Shared Responsibily and Islamic Socialism

Al-Takaful Al-Ijtimai (Shared Responsibility) and Islamic Socialism

The Muslim World, vol: 59, issue: 3-4, 1969, pages: 275-286.

- By Sami A. Hanna


The real prelude for the concept of al-takaful al-ijtimai, which is nowadays one of the common themes among the revolutionary regimes in Egypt, Syria and Iraq, may be traced back to the days of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself and his successors. This concept was expressed one way or another by the single call for social justice among the Muslims. But perhaps the most overt call came from Abu Dharr al-Ghifari who knew the Prophet and witnessed the remarkable social changes which took place in the new Muslim empire, especially during Uthman's reign when Abu Dharr issued his warning against the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the few whom the Caliph had appointed to rule the conquered regions.

Since then the conditions of the Arab Middle East have constantly invited not only the cries of social and religious reformers, but also a variety of solutions. In modern times, some have been and are advocating a quick and effective social reform. Others-not all of them secular voices -are pleading for socialism as a solution. Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, the Muslim theologian, philosopher and political leader, has examined Western socialism and suggested that Islamic socialism (ishtirakiyya) - is far better. Khalid Muhammad Khalid, in his book From Here We Start -written two years before the July 1952 revolution in Egypt-perceived the road of socialism as the one most likely 'to lead to a social system which would concentrate on lifting the Egyptian masses out of the morass of poverty, ignorance, disease and dependence.

The problem has been to find ways to interpret the new ideology to the Muslims not only of Egypt but of the entire Arab world. It scans to have been decided that by no other way can socialism be understood and accepted by the Muslim masses but through Islam itself and Islamic teaching by authoritative Muslim theologians. This firm conviction has released an astonishing creative output not only from laymen but, more impressively, from the ulama (scholars) of al-Azhar University, the great bastion of Islam and Islamic teaching.

What seems to be more impressive, in addition to this steady flood of books on Islamic socialism, is the emergence of a new concept in Islamic thought, namely al-takaful al-ijtimai (mutual social responsibility), which is not exactly an alternate terminology for ishtirakiyya, socialism, but a notion to introduce the masses to a fuller understanding of what Islamic socialism means. Many works have already-appeared concerning this concept, and it is the purpose of this paper to bring it to the attention of interested Western readers and orientalists and to show how it is related to Islam and to socialism as well. Among the many writers who have written directly or indirectly on this subject, three were chosen for this article because they represent the theological as well as the secular points of view.

Let us begin with Mustafa al-Sibai whose book Ishtirakiyyat al-Islam could be considered the most widely acclaimed by Egyptian authorities. The most relevant part of the introduction has been published in an earlier article in The Muslim World, a passage which contrasted Europe in the middle ages with the Muslim world of that time, "enjoying a high standard of living, the very embodiment of goodness, cooperation and al-takaful al-ijtimai." In order to explain the concept of al-takaful al-ijtimai, al-Sibai, devoted an entire chapter not only to explain what Islam means by the term, but also to list what he calls the 'laws' from the Quran and the Hadith which govern such concepts. He makes the following statement on the definition of al-takaful:

People, in the society in which they live, need each other in all phases of life. As a whole, they make up a coherent force which comes to perfection or completion only through the strength of each individual and his happiness, just as an army's strength is not completely fulfilled unless each individual in it is strong physically and morally. A society is strong only in as far as the individual is strong, and is happy only in as far as each individual is happy.

The world in modern times has become aware of this fact and has begun to call for al-takaful al-ijtimai among the individuals of the society but it has limited the concept to fulfilling the demands of deprived groups in terms of food, clothing, housing and the like. But Islam recognized this fact fourteen centuries ago.

After granting each citizen the Five Rights (the right to live, the right of freedom, the right of education, the right of ownership, the right of dignity), without which human dignity and happiness could not be fulfilled, Islam looked at those whose circumstances prevented their enjoyment of the Five Rights, and held society responsible for making them possible. It is from this that the concept of al-takaful al-ijtimai arose in Islamic socialism,


When Islam in its socialism calls for al-takaful al-ijtimai, it does not simply mean food, housing or clothing needs, but rather it broadens the concept to include the Five Rights... Thus, its idea of al-takaful al-ijtimai has come to include all material and moral aspects of life.

He quotes from the Quran: "The believers are brethren" (S. 49: IO), and continues:
To declare brotherhood among the individuals of any society necessitates al-takaful among them, not only in eating, drinking and bodily needs but also in every other necessity of life. The acknowledgment of brotherhood between two persons is an acknowledgment of al-takaful and al-tadamun (solidarity) between them in sentiments and feelings, in demands and needs, and in status and dignity. This is the truth of al-takaful al-ijtimai in Islamic socialism.

The author then discusses two qualities spoken of in the Quran which he considers the components of cooperation-righteousness and piety-and explains their relationship to al-takaful. He sums up his observations on righteousness as follows:

Righteousness has the meaning of a group of psychological, dogmatic and moral virtues. Concerning this the Almighty said, "It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards East or West, but it is righteousness to believe in God and the last day.. and to spend of your substance... for your kin, for the orphan, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves..." (S. 2: 177).

As for piety, he gives twelve definitions, each of which he attempts to correlate with al-takaful. From the Hadith he also draws example to support his argument. Perhaps the most definitive statement in the Hadith regarding the establishment of the bases of al-takaful al-ijtimai is the Prophet's saying, "None of you can be a believer unless he would love for his brother what he loves for himself." "Does man love only 'bread, meat, clothing and shoes for himself? Does he not also love life, dignity, freedom, education and whatever brings happiness in life?"

The author presents ten types of al-takaful al-ijtimai ranging from mutual responsibility with respect to social manners, to education and living, al-takaful al-maashi. The latter is equated with al-takaful al-ijtimai because it is concerned with the responsibility of the society for providing a life suitable to the dignity of man.

al-Sibai also lists what he calls qawanin al-takaful al-ijtimai (The Laws of mutual social responsibility). These laws are divided into two classes, the first dealing with the laws which are found in Islamic socialism that specify the kinds of people deserving al-takaful and the second dealing with the laws which specify financial sources to assist in the realization of al-takaful for these people. Under the first category he lists laws based on the Quran and the Hadith covering a wide range of mutual social responsibilities such as hospitality, aid. sharing things (al-musharaka}, as well as acts of kindness (al-maun), help in personal and national emergency situations, etc. For the financial sources of al-takaful, he lists twelve laws : al-zakat, al-nafaqat (adequate support), al-waqf (endowment), wills, booty, buried treasure of the earth, al-nudhur (vows), al-kaffarat (expiation), al-adahl (blood sacrifice), almsgiving of Ramadan, public treasury and al-kifaya (charity above and beyond al-zakat). al-Sibai concludes his chapter on al-takaful as follows :

Hence, there are twenty-nine laws for the realization of al-takaful al-maashi, which enable a human being to receive that care which makes him feel secure in his present and future, as well as that of his family and children. We have seen that twelve of these laws are designated to finance al-takaful al-maashi in such a way that the execution of its laws is guaranteed, something we have not seen exemplified in the laws and canons of any other nation of the world.

Comparing the Islamic concept of al-takaful with its European counterpart, al-Sibai says:
When the Western nations thought of al-takaful al-ijtimai, and when the communists thought of solving the problem at its roots, this happened as a result of the pressure of industrial development and the spread of unrest among the working class and the masses. In fact, Europe did not consider protecting the workers against unemployment until the economic crises of 1929 occurred from which all Europe suffered, whereas Islam declared its inclusive system of al-takaful al-ijtimai thirteen centuries ago. In the Arab environment in which Islam arose, there were no economic factors which could have forced Islam to declare such a system, al-takaful was not declared out of any class 'hatred nor did it come as a result of the vengeful desire to control the wealth of the rich. It was rather a deep human motive... and a complete and accurate system. We mentioned already a Sibai reference and there is emphasis laid upon the takaful of the family in the following passage:

One of the most obvious phenomena in Muslim society today is the family solidarity and the domination of the spirit of cooperation over all its aspects. The son still supports his father and mother; he lets them live in his house with his wife and children. He serves them until they die. In doing so, he considers it as a religious duty and a kind of work which brings him closer to God. We also see cases in which an older brother supports his younger brothers, helping to rear them, educate them, and marry them off. He knows that they have the right to receive all this and that it is not an act of charity on his part. He also fulfills his obligations towards his relatives by sparing them from the evil of deprivation and beggary if they are poor or disabled. This is an eye-catching phenomenon compared with what we see in western civilization in the way of family disintegration, the father's disinclination to support his son or daughter and the disinclination of the children to support their parents when they grow old or become disabled. We seldom see a western man and his family living with his parents. There is no doubt that this phenomenon, which characterizes the Muslim society, is one of the traces of Islamic socialism.

II
A more recent book, written by a professor in al-Azhar's College of Law, is totally devoted to the same concept. First he explains what is meant by al-takaful al-ijtimai; then he discusses matters such as the material society versus the moral society, the influence of religion on society, the influence of Islamic worship on the society, good public opinion, social relationships and their origin in Islam, the family and the relationships between its members, societies and the relationships between their members, the relationship between the ruler and the ruled, human relationships in Islam and public and individual rights. What concerns us here is his discussion of al-takaful al-ijtimai. He states that this term and al-tadamun al-ijtimai (social solidarity) are two different expressions which denote an identical or similar meaning, "and goes on to say:

The similarity in the meaning of these phrases leads to the definition of al-takaful al-ijtimai as the mutual and reciprocal solidarity between the individuals of the society and their faith in their responsibility toward each other, materially as well as morally. They [the members of the society] must also believe that each of them bears his brother's shortcomings and that his shortcomings are borne by his brother. As a group, they form a cohesive force which attains its fullness only through the strength and happiness of each of its individuals.

What Islam means by al-takaful a!-ijtimai is that individuals should be under the kafala (care) of the group, that all human forces in the society should converge in order to protect the spiritual and material interests of the individuals, and establish the social structure on sound foundations. Thus, all the members of the society must agree among themselves on the necessary measures that they must take for the preservation of the strength of the individual, so that they will be able to march in the dynamic caravan of society.

al-takaful al-ijtimai has passed through various phases of human legislation. The whole world, especially the West, used to consider help to the poor to be limited to the voluntary charity of the rich. Furthermore, the function of religious leaders and social reformers was to stimulate the rich to be kind to the poor. This attitude continued to prevail until the nineteenth century when the West began to consider the idea that the poor have their rights in society, too. But the reformers felt that such rights were the function of welfare societies and local organizations which undertook the task of feeding the poor. At the end of the nineteenth century, social reformers became aware of the fact that social and welfare organizations were not enough, nor did they furnish the poor with all their needs. Consequently, al-takaful al-ijtimai began to be looked at as a necessary function of the state.

The first Western country which began regulating this takaful [system] was Germany which issued the first law in 1883. But this law did not regulate al-takaful so that all the deprived groups were included. Rather, it was completed in stages. The first law, issued in 1883, was directed against the injuries which occurred to factory workers on the job. An insurance law against sickness and old age for workers in industry, commerce and agriculture was enacted in 1889, and was followed in 1911 by a law insuring employees against disability, old age and death. In 1923 Germany also enacted a law insuring mine workers against disability and old age. At first, Britain, as well as other countries, was opposed to compulsory takaful, but has since 1908 accepted it. It was not until 1933 that the principle of al-takaful al-ijtimai became a right of all classes in most countries... However, many of these countries made the provision that those who are covered by the laws of al-takaful must contribute part of their weekly or monthly income. In 1935 the United States legislature enacted the Social Security Act which originally was directed against factors which were a constant source of worry in the life of the individual, particularly in the event of unemployment and old age.

Then in 1942, Sir William Beveridge in England defined al-takaful al-ijtimai as insuring that the individual will receive a specific income instead of his regular earnings when such earnings cease due to unemployment, sickness, and injury, as well as a pension in old age and support in the event of the death of his supporter.

In 1945 the French Government defined al-takaful al-ijtimai as the guarantee given to each citizen that in all circumstances he will be able to secure the means of livelihood for himself and his family at a proper and respectable level.

In 1948 the U.N. General Assembly approved the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Article 25 of the said Declaration clearly defined the meaning of al-takaful al-ijtimai by providing that each individual has the right to a reasonable standard of living.

Finally, there was Otto Schmidt of the Permanent Committee on Exchange of Benefits and the Chairman of Health Insurance in Switzerland, who defined al-takaful as the "freedom from want..."

These are the statements of certain men in their attempt to clarify the true meaning of al-takaful or al-daman al-ijtimai. All of these statements are focused on the fact that al-daman al-ijtimai ('social security) is the sum of the systems which offer help and assistance to the needy and which secure the livelihood of each person and his family. This shows that the world in modern times has become aware of the need for establishing certain systems of al-takaful al-ijtimai.

This does not mean that social security systems were invented by social reformers. In fact, the roots of these systems go back to Islamic teachings, and Islam recognized them fourteen centuries ago when it established for each individual certain rights by which 'his dignity as a human being is preserved, as well as his happiness as a member of the overall structure of his nation. It is religion which considers society responsible for the realization of these rights.

Salim compares the meaning of al-takaful al-ijtimai in civil legislation with its meaning in Islamic civilization, using an argument very similar to al-Sibai's. This shows the common ground of their thinking as men who are attempting to reinterpret Islam to broader groups of fellow Muslims.

First: The way that Western and Communist countries think of the principle of al-takaful al-ijtimai came as a result of the pressure of industrial developments and the spread of discontent among the working class and the masses. Europe, therefore, took the step to insure the workers, against unemployment only after the 1929 economic crisis from which all of Europe suffered. Meanwhile, Islam established its complete system of al-takaful al-ijtimai as early as fourteen centuries ago without being urged to do so by certain economic conditions which would necessitate it in the Arab environment. Nor was this takaful realized as a result of the hatred of one class against the other, nor was there any desire to confiscate wealth in revenge against the rich and the wealthy. Islamic takaful is nothing but a human tendency which had a deep and far-reaching influence even before the conscience of the world became aware of it.

Second : Civil laws are limited to guarantee food, clothing, housing and living needs. But in Islam, these laws are more, inclusive; they guarantee all the material and moral needs of life because the sharia has given each citizen certain rights-the right to live, of freedom, of education and of ownership.

The author's discussion on al-zakat is summarized as follows: al-zakat is the portion given by the rich from their own wealth, whether cash or otherwise. Through this obligation, the meaning of al-tadamun (solidarity) and al-takaful al-maddi (mutual material responsibility) demanded by Islam becomes quite clear. This is a social organization legislated by Islam in order to establish perpetual cooperation between the haves and the have-nots, and to sow the seeds of loyalty and charity between the supporters and the supported.

Islam does not allow wide differences between classes nor does it allow one class to live luxuriously while another class starves. Islam calls societies with such a disparity faithless.

The zakat, as designated by Islam, protects society from destruction and extravagance. It protects it from capitalism with its absolute individualism and exploitation, and from communism which denies religion, destroys the individual and enslaves him for the welfare of the state.

The author then discusses two major kinds of solidarity-moral solidarity and material solidarity. The interaction between the two 'strengthens the spirit of cooperation and focuses attention around one core which unifies varied directions and prevails over all interests. In the case of material solidarity, Islam insists that it is the duty of the rich to help poor and disabled relatives, that the people in one district must live together supporting and cooperating with each other and that the state treasury must contribute to the support of those who need help. In other words, the author continues to say, al-takaful al-ijtimai in Islam is moral as well as material cooperation which functions on three socio-cultural levels of integration-the small family level, the district or village level, and the national level.

In another section, the author presents a discussion in which he compares the materialistic and moralistic societies. He distinguishes the moralistic society as that which is based on sufism and sufist behavior-that is, denial of material desires and living a spiritual life. The moralistic society is that "whose experiences do not submit to any logical measurement or proof. Rather, it submits to spiritual perceptions and divine upwellings of the heart, which are the main source of calm and security."

As for the materialistic society, it is the society which rushes to and is proud of material things. Such a society can be capitalist or communist, Islam sees capitalism as a "tremendous progressive step because it encouraged the increase of production, improved the means of communications, and exploited natural resources on a large scale. But such a bright picture did not last long because the capitalists disregarded heavenly religions and because they- (the capitalists) are the slaves of personal benefits." Islam, on the other hand, "has prohibited monopoly, and Muslim, Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi have claimed that the Prophet said, 'He who exploits is a sinner.'

With regard to communism, Islam sees it the same way as it sees capitalism. The author believes that the gap 'between Islam and communism is much wider and much deeper simply because the teachings of communism are completely the opposite of Islamic teaching. Communism is based on a materialistic philosophy, and its economy is based on the assumption that society is everything, contrary to Islamic teaching which gives much attention to the individual who in turn is expected to carry out his obligation toward the society. Furthermore, while communism conceives that the economic factor is the thing that makes society function and regulates its relationships, Islam does not believe that life is nothing but economics, nor is economics the only tool for solving social problems. Islam emphasizes spiritual and moral values. Moreover, while communism does not believe in individual ownership, Islam does not deny it and it established all legitimate means to acquire it as long as it is useful for both the individual and society.

From all this, the author comes to the conclusion that the Muslim society is both a materialistic and moralistic society. Because Islam is related to a divine belief, it is an interwoven unit which aims at moral goals as well as general human interest. Accordingly, Islam has established its reform principles on human reality: body and soul.

Having presented the 'religious' point of view on the concept of al-takaful al-ijtimai, one example of a secular interpretation of the, same concept must follow. A little book by Ismail Mazhar approaches the concept al-takaful from a purely scientific angle. Mazhar starts his first chapter with a definition of al-takaful as the transition from the stage of human inability to the stage of ability.


In elaborating this, he uses the term 'symbiosis' as equivalent to the Arabic takaful. In organic life, al-takaful is "an example of coexistence in which the life of one creature depends on the life of another to the extent that both lives are coexistently related to one another, and interests are shared among them.

After a brief review of the development of capitalism and communism, Mazhar reaches the conclusion that both systems are destructive to an important aspect of social life, namely the individual. The individual is important to the society because his freedom protects group development; the group is necessary for the individual, but its authority over him must not deprive the society of the influence of the individual. Thus, there must exist a social system on the basis of al-takaful between the individual and society, integrating both together without the supremacy of one over the other.

He then raises the question of whether or not a social system can be established which is formed on the basis of a mutual feeling of responsibility in which all segments of society feel that they are supporter; as well as supported, a system which makes mutual support among the segments of the society a matter of supporting the very structure of the society itself, leading to its survival as a complete unit.

In his review of the history of great civilizations, it is interesting to notice that Mazhar comes to the conclusion that the developmental steps with which man stepped forward indicate that he is moving with his culture in the direction of a system of al-takaful al-ijtimai, "The cultures which flourished in ancient times were due mostly to the prevalence of the spirit of al-takaful and their disintegration was due to its weakness." This leads him to the definition of nationalism. To Mazhar, nationalism is "a feeling of al-takaful al-ijtimai which give the individual the feeling that he is more honored and has a better place 'in his society than in any other society." While seeing communism as the oppression of the individual by fanatic socialists, and capitalism as the domination of the individual over the group, he focuses attention on the positive value of 'equality' (al-musawa). In explaining this notion, he uses scientific terms, such as mufadala (the difference in ability of some people over others) and al-tafdil (natural selection). He accuses the communists of misinterpreting the term 'equality.' In the world of living things, no two individuals, two trees or two flowers enjoy perfect equality. However, if communism arose on a false concept called 'equality,' it is no doubt in a transition period which will ultimately lead to a takaful system.

What, then, stands against the achievement of al-takaful al-ijtimai? Mazhar lists six obstacles:
1. The domination of individual or group interests.
2. Social parasitism. ("... types of individuals who have tried to obtain the necessities of life from other individuals without making any productive effort equal to what they consumed.")
3. Rigidity of social systems. (That is, slavery under unchanging
laws.)
4. Unequal life opportunities.
5. The conflict of responses and their harmony. There are people who burst out in destructive revolts disproportionate to the stimuli which caused them. Others surrendered and yielded to conditions which they could easily have rejected and thus freed themselves.
6. The converging of opposites. (This is manifested in the collaboration of higher authorities-the governmental and the religious powers-to suppress freedom and repress thought.)

Finally, how can the takaful be achieved? In Mazhar's opinion, the realization of al-takaful al-ijtimai rests on two important pillars. The first is legislation for the sake of regulating the needs of the society. In order to avoid social retardation, such legislation must not be inspired by a tyrant or be the outcome of his will, nor should it be inspired by the supernatural. In other words, the law must be the outcome of the will of the society. This is the core around which the ties of al-takaful converge and without which society disintegrates.

The second pillar is a moral-idealistic one. In explaining this, Mazhar reviews the early history of the Islamic State. He says: "During the 'first phase of Islam, I mean the phase during which the Muslims believed that the slate was the property of each one of them and that religion was for God, the Muslim State was able to defeat the two greatest empires, the Persian and the Byzantine, in a short time" because it was a state built on the concept of al-takaful, the complex which "united the Muslims and was supported by the conviction of every Muslim that he was part and parcel of the state, that the state was his state and that Islam was a religion which had no judge but God." When corruption crept into the new state, and when the complex of al-takaful between individuals was dissolved and replaced by a despotic state, the Muslim State disintegrated and collapsed.

These three writers, by defining and analyzing al-takaful al-ijtimai, make it clear what kind of society advocates of al-takaful are looking for. If al-takaful al-ijtimai or al-ishtirakiyva is one of the major outcomes of the socialist ideology, it becomes necessary to perceive it in the light of Islam as a religion. A comparison with Christian influences upon the development of socialism in the West would be of interest. The only point to which we can draw attention here is the issue of separation of 'state' and 'religion.' If the Christian West has succeeded in separating the State from the Church, it would seem that Islam can do the same but in a more limited sense, at least for the time being. What seems to be taking place now in socialist Egypt is the creation of a welfare state: based on secular arguments as well as arguments derived from Islamic teaching.

Finally, it should be stressed that the notion of socialism is not alien to the Arab culture as a whole. Asabiyya (clannishness) and al-aila (the family) belong to the typical Arab cultural patterns. Furthermore, the principle of sharing things is not only demanded by Islam, but is also advocated by Arabic proverbs, stories and legends. The heart of the matter seems to rest in today's challenge of a reinterpretation of Islam in order to meet the demands of the twenty-first century.