It's been over seven months, with 45,000+ civilians killed in P41estine the majority of whom are women and children. Similarly with Muslims worldwide (Burma, Kashmir, Uygurs in East Turkestan etc..), and the silence of "Muslim" rulers is deafening. The only solution is for Muslims to mobilize their armies and unite under a single umbrella of Khilafah, which is the promise of Allah SWT. If you are in a position of power, please raise your voice. If you can't do much, please consider donating to Palestine Red Crescent Society or any other charity organisations which you truly trust, JazakAllah khairan.

Subscribe to this RSS feed
Economic system

Economic system (105)

This book of the economic system in Islam is a precious intellectual Islamic fortune, rarely matched. It is the first book which crystallises, clearly and obviously, in this century, the reality of the economic system of Islam in this period in an explicit fashion.

It explains the Islamic view of the economy and its objective, how to own property and increase it, how to spend and dispose of it, how to distribute the wealth amongst the citizens in society and how to establish a balance within it.

It explains the types of properties (private, public and State property) including the property due to the Bait ul-Mal and the areas over which it is spent.

It explains the rules of lands, whether ‘Ushriyya or Kharajiyya, and what is obliged in them of the tithe (‘Ushr) or land tax (Kharaj) and how to utilise, cultivate and allocate and also how to transfer them from one owner to another.

It also discusses the different types of currencies (Nuqud) and what occurs in them of Riba, exchange and what is obliged from them of Zakat.

Finally it discusses the foreign trade and its rules. The sole sources in adopting the rules mentioned in this book are the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger [1] and what they directed to, namely analogy and Ijma’a as-Sahabah. No other source is taken in adopting these economic rules.

The book introduces the reality of the capitalist and socialist, including (communist) economic systems and their refutation, explaining their defects and contradiction with the economic system of Islam. This book was reviewed prior to printing the new edition with only minor corrections. Careful attention was spent in reviewing all the Ahadith mentioned which were proven according to their narrators in the books of Hadith.

This book, to its credit, has created amongst Muslims a great awareness of the Economic System in Islam. We ask Allah that He  spreads its favour and enables Muslims to place its rules into action in a State ruling them exclusively with that which Allah  has revealed.

23rd Safar 1410 Hijra

23/9/89

Monday, 02 January 2017 21:08

24.3 Problems facing the Gold Standard

Written by

When the gold standard was applied throughout the whole world, it did not experience any problems. However, problems arose when the superpowers opted to fight their enemies using money, by introducing alongside the gold standard the non exchangeable (compulsory) paper money standard. For this reason, Western colonial powers established the International Monetary Fund, and the USA introduced the U.S. dollar as the basis for the new monetary standard. Hence, any State operating the gold standard would be faced by certain problems which need study in order to solve and overcome them. These problems are as follows:

1. The concentration of gold in countries whose level of production, their ability to compete in foreign trade and the professionalism of their scientists, experts and industrialists have all increased. This would lead to the flow of gold into these countries either as a price for commodities or as salaries for the workforce i.e. experts, scientists and industrialists. Therefore, most of the existing reserves of gold world-wide would accumulate in these countries, causing an imbalance in the distribution of gold among various countries. This would also lead to countries restricting the transfer of gold for fear of losing their reserves, thus bringing their foreign trade to a grinding halt.

2. Gold could flow into some countries due to the balance of trade being in their favour. However, these countries could prevent this gold from influencing the local market and from causing an increase in the level of prices by flooding the market with a large number of bonds. This could be sufficient to lead to a withdrawal of money equal to the gold they had received, thus such countries end up retaining the gold and preventing it from returning to the country of origin, which would suffer from the use of the gold standard as a result.

3. The widespread use of the gold standard has always been linked to the concept of international specialisation in various areas of production and to international free trade. However, a powerful tendency toward the protection of industry and agriculture in these countries has emerged, which has led to the introduction of tariff barriers, thus erecting an obstacle in the face of goods exported to these countries and making it difficult for the transferring of gold out of these countries. Therefore, the trade of the country that operates the gold standard would suffer, for if her goods did not reach other countries’ markets at the normal price, she would either be forced to reduce the level of her commodities’ prices further in order to overcome the tariffs and quotas or not export her goods in the first instance, and in both cases, her trade would suffer.

These are the main difficulties which the gold standard could face if operated by a single country or several countries. The way to overcome such difficulties would be to adopt a policy of self-sufficiency and to make workers’ salaries performance-related rather than estimated in relation to the price of the commodities they produce or manufacture, or their standard of living. Also no consideration should be paid to shares and government bonds as commodities owned by individuals, and there should be no over-reliance on exports as a source of developing wealth. A country should rather aim at generating her wealth within her own boundaries without having to export her goods and services abroad, which would help her do away with trade barriers imposed by other countries. Once a country adopts such a policy, she would have nothing to fear from the gold standard, and instead would reap all its benefits, avoid all its disadvantages and not suffer any setback from it at all. On the contrary, it would be in her interest. So it is inevitable for her to follow the gold and silver standard to the exclusion of all other standards.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:07

24.2 Benefits of the Gold Standard

Written by

If the benefits of the gold standard were to be compared with the fiat (paper currency) standard and other standards, it would be inevitable that the monetary gold standard would become a global standard. These benefits would not allow any other monetary standard to become established. Throughout the history of money and up until the First World War, the whole world operated the gold and silver standards. No other standards were known to the world until then. However, when the colonialists mastered the various styles of economic and financial imperialism, and began using currency as a means of colonialism, they established different monetary standards. They considered bank deposits and non exchangeable banknotes, which had no reserve of gold or silver, as money, along with gold and silver. Therefore, it is necessary to explain the benefits of the gold standard, the most important of which are:

1. The gold basis necessitates the free circulation, import and export of gold, which leads to monetary, financial and economic stability. In this case, transactions of exchange would only originate from foreign payments to meet the cost of commodities and the salaries of workers.

2. The gold standard ensures the stability of exchange rates between various countries, and the stability of the exchange rates in turn leads to a boom in international trade, for traders would no longer fear the expansion of foreign trade, and the uncertainty of exchange rate instability.

3. If the gold standard was employed, central banks and governments would not be able to expand the issuance of banknotes, for as long as the banknote remains non exchangeable with gold at a fixed rate, the authorities concerned would fear that if they exceeded limits in issuing banknotes, the demand for gold would increase and they would not be able to meet this demand. Therefore, they would always tend to maintain a reasonable ratio between what they issue in terms of banknotes and gold reserves.

4. Each of the currencies used, all over the world would be fixed by a specific amount of gold. As a result, the movements of commodities, money and people from one country to another would be easier, and the problems of hard currency would disappear.

5. The gold standard would help each country preserve her gold, for there would be no gold smuggling from one country to another, and countries would not need to exercise control in order to protect their wealth, for gold would only leave the country for legitimate reasons i.e. as prices for commodities or salaries for workers.

These are some of the benefits of the gold standard, and they all make it necessary that the world operates this standard. Therefore, it comes as no surprise to learn that the whole world up until the First World War was indeed operating the gold standard.

At the start of the first world war, the most prevailing monetary system in the world was that based on the gold standard, and money in circulation at the time was in fact gold coins and paper money readily exchangeable for their equivalent value in gold. The silver standard also operated alongside the gold standard. The implementation of this standard led to the establishment of the most productive economic relations. However, when the First World War was declared in 1914, the warring countries undertook certain measures which led to disorder in the gold standard. Some countries cancelled the liability of exchanging their currencies to gold. Other countries imposed harsh restrictions on the export of gold, while others put obstacles in the face of importing it. This continued until 1971 when America declared that she had put an end to the operation of the gold standard and that she intended to sever the link between gold and the dollar. Since then, gold has had no relation with the currency, but rather has become like any other commodity. America’s intention was to establish the dollar as the monetary basis world-wide so that it could control and dominate the international money market. Therefore, the gold standard no longer operated throughout the world and this disturbed the monetary system and the rates of exchange fluctuated. Since then, obstacles and difficulties in the transfer of currencies, goods and services have appeared.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:07

24.1 The Gold Standard

Written by

A State would be following the gold standard if it used gold currency in its foreign and domestic transactions, or if it used domestically a paper money which could be exchanged for gold. This paper money could either be for domestic use and for making payments abroad or solely for making payments abroad, on condition that this exchange for has a fixed price. In other words, it would still be following the gold standard on condition that the paper unit can be exchanged for a specific quantity of gold, at a fixed price and vice-versa. It would be natural in this case for the value of the currency in the country to remain solidly linked to the value of gold. Therefore, if the value of gold rose in comparison with other commodities, the value of the currency in comparison with other commodities would rise as well. If the value of goods decreased in comparison with commodities, the value of the currency would also decrease.

Money based on gold has a special characteristic, reflected in the fact that the monetary unit is linked to gold in a specific amount. In other words it would, by law, consist of a specific weight of gold. The import and export of gold would be freely conducted, and people would be able to freely acquire currencies, gold bullion, or gold dust and be able to export them.

Since gold in this instance would move freely between various countries, every person has the choice of either buying foreign currency, or transferring (i.e. settling in) gold; a person would however opt for the cheaper method. Therefore, since gold and the cost of its transfer would cost more than the price of the foreign currencies in the market, it would then be sensible to use foreign currency instead. However, if the exchange rate exceed that figure, it would be best to take the gold out of circulation and settle with it.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:04

24 Money-Currencies (An-Nuqood)

Written by

Money is the standard by which we measure the benefit found in the commodity and in the effort i.e. goods and services. Therefore, money is defined as being the medium by which all goods and services are measured. Hence the price of a commodity and the wage of a worker for instance, each represents the society’s estimate of the value of that commodity and the effort of that worker. Bonds, shares and the like are not considered money.

This estimation of the value of goods and services is, in all countries, expressed by units. These units become the measure by which the benefit obtained from a commodity and the benefit obtained from a service is measured. These units would act as a medium of exchange, and these units are money.

When Islam decreed the rules of trading and hiring, it did not determine any specific item with which the exchange of goods, services and benefits had to be compulsorily conducted. Islam has rather given the human being the choice to conduct the transactions of exchange with whatever medium He chooses, as long as mutual consent prevailed in the exchange. It is, therefore permitted for a man to marry a woman by teaching her the Qur’an, just as it is permitted for a person to buy a commodity by working for its owner for a day, or to work for someone for a day in exchange for a certain amount of dates etc. The exchange could therefore be conducted with whatever people wished. However, when it comes to exchanging a commodity with a specific monetary unit, Islam has guided us to the monetary unit by which the exchange is to take place. It has restricted the Muslims to a specific type of money, which is gold and silver. Islam has not left it to society to express its own estimation of the measure of benefit drawn out of goods or services, by either fixed or variable monetary units, which society could manage as it wished. Islam has rather specified these monetary units by which society expresses the values i.e. the prices of goods and services.

This specification could be deduced from several matters and these are as follows:

1. When Islam prohibited the hoarding of wealth, it specifically prohibited the hoarding of gold and silver despite the fact that wealth includes any property that can be owned. Wheat for instance is a type of wealth, so are dates and money. However, hoarding is reflected in money, not in the goods and services. The prohibition in the verse refers to the hoarding of money, for it acts as the generally accepted medium of exchange, and because the hoarding of money is the matter that produces the effect of the prohibition i.e. restricting circulation. As for other commodities, their accumulation would not be known as Kanz, (hoarding), but as Ihtikar (monopoly). Hence the verse which prohibits the hoarding of gold and silver in fact refers to the hoarding of money. The verse has specified the money which Allah (swt) has prohibited us to hoard which is gold and silver. Allah (swt) says:

“And those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend them in the way of Allah, let them know that a severe punishment is awaiting them” [At-Tauba: 34]

Therefore, prohibition is focused upon the monetary medium of exchange, thus the hoarding of gold and silver is forbidden, whether it was minted or not.

2. Islam has linked gold and silver to a set of fixed rules. Hence, when it imposed the Diyyah i.e. blood money, it specified a fixed amount of gold. Also, when it decreed the penalty of cutting the hand of the thief, it specified the minimum value of gold that is stolen which would entail the cutting of the hand. In his letter to the people of the Yemen, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was reported by An-Nisai on the authority of Amru Ibn Hazm to have said: “The blood money for one soul would be 100 camels...and for those who deal in gold it would be 1000 dinars.” Bukhari also reported on the authority of Aisha (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) also said: “The hand is cut for the theft of one-quarter dinar and upward.” Therefore, this fixing of certain rules by the Dinar, the dirham and the Mithqal, would make the Dinar with its weight in gold, and the dirham with its weight in silver, a monetary unit by which the values of goods and services are measured. This monetary unit would be the money, which is the basis of the currency. Therefore, the fact that Islam has linked the Shari’ah rules to gold and silver by text, when these rules are related to money, serves as evidence that the currency is solely restricted to gold and silver.

3. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) has determined that gold and silver be used as money, and exclusively made them the monetary measure to evaluate goods and services, and ensured that all transactions be conducted with them as their basis. He (pbuh) also established the units of this money, which are the ounce, Dirham, Daniq (equal to 1/6 Dirham), Carat, Mithqal and Dinar. These units were well known and widespread during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and they were widely used by all people. It has also been established that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) approved of them. All trade and marriage transactions were conducted in gold and silver, in their quality as money, and this has been established in the Sahih Ahadith. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) has determined the weight of gold and silver with a specific weight, which was the weight of the people of Makkah. Abu Dawud and An-Nisai reported on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “The weight should be that of the people of Makkah.” When reviewing the monetary weights in Islam, we would conclude that the legal ounce would equal 40 Dirhams, the dirham would be 6 Daniqs, the Dinar would equal 24 Carats and every 10 Dirhams would equal 7 Mithqals. The weights of Madinah were established according to this order.

4.When Allah (swt) decreed the Zakat of money, He (swt) made it obligatory in gold and silver, and He (swt) determined a Nisab for the Zakat in gold and silver. Therefore, to consider the Zakat of money as being gold and silver would establish the money as being gold and silver.

5. The rules of exchange listed under the monetary transactions only, have come in gold and silver alone. Also, all the financial transactions mentioned in Islam were reported to have been conducted in gold and silver. Exchange is the trading of one currency for another. It would be either trading of one currency with the same type, or trading of one currency for another type. In other words, exchange would be the swapping of one currency for another. The fact that Shar’a has determined the exchange, which is purely a financial transaction, linked to nothing else but money by gold and silver serves as a clear evidence that money should be in gold and silver and nothing else. At-Tirmidhi reported that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Trade gold for silver as you wish, but hand to hand (without delay).” Bukhari also reported that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Gold for silver would be Riba, unless it was hand to hand (without delay).”

Therefore, money is considered one of the issues which Islam has laid down rules for and is not an issue subject to opinion and consultation, nor subject to the requirements of economic and financial life. The attribute of money as a specific type and unit of currency, is rather determined by a Shari’ah rule. If one were to ponder over the above mentioned five points, one would find a host of Shariah rules has been related and linked to the money in Islam. Therefore, the prohibition of its hoarding, the obligation of Zakat on it, the decreeing of the rule of exchange for it, the approval of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) of dealing with it, the linking of the Diyyah (blood money) and the cutting of the hand in theft to it makes the opinion in such a matter subject to the Shari’ah text only. The fact that Shar’a has expressed through rules which are related exclusively to money in gold and silver, or are linked to it, serves as a clear evidence that the currency should be gold and silver, or based on gold and silver. Therefore, the type of currency determined by the Shari’ah rules must be adhered to. Thus, money in Islam should be gold and silver.

However, to exclusively determine gold and silver as money would not necessarily mean that it would be forbidden to conduct any exchange in other than gold and silver. The issue of currency in this regard would be other than that of exchange, it would rather be the issue of adopting a currency. Therefore, despite the fact that it would be permitted for people to exchange in anything they wished, the monetary measure for exchange and for anything other than exchange must be in gold and silver, for money in Islam is gold and silver.

The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) made various types of gold and silver as money, regardless of whether these were minted or not. He (pbuh) did not mint a specific money, with specific and fixed features, rather the units of gold and silver were Roman and Persian coins, both small and large coins along with silver coins which were neither minted nor engraved, as well as Yemeni coins. All of these coins were in use widely without exception. However, these coins were not considered by their number or whether they were engraved or not; they were only considered according to their weight. The piece of gold could be the size of an egg, and people would still deal with it. Thus, the definiition was by specifying gold and silver and specifying the weight for each of them. Therefore, the rights of Allah (swt) such as Zakat, the rights of the people such as debts, as well as the prices of goods and services, were related to Dirhams and Dinars i.e. to gold and silver, evaluated by weight.

This State of affairs continued throughout the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), that of the four Khulafaa Al-Rashideen, and the beginning of the era of Bani Umayyah, until the arrival of Abdulmalik Ibn Marwan, who deemed it appropriate to transform all the gold and silver that was in use at the time, minted and non minted alike, into an Islamic coinage and inscription, and gave it a standard and invariable weight, thus doing away with the need to make reference to their weight. So, He collected the largest and the smallest of coins and minted them according to the weight of Makkah. Abdulmalik minted the Dirhams in silver and the Dinars in gold in the year 75 AH, and ever since that time, Islamic minted Dirhams and Dinars were in circulation i.e. the currency of the Islamic State became distinguished, having the same invariable feature. Therefore, the basis of the monetary standard in Islam was gold and silver. As for size, coinage, form and inscription, these are all part of the style. Therefore, the words of gold and silver, when mentioned in the Shari’ah terminology and evaluation, would apply to two matters: The money which is in circulation, whether it is copper or paper money as long as it has an equivalent (from gold and silver), and the two metals of gold and silver. Any money that is from gold or silver, would thus be considered, and any paper or copper money or the like, which could be transferred into gold or silver would also be considered.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:03

23.3 Exchange Transactions

Written by

No matter how numerous and varied the transactions of exchange are, they would always be confined to the trading of one currency for another of the same type, or the trading of one currency for another of a different type. The transaction only occurs either between ready cash for other ready cash, or between a Dhimma (credit) for another credit. The exchange cannot take place between cash and a credit. When the exchange transaction takes place, it becomes effective once the contracts and the cashing in have taken place, and neither of the two contracting parties can go back on his word, unless it became established that there had been a case of serious fraud or defect, in which case it is permitted for one of the contracting parties to withdraw from the deal. If, for instance one of the contracting parties found a defect in that which He had purchased, for example He found that the silver He had bought contained copper, or that the silver turned black, He has the option to return the goods He had bought or to accept them based on the agreed price at the time of the transaction. This means that the returning of goods is allowed as long as it is at the same rate as the time of the deal. If one of the contracting parties accepted the goods, the transaction would be valid, and if He decided to return them, the deal would be cancelled. If, for instance one bought 24 carat gold for 24 carat gold, only to find that the gold purchased is only 18 carats, this would be considered fraud, and in this case He would have the choice of either accepting the deal at the agreed price of exchange at the time of the transaction or rejecting it. So, if the person who exchanged the gold for gold decided to accept the gold with its defect at a discount, this would not be allowed because there would be a higher value placed on one of the two commodities, and there is an absence of equivalence which is a condition of a deal of the “same type”.

Another example would be if an indebted person said to his debtor: “Reduce some of my debt and I will hurry in repaying the remainder of the debt.” This is also not allowed because it would be the trading of a ready sale for a future sale without equivalence i.e. it is as if the indebted person sold his debt “promptly” to his debtor for less than the original transaction, thus creating a disparity which is Riba. Likewise, if the debtor said to the indebted: “I would give you ten Dirhams if you accelerated the repayment of the 100 you owe me”, this is not allowed because there would be a disparity in the value which is Riba. Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Trade gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, barley for barley, dates for dates and salt for salt, like for like, and hand to hand, for whoever increases or takes an increase will fall into riba, for the taker and the giver alike.”

Another example would be if one person owed another gold and the latter owed the former silver, and they exchanged what each owed the other i.e. if the former settled what He owed in gold with what He is owed in silver, this type of exchange would be lawful, for the immediate payment of debt is like the immediate payment of goods. Also, if a person bought goods in gold, and the seller cashed the value of the goods in silver, this type of transaction would be permitted, for it would be permitted to pay off one of the currencies by another currency, and this deal would be an exchange with an asset and debt (credit). This is because Abu Dawud and Al-Athram reported in their “Sunan” on the authority of Ibn Umar who said: “I used to trade in camels in the Baqee’, so I would sell in Dinars and get paid in Dirhams, or sell in Dirhams and get paid in Dinars. I would take this from that and give this from that, so I went to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) at Hafsa’s house, and I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah (pbuh) will you please listen, I want to ask you something. I sell camels in the Baqee’, I sell in Dinars and get paid in Dirhams or I sell them in Dirhams and get paid in Dinars. I take this from that and give this from that.’ The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) answered: ‘There is nothing wrong in this as long as you trade according to the market value of the day and as long as you do not part company from the other party with something still outstanding between the two of you.”’

Also, if a person bought from another a genuine Dinar for two fake Dinars, this would not be allowed. However, if He bought a genuine Dinar for silver Dirhams, then bought with the Dirhams two fake Dinars, this would be allowed whether He bought them from the same person or from another. This is so because Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Sa’id who said: “Bilal came to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) with some Barni (fine quality) dates, so the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) enquired: ‘Where did this come from?’ Bilal replied: ‘These are dates of inferior quality we had for some time, and I exchanged two sa’as of inferior quality for one sa’a of fine quality as food for the Messenger of Allah (pbuh).”’ Upon this the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Woe! this is real Riba so do not do that. If you wish to buy dates (of superior quality) you could sell the dates (of inferior quality) in a separate bargain and then buy the (superior quality dates).” Also, Abu Sa’id and Abu Hurairah reported in an “agreed upon” Hadith “that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) appointed a man as a tax collector over Khaybar, so He came to Him one day with some fine quality dates called Janeeb. Upon this the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: ‘Are all the dates of Khaybar like this?’ He said: ‘No, by Allah, O Messenger of Allah! We buy one Sa’a of these fine quality dates for two Sa’as of inferior dates and also two Sa’as of it for three Sa’as.”’ Upon this the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Do not do this; rather sell the inferior quality of dates you have for dirhams and then buy the Janeeb dates with the use of dirhams.”

Here, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) did not order the man to sell his dates to a person other than the one He would buy them from, and if the selling of dates to the same person He buys from was Haram then the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) would have explained this to his tax collector. It was therefore permitted because He sold one type of good (dates) for another type (dates) without any preconditions or secret agreement (connivance) so it is allowed, as if He had bought from another person. Likewise, it would be permitted to sell gold for silver, and then buy silver. However, if this were subject to a prior arrangement and secret deals, it would not be allowed, and it would be regarded as a prohibited ploy. This is because any type of trickery is prohibited and unlawful in Islam i.e. any attempt to portray a contract as legitimate with the intent to commit a forbidden act using deception. This includes soliciting an action that Allah  has forbidden, neglecting an action that Allah (swt) has commanded, suppressing a right etc. This is because whatever leads to Haram is itself Haram, and because Ahmed reported on the authority of Ubada Ibn As-Samit that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “A group from my ummah will one day consider “khamr” (intoxicants) lawful after they give it a different name.” Ahmed also reported on the authority of Abu Malik Al-Ashja’i who said that He heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) say: “People from my ummah will drink alcohol (Khamr) while giving it a different name.”

Therefore, exchange is one of the lawful transactions in Islam according to specific rules determined by the Shar’a. It can be conducted in local transactions as well as foreign. Just like the exchange of gold for silver and silver for gold of the same currency of the country, this can also be performed in a foreign currency, whether at home or abroad, and whether the exchanges were monetary or commercial as well as where the exchange of a currency for another is involved. In order to elaborate on the foreign exchange between various currencies, we need to study in depth the nature of money.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:03

23.2 Currency Exchange (Sarf)

Written by

If we examine the trade contracts of a financial nature that exist in world markets, we would find that purchase and sales transactions occur in six types:

1. The exchange of a currency with the same type of currency, such as the exchange of old Iraqi dinar notes for new notes.

2. The exchange of one currency for another currency, such as the exchange of Egyptian pounds for dollars.

3. The purchase of certain goods with a certain currency and the purchase of that currency with another currency, such as the purchase of aircraft with dollars and the exchange of those dollars for Iraqi dinars in one single deal.

4. The sale of certain goods in sterling and then exchanging them for dollars.

5. The sale of certain bonds with a certain currency.

6. The sale of stocks in a certain company, with a certain currency.

These six transactions are trade contracts of a financial nature. As for the purchase and the sale of bonds and shares, this is categorically forbidden under the Shari’ah rules, for the bonds have a determined rate of interest thus usury occurs in them; it is even in itself, a usurious transaction. A stock represents a part ownership in a company that is unlawful in the first instance, thus trading in stock is forbidden, and it is also forbidden to deal in the stock of all the public companies, whether these were companies that deal in lawful trade, such as the industrial and commercial public companies, or companies that deal with unlawful trade such as the banks’ stocks. As for the purchase of goods with a certain currency, the exchange of that currency for another, or the sale of certain goods for certain currency and then exchanging that currency for another currency; these represent two transactions, a transaction of purchase and sale and a transaction of exchange. Therefore, they follow the rules of trading and exchange, and they should be subject to the rule of the separation of the deals.

The sale of one currency for the same or a different currency is a transaction of exchange, and it is permitted. This is because exchange is the swapping of money for money, of gold and silver, either equally in the same type, or differently and equally in the different types. The exchange takes place in the money as it takes place in gold and silver, for the description of gold and silver applies to it in its quality as a currency. Money is not analogous to gold and silver but is one of its forms, for it is based on either of them in their monetary valuation. So if a person were to purchase gold for silver, coin for coin, by saying for instance: “I sold to you this golden Dinar for these silver Dirhams”, by naming them while present at the time of sale, or if He were to purchase gold for silver while not present such as when signing a contract over a described monetary item while not being present, and He says: “I sold to you these Egyptian pounds for ten Hijazi Dirhams”. These examples are permitted, for the monies are determined in the contracts by naming them, thus the ownership of their assets is established. Therefore, trading gold for silver is permitted, whether this was pounds for Dirhams, silver jewellery or for Niqar (i.e. silver dust). The Niqar is the silver equivalent of Tibr (i.e. gold dust). It is also permitted to trade silver for gold, whether jewellery, bullion or gold dust. However, all such trade must be conducted hand to hand and described, either equally or unequally, weight for weight, or known quantity (Jizaf) for known quantity, or weight for known quantity in all the mentioned types, provided the exchange is in two different types, for if they were from the same type, they can only be equal and must not be unequal. Gold could be traded for gold, whether this were Dinars, jewellery, bullion, ore, weight for weight, described asset for described asset, hand to hand, and in principle no difference is permitted. Silver could also be traded for silver, be it Dirhams, jewellery or Niqar, weight for weight, described asset for a described asset, hand to hand, and no difference is allowed in principle. Therefore, the exchange between the same type of currency is permitted, provided that it is equal, hand to hand and a described asset for a described asset. The exchange between two different currencies is also permitted and in this case, the condition of equality and disparity does not apply, but this must be exchanged hand to hand, and a described asset for a described asset. Evidence for the permissibility of exchange is derived from the Hadith reported by At-Tirmidhi on the authority of Ubada ibn As-Samit who said that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “You may trade gold for silver as you wish, hand to hand.” Muslim also reported on the authority of Ubada ibn as-Samit who said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) forbid the trading of gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, barley for barley, dates for dates, salt for salt, unless this was in equal quantities and described asset for a described asset. He who increases or takes an increase would fall into usury (Riba).” Muslim also reported on the authority of Abu Bakra who said: “He has ordered us to buy gold for silver as we wished, and to buy silver for gold as we wished. A man asked Him (pbuh) so He said: “Hand to hand”. He added: “That is how I heard it.” At-Tirmidhi reported on the authority of Malik Ibn Aws Al-Hadathan who said: “I came asking who would exchange some Dirhams, whereupon Talha Ibn Ubaydullah as He was sitting with Umar ibn al-Khattab, said: ‘Show us your gold,’ and then come to us at a later time, when our servant would come we would give you your silver (Dirhams).” Upon this Umar said: “No by Allah, you shall give Him his silver coins or return his gold to him, for the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: ‘Exchange of silver for gold has an element of Riba in it unless it is exchanged hand to hand, wheat for wheat is Riba unless it is hand to hand, barley for barley is also Riba unless it is exchanged hand to hand and dates for dates is also Riba unless it is hand to hand.”’ It is therefore forbidden to trade gold for silver except hand to hand, for if the two trading parties parted company before they exchanged hand to hand, the exchange would be unlawful. Bukhari and Abu Dawud reported on the authority of Umar that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Exchanging gold for silver is riba except hand to hand.”

It is conditional that the two contracting parties cash in at the place of the deal, for once they separated prior to the cashing in, the sale would not lawfully be considered to have taken place. This is because the exchange is the inter-trading of prices, and to cash in at the place of the deal is a prime condition for the exchange to be valid. Bukhari reported on the authority of Malik Ibn Aws who said: The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Trading gold for silver is Riba unless it is hand to hand.” At- Tirmidhi also reported that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Trade gold for silver as you wish, as long as it is hand to hand.” The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) prohibited the trading of gold for silver in credit, and also prohibited the trading of an absent asset for a present one. Therefore, the exchange must take place at the place of the deal, for if the contracting parties separated before cashing in, the exchange would be invalid due to the non-fulfilment of one of its main conditions. If however, part of the deal was exchanged at the place of the deal, the deal would then be valid in the part which was exchanged and, its equivalent on the recompense and it would be invalid for the remainder of the deal and its equivalent part of the deal. This is because it is permitted to divide the deal into parts. For instance, if a person exchanged one Dinar for ten Dirhams with a person who has only five Dirhams, it would be invalid for them to separate before the full ten Dirhams are cashed in. If the five Dirhams were cashed in and they separated, the exchange would be invalid for half the Dinars and valid for the other half which is equivalent to the five Dirhams that have been cashed in. This is because it is permitted to divide the deal of sale. If the person with the five Dirhams borrowed the remainder of the money from the other person or a third party, to complete the deal, the exchange would be valid, as long as the borrowing was not a condition in the deal, for if it was a condition in the deal, the deal would be invalid.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:03

23.1 Riba (Interes-tUsury)

Written by

Usury does not take place in the Bay’a (trade) and the Salam (advance sale) except in six items only, and they are: dates, wheat, barley, salt, gold and silver. As for the Qardh (loan), usury can take place in all its types i.e. in everything; it is forbidden for a person to lend something to another, and to expect more or less for it, or to receive something different in return. The settlement of the loan or anything borrowed should be by the same amount and the same type of goods borrowed. The difference between the trading and the Salamon the one hand, and the Qardh on the other hand, is that the former can be exchanged for a different type or for the same type, whereas the Qardh can only be exchanged for the same type and nothing else. As for the evidence that usury can only take place in the six mentioned items, this is derived from the general consensus of the Sahaba and because Muslim reported on the authority of Ubada ibn as-Samit that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “The gold for gold, the silver for silver, the wheat for wheat, the barley for barley, the dates for dates and the salt for salt; like for like, measure for measure and hand to hand (i.e. immediately) and if they differed sell as you wish if it was hand to hand.” The general consensus of the Sahaba and the Hadith have mentioned that specific things are subject to Riba, thus it cannot occur except within these things. The Shari’ah principle stating that: “All things are originally permitted unless there is evidence about the prohibition” applies to the things in which Riba occurs. Evidence has not been established regarding any other things except these six that are mentioned, therefore Riba only occurs in them. Things which are from the same origin and things which fit the description, as the six mentioned, are included and they follow the same rule, but nothing else. As for the reason (Illah) behind prohibiting these things, there is no Shari’ah text to that effect, therefore no reason must be deduced in this instance, simply because the reason must be a Shari’ah one and not rational; and if the reason cannot be deduced from a text, it cannot be recognised.

As for the analogy of the reason, this also cannot be deduced in this instance, for the condition of making analogy in the reason itself must be the presence of a clear and understood description in order that analogy can be made to it. If there were no clear description to be found, there can be no reason behind the rule of prohibition; and things like a primary noun (not derived from a verb form) and a vague description cannot be regarded as divine reason, and analogy cannot be made from it. For instance, when the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said, as reported by Ibn Majah on the authority of Abu Bakra: “A judge must not sit to pass judgement between two disputing parties when he’s in a State of anger.” Anger was considered as the reason for preventing the passing of judgement; this is because it is clearly understood that anger is the preventive factor, thus it was an “illa” (reason); the reason itself was deduced from the understanding of the text, which is that the prevention was because of it. This understanding entails that the mind is confused; therefore analogy can be made to anger or anything similar to what made anger as the reason (Illah) i.e. it would cause the mind to be in a state of confusion, such as severe hunger for instance. In such cases, it would be right to make analogy with the anger on anything else, for the expression of “anger” is a description that explains the prevention of passing judgement. This is unlike Allah (swt)’s saying:

“Carrion meat has been made unlawful to you” [Al-Ma’idah: 3]

Carrion is not an explanatory description of prohibition, therefore, analogy can not be made to it and the prohibition would in this case be restricted to the carrion meat. Also if usury has been prohibited on wheat, it cannot be used as analogy for anything else, for wheat is a primary noun, and not an expression that carries an understanding. It would be wrong to say that usury has been forbidden in the wheat because it is food, for it is not an expression that carries an understanding, thus it cannot be considered as a reason for the prohibition and it cannot be used as an analogy on other things.

As for the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) Hadith reported by Muslim on the authority of Mu’mmar ibn Abdullah: “The food for food, in equal quantities”, and the Hadith reported by Ahmed on the authority of Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri “that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) divided among them different types of food, some of which was better than the other, so He said: ‘We started bidding amongst ourselves so the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) prohibited us from doing so and ordered us not to trade in it except by measure for measure with no increase whatsoever’”. As well as the Hadith reported by An-Nisai on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “A heap of food must not be traded for another heap of food, nor the heap of food for the fixed measure of food.” All these Ahadith do not indicate that the reason of prohibition is the food. Rather they merely indicate that usury does occur in the foodstuffs, therefore it includes all types of foodstuffs which makes it a general rule; then came the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to specify the types of food in which usury occurs. This is so because there are many other types of foodstuffs where usury, if it occurred, would not be forbidden e.g. aubergines, courgettes, carrots, the sweet, peppers, garlic and grapes are foodstuffs. Usury does not occur in them according to Ijma’a of the Sahaba, despite the fact that the expression of food does apply to them, for they are edible things; and because Muslim reported on the authority of Ayisha (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “No prayer when food is ready”, i.e. the food is ready to eat. Therefore, if usury occurred in every type of food, the above mentioned foods would have been the subject of usury; this indicates that the Hadith of food is general and usury occurs in the types specified by the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) in his saying: “The wheat for wheat, the barley for barley, the date for dates...”. And just as the Qur’an can be specified by the Hadith, so can the Hadith be specified by another Hadith. Therefore, usury in the trading and the Salam occurs only in the six types mentioned in the Hadith.

Furthermore, it would be wrong to claim that usury has been forbidden in gold and silver because they are estimated in weight, making the reason of prohibition the fact that they are weighed items. And it would be wrong to say that usury in wheat, barley, dates and salt is forbidden because such items are estimated in volumetric measure, thus making the reason of prohibition the fact that such types of foodstuffs are estimated in volumetric measure, this is wrong because the weight and measure were mentioned in the Hadith as a description of those types of foodstuffs and not as a reason. An-Nisai reported on the authority of Ubada Ibn as-Samit that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Gold for gold, ore and coins alike, weight for weight, and silver for silver, ore and coins alike, weight for weight, and salt for salt, dates for dates, wheat for wheat, barley for barley, equally and similarly; so He who were to increase or take an increase, He would fall into usury.” The Hadith has explained the situation in which prohibition applies, which is the difference of weight in gold and silver, and the difference of volumetric measure in wheat, barley, salt and dates. This shows the way of exchange i.e. the trading takes place, not a reason for the prohibition. Therefore, usury does not occur in every measured or weighed item, but only in the six types mentioned above in weight for gold and silver, and in measure for the others. As for lending and borrowing (Qardh), this is permitted in the six types mentioned and in other types and in any other thing that can be subject to ownership and whose ownership is lawfully transferable. Usury in this case can only occur if it is stipulated for a higher return or a lower return, or if a condition is laid for lower quality than what has been loaned.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:02

23 Riba and Currency Exchange (Sarf)

Written by

Riba (usury) is the practice of taking property for another property of the same type unequally. The money exchange (Sarf) is the practice of taking a property for another property from gold and silver of the same type equally, or of two different types equally or preferentially. The exchange can only take place in trade, as for usury, it can only happen in a trade (Bay’u) transaction, in a loan (Qardh) or in a Salam (forward buying). Trading (Al-Bay’u) is the practice of exchanging property for property resulting in an exchange of property; this is permitted for Allah (swt) says:

“And Allah has made trading lawful” [Al-Baqarah: 275] And because Bukhari reported on the authority of Hakeem Ibn Hizaam that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “The two trading parties possess the right of withdrawal (from the deal) unless they separate.” As for the Salam, this means handing over a commodity immediately for a defined commodity which is to be handed over at a specific time in the future (Ajal). Salam also known as Salaf (credit). It is one type of trading and it is contracted in the same way as the trading, but with the wording of Al-Salam. This is permitted for Allah (swt) says:

“When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down” [Al-Baqarah: 282] Ibn Abbas said: “I bear witness that the guaranteed Salaf (borrowing), to a fixed future date, has been made lawful and allowed by Allah “Azza Wa Jall”, then He recited the verse:

“When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down” [Al-Baqarah: 282]

Also because the two Sheikhs (i.e. Bukhari & Muslim) reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas who said: “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) arrived in Madinah while people were lending and borrowing dates over two or three years, so He (pbuh) said: ‘If any of you lends anything, let it be in a known measure or a known weight and for a known period of time.”’ As for the Qardh (loan), it is a type of Salaf, which is to give property to someone in order to restore it from Him later and this is lawful. Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Rafi’i “that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) borrowed a young camel from a man, then He received Sadaqah in the form of camels. So He (pbuh) ordered Abu Rafi’i to give the man his young camel; Abu Rafi’i came back to Him and said: ‘I only found a four year old camel.’ Upon this He (pbuh) said: ‘Give it to him, for the best people are those who pay back their debt in the best manner.”’ Ibn Hibban reported on the authority of Ibn Mas’oud that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “No Muslim would give another Muslim a loan twice, except that one would be written for Him as charity.” Also because it has been established that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) used to borrow.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:01

22.2 The Prohibition of Hoarding Gold and Silver

Written by

The phenomenon of maldistribution of wealth among individuals all over the world is one of the realities reflected clearly in all aspects of daily life, to the extent that this does not require an evidence to be proven, and what people suffer due to the flagrant disparity in meeting their needs cannot be over-emphasised. Capitalism had made several attempts at tackling this phenomenon but to no avail.

When the capitalist economists study the theory of income distribution, they completely ignore the mal distribution of individual income, and become contented with the publication of figures and statistics without offering a solution and without any comment.

Apart from the quantitative restriction of ownership, the Socialists have not been able to conjure up a solution to this phenomenon. As for the communists, their solution was the prohibition of ownership. Islam on the other hand has ensured the effective and efficient distribution by determining the means of ownership and the method of disposal, and also by offering the needy financial assistance which secures for them a relative parity in meeting their needs with other members of society. Islam has therefore provided a solution to the phenomenon of maldistribution.

However, despite the relative parity among people as far as the basic needs are concerned, there may be some very wealthy individuals in the society; Islam has not imposed the parity on ownership, but rather obliged that every individual is independent from others in his ordinary needs. Bukhari reported that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “The best sadaqa is that which is given out of one’s wealth after sufficiency.” These large amounts of wealth prepare the ground for their owners to save, and help them acquire large incomes. Therefore the wealth remains intact, for wealth generates wealth, although personal effort plays a part in gaining such wealth and in generating the opportunities to invest the wealth. This does not pose a danger to the economy, on the contrary, it helps increase the economic wealth of the community as well as the individual. The danger lies in the hoarding of monies by some individuals with very large fortunes, leading to the fall in the standard of income and causing wide unemployment thus pushing people into poverty. It is therefore essential to tackle the hoarding of monies. Money is the medium of exchange between two properties, or between a property and a service, or between two services, hence it acts as a measure to this exchange. Therefore, when money becomes scarce and people are unable to obtain it, the exchange vanishes and the economic wheel comes to a grinding halt. The more that money changes hands, the more economic activity proceeds.

This is because every person’s or company’s income must originate from another person or company. Funds levied by the State are regarded as income to the State and an expense to the individuals, and the monies spent by the State on employees, projects and servicemen’s salaries etc. are in fact incomes to those people and an expense to the State; the monies spent by the employee, the serviceman, among others are incomes to those who sell their goods and services to those people, such as butchers, grocers, landlords, traders etc. Therefore, people’s incomes and their overall spending would be constantly circulating. If a person were to hoard a sum of money, He would in fact be withdrawing it from the market, and this would lead to a decrease in spending and to a decrease in the income of persons who would have had dealings with that person had He not hoarded that money. This in turn would lead to a decrease in their production, for the demand for goods decreases, thus leading to unemployment and an overall economic decline. Therefore, the hoarding of money leads definitely to unemployment and to economic decline due to the decline in people’s incomes.

It should however be made clear that this damage to the economy emanates from money hoarding and not from saving; saving does not halt the employment cycle whereas hoarding money does. The difference between hoarding money and saving is that the former means accumulating money without purpose. It means taking money away from the market, whereas, the latter i.e. saving, means accumulating money for a purpose, such as saving to build a house, or for a wedding, or to set up a business etc. This type of money accumulation does not affect the market nor does it affect the employment cycle, for it does not lead to taking money from the market, rather it means saving a sum in order to spend it at a given time, thus the money will circulate again once it is invested, there is therefore no harm in saving, unlike hoarding the money for no real purpose.

Islam has made it lawful to save gold and silver, for it means the accumulation of money for a purpose. Islam has permitted the “Mukatib” (contracting slave) to work and save money in order to pay for his freedom; Islam has also permitted a man to save money in order to accumulate a dowry for a woman He wishes to marry, or to save money in order to go to Hajj etc. The saver would only have to pay the Zakat due on the accumulated money if it reached the Nisab and remained in his possession for a full year. When the verse was revealed prohibiting the hoarding of gold and silver, these two metals represented at the time the units of exchange and measure of the effort spent (in work) and the units of value put on goods, services and properties, whether these were minted or not; the prohibition was therefore directly linked to the fact that they represented the unit of exchange.

The hoarding of gold and silver was prohibited explicitly in the Qur’an. Allah (swt) says:

“And let those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend them in the way of Allah know that a severe and painful punishment is awaiting them.” [At-Tauba: 34]

This warning of severe punishment for those who hoard gold and silver serves as a clear evidence that the Law Giver has decisively ordered us to refrain from doing so; it is therefore forbidden to hoard gold and silver.

Evidence of the fact that the verse has conclusively forbidden the hoarding of gold and silver is reflected in the following:

1. The generality of the verse: The text of the verse in Mantuq (words) and in Mafhum (meaning) serves as evidence about the clear-cut prohibition of hoarding gold and silver. To say that the hoarding of gold and silver is permitted once the Zakat has been paid would mean abandoning the rule of the verse, which is clearly indicated. This cannot be deduced from the verse unless there were another evidence, independent from this verse, leading to such an understanding or abrogating the rule of the verse. And there is no such sound text to lead us to understand other than what the verse clearly indicated, nor is it likely that such an evidence exists to avert its meaning, for the verse is conclusive in meaning. The other possibility would be that the verse has been abrogated, and there is no evidence to suggest that it has been abrogated. As for the verse where Allah (swt) says:

“Take from their wealth a Sadaqah that would purify them” [At-Tauba: 103]

This verse was revealed in the second year of Hijra when the Zakat was made compulsory, whereas the verse of the Kanz (hoarding) was revealed in the ninth year of Hijra; and the earlier revelation does not abrogate the later revelation. As for the Ahadith relating that the wealth whose Zakat has been paid is not regarded as a hoarded wealth, these Ahadith have not been proven sound (Sahih) except the Hadith reported by Al-Daraqutni and Abu Dawud on the authority of Umm Salama; as for the other Ahadith in relation to this matter, they are fabricated and refuted in narration and in meaning i.e. in Sanad (chain) and in Matn (content). As for the Hadith of Umm Salama, it cannot abrogate the verse even if it were Mutawatir, for the prophetic Ahadith cannot abrogate the Holy Qur’an, even if these were Mutawatir, for the Qur’an is definite in text, and we worship Allah (swt) with the Qur’an in words and in meaning, whereas the Mutawatir Hadith is only definite in meaning, and we do not worship Allah (swt) in the words of the Hadith, so the Qur’an cannot be abrogated by the Ahadith even if these were Mutawatir. So how could the individual report, such as that of Umm Salama, abrogate a verse that is definite in text and definite in meaning?

2. At-Tabari extracted in his commentary on the authority of Abu Umama Al-Bahili who said: “A man from the people of the Suffa (poor) died and a dinar was later found in his garment, upon this the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: ‘That is a branding (burn).” Then another man died and two dinars were found in his garment, and upon this the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: ‘That is two brands.’” This was because the two men were living off the Sadaqah while they had gold. One Dinar or two do not reach the Nisab in order to say that Zakat is taken out of them. So when the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said about them “a branding and two brandings”, He (pbuh) was referring to them as hoarding, even though the amount is not liable for Zakat. He (pbuh) was referring to the verse of the hoarding where Allah (swt) says:

“On the day their wealth will be heated in hell fire, and with which their foreheads, flanks and backs will be branded” [At-Tauba: 35]

3. The text of the verse contains a warning against two matters: The first is against the hoarding of money, and the second is against not spending in the way of Allah i.e. those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend them in the way of Allah, a punishment would be awaiting them. This clearly indicates that He who does not hoard money and does not spend in the way of Allah is sinful, and He who hoards and does spend in the way of Allah is also sinful. Al-Qurtubi said: “He who does not hoard and does not spend must be like that (sinful) as well.” What Allah means by “in the way of Allah” is Jihad, for it is linked to spending. The phrase “in the way of Allah” means Jihad if it is linked to spending. It came in the Qur’an with this meaning alone, and nothing else; this phrase does not appear in the Qur’an linked with spending without it meaning Jihad.

4. Bukhari reported on the authority of Zayd Ibn Wahab who said: “I passed by Abu Dharr in Al-Rabtha so I asked him: ‘What brought you here?’ He replied: ‘We were in Ash-Sham where I recited:

“And those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend it in the way of Allah, then tell them that a painful punishment is awaiting them.” [At-Tauba: 34]

Mu’awyya said: “This does not concern us, it only concerns the people of the book.” Abu Dharr said: “It does indeed include us and them.” This was also reported by Ibn Jarir on the authority of Ubaydullah ibn Qasim from Hassam from Zayd Ibn Wahab from Abu Dharr: “The incident was mentioned and it was added: The argument about the matter between Mu’awyya and myself became heated so He wrote to Uthman complaining about me. Then Uthman wrote to me and summoned me to him, so I went to him.When I reached Madinah people overwhelmed me as if they hadn’t see me before, so I complained about the matter to Uthman, He said to me: “Distance yourselves slightly (away from Madinah)”, so I said: “By Allah I shall never abandon what I have been saying.” Therefore, the argument between Abu Dharr and Mu’awyya was regarding whom the verse referred to, and not regarding its meaning. Besides, had there been a Hadith at the time stating that the money for which its Zakat has been taken out would not be considered as hoarded wealth, then surely Mu’awyya would have used it to argue his case and refute Abu Dharr. It is likely that such Ahadith have been fabricated after the Abu Dharr incident, and it has also been confirmed that such Ahadith are not classified as Sahih.

5. Linguistically, Al-Kanz (hoarding) means piling up money, and hoarded money means accumulated money. Kanz also means anything piled up and hidden underground or overground. The words of the Qur’an can only be explained with the linguistic meaning, unless a Shari’ah meaning to such words is mentioned, in which case they would then be explained with the Shari’ah meaning. It has not been established that the word Kanz has had a Shari’ah meaning, therefore it must be explained with its linguistic meaning only, which is to hoard money and pile it up without purpose. This hoarding is abhorred and it is the one which Allah (swt) warned against and for which He promised the perpetrator a severe punishment.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Monday, 02 January 2017 21:00

22.1 Economic Equilibrium in Society

Written by

Islam has made the circulation of currency between all citizens an obligation, and it has forbidden the restriction of such circulation to a certain group of people to the exclusion of others. Allah (swt) says:

“Lest it circulates solely among the wealthy from amongst you.” [Al-Hashr: 7]

If there were an excessive disparity between individuals within society in terms of securing the needs, and if society needed to be rebuilt anew, or if this disparity was caused by neglect of or the indifference in the implementation of the Islamic rules, the State would be under obligation to redress the situation by handing out financial assistance to those in need, until these basic needs were satisfied, and until a balance in distribution was struck. The State should endeavour to provide both movable and immovable commodities, for its aim should not only be to temporarily fulfil one’s needs, but also to provide the means which would assist the individual in his quest to fulfil his own needs over the long term. If the State were short of funds, and if its revenues were insufficient to generate such a balance within society, it would be wrong for it to impose taxes on its citizens for the sake of bringing about such balance, for this matter is not the duty of all the Muslims; it should rather endeavour to generate funds from sources other than taxes, such as the war booties and public properties in order to bring about the balance. Therefore, whenever the State feels that there is a disparity in the economic balance within society, it should address this disparity by handing out financial assistance from the treasury to those in need, provided funds gained from booties and public properties were available.

When the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) realised that there had been a disparity in wealth between the Muhajireen and the Ansar, He (pbuh) divided the booty gained from Bani Nadheer exclusively among the Muhajireen, in order to generate an economic balance. It has been reported ‘that when the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) peacefully conquered Bani Nadheer and then expelled the Jews from it, the Muslims asked the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to divide the booty among them; so Allah (swt) revealed the following verses:

“What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger from them, for this you have madeno expedition” [Al-Hashr: 6]

So Allah (swt) had placed the wealth gained from Bani Nadheer exclusively at the disposal of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), to spend in whichever way He deemed fit. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) divided it among the Muhajireen and did not give any of it to the Ansar except to Abu Dajana Sammak ibn Kharsha and Sahl ibn Haneef who both were at that time poor just like the Muhajireen.’ It has been reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said to the Ansar: “If you wish I could ask you to share your homes and your wealth with the Muhajireen and divide among you this booty, or if you wish you could keep your homes and your wealth and I shall not have to give you anything from this booty.” Upon this the Ansar said: ‘We would rather share our homes and wealth with our brothers and let them have the booty as well.’ Allah (swt) then revealed:

“But they give them preference over themselves even though poverty was their own lot” [Al-Hashr: 9] Therefore, Allah (swt) saying:

“Lest it circulates solely among the wealthy from amongst you.” [Al-Hashr: 7]

means lest it circulates only amongst the rich. The Arabic word “Doola” means the object that circulates or changes hands amongst people; it also refers to the circulated wealth; this means that the booty which by right should be granted to the poor to help them secure a living, should not be exclusively circulated among the rich.

The booty of Bani Nadheer, which is part of the funds of the Bait ul- Mal that belonging to all the Muslims, was exclusively shared among the poor while the rich were excluded, in order to strike a balance in the provision of the basic needs within the society. Handing out financial aid from the treasury is performed by the State, provided these funds have not been collected from the Muslims, but rather from the war booties and the public properties revenues. If the funds have been collected from the Muslims, it should not be spent on generating such a balance. This approach should be followed at all times, for the precept lies in the generality of expression not in the particularity of the cause. Therefore, the Khalifah must ensure that the economic balance is established by handing out financial assistance exclusively to the poor from the treasury’s funds, which belong to all the Muslims, thereby ensuring that economic balance is maintained. However, this is not considered to be part of the fixed expenditure of the treasury, but rather a remedy for a specific situation from specific funds.

Published in Economic system
Be the first to comment!
Read more...
Page 2 of 8

@2023 System of Islam.