind for a Muslim or for a Dhimmi to look after, or lending it to either of them, it would in this case have to be examined as to the reasons why He left. If He left for personal reasons, or as a trader, an envoy, a tourist or for a pressing matter, and returned to the Islamic land, then the protection He had been given to his person and his wealth would remain in force. This is because if He left to the belligerent country, but with the intention to remain as a resident of the Islamic State, He would be treated like the Dhimmi who leaves to the belligerent country, therefore the same rule would apply to both. His leave to the belligerent country would not nullify his protection as long as his intention is to reside in the Islamic land. However, if He returned to the belligerent country as a resident, his protection for himself would be nullified, and if He wished to return to the Islamic land, He would require a new application for protection. As for the protection given to his wealth, this has to be examined. If He had left it behind in the Islamic land, by leaving it in the care of a Muslim or a Dhimmi, then his wealth would remain protected. This is because once He had reached the Islamic land and was given protection, this protection would cover both his person and his wealth. If his wealth was left behind and He returned by himself to the belligerent country, the protection given to Him would be nullified once He reached the belligerent country, but the protection given to his wealth would remain valid for that which He had left in the Islamic land, due to the fact that the nullifying factor would be restricted to his person only. So if He died, his wealth would be transferred to his inheritors; because the protection is a binding duty related to the wealth. Therefore, if this wealth was transferred to his heirs, so too should the right to protection be given to his heirs. However, if He took his wealth with him, He would lose the protection given to both himself and to his wealth.

Shuning uchun harbiy davlat fuqarolarining savdo mollari ularning egasiga berilgan aman-xavfsizlik (amon) holda bizning yurtimizga kirmasligi kerak, va uning amani savdo molining amaniga ham kengayadi. Agar harbiy davlat fuqarosi o'zi kirmasdan savdo mollarini olib kirmoqchi bo'lsa, bu mollarga aman berilishi ham, berilmasligi ham mumkin, chunki bu holda mollarga berilishi mumkin bo'lgan aman uning shaxsiga berilgan amandan ajratilishi mumkin. Chunki agar harbiy davlat fuqarosi bizning yurtimizga kirsa va o'ziga aman berilsa, bu aman avtomatik ravishda u olib kirgan mollariga ham kengayadi, lekin Islom yurtiga olib kelmagan boyligiga kengaymaydi. Agar u Islom yurtidan chiqib ketsa va mollarini Islom yurtida qoldirsa, mollariga berilgan aman Islom yurtida kuchda qoladi, o'ziga berilgan aman esa bekor bo'ladi. Shuning uchun, agar bu boylik egasisiz Islom uyiga yetib kelsa, xalifaning harbiy davlat fuqarosining savdo mollariga, ya'ni uning mollariga aman berishi joiz bo'ladi. Agar uning boyligiga, ya'ni savdo mollariga aman berilsa, u bu savdoni vakil, xizmatchi yoki boshqa yo'l bilan olib kirishga ruxsat etiladi. Bu shuni ko'rsatadiki, harbiy davlat fuqarosining boyligi Islom yurtiga kirishi uchun, xuddi shaxsning kirishi kabi, aman talab qiladi. Demak, chet el savdosi Islom yurtiga kirishi uchun aman talab qiladi, ya'ni davlatdan ruxsatnoma talab qiladi. Agar ruxsatnoma berilsa, davlat bu boylikni o'z fuqarolariga tegishli boshqa har qanday boylik kabi himoya qilishi kerak. Agar u aman holda, ya'ni ruxsatnomasiz kirsa, u davlat musodara qilishi mumkin bo'lgan, daxlsiz bo'lmagan mol hisoblanadi. Biroq, bu faqat mollar harbiy savdogarlarning mulki bo'lsa, sodir bo'ladi. Shunga ko'ra, agar bu mahsulotlarni Islom davlatining fuqarosi bo'lgan savdogar — musulmon bo'lsin yoki zimmiy — sotib olgan bo'lsa va u mahsulotlarni Islom davlatiga olib kirmoqchi bo'lsa, bunday holatda unga ruxsatnoma talab qilinmaydi. Bu shart bilan amalga oshadiki, mahsulotlar uning mulki bo'lishi va mulkchilik o'tkazilishi barcha jihatlari bilan yakunlangan bo'lishi kerak. Chunki agar mulkchilik o'tkazilishi hali yakunlanmagan bo'lsa, ya'ni sotuv shartnomasi tugallanmagan, faqat jarayonda bo'lsa — bugungi kundagi ko'pgina savdo bitimlarida bo'lgani kabi, masalan, xaridor yuk hujjatlarini olmaguncha sotuvga majbur bo'lmasa yoki mahsulotlar sotib olingan bo'lsa-da, hali qabul qilinmagan bo'lsa — bunday mahsulotlar harbiy kuch vakili (harbiy)ning savdo mollari hisoblanadi va ularning Islom yurtiga kirishi uchun himoya, ya'ni ruxsatnoma talab qilinadi. Agar mahsulotlarni qabul qilish ularni zavod yoki omboridan chiqqanidan yoki jo'natilganidan keyin kuchga kirsa, u holda mahsulotlar musulmon yoki zimmiyning savdo mulki hisoblanadi. Biroq, agar topshirish mahsulotlar o'z manziliga yetib borguniga qadar kuchga kirmasa, bunday holatda ular harbiy kuch vakilining mulki hisoblanadi.

Therefore, the trading commodities of the belligerent should not enter our land without a protection given to the owner, and his protection extends to the protection of his trade. If the belligerent wanted to bring his trading commodities in without however entering himself, a protection to his trading commodities may or may not be given, because in this case the protection which may be given to the commodities could be separated from the protection given to his person. For if the belligerent person entered our land, and He were given protection for himself, this protection would automatically be extended to his commodities which He brings with him, but not to the wealth He didn’t bring with Him to the Islamic land. If He departed the Islamic land and left his commodities behind in the Islamic land, the protection given to his commodities would remain in force within the Islamic land, and the protection He had been given to himself would be terminated. Therefore, it would be permitted for the Khalifah to give protection to the trading commodities of the belligerent i.e. to his commodities, if this wealth were to reach the Islamic household without its owner. If protection to his wealth i.e. trading commodities was granted, He would be allowed to transport this trade with an agent, an employee or otherwise. This indicates that for the wealth of the belligerent to enter the Islamic land, it would require protection, just like the entry of the belligerent person. Therefore, foreign trade requires protection for it to enter the Islamic land i.e. it requires a permit from the State. If a permit were given, then the State would have to protect this wealth just like any other wealth belonging to her citizens. If it entered without protection i.e. without a permit, it would be a violable property which the State could seize. However, this would only occur if the commodities were the property of the belligerent traders.Whereas, if these commodities were purchased by a trader who happened to be a citizen of the Islamic State, whether Muslim or Dhimmi, and He wanted to import the goods to the Islamic State, He would not in this case require a permit. This would be on condition that the commodities happened to be his property, and that the transfer of ownership had been completed in all its aspects. For if the transfer of ownership were not yet completed, because the sale deal was not completed, but just happened to be in process, as is the case in most business deals at present, where for instance the buyer would not be committed to the sale until He receives the shipping documents, or where the goods are yet to be received although they had already been bought, these goods would in this case be considered the trading commodities of a belligerent, and their entry to the Islamic land would require protection i.e. a permit. If the receipt of goods took effect once they have left the factory or the warehouse, or once they have been shipped, then the goods would be considered as being the trading property of the Muslim or the Dhimmi. However, if the handover did not take effect until the goods reached their destination, in this case they would be considered as the property of a belligerent.

Bu harbiyning savdosi va harbiyning yurtimizga kirishi bilan bog'liq masalalar darajasida to'xtaydi. Harbiyning yurtimizdagi mahalliy mollarni, ya'ni harbiy tomonidan yurtimiz mahsulotlarini sotib olishi, ya'ni chiqishi masalasiga kelsak, bu tekshirilishi lozim: agar mollar strategik xarakterga ega bo'lsa, masalan qurol-yarog' yoki dushmanga qarshi urushda ishlatilishi mumkin bo'lgan har qanday harbiy yordam vositalari bo'lsa, u bunday mollarni sotib olishdan man etiladi, agar u ularni allaqachon sotib olgan bo'lsa, ularni eksport qilishdan man etiladi. Oziq-ovqat mahsulotlari, iste'mol buyumlari va boshqa turdagi mollarga kelsak, himoya berilgan harbiyga bunday mollarni yurtimizdan sotib olish, tashish va eksport qilishga ruxsat beriladi, agar ular kamyobligi sababli fuqarolarning zaruriy ehtiyojlari qatoriga kirmasa. Aks holda, fuqarolarning ularga bo'lgan ehtiyoji tufayli eksportga taqiq qo'llaniladi. Musulmon va zimmiy savdogarlar ham bunday mollarni eksport qilishdan man etiladi, bunda shar'iy illat fuqarolarning ushbu mollarga bo'lgan ehtiyoji hisoblanadi.

This is as far as the trade of the belligerent and the entry of the belligerent are concerned. As for the exit of the belligerent’s trade out of our land i.e. the purchase by the belligerent of our local goods, this has to be examined: if the goods were of a strategic nature, such as weaponry or any other war aid that may be used in the war against the enemy, He would be prevented from purchasing such commodities, and if He had already purchased them, He would be prevented from exporting them. As for other types of commodities such as foodstuffs, consumables and others, the belligerent who had been given protection would be allowed to purchase, transport and export such commodities from our land, as long as these are not among the necessities of the citizens because of their scarcity, in which case an export ban would apply due to the citizens’ need for them. The Muslim and the Dhimmi traders would also be prevented from exporting such commodities, the Shari’ah reason (Illah) being the need of the citizens for such commodities.

Bu islomiy yerlarga va undan tashqariga savdogarlarning harakati hamda savdo tovarlari borasida. Bu tovarlarga solinadigan soliqlarga kelsak, shariat hukmi savdo tovarlariga emas, balki savdogarlarga qarab o‘zgaradi. Chunki Islom savdo tovarlarini faqat mulk sifatida ko‘rmaydi va ularni kelib chiqishiga ko‘ra ham ko‘rmaydi, balki savdo tovarlari shaxslarga tegishli ekanligiga ko‘ra qaraydi. Shu sababli, savdo tovarlariga solinadigan soliqlar tovarlarning kelib chiqishidan va turidan qat’i nazar, savdogarlarning o‘zlariga bog‘liq bo‘ladi. Demak, agar savdogar Islom davlatining fuqarosi bo‘lsa, musulmon bo‘ladimi yoki zimmiy, uning savdosiga hech qanday ‘ushr bojxona soliqlari solinmaydi. Buning sababi, ad-Doramiy, Ahmad va Abu Ubayd ‘Uqba ibn ‘Omir rivoyat qilishicha, u Allohning Elchisi ﷺ shunday deganini eshitgan: “Maks (bojxona soliqi) solgan kishi jannatga kirmaydi.” Abu Muhammad aytadi: “U ﷺ ‘ushr bojlarini va import qilinadigan tovarlardan o‘nlik soliq oladiganni nazarda tutgan.” Muslim ibn Mushbih rivoyat qilishicha, u bir marta Ibn ‘Umardan so‘radi: “Umar musulmonlardan o‘nlik soliq olganini bilasizmi?” U dedi: “Yo‘q, bilmayman.” Ibrohim ibn Muhojir rivoyat qiladi: “Ziyod ibn Hudayr shunday deganini eshitdim: ‘Islomda o‘nlik soliqni birinchi bo‘lib men undirganman’. Undan so‘radim: “Kimdan o‘nlik soliq olardingiz?” U javob berdi: ‘Biz hech qachon musulmondan yoki ahdli kishidan (zimmiydan) soliq olmaganmiz; Bani Tag‘lib nasroniylaridan soliq olganmiz.’” ‘Abdurrahmon ibn Ma’qal rivoyat qiladi: “Ziyod ibn Hudayrdan so‘radim: Kimdan soliq olardingiz? U javob berdi: ‘Biz hech qachon musulmondan yoki ahdli kishidan soliq olmaganmiz.’ Shunda dedim: “Unda kimdan olardingiz?” U javob berdi: ‘Harbiy holatdagi savdogarlardan, chunki biz ularning oldiga savdo bilan borganimizda ular bizdan soliq olardilar.’” Ya’qub ibn ‘Abdurrahman al-Qarri rivoyat qiladi, uning otasi aytdi: ‘Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz ‘Uday ibn Arta’ahga quyidagicha xat yozdi: “Odamlardan fidya (qutqarish to‘lovi) yukini, kafforat sifatida ovqat berish majburiyatini olib tashlang, shuningdek, maks, ya’ni bojxona yukini ham olib tashlang. Darhaqiqat, bu bojxona solig‘i emas, balki odamlarning haqini ushlab qolishdir, bu haqda Alloh (SWT) aytadi:

This is as far as the movements of traders and trading commodities in and out of the Islamic land are concerned. As for the levies imposed on these commodities, the Shari’ah rule varies according to the traders, and not according to the types of trading commodities. Because Islam does not view the trading commodities as being merely a property, nor does it view them in relation to their origin, but rather to the fact that the trading commodities are owned by individuals. Therefore, levies imposed on the trading commodities would depend on the traders themselves, regardless of the origin of goods and regardless of their type. Therefore, if the trader were a citizen of the Islamic State, Muslim or Dhimmi alike, no ’Ushr customs would be imposed on his business whatsoever. This is because Ad-Darimi, Ahmed and Abu ‘Ubayd reported on the authority of ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Amir that He heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) say: “He who imposes maks (custom duty) would not enter paradise.” Abu Mohammed said: “He (pbuh) means the ‘Ushr customs, and the one who collects the tithe on imported commodities”. Muslim bin Musbih reported that He once asked Ibn ‘Umar: “Did you know that Umar took from the Muslims the tithe?” He said: “No, I did not”. Ibrahim Ibn Muhajir reported: “I heard Ziyad Ibn Hadeer say: ‘I was the first to collect the tithe in Islam’. I asked: “Whom did you use to levy the tithe?” He replied: ‘We never used to levy the tithe on a Muslim or a covenantor (Dhimmi); we collected the tithe from the Christians of Bani Taghlib.’ ‘Abdurrahman Ibn Ma’qal reported: “I asked Ziyad Ibn Hadeer: Whom did you use to levy? He replied: ‘We never used to levy a Muslim or a covenantor.’ So I said: “then whom did you levy?” He replied: ‘The belligerent traders, for they used to levy us when we went to them on business.’ Ya’aqub Ibn ‘Abdurrahman Al-Qarri reported on the authority of his father who said: ‘Umar Ibn Abdul-Aziz wrote to ‘Uday Ibn Arta’ah the following: “Remove from people the burden of Fidya (redemption), the burden of having to provide food as atonement, and also remove the burden of Maks i.e. customs. Indeed, it is not customs duty but the withholding of people’s due, in which Allah (swt) says:

...kim sizga sadaqa (zakot) olib kelsa, uni qabul qiling; kim olib kelmasa, Alloh uni yetarlicha hisobga oladi. Kariz ibn Sulaymon aytdi: “Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz ‘Abdulloh ibn ‘Awf Al-Qarriyga quyidagicha xat yozdi: “Refahdagi, Maks uyi deb ataladigan uyga bor, uni buzib tashla, so‘ng uning qoldig‘i qolmaydigan qilib, dengizga olib borib tashla.” Abu Ubayd bu besh rivoyatni “Al-Amval” kitobida keltirgan. Abu Ubayd aytdi: “Biz ushr, bojxona to‘lovini yoqtirmaslik va unga qarshi qattiq ogohlantirish zikr qilingan bu rivoyatlarning ma’nosi johiliyat davriga borib taqaladi. O‘sha davrda arab va g‘ayriarab podshohlar savdogarlar o‘z yerlaridan o‘tib qolsalar, ularning mollaridan ‘o‘ndan bir’ olish odati bor edi. Buni Allah Elchisi ﷺning boshqa viloyatlarga, jumladan Saqif, Bahrayn, Doumat al-Jandal va Islomni qabul qilgan boshqa kishilarga yuborgan xatlarida ko‘rish mumkin, unda u zot ﷺ shunday yozganlar: “Ularni qiynamasinlar va ulardan (bu narsani) olmasinlar.” Shuning uchun biz bundan shuni tushundikki, bu johiliyat davrining odati bo‘lgan (bu haqda ko‘plab hikoyalar bizga yetib kelgan), to Alloh (subhanahu va taolo) Elchisini ﷺ Islom bilan yuborgan vaqtga qadar, Alloh (subhanahu va taolo) bu odatni bekor qilgunga qadar”, ya’ni johiliyat davrida o‘ndan bir, ya’ni bojxona to‘lovlarini (mukus) olish odat bo‘lgan, Alloh (subhanahu va taolo) esa buni Islom orqali bekor qildi.

...he who brings to you charity (Sadaqah), accept it from him; and He who does not, Allah would then adequately account him. Kariz Ibn Sulayman said: “Umar Ibn Abdul-Aziz wrote to ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Awf Al- Qarri the following: “Ride to the house which is in Refah called the house of Maks, demolish it, then take it to the sea and throw it in, leaving no trace of it.” Abu ‘Ubayd reported these five narrations in the book of Al- Amwal. Abu Ubayd said: “The meaning of these reports in which we mentioned the ushr, the dislike of customs duty and the harsh warning against it, has its roots in the days of ignorance (Jahiliyya), when it was the practice of Arab and non-Arab kings to impose upon the traders ‘a tithe’ of their properties if they happened to pass by their lands. This is illustrated in the letters dispatched by the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to other provinces such as Thaqeef, Bahrain, Doomat al-Jandal and others among those who embraced Islam, in which He (pbuh) wrote: “That they should not be pressed nor should they be levied on.” Therefore, we gathered from this that it was a customary practice of the days of ignorance (with many tales about it reaching us) until Allah (swt) abolished this practice when He (swt) sent His Messenger (pbuh) with Islam” i.e. it was the customary practice of the days of ignorance to impose the tithes i.e. customs duties (Mukus), so Allah (swt) abolished this by Islam.

Ushbu rivoyat qilingan hadis Allohning Elchisi (sollallohu alayhi vasallam) va ‘Umar ibn al-Khattob hamda ‘Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz rivoyatlari shuni ko‘rsatadiki, musulmon yoki zimmiydan o‘zlarining savdo mollaridan – Islom yurtiga olib kirilgan yoki harbiy dushman xonadoniga olib chiqilgan bo‘lishidan qat’i nazar – bojxona yig‘imi olinmasligi kerak. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattob shunga amal qilgan va hech qachon musulmon va zimmiy savdogarlardan bojxona yig‘imi olmagan, sahobalar esa bunga rozi bo‘lgan; shuning uchun bu sukut orqali kelishuvni, ya’ni shariat dalilini bildiradi. Bojxona yig‘imi davlat chegaralaridan mamlakatga kiruvchi yoki undan chiquvchi savdo mollaridan olinadigan pul hisoblanadi. Shu maqsadda chegaralarda qurilgan bino Bayt ul-Maks deb ataladi. Mollarga solinadigan bojxona yig‘imi johiliyat davrida bozorlardagi sotuvchilardan olingan pul yoki mollarni sotish paytida yoki shaharlarga kiritilganda davlat amaldorlari tomonidan olinadigan alohida narsalardir. Bojxona yig‘imining ko‘plik shakli Mukus. Aytiladi: Makasa, ya’ni u bojxona yig‘imining pulini yig‘di. Demak, bu so‘z aynan savdodan olinadigan soliqqa nisbatan qo‘llanadi. Bojxona yig‘imini olishning taqiqi umumiy bo‘lib, musulmon va zimmiyni o‘z ichiga oladi.

This reported Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), as well as the reports from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and ‘Umar Ibn Abdul-Aziz, indicate that no customs duty should be taken from the Muslim or the Dhimmi on their trading commodities, be they imports into the Islamic land or exports to the belligerent household. Umar ibn al-Khattab adhered to this and never took customs duty from the Muslim and Dhimmi traders, and the Sahabah approved of this, therefore it indicates silent consensus i.e. a Shari’ah evidence. The customs duty is the money taken on the trading commodities which pass through the State’s frontiers either in or out of the country. The house erected on the frontiers for this purpose is called Bait ul-Maks. The customs duty on goods is either money that was taken in the days of ignorance from the salesmen in the markets, or specific items taken by the State’s officials upon the sale of commodities, or upon their entry into the cities. The plural of customs duty is Mukus. It is said: Makasa i.e. He collected the money of customs duty. Therefore, it is specifically applied to the levy taken on trade. The prohibition of taking the customs duty is general, comprising the Muslim and the Dhimmi.

Abu ‘Ubayd ning “Al-Amwal” kitobida Harb Al-Thaqafiy orqali uning bobosidan rivoyat qilingan hadisga ko‘ra, Rasulullah ﷺ shunday degan: “Musulmonlarga ushr solinmasin, balki yahudiy va nasroniylarga solinsin.” Bu hadis uchta sanad orqali rivoyat qilingan, ulardan ikkitasi noma’lum kishidan naql qilingan. Hadis rivoyat qiluvchilari Harb ibn ‘Ubaydulloh Ath-Thaqafiy orqali, uning bobosidan qilingan rivoyatga izoh bermagan va unga nisbatan sukut saqlagan. Bundan tashqari, hech bir mujtahid olim bu hadisni qabul qilmagan va bu hadisni dalil sifatida ishlatganini biror xabar bizga yetib kelmagan, na savdodan hech narsa olinmaydi, deydiganlar orasidan, na musulmonlarning savdosidan zakot sifatida qirqdan bir qism, zimmiylardan esa siyosiy majburiyat sifatida yarim ushr olinishi kerak, deydiganlar orasidan. Agar bu xabar sahih deb tasdiqlangan bo‘lganida, albatta qabul qilinib, dalil sifatida ishlatilgan bo‘lardi. Demak, bu hadis hech kim tomonidan sahih deb hukm qilinmagan va shu sababli uni dalil sifatida ishlatish joiz emas.

As for the Hadith reported by Abu ‘Ubayd in Al-Amwal, on the authority of Harb Al-Thaqafi on that of his maternal grand-father that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “No tithe (ushr) should be imposed upon the Muslims, but they should be imposed upon the Jews and the Christians.” This Hadith has been reported through three chains, two of which narration was made from an unknown, and the narration of Harb Ibn ‘Ubaydullah Al-Thaqafi, which He reported on the authority of his maternal grandfather, on which the Hadith narrators did not comment on and remained silent about. Besides, none of the scholars (Mujtahideen) adopted it, and no reports whatsoever reached us stating that someone has used it as evidence, whether from among those who say that nothing should be taken on the trade, or from those who say that a quarter of the tithe should be imposed upon the Muslim’s trade as Zakat and half of the tithe on the Dhimmi as a political responsibility. If the report had been confirmed as being sound, it would have surely been adopted and used as evidence. So the Hadith has not been judged to be sound by anyone, and thus must not be used.

Quyidagi ruvoyat borasida: ‘Umar Muslimlardan to‘rtdan bir ‘ushr (o‘ndan bir ulush), zimmiylardan yarim ‘ushr va harbiy holatdagi kofirlardan to‘liq ‘ushr olgan, degan rivoyat bor. Bu masala muslim, zimmiy va harbiy holatdagi kofirning savdo-sotiq bilan bog‘liq muomalalari hukmiga bog‘lanishi kerak. Muslim va zimmiyga kelsak, hadislar ularga biror narsa yuklashni, ya’ni savdodan ‘ushr olishni umumiy ravishda man qilgan, bu makus (maks) deb ataladi. Shunday ekan, ‘Umar muslimdan olgani zakot bo‘lgan, harbiy holatdagi kofirdan olgani esa o‘zaro munosabatga asoslangan bo‘lgan, chunki ular bizning savdogarlarimizdan ‘ushr olar edilar. Zimmiylardan olgani esa ular bilan tuzilgan sulh shartnomasiga muvofiq bo‘lgan. Demak, zimmiylardan olingan narsa sulh shartnomasi doirasiga kiradi, maks emas, chunki Alloh taolo kofirlarga faqat jizya solgan. Agar zimmiylardan jizya va xiroj bilan birga sulh shartnomasi shartlariga ko‘ra yarim ‘ushr olingan bo‘lsa, bu to‘g‘ri va sahih shartnoma bo‘ladi. Aks holda, zimmat shartnomasi jizya va itoat bilan to‘g‘ri tuzilgandan so‘ng, ular shartnomani buzmaguncha, ularning molidan biror narsa olish harom bo‘ladi. Abu Ubayd aytadi: “Menga qiyin tuyulgani shu bo‘ldiki, u (ya’ni ‘Umar) zimmiylardan (yarim ‘ushr) olgan edi. Men doim: ‘Ular musulmon emas, shuning uchun ulardan sadaqa (zakot) olinmaydi, harbiy holatda ham emaslar, shuning uchun ular bilan o‘zaro munosabat qoidasi bo‘yicha ish tutilmaydi’, deb aytib yurardim. Lekin uning rivoyatlaridan birini o‘rganganimda, bu masalaning mohiyatini tushundim: u ular bilan shu asosda, ya’ni yarim ‘ushr to‘lash, jizyadan tashqari va ikki yerning xirojidan tashqari, sulh tuzgan ekan.” Muslim va zimmiy savdogarlarga kelsak, shulardir. Shartnoma asosidagi savdogarga kelsak, unga ular bilan biz o'rtasida tuzilgan shartnoma matniga ko'ra soliq solinadi. Agar shartnomada u soliqdan ozod etilishi aytilgan bo'lsa, u holda ozod etiladi, agar muayyan miqdordagi summa undirilishi belgilangan bo'lsa, u holda undan shu summa olinadi, shu tariqa shartnomada belgilangan narsa unga nisbatan amalga oshiriladi.

As for what has been reported that ‘Umar used to take a quarter of the ‘Ushr (tithe) from the Muslims and, the from Dhimmies half of the ‘Ushr (tithe) and from the belligerent the ‘Ushr (tithe), this should be linked to the rule concerning purchase and sale transactions undertaken by the Muslim, the Dhimmi and the belligerent. As for the Muslim and the Dhimmi, the Ahadith have been explicit about the prohibition of imposing anything upon them when they stated in general terms, the prohibition of Maks, which is the taking of ‘Ushr on trade. Therefore, what ‘Umar had taken from the Muslim would have been Zakat, and what He had taken from the belligerent would have been based on reciprocity, for they used to impose the ‘Ushr (tithe) on our traders, and what He had taken from the Dhimmi would have been in accordance to what He had agreed with them as a peace settlement. What He had therefore taken from the Dhimmies would have been within the remit of the peace treaty, and not a Maks, because Allah (swt) has only imposed the Jizya on the disbelievers. Therefore, if half of the ‘Ushr (tithe) were taken from them, within the terms of the peace treaty, together with the Jizya, it would then be a correct and sound treaty. Otherwise, it would be unlawful to take anything from their wealth once the treaty of the Dhimma has been soundly concluded with the Jizya and the submission, and as long as they did not violate the treaty. Abu ‘Ubayd said: “What I found difficult to perceive was his taking (meaning ‘Umar) from the people of the Dhimma (halftithe), so I kept saying: They are not Muslims in order to take from them Sadaqah (Zakat), nor are they belligerent in order for us to treat them with reciprocation. So I did not realise what it was until I studied one of his reports, so I found that He had struck a peace deal with them on this basis (i.e. to pay half an ‘Ushr (tithe), in addition to the Jizya (poll tax) and the Kharaj (land tax) of the two lands.” This is as far as the Muslim and the Dhimmi traders are concerned. As for the trader under treaty, He would be levied according to the text of the treaty concluded between them and us. If the treaty had stated that He should be exempted, He would then be exempted, and if it stated that a certain sum must be imposed, it would then be collected from him, thus implementing upon Him what the treaty had stipulated.

Harbiy savdogarga kelsak, shariat hukmi shuki, davlat unga o'z mamlakati davlat savdogarlariga solayotgan o'sha soliqni solishi kerak. Demak, agar harbiy savdogar ahd-himoya ostida davlat yerlariga kirsa, davlat unga Islom davlati savdogarlariga solinadigan narsani soladi, ular musulmon bo'lsin yoki zimmiy. Chunki Abu Qudama o'zining "Al-Mug'niy" kitobida Abu Majlaz Lahiq ibn Hamid rivoyat qilganini keltiradi: "Ular 'Umarga dedilar: 'Agar harbiy xalq bizning yurtimizga kelsa, ulardan qancha olamiz?' U so'radi: 'Ular sizdan qancha olishadi?' Ular dedilar: 'Ushr (o'ndan bir).' U dedi: 'Unda ulardan ham xuddi shuncha ol.'" Abu Ubayd "Al-Amvol" kitobida Ziyod ibn Hadir rivoyat qilganini keltiradi: "Biz musulmondan yoki ahd ostidagidan hech qachon ushr olmasdik. Men so'radim: 'Unda kimdan ushr olardingiz?' U dedi: 'Harbiy xalqning savdogarlaridan. Biz ularning oldiga savdo bilan borganimizda ular bizdan qanday olsa, biz ham ulardan shunday olardik.'" 'Umar ibn al-Xattob buni sahobalar huzurida qildi va hech bir sahobiy unga e'tiroz bildirmadi; hammasi jim qoldi, shuning uchun bu umumiy kelishuv (ijmo') bo'ldi. Biroq harbiy savdogarlardan davlat savdogarlaridan olinadigan miqdor bilan teng soliq olish ruxsat etilgan, majburiy emas, ya'ni bu davlatning ixtiyoridadir va u soliq solishga majbur emas. Davlat harbiy savdogarlardan maks (bojxona soliqi)ni olib tashlashi yoki undan kamroq maks solishi mumkin. Lekin ulardan o'ziga solinadigan miqdordan ko'proq maks olishga ruxsat yo'q. Buning sababi, maks solish daromad yig'ish uchun emas, balki o'zaro munosabat (mo'amala bilan qaytarish) prinsipiga asoslangan. Bunday siyosatni qabul qilganda xalifa musulmonlarning manfaatlarini ko'zda tutadi. Abu Ubayd "Al-Amvol" kitobida Salim b. ... Abdulloh ibn Umar otasidan rivoyat qilgan: “Umar Nabatiy savdogarlar olib kelgan zaytun moyi yoki bug‘doyga yarim o‘ndan bir (ushr) solig‘ini solar edi, Madinaga mahsulot kiritishni rag‘batlantirish uchun. Matodan esa o‘ndan bir (ushr) solig‘ini olar edi.” O‘sha paytda ular bizning savdogarlarimizdan olinadigan soliq ham shunday edi. Shunga ko‘ra, harbiy holatdagi davlatlardan olinadigan bojxona to‘lovi Davlatning manfaatlari nimani talab qilishiga bog‘liq bo‘ladi. Shunday qilib, bojxona to‘lovi joriy etilishi yoki bekor qilinishi mumkin; u yuqori yoki past bo‘lishi ham mumkin, shartki, u harbiy holatdagi davlatlarning Davlat savdogarlaridan olgan miqdoridan oshmasin.

As for the belligerent trader, the Shari’ah rule is to impose upon Him the same levy imposed by his country upon the State’s traders. So if a belligerent trader entered the State’s land with protection, the State would impose upon Him what is imposed upon the traders of the Islamic State, whether they were Muslims or Dhimmi, for Abu Qudamah mentioned in his book “Al-Mughni” that Abu Majlaz Laahiq Ibn Hameed said: “They said to ‘Umar: ‘How much should we take from the belligerent people if they came to our land?’ He asked: ‘How much do they take from you?’ They said: ‘The ‘Ushr (tithe).’ He said: ‘So take the same from them.” ‘Abu Ubayd reported in “Al-Amwal” that Ziyad Ibn Hadeer said: “We never used to levy ‘Ushr (tithe) on a Muslim or one under treaty. I asked: ‘On whom did you use to levy ‘Ushr (tithe) on then?’ He said: ‘The traders from the belligerent people, just as they used to levy (the tithe) on us when we went to them with our trade.’ ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab did so in the presence of the Sahaba, and no Sahabi rebuked Him for this”; they all kept silent and therefore it was a general consensus (Ijma’a). However, to impose on the belligerent traders a levy equal to that they impose on the State’s traders is permitted, and not compulsory i.e. it would be at the State’s prerogative, and not an obligation upon her to impose a levy. It would be permitted for the State to exempt the belligerent of the Maks (custom duty), or to impose a lower Maks than that imposed on it. However, the State is not allowed to impose a higher Maks than that imposed upon it. This is because imposing Maks is not designed for the collection of revenue, but is based on the principle of reciprocity. When adopting such a policy, the Khalifah would consider the interests of the Muslims. Abu ‘Ubayd reported in “Al-Amwal” that Salim b. ‘Abdullah ibn Umar reported on the authority of his father who said: “ ’Umar used to impose half-tithe on oil or wheat brought in by the Nabatean traders, in order to encourage imports into Madinah, and He used to impose the tithe on textiles.” The tithe was what they used to levy on our traders at the time. Therefore, the customs duty taken from the belligerent would depend on what the interests of the State entail. The customs duty could therefore either be imposed or waived; it could also be either high or low, provided that it does not exceed what the belligerents impose upon the State’s traders.