Irtidâd In The Context of Wilâya, Hegira And Faction

Abstract

In some studies about Qur’an the subjects are limited either to words derived from a certain root or to a single word addressing a part of the subject and these studies are carried out based on parts. At the same time, information narrated in the process and medium of inspiration and prophetic biography can be neglected while making research on the subjects. Because the studies carried out on the subjects are incomplete, naturally the obtained results are also incomplete.

The issue of abjuration is one of these subjects. Although the subject is seriously related to the important subjects of Quran such as hegira, faction and custody, both traditional Islamic law books and article, thesis and book studies carried out in the modern era have been based on a limited number of verses and hadith. As a result, it was concluded in classical Islamic law books that Quran ordered to murder the apostate.

Because studies in the modern era are also shaped based on the aforementioned classical works, the results obtained from these are the same. Because it is clearly ordered to murder the apostate in the hadith, the penalty of abjuration has been based on the hadith. Because the issue of murdering the apostate, which wasn’t a problem in the classical era, doesn’t agree with modern perceptions and practices and as it is perceived as against freedom of religion and conscience, a problem emerges in the explanation of this issue in the framework of Quran. When it comes to hadith, different remarks can be made and sometimes hadith can be disregarded. Moreover, the incorrectness of murdering the apostate can be advocated based on only some of the hadith. There can be doubt and hesitation in the hearts because those advocating the murder of the apostate cannot explain this issue on the basis of Quran. Also, this situation may create an impression that there are contradictions between Quran and hadith.

Discussing this issue in the manner explained above actually does not comply with the integrity of Quran. Verses of Quran are like building blocks of a safe building. To prevent being on the wrong track about this building, the relation of the whole within itself should be noted.

Although it is overlooked, the issue of abjuration has close connection with the issues of custody, hegira and faction. By the inspiration of Quran, Allah SWT desired to construction of a balanced religious community that would set a good example for humanity on earth. For the establishment and survival of such religious community, the individual needed to become sisters and brothers and realize relations based on the law of custody. Custody is the primary one among the issues overemphasized in Quran because it constitutes one of the most important building block of Islamic community. Within the frame of conditions, custody of Muslims with the non-Muslims is discussed and custody with them is prohibited according to conditions. Those violating this prohibition are threatened with rejecting the religion and they are regarded as heretics in some verses.

Hegira means migrating from en environment in which Islamic life cannot be sustained to an environment where it can. Because living according to Islam and establishment of Muslim community are among primary targets of Quran, it was established as a religious duty to Muslims to migrate to Medina. This duty had two primary targets which were providing Muslims with ability to live the religion and allowing them to unite and form a strong Islamic community. Hegira required bearing the difficulties such as leaving property, goods, relatives and homeland. Those who migrated proved their loyalty to Islam. Those who didn’t migrate although they were capable for this were considered as heretics as they didn’t prove their faith and loyalty.

Every community desires unity, fraternity and solidarity to form within itself. Faction is a gash, a deep problem for communities as it is a obstacle for the formation of this unity. In Medina, there was a group of factious people consisting of people with a certain level of influence and number, which can be defined, in other words, as an inner opposition group. They were causing problems continuously in many issues for his holiness Prophet and Muslims. In the first years of Medina, manners like humoring, forgiving, advising were adopted against these people. When Muslims became stronger and the deeds of factious people increased, a harsh language and pattern were adopted against them. In the latest process, it was explained in many verses that particularly the leaders of factious movement were heretics. It was announced in these verses that they had abandoned rejection and committed abjuration. In addition, although it was ordered to fight against them and treat them harshly, no factious could be killed in Medina. In this situation, it seems like there is a contradiction between these verses and hadith ordering to murder the apostates. But when verses and hadith are examined mindfully on the basis of the environment of inspiration, it is seen that there is no contradiction. Hadith orders the murdering of those who actually leave the Islamic community. In the verses regarding factious people, no factious person was harmed no matter what they did in Medina because they continued to stay in Medina and live with the Muslims.

Other than the verses we mentioned above, there are some verses which discuss the issue from a different point of view, completely overlap with related hadith and order those leaving the Islamic community to be murdered. It is clearly ordered the factious people and apostates that side with the enemy be murdered in verses 88-91 of Nisâ surah. Also in the same verses, while it is ordered that those who do not want to fight either with Muslims or their own clan and those who take refuge in contractual clans shouldn’t be killed, it is ordered that those who are not sincere in these actions should be murdered wherever they are.  It is difficult to advocate the murder of the apostate because it is seen against the freedom of religion and conscience when these verses are disregarded. However, those who committed treason has been executed from past to today and they are still executed or heavily punished in many countries. Because this issue is discussed exactly in these terms in Quran and tradition, it is ordered to murder those who side with the enemy.

In order to correctly determine what Islam imposes in the issue of abjuration, the issue should be discussed in terms of not only limited verses but also in the context of hegira, custody and faction. When discussed in this aspect, it is understood that the issue is discussed in the frame of treason against Islam, Muslims and Islam cause and cooperation with the enemy and it is ordered to kill those who actually side with the enemy. Hence, those who didn’t migrate and joined the polytheist army in Badr war were killed as a result of this point of view.

Keywords

• Tafsir,Faction,Irtidâd,Wilâya,Hegira

Velayet, Hicret ve Nifak Bağlamında İrtidat

Abstract

Kur’ân’la ilgili yapılan bazı çalışmalarda konular ya belli kökten türeyen kelimeler veya konunun bir kısmına işaret eden sadece bir kelime ile sınırlı, parçacı bir şekilde yapılmaktadır. Arıca bazı araştırmalarda nüzul süreci, ortamı ve siyer kaynaklarında aktarılan bilgiler de ihmal edilebilmektedir. Konular eksik çalışıldığı için ulaşılan sonuçlarda doğal olarak eksik olmaktadır. 

İrtidat konusu da bu tür konulardan biridir. Konunun hicret, nifak, velâyet gibi Kur’ân’ın önemli konularıyla çok ciddi bağlantısı olduğu halde ilgili çalışmalar sınırlı sayıda âyet üzerinden yapılmıştır. Bundan dolayı bazı naslardan hareketle mürtedin öldürülmesi ve öldürülmemesi konusu yeteri kadar ikna edici bir tarzda izah edilememiştir. Eksik yaklaşımdan dolayı bu konuda Kur’ân ile hadisler arasında çelişki varmış gibi bir algı da oluşabilmektedir.

İrtidat konusu hicret, velâyet ve nifak bağlamında ele alındığında irtidat eden ve fiili olarak İslâm düşmanlarının safına geçenlerin, Müslümanları aldatmak isteyenlerin nerede olursa olsun öldürülmesinin emredildiği anlaşılmaktadır. Nitekim Bedir savaşında müşrik ordusunda bulunanlar da öldürülmüşlerdi. Aynı şekilde İslâm düşmanlarının safına geçmeyen ve hem Müslümanlar hem de düşmanlarla savaşmak istemeyen mürtetlere de dokunulmasının yasaklandığı anlaşılmaktadır. 

Günümüzde tefsir ilmi bazılarınca rivâyetlere başvurmadan da yapılabilecek bir ilmî faaliyet olarak algılanıp, savunulsa da aslında geleneğimizde de izah edildiği gibi bu ilim dil ve tarih/rivâyetler üzerine kuruludur. Kur’ân’ı anlamak için yola çıkanların rivâyetlerle yüzleşmesi, ihtilaflı nakiller arasında nüzul-siret temelli tercihlerde bulunması gerekmektedir.

Keywords

• Tefsir,nifak,irtidat,velayet,hicret

References

1. ABDULBÂKÎ, Muhammed Fuad, el-Mu‘cemu’l-müfehresli elfâzi’l-Kur’ani’l-Kerim, Kahire: Dâru’l-hadis, 1364.
2. ARDOĞAN, “Recep, Tarihsel Nedenler Ve Teorik Sakıncalarıyla İslâm’da İrtidatın Cezalandırılması -Teolojik Bir Yaklaşım-“ İslam Hukuku Araştırmaları Dergisi, 26, (2015): 311-330
3. İBN ÂŞUR, Muhammed b. Tâhir. Tefsiru’t-tahrîr ve’t-tenvîr. 30 Cilt. Tunus: Dâru Sahnûn li’n-Neşrve’t-Tevzi’, 1984.
4. AYDIN, Şükrü, “Kur'an Açısından Dinden Dönme (İrtidat) Ve Cezası.” Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10/54 (2017): 959-968; ttp://dx.doi.org/10.17719/jisr.20175434665;
5. BUHÂRÎ, Ebû Abdillah Muhammed b. İsmail. el-Câmiu’s-Sahih. İstanbul: Çağrı Yayınları, 1992.
6. CANAN, İbrahim ,“Hz. Peygamber’in Münafıklara Karşı Takip Ettiği Siyaset.” Diyanet Dergisi, 16/4, (Temmuz Ağustos 1977): 244-250.
7. İBNU’L-CEVZÎ, Ebu’l-Ferec Cemaluddin Abdurrahman Ali, Zâdu’l-mesîr fî ilmi’t-tefsir, Beyrut: Mektebu’l-İslâmî, 1948.
8. DALGIN, Nihat, “İrtidat ve Cezası.” Kur’an Mesajı İlmî Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı, 10, 11, 12 (Ağustos, Eylül, Ekim, 98): 172-189.

9. EBÛ DÂVÛD, Süleyman b. el-Eşas es-Sicistânî. Sünenü Ebî Dâvud. İstanbul: Çağrı Yay, 1981.
10. DEMİRCAN, Adnan, “Resulullah (s.a.v)’ın Münafıklarla İlişkileri.” İslam’da İnsan Modeli ve Hz. Peygamber Örneği, (Ankara: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Yayınları, 1995): 141-154.
11. DERVEZE, İzzet,et-Tefsîru’l-hadîs, çev. Mehmet yolcu ve diğerleri, İstanbul: Ekin Yayınları, 1998.
12. EKİNCİ, Kutbettin, “Ankebut Suresi’nin 11. Ayeti Bağlamında Mekke döneminde Nifak.” E-Şarkiyat İlmi Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7/2, (2015): 289-294.
13. ERTURHAN, Sabri, “İslâm Ceza Hukuku Etrafındaki Tartışmalar.” İstanbul: Rağbet Yayınları, 2008.
14. HAMİDULLAH, Muhammed, İslam Peygamberi, çev., Salih Tuğ, İstanbul: İrfan Yayımcılık, 1991.
15. İNCE, İrfan. “Ridde”maddesi, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: 2008
16. EL-KARDAVÎ, Yusuf, “İrtidat Sorunu: Yaşanan Sosyal Değişimler Ve Tehdit Boyutu” Trc: Osman Güner, Din Bilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi V/2 (2005): 259-273.
17. el-KÂSÂNÎ, Alâuddin Ebî Bekr b. Mes’ûd, Kitâbu bedâiu’s-senâi’ fî tertîbi’ş-şerâi’, Beyrut: Dâru’l-kütübi’l-Arabî, 1394/1974.
18. İBN KESÎR, Ebu’l-Fidâ İmâduddîn İsmâil, Tefsîru Kur’âni’l-azîm, thk. Mustafa es-Seyyid Muhammed ve diğerleri, bs.y. Müessetu Kurtuba, trs
19. KILINÇLI, Sami, Nüzul sürecinde Müslümanların Gayrimüslimlerle İlişkileri-Medine Dönemi 622-625 yılları Arası-, Ankara: Ankara Okulu Yayınları, 2018.
20. KIRBAŞOĞLU, M. Hayri, “İslam'a Yamanan Sanal Şiddet: Recm ve İrtidat Meselesi.” İslamiyât 5/1 (Ocak-Mart, 2002): 125-132
21. İBN KUDÂME,Muvaffaku’d-Din Ebî Muhammed Abdullah b. Ahmed b. Muhammed,, el-Kâfî, thk. Abdullah b. Abdulmuhsin et-Türkî, bs. y. Dâru hicr, 1418/1997.
22. KURT, Ali Osman,”Yahudilik’te, Hıristiyanlık’ta ve İslam’da İrtidat.” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi, 2000.
23. KURT, Hasan, “İslam İnancına göre Nifak ve Münafık.” Doktora Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, 2003.
24. el-KURTÛBÎ, Abdullah b. Muhammed b. Ahmed. el-Câmi‘u li ahkâmi’l-Kur’ân. thk. Abdullah b. Abdu’l-Hasen et-Türkî. Beyrut: Müessetu’r-Risale, 1427/2006.
25. KUTUP, Seyyid, Fî Zilâli’l-Kur’an, çev. Salih Uçan-Vahdettin İnce, İstanbul: Dünya Yayıncılık, 1989.
26. KUŞEYRÎ, Abdülkerîm b. Hevâzin b. Abdilmelik, Letâifu’l-işârât, Beyrut: Dâru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye, 1971.
27. MACİT, İsmet, “Düşünce, İnanç Ve İfade Özgürlüğü Kapsamında Mürtedin Yaşama Hakkı (Siyasi Suç Ekseninde İrtidat).” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, On dokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, 2014.
28. MATURÎDÎ, Ebu Mansur Muhammed b. Muhammed b. Mahmud, Te’vilâtü ehli’s-sünne. thk. Mecdî Bâslûm, Beyrut: Dâru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye, 1426/2005.
29. MEVDÛDÎ, Tefhimu’l-Kur’an, çev. Muhammed Han Kayanî ve diğerleri, İstanbul: İnsan Yayınları, 1991.
30. MUKÂTİL, Ebu’l-Hasen b. Süleyman. Tefsîru Mukâtil b. Süleyman. thk. Ahmed Ferid. Beyrut: Dâru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, 1424/2003.
31. MÜSLİM, Ebu’l-Hüseyn Müslim b. Haccac, Sahih, II. Baskı, thk. Muhammed Fuad Abdulbakî, İstanbul, Çağrı yayınları, 1992.
32. EN-NESÂÎ, Ebû Abdirrahmân Ahmed b. Şuayb b. Alî Sünen, nşr. Bedrettin Çetiner, İstanbul: Çağrı Yayınları, 1992.
33. SİNANOĞLU, Mustafa, “İman” maddesi” Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: 2000.
34. OKUR, Kâşif Hamdi. “İslam Hukukunda İrtidat Fiili İçin Öngörülen Asli Yaptırım Üzerine Bazı Düşünceler.” Gazi Üniversitesi Çorum İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2002/I (2002): 344-364.
35. ORHAN, Fatih, “İslam Ceza Hukukunda İrtidat Ve Temel İnsan Hakları Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi.” Doktora Tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi, 2014.
36. er-RÂZÎ, Fahruddîn İbn Ziyâuddîn b. Ömer Muhammed. Mefâtihu’l-gayb. Beyrut: Dâru’l-Fikr, 1401/1981.
37. es-SERAHSÎ, Şemsuddîn, Kitâbu’l-mebsût, thk. Komisyon, Beyrut: Dâru’l-ma’rife, 1409/1989.
38. eş-ŞÂFİÎ, Muhammed b. İdrîs, el-Ümm, thk. Muhammed Zehra en-Neccâr, bs. y. Mektebetü Külliyyeti’l-Ezher, 1. Baskı, 1381/1961.
39. ŞAHİNALP, Hacer, “Din Hürriyeti Bağlamında Din Değiştirme Hürriyeti: İrtidât.” İ.Ü. İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Güz 2013/4(2), (2013): 101-125.
40. Taberî, EbûCa’fer Muhammed b. Cerîr. Câmi‘u’l-Beyân ‘an te’vîliâyi’l-Kur’an.Thk. Abdullah b. Abdulmuhsin et-Türkî. Beyrut: Dâru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, 2005.
41. et-TİRMÎZÎ, Ebu İsa Muhammed b. İsa b. Sevra, Sünen, nşr. Bedretin Çetiner, İstanbul: Çağrı Yayınları, 1992.
42. ULUDAĞ, Süleyman, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi, “Amel” maddesi, İstanbul: 1991.
43. YAZIR, Elmalılı Hamdi, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, I. Baskı, İstanbul: Yenda Yayın-Dağıtım, 2000.
44. ez-ZEMAHŞERÎ, Ebu’l-Kâsım Mahmûd b. Ömer. el-Keşşâf‘an hakâiki’t-tenzîl. Beyrut: Dâru’l-Ma‘rife, 2008.