This is an oft-asked question and the best occasion to answer this question is the issue of Osman II, for the answer was given in the Incident of the Assassination of Osman II.
According to Islamic law, Jihad is fard al-kifayah (a duty where the achievement by some will absolve the rest). For this reason, a Muslim would undertake Hajj, which is a fard al-ain (duty applicable to all), unless there is a danger from enemies which he is responsible for. Jihad would not be an obstacle for most Muslims in performing Hajj. However the matter is different for Caliphs and Sultans. When the Prophet (saw) was asked which deed was more virtuous, he replied they were belief in Allah and His Prophet, Jihad in His Cause and Hajj al-Mabrur respectively. The reason thereof is obvious: Protecting Muslim lives, properties and chastity is among the public rights, also known as Hukukullah, viz. it is a devotion pertaining to the public. Sometimes a matter of public rights becomes more important than personal obligations as in this case.
All the Ottoman Sultans up to Selim II spent half their lives on campaigns of Jihad for the Divine cause of Allah.
The scholars issued fatwahs (judgments) that the Sultans should prefer Jihad that was incumbent upon them as fard al-ain. While Bayezid II was intending to go for Hajj when he was Governor of Amasya, with a letter undersigned by Grand Vizier and the other leading statesmen he was advised to sit on the throne with no delay, leaving making of Hajj to the public and those not involved in administering the State or otherwise he would cause the enemy to be encouraged to attack Muslims.
Likewise, Sultan Osman II was insistent on undertaking the Hajj the price of which he paid with his life, was given by Es'ad Effendi, Shaikhulislam and his father-in-law, the following fatwah summarising this Islamic decree:
"Hajj is not incumbent upon Sultans; they would rather sit on the throne and do the justice lest an instigation should arise".
Aziz Mahmud Hudai, the most eminent personage of the time, endorsed this fatwah, asking Osman II that he should abide by it:
"O my Sultan! Far it be from the scholars who pray for your good to provoke bandits. Nevertheless, we sincerely were unwilling to consent to that your wish, for your forefathers did not perform it, did not go for that journey. And this is all our sin, if any."
While on the other hand, the following expressions that summarize the rumors that spread in public and in the army expound the matter:
Professor Dr. Ahmed Akgunduz mentions Sultan Abdulaziz secretly made Hajj in disguise. However, there is no document in hand to evidence this.
"Sultans have even given up Hajj for the maintenance of the order of the world. It is wrong to leave Mamaliq al-Makhrusah (the Imperial Ottoman Dominions, as divinely protected) in the existence of the possibility that the enemy appear and cause instigation throughout the country."
In explanation of the stipulation of having a sound body, some Islamic jurists stated that even if a person was healthy, being imprisoned or being afraid of a tyrannical administrator preventing him from making Hajj would hinder the performance of Hajj; and they came to the conclusion that the Sultan - and those statesmen in the same situation - would also be regarded as confined and that Hajj would be compulsory for the Sultan only from his personal properties other than the public goods and that as long as that excuse continued to exist he might not be able to go for Hajj until his death. And in a century when the means of transport were not yet so sophisticated as those of our time and the task of Hajj took at least three months it comes to mean being incognizant of the Islamic Laws to think that the Ottoman Sultans should have performed the duty of Hajj.
It can not be asked why the Ottoman Sultans, who spent half of their lives on war fronts went for Jihad as far as Egypt but did not go for Hajj, for a Sultan who went on a campaign at the head of the army as a Mujahid (Warrior of Islam) could not be the same as one who left his country alone for three months for his personal devotions. The most substantial example of this was the reaction of not only the army but of the public against Osman II. Again, Islamic scholars expressed that Hajj (pilgrimage) was not obligatory for 20 years after 326 A.H./ 937 A.C. because of the rebellion of Karamita Group, which violated the safety of route, which is one of the stipulations of Hajj, for Hajj travelers might be confronted with anarchy on their way.
It was not compulsory for the Ottoman Sultans to make Hajj as they undertook jihad in its place and ensured security for the ummah to undertake such rituals. Nonetheless, they usually sent someone else in their lieu.
Great answers start with great insights. Content becomes intriguing when it is voted up or down - ensuring the best answers are always at the top.
Questions are answered by people with a deep interest in the subject. People from around the world review questions, post answers and add comments.
Be part of and influence the most important global discussion that is defining our generation and generations to come