عربي
Home


Articles

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

What is the ruling if a postpartum woman becomes pure before forty days; are acts of worship obligatory upon her, and is she permissible for her husband?

If the postpartum woman becomes definitely pure before forty days, she must perform the ritual bath and perform acts of worship as a pure woman does. What was prohibited for her also becomes permissible, so she becomes permissible for her husband after her bath. The minimum duration for postpartum bleeding is a moment (an instant), and its usual maximum is forty days. Reaching forty days is not a condition; rather, it is sufficient for the blood to stop or to see the white discharge (qassa bayda'). And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What do you say about someone who stays up all night on Laylat al-Qadr but misses Fajr prayer?

Such a person has deprived themselves of a great reward. Performing obligatory acts is more beloved to Allah than voluntary acts. Fajr prayer is an obligation, and performing it in congregation is equivalent to worshiping for the entire night. So how can someone neglect it while striving for voluntary prayers?!

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More