Is it permissible for a tyrant or sinner to be elected as head of state?
Question
“Is it permissible for a tyrant or a sinner to be elected as the Head of State?
Nizamuddin Demir
Register Now
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.Morbi adipiscing gravdio, sit amet suscipit risus ultrices eu.Fusce viverra neque at purus laoreet consequa.Vivamus vulputate posuere nisl quis consequat.
Türkçe 
English
Answer ( 1 )
Esselamü aleyküm… Kardeşler, malumunuz Gayr-i müslim bir kimsenin Halife-İmam-Sultan yada Devletbaşkanı Seçilmesi ittifakla caiz değildir… Ancak ihtilaf edilen hususa gelince muteber kaynaklarımızda geçen konu ile ilgili bilgiler şöyledir:
İSLAM AHKAMINA GÖRE ZALİM VE FASIKIN DEVLET BAŞKANLIĞI
“I will make you an imam for the people.” (Baqarah: 124)
“İmam”, peygamberlik yolunda, dini konularda kendisine uyulan kimse demektir. Diğer Peygamberler de öyledirler. Çünkü Cenab-ı Allah,insanları onlara tabi olmak ve dini konularda onlara uymakla yükümlü kılmıştır. Halifeler de imamdırlar. Çünkü onlar, insanların kendilerine uymalarının gerekli olduğu, söylediklerini ve verdikleri hükümleri kabul etmekle yükümlü oldukları bir makama seçilmişlerdir. Kadılarla fakihler de
imamdırlar. Bu anlamda, insanlara namaz kıldıran kişi de imamdır. Çünkü onun arkasında namaza duran kimsenin, ona tabi olması ve namaz hareketlerinde ona uyması gerekir.
In this regard, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “The imam has been placed in front so that he may be followed. When he bows down, bow down too; and when he prostrates, prostrate yourself.” (Tabarani, al-Mujam al-Awsat: 4/70)
Ayrıca Peygamber sallallahu aleyhi ve sellem, “İmamınıza muhalefet etmeyiniz”
demiştir. Böylece imam ünvanını hak eden kişinin, dini işlerde ve konularda kendisine uyulması gereken kişi olduğu ispatlanmış oldu.
Sometimes, those who are followed on the false path are called "imams." However, when used plainly, the word "imam" does not include the leaders of the false path.
In this context, Almighty Allah said: “We made them leaders who call to the Fire.” (Al-Qasas, 28/41)
In this verse, those who call people to the fire of hell are called "imams." Although they are not leaders to be followed, they are called imams because they are considered to be imams who are followed in religious matters.
Indeed, Allah Almighty says:
“The gods they worshipped did not benefit them.” (Hud, 11/101)
“Look at that god you worship!” (Ta-ha, 20/97) Look at what you consider to be god according to your own belief and thought!
The Prophet (pbuh) said: “The most fearful thing I fear for my Ummah is the imams/leaders who lead astray.” (Dani, es-Sünenu'l Varidetü fi'l Fiten: 11271)
When used plainly, the word "Imam" evokes the religion of God, the person to whom one must follow the path of truth and guidance. As can be seen, the verse "I will make you an imam for people" conveys this meaning without any qualification. However, the verse "We made them imams/pioneers who call to the Fire," which refers to the imams/pioneers of evil, includes the clause "imams who call to the Fire."
Since the word "imam" encompasses the meaning we're describing, the highest rank of imamate is held by the prophets (peace be upon them). After them come the rightly guided caliphs, then the scholars, then the just judges, and those whom God has made obligatory to obey, followed by the prayer imams, and so on. In this verse, God Almighty reveals that He appointed the Prophet Abraham as an imam/leader.
Prophet Abraham asked God to make his children leaders and said, "(Make leaders, O Lord!) from my descendants too."
The word "and my offspring" here is attributed to the letter (qaf) in the word. Accordingly, the meaning becomes: O Lord, make some of my children imams/leaders. It is also possible that by uttering the words "and my offspring," Abraham (peace be upon him) asked, "Are there any of my children who will be imams/leaders?"
Allah Almighty replied to him: "My covenant (promise) does not include the wrongdoers." This statement has two meanings: Allah is the Tefila, Abraham is the prophet.
He declared that He would appoint some of his descendants as imams/leaders. Either in response to Abraham's question, "Who will be the imam/leader?" He declared that his descendants who were not oppressors would be the imams/leaders. Or in response to his request, "Will you appoint an imam/leader from among my descendants?" He declared that He would not appoint those who were oppressors as imams/leaders.
It is possible that God Almighty intended both forms. Abraham (peace be upon him) asked God to appoint some of his descendants as imams/leaders and to inform him of whom to appoint as imams/leaders.
God had informed him that He had accepted his request with the words, "My covenant does not extend to the wrongdoers." Had He not accepted his request, He would have responded, "There is no one among your descendants whom I could appoint as an imam/leader" or "My covenant does not extend to anyone from your descendants." However, the words, "My covenant does not extend to the wrongdoers," indicate that Abraham (peace be upon him) gave a positive response, appointing some of his descendants as imams/leaders.
Then, by saying, “My covenant (my promise) does not include the oppressors,” he declared that the descendants of Abraham (peace be upon him) would not be made imams/leaders and people to whom the community would follow.
“My covenant does not include the wrongdoers.”
Suddi said that the imamate covenant in this verse refers to the rank of prophethood.
Mujahid said: “This verse aims to explain that oppressors cannot be imams/leaders.”
Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "What is meant in the verse is this: It is not necessary to honor a contract made with an oppressor. If an oppressor makes a contract with you based on oppression, break the contract."
Hasan said: “There is no promise made to the oppressors by Allah except that Allah will give them goodness and reward in the Hereafter.”
Ebfi Bekir el-Cessas dedi ki: Bahsedilen ayetin, rivayet edilen bu manaların hepsini içermesi mümkündür. Cenab-ı Allah’ın bu manaların tümünü murad etmiş olması da mümkündür. Bize göre ayeti böyle yorumlamak mümkündür. Dolayısıyla zalimin peygamber, peygamber halifesi, kadı, müfti, şahit, Peygamber’ den sallallahu aleyhi ve sellem hadis rivayet eden ravi gibi dini konularda insanların sözünü kabul etmekle yükümlü kılındıkları biri olması caiz değildir. Ayet-i kerime, dini konularda önder ve örnek olan kimselerin adaletli ve salih olmalarını şart koşmaktadır. Bu da namaz kıldıracak imamların salih kimseler olmaları, fasık ve zalim olmamaları gerektiğine de delalet etmektedir. Çünkü ayet, dini konularda imamlık/önderlik makamına atanan kimselerin adaletli olmalarını şart koşmaktadır.
For God's covenant is His command. He did not intend for these commands to be taken from oppressors. These divine commands were entrusted to the imams/leaders by God, and their words regarding these commands were validated, and He commanded people to accept and obey their words.
For example, the following verses are very striking on this subject: “O children of Adam! Did I not command you: ‘Do not worship Satan, for he is to you a clear enemy’?” (Ya Sin, 36/60) “They said, ‘Allah has commanded us.’” (Aal-i Imran, 3/183)
The word "covenant" in these verses means command. The covenants sent by the caliphs to their governors and judges are written orders so that they can govern the people within that framework and rule accordingly. Since God's covenant is God's command, and according to the verse "My covenant does not extend to the oppressors," oppressors are either not subject to these divine commands, or they are not allowed to occupy the positions of those from whom God's commands and decrees are to be heard and accepted, and they are not trusted in this regard. It is never the case that oppressors are not subject to divine commands.
All Muslims have agreed that just as others are obligated to obey divine commands, oppressors are also obligated to obey them.
Because they abandoned and failed to fulfill God's commands, they were branded as tyrants. Since it was out of the question for them not to be subject to divine commands, the only other option left was that tyrants could not be entrusted with divine commands.
Therefore, oppressors cannot be imams and leaders who are followed in religious matters. This verse demonstrates that a sinner's imamate is not valid, he cannot become caliph, and even if he ascribes himself to the caliphate, the people are not obligated to follow and obey him.
In fact, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "In case of rebellion against the Creator, the created one should not be obeyed." (Tabarani, al-Mujam al-Kabir: 181170)
This hadith indicates that a sinner cannot be a judge, that even if appointed, his judgment will not be valid, that his testimony will not be accepted, that if he narrates a hadith from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), his narration should not be believed, and if he is a mufti, his fatwa should not be believed, and that he should not be allowed to lead the prayer. If someone prays behind him, the prayer of the one praying is valid. The verse, "My covenant does not include the wrongdoers," encompasses all the meanings discussed here.
Some people claim that Abu Hanifa permitted sinners to become heads of state and caliphs, that he distinguished between them and judges, and that he invalidated the rulings of sinner judges. It is said that the person who made this claim was a theologian named Zurkān. In making this claim, Zurkān uttered a lie and baseless statement. In fact, he is not among those whose narration is accepted.
According to Abu Hanifa, there is no difference between a caliph and a judge in terms of the requirement that they possess the attribute of justice. A sinner can neither be a caliph nor a judge. His testimony is not accepted, and if he narrates a hadith from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), his narration is also not accepted. How can such a person become caliph when his narration is not accepted and his rulings are not considered valid? How can such a person make such a claim about Abu Hanifa?
However, during the Umayyad period, Ibn Hubayrah had forced him to accept the position of judge. When he refused, Ibn Hubayrah insisted on pressuring him, even whipping him daily. Fearing his condition, the scholars told him, "To avoid this beating, accept some other task he might assign." He took on the task of counting the loads of straw entering the warehouse. Ibn Hubayrah then released him from prison. Later, the Caliph Mansur invited him to accept the position of judge. When he refused, he was imprisoned. Finally, on Mansur's orders, he accepted the task of checking the number of adobe bricks to be used in the city walls of Baghdad.
It is widely known that Abu Hanifa took the path of fighting oppressors and tyrannical rulers. In this context, al-Awza'i said, “We placed everything on Abu Hanifa. Finally, he brought us the sword, meaning he fought the oppressors. But we could not shoulder this burden.”
He said, "It is obligatory to verbally advise what is good and forbid what is evil. If what you say is not heeded, then this duty must be fulfilled with the sword."
Indeed, it is narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said so. Ibrahim as-Saigh, one of the jurists, narrators and atheists of Khorasan, asked him about the ruling on advising what is good and forbidding what is evil, and he said that it was obligatory. He narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said the following regarding this matter: “The best of the martyrs is Hamza, the son of Abdulmuttalib. And he stood before the tyrannical leader and said to him,
"He is the one who fulfills his duty of advising the good and forbidding the evil and is killed for this reason." (Suyuti, Cfuniu'l-Ahadis: 5/381)
After receiving this response from Abu Hanifa, Ibrahim al-Sa'igh returned to Merv. He stood before the governor, Abu Muslim, fulfilling his duty of advising what was right and forbidding what was wrong. He protested his cruelty and unjust bloodshed. Abu Muslim tolerated him several times, but then had him killed.
Abu Hanifa's stance on the issue of Zayd ibn Ali is well known, as he provided him with financial support and secretly issued fatwas declaring it obligatory to aid him and fight alongside him. His positive attitude toward Abdullah ibn Hasan's sons, Muhammad and Ibrahim, is also well known.
When Abu Ishaq al-Fazari asked him, "Why did you advise my brother to rebel against the government along with Ibrahim?! He was killed for following your advice!" Abu Hanifa's response was, "I like your brother's course more than your own." Abu Ishaq left for Basra. The reason for all this was that some scholars of hadith, lacking in scientific experience and knowledge, had taken a stance against Abu Hanifa, neglecting their duty to advise righteousness and forbid evil, and thus tyrants had ascended to the ranks of leadership over the Islamic Ummah.
How could Abu Hanifa, whose approach was to recommend good and forbid evil, consider it permissible for a sinner to be a head of state? Those who claim this are either lying or making a mistake in conveying the views of Abu Hanifa and the Iraqi scholars who thought like him.
Because Abu Hanifa and other Iraqi scholars believe that even if a judge is appointed by a tyrannical head of state, if he is just, his rulings are valid and his judgments are valid. Even if they are tyrants and sinners, prayers performed behind them are valid. This is a sound view.
There is no evidence in these accounts that Abu Hanifa considered it permissible for a sinner to be a head of state. Because if a judge is just, he is a true judge, capable of implementing his rulings. He has the power to compel those who do not accept his rulings to do so.
In this case, the person who appointed him is not taken into consideration. Because the person who appointed him is considered the same as his other assistants who support him in executing his decisions. Assistant judges, on the other hand, are not required to be just.
Consider, for example, a country without a head of state. If the people of that country come together and agree to appoint a just person among them as judge, and if they support the judge against anyone who rejects the appointed woman's rulings, then her rulings will be valid even if there is no head of state who appointed her. Therefore, Qadi Shurayh and the judges of the Tabi'in era were appointed to the office of judge by the Umayyads.
Şüreyh, Haccac-ı zalimin zamanına kadar Küfe kadılığı görevine devam etti.Araplarda ve Mervani hanedanında Abdulmelik’ten daha zalim,daha kafir ve daha facir bir kimse yoktu. Onun atadığı valiler arasında da Haccac’dan daha kafir, daha zalim ve daha facir bir kimse yoktu. İyiliği tavsiye edip kötülükten sakındırma konusunda insanları ilk susturan, Abdulmelik idi. Bir defasında minbere çıkıp şöyle konuşmuştu: “Allah’a yemim ederim ki ben Hz. Osman gibi zayıf ve güçsüz, Muaviye gibi başkasına yaltaklanan, hilekar bir halife değilim. Bize bazı şeyleri tavsiye ediyorsunuz, ama kendiniz o şeyleri nefsinize uygulamayı unutuyorsunuz. Allah’ a yemin ederim ki şimdiden sonra bir kimse bana takvalı olmamı tavsiye ederse, kesinlikle boynunu vururum!”
The people received their provisions from the Umayyad treasury. The False Mukhtar provided financial support to Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyah (may Allah be pleased with him), and Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). They, in turn, accepted this support.
Muhammad ibn Ajlan narrated that Qa'qa said: Abdulaziz ibn Marwan wrote a letter to Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) asking him to inform him of his needs. Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) wrote to him in response:
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "The upper hand is better than the lower hand." (Bukhari, Zakat, 18) I believe that the upper hand is the hand of the giver. The lower hand is the hand of the receiver. I will not ask you for a provision that Allah will grant me through you, nor will I refuse you if you give it. So, stay safe."
Hasan, Said ibn Jubayr, Shabi, and the other followers were taking their provisions from the hands of those oppressors. They were taking these provisions not because they accepted their caliphate and leadership, but because it was their rightful place in the hands of the sinners. How could they accept their caliphate?
Haccac’ın yüzüne kılıçla vurmuşlardı. Tabiilerin seçkinlerinden 4000 kadar kurra ve fakih ona karşı harekete geçmiş, önceleri Ahvaz, sonra Basra, sonra da Kufe yakınlarında Fırat kenarındaki Deyrül Cemacim’de Abdurrahman b. Muhammed b. Eş’as’ın safında yer alarak savaşmışlardı. Abdulmelik b. Mervan’ı hal’etmiş, ona lanet okumuş ve ondan beri olduklarını ilan etmişlerdi. Bunlardan önceki alimler de, Hz. Ali’nin şehadetinden sonra Hz.Muaviye zorla hilafet makamına geçince Muaviye’ye karşı benzer tavırlar sergilemiş-lerdi. Hz. Hasan ile Hz. Hüseyin ve o asırda yaşayan diğer sahabiler de, baştakilerin hilafetini kabul etmedikleri halde onların beytulmalından ödenek alıyorlardı. Aksine Hz. Ali’nin radıyallahu anh vefat edip Allah’ ın rızasına ve cennetine kavuştuğu ana kadar yaptığı gibi, o zalimlerden beri olduklarını söylüyorlardı. Dolayısıyla önceki alimlerin zalim hükümdarlar tarafından verilen kadılık görevini kabul etmeleri, onların Beytulmalından ödenek almaları, onların halifeliklerini kabul ettiklerini ve imametlerinin geçerli olduğuna inandıklarını göstermez.” Nizameddin DEMİR
(Imam al-Cessas, Ahkamul Kur'an, Tafsiri. Bakara:124.ayet. C/1, p: 218-227)