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 on combining more than one intention in the prayer, such as combining the *sunnah* of wuḍūʾ with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*, or combining the *sunnah* of greeting the mosque (*taḥiyyat al-masjid*) with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Combining two intentions in a single act of worship, which some jurists call the “overlapping of acts of worship”, has several cases and precise rules. These can be consulted in the books of legal maxims, such as al-Manthūr fī al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah by al-Zarkashī and al-Ashbāh wa’l-Naẓāʾir by al-Suyūṭī. Among the most important of these rules:
First: If all of the acts of worship that one wishes to combine under one intention are obligatory, the intentions do not overlap. An example is combining the intention of the obligatory ʿAṣr prayer with that of the obligatory Dhuhr prayer. The intentions do not overlap in this case.
Second: If the two acts are specified supererogatory prayers (nawāfil muqayyadah) that are aimed at in themselves because of a particular time, occasion, or cause, or if they are an obligatory prayer and a specified supererogatory prayer, the intentions again do not overlap. An example is the Duha prayer, which may not be combined with, for instance, the regular sunnah of Dhuhr.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: “Whatever is not, in meaning, an absolute voluntary prayer, such as the Duha sunnah… is not subsumed under another. Rather, if he intends something else along with it… the prayer is not validly entered. This is because combining two obligations, two specified supererogatory prayers, or an obligation and a specified supererogatory prayer invalidates the prayer in cases not built upon overlapping, as ritual purification (ṭahārah) is.”
Third: If the two acts are absolute voluntary prayers (nawāfil muṭlaqah), or one of them is, where the texts of the Sharīʿah show that the aim of the voluntary act is to fill the time with worship, then overlapping of intentions is permissible. An example is the obligatory Dhuhr prayer together with the sunnah of greeting the mosque (taḥiyyat al-masjid). And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for a pious Muslim woman to stay with her husband who had quit praying out of laziness?

Quitting prayer is one of the major grave sins that come after disbelieving in Allah, but the wife of such a person isn`t considered divorced, rather, she should exert all her efforts in order to bring him back to the way of Islam. However, if his sin is likely to lure her from the way of Islam, then she had better separate from him by lawful means such as Mokhal`aa (When a wife pays a compensation for her husband in return for divorcing her). Moreover, if she exercises patience, and remains steadfast on her faith, then there is no harm in doing that.

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is the one offering the sacrifice liable if its meat spoils?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
If the meat (of the sacrifice) spoils due to the negligence of the one offering the sacrifice in preserving it, or due to improper storage, then he is liable to compensate for the portion due to the poor (which is estimated as half a kilogram of meat). If the sacrifice was a vowed (mandatory) one, then he is liable for all of it.
 
However, if he was not negligent, then there is no liability upon him, because its ruling is the ruling of a trust (like an item left in someone's care). And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More