Beytülmal ve hazine kurumlarının mukayeseli analizi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı beytülmâl ve hazine kurumları arasında bir mukayese gerçekleştirmek ve ilgili iki kurum arasında bulunan farklılıkların sebep olduğu sonuçları analiz etmektir. Beytülmâl ve hazine arasındaki en önemli fark beytülmâlin ortaya çıktığı İslami yönetimde teorik açıdan tek egemen olarak Allah varken modern bir kurum olan hazinenin içinde bulunduğu yönetimde tek egemen modern devletin kendisinin olmasıdır. Ayrıca beytülmâl İslami yönetimin mali gelir ve giderlerini organize etmek için ortaya çıkmış organik bir kurum olarak meydana gelmiştir. Varoluşu bizzat Hz. Peygamber'in uygulamalarına dayanmaktadır. Hz. Peygamber'in dini liderliği ve beytülmâlin kaynaklarının büyük ölçüde dini emirlere dayanarak oluşturulması beytülmâl kurumunun ontolojik olarak dini bir temele dayandığı ve bu sebeple gider kalemlerinin de yine şeriatın amaçlarına uygun olmasını, diğer bir ifadeyle Allah'ın -sadece insanlar hakkında uygun gördüğü maslahatların meydana gelmesi için vaz' ettiği- hükümlerinin eksiksiz bir şekilde yerine getirilmesini hedeflemektedir. Hazine sisteminin temel dayanağını ise modern devletin kendisidir. Modern devletin sahip olduğu tek, bölünmez, sürekli ve mutlak egemenliğin bir sonucu olan merkezi kontrol özelliği sayesinde siyasi yönetim vatandaşın üretim ve tüketim faaliyetleri istenilen alana kanalize edilebilmektedir. Ayrıca güçlü bir devlet olmak ve bunu devam ettirmek için gereken finans ihtiyacı vatandaşı vergilendirme üzerinden sağlanırken sürekli büyüme ve ilerlemeyi hedef alan kapitalizmle uyumlu uygulamalar gerçekleştirilmektedir. Modern devletin sahip olduğu bu arka planın ve özellikle güçlü bir egemenlik ve merkezileşmenin pratikteki sonucu olarak hazine sistemi meydana gelmiştir. Devletin hazine sistemi sayesinde her türlü gelirin toplanmasını merkezden kontrol etmesi aynı zamanda yapılan harcamaların da kalemlerini belirlemesini ve dolayısıyla bu harcamaların modern devletin ve kapitalist sistemin amaçlarıyla örtüşmesini beraberinde getirmektedir. Beytülmâlin ontolojik dayanağını Allah'ın muradını ortaya çıkarmayı hedef edinen İslâmî yöntem oluştururken, hazine sisteminin ontolojik dayanağını modern devlet ve kapitalist sisteminin oluşturması bu iki sistemin birbirinin devamı olamayacağını açık bir şekilde ortaya koymaktadır. ----- Bayt al-mal is one of the institutions whose ontological and epistemological foundations determine its functioning in pre-modern context, yet these underlying structures have been ignored to a certain extent in modern studies leading to an anachronic analysis of bayt al-mal. The aim of this study is to make a critical comparison of bayt al-mal and treasury institutions in terms of income items, expenditures, and objectives of respective institutions. The motivation for such a comparison is due to studies in the literature treating these institutions as if there is no essential qualitative difference with each other. In such studies, the treasury institution of modern states and bayt al-mal of pre-modern Muslim societies are addressed as continuation of each other despite these institutions have two different ontological and epistemological backgrounds. However, these metaphysical differences lead to differences in income items, expenditures, and objectives of respective institutions in relation to the political system they are part of. Ignoring such differences lead to the continuation of research based on anachronistic readings of these institutions in the future. The most important difference between bayt al-mal and treasury is related to the sovereignty. As an institution of Islamic governance, Allah is the sole sovereign in determining the income items, expenditures, and objectives of bayt al-mal, while the modern state is itself the sovereign in which the treasury is part of. Main income items of bayt al-mal are zakat, humus, jizya and tribute. These revenues had been collected starting from the time of the Prophet and most of the items had continued to be part of bayt al-mal with additional items such as tax based on the ijtihad of the scholars. The institution of bayt al-mal is ontologically based on a religious basis, and for this reason, expense items are also suitable for the purposes of Shariah such as enjoining good and forbidding wrong, jihad, and establishing justice. In other words, the sources of bayt al-mal are utilized to fulfil the objectives of Shariah, which aims only to bring about the benefits Allah deems appropriate for people. The treasury system, on the other hand, is part of the modern state, which has different income items, expenditures, and objectives in line with its ontological and epistemological background. Modern state has a single, indivisible, continuous and absolute sovereignty and controls the citizens within its borders centrally. It is also closely related to capitalism since the citizens live in a social formation established based on capitalist principles. Hence, the income items, expenditures, and objectives are in line with sustaining the sovereignty of modern state and capitalist principles, which differs from an Islamic governance qualitatively. Most of the income of modern state is collected through taxation of citizens and corporates, and to be expended to the items compatible with capitalism aiming at continuous growth and progress and sustaining the central authority of the state. Expenditures made for areas such as salary payments and pensions, which constitute the permanent and large part of expenses of the state. These items are due to the large number of civil servants in the modern state to establish central control of the state. The central control feature has an important role in providing social services to citizens to provide a redistributive mechanism. The expenditures made to provide these services from the center still have a large share in the treasury expenditures of the modern state. Because the modern state, which monopolizes the responsibility of providing the welfare of the people, pays the expenses of the services such as education and health, which it provides free of charge in most cases, from the treasury. However, while providing these social services, it is noteworthy that it prioritizes the citizens it deems appropriate and especially the citizens who will contribute to increasing the welfare of the society. In the background of this selective attitude that the state shows while providing services such as education and health to its citizens free of charge, there is an effort to create a healthy and well-educated human capital since the modern state needs citizens who work continuously and focus on production as an outcome of objectives such as progress, growth and development. This study draws attention to the fact that trying to establish a continuous connection between the two institutions by ignoring the qualitative differences that we try to reveal in this study between the bayt al-mal and the treasury poses a significant danger for the effort to proposing financial instruments and institutions in compliance with Islamic principles in the modern period. There are two important benefits of the comparison attempted in this study. It is emphasized that these qualitative differences should be taken into account when evaluating the treasury institution of modern state in the fatwas given for Islamic financial instruments. A second important point is that the question of whether the bayt al-mal can be in harmony with the modern state in terms of both income items, expenditures, and objectives is raised as a question for further investigation.