Dr. Yusuf Al Qardawi
In this manner, whenever any permissible action of the believer is accompanied by a good intention, his action becomes an act of worship. But the case of the haram is entirely different; it remains haram no matter how good the intention, how honorable the purpose, or how lofty the aim may be. Islam can never consent to employing a haram means to achieve a praiseworthy end. Indeed, it insists that not only the aim be honorable but also that the means chosen to attain it be pure. “The end justifies the means” is not the maxim of the Shari’ah, nor is “Secure your right even through wrong-doing.” This can never be, for the Shari’ah demands that the right should be secured through just means only.
If someone accumulates wealth through usury, forgery, gambling, prohibited games, or in any other haram manner in order to build a mosque, establish a charitable foundation, or to do any other good work, the guilt of having done what is haram will not be lifted from him because of the goodness of his objective; in Islam good aims and intentions have no effect in lessening the sinfulness of what is haram. This is what the Prophet (peace be on him) taught us when he said:
Verily, Allah is good and does not accept anytbut good, and Allah has commanded the Believers, as He commanded His messengers, saying ‘O you messengers! Eat of whatever is good and work righteousness. Indeed, I am aware of what you do.’ (The Qur’an 35:31.) He also said, ‘O you who believe! Eat of the good things which We provide for you. (2:172.)
The Prophet (peace be on him) then said,
A man travels far, unkempt and dust-stained (for hajj, umrah, or the like), raising his hands to the sky (and saying), ‘O Lord! O Lord!’ while eating what was haram, drinking what was haram, wearing what was haram, and nourishing himself through haram means. How then could his prayers be accepted? (Reported by Muslim and al-Tirmidhi on the authority of Abu Hurairah.)
He also said:
If anyone amasses wealth through haram means and then gives charity from it, there is no regard for him and the burden of sin remains. (Reported by Ibn Khazimah, Ibn Hibban, and al-Hakim on the authority of Abu Hurairah)
Again he said:
If a person earns property through haram means and then gives charity, it will not be accepted (by Allah); if he spends it there will be no blessing on it; and if he leaves it behind (at his death) it will be his provision in the Fire. Indeed, Allah Ta’ala does not obliterate one bad deed by another bad deed, but He cancels out a bad deed by a good deed. An unclean thing does not wipe away another unclean thing. (Reported by Ahmad and others on the authority of Ibn Mas’ood.)
- Doubtful Things Are To Be Avoided
It is Allah’s mercy to human beings that He did not leave them in ignorance concerning what is lawful and what is prohibited. Indeed, He has made explicit what is halal and explained what is haram, as He says:
…He has explained to you what He has made haram for you…. (6:119)
Accordingly, one may do what is lawful and must avoid what is prohibited insofar as he has the choice. However, there is a gray area between the clearly halal and the clearly haram. This is the area of what is doubtful. Some people may not be able to decide whether a particular matter is permissible or forbidden; such confusion may be due either to doubtful evidence or because of doubt concerning the applicability of the text to the particular circumstance or matter in question.
In relation to such matters, Islam considers it an act of piety for the Muslim to avoid doing what is doubtful in order to stay clear of doing something haram. This is similar to what was discussed earlier concerning the blocking of the avenues which lead to what is haram. Such a cautious approach, moreover, trains the Muslim to be farsighted in planning and increases his knowledge of affairs and people. The root of this principle is the saying of the Prophet (peace be on him):
Verily, the halal is clear and the haram is clear. Between the two there are doubtful matters concerning which people do not know whether they are halal or haram. One who avoids them in order to safeguard his religion and his honor is safe, while if someone engages in a part of them he may be doing something haram, like one who grazes his animals near the hima (the grounds reserved for animals belonging to the King which are out of bounds for others’ animals); it is thus quite likely that some of his animals will stray into it. Truly, every king has a hima, and the hima of Allah is what He has prohibited. (Reported by al-Bukhari’ Muslim, and others; the narration is taken from al Tirmidhi.) - The Haram Is Prohibited to Everyone Alike
In the Shari’ah of Islam the haram has universal applicability; here there is no such thing as that which is prohibited to a non-Arab but permitted to an Arab, nor anything which is restricted to a Black but allowed to a White. For in Islam there are no privileged classes or individuals who, in the name of religion, can do whatever they please according to their whims. Muslims do not have any privilege of making something haram for others while it is lawful for themselves; this cannot be, for truly Allah is the Lord of all, and the Shari’ah of Islam is the guide for all. Whatever Allah has legislated through His Shari’ah is lawful for all human beings and whatever He has prohibited is prohibited to all human beings until the Day of Resurrection.
As an example, stealing is equally haram for the Muslim and the non-Muslim; the punishment for it is the same, regardless of the family or the origin of the thief. The Prophet (peace be on him) firmly enforced this rule, proclaiming,
“By Allah, if Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad, were to steal, I would have her hand cut off.” (Reported by al-Bukhari.)
A case of theft was brought before the Prophet (peace be on him) involving two suspects, the one a Jew and the other a Muslim. Some relatives of the Muslim advanced circumstantial evidence to cast doubt on the Jew in order to save their man while he was, in fact, guilty. The Prophet (peace be on him) was almost persuaded to believe that the Muslim was innocent. Then a revelation was sent down exposing the conspiracy, clearing the Jew of the crime and directing the Prophet (peace be on him) to establish justice without any bias:
Indeed, We have sent down to thee the Book with the truth, so that thou mightest judge between the people as shown by Allah; then do not be an advocate for the treacherous, and seek forgiveness of Allah; indeed, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And do not plead on behalf of those who deceive themselves; indeed, Allah does not like the one who is treacherous and sinful. They may hide from men, but they cannot hide from Allah, for He is with them even when they hold, by night, discourse not pleasing to Him, and Allah encompasses what they do. Ah! You are the ones who pleaded for them in the life of this world, but who will plead for them with Allah on the Day of Resurrection, or who will be their guardian? (4:105-109)
In the distorted scripture of the Jews, it is alleged that while usury or interest is prohibited to the Jew when lending money to a brother Jew, there is no harm in charging it to a gentile, as stated in Deuteronomy 23:19-20:
You must not lend on interest (usury) to your brother, whether the loan be of money or food or anything else that may earn interest. You may demand interest on a loan of a foreigner, but you must not demand interest from your brother,
The Qur’an also speaks about another similar tendency among the Jews, that of cheating others who are not of their race or faith without feeling anything wrong in it. The Qur’an says:
And among the People of the Book is he who, if entrusted with a single gold coin, would not return it to thee unless thou constantly stood over him. This is because they say: We have no duty toward the gentiles, but they utter a falsehood concerning Allah, and they know it. (3:75)
They have unquestionably uttered falsehood in what they have ascribed to Allah, for the law of Allah does not discriminate between one people and another, and insofar as cheating is concerned, Allah has condemned it through the tongue of all His messengers and prophets.
With due apologies, we may say that this tendency to use a double standard, one for one’s “brother” and another for a “foreigner” or outsider, is a characteristic of primitive ethics. It can never be ascribed to a divinely revealed religion, for high morality—that is, true morality — is distinguishable by its universality and comprehensiveness and by its lack of a double standard. The distinction between us and primitive peoples is not in the existence or absence of a moral code but in the enlargement of the area of its application. As an example, such people also consider honesty as a praiseworthy quality, but they restrict its practice to the people of their own tribe. When dealing with people from outside their tribe or clan, they see nothing wrong with cheating them, or in fact recommending or even requiring it.
The author of ‘The Story of Civilization’ writes, Almost all groups agree in holding other groups to be infer to themselves. The Amerian Indians looked upon themselves as the chosen people, specially created by the Great Spirit as an uplifting example for mankind. One Indian tribe called itself ‘The Only Men;’ another called itself ‘Men of Men;’ the Caribs said, ‘We alone are people.’ The Eskimos believed that the Europeans had come to Greenland to learn manners and virtues. Consequently, it seldom occurred to primitive man to extend to other tribes the moral restraints which he acknowledged in dealing with his own; he frankly conceived it to be the function of morals to give strength and coherence to his group against other groups. Commandments and taboos applied only to the people of his tribe; with others, except when they were his guests, he might go as far as he dared. (Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1935, vol. l, pp. 54-55.).