Articles

Islamic Ruling on Using Public Funds for Personal Purposes
Author : Dr Noah Ali Salman
Date Added : 23-01-2024

Islamic Ruling on Using Public Funds for Personal Purposes

 

Public funds are owned by all citizens and are spent on their interests as determined by the governing authority. In Islamic jurisprudence, public funds are often referred to as "Bait al-Mal al-Muslimin" (the treasury of the Muslims), and they have specific revenues and designated areas of expenditure. Taking from public funds without a rightful claim is one of the gravest prohibitions, as it constitutes a form of misappropriation. Allah the Almighty has emphasized this in the Quran, stating {What means}: "No prophet could (ever) be false to his trust. If any person is so false, He shall, on the Day of Judgment, restore what he misappropriated; then shall every soul receive its due,- whatever it earned,- and none shall be dealt with unjustly. "(Al-Imran, 161). The Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) also made it clear by saying, "By God, any one of you will not take anything from (the public funds) without any justification, but will meet his Lord carrying it on himself on the Day of Judgment.  "(Transmitted by Bukhari & Muslim).

 

This is evident in those who take in kind from the state wealth, and it also includes those who use state tools and properties for personal purposes, such as someone who uses official vehicles in ways not authorized by the governing authority. However, expenditure from public funds must be in accordance with the permissions granted by the governing authority.

 

 The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: "Some men acquire Allah’s Property (such as the funds of the Muslim state treasury, Zakah etc.) and they will go to Hell on the Day of Resurrection."

 

If we pay attention to the fact that the state treasury is composed of the total fees collected from the citizens for expenditure on public welfare, and what some countries allocate to the state treasury, meaning to the entire citizenry, we realize that whoever takes from public funds is taking from the wealth of all citizens. This is worse than someone who takes from the funds of a specific individual because if one wants to repent, they can seek forgiveness from that individual or return what they took. However, when taking from public funds, how can one seek forgiveness from all citizens?!

 

For this reason, it is necessary to avoid any potential harm and be cautious of any suspicion in such matter.

 

It doesn`t befit a Muslim to use the excuse that this evil act is being committed by others. This because hospitals have thousands of patients but no one wishes to be ill. In fact, the integrity of one's faith is more important than the well-being of the body, and the allure of ill-gotten wealth can only be deterred by the remembrance of standing before Allah on the Day of Resurrection. Therefore, Allah has forbidden usury and warned against it. He concludes the verses on usury by saying, " And fear the Day when ye shall be brought back to God. Then shall every soul be paid what it earned, and none shall be dealt with unjustly. " (Al-Baqarah, 281).

 

It is also prohibited to manipulate and tamper with scales and measures. Then, Allah emphasizes the significance of standing before Him, stating, "Do they not think that they will be called to account?- On a Mighty Day, A Day when (all) mankind will stand before the Lord of the Worlds? " (Al-Mutaffifin, 4-6).

 

It has been truthfully said: "Today is a day of action without accountability, and tomorrow is a day of accountability without action." How often have we seen in this world those who persist in engaging in what is forbidden, only to face negative consequences in this life, let alone the punishment of Allah in the Hereafter.

 

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

Must a person refrain from eating for the rest of the day if they break a fast of a vow (nadhr) or a make up fast (qada)?

 

Whoever observes a vowed fast (nadhr) or a makeup fast (qada) is prohibited from breaking it without a valid excuse. If they break it without a legitimate reason, they are sinful.
However, they are not required to refrain from eating for the rest of the day, because such restraint is only required out of respect for the month of Ramadan, not for other types of fasting.

What is the ruling on the fasting of a woman who has reached menopause if menstrual blood flows?

If a woman reaches the age of menopause (which is usually sixty-two) and her menses have ceased, then she sees blood after that, and its duration is not less than a day and a night (24 hours), it is menstruation (hayd). If it is less than a day and a night, she is considered as having non-menstrual vaginal bleeding (mustahada), so she fasts and prays. However, she must perform ablution for every obligatory prayer after its time enters, pray immediately, and be treated as a person with a continuous condition. There is no specific end limit for a woman's menstruation; it is possible as long as the woman is alive. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on one who died owing debts and left no wealth? Is it obligatory upon the heirs to settle these debts?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general rule is that if a person dies owing rights to other people, such as debts, these are settled from his estate, if he left any wealth, before the estate is divided. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “The believer's soul is suspended by his debt until it is settled for him.” Graded ḥasan by al-Tirmidhī. Repayment of debts takes precedence over the heirs’ right to inheritance.
If the deceased left no estate, or left wealth that was insufficient to cover his debts, it is not obligatory for the heirs to pay from their own wealth, but it is recommended for them to do so, because the deceased’s dhimmah (legal liability) remains occupied by the debt. It is reported in some narrations that he remains held in suspension until his debt is paid, and it is not part of filial righteousness for a child to leave his father’s dhimmah burdened with debt.
All of the children may contribute to settling the debt on behalf of their father and cooperate in doing so, even in installments, according to their ability. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.