17.2 Shartnoma tuzish (in'iqad). Xalifalik - Islomiy shaxsiyat | Quran Course

17.2 Shartnoma tuzish (in'iqad). Xalifalik - Islomiy shaxsiyat | Quran Course

0% read · 4 min left

Islomiy shaxsiyat Bookmark

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

Show original

17.2 Shartnoma tuzish (in'iqad). Xalifalik

17.2 Contracting (in’iqad) The Khilafah

by Sheikh Taqīuddīn An-Nabahānī4 min readViewed 105 times

Xalifalik rozilik va ixtiyor asosida tuzilgan shartnomadir, chunki u hokimiyat egalari orasidagi itoat huquqiga ega bo‘lgan kishiga itoat qilish va’dasidir. Shuning uchun xalifalik lavozimini egallash uchun bay’at berilgan shaxsning roziligi hamda bay’at beruvchilarning roziligi zarurdir. Agar kimdir xalifa bo‘lishdan bosh tortib, uni rad etsa, uni bunga majburlab bo‘lmaydi, balki uning o‘rniga boshqa shaxs tanlanadi. Shuningdek, odamlardan zo‘rlik bilan bay’at olish joiz emas, chunki bunday holatda bay’at shartnomasi zo‘rlikka zid bo‘lgani uchun qonuniy deb hisoblanmaydi. Xalifalik boshqa har qanday shartnoma kabi majburlashsiz, faqat rozilik va ixtiyor asosida tuzilgan shartnomadir. Ammo agar bay’at shartnomasi bay’ati e’tiborga olinadigan shaxslar tomonidan amalga oshirilsa, bay’at tuzilgan bo‘ladi va saylangan shaxs itoat qilinishi lozim bo‘lgan hokimiyat egasiga aylanadi. Bu nuqtada unga berilgan bay’at shartnoma bay’ati emas, balki itoat bay’atiga aylanadi. Bunday holatda u qolgan odamlarni unga bay’at berishga majburlashi mumkin, chunki bu Shar’iy jihatdan majburiy bo‘lgan itoat bay’atidir. Majburlashni noqonuniy deb aytish to‘g‘ri emas, chunki bu holatdagi bay’at xalifalik uchun tuziladigan shartnoma bay’ati emas. Demak, bay’at dastlab faqat rozilik va ixtiyor asosidagina qonuniy bo‘ladigan shartnomadir. Ammo shartnoma bay’ati xalifaga berilgandan so‘ng, bay’at uning amriga itoat qilish tusiga kiradi va majburlash esa Allohning (swt) amrini ijro etishga ruxsat berilganidan kelib chiqadi. Xalifalik shartnoma bo‘lgani uchun, uning qonuniy bo‘lishi uchun shartnomani tuzuvchi bo‘lishi shart, xuddi sud tizimida bo‘lgani kabi: kishi boshqa birov tomonidan bu lavozimga tayinlanmaguncha sudya bo‘la olmaydi, imorat (rahbarlik)da esa uni shu lavozimga tayinlaydigan shaxs bo‘lmasa, hech kim amir bo‘la olmaydi. Xuddi shunday, Xalifalikda hech kim, bu lavozimga Xalifa sifatida tayinlanmagan bo'lsa, Xalifa bo'la olmaydi.

The Khilafah is a contract of consent and choice, because it is a pledge to obey the one with the right of obedience among those in authority. So the consent of the person who is given the bay’ah to hold the Khilafah and the consent of those who give the bay’ah are essential. Therefore, if somebody rejected to be a Khalifah and declined it, he must not be compelled to accept it, but another person is selected instead. Also, it is not allowed to take the bay’ah from the people by force because, in this case, the pledge contract cannot be considered legal due to its contradiction with using force, since the Khilafah is a contract of consent and choice devoid of any compulsion like any other contract. However, if the pledge contract is accomplished by those whose bay’ah is considered (binding) then the bay’ah would be contracted, and the elected person would become the person in authority who must be obeyed. At this point the bay’ah given to him becomes a bay’ah of obedience rather than a bay’ah of the Khilafah contract. In this case he is allowed to force the rest of the people to give him the bay’ah because it is a bay’ah of obedience which is obliged by the Shar’a. It is not correct to say that it is illegal to use compulsion, because the bay’ah in this case is not the contracting bay’ah for the Khilafah. Accordingly, the bay’ah initially is a contract which is not legal except by consent and choice. But after the contract bay’ah is given to the Khalifah the bay’ah becomes obedience to his order, and compulsion comes from the fact that it is allowed to implement the order of Allah (swt). Since the Khilafah is a contract, then there must be a contractor for the contract to be considered legal, like in the judiciary where the person cannot be a judge unless he is appointed in this office by somebody else, and in the imarah nobody can be an Amir (leader) unless there is a person who appoints him in this office. Similarly in the Khilafah, no person can be a Khalifah unless he is appointed in this post as a Khilafah.

Shunga ko'ra, aniq bo'ldiki, musulmonlar uni bu lavozimga tayinlamaguncha hech kim Xalifa bo'la olmaydi va u shartnoma tuzilmaguncha Xilofat vakolatiga ega bo'la olmaydi. Bu shartnomani esa faqat ikki tomon amalga oshirishi mumkin: birinchisi – Xilofatni so'ragan shaxs, ikkinchisi – uni o'zlariga Xalifa sifatida qabul qilgan musulmonlar. Demak, Xilofat shartnomasini bajarish uchun musulmonlarning bay'ati zarur. Shunga muvofiq, agar kimdir kuch bilan hokimiyatni egallasa, u musulmonlarga o'zini Xalifa deb e'lon qilgan taqdirda ham Xalifa bo'lmaydi, chunki Xilofat shartnomasi unga musulmonlar tomonidan tuzilmagan. Agar u musulmonlardan bay'atni zo'rlik bilan olsa, bunday bay'at bilan ham u Xalifa hisoblanmaydi, chunki zo'rlik bilan olingan bay'at noqonuniydir. Xilofat esa rozilik va ixtiyor asosidagi shartnomadir, uni zo'rlik bilan amalga oshirib bo'lmaydi, balki rozilik va ixtiyor asosidagi bay'at bilan tuziladi. Biroq, agar bu zo'ravon hokimiyat egasi odamlarni unga bay'at berish ularning manfaatiga ekaniga, shariat hukmlarini joriy etish uchun odamlar unga bay'at berishlari lozimligiga ishontirsa va ular bunga ishonib, qabul qilib, rozilik va ixtiyor bilan unga bay'at bersalar, u dastlab kuch bilan hokimiyatni ushlab turgan bo'lsa ham, rozilik va ixtiyor bilan bay'at berilgan paytdan boshlab Xalifa bo'ladi. Demak, bay'atning rozilik va ixtiyor asosida bo'lishi shart, bay'at olgan shaxs hokim bo'lganmi yoki yo'qmi, bundan qat'i nazar.

Thereupon, it is clear that nobody becomes a Khalifah unless the Muslims appoint him in this post, and he cannot have the authority of the Khilafah unless he is contracted to it. And this contract can only be implemented by two parties - the first is the one who asks for the Khilafah and the second is the Muslims who accepted him as their Khalifah. Therefore, the bay’ah of Muslims is essential to fulfill the Khilafah contract. Accordingly, if someone usurped power by force he will not become a Khalifah even if he declared himself a Khalifah for Muslims, because the contract of Khilafah has not been convened to him by the Muslims. And if he took the bay’ah from the Muslims by force, he is not considered a Khalifah by such bay’ah, because the bay’ah by force is illegal. And the Khilafah cannot be convened by it, since it is a contract of consent and choice (Rada wa ikhtiyar) which cannot be accomplished by force, but is convened by a bay’ah of consent and choice. However, if this usurper (mutasallit) managed to convince the people that it is in their interest to give him the bay’ah, and that the implementation of the Shari’ah laws requires from the people to give him the bay’ah and were convinced of that and accepted it, and they gave him the bay’ah by consent and choice, then he becomes a Khalifah the moment he was given the bay’ah by consent and choice, although he initially held the power by force. So it is a condition that the bay’ah must occur by consent and choice whether the person who obtained the bay’ah was the ruler or not.

Что касается людей, чьей бай'ой устанавливается Халифат, это можно вывести, изучив то, что произошло при бай'е Халифов ар-Рашидун и на чём сошлись Сахабы (ра). При бай'е Абу Бакру (ра) было достаточно мнения ахл аль-хал валь-'акд (людей влияния) среди мусульман одной только Мадины; мнение мусульман Мекки и остального Аравийского полуострова не спрашивали, их даже не спрашивали. То же было и при бай'е Умару (ра). Что касается бай'ы Усману (ра), то Абдурахман ибн Ауф (ра) спросил мнение мусульман Мадины и не ограничил его людьми влияния, как Абу Бакр (ра) поступил, когда назначил Умара (ра). Во времена Али (ра) было достаточно бай'ы большинства жителей Мадины и Куфы, и он был выделен бай'ой. Его бай'а считалась законной даже теми, кто не соглашался с ним и сражался против него, ведь они не давали бай'у никому другому, кроме него, и не возражали против его бай'ы. Напротив, они требовали мести за кровь Усмана (ра), поэтому их считали мятежниками, мстившими за дело Халифа, и он был обязан объяснить им это и сражаться с ними, но они не создавали другого Халифата.

As for the people by whose bay’ah the Khilafah is established this can be derived by examining what happened in the bay’ah of the Khulafaa ar-Rashidun and what the Sahabah (ra) agreed upon. In the bay’ah of Abu Bakr (ra) it was sufficient from the ahl al-hal wal ‘aqd (the people of influence) among Muslims in Madinah alone; the opinion of Muslims in Mecca and the rest of the Arabian Peninsula were not sought, they were not even asked. It was the same case in the bay’ah of ‘Umar (ra). As for the bay’ah of ‘Uthman (ra), ‘Abdurrahman bin ‘Auf (ra) took the opinion of the Muslims in Madinah and did not confine it to the people of influence as Abu Bakr (ra) did when he nominated ‘Umar (ra). At the time of ‘Ali (ra) it was sufficed with the bay’ah of the majority of the people of Madinah and Kufa, and he was singled by the bay’ah. His bay’ah was considered legal even by those who disagreed with him and fought against him, as they did not make bay’ah with anyone other than him, and neither did they object to his bay’ah. Rather they demanded revenge for the blood of ‘Uthman (ra), so their case was considered as rebels who avenged a matter from the Khalifah and he had to explain it to them and fight them, but they did not form another Khilafah.

Agar xalifa vafot etgan yoki lavozimdan chetlatilgan bo‘lsa va uning o‘rniga boshqa xalifa tayinlash zarur bo‘lsa, bu holat shunday. Lekin umuman xalifa bo‘lmasa, u holda musulmonlarga o‘zlari uchun xalifa tayinlash farz bo‘ladi, shari’at qonunlarini amalga oshirish va islomiy da’vatni dunyoga yetkazish uchun. 1343 hijriy yilda (1924 milodiy yil) Istanbuldagi islomiy xilofat bekor qilinganidan buyon hozirgi kungacha bo‘lgani kabi, islom dunyosidagi har bir davlat xalifa saylashga va shu yo‘l bilan xilofatni o‘rnatishga haqli bo‘ladi. Shunday qilib, agar islom dunyosidagi bitta davlat xalifa tayinlasa va unga xilofat o‘rnatilsa, musulmonlarga unga itoat bay’ati, ya’ni bo‘ysunish bay’atini berish farz bo‘ladi. Bu xilofat o‘z davlatidagi xalqning bay’ati bilan unga berilganidan keyin shunday bo‘ladi, xoh bu davlat Misr, Turkiya va Indoneziya kabi katta, xoh Albaniya, Kamerun va Livan kabi kichik bo‘lsin, faqat davlat to‘rtta mezonga javob berishi sharti bilan:

This would be the case if there was a Khalifah who died or was deposed and it is required to establish a Khalifah in his place. But if there is no Khalifah at all, then it becomes obligatory upon Muslims to appoint for themselves a Khalifah to implement the Shari’ah laws and convey the Islamic call to the world, as is the case since the removal of the Islamic Khilafah in Istanbul in 1343 after Hijrah (1924 Christian Era) until the present day, then every country in the Islamic world is eligible to elect a Khalifah and thereby establish a Khilafah. So if one country of the Islamic world appointed a Khalifah, and the Khilafah was established for him, it becomes obligatory upon Muslims to make a pledge of obedience to him i.e. a bay’ah of submission, after the Khilafah was convened to him by the bay’ah of the people in his country, whether this country was big like Egypt, Turkey and Indonesia or small like Albania, Cameroon and Lebanon, on condition that the country fulfils four criteria:

Shunday ekan, agar o‘sha mamlakat bu to‘rt shartni bajargan bo‘lsa, unda Xalifalik faqat o‘sha mamlakatning bay’ati bilan o‘rnatilgan bo‘ladi va faqat u bilan tuzilgan bo‘ladi, hatto bu mamlakat Islom ummatini vakillik qiluvchi nufuzli kishilarning ko‘pchiligini vakil qilmasa ham. Buning sababi shuki, Xalifalikni o‘rnatish jamoaviy farzdir va bu farzni to‘g‘ri yo‘sinda bajargan kishi shar’iy vazifani ado etgan bo‘ladi. Shuningdek, nufuzli kishilarning ko‘pchiligi haqidagi shart Xalifalik mavjud bo‘lgan va vafot etgan yoki lavozimidan chetlatilgan xalifa o‘rniga boshqa xalifa tayinlash zarur bo‘lgan holatga taalluqlidir. Agar esa umuman Xalifalik bo‘lmasa va uni o‘rnatish zarur bo‘lsa, unda uni shariat asosida o‘rnatish orqali, nechta odam uni saylaganidan qat’i nazar, shartnoma shartlariga javob beradigan har qanday xalifa tomonidan Xalifalik qonuniy ravishda tuzilgan bo‘ladi, chunki bu masala uch kundan ortiq e’tiborsiz qoldirilgan farzni ado etish masalasi bo‘ladi. Ularning bu farzga e’tiborsizligi esa, ular xalifa qilib xohlagan kishini tanlash huquqidan mahrum bo‘lishlarini anglatadi.

Therefore, if that country has fulfilled these four conditions, then the Khilafah has been established by the bay’ah of that country alone and it was convened with it alone as well, even if this country does not represent the majority of the influential people who represent the Islamic Ummah. This is so because establishing the Khilafah is a collective duty, and whoever performs this duty in the correct manner would accomplish the prescribed duty. And because the condition concerning the majority of the influential people applies if there was a Khilafah and there was a need to appoint another Khalifah in place of the dead or deposed one. However if there was no Khilafah at all and the establishment of one is necessary, then by its establishment in accordance with Shari’ah the Khilafah will be convened legally by any Khalifah who satisfies the conditions of the contract regardless of the number of the people who elected him, as the matter would be then a question of fulfilling a duty neglected by the Muslims for more than three days. Their negligence to this duty is a termination of their right to choose whom they want for a Khalifah.