MORALITY OF ISLAMIC ECONOMY

It may be argued that the economy that exists in Islam is not an economic theory. It is only a moral system which every religon is expected to offer its believers and ask them to follow it.

Hence, just as Islam exhorts the people to truthfulness, honesty, patience and politeness and restrains them from forgery and creating discord, similarly it exhorts them to help the poor and restrains them from doing injustice, encroaching upon the rights of others and collecting money through unlawful means. As it has enjoined prayers, fasting and pilgrimage, it has prescribed zakat also as a compulsory meritorious act, to implement its policy of helping the poor.

All these laws represent the moral injunctions of Islam and aim at the moral uplift of the Muslims. They do not mean the formation of an economic theory with a view to organize the society.

The difference between these teachings and an economic theory is similar to that which exists between a preacher and a refromer. A preacher calls upon the people to cooperate with others and have mercy on them and warns them against injustice and tyranny. But a social reformer chalks out a plan for the organization of the mutual relations of the people with a view to fix the rights and obligations of everybody.

We admit that all Islamic teachings have a moral aspect and it is true that Islam gives many moral directions in the various fields of life. It is also true that Islam has adopted the most beautiful method to put the Muslims on the basis of moral values.

But that does not mean that Islam is concerned only with moral order of the life of the individual and has not paid any attention to the social organization or has offered no programme for economic life. Islam is not a religon which may invite the people to do justice and abstain from injustice without making clear its concept of these terms.

In fact Islam has not neglected to explain the concepts of justice, injustice and human rights. Like preachers it has not left their interpretation to others. Islam has defined the limits of justice and has laid down general laws for social life in the various fields of production, distribution of wealth and mutual dealings. It has described any violation or neglect of these laws and commandments as injustice and transgression.

Here lies the difference between the duty of a preacher and the responsibility of a school of economics. A preacher urges his audience to do justice and warns them against injustice, but does not lay down a standard for them. He leaves the meaning of these terms to the intelligence of his listners. On the other hand, a school of economics defines the standard of justice and injustice and seeks to lay down an economic system covering all the aspects of economic life.

Islam could be described as a preacher only if it had merely invited the people to do justice in general terms having left it to their own taste and requirements to give a practical shape to this principle and to determine its requirements. But Islam has not done so. It has made its concepts of justice and injustice clear and has kept its just methods of production, distribution and mutual dealings distinct from other unjust methods of these activities.

Islam says that to acquire the ownership of land without utilizing it is unjust. The private ownership of land is just only on the basis of making exertion for its utilization. Similarly in other matters Islam separates the concept of injustice from that of justice.

It is true that Islam exhorts the rich to help their poor neighbours and brethren, but that is not all that it does. It has enjoined upon the mulsim government to ensure a respectable life for the poor and the needy. This direction is an integral part of the Islamic system governing the relations between the rulers and the ruled.

While explaining a ruler's responsibility in regard to zakat, Imam Musa ibn Jaffer (P) is reported to have said:

"He should collect money as ordered by Allah and should disburse it to the eight categories of the poor and the needy. Money should be disbursed in a way that it should be enough for the reciepents for a year without facing any hardship. If any surplus is left it should be enough for the recipients for a year without facing any hardship. If any surplus is left it should go back to the treasury. In case of a shortfall, the ruler has to augment the zakat fund from other resources available to him."

It is clear from this report that the principle of providing means of living to all citizens is not a matter of preaching. It is a legal duty of the muslims rulers, and a part of the Islamic program for economic life.

There is a difference in the content of the tradition which says:

"He who sleeps satiated while his neighbour is hungry, is not a true believer in Allah and the Hereafter"

"It is binding on the rulers to help the poor from their own resources in order to satisfy their needs".

The first tradition is recommendatory and reflects the moral aspect of Islam, while the second is binding and shows the general spirit of the Islamic socila system. There is no doubt that zakat is one of the most important devotional acts and falls in the same category as prayers and fasting. But its being a devotional act does not mean that it has no economic content or that it does not reflect the existence of a social system of economic life in Islam.

Zakat is a part of the social scheme in the Muslim society. It is not an individual act of worship nor is it a part of moral culture prescribed for the rich. It falls in the category of social schemes.