The Means Do Not Justify The End

If there is one thing I have learnt from life, it is that the means do not justify the ends. Since childhood, I observed my father who was vigilant to not break any rules as an expatriate worker in the UAE for 50+ consecutive years. I learnt that the laws of a society are made after considerable deliberation. Yes the are man made laws but a lot of work and consultantion goes to draft them. They are not perfect, but they are the best for that time for that place. By working within them we align with the natural processes of that society and live in peace and harmony with everyone. If we want to improve the society we work within the system to influence and change it for the better. Islamic laws are natural laws. There is tremendous flexibility in their scope and the way they can be implemented and exist within the system. As they are based on nature, practicing them sincerely within any system will influence the laws of any country and improve them naturally over time. 

The important thing is that we change ourselves, and that in itself will change our enironment and societies positively. When Islam spread worldwide it worked within the exsiting pre-Islamic cultures to refine them to become the best versions of it. During a casual conversation in a recreation center with a Canadian who spent his working life in Japan I learned that when he goes on vacations in India he prefers to stay at hotels owned by Muslims as Islam places a lot of emphasis on hygiene. The essential Indian culture is the same for Muslims and non Muslims, but Islam filtered the mainstrem Indian society in many ways over the centuries.

I remember how my father criticized newcomers to UAE in their carelessness in breaking the country's regulations. Yet many do not cringe at breaking laws when we immigrate to the West while emulating the Western systems blindly. Realize, that every rule we break has an impact on how we live. In general, it makes us deviate with natural living in that society. The fact that immigration status is denied to us in a country means that it is in OUR benefit not to stay there illegally, not for the fear of legal punishment but because it will have a host of negative repercussions that are not good for us in many ways. They will complicate our life and circumstances. So if we are denied a privilege by law, it means that it is beneficial for us not to have it. We may like a thing which is bad for us and dislike a thing which is good for us. The laws have been made with much deliberation for everyone's benefit including our own. The means do not justify the end.

Unfortunately, we see the same "by hook or by crook" mentality in new migrants to the West that we observed in illegal residents in the UAE in our youth. The West is a place where it is easy to deviate from natural living if we deliberately go against conventional and natural principles. So if there is a natural principle that engaging in riba whether in the form of home mortgages, car loans, or student loans is not natural, then we say OK, there is good in that for our holistic development and it will help us develop ourselves and our families in the long run and we do not engage in it. It is better not to be "touched by madness" that the Quran describes the dealing with riba causes, such that its effects do not allow us to live naturally, by constantly improving ourselves and others. Rather it causes us to become cogs in the Western system, enhancing its extreme nature rahter than improving it through influence and personal example to a natural equilibrium.

For some improvement and self development is aided through marriage or active participation in a particular community. Whereas others might thrive, producing great legacy by not marrying even though it it the Sunnah. Perhaps if Imam An Nawwawi married he might not have produced such great gems through dilution of his vision and efforts. Every case is different. For some Muslims, marriage in the West is obligatory, for some it is mubah, and for some it might be better not to marry. Similary, for some Muslims in the West, staying within a particular community might be obligatory, while for some interacting with a whole range of communities might be more beneficial to realize their unique vision. In any case, the important thing is to do the right thing which is uniquely right for the individual. without going against any conventional or natural principle. If we are violating any such principles, it is always possible to go back and correct our mistakes and build again to do things right, even though the matter might not be to our liking. If it means going back to our home countries because we are unable to upkeep conventional or natural principles, so be it, as the means do not justify the end. If it means to change our financial ways, it is always possible to reset to live more naturally in a society which has many benefits.

The Role of Wealth in Immigrant Muslim Communities in the West

They come mainly from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia speaking a gamut of diverse languages. All races, ethnicities, and economic classes are flooding Western urban centers. While some are unskilled laborers from rural villages, many are highly skilled professionals -- doctors, engineers, IT experts, accountants, financial wizards, and entrepreneurs. Some are refugees escaping war, religious persecution or oppression but a significant proportion of Muslims are migrating to the West for purely economic reasons, either as international students in Western universities or through professional migration schemes designed to attract the cream de la cream of the world.

The nature of capitalism in the West is that even religious non profit organizations are ecomically driven to solicit funding through donations. Unlike in Muslim countries where there are religious endowments (wafs) to fund religious activities, the religious institutions in the West are funded mostly through donations modeled on rules which originally goverened traditional Christian organizations. One local Islamic scholar described this public funding model as "beautiful" in terms of how many projects can be done through mutual cooperation.

Personally, I find some aspects of this model, which is rampant in immigrant communities, disgusting and sometimes against the Islamic ethos. When religious advice and services are influenced by donations, then they are not equitably dispensed in the community. As most immigrants are blindly focused on economic goals, they discount the importance of earning according to Islamic ethics, and encourage making wealth and properties based on riba and such exploitative economic practices that Islam explicitly prohibits. When such people gain influence through donations, neither is there blessing in the Islamic projects funded by impure wealth nor are the Islamic organizations able to cater to the needs of all the congregation equitably.

The waqf system needs to be established in the West whereby Islamic organizations become free from the addiction of perpetual fundraising. When Islamic organizations own properties and land which generate rent and harvest annually to fund Islamic projects there will be less need for perpetual fund raising.

How can Muslims in the West be leaders in astromony, history, research, etymology, social work, or a plethora of very interesting and fulfilling professions when everyone is expected to be a doctor, engineer, IT tech, or financial guru to make as much money as possible for influence and social status through donations? How can the best examples of humanity be so singularly money driven?

In medieval Christiandom, it was possible to purchase a certificate for Paradise from the Church for the right amount of donation. Likewise, we find Muslim elite financing their spiritual needs through donations, so it is possible for the rich to have a religious scholar recite the Quran beautifully for a terminally ill patient daily even if the patient does not try to perform salaat as long as they donate.

The concept of "pure" wealth and "impure" wealth was very clear even before the advent of Islam. When the Kaaba was reconstructed there was not enough funding to complete the whole structure with "pure" wealth so they did it without constructing the hateem (a semi circular adjacent area today). Yet Immigrant Islamic organizations have no qualms about the sources of their funds, just as Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan had no remorse to go to the dancing girls to collect funds for Aligarh Muslim University to revive Islam in India as did the public fundraising campaign in Morocco to build a giant mosque in Rabat recently which collected donations from even prostitutes.

There is nothing wrong with being wealthy in Islam just as there is nothing wrong with a lack of wealth. Wealth can be inherited or it can be a by product of productive and socially productive activities. The richest man in human history, Mansa Musa of Mali was a Muslim. Abu Bakr Siddique (RA), Uthman Ibn Affan (RA), and Abdulrahman Ibn Awf (RA) generated tremendous wealth, but wealth was never in their hearts. It was in their hands to do good with. For them wealth was a blessing. It came to them through ethically and lawfully as a by product of their good works and they used it for more good works and thus it kept multiplying in quantity and blessing. They did not hoard it, like it is hoarded today, but kept circulating it. Thus unlike Chistianity, Islam does not advocate shunning wealth to lead a righteous life. Nevertheless, we need to realize that in some circumstances wealth can be a curse, and in such individual circumstances it might be wiser not to pursue it and there is nothing wrong with that either.

Musab Ibn Umair (RA) was from a wealthy Makkan family, yet when he was burried after Uhad his shroud was not enough to cover his whole body. For many Muslims, especially of our present materialistic era, wealth can be a test and curse. Did not the Prophet (SWAS) explicitly single out the pursuit of wealth as THE fitna specific for his Ummah?

Islamic organizations in the West need to realize the repercussions of their actions with respect to funding their projects. Rather than perpetual fundraising, it might be more fruitful to establish awqaf for long term funding and take care of the spiritual need of their congregation irrespective of their economic condition. 

In the long term, such steps might lead to a more balanced flourishing of Islam in the West, free from the influences of oppressive Muslim regimes, while being immune from the blind pursuit of wealth and social status of our times which is one of the main spiritual illness that humanity suffers globally.