The Economic in Religion and the Religious in Economics:
A Qur'anic-Weberian
Perspective
Basit Koshul
Concordia College
Introduction
I will begin by
drawing your attention to the anomalous character of this particular
setting. We have a theologian, a philosopher
and a sociologist of religion addressing what is essentially an economic issue
(poverty and debt-release) at the annual meeting of the American Academy of
Religion—something or someone appears to be out of place. It seems more appropriate that this topic be
addressed by a banker, a macroeconomist specializing in development economics
and a finance ministry official at the World Economic Forum or the annual
meeting of the Economists. Given the
disciplinary boundaries in vogue in the academy, it appears that Gibbs, Hardy
and Koshul are leaving their areas of expertise and encroaching upon the turf
of Milton Friedman, Alan Greespan and George Soros. Conversely, the traditional yeshiva, seminary
and madrassah would also frown upon scholars of religion addressing such a
topic. The reason for their objections
could be summed up paraphrasing a question proposed by Tertullian, and
answering it by paraphrasing a well known quote by Kipling. The response to the question "What hath
religion to do with economics?" by the secular academy and the religious
seminary is "Religion is religion, economics is economics and never the twain
shall meet." Consequently, both from the
perspective of the academy and the seminary, there is something anomalous when
scholars of religion discuss economics.
Very much
cognizant of this anomalous situation, my paper will not so much focus on the
topic of poverty and debt-release as it will seek to provide a scriptural and
social scientific rationale that adequately redresses the aforementioned
anomaly. The bulk of the paper will
focus on a particular Scripture (the Qur'an) to challenge the seminary's[1]
position and demonstrate that there is an irreducible presence of the economic
in religion. Then the paper will briefly
turn to a particular corpus within social science and show the inadequacy of
the attitude of the academy by demonstrating the irreducible presence of the
religious in economics from the perspective of Max Weber's social science. The paper will conclude with some remarks on
the relevance (and perhaps necessity) of an investigation of the economic from
a religious perspective—and vice versa—in the contemporary cultural
milieu.
The Economic in
Religion: A Qur'anic Perspective
The fact that
the Qur'an sees an irreducible and inevitable presence of the economic in
religion can be demonstrated from three different, but related perspectives —
the structure, the language and contents of the Qur'anic narrative. As Ricoeur has noted, echoing both classical
and modern Qur'anic exegetes, the structure of the discourse carries a message
that complements and clarifies what the narrative words themselves explicitly
state. The structure of the Qur'anic
narrative shows a sustained discussion of "economic" matters accompanying and
sometimes abruptly disrupting discussions of matter of great "religious"
sensitivity and significance. This is
best illustrated by looking at the structure of the narrative in Sura number
two. This sura is titled "The Cow/Calf,"—the longest of the Qur'anic suras—and there is a hadith characterizing it
as the "mini-Qur'an." In this sura, ayah
number 255 is called the "Ayah of the Throne" and it describes the attributes
of Allah, His Throne, and His and its relationship to the created order,
especially humanity. The Prophet
described this ayah as the "Queen of the Ayaat" (pl. of ayah)—thereby
highlighting its privileged spiritual/religious significance. The sura concludes with a passage consisting
of ayahs 285-286. This passage is of
special significance because it is the only part of the Qur'an that did not
"come down" to the Prophet via the Archangel Gabriel—the Prophet received
this passage directly from Allah in the course of their meeting during the
Night Journey. The fact that the Prophet
received this passage directly from Allah at a pivotal point in his career
invests this passage with special spiritual/religious significance. The Ayah of the Throne (2:255) and the two
ayahs directly received from Allah (2:285-6) can be seen as two markers of
great "religious" significance in Sura 2. A survey of the subject matter that is discussed between these two
"religious" markers reveals that "economic" issues are discussed in far greater
frequency and detail than any other issue. After ayah 255, the "Ayah of the Throne," the passage from 261-266
offers a parable describing the manifold increase that results from wealth
being spent as charity. Ayaat 267-273
detail the ethics of charity-giving and identifies the groups in society who
are entitled to economic assistance from society at large. 274-281 contrast charity and legal economic
activity with usury and interest. The
Qur'an describes the two as being mutually opposed, encourages charity and free
economic activity and harshly condemns/prohibits usury and interest. 282-283 detail the ethics and norms of
drawing up business contracts. The
detailed discussion of economic matters between the two religiously significant
markers is all the more remarkable in light of the fact that economic matters
are mentioned only briefly prior to 255. The "economic" is in religion
— the structure of the Qur'anic narrative in Sura
2 shows this to be the case in a very literal sense.
The close
relationship between the economic and religious spheres intimated by the
structure of the Qur'anic narrative is reaffirmed by the language that the
Qur'an uses to describe the religious life of an individual. The Qur'an uses imagery from the social,
natural and economic worlds to describe different aspects of the human being's
religious life. Symbolism from the
social world is used to characterize the behavior of a life lived with (or
without) faith—(i.e., 39:29[2], 67:22[3]). Symbolism from the natural world is used to
describe the final result of actions accompanied by (or devoid of) faith. For example 48:29[4]
uses symbolism from the natural world to describe the final outcome of actions
accompanied by faith and 3:117[5] and 24:39[6] of
actions that are devoid of faith. Both
of these ways of using symbolism from the natural world are juxtaposed in
2:265-6.[7] Whereas symbolism from the social and natural
worlds is used to characterize the behavior and ultimate outcome of a life
lived with or without faith, the actual act of either accepting or rejecting
faith is described in explicitly economic language of buying, selling, trading,
profit, loss, etc.
At
the very beginning of Sura 2, the believer is described as someone who has
willingly "sold" his/her soul: But
there is [also] a kind of person who would willingly sell his own self in order
to please Allah: and Allah is most compassionate towards His servants
(2:20). The unbelievers are also described as having "sold" themselves, but
their motives and fate are quite different:
Vile is that [false pride] for which they have sold their own selves by denying the truth of
what Allah has bestowed from on high, out of envy that Allah should bestow of
His favor upon whomsoever He wills of His servants: and thus they have earned
they burden of Allah's condemnation, over and over. And for those who deny the truth there is
shameful suffering in store (2:90).
A little
earlier, the unbelievers are depicted as having made an economic transaction in
which they have "sold" the life of the hereafter and "bought" the life of this
world. The unbelievers are All who purchase the life of this world
at the price of the hereafter—their punishment shall not be lightened, nor
shall they be succored (2:86). Besides the believers and unbelievers there is a third group, the
hypocrites—and their choice of accepting/rejecting faith is also described
using economic imagery: It is they
who purchase error in exchange for guidance; but their bargain [lit. "business
exchange"] brought them neither gain [lit. "profit"] nor have they found
guidance [elsewhere] (2:16).
In
addition to using economic language and symbolism to describe the religious
life of the individual believer, the Qur'an draws attention to the impact that
the economic sphere has had on the historical development of religious
communities. The Qur'an identifies the
pursuit of economic interests/goods as being a major factor in the development
of religious ideas. The Qur'an notes
that economic interests have influenced the manner in which certain aspects of
religious scriptures have been emphasized and other aspects of the same
scriptures neglected.
Verily those
who conceal any part of the revelation which Allah has bestowed from on high
and barter it away for trifling [monetary] gain—they but fill their bellies
with fire... It is they who purchase error in exchange for guidance, and
punishment in exchange for forgiveness: yet how little do they seem to fear the
fire (2:174-5).
Besides
influencing the interpretation of scripture, the Qur'an posits that economic
interests have had an even more direct role in the "production" of religious
ideas.
Woe, then,
unto those who write down, with their own hands, [something which they claim to
be] divine writ, and then say, "This is from Allah," in order to acquire a
trifling [monetary] gain thereby; woe, then, unto them for what their hands
have written, and woe unto them for all that they may have gained!
(2:79).
This passage
establishes a direct link between economic interests and the production of
religious ideas. Consequently, the
language of the Qur'an does not establish a relationship between the economic
and religious spheres merely at the symbolic or rhetorical level, it
establishes a link between the two spheres at the concrete and historical level
also.
In addition to the structural and
linguistic aspects of the Qur'anic narrative, the actual content of Qur'anic
discourse evidences an irreducible relationship between the religious and the
economic spheres. The content of the
Qur'an does this by giving a place of
privilege to the discussion of economic matters—a place of privilege that it
does not give to any other subject matter. It is interesting to note that in a "religious" book often considered to
be primarily concerned with "spiritual" matters related to the "world to come,"
both the longest ayah in the Qur'an and the last passage revealed to the
Prophet before his death explicitly deal with materialistic, worldly "economic"
issues. It has already been noted that
the "Ayah of the Throne" (2:258) has been called the "queen of the ayaat." The "Ayah of Light" (24:35)[8] is
considered of such significance that entire books have been dedicated to its
exegesis—for example Ghazzali's Mishkat al-Anwar. While the significance of these ayaat
cannot be questioned, the longest ayah in the Qur'an is the "Ayah of Trade"
(2:282)—this ayah is longer than approximately 24 suras at the end of the
Qur'an. Just the fact that this ayah is
longer than any other in the Qur'an suggests that the Qur'an considers the
subject matter being discussed therein to be of special significance. The ayah makes it a religious obligation to
draw up a written contract to finalize any type of transaction involving a loan
— a most demanding and culturally anomalous obligation, because originally it
is being promulgated in an oral cultural in which writing washardly known. The ayah also details the conditions that need to be met in order for a
contract to be valid, and recommends (but does not require) that all cash
purchases be recorded in writing.
In
addition to the longest Qur'anic ayah addressing an economic issue, the last
Qur'anic passage revealed to the Prophet before his death (2:278-81)[9]
did not deal with matters of "religious" myths, beliefs or rituals. It dealt with the very worldly, and mundane
"economic" matter of prohibiting interest. This passage states that while Allah has permitted economic
trade/exchange, He has prohibited interest. Taken together with other passages (i.e., 30:39
and 3:130) a picture emerges which shows that from the Qur'anic perspective the
giving and taking of interest is the antithesis of charity and free economic
exchange—whereas the latter lead to "increase" and "growth," interest finds
no growth "in sight of Allah" (30:39). In 2:278-81 the giving and taking of interest is condemned in a language
that suggests that it is a far more egregious offense than any "religious"
sin. Those who continue to engage in
this practice after it has been prohibited are warned that they are in a state
of "war with Allah and His Apostle".
Both
the longest ayah in the Qur'an and the last passage revealed to the Prophet,
though dealing with mundane economic issues, conclude with a reminder of the
inevitability of death and the eventual resurrection and Day of Judgment. This could be interpreted as the Qur'anic way
of expressing its view of the reflexive character of the relationship between
the "economic" and "religious" spheres. After having established the "economic" dimension of the "religious,"
the aforementioned passages conclude by offering a reminder of the "religious"
implications of the "economic"—an implication whose full import will be
manifestly apparent on the most important of all of the days that is yet to
come, the Day of Judgment. In sum, the
structure, language and content of the Qur'an all demonstrate that the Qur'an
sees an irreducible presence of the "economic" in the "religious" or "religion."
Having established the fact that the
Qur'an sees a reflexive relationship between the religious and economic
spheres, we are in a position to better address two second order concerns: a)
Why does the Qur'an consider the charging of interest such an egregious
offense? b) What is the vision of social
justice that underpins Qur'anic legislation regarding economics? With respect to the first question, the
answer seems to be pretty straight forward: the "calculus of recompense"
underlying economic dealings involving interest is the antithesis of Divine
Grace. Divine Grace is the Self freely
sharing its abundance and surplus with those in need in order to enrich
them. In contrast, economic dealings
based on interest see the self using the abundance it "owns"[10]
(its capital) to further enrich itself by taking advantage of the needs,
difficulties and vulnerabilities of others. The Qur'an contains a detailed description of the calculus of Divine
recompense - and this is not at all surprising, given the fact that one of
Allah's 99 Names is Al-Haseeb (The Accountant). The Qur'an repeatedly emphasizes the point
that all individuals will die, be resurrected and then "called to account" or
"called to give an account" of how they lived their lives. Each individual will be given a "book"
containing precise and detailed entries of the individual's "earnings" and
"debts" accumulated in the world—i.e., a record of the individual's good and
bad deeds (84:7-10). Each individual
will be asked to go over his/her book to assure the accuracy of the entries contained
therein and get ready for the final "weighing" of the deeds (17:14)—the good
deeds going on the right hand scale and the bad deeds going on the left hand
scale. The One presiding over this
balancing of the books and the weighing of the deeds will be none other than
Al-Haseeb. The Qur'an offers a "calculus
of recompensation": the punishment of a bad deed will be meted out according to
a 1:1 ratio, the reward of a good deed will be at least 10 times the value of
the deed:
Whoever shall
come [before Allah] with a good deed will [be rewarded] tenfold the like
thereof; but whoever shall come with an evil deed will be requited with no more
than the like thereof, and none shall be wronged (6:160).
A parable in
Sura 2 suggests that the reward for a good deed in the form of giving in
charity is 700:1:
The parable
of those who spend their possessions for the sake of Allah is like that of a
grain out which grows seven ears, in every ear a hundred grains: for Allah
grants manifold increase unto who He wills, and Allah is Infinite and
All-Knowing (2:261).
The following
passage goes even further—while repeating that the ratio of bad deed and
punishment is 1:1, it suggests that the ratio of good deed and reward is
1:infinity:
Anyone who
has done a bad deed will be requited with no more than the like thereof,
whereas anyone, be it male or female, who had done righteous deeds and is a
believer withal—all such ones will enter paradise, wherein they shall be
blessed with good beyond all measure/limits! (40:40).
The calculus of
Divine recompense facilitates growth and relationality among the parties who
are part of the exchange—in the cases cited above the parties are
human-God.
In
contrast, interest-based transactions are an inversion of the Divine calculus
of recompense—the party that already "has" gets even more, the party that
does not have has to give up a whole lot more than he/she has in order to get
something. The ratio of principal to
interest on credit cards and standard 30 year mortgages varies between 1:2 or
1:5. Some of thecountries of the South caught in the debt
trap have paid back upwards of 30 times the principal they originally borrowed
in interest—and they still have not gotten to the point of paying back the
principal that they borrowed. Whereas
growth and relationality are the outcome of the Divine calculus of
recompensation, interest-based transactions appear to be a "mortgage" indeed
(i.e., grip of death) in terms of fostering mutual growth and
relationality. The fact that interest-based
transactions have an acerbic affect on human relations is documented by Nelson
in his study of the development of the idea of usury.[11]
Besides
the inversion of Divine Grace, a question can be raised regarding the
"economic" status of an interest-based transaction. The Qur'an challenges the claim that the
giving and taking of interest is comparable to economic activity:
Those who
take interest will rise up on the Day of Resurrection like someone tormented by
Satan's touch. That is because they say.
"Trade and interest are the same," but Allah has allowed trade and forbidden
interest (2:275).
Commenting on
the ayah, Mawdudi notes that in considering the lending of money on interest to
be an "economic" activity, a fundamental aspect of "economics" is lost sight of—risk:
... in every economic activity that is known, whether it is
related to the market, industry or agriculture, and irrespective of whether an
individual engages in such activity on the basis of his labor or invests
capital alongside his labor—in all such activity, there is not a single
example where the individual is not taking a risk and in which he is guaranteed
a pre-determined profit.[12]
Given the fact
that there is no known economic activity in which one party is free from all
risk and guaranteed a pre-determined profit, it is a peculiarity to consider an
interest-based exchange to be "like trade." The element of risk is as much a part of an economic exchange as is the
hope of profit. In an interest-based
transaction only one party takes all the risk—the one taking the loan. The lending party has no interest in the
success or failure of the borrowing party in repaying the loan. It may be actually more profitable if the
borrowing party defaults on the loan, if the collateral that has been put up
for the loan is more valuable than the loan itself. If risk has been eliminated for one of the
parties in the transaction and a pre-determined profit guaranteed, one can
legitimately question whether that party is engaged in "economic" activity.
Besides its being a direct
antithesis of the Qur'anic notion of Grace and running counter to the Qur'anic
conception of "economic" activity, a key principle within an interest-based
economy makes the Qur'anic notion of social justice unattainable. There is an assumption underlying all
interest-based transactions—an assumption that is rarely noticed or ever
questioned. The "owner" of principal (or
property) assumes that in some real and absolute sense, he/she is truly The
Owner. The Qur'an recognizes
"ownership" of wealth and property, offers legislation protecting it, and
encourages the pursuit of economic wealth.[13] But at the same time the Qur'an offers a
critique of ownership that is even more radical than the Marxist critique. Whereas Marxism critiques the principle of
"private ownership" and argues in favor of "collective ownership," the Qur'an
rejects the very notion of "human ownership." On a spiritual plane, the Qur'an considers Allah as the "True
Owner." All that is owned by human
beings is nothing more than a "trust" (amana) and all human beings are
nothing more than vicegerents or trustees (khulafa) of what Allah has
temporarily put in their charge. At the
legal and legislative level, private property is not only recognized and
protected, free and fair trade is encouraged. On this level freedom in the sense of free economic activity with
minimal intervention from the outside is the highest ideal. But at the same time, on the spiritual level,
human beings are encouraged to aspire to the ideal of "from each accordingto his ability, to each according to his
need"—because only Allah is The True
Owner of everything. At the legal,
public level, freedom of economic exchange and material accumulation is
promulgated as the highest ideal. But at
the spiritual, personal level, individuals are encouraged to embody the ideal
that "if someone asks for your coat, give him the shirt off your back."[14] The differentiation of ideals between the
"worldly" and "spiritual" domains that the Qur'anic narrative intimates allows
the "religious" and the "economic" spheres to maintain their respective
distinctiveness but at the same time remain intimately related to each other.[15] The Qur'anic prohibition of interest and
notion of social justice further illustrate the link between the economic and
religious. The link between the two is
such that engaging in a particular type of economic activityeither facilitates or hinders the possibility
of salvation. This suggests that the
Qur'an sees a direct link between economics and salvation. Even though he presents the point from a
different angle, there appears to be significant overlap between the Qur'anic
narrative and Weber's social science.
The
Religious in Economics: A Weberian Perspective
Weber
noted that the concern for salvation is a central issue in all religious
traditions. In the most general terms,
salvation is a state in which there is no gap between the "what is" and "what
ought to be." Every religious tradition
has a conception of such a state even though (or perhaps because) the empirical
reality in which human beings live is far removed from this ideal. In spite of the common concern for salvation,
each religious tradition has its own unique understanding of the "from what," "how" and the "to what" of
salvation. Far more than any other
religious tradition, including other variants of Christianity, the "how" of
salvation in Protestantism is inextricably tied to worldly toil and effort. For the Protestant labor in a worldly
vocation "existed only as an expression of [the believer's] striving for
other-worldly salvation."[16] As Kalberg notes, the Protestant
understanding of salvation created the conditions for the emergence of the
Protestant ethic (i.e., "a methodical-rational organization of life" [PESC,
xxxviii]). This in turn made possible
the emergence of an industrial firm separated from the family, rational
accounting techniques and free labor—the three fundamental prerequisites for
the emergence of modern capitalism (PESC, 156). Consequently, the relationship between
capitalism and Protestantism is deeper than the link between the "ethic" of
Protestantism and the "spirit" of capitalism—there is a similar link between
the "spirit" of Protestantism (expressed in its unique understanding of and
concern with salvation) and the "ethic" of capitalism (expressed in the unique
character of the structures, institutions and procedures that characterize the
capitalist mode of production.)
If we take this Weberian perspective into
account in the analysis of our own cultural situation we would have to give an
account of the religious implications of novel economic trends/actors. Weber posited that the emergence of modern
"rational" capitalism could not have been possible without three important
prior developments: 1) the separation of the industrial company from the
household/family, 2) the development of rational methods of accounting
(especially double-entry bookkeeping) and 3) the availability of wage laborers
freed from ties to land by law or tradition (PESC, 156-7). It is interesting to note that with the
emergence of global capitalism we are witnessinga fundamental transformation of the three
basic factors that Weber identified as having created the conditions for the
emergence of modern capitalism. The
process of rationalization has seen the industrial company divorced from the
family or sib, evolve into "a family of companies" in the form of multinational
conglomerates aspiring to complete horizontal and vertical integration. In the place of rationalized accounting by
means of double-entry bookkeeping, we see the emergence of entering the
accounts of the company in two different sets of books—the accounting
techniques of Enron, WorldCom, Parmalat, etc.—with these accounting techniques
being certified and approved by some of the leading accounting firms in the
world. In the place of free labor in the
sense of workers not bound to the land by tradition or law we have the
emergence of free labor in the sense of the employer being able to pay the
laborer virtually nothing for his (and more likely her) labor. From a Weberian perspective, the emergence of
these novel economic factors/actors brings with it, or follows in the wake of,
a new theological/philosophical understanding of salvation—an understanding
that might very well be implied and a latent possibility in other cultural
settings, but is actualized only in post-industrial capitalist culture. Originally the Protestant industrialist
valued economic gain because he saw such gain as a sign of salvation. It
appears that under the conditions of global capitalism economic gain is not
seen as a sign of salvation, it is seen as salvation itself—salvation that is
to be forced upon the unwilling heathen for their own good. The shift from viewing economic gain as a
sign of salvation to considering it as salvation itself is subtle yet
profound. This shift not only marks the
complete divorce of the economic from the religious, it heralds the ascension
of the economic to the status of the religious. Weber saw this shift taking place before his eyes and he was deeply
distressed by the implications it would have for the health and well-being of
modern culture.
Weber
notes that modern capitalism, though originally rooted in religious soil, now
finds its nourishment from another source:
Victorious capitalism, ..., ever since it came to rest on a
mechanical foundation, no longer needs asceticism as a supporting pillar. Even the rosy temperament of asceticism's
joyful heir, the Enlightenment, appears finally to be fading. And the idea of an "obligation to search for
and then accept a vocational calling" now wanders around in our lives as a
ghost of beliefs no longer anchored in the substance of religion" (PESC,
124).
In short,
Weber's analysis of modern economics shows the economic to have become
completely separated from the religious. But at the same time there is deep unease on Weber's part about this
state of affairs. He notes that in the
contemporary cultural setting economic activity has become an external
compulsion rather than an "inner calling":
Tied to the technical and economic conditions at the
foundation of mechanical and machine production, this cosmos today determines
the style of life of all individuals born into it, not only those directly
engaged in earning a living. This
pulsating mechanism does so with overwhelming force. Perhaps it will continue to do so until the
last ton of fossil fuel has burnt to ashes (PESC, 123).
Weber is clearly
concerned about the "steel-hard casing" (or "iron cage") that has resulted from
(or has led to) the complete separation of the economic from the
religious. He notes:
No one any longer
knows who will live in this steel-hard casing and whether entirely new prophets
or a mighty rebirth of ancient ideas will stand at the end of this prodigious
development. Or, however, if neither,
whether a mechanized ossification, embellished with a sort of rigidly compelled
sense of self-importance, will arise. Then, indeed, if ossification appears, the saying might be true for the
"last humans" in this long civilizational development:
Narrow specialists
without mind, pleasure-seekers without heart; in its conceit, this nothingness
imagines it has climbed to a level of humanity never before attained.
He acknowledges
that by characterizing the capitalist-mechanistic cosmos as a "steel-hard casing" and describing those who
are at home in this cosmos as a self-deluding "nothingness" he has "fallen into
the realm of value-judgments, and judgments rooted in faith" (PESC, 124). In other words, his critique of modern
economics is a faith concern, even though it is informed by a social scientific
analysis of modern economics. Similarly,
his hope and desire for an alternative possibility can only be described as a
"faith" concern rather than a "social scientific" concern. This desire can be interpreted as a quest for
"salvation"—a desire to move from the "what is" to the "what ought to be." There is obviously a difference between the
"worldly" quest for salvation that Weber appears to be after and the
"other-worldly" salvation promised by religion.
A
Final Word
An analysis of
the language, structure and content of the Qur'anic narrative reveals that the
Qur'an sees the irreducible presence of the economic in the religious. Furthermore, the Qur'anic narrative intimates that certain economic practices
endanger the Qur'anic understanding of salvation and salvation requires the
practice of particular economic activity. A summary discussion of Weber's view shows that there is an irreducible
element of the religious in the very roots of modern economics—both in terms
of the origins of modern capitalism and its ultimate ossification into a
"steel-hard casing." Weber's analysis
shows that a certain understanding of salvation is the ultimate outcome of
capitalist economic activity. Modern
social science has largely affirmed Weber's observation that during the course
of history a "naïve piety" repressed the development and rationalization of the
economic impulse. The contemporary
cultural condition could be considered a reversal of fortunes where a "naïve
acquisitiveness" is repressing the development of the religious impulse. If this is indeed the case then the fact that
economic issues such as poverty and debt-release are being discussed at the
annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion by scholars of religion is
not only not anomalous, it might actually be a response to the need of the
times. If Weber's thesis is correct then
the emergence of novel economic factors/actors implicitly means the emergence
of a new conception of salvation. This
is as much a "religious" concern—and of equal concern to Jews, Christian, and
others—as it is an "economic" trend. Consequently, this issue requires that it be addressed by scholars of
religion. This exercise marks the
breaking with the naïve understanding of the (non)relationship between religion
and economics that is prevalent in the academy and seminary. The shattering of naïveté is as much an
economic activity as it is a religious activity. The emergence out of naïveté puts into
question what had been taken for granted. If a seminarian claims that "religion
is religion and economics is economics, and never the twain shall meet" then
he/she is actually demonstrating a naïve understanding of religion and an
uninformed understanding of economics. If there are economists claiming that "religion is religion and
economics is economics and never the twain shall meet" then they are
demonstrating a naïve and partial understanding of economics as well as an
uninformed understanding of religion. The Qur'anic narrative and Weberian social science present a challenge
to both the contemporary religious seminary and secular academy. In their own ways, both of them require that the naïve understanding of the
(non)relationship between religion and economics be put into question, because
such an understanding distorts the identity of both the religious and the
economic.
ENDNOTES
[1]The word "seminary" should be
understood in a non-faith-specific sense—as it is used here it also refers to
the yeshiva and the madrassah.
[2]This ayah uses a parable
comparing the believer to a slave/servant who has only one master and an
unbeliever to a slave/servant who has a number of masters. The Qur'an asks the rhetorical question as to
whether or not the two individuals can be considered "equal" in terms of the
consistency and purposefulness of their actions:
Allah
sets forth as parable: A man who has for his master several partners [all of
them] at variance with one another, and a man depending solely on one person:
can these two be deemed equal as regards to their condition? [Nay] all praise is due to Allah [alone]: but
most of them do not understand this(39:29).
[3]This ayah compares the behavior
of an unbeliever to an individual who grovels about on his/her face and that of
the believer to the purposeful gait of an individual whose manner of walking
evidences an intentional directionality:
And is there any, besides the
Most Gracious, that could be a shield for you, and could succor you [against
danger]? They who deny this truth are
but lost in self-delusion. Or is there
any that could provide you with sustenance if He should withhold his provision
[from you]? Nay, but they [who are bent
on denying the truth] stubbornly persist in their disdain [of Allah's messages]
and in their headlong flight [from Him]! But then, is he that goes along with his face to the ground, better
guided than he that walks upright on a straight way? (67:20-22).
[4]This particular passage is of
special interest because it states that the parable that is being used to
describe the believer is also to be found in the Torah and the Gospels:
Muhammad is Allah's Apostle: and
those who are [truly] with him are firm and unyielding towards all deniers of
the truth, [yet] full of mercy towards one another. You can see them bowing down, prostrating
themselves [in prayer], seeking favor with Allah and His goodly acceptance: their
marks are on their faces, traced by prostration.This is their parable in the Torah as well as
their parable in the Gospel: [they are]
like a seed that brings forth its shoot, and then He strengthens it, so that it
grows stout, and [in the end] stands firm upon its stem, delighting the sower. [Thus will Allah cause the believers to grow
in strength,] so that through them He might confound the deniers of truth. [But] unto such among them as may [yet]
attain to faith and righteous deeds, Allah has promised forgiveness and a
reward supreme (49:28).
[5] [But] behold, as for those
who are bent on denying the truth—neither their worldly possessions nor their
children will in the least avail them against Allah: and it is they who are
destined for the fire, therein to abide. They parable of what they spend on the life of this world is that of an
icy wind which smites the tilth of people who have sinned against themselves,
and destroys it: for, it is not Allah who does them wrong, but it is they who
are wronging themselves (3:116-7)
[6] But as for those who are
bent on denying the truth, their deeds are like a mirage in the desert, which
the thirsty supposes to be water—until, when he approaches it, he finds that
it was nothing: instead he finds Allah with him, and He will pay him his
account in full—for Allah is swift in reckoning (24:39).
[7] And the parable of those
who spend their wealth out of a longing to please Allah, and out of their own
inner certainty, is that of a garden on high, fertile ground: if rain falls
upon this ground its yield is two-fold and [even if] no rain falls upon it, it
still brings forth [its expected yield.] And Allah sees all that you do. Would any of you like to have a garden of date-palms and vines, through
which running waters flow, and have all manner of fruit therein—and then be
overtaken by old age, with only weak children to [look after] him—and then
see everything smitten by a fiery whirlwind and utterly scorched? In this way Allah makes clear His ayaat unto
you, so that you might reflect [and pay heed] (2:265-6).
[8] Allah is the Light of the
heavens and the earth. The parable of
His light is, as it were, that of a niche containing a lamp; the lamp is
[enclosed] in glass, the glass [shining] like a radians star: [a lamp] lit from
a blessed tree—an olive tree that is neither of the east nor of the west —
the oil whereof [is so bright that it] would well-nigh give light [by itself]
even though fire has not touched it: light upon light!Allah guides to His light him that will [to
be guided]; and [to this end] Allah propounds parables unto humanity, since
Allah [alone] has full knowledge of all things (24:35).
[9] O you who believe!Remain conscious of Allah, and give up [your
claim to] all outstanding obligations [owed to you resulting] from
interest. If you are [truly] believers;
for if you not do it, then know that you are at war with Allah and His
Apostle. But if you repent, then you
shall be entitled to [the return of] your principal: you will do no wrong, and
neither willyou be wronged. If, however, [the debtor] is in straitened
circumstances, [grant him] a delay until the time of ease; and it would be for
your own good—if you but knew it—to remit [the debt entirely] by way of
charity. And be conscious of the Day on
which you shall be brought back to Allah, whereupon every human being shall be
repaid in full for he has earned, and none shall be wronged (2:278-81).
[10]As will be detailed shortly, the
Qur'an challenges the very notion of"ownership" in a manner that is even more radical than the Marxist
critique of "private ownership."
[11]See, Nelson, B. (1949)The Idea of Usury: From Tribal Brotherhood to Universal
Otherhood. Princeton
University Press.
[12]Mawdudi, A. A. (1980) Tafheem-ul-Qur'an. Maktaba Tameer-e-Insaniyat: Lahore,
Pakistan. Vol. 1, Fn. 317, pp. 211ff.
[13]This is the Qur'anic injunction
regarding Friday—sometimes called the "Muslim Sabbath":
O you who believe! When the call to prayer is sounded on Friday,
hasten to the remembrance of Allah, and leave all worldly commerce [behind]:
this is for your own good, if you but knew it. And when the prayer is finished, disperse freely on the earth [return to
your worldly commerce] and seek to obtain [something] of Allah's bounty; but
remember Allah often, so that you may attain salvation (62:9-10).
In contrast to the Jewish and Christian understanding
of Sabbath, the Muslim weekly holy day does not mark a radical departure from
the daily "worldly" routine that has been established during the week. The Muslim understanding of "Sabbath" calls
for re-adjusting one's relationship to or understanding of that same "worldly"
routine, and heightening one's consciousness of Allah as a result ofthis readjustment.
[14] From the Qur'anic perspective, the poverty of some and
the wealth of others are but a means to test both—the charitableness of the
rich and the patience of the poor. All
the while keeping in view the fact that economic fortunes can and do change —
which in itself is among the ayaat of Allah, no less than the
fact that the verses of the Qur'an are the ayaat of Allah:
Are
they, then, not aware that it is Allah who grants abundant sustenance, or gives
it in scant measure, unto whomever He wills? In this, behold, there are ayaat indeed for people who will believe
(30:37).
[15] This understanding of the Islamic
conception of social justice is articulated by Israr Ahmad in a number ofspeeches that he delivered in the early
1980's. These speeches have were
transcribed and published under the title Islam ka Ma'ashi Nizam in 1985
by Maktaba Anjuman Khuddam-ul-Qur'an, Lahore.
[16] Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic
and the Spirit of Capitalism (New York: Scribner, 1958) (hereafter PESC),
p. xxxix.
Title Page | Archive
© 2005, Society for Scriptural Reasoning
|
