THE core of the Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) movement was the economic and democratic organisation of society, because the fulcrum of the Quranic message is human integration on the principle of Tawhid (monotheism). So, the immediate task before him was to destroy the corrupt socioeconomic structures and build afresh, since social inequalities and economic disparities had sown pernicious divisions among men, and polytheism was the culmination of the same malaise.
The Prophet seemed certain that without achieving socioeconomic equilibrium, monotheism could not take root, as against previous and prevalent monotheistic traditions, the Quranic monotheism was organically linked to socioeconomic justice.
In the Quran, faith that does not compel one to intervene, build and mend is not faith at all (6:158). So, the Prophet persevered to create a just moral order on earth. Central to his moral initiative was human egalitarianism, hinged on socioeconomic equilibrium. However, he knew if economic reform did not precede socio-political and cultural reform, the movement would not take off. He, along with his followers, suffered repeated travails perpetrated by the Makkan oligarchy and soon after gaining political space in Madinah, established the ‘Cooperative Commonwealth of Islam’, exemplified by the pact of brotherhood, where people competed for virtue and mutual help, not wealth.
Economic reforms are a means to serve higher values, not an end in themselves, whereas the Marxist interpretation of history deems man as essentially an ‘economic unit’ and progress as ‘economic progress’, which man’s nature and historical journey refute. However, equipped with the faculty of knowledge, man is a thinking machine whose physical fuel is economic factors. Once his economic needs are secured, his personality expands to creative scientific, intellectual, artistic, and moral channels whereby he both realises his own capacities and truly appreciates the meaning of God for the world. Thus, the pact of brotherhood of Madinah catalysed moral energies of the community to build an egalitarian sociopolitical order.
Zakat covers all costs of the modern welfare state.
Socioeconomic equilibrium is the foremost concern of the Quran as it augments the creative genius and cumulative performance of society. That is why it has spelt out socioeconomic moral principles, promulgated zakat, and prohibited riba to keep socioeconomic security intact. However, after the collapse of the central Islamic state, other taxes appeared without being integrated into zakat. During the colonial period, zakat disappeared altogether and became private charity.
As of now, to the modernists, huge social change and varying means of production and distribution demand reinterpretation of zakat heads and its rate. To them, as the Prophet’s was a ‘simple’ and ‘informal’ government with tax collectors arguably the only civil servants, modern civil service expenditure falls in zakat heads. When the Quran mentions expenditure in the path of Allah, it means both jihad, ie, defence and social welfare, ie, health, education, etc. And facilitating travel implies communication expenditure. Thus, zakat covers all the costs of a modern welfare state.
If we replace a secular taxation system with zakat, which in fact is the state’s prerogative, inspiration and commitment to contribute would increase. Our Constitution deals with zakat and riba as if both have little to do with positive economic impact. In fact, the Quran’s socioeconomic programme can better serve as an alternative to Adam Smith’s laissez-faire economy.
Mediaeval literature on riba inspires idealism and draws no lines between usury and interest. Hence equating riba with banking interest is incorrect. Riba is arguably larger in scope and meaning than the orthodox understanding. To Ibn Qayyim, any fiscal malpractice falls within the purview of riba. The Quran began to address riba in the early Makkan period and banned it in the mid-Madani period. Riba is a crime against state and society, yet we deal with it as a private sin.
The treasures of the earth and heavens belong to God, and thereby to society. Man possesses wealth and property as a trust, so God sets limits on their expenditure; in the ultimate sense, private assets are social wealth. The practice of devouring the wealth of others ultimately leads societies to socioeconomic suicide (4:29).
The preamble of our Constitution envisages an egalitarian order. However, zakat and riba are placed in isolated corners. We are standing at the precipice of default and socioeconomic suicide. The panacea lies in an egalitarian economic order since in Islam, the acts of worship of a society which does not bridge the gulf between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ are deemed hypocritical. Are we ready to take the plunge?
The writer is an academic.
Published in Dawn, October 10th, 2025
