Çift Bozan (lit. Farm Breaker) Tax in Terms of Islamic Law

Tasavvur - Tekirdag Theology Journal 9 (1):763-802 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The primary source of income in the Ottoman Empire, like in other pre-vious and contemporary states, was land. For this reason, the private ownership of land, especially those used for grain production, was avoided, and efforts were made to keep them as state-owned or public lands known as "mirî" or "memleket arazisi". This situation brings up the issue of cultivating the land and generating income from it. The Ottoman Empire further developed the timar system, which was also implemented by the previous states, and allocated land to families based on its productivity by dividing it into certain sizes. These families were required to pay a tax known as "çift resmi", "raiyyet resmi", or "kulluk akçası." The system was based on the cultivation of the land by the peasants, thus ensuring both the production of crops without venturing food security and providing the state with the necessary tax revenue. Thus, it was necessary for the peasants not to abandon their land. One of the precautions taken to ensure this was "cebrî ikamet" (compulsory residency), and the other was "çift bozan resmi" (a tax imposed on those who leave their land uncultivated). Regulations regarding these measures have been included in the Kanunnames (legal codes) since the time of Fatih Sultan Mehmet, and they remained in effect until the 1858 Land Code. Since the nişancıs who prepared the Kanunnames had a good command in Islamic fiqh and the laws were at least theoretically approved by the sheikh al-islam until the mid-17th century, no one among the Ottoman scholars was known to oppose these regulations. Due to the serious disruption of the timar system and the increasing oppression of the peasants, criticisms of the "çift bozan" and "cebrî ikamet" measures began among the scholars in the Damascus region, led by Hayreddin Remlî, in the second half of the 17th century. This criticism intensified over time. In fact, two separate treatises were written on this issue. The scholars in Istanbul were also partly affected by this criticism. In this article, the "çift bozan" tax and its status in Islamic law will be primarily examined. All views in favor or against this issue will be put forth as much as possible, and an evaluation will be made while trying to come up with a different perspective.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,853

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Slavoj Zizek.Kant ile Sade & İdeal Çift - 2005 - Cogito 41:181.
Türkçe Çift Nesneli Bir Dil midir?Nuh DOĞAN - 2015 - Journal of Turkish Studies 10 (Volume 10 Issue 8):919-919.
The Issue of Ali er Rıza’s Heir to the Throne."Bozan Metin" - 2004 - Dini Araştırmalar 7 (19):159-171.
Li shi zhe xue jiao cheng.Bozan Jian - 1990 - [Peking]: Xin hua shu dian Beijing fa xing suo fa xing.
Mardin Region in Hijri I. Century Sectarian Movements."Metin Bozan" - 2006 - Dini Araştırmalar 9 (25):125-142.
The foundations of Islam and Islamic thought.Ariana Wolff (ed.) - 2018 - New York, NY: Britannica Educational Publishing.
Islamic worldview: paradigma intelektual Islam.Abas Mansur Tamam - 2017 - Duren Sawit, Pondok Bambu, Jakarta: Spirit Media Press.
Islam nusantara.Mujamil Qomar - 2020 - Epistemé: Jurnal Pengembangan Ilmu Keislaman 14 (1):131-150.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-06-24

Downloads
8 (#1,316,752)

6 months
4 (#787,709)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references