In the divine system every individual keeps only what he needs!!

[Ismail]

Salaam.

If some historian says that in such and such a society the people were not in the habit of bequeathing anything to their progeny, and if experts find the report History-worthy, that will be accepted as something worthy of consideration.

But, if, in a society consisting of millions upon millions, if somebody reports - be the report considered ever so authentic - about the action of one or two people, that they did not bequeath, it means nothing.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

[optimist]

If in a society cosisting of millions and millions with millions of reports about one person, as to how this person was, his actions, his habits, his sayings, with no reports about this person bequeathing anything to his progeny, and a few reports that he did not beqeath anything to his progeny, it mean BIG.

[Sword]

Dear brother Optimist,


Salamun Alaykum and thanks for your posts.


You share:

In the divine system neither the land nor its resources can be taken into private ownership. These are left open for the benefit of all (41:10)


The Land belongs to Allah alone :-

To state this fact, the Quran has quoted an event of the people of Thamud. It states that cattle-rearing was the means of livelihood of the people of Thamud. There were open grazing lands and water points in the surroundings, but the leaders of that nation had kept them under their individual control. Due to this, cattle of the weaker sections used to remain hungry and thirsty. Prophet Saleh raised voice against the oppression and violence of those chiefs who asked him as to what he wanted finally. He replied: ‘I want that as this land belongs to Allah, it is neither yours nor mine, and these cattle are also created by Him. Therefore, these animals should have freedom to graze on the land of their Allah. In what way you have the right that you fix up boundaries on arzullah (land of Allah) this way that His creatures cannot cross the boundaries fixed by you on His land (7:73; 11:64).

The land is the means of livelihood for the entire mankind; it cannot become anybody’s personal property and giving it practically under the ownership of individuals is paganism, it is kufr.


You also share:

According to the Quran, whatever in the heavens and on earth belong to Allah alone.  The earth is the medium for the production of all means of subsistence, which are provided freely for the benefit of humanity.  Wind, water, light, heat and the earth, all of which exist for our sustenance and are freely given by Allah, should actually be left equally open for all human being.

[Muhammed Asad] For He [it is who, after creating the earth,] placed firm mountains on it, [towering] above its surface, and bestowed [so many] blessings on it, and equitably apportioned its means of subsistence to all who would seek it: [and all this He created] in four aeons. (41:10)

And the earth – We have spread it out wide, and placed on it mountains firm, and caused [life] of every kind to grow on it in a balanced manner,  and provided thereon means of livelihood for you [O men] as well as for all [living beings] whose sustenance does not depend on you (15:19-20)

And the earth has He spread out for all living beings (55:10)

Weigh, therefore, [every decision and act] with equity, and cut not the measure short!(55:9)

From the above, it should be clear that all natural resources are God given, and their purpose is to sustain the whole of humanity.  For this no one has the right to create artificial barriers and divisions and declare ownership of these resources.


Reading the above from you, and considering all your points, I want to ask you a question. Do you think every person on earth should be given all the rights to travel or migrate to any country/part of the world without requiring a visa and a passport? Because you know, it is not always easy and not always allowed to go to a certain country because of the so-called rules of the government of that particular country. Please share your thoughts on this.


Regards.

[optimist]

Dear brother Optimist,

Salamun Alaykum

Wa'alaikumussalam

considering all your points, I want to ask you a question. Do you think every person on earth should be given all the rights to travel or migrate to any country/part of the world without requiring a visa and a passport? Because you know, it is not always easy and not always allowed to go to a certain country because of the so-called rules of the government of that particular country. Please share your thoughts on this.

When you say "any country/part of the world" it is again creation of aritificial boundaries, however, if an islamic state is established at any particular geographical area, it becomes necessary to follow regulations of other countries (visa, passport etc) to travel to such countries.  We also have even examples of prophet and his companions entering into different agreements (based on different situations) with others during the initial stage of establishing islamic society.

I hope I understood your question correctly

Regards
Optimist

[Sword]

Peace be upon you, brother Optimist.


Let me ask you my question one more time by giving an example.


For a moment, think that you live in country X and this country is in control of a tyrant where it's citizens are oppressed and badly afflicted with misfortune. Living in this country is a danger to you and you are always in a constant state of worry that you could get killed anytime. Also think that you are poor. Now after suffering for a few years, you have decided to leave this country and go somewhere else at least to escape from this tyranny. It doesn't matter whether you migrate to an Islamic country or a non-Islamic country, your main concern is just to get out of here. But unfortunately, you can't because you are poor. So just because you don't have money, you won't get a visa for migration and you would be forced to stay behind the borders of the country of the tyrant ruler. But there are others who have money and they can make their moves to migrate by easily getting a visa to another country and save their lives and that of their children.


You, yourself, have said that the world belongs to God. Therefore, do you think it is fair that only the rich ones can travel around the lands of God to protect themselves and to seek it's bouties, and the poor ones can't and are only forced to stay inside the borders of the tyrant ruler and suffer when all the lands belong to God?


Why such an ill discrimination between the rich and the poor? Is such a manner of treatment in line with Quranic teachings?



Regards.

[optimist]

Therefore, do you think it is fair that only the rich ones can travel around the lands of God to protect themselves and to seek it's bouties, and the poor ones can't and are only forced to stay inside the borders of the tyrant ruler and suffer when all the lands belong to God?

Wassalam,

The Quran has described a similar situation in history, namely that Pharaoh.   Pharoah enslaved his people until Moses came for their rescue (the history you know already). 

(Pharaoh) said: “I am the sustainer (Rabb) all- Highest! (79:24).  In other words, other than claiming divinity, he claimed he was meeting the needs of his people, hence “sustainer” – Rabb).  Pharoah further stated that since the land and the rivers of Egypt were in his control and his system administered them, this justified his claim that he was people’s sustainer (43:51).  He also presented a similar claim before Moses and made a point of reminding Moses that the royal household had raised him as one of their own, but the reply from Moses revealed the fundamental difference between the Pharoah’s system of rule and that of Allah’s. 

[Moses replied -  as of the favour of which you tauntingly remind me  (was it not) due to your having enslaved the children of Israel? (26:22).

I hope you can find the links here that answer your question.   In short, it shall be the collective responsibility of all Muslims to fight against such oppressors.   One of the responsibilities Allah has entrusted Muslims is to watch over the activities of other people of the world (to see that no nation/people is oppressing the others) 2:143 لِتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ

Regards,
Optimist

[Ismail]

Salaam.

After a pause, let me now go back, and deal with some of the remaining backlog.

Meaning, for example, your oft-repeated remark, as to how else can we explain the choice of a camel, and its turn to drink water, other than, that, Tyrants were appropriating the scarce and most precious - gift of God to All Mankind - to themselves and their sycophants, thus preventing the masses from their equal share in God's freely given bounty.

After fully agreeing, that, in public water holes everyone has a right to water, I humbly beg to submit another explanation to God's choice of only a single camel and appointing its turn to drink water.

First of all, if it were primarily a question of forcibly preventing the common folk to water their camels, God's ultimatum could have been to stop such discrimination, lest a calamity befall them! This is simple and straight forward, and eliminates the ubiquitous Camel-Symbolism altogether.

Even today, wherever water is not over-abundant, people's life, especially in villages, and I am witness - for, I have been moving my residence too often, from city to village, and vice verse since more than three decades now - people's life, both physically, and emotionally, revolves round the village bore-well. Traditional private and public wells have all dried up.

Almost every day, there is some skirmish or the other at the bore-well, in my village.

Even as this thread was progressing, there have been at least three major showdowns.

Among them was the episode of one impatient boy in his late teens, caught, and beaten up by about ten women!!

Today, again, four sturdy men beat up another impatient, well-built man!

A somewhat similar-or-not-thing we have also noted in the episode of Moses and the young women at the water-hole.

But there is neither a Women's Lib, nor any Tyrant or American or Indian capitalist around here.

In short, a feasible argument can be this:

A water hole is a universal testing ground to gauge the patience and stability of folks.

This explains it's selection for the Divine Test.

Another point is regarding the condemnation of Capitalism, on the plea that it is based on surplus wealth.

How can any business, big or small, make any progress, without capital? A small farmer saves money in small amounts regularly in order to buy a pair of bullocks, or a pregnant cow. Similarly, a big businessman collects money to expand his business, and regularly saves large amounts in banks. Terms like Capitalism, Communism, etc have many definitions. Let us be wary of using them.

Amassing, and saving are two different things, just like eating, and devouring are.

Everybody condemns amassing of wealth, and devouring of food.

Not so, saving, and eating.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

[optimist]

First of all, if it were primarily a question of forcibly preventing the common folk to water their camels, God's ultimatum could have been to stop such discrimination, lest a calamity befall them! This is simple and straight forward, and eliminates the ubiquitous Camel-Symbolism altogether.

Salaam,

I respectfully strongly disagree with your analysis.   The God's ultimatum with 'camel symbolism' served just as a final warning and last opportunity for them to mend their ways.   This final test fully justified punishment on them and this test was given after prophet saleh took all efforts to stop the discrimination.   We have a similar example in Lot's people.  Lot kept on advising his people against their evil way of life, and their punishment was fully justified when the messengers came to visit Lot (notice how desperately Lot was trying to make people understand the seriousness of the situation and he had to shield the messengers from the people), and this final test served as a final chance for them, however, unfortunately, they failed in this test which led to their destruction.

In short, a feasible argument can be this:
A water hole is a universal testing ground to gauge the patience and stability of folks.
This explains it's selection for the Divine Test.

I can agree with you water scarcity is a general issue faced at many places in the world.   However, you must understand that the various examples and stories narrated in the Quran is for the purpose of teaching the people different lessons from the history (a fact repeatedly mentioned in the Quran).   It is here the issue of monopolyzing water resources explained in the story of Thamud is relevant.   The lesson we should know this example is that it is a crime against humanity to monopolize water resources which is freely provided by Allah for the benefit and sustenance of all humanity.  You may notice the solution prophet saleh suggests to permit animals to take water based on their turns.  Thats it.  See how beautifully Quran provides solutions for the water shortage and this is the practical procedure that should be implemented by all people, permitting people to take water on their turn without giving any undue previledge for anyone (or to set a procedure for all the people to have equal opportunity to take water to meet their needs).   No one shall have right to monopolize the water resources.

Another point is regarding the condemnation of Capitalism, on the plea that it is based on surplus wealth.
How can any business, big or small, make any progress, without capital? A small farmer saves money in small amounts regularly in order to buy a pair of bullocks, or a pregnant cow. Similarly, a big businessman collects money to expand his business, and regularly saves large amounts in banks. Terms like Capitalism, Communism, etc have many definitions. Let us be wary of using them.

You are discussing under the premises where people doing business to make a  profit.   However, when Quran leaves no room for the acquisition of surplus wealth and when it comes to fulfilling needs, the system assumes responsibility, the Quranic system will give no opportunities to anyone to either keep the surplus or privately spend the surplus for any investment.   The surplus will be under the collective possession of the people and investments will be made by the state taking into account the needs of the people.

In fact we tend to hoard only because we fear that when we grow old and can no longer earn, we may not be able to provide for ourselves and our children (2:266).  In a manmade system people will have to save money for their own security and also to secure and protect thier business interests because the responsibility to meet the needs of the people and to lead a dignified life rests on the people.   However such a thought should not even enter the mind if we are living in a system that takes care of our needs and the needs of our children and everyone.   In fact, it is the fear of future insecurity that compels people to hoard.  That’s why Quran has said;

Satan threatens you with the prospect of poverty and bids you to be miserly (2:268)

Conversely the Islamic system eliminates all fear of insecurity since it gurantees sustenance to all of humanity; ….whereas God promises you His forgiveness and bounty.  (2:268). 

Just look very closer to the above verses.   The Quran has explained the difference between a manmade system and a divine system in just a few words.  In the former every individual is responsible for meeting the needs and in this kind of society everyone lives in fear and insecurity.   It is this insecurity that is the underlying root of the need to hoard to the grave (102:1-2).  In the latter system the responsibility of taking care of every individual and to make them enable to lead a dignified life rests with the administration.   

At this stage we might also justly predict the end of business that exists to make profit.  In fact, the very concept of business itself will have changed.  At such a time those who produce goods and services will continue to do so, however,  the ‘business’ as we now understand will come to mean the facilities which distribute goods and services.    The investment will be a collective investment for the benefit of all based on different needs.  In this divine system an individual knows if he is faced with a crisis, the system will fully support him and he will not be left alone to deal with it himself.  He is saved from worrying about anything.  He is no longer anxious about his livelihood, the upkeep of his children, their education, his and his family medical bills, accommodation, etc.  It is always material insecurities that make people fear for the future and continually divert their creative energies and prevent them from fulfilling their potential.   Otherwise humanity has almost no limit in its power and creative potential.  A society of this type will be an unstoppable force.

Regards,
Optimist

[Ismail]

Salaam.

Read (15:57-60). It is clearly mentioned that the punishment of Lot's people was preordained. I mean the messengers came with the express purpose of destroying them.

The uttermost heinous attitude of the people towards the messengers at that juncture, served to silence Lot against pleading for them, the way Abraham pleaded for them before.

There is no clear-cut evidence in Al Qur'an that we should not reasonably save anything for future use.

Only, it should not be at the cost of God's displeasure in any way whatsoever, like earning by wrong means, or not spending reasonably well in the way of God.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

[optimist]

The uttermost heinous attitude of the people towards the messengers at that juncture, served to silence Lot against pleading for them, the way Abraham pleaded for them before.

Salaam,

While I admit that the punishment for Lot's people was pre-ordained in the sense that their rebelliousness was a point of no return,  which is very clear from Quran itself when it says, "sincerely, by your life (O Muhammad), in their wild intoxication, they were wandering blindly"(15:72),  I strongly OBJECT your comment that this incident intended to serve to silence Lot against pleading for them.  I sincerely believe there is nothing in the Quran Lot pleaded for his people.  Even at the last stage prophet Lot was telling his people "And fear Allah and disgrace me not"(15:69).  It is clear from this that, had the people listened to him and feared Allah at that crucial stage, the punishment would been avoided.   That is why I said it served as a last warning.   Before Allah completely annihilate a community, the people will be given a last opportunity, and this is not to silence the person who warns them, but to silence the people from coming up with any excuse or justification later (including during the day of judgment) that they were not sufficiently warned.   This is also a common sense way of handling the criminals and those who violate laws in every society.   You are making me focus on an issue not so important focusing things like, whether it was to silence the warner or to silence the people.  By the way, do you think that the camel warning was meant to silence prophet Saleh??   

Anyhow, please let us focus on the main points.  I will be posting some comments later, insha allah

Regards,
Optimist

[Ismail]

Salaam.

There was neither any room to listen to pleas, nor any need whatsoever for a test. They were warned enough by Lot.

Before coming to Lot, they conveyed the decision to Abraham (God's choicest blessings be on all His prophets), that a torment is coming to the people of Lot, and that it is not to be turned back. See: (11:76).

As for my remark that the uttermost heinous attitude of Lot's people at that juncture only served to silence Lot against pleading for them, it is, clearly, my personal observation, which, in fact, spontaneously flowed from my pen, and has no "motive(s)" behind it. It will be clear to any Qur'anist (2:121) that it is only the personal observation of the writer.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

[optimist]

Before coming to Lot, they conveyed the decision to Abraham (God's choicest blessings be on all His prophets), that a torment is coming to the people of Lot, and that it is not to be turned back. See: (11:76).

Salaam!

According to me there is no contradiction in what you say and what I stated.   It was pre-ordained in the sense it was too late for the people to abandon their evil ways because, as testified by Quran itself, they were wandering blindly in evil.  Therefore their destruction was already confirmed.  However, if you argue that if the people had listened to the warning from Lot to while the messengers were with him to "fear Allah and disgrace me not"(15:69),  even then they could not have avoided the punishment, I respectfully do not wish to argue with you further on this point.  You are free to understand the point in the way you understand.  This is not a major issue of contention.   I stick to my point that the last warning served to silence the people from coming up with any blame or argument against Lot  and the punishment they received.  In other words, by this incident, the punishment was fully justified against them.

There is no clear-cut evidence in Al Qur'an that we should not reasonably save anything for future use.

I do not know what you meant by "clear-cut" evidence.  I already explained the point that, once an Islamic system is established,  the system/ administration will take care the responsibility of taking care of every individual in order to enable them to lead a dignified life in this world free from fear or shortage of food.  And whatever laws in the Quran concerning sadakaat, helping the needy,  inheritance, etc were meant to serve the intrim period.   Kindly check following verses.

(They) amass (wealth) and thereupon withhold (it upon others). Indeed man is born with a restless disposition (70:18-19) (Restless (haluan) in Arabic means one whose hunger for acquisition is unending)

He who amasses wealth and counts it a safeguard thinking that his wealth will make him live foreever! (104:2-3)

And you devour the inheritance with devouring greed (89:19)

You are obsessed with greed for more and more until you go down to your graves 102:1-2

Behold! God has bought of the believers their lives and their possessions, promising them paradise in return 9:111

O YOU who have attained to faith! Shall I point out to you a bargain that will save you from grievous suffering [in this world and in the life to come]? You are to believe in God and His Apostle, and to strive hard in God's cause with your possessions and your lives: this is for your own good – if you but knew it! (64:10-11)

They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." (2:219)

As for all who lay up treasures of gold and silver and do not spend them for the sake of God, give them the tiding of grievous suffering. 9:34

Regards,
Optimist

[Ismail]

Salaam.

Our duties towards parents, kindred, orphans, destitute, indigents, neighbors, stranded travelers, subordinates, etc, remain fresh and well entrenched, governments notwithstanding.

These belong to the Universal Commandments of God - the Spiritual Legacy of All Mankind.

No temporal government can substitute the individual in this in any way whatsoever.

Of course, when a society, as a whole, leans towards goodness, these individual duties can get a bit easier.

However, invariably, in any case, every individual is to be fully tested in every way regarding his divinely ordained individual responsibilities. No government can take over any of these responsibilities from the individual.

Rights of ownership are not unislamic.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

[optimist]

Our duties towards parents, kindred, orphans, destitute, indigents, neighbors, stranded travelers, subordinates, etc, remain fresh and well entrenched, governments notwithstanding.

However, invariably, in any case, every individual is to be fully tested in every way regarding his divinely ordained individual responsibilities. No government can take over any of these responsibilities from the individual.

Salaam,

I did not say it is also a government responsibility to love your parents, to treat them with kindness,  praying for them,  talking to them with nice words, etc.   When an islamic society is established, the role of individuals will be different with regard to taking care of orphans, destitute, indigents, neighbors, stranded travelers.  It will be minus incurring financial responsibility by themselves.  Islamic society will take care of their needs.  They will lead a dignified life without under the support of any individual.

You are focusing on individual responsibilities as if no society should collectively take measures to arrange for the needy, the poor, the destitute, etc.   You may have enough financial capability to support your father and therefore may be in a position to give them better food, medical treatment, etc (it may be that they do not need to depend on you).  Also you may have sufficient resources to take care of orphans, destitute, indigents, neighbors, stranded travelers, etc.   THIS IS NOT SO WITH MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD.   Majority finds it difficult to meet  even their minimum needs.   Even those who have sufficient means live in fear of poverty, loss of business, loss of jobs, etc.   Even those who have desire to take care of the needy, they are unable to do so because they have enough responsibility to take care of their own needs.  This is even affecting relationships in the world, even inside a family.  Even if you think logically (taking into account different examples around you) you will notice that a system which entrust responsibility on individuals to take care of orphans, destitutes, indigents, stranded travelers, sick and poor can not be an ideal system.  All problems have to be tackled collectively through a central system.

By the way, I read in yesterday's news paper, one indian family in Saudi Arabic who had been living reasonably good life, recently a baby was born for them premature birth (6 months) and the baby had to be admitted in the hospital prolonged period of time.  They received a hospital bill of 35000 USD and the hospital detained the baby without release until they pay the bill, however the family can not afford such huge bill.  They were forced to approach many charitable organisations (in a way forced to beg).   Please focus your mind and think about different inequities happening in the society.  I do not want to type more, however, just saying that this is not the social and economic system Islam introduces as an ideal system.   Just to tell you an incident from the pages of history about Khalifa Omar to let you know how they lived a collective life.

......Umar, the Caliph arrived to lead the prayers. He said his preliminary prayer and then proceeded to deliver  his address to the congregation. He began by reciting some verses from the Holy Quran. Then addressing  the congregation he said "Now listen".  A young man from the congregation stood up to say, "We will not listen to you, until you give us the  explanation that you owe to us."  The people were startled at this audacious interference. Umar paused for a moment, and then turning to  the young man said, "Explanation for what?" The young man said "The other day each one of us obtained a piece of cloth from the Baitul Mal. Today I  find two pieces of cloth on the person of the Caliph. I want to know what right had the Caliph to get a  share twice the share of an ordinary Muslim?"  Before Umar could explain Abdullah the son of Umar rose up and said, "Friends, the truth of the matter is  that like every other person my father and myself obtained a piece of cloth each from the Baitul Mal. My  father is so tall that the piece of cloth that he got from the Baitul Mal did not suffice him. So I gave him my  piece of the cloth".  This explanation satisfied every one. The young man who had interrupted the Caliph said, "We are  satisfied. You can now proceed with your address. We will listen to you and, obey your commands."

Finally, while I agreeing with you that, taking care of the needy is the Universal Commandments of God,  please note, God does not want to create perpetual rich and poor inequity in a society.  If we follow the true teaching of God we will be able to completely eradicate poverty in the world, everyone will live with a dignified life under the protection of a system, without being under the support of any individual.

Regards,
Optimist

[Ismail]

Salaam.

Our focus is not towards "completely eradicating poverty".

Our focus is to be good to parents, kindred, orphans, the destitute, the indigents, neighbors who are near, other neighbors, the person beside us (in a vehicle, in the workplace, etc.), our subordinates, etc. in that order. [this is a rough estimate based on (4:36)], to the best of our ability.

At the same time, we are to always be reminding each other regarding these responsibilities. And these responsibilities entail patience and stability. (90:17, 103:3). These two Verses draw the picture of our Prophet's society, for us to emulate.

When a society follows God's Commandments, it is gifted by the Almighty God, with a good government. Any good government does not claim to be shouldering the individual's responsibilities.

'Umar may have been a good administrator. Beyond that, we cannot praise him, because he, fortunately, administered a people who had already been subjected to the everlasting spell (if I may say so) of Al Qur'an. Who had already been at peace with themselves, and with everyone else. Who would keep God's Commandments, Umar, or no Umar!

Of course, 'Umar may b entitled to some credit.

But the society which he administered, should get more credit.

The individuals- the members of that society - who were focused on the Spiritual Legacy of All Mankind, should get even greater credit.

Salat, that molded, and cultivated such exemplary personalities, must get the most credit.

Finally, and ultimately, all credit belongs to God, who never asked us to focus on securing Power in order to create a State!

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.