Bazı hadislerde sadakaların Hz. Peygamber’e ve âline helal olmadığından söz edilmiş; yine aynı rivayetlerin bir kısmında “Sadakalar ancak insanların kirleridir” denilerek sadakaların kir olduğu ifade edilmiştir. Bu iki hususun bir arada zikredilmesini dikkate alan pek çok âlim, sadakaların Hz. Peygamber ve âline “kir olduğu için” haram kılındığını savunmuş; buna karşın, kir olan bir şeyin herkese değil de sadece Hz. Peygamber ve âline haram kılınmasının izah edilemeyişi bu âlimleri şeref ve kire liyakat bakımından insanları sınıflara ayırmaya sevk etmiştir. Anlamlarından birisi “temizlik” olan zekat da verilmesinin dini bir vecibe oluşu itibariyle diğerlerinden ayrılan bir sadaka türüdür. Bu açıdan bakıldığında temel iki problem ortaya çıkar: Birinci problem, zihnin sadaka ile kir arasında bir irtibat kuramayışıdır. İkinci problem, şeref ve üstünlüğü herkesin kazanıp kaybedebildiği bir özellik olarak objektif kriterlere bağlayan İslam ile; kazanılamayan ve kaybedil(e)meyen bir özellik olarak kana bağlayan kültürel şeref anlayışının bağdaştırılamamasıdır. Sadaka ile kir arasında hakiki manada bir ilişkinin kurulamayışı, sadakanın kir olduğuna dair ifadelerin Hz. Peygamber tarafından hangi anlamda ve ne maksatla kullanıldığının tespitini gerekli kıldığı kadar; zekatın helalliği ve haramlığı gibi fıkhî bir hükmün ortaçağ Arap kültüründe görülen üstünlük anlayışına bağlanmasının ne kadar makul ve meşru olduğunun tespitini de gerekli kılmaktadır. İslam hukuk literatürü, mezkur görüş kadar öne çıkmayıp kenarda kalan ama sorunu problemsiz ve çelişkisiz bir şekilde çözen içtihatlara sahiptir. Makalemizde konuyla ilgili görüşler karşılaştırılarak zekatın kir olmadığı, dolayısıyla sözde kir olan zekata liyakat açısından insanları tasnif etmenin ve Hz. Peygamber’in soyundan gelenler için onun vefatından sonra özel hükümler benimsemenin anlamsız ve gereksiz olduğu ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır.
Alms (zakat) is an institution which is elated by the Muslims and which are thought to be able to eliminate the imbalance of the income between the rich and the poor and which is thought to be able to prevent possible hostilities and which is seen as an alternative to the interest system. Alms constitutes one of the main foundations of the Islamic economy by serving the purpose of maintaining every fraction of the society to not to remain under the minimal life standards. Alms, which become a financial and legal obligation at the same time in the case of existence of a state that undertakes the organization of this service, continues its existence forever as a religious obligation or worship. Especially in our time when alms are “based upon the volunteering principle” and generally which are not been made a subject of constraint, the function and benefits of it that exceeds the state borders, become even more prominent. Many aids such as alms and charities are transferred to the needy by means of national and international organizations founded by the Muslims; while the ones who give experience the happiness of fulfilling their religious obligation and doing good, the receivers are grateful for the fact that they are a member of a religion that takes care of their needs and entitles this as a “right” for them and at the same time they feel grateful for their brothers who understand their situations.
Holy God (Allah) adverts the eight classes that can be given alms by ordaining “The Charities (Alms) are pertained to the poor, needy, officers (who collect alms), the ones whose hearts will be warmed for (Islam), the slaves (who try to buy their freedoms), the ones who are in debt, who are in God's way and the who are stranded” in Koran. The fact that whom the alms will not be given to, is a subject that is as important much as the fact that to whom the alms will be given to; besides the mother, father, wife and children, non-Muslim and the rich, Prophet's family and descendants are counted as the people who will not be given alms. There are mainly three different reasons in the subject why the family and descendants of the Prophet cannot be given alms: First of these, is the fact that alms are the “dirt of the people”, the second is the fact that “the imparting the khums (one fifth) to them”, the third is “the probability that the Prophet to be accused of obtaining pecuniary advantage by use of religion when zakat is given to his relatives”. Even though every one of these reasons finds a place in the literature of Islamic law, interestingly the first one is more adopted. The second reason is approached in connection with the first one: According to some, the second reason completes the first one, as alms are dirt is forbidden for the Prophet's honored and excluded relatives; instead of this, they were given a share from the khums. According to some, the main reason is the second one, the share given to relatives has made them rich in a way which will exclude them from the eight classes that alms can be given, and only as a result of this alms were rendered unlawful to them. According to our opinion, the third reason which is the true and real reason of the incitement of the alms to the relatives of Mohammad has found rather a lesser place in the Islamic law.
The view that the alms are the dirt of the people and because of this it was rendered unlawful to the family of Muhammad conflicts with a lot of wordings about the subject and the general principles of the Islamic law and its spirit; for it's not really possible for alms to be any kind of dirt. Similarly, as the share of khums given to them is a matter of debate, it would not also constitute a solid basis for the prohibition of alms/zakat for the family of Muhammad. Yes, alms were prohibited to the family of Muhammad and share from the khums were given to them; but these had nothing to with the fact that alms are dirt and these reasons for the prohibition of zakat to the family of Muhammad including the third one loses all the meaning and validity with his death.
The fact that Muhammad, who indicated that “the alms is but the dirt of people” or other expressions similar to this, using the metaphor of dirt to alms or charities by means of figure of speech, simile and hyperbole from time to time, created quite different reflections on the minds of the faqihs. Within this scope, while the expression of “the countenance of dirt to alms” points out to the fact that alms are not dirt in real meaning and that dirt will not be counted as the alms; the statement of “reflection” show that some expressions that are uttered by the Prophet as figures of speech, similes and hyperboles have “changed direction” by being perceived as reality by some faqihs. Such misdirection has lead up to glorification of the family of Muhammad and the degradation of the “others” of whom the alms were rendered lawful to and this degradation continued to occur in the literature.
When someone, who received alms because he was poor or needy, stranded or in debt or because he has made self-sacrifice of going to jihad by risking his head, reads or learns about the heavy and degrading lines about how bad actually it is to receive alms, it is definite that he will experience a big disappointment and a trauma. Above all, if this benefiting from the products of alms is realized without consent as in the babies or children this trauma would be heavier; and someone who has somehow become an object to alms until reaching maturity, will suddenly find out that he had already lost his chance to be a member of the higher levels of the society after years!
For this reason, it is necessary to compare wordings and views about the subject with each other and the general principles of Islamic law and to assert the truth of the true views and the falsity of the wrong views. As we can see, a well-coordinated research, which examines this attribution of dirt to alms within this framework, doesn't exist. This research set forth to exonerate the Prophet humiliating needy persons and classify people in this respect instead of first attributing dirt to the alms and exonerating a certain part of the society from this dirt which was claimed to be more honorable.
Publication Date : October 31, 2019
|APA||ARANGÜL, M . (2019). Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları. Bilimname , 2019 (38) , 591-636 . DOI: 10.28949/bilimname.590475|
|MLA||ARANGÜL, M . "Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları". Bilimname 2019 (2019 ): 591-636 <https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/bilimname/issue/49808/590475>|
|Chicago||ARANGÜL, M . "Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları". Bilimname 2019 (2019 ): 591-636|
|RIS||TY - JOUR T1 - Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları AU - Muammer ARANGÜL Y1 - 2019 PY - 2019 N1 - doi: 10.28949/bilimname.590475 DO - 10.28949/bilimname.590475 T2 - Bilimname JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 591 EP - 636 VL - 2019 IS - 38 SN - 1304-1878-2148-5860 M3 - doi: 10.28949/bilimname.590475 UR - https://doi.org/10.28949/bilimname.590475 Y2 - 2019 ER -|
|EndNote||%0 Bilimname Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları %A Muammer ARANGÜL %T Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları %D 2019 %J Bilimname %P 1304-1878-2148-5860 %V 2019 %N 38 %R doi: 10.28949/bilimname.590475 %U 10.28949/bilimname.590475|
|ISNAD||ARANGÜL, Muammer . "Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları". Bilimname 2019 / 38 (October 2019): 591-636 . https://doi.org/10.28949/bilimname.590475|
|AMA||ARANGÜL M . Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları. Bilimname. 2019; 2019(38): 591-636.|
|Vancouver||ARANGÜL M . Kirin Zekata Nisbeti ve Bunun Fıkhî Yansımaları. Bilimname. 2019; 2019(38): 636-591.|