read

5. The Foundation Of Islamic Economics And The Roots Of Its Injunctions

We have just seen that Islam expounds upon the general elements, goals, and results of public and private relations of individuals and the society. Also, Islam promulgates principles and injunctions based on these ends and elements. The injunctions and the derivatives from these vary depending on the spiritual, material, individual, and social relations and goals. In this chapter we will discuss the principles of ownership and economic relation derived from Islam.

The following basic principles are deduced from the verses of the Qur'an and sound traditions. Ownership is relative and limited. Ownership means the authority and power of possession. As human power and authority are limited, no person should consider himself the absolute owner and having a complete possession. Absolute authority and complete possession belong only to God who has created man and all other creatures and has them constantly in his possession. Man's ownership then is limited to whatever God has wisely willed and to the capacity of his intellect, authority, and freedom granted to him.

"Say: O Allah! Owner of Sovereignty! Thou givest sovereignty to whom Thou wilt, and Thou withdrawest Sovereignty from whom Thou wilt” (3:26).

“And Who hath no partner in the Sovereignty" (17:111).

These verses make the believer - the one who confesses the oneness of God - constantly acknowledge that the world, of which he is a part, is always the possession of a victorious power who is just. There are other verses in the munificent Qur’an, which explicitly acknowledge that the earth and its resources belong to God. It is He who has made them subservient to man. Man, in this position, is His vicegerent (khalifah) on earth:

"And the earth hath He appointed for (His) creatures" (55:10).

"Who hath appointed the earth a couch for you" (2: 22).

“Has thou not seen how Allah has made all that is on the earth subservient unto you?” (22:65).

"'Then We appointed you viceroys on earth ...” (10:14).

"He it is Who hath made you regents on the earth ...” (35:39).

These and other similar verses explain the vicegerency (khilafah) of man on earth in order that the vicegerents may follow the command and the will of the Owner.

"And spend of that whereof He hath made you trustees" (57: 7).

“And bestow upon them of the wealth of Allah which He hath bestowed upon you.. (24:33).

“And We help you with wealth and sons” (71:12).

“Think they that in the wealth and sons wherewith We provide them” (23:55).

“And ye have left behind you all that We bestowed upon you" (6:94).

These verses explicitly point out that the absolute owner is God alone. It is He who has within the capacities of His vicegerent granted (gifted) the right of ownership, helped (the capacity to survive) and extended the right of transfer (transferring the right of possession). Furthermore, the Qur’an explicitly designates ownership of the earth as that of God.

“ ..... and Allah's earth is spacious ..." (39:10).

"... so let her feed on Allah's earth ... (7:73) and (11:64).

Based on this principle - relative and limited ownership, which is derived from the Qur’anic text - man is neither the absolute owner nor does he completely possess the earth and its resources. He does not have the right to possess as much as he desires or to obtain material wealth in any way he may choose. Indeed, the earth's wealth belongs to God and man is His vicegerent and servant.

Indeed, because vicegerency belongs to all people, each individual is a guardian of the public trust. And his ownership should be limited for the public welfare. Ownership, in this analogy, is limited, borrowed, conditional, and entrusted1. From this basic principle of limited and relative private ownership, the following basic injunctions about the desire for ownership are deduced:

1. Land and natural resources are not the particular property of anyone (neither an individual nor the society). Only the guardian of the Muslims - Imam and wali al-amr (the people of authority) - committed to public wellbeing has supervision over the earth and its resources, reflecting the principle of permissibility and non-permissibility of private ownership except in special conditions and situations.

2. The people have special and limited rights to the possession of land and natural resources as long as they put these to fruitful and productive use. They also have special and limited ownership over production and goods.

3. Islamic jurisprudence provides specific definitions and conditions for formalizing ownership and activities that lead to ownership.

4. Individuals and specific groups must not have possession or title over natural resources (anfal and fay). Furthermore, no one should be stopped from utilizing those resources by imposition of special conditions.

5. Money and currencies, which are means of exchange and a standard of value, must not be accumulated by a selected few individuals. When such a thing happens these individuals become powerful, and the necessary resources and means of life are concentrated in their hands; the normal and just conditions of work and distribution become disrupted.

6. In accordance with Islamic principles and injunctions, when a person's liquid assets and wealth reach a certain level or increases within a certain period, they are subject to direct and fixed taxes (zakat and khumus).

7. Based on the principle of public well-being, the Islamic guardian (the Imam, men of authority or deputies) has the right to seize the assets and levy tax (kharaj) on the lands and natural resources.

8. Profits and wealth earned by illegal means (usury, gambling, and lottery) or wealth obtained from the transaction of harmful goods do not result in ownership.

9. Children and insane persons have no right possess their own wealth.

10. Islam forbids individuals and the society from wasteful and harmful expenditures; this serves to stop the amassing of unlimited and illegal wealth.

These are the general injunctions and basic principles of Islam on ownership and economic relations. They are explained in detail and are well documented. The sources and the standard of the injunctions, in addition to the aforementioned sources are found in the Qur'an, the sunnat, reason ('aql) and custom (‘arf). Some examples are:

"And consume not wastefully your property among yourselves (bainakum)2 in vanity'' (2:188).

''... that it become not a commodity between the rich among you …" (59:7).

''Give not unto the foolish (what is in) your (keeping of their) wealth which Allah had given you to maintain ..." (4:5).

“ ... fulfill your undertakings...” (5: 1);.

"There is neither damage nor compulsion (la zarar) in Islam (the Prophet’s tradition)3:

“Necessity removes the objective observance of caution” (either a tradition or a rational or customary principle).

“Ignoring the small and particular harm in order to avoid a major and general one” (rational or customary principle); and

“The believers honor their contracts unless they follow what is b=forbidden (haram) and forbid what is allowed (halal)” (tradition)

The collection of the principal injunctions, legal and intellectual principles, and their derivatives will become the actual economic and financial contracts based on faith and executive powers

This summarizes the foundations of the injunctions and the principal injunctions in Islam about ownership and economic relations. Based on these foundations, injunctions, and general and particular rules that conform to the intrinsic nature of man and of reality, men are free and independent. They are not limited to - and their rights are not suspended with respect to – expression of talents and of physical and spiritual gifts which arc stimulated by material needs and desires. However, this freedom - in particular for gaining and using wealth - is limited by special injunctions and principles of public wellbeing, so that neither the centralization of wealth nor its subjugation occurs. Nor would a ruling and privileged class emerge.

The ideas of absolute ownership with freedom (capitalism) and its rival, the absolute negation of private ownership (collectivism and socialism), are the special products of the century of abrupt industrial development and the places in which it took place. Whenever one of these two types of uncompromising and different economic systems dominates, the other one is rejected. One has to submit to all the provisions and the implications of the accepted system.

Freedom-based ownership causes subjugation, tyranny, concentration of wealth, emergence of privileged capitalists and deprivation of workers. On the other end, negation of private ownership limits individual freedom and in turn requires dictatorship by a special class. Therefore, one has to consent to the provisions of the regime, whether it allows private ownership and prescribe its provisions or accept public or governmental ownership. Because each is a product of the special and opposite times and places, none of these two opposing ideas have materialized anywhere in a complete form4.

In fact, the theories presented a century ago to solve industrial problems - caused by the means of production, in light of the progress and the development of other social principles, rapid developments in technology, a decrease in the number of workers, and an increase in production - have not and could not predict the final solution.

Economic Problems Revolve Around Three Issues Irrespective Of The Time And Place

The first issue is the desire for and the relations of ownership over land and natural resources that satisfy the basic needs of life. Industrial goods and technology-driven production belong to the later phase of man's quest for making natural resources evermore available5.

The second is securing human freedom and independence, a natural human tendency. This freedom pertains to both social and economic conditions.

The third issue relates to the universal and perpetual problem of the circulation of money and prohibiting the emergence of economic power based on this. The complexity and disorder in capitalist environments arc caused by these three basic problems. If the foundation or freedom of transactions, the utilization of natural resources, and money - as means of exchange - are based on their original principles, rights, and justice, the problems of means of production, their production and distribution can be solved by solutions formulated in accordance with those principles.

Islam emphasizes a just and natural solution to these three issues, so that members of the society can benefit from intellectual talents and natural resources and continue to have access to land resources and the necessities of life as long as they are not violating the rights of others. They can own and enjoy the results of their labour within useful, legal, intellectual, creative and physical efforts as long as the money does not become the means of attracting wealth, of subjugation and of power.

There are special texts (nass) that serve as the basis for derivative injunctions and for applying jurisprudence to this topic, in addition to the aforementioned legal injunctions (usul-ahkam) and the principle governing injunctions (ahkam al-usuli).

Islamic Jurisprudence Divides Lands Into Two Categories

The first category refers to cultivated land and the other refers to barren and unusable land (mavat). The mavat lands are those that have not been cultivated (most land is of this type). No ownership, possession, buying, selling or transference is allowed with regards to these lands. These lands, particularly those close to habitable areas, have potential and real value for cultivation. Therefore, they should have an owner as they should be possessed and supervised by an owner who utilizes them justly and for the public wellbeing.

According to Islamic jurisprudence neither the people nor the governments own these lands. They belong to God and then his representative (the Prophet and the Imam).

The divine representative perceives these lands in the same light as God sees them. With the Imam's permission (if an Imam is present; otherwise the permission of the general deputies is sufficient) and provided the land is cultivated (revitalized), limited right of ownership for the cultivator remains6. The same injunction applies to other uncultivated lands such as peaks of mountains, valleys, pastures, forests, and natural canebrakes.

Cultivable lands left to lie fallow and lands preserved by the rulers for themselves or given to others as iqta and areas (cultivated or uncultivated) taken by Muslims through peaceful means or as a result of terminating a war are treated like mavat lands or lands that are naturally green and fertile. The basis of the injunction, in addition to the sunnat and hadith, is the verse of anfal7 (booty);

“They ask thee (O Muhammad) of the spoils of war. Say: The spoils of war belong to Allah and the messenger, so keep your duty to Allah and adjust the matter of your differences, and obey Allah and His messenger if ye are (true) believers” (8:1).

Other than that verse, the basis of this injunction is the sound (mu'tabar) hadith reported from the exalted messenger of Allah and the infallible imams (peace be upon them). The following are some examples:

“Lo the Muslim, whoever cultivates an uncultivable land, which is not claimed by another Muslim, has right over it: the land is his. Whoever builds a wall around a piece of land it is his. The common lands (with no owner in the past) belong to God and his messenger and due to Me they can be yours. The uncultivated lands are God's, mine, and then yours” (Prophetic tradition).

Muhammad ibn Hassan ('Ali Tusi8] documents his work by a report from Hussain ibn Sa'id who reports from Safran who reports from 'Ala and who reports from Muhammad ibn Muslim who had asked the honorable Imam Ja'far Sadiq, peace be upon him, about transactions with the Jews and Christians. He answered: "There is no legal objection.” He added: "Every nation that cultivates a piece of land or initiates activity (or performs some tasks on it) has the right over it, it becomes theirs9

The Islamic General View Regarding Cultivated Lands

Based on the Islamic general view regarding idle lands and adjacent areas such as forests, pastures, groves, coastal regions, and seas (if they are possessed to be cultivated), its views on cultivated lands will become clear. Because cultivation alone results in the right of ownership, such a right is limited to the length and duration of cultivation. Therefore, there is no right of ownership for anyone beyond the boundaries of the cultivated areas.

If farmer docs not cultivate the land or loses interest in cultivation, his ownership ceases. There are sound traditions from the infallible imams, peace be upon them, to support this principle. For example:

Muhammad ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni10 reports from some companion of the imams who reports from Mu'awiya ibn Wahab, who had heard Imam Hussain (the third Shi’a imam] say: "Every man who changes the condition of a ruined and abandoned land - cultivates and dredges its irrigation channels - will own it. If another person who previously owned that land abandons it, he loses his right of ownership. If he reclaims the land he should know that the land belongs to God and he who cultivates."

It has been reported in Tahzib11 that Sahl ibn Ziyad reports form Hayyan ibn al-Salat (or in another case from Riyan), who reports from Yunis, who reports from 'Abd Salih (Imam Musa)12: "Indeed land belongs to the Glorious and Dignified God Who has made it the sustenance of His creatures. Therefore, anyone who leaves the land unutilized for three consecutive years loses his right of ownership and it will be transferred to someone else's possession. If anyone has a right over a piece of land but has not claimed it for ten years, he will no longer have the right over it.”13

In dosing, there is yet another hadith [tradition] with regard to this subject which leaves the judicial decision and inferred injunctions based on this tradition to scholars and independent jurists.

Hisham ibn Salim reports from Abi Khalid Kabuli, who reports Imam Baqir (the fifth Shi'a Imam), peace be upon him, as saying: "I have found in a written document by Imam 'Ali, peace be upon him, that land belongs to God Who will grant it to anyone He desires. In the end He will choose those who are the most pious. God has bestowed the land upon my household and me, because we arc pious people. Hence the land totally belongs to us. Therefore, every Muslim who revitalizes the land should continue to do so and pay taxes to an Imam who is a member of my household. Whatever he consumes and the benefits he draws will be his. Thus, if the cultivator abandons the land and lets it go to waste and another Muslim cultivates and fixes it after him, the latter will have a right over the former. The new owner should also pay taxes to an Imam who is a member of my household. Whatever he consumes will be his. This injunction is valid and permanent until the Mahdi, who is a member of my household, appears with the power of the sword. It is he who will take over the entire land, end improper possession and drive out the usurpers (just as the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, who took over the lands and stopped improper possession) but he will not take over the land which is in the possession of our followers and which the Imam will allow them to hold in contract."

These traditions explicitly show that lands in the natural state belong to God, His messenger and his vicegerents. Private ownership only exists within limits and is dependent on the duration of cultivation. Once cultivation ceases, private ownership ends.

The precious and usable parts of cultivated lands in the past (in the feudal era) were in the hands of the rulers, their subordinates, and their families in the form of iqta’. As discussed earlier, these lands are part of anfal and should be treated accordingly. According to Islamic jurisprudence, lands conquered through non-peaceful means by Muslims are not subject to private ownership14. These types of lands are known as fay' and not anfal. Fay' which literally means "return", is used in the Qur'anic exegesis to mean wealth and properties removed totally from private ownership and turned into public wealth. No form of ownership, possession, transfer or exchange of lands is allowed, except for barren lands that are cultivated later. A portion of their profits or value, taken as tax, should be spent on public welfare.

The Qur'anic basis for this injunction concerning fay’ lands is the following verse:

''That which Allah giveth as spoil unto His messenger from the people of the township, it is for Allah and His messenger and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, that it become not a commodity between the rich among you. And whatsoever the messenger giveth you, take it. And whatsoever he forbideth, abstain (from it). And keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is stern in reprisal" (59:7)15.

Based on these injunctions and principles derived from the Qur'an and the sunnah, the condition of land and the manner of its possession are clarified in present Muslim countries and in those yet to adhere to Islam. These lands were neither non-reclaimed lands, which later were cultivated by Muslim cultivators and farmers, or lands which once belonged to the feudal kings in the form of iqta'.

The former should remain the property of the cultivator within the boundaries and the duration of cultivation, and the latter should be distributed among Muslims with the condition that they continue with cultivation (these are two examples of anfal type lands). There are also those lands whose owners have either migrated or which have been acquired by peaceful means by the Imam or the Islamic guardian. These are fay' and should be utilized for the public welfare under the supervision and control of the Imam. Only lands acquired through conquests are subject to tax (kharaj) to be spent for public welfare and no one is allowed to possess them16.

In summary, with respect to possession Islam distinguishes between three types of lands:

1. Anfal - these are lands that originally belong to all Muslims. With general or special permission of the Imam (the infallible or a just guardian) and for the purpose of cultivation, they are granted to the cultivator.

2. Fay’ - these arc lands which belong to the Imam and are under his possession. They are utilized either for his private affairs or for public welfare.

3. Lands over which there is no private ownership - e.g., conquered lands - should be distributed among Muslims and the local inhabitants under the supervision of the guardian.

Natural resources and mines are dealt with according to the rules that apply to the land where they are found. Everyone is entitled to exploit them in uncultivated areas according to need. In case of cultivable lands, the cultivator has the right over the natural resources and the minerals. Mines that are not easily accessible belong to the miner who had expended his efforts and labour to exploit them (in Islamic countries however, the miner must be a Muslim). Some jurists consider mines in any form as anfal, hence subject to the rules concerning anfal lands.

In conclusion, from the Islamic viewpoint the situation of ownership of lands and natural resources and the manner in which they arc possessed are varied and evolving. The variation in the types of ownership depends upon the condition and history of the land and how each area was conquered or came into the possession of Muslims and fell under the control and supervision of Islamic leadership. It has to be prophethood, imamate, guardianship or just caliphate. Government in its conventional meaning does not exist in Islam: rather according to the division of land, conditions of those who work on it and public interest, a tax (kharaj) is collected from the land.

During the time of the exalted prophet of Islam, Muhammad, concomitant with social and spiritual changes, economic conditions in general, and the conditions of lands and the desire for ownership, in particular, also underwent changes. According to the books of tradition and history, e.g. those by Abi Khalid Kabul, such changes took place in Yathrib (present day Medina) and its surrounding areas and around the Arabian Peninsula during the time of the Prophet.

During the rule of the caliphs and until the rule of 'Uthman, the injunctions and traditions of the exalted Prophet were applied to areas where the inhabitants had converted to Islam, or where Muslims had gained control. In cultivable and green lands near the seat of the Caliphate and on more fertile lands (e.g., the territory comprising present day Iraq which was then known as "the black territory'' because or its greenery and vegetation) these injunctions were applied more accurately to the division, demarcation, and taxation of lands.

The authorities in charge of distribution, demarcation, and tax collection were either trustees of the public treasury or were selected from among special agents and trustees who were experts in their field. Once they had surveyed the lands, they distributed them according to the condition of the land and the ability of the cultivators.

The trustees either determined a small share of the revenue for the government or levied a tax. Most of this revenue was spent locally for administration and development of the area. In distributing and defining the limit on each tract of land, the ability to cultivate was the important determining factor, not whether the cultivator was a Muslim or otherwise17.

Deviation from this and other revolutionary principles of Islam began when the defeated and humiliated aristocrats of Quraysh and the Umayyads gained influence and flourished during ‘Uthman's rule. They divided some lands in Egypt, Iraq, Syria, certain areas in the Arabian Peninsula, and other developed Islamic provinces among themselves in the form of iqta' rather the trusteeship. Under the banner of the guardianship of Islam, they dominated the lives and wealth of the inhabitants, depriving them of freedom. They levied heavy taxes on these lands; for personal consumption and for amassing of wealth, and imposed a feudal order benefitting themselves and their relatives.

The Situation Of Property Ownership And Iqta' [Feudalism] In Islamic Countries

The caliphate of Imam ‘Ali, peace he upon him, began with war and bloodshed as a result of the peoples uprising against 'Uthman. The government of 'Ali was, in fact, a revolution against the feudal elites and oppressive landlords18.

After receiving allegiance and establishing himself as the Caliph, Imam 'Ali's first policy was to confiscate the lands which were in the feudal possession of 'Uthman's agents and followers. He dismissed the previous administrators and distributed the lands among those who worked on them. He levied a tax on anfal and fay’ lands. History has clearly recorded his sermons and letters to his governors and agents.

Despite all the deviations and breaches of the law that took place, and the caliphs and unrightful and un-Islamic government that came to dominate the people in the name of Islam, halting and abandoning the social, political, and economic principles and injunctions of Islam following the divine and rightful caliphate of Imam 'Ali, the situation pertaining to the possession and ownership of land in most Islamic countries was not nearly as oppressive and unbridled as that in other countries, particularly those in the Occident.

Muslim landowners never had absolute control over the peasants. Neither was the government formed by them. After the first Caliphate (632 to 661), Islamic governments generally established themselves through inheritance or revolution under religious slogans and pretexts. Deceiving people by these pretexts, they maintained themselves in power by plundering the public wealth, and then making generous gifts and donations. In Islamic countries, peasants and farmers were not deprived of their freedom - with a few exceptions - because Islamic laws and moral constraints in some form were observed. The governments were obliged to observe these laws.

Unlike European feudalism, in Islamic countries infringement upon the rights of the peasants was not only illegal but constituted a breach of law. Based on the standards of Islamic law, the peasants were not obligated to work; they could choose to be wage earners or to migrate to another area. Adjudication and governance were not in the hands of the landlords. However, violations and infringement on the part of the landlords always occurred either because of the special conditions of the area (being distant from the Islamic legal domain) or with the backing of a few governments and officials. Obviously, these exceptional situations should not be seen as representative of Islamic principles and order.

The impact of Islamic teaching and principles in history becomes clear only when Islamic injunctions on land ownership and the rights of peasants are compared with those of non-Islamic states in past centuries. The extent of the influence of economic situations on social changes becomes clear as well. In the entire history of the Islamic countries, of the revolutions that have taken place and the governments that have risen and fallen, none have been brought about by peasant uprisings. In the history of Islam, no case can be found where the peasants were under duress and encroachment to the point where they would be ready to revolt, unlike in the Western countries. Nor were peasants killed in groups by governments and landlords. The landlords never bought and sold peasants, and the Islamic governments could never support the oppressive landlords legally and officially.

After the martyrdom of Imam 'Ali, Mu'awiya changed the form of the Islamic caliphate to tyrannical and authoritarian monarchy. Regulations and practices pertaining to public properties and wealth and Islamic principles deviated from the true Islamic system. In some regions, part of the lands became toyul (feudally owned) of the kings and their lackeys.

In order to silence and eliminate the heirs of the message of Islam (the imams) and their followers, to expand the means of propaganda, conquest, and plunder, and to establish the glory of their court, the new rulers were in need of unlimited wealth Therefore, they plundered the newly converted Muslims as much as they could, took over the lands and pastures, and levied unbearable taxes on lands and even individuals.

From the time when Wilayah and Islamic government and, consequently, economic and social principles and injunctions of Islam were eliminated from active life, diverted from their revolutionary course and buried in the pages, toyuldari (feudal possession)19 over public lands (anfal and fay’) became prevalent among the rulers and their lackeys. Since toyuldari, like the system of private ownership, was totally alien to Islam and had no permanent and lasting root, with the downfall of each dynasty, the land would automatically be divided or the system of toyuldari would also fall apart and the lands would be redistributed.

If toyuldari has endured in Islamic history, it is only in recent centuries before collectivism and its stronghold emerged. Toyuldari coincided with the period when colonialism took root in Islamic countries. Muslims became west-stricken (gharbzadeh)20 Islamic ideological and legal principles weakened or died among the Muslim people.

Islamic states and governments found support outside of their own borders, violated Muslim rights and laws as much as they could, and undermined the Muslim independence, identity, and economy.

The Tradition Of Religious Endowments

To endow lands and their attachments is a tradition that is highly encouraged by Islamic governments, both in theory and practice. Endowment (waqf) means to freeze the right of ownership over a property and to use its revenues for charity and general Islamic welfare (habs al-'eyn) and (tasbil al-manfe'at). Consequently, property is withdrawn from individual or government ownership and its revenues are spent for public use or for the needy in accordance with the donor's wish and public welfare. Endowment properties are protected from the control by the rulers or the feudal lords.

The tradition of endowment in Islam began with Imam 'Ali21. Afterwards, the nobility, imams, and other Muslims have followed this tradition. As a result, a sizable portion of the cultivated land in Islamic territories has become endowed and has escaped private ownership.

  • 1. This is in contrast to the view of absolute, complete and unconditional ownership with the corresponding freedom. Under such a view ownership spreads deep roots in the minds of owners and becomes an idol to the extent that wealth and economic relations are considered the foundations and the bases of all spiritual and social affairs.
  • 2. The word ‘bainakum’ (among yourselves) and the repetition of the pronoun ‘kum’ (yourselves) seem to point out that wealth belongs to all, so that everyone can, in his own right and need, have access to it.
  • 3. The difference between the principles of la zarar and la zirar will be discussed later
  • 4. In capitalist countries certain resources and industries have been gradually nationalised and, in the communists’ block, private ownership over land and small factories is recognized.
  • 5. Land and natural resources and their products are the source of human life and sustenance i.e. water, air, food and shelter. A natural and just solution to the ownership, utilization and distribution of land as endowments everywhere are permanent keys for solving other economic problems. The sudden emergence of advanced and powerful capitalism is largely the result and continuation of unrestricted ownership of land and wealth by pirates as a result of plunder of people and farmers of faraway lands. After the emergence of industries, the easiest way to exploit, maintain, and supervise this wealth was through these very same industries.

    Thus, the capital was invested in these areas, attracting peasants to the cities. This in itself created social and economic crises and gained the attention of the thinkers. It is easy to understand the problems of industrial capitalism and to find solutions such as nationalization of industries or raising wages. It is easier to implement such policies in urban areas and the seat of authority than to find solutions related to issue of the distribution of land and natural resources.

  • 6. The limits of land reclamation, which is the source of ownership, is determined by ‘arf (customs). But the right of possession begins with tahjir. As the meaning of the word tahjir implies, the purpose is to build a ‘fence of rocks’ or a wall or a similar structure. Muslim jurists, however, consider tahjir as clearing rocks off the land, leveling the ground, building water canals, removing weeds, and irrigation. They do not believe that tahjir should lead to ownership aside from determining the right of priority. (In these discussions, because the aim is to explain the general views of Islamic jurisprudence, it is not necessary to mention various fatwas [legal opinions] of the jurists. Where there is a disagreement, one must refer to the opinions of a living and qualified jurists).
  • 7. Anfal (the plural form of nafl) means ‘added on’, ‘gifts’ and ‘spoils’. Perhaps because these types of land are either more available than what people generally need, or are gifts and/or acquired in Islamic warfare (jihad), they are known as anfal.
  • 8. The hadith reporter is better known as Shaikh Tusi (d 385/1067). He was one of the three prominent compilers of the Shi’a traditions. The other two are Abu Ja’afar Muhammad ibn Ya’qub al Kulayni (d 329/940) and Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Husayn ibn Babuya (d. 381/991). The four Shi’a compilations of traditions are: (1) Usul al-Kafi, by Al Kulayni (2) Faqih man la Yahduru al Faqih, by Ibn Babuya (3) Tahzib al-Ahkam, by Shaikh Tusi and (4) Istibsar, also by Shaikh Tusi. Later on, others also compliled collections of traditions. The following three are among the better known and more frequently cited: (1) Wafi, by Muhammad ibn Murtadha (Mulla Muhsin Fayd Kashani (d 1091), (2) Bihar al-Anwar, by Mulla Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d 1111/1699) and (3) Wasa’il al-Shi’a, by Muhammad ibn Hassan ibn ‘Ali Mashghari (Shaikh hor ‘Amoli (d 1033/1720) (tr).
  • 9. The phrase ‘has the right over it’ in this tradition and in the previous one suggetss that the ownership of the cultivator is not permanent and absolute. Therefore, if land is left idle, the right of ownership is nullified.
  • 10. See note 59 above.
  • 11. See note 59 above.
  • 12. The Shi’as were the opposing revolutionary minority in this period. To protect the Imam’s life, his name was not mentioned openly. He was referred to as ‘Abd Salih (meaning the righteous and competent servant of God (tr)
  • 13. This tradition is taken from Jami’ al-Akhbar by Sayyid Majd ibn Hashim Bahrani. He reports it from Tahzib on the authority of Shaikh Tusi. In Wafi, instead of “sustenance for His creatures”, it was reported as ‘endowment for His servants’. There are other traditions conveying similar ideas.
  • 14. To free land from private ownership is one of the goals and consequences of the Islamic holy wars, jihad.
  • 15. This verse, the one preceding it and the following three propose the injunctions pertaining to lands, whose owners have embraced Islam without any resistance. They also explain the way in which the revenue should be spent. The phrase “become not a commodity between the rich of you”, in the middle of the verse points to the basic and final message of the verse. With regard to its comprehensiveness and foundation, this example is as valid as the principles expressed in “…..fulfill you undertaking …..” (5:1) and “Allah permiteth trading” (2:275), upon which jurists base their derivative rulings.
  • 16. The difference between “conquered lands” and “lands acquired through peaceful means” is that the former cannot be bought or sold. Only the Imam has the right to supervise their utilization. The latter belongs to the Imam or the Islamic guardian.

    Records show that most of the Iranian lands were conquered territories: The History of Islamic Conquest states about the province Rey (present day Tehran): “Naim ibn Moghren, the commander of the army of Islam, marched toward Rey in 25 A.H (645 A.D). The governor of Rey assembled a massive army from among the people of Damavand and Mazandaran, the neighbouring provinces. A battle broke out near Rey. One of the Iranian commanders allowed the Muslim army to enter the gates he was to defend. A group of hand-picked cavalrymen attacked the rear of the Iranian army while shouting ‘God is great!’. The Iranian army dispersed and the province of Rey fell”.

    Most major Iranian cities and provinces fell into Muslim hands. The oppressed people of Iran, hoping for Islamic justice, guided and helped the Muslim army.

  • 17. In his charter to Malik al-Ashtar regarding land revenue, Imam ‘Ali, peace be upon him, said: “so far as the collection of land revenues and taxes are concerned you must always keep in view the welfare of taxpayers, which is of primary importance, more than the taxes themselves. Because taxes and taxpayers are the original source for the welfare for your state and its subjects.” Later he continues: “More importance should be attached to the fertility of land than to the collection of taxes, because the actual taxable capacity of people rests upon the fertility of the land” (Nahjul Balaghah p. 253).
  • 18. A part of Imam Ali’s sayings concerning his action in returning ‘Uthman’s Iqta’ lands to Muslims is: “By God, if I had found that public money had been squandered in celebrating marriages and purchasing slave girls, I would have taken it back and would have handed it over to the State, because the functions and responsibilities of justice and equity are far-reaching. One who does not boldly act according to the dictates of justice and fair play will feel very nervous in facing tyranny and oppression.” (Nahjul Balaghah p. 16).

    Interpreters of Nahjul Balaghah have quoted the following from Kalbi who, relying on documents from Abi Salih, who in turn had quoted from Ibn Abbas that: On the second day after the oath of allegiance to the exalted Imam ‘Ali by the people, he delivered a sermon saying: “Beware that each piece of land that ‘Uthman has granted as Iqta’ and the wealth he had gifted is void and should be returned to the public treasury. I swear to God that no right can be voided by the passage of time.”

    Every sentence in this sermon, which he delivered at the beginning of his caliphate and in which he proclaimed the basic program of his government, heralds a basic truth than needs to be discussed and interpreted at appropriate places. The most significant and important point in this short sermon is his elaboration of the stability and sovereignty of the rights of the people, This sovereignty is inalienable and indestructible, even if it has been violated to acquire slaves or celebrate marriages or has been ignored for a long time. It has priority over any type of possession, even if it had been violated over time.

  • 19. Translation of toyuldari as feudalism poses conceptual difficulties. The translators’ usage follows that of the author’s, who on several occasions has referred to it as such in the Persian text. For an account of land systems in Iran and toyuldari, see Ann K.S Lambton, Landlord and Peasants in Persia (London: Oxford University Press, 1953; reprinted ed., 1969) (tr)
  • 20. See Note 44.
  • 21. In reputable books of traditions, it has been reported from Safwan, who reported from Bajli: “Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (the seventh Shi’a Imam), peace be upon him, sent me Imam ‘Ali’s last will and testament. The Imam had listed all lands His Holiness had acquired, either by anfal or cultivation, and then endowed the lands of Yan, Wadi al-Qura, and Adhina. He had designated guardians for them and specified their use. He had freed all slaves or required that they be set free. Among other things, he wanted the revenues from these lands to be spent on freeing slaves. Some of His Holiness’ companions endorsed the document. The will concludes with the following phrase: ‘This will was written by ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib on Jamadi al-Awwal, 37 A.H.’ The will has been prepared during His Holiness’ rule, three years before his martyrdom”

    One of His Holiness’ freed slaves and workers has said: “His Holiness came for a visit to the farm where I was working. He asked for some food. From the produce of the farm, I prepared cooked squash for him. He finished his food, washed his hands with water and sand, then said, ‘May God disgrace him who would fill his belly free thereby preparing the fire of hell for himself.’ He inquired about irrigation water, then took a pick from me and went digging inside the water canal where the water had ceased flowing. He dug so hard that when he returned, he was tired and perspiring. Again, he returned to the canal and continued digging so hard that his panting could be heard. Suddenly the rocks and mud were removed and water sprang out like blood flowing from the neck of a slaughtered camel. He hurried out and, with perspiration pouring down his face, said ‘It is God’s grace! It is God’s grace!

    At once he asked for pen and paper and wrote: ‘This is the deed of endowment of ‘Ali, the commander of the faithful and the servant of God. I endow this spring and the spring of Baghibaghat for the poor of Medina. This is not to be sold, transferred or bequeathed until God, the inheritor of heaven and earth, takes possession of it. However, if my children Hasan and Husayn are ever in need the revenue would belong to them’”

    With his unique farsightedness, the commander of the faithful, peace be upon him, saw the deviation from Islamic principles and sensed that the infringement on the rights of the people that began with the Umayyads during ‘Uthman’s rule would continue after him. The Umayyad rulers, their lackeys, and their followers plundered the land and natural resources like they did other spiritual and material wealth. This would deprive the Muslims in general and the people of Medina in particular of their livelihood and wealth. (Bani Umayyah and the Meccan idolatrous aristocrats submitted to Islam after Islam had been established in Medina with the help of the sword of the Medinan crusaders.) This is probably the reason Imam ‘Ali endowed these lands in Medina to stop the plunderers from taking possession and making these lands a source of livelihood for the poor. The endowments, however, like other wealth, were not immune from plunder by the tyrants and their lackeys.