The currency of the State is to be restricted to gold and silver, whether minted or not. No other form of currency for the State is permitted. The State can issue something as a substitute for gold or silver provided that the Bayt Al-Mal has the equivalent amount of gold and silver to cover the issued coinage. Thus, the State may issue coinage in its name from brass, bronze or paper notes and so on as long as it is covered completely by gold and silver.

When Islam decided the rules of selling and hiring, it did not specify what would be exchanged for the goods or service and benefit such that upon that basis that thing would become obligatory. Rather it left man to exchange using anything as long as there was mutual consent for that exchange, and so it is permitted to marry a woman upon teaching her sewing, and to buy a car in exchange for working in the factory for a month, and it is permitted to work for an individual for a specific amount of sugar. The Shari’ah left the issue of exchange open for people so that they could base it upon whatever they wanted, which is proven by the generality of the evidences for trade and hiring such as:

“And Allah (swt) has permitted trade” (TMQ 2:275) – for anything and by anything, and the narration:

» أَعْطُوا الأَجِيرَ أَجْرَهُ قَبْلَ أَنْ يََِفَّ عَرَقُه «

“Give the worker his wages before his sweat dries.” (reported by Ibn Maja); in other words, that the worker should receive his salary when he finishes his work, whatever the nature of that wage. Additionally, these things that are used for exchange are not actions such that they would in origin be restricted (to the evidence) and so their permission would require an evidence, but rather they are things. The origin regarding things is that they are permitted as long as there is no evidence to prohibit them, and there is no evidence reported which prohibits using anything as an exchange, and so accordingly it is permitted to carry out Shari’ah transactions with them whether buying and selling, giving as a gift or exchanging with the exception of anything where there is a text prohibiting its exchange. Based upon this, exchanging goods for money, and money for goods is permitted without any restrictions, except for exchanging money with money because it has specific rules and so it is restricted by those rules. In the same manner, exchanging effort for money, and money for effort, is permitted without restriction unless the goods or service have been mentioned in a text as being forbidden. Accordingly, to exchange goods for a specific form of money, and in the same manner to exchange a service or effort for a specific unit of money, is also permitted without any restriction, whatever the unit of that money may be. So irrespective of whether that unit doesn’t have anything backing it, such as fiat currency, or if it was backed by a specific amount of gold , such as secured paper currency, or if the unit was backed by gold and silver to its value such as representative paper currency, all of them are considered to be allowed to trade with. Therefore, it is correct to exchange goods or services for any unit of money and it is permitted for the Muslim to sell for any currency and to buy with any currency and to hire with any currency and to be employed for any currency.

However, if the State wanted the lands that it ruled to adopt a specific unit of money, such that it implements the rules of the Shari’ah related to finance from the angle of it being wealth such as Zakah, exchange, interest and anything else, and the rules related to the individual who owned the wealth such as blood money, the minimum stolen amount that would be considered theft, and so on, then it does not have an open hand to use any specific monetary unit, but rather it is restricted to use only a specific type of money and no other. The Shari’ah specified the monetary unit, from a specific genus which the text mentioned, and this is gold and silver. So if the State wanted to issue a currency, it is restricted to the money being gold and silver and nothing else. The Shari’ah did not leave the State to issue any money it pleased, from any type it wanted, but rather it specified the monetary units which the State could make as a currency for itself if it wanted to issue a currency with specific monetary units; which are gold and silver alone. The evidence for this is that Islam connected to gold and silver with fixed rules, and without any change. So when blood money was specified, it was specified from a specific amount of gold, and when the cutting of the hand of the thief was obligated, the minimum amount that the punishment would be applied for was specified from gold; the Messenger (pbuh) said in his message to the people of Yemen:

 ؤْمِنَةِ مِاْئَةٍ مِنَ الإِبِلِ، وَعَلَى «  ُ » وَأَنَّ فِي النَّفْسِ الم أَهْلِ الْوَرَقِ أَلْفُ دِينَارٍ

“and for the believing soul (if killed) it is one hundred camels, and for the people of silver one thousand Dinars” (mentioned by Ibn Qudamah in Al-Mughni from what was reported from ‘Amru b. Hazim from the letter of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to the people of Yemen). And in the report in Al-Nisa’i regarding the letter of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to the people of Yemen: “and upon the people of gold it is one thousand Dinars” in place of: “people of silver”. And he said:

 » لا تقُْطَعُ يَدُ السَّارِقِ إِلاَّ فِي رُبْعِ دِينَارٍ فَصَاعِدًا «

“Do not cut (the hand) except for a quarter of a Dinar and more” (reported by Muslim from Aisha(ra)).

This defines specific rules with Dinars and Dirhams, and the weight of the Dinar measured by gold, and the Dirham by silver, which made them monetary units analogous to the value of objects and effort. This monetary unit is the currency and its basis. The fact that the Shari’ah textually connected gold and silver to the Shari’ah rules when these rules were related to currency is evidence that the currency can only be from gold and silver alone.

Additionally, when Allah (swt) obligated Zakah, He (swt) obligated it upon gold and silver alone, and specified the Nisab from gold and silver, and so the consideration that the Zakah upon money is by gold and silver specifies that the currency is gold and silver, and if there was a currency other than them then Zakah for money would have been obligatory upon it. Because there is no text for Zakah upon money except upon gold and silver, this indicates that there is no consideration for any other type of money. Also, the rules of currency exchange which were revealed regarding monetary transactions alone addressed gold and silver alone and all of the financial transactions mentioned in Islam are dealt with in gold and silver. And currency exchange is to sell money for money, either to sell one type of money with itself, or to sell it for another type of money, and by another expression currency exchange is to sell a currency for a currency. The Shari’ah specified currency exchange – which is a purely monetary transaction – with gold and silver alone, which is a clear evidence that the currency must be from gold and silver and nothing else. He said:

» وَبِيعُوا الذَّهَبَ بِالْفِضَّةِ وَالْفِضَّةَ بِالذَّهَبِ كَيْفَ شِئْتُمْ «

“Sell gold for silver as you please” (reported by Al-Bukhari from Abu Bakra). And Muslim reported similar to it through Ubada Bin Al-Samit. The Messenger (pbuh) also said:

» الذَّهَبُ بِالْوَرِقِ رِباً إِلاَّ هَاءَ وَهَاء «

“Gold for silver is interest (usury) unless it is exchanged hand to hand” (agreed upon from Umar).

Above that, the Messenger (pbuh) specified gold and silver as money, and made them alone the measures of monetary value which the values of goods and efforts were measured against, and upon which basis transactions were carried out. The measures for this currency were the Awqiya, the Dirham, the Daniq, the Qirat, the Mithqal, and the Dinar. These were all well known and famous at the time of the Prophet , and the people would transact with them. And it is confirmed that he consented to them. All of the trade and marriages took place with gold and silver, as has been confirmed by several authentic narrations, and so the fact that the Messenger (pbuh) made gold and silver the currency, and the fact that the Shari’ah linked some of the Shari’ah rules with them alone, and that Zakah upon money is limited to them, and currency exchange and financial transactions were limited to them, are all clear evidence that the money of Islam is only gold and silver and nothing else.

However, it is necessary to be clear that the fact that the Shari’ah specified the currency that the State can issue as being monetary units from gold and silver, does not mean that the State restricts the exchanges between the people in the lands which are ruled by this currency, rather it means that the Shari’ah rules which the Shari’ah specified the use of these specific monetary units cannot be carried out other than in accordance with this money. As for general exchanges, they remain permitted as brought by the Shari’ah. It is not permissible for the State to restrict them to a particular unit; in other words, it is not permissible to restrict them to its or any other currency, since this restriction would be the forbiddance of something permitted, which is not permitted for the State to do. However, if the State thought that permitting any other currency in the lands it had authority over would lead to damaging its currency, its finance or its economy, in other words, would lead to harm, then it would be permitted to prevent it in accordance with the principle: “The means to something forbidden is also forbidden”. In the same manner, if it thought that a particular currency would lead to that harm, then it could prohibit that currency in accordance with the rule: “If one type of a permitted thing leads to harm then only that one is prohibited, and the thing remains permitted”. This is also applied to exporting the currency of the State, and importing and exporting foreign currency, in the same way that it is applied upon the transactions within the State.

The State issues its own independent currency, and it is not permitted for it to be linked to any foreign currency.

The evidence for the first half of this article is the evidence that gave the Imam the right to manage the affairs with the words of the Prophet :

 » الإِمَامُ رَاعٍ «

“The Imam is a guardian” (reported by Al-Bukhari from ‘Abd Allah (swt) Bin Umar), and organising the permitted issues is from the management of the affairs. To create a specific currency for the State is from the permitted issues, so it is permitted for the State to create a specific currency, and in the same way it is permitted for the State not to do so. The Messenger (pbuh) did not create a specific currency based upon specific consistent characteristics, and in his time the State did not have its own currency, and the situation remained the same throughout his time and the time of the righteous guided Khulafaa’ after him, and during the beginning of the Ummayad period up until the time of ‘Abd alMalik b. Marwan who decided to change everything from the gold and silver that was being used, whether minted or not, to the currency with an Islamic minting and of equal weight without any disparity. Consequently, he minted Dirhams from silver and Dinars from gold, and from that time the Islamic Dinars and Dirhams were minted whereas they were not known before then. So to issue a currency is permitted and is not obligatory upon the State, unless safeguarding the economy of the land from ruin and protecting it from its enemies required the issuing of a currency, at which point its issuance would be obligatory, in accordance with the Shari’ah principle: “That, without which the obligation cannot be accomplished, is itself an obligation”.

As for the second part of the article, the evidence for its forbiddance is that it would make the State follow whichever disbelieving state it links its currency too, as was the scenario when Iraq used to be linked to Sterling, and over and above that it would be at the mercy of that disbelieving state from the financial angle. Both of these issues are forbidden, and the Shari’ah principle states that: “The means to something forbidden is also forbidden”, and so to link the currency of the Islamic State to a foreign State is forbidden.

Development and investment by foreign funds within the State are forbidden. It is also prohibited to grant franchises to foreigners.

The two words: “investment” and: “development” are Western terms. The term investment means that the money itself produces profit, which is by yielding interest. As for the term development, it means to use the money in industry, agriculture or trade, in order to produce profit.

Based upon this understanding, all investment is not allowed, since it is interest and interest is forbidden (Haram). Although the text regarding foreign investment is explained by the rule that it is prohibited to engage in interest with a Harbi, in the same way as a Dhimmi and a Muslim without any difference between them due to the generality of His (swt) words:

“And has forbidden interest (usury).” (TMQ 2:275), and since there is no authentic text which specifies it then it remains general. It cannot be said that the narration:

 » لاَ رِبًا بيََْ الْمُسْلِمِيَ وَأَهْلُ الحَْرْبِ فِي دَارِ الحَْرْبِ «

“there is no interest (usury) between the Muslims and the enemy in Dar Al-Harb” specifies it since the narration is weak as it is Mursal from Makhul. Shafi’i said in Al-Umm that it is not confirmed and it is not an evidence, and Ibn Muflih said the report is unknown - so it is not suitable as an evidence to prove the permission of interest, and nor does it specify/restrict the verse, and so the verse remains general. Therefore, foreign investment is forbidden in the same way as investment from the subjects (Muslims and Dhimmis) because it is interest and thus it is forbidden.

As for the prohibition of development through foreign funds this is because it leads to Haram in agreement with the rule: “The means to something forbidden is also forbidden”, and the strongest possibility is enough to make something prohibited, so what about when foreign development leads to a confirmed Haram? It is confirmed by the senses and by information whose authenticity is trusted that the use of foreign funds for development in the country is the method to extend the influence of the disbelievers over them, and extending their influence in the land is Haram.

As for concessions, it is also a Western term, and has two meanings. Firstly, that a particular foreign State is given special rights with the consideration that they are an obligation for that state upon the Islamic State, such as the concessions that the Islamic State gave in the nineteenth century while it was weak, and such as the concessions that Britain and France used to have in Egypt, such as the foreign subjects being judged according to the laws of their country rather than the laws of Islam, and the example of the State having no authority over the foreigners. These concessions, with this meaning, are forbidden from two angles; firstly: they take away from the sovereignty of the Islamic State, and give the disbelieving States authority over the Islamic lands, which is something decisively forbidden (Haram Qat’an); secondly: they prevent the rule of Islam being applied upon the non-Muslims in the Islamic State and make the rule of disbelief (Kufr) applicable in its stead, which is also decisively forbidden. Due to this, concessions according to the meaning mentioned are prohibited.

As for the second meaning of concessions, it means to give a permit to carry out a permitted action, and those without the permit would be forbidden. This is all forbidden, irrespective of whether it was being applied to the foreigner or not, since any permitted issue is permitted for everyone, and so to restrict it to a particular individual while prohibiting others, is forbidding something which is permitted for the people. It is correct that the State can organise the permitted issues according to the styles which would enable it to benefit from them in the best manner; however it is not correct that this organisation would prohibit anyone from something that was permitted.

Accordingly, concessions according to this meaning are also prohibited for the foreigner and the one who was not a foreigner, and the text mentions foreigner since giving the concession to him is a cause of harm, since it gives him control over the country, as is the case with the oil concessions.

The State provides free health care for all, but it does not prevent the use of private medical care or the sale of medicine.

Healthcare is part of the interests and utilities which the people cannot do without and so it is considered to be from the essentials. The Messenger (pbuh) ordered people to take treatment:

 جَاءَ أَعْرَابِ ي فَ قَالَ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَنَ تَدَاوَى؟ قَالَ: نَ عَمْ، فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمْ ي نُْزِلْ دَاءً « » إِلاَّ أَنْ زَلَ لَهُ شِفَاءً، عَلِمَهُ مَنْ عَلِمَهُ وَجَهِلَهُ مَنْ جَهِلَه

“A Bedouin came and said: O Messenger of Allah (pbuh), should I make use of medical treatment? He replied: Make use of medical treatment, for Allah (swt) has not made a disease without appointing a remedy for it, the one who knows it knows it and the one who is ignorant of it is ignorant of it” (reported by Ahmad from Usama Bin Shareek). And in another version from Al- Tabarani in Al-Mu’jam Al-Kabir, reported from Usamam b. Sharik:

 فَأَتَاهُ نَاسٌ مِنَ الأَعْرَابِ فَسَأَلُوهُ، فَ قَالُوا: يَا رَسُولَ ،كُنَّا مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ « .» اللَّهِ، أَنَ تَدَاوَى؟ قَالَ: نَ عَمْ، إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ لَمْ ي نُْزِلْ دَاءً إِلا أَنْ زَلَ لَهُ شِفَاء

“We were with the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), when some desert Arabs came. They asked: Messenger of Allah (pbuh), should we make use of medical treatment? He replied: Make use of medical treatment, for Allah (swt) has not made a disease without appointing a remedy for it.”. And in Al-Tirmidhi also from Usamah b. Sahrik with the wording:

 قَالَتْ الأَعْرَابُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَلا نَ تَدَاوَى؟ قَالَ: ن عََمْ، يَا عِبَادَ اللَّهِ تَدَاوَوْا، « فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمْ يَضَعْ دَاءً إِلا وَضَعَ لَهُ شِفَاءً، أَوْ قَالَ دَوَاءً إِلا دَاءً وَاحِدًا، قَالُوا: يَا رَسُولَ » اللَّهِ، وَمَا هُوَ؟ قَالَ: ا لْهَرَم

“Some Bedouins asked: 'O Messenger of Allah (pbuh) (s.a.w) shall we treat (our ill)?' He said: 'Yes, O worshipers of Allah (swt)! Use remedies. For indeed Allah (swt) did not make a disease but He made a cure for it' - or - 'a remedy. Except for one disease.' They said: 'O Messenger of Allah (pbuh) (s.a.w)! What is it?' He said: 'Old age.'”, and Al-Tirmidhi said this narration is Hasan Sahih. Al226 Haram (Elderliness) is the end of life, which is usually followed by death.

This indicates the permissibility of seeking treatment. Through treatment, benefit is gained and harm is prevented, so it is considered to be an interest, and on top of that the clinics and hospitals are a utility which the Muslims use for the sake of seeking treatment and cure, and so healthcare is, therefore, part of the benefits and utilities. The State is obliged to provide the benefits and utilities, because it is part of what the State must practically manage due to the words of the Messenger (pbuh) :

» الإِمَامُ رَاعٍ وَهُوَ وَمَسْؤُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ «

“The Imam is a guardian and he is responsible for his subjects” (reported by Al-Bukhari from ‘Abd Allah (swt) Bin Umar). This is from the responsibilities of guardianship and for that reason it is obligatory upon the State to ensure it is provided to the people. From the evidences for that:

Muslim reported from Jabir who said:

» إِلَى أُبَيِّ بْنِ كَعْبٍ طَبِيبًا، فَ قَطَعَ مِنْهُ عِرْقًا ثُمَّ كَوَاهُ عَلَيْهِ بَ عَثَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ «

“The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) sent a physician to Ubayy b. Ka'b. He cut the vein and then cauterised it”.

Al-Hakim narrated in Al-Mustadrak from Zayd b. Aslam from his father who said: “I fell severely ill at the time of Omar Bin Al-Khattab, and so Omar called a physician for me, and so he warmed me up to the point I would suck on date pits due to the intense heat.”

Based upon this, it is obligatory upon the State to provide free medication and medical facilities, since it is part of the expenditures obligated upon the Bayt Al-Mal from the angle of being an interest and utility without recompense, and accordingly the State must provide all the health services without cost. This is the evidence that healthcare is part of what the State is obliged to provide to the people for free.

As for the permissibility of hiring a doctor, and paying him a fee, this is because seeking treatment is permitted (Mubah); as mentioned previously the Prophet said:

» يَا عِبَادَ اللَّهِ تَدَاوَوْا «

“O Slaves of Allah (swt) seek treatment”, and since treatment is a service that the one paying for can achieve, therefore, the definition of hiring is applicable to it, and there has been no prohibition narrated regarding it. Above that, it is reported from Anas:

 حَجَمَهُ أَبُو طَيْبَةَ، وَأَعْطَاهُ صَاعَيِْ مِنْ طَعَامٍ وَكَلَّمَ مَوَالِيَهُ احْتَجَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ « » فَخَفَّفُوا عَنْه

“Allah (swt)'s Prophet was cupped by `Abd Taiba, to whom he gave two Sa of food and interceded for him with his masters who consequently reduced what they used to charge him daily.” (reported by Al-Bukhari from Anas), and what is intended by master was his owners since he was owned by a group, as indicated by the report in Muslim. It is reported by Ibn ‘Abbas:

 » وَأَعْطَى الحَْجَّامَ أُجْرَةً، وَلَوْ كَانَ سُحْتاً لََْ يعُْطِهِ احْتَجَمَ النَّ بِ «

“The Prophet was cupped and he paid the wages to the one who had cupped him If it had been haraam, he would not have paid it.” (reported by Ahmad with this wording, and by Muslim and Al-Bukhari with a different wording). In those days Hijamah was part of the treatments that people would care for their health with, which indicates that to pay a fee for it is permitted. And similar to the fee for a doctor, is the selling of medicines since it is something permitted encompassed by the words of Allah (swt):

“And Allah (swt) has permitted trade” (TMQ 2:275), and there is no text narrated to forbid it.