However, the intellectual and esoteric dimensions of Islam are necessary for realizing the latter objectives, perfecting our talents as stewards, and working cooperatively to liberate ourselves from our egocentricity. But other classical economists such as David Ricardo and James Mill strongly opposed this view, denying the existence of such harmful effects.
They asserted that all types of work are homogeneous in terms of human development. They only acknowledged the first objective of work—production and service. These various positions have critical implications for the link between ethics and economics and the extent to which economic realities can be governed by their own logic, pointing toward an answer to the third question on the need for a new economic paradigm.
As Robert Foley has pointed out, the modern economic approach bases itself on a view of. A prevailing preoccupation with the accumulation of wealth is self-defeating, often converting the joy and blessings of wealth into a sort of envious misery—because somebody else will always have more. Instead, it generates scientific, technological, political, economic and other social structures that do violence to man and nature, by ignoring nearly everything necessary for a harmonious and just society.
These structural injustices, in turn, generate patterns of economic instability and environmental degradation that manifest themselves in specific financial and economic crises, on the one hand, and ecological catastrophes on the other.
Paying kids to read books might get them to read more, but also teach them to regard reading as a chore rather than a source of intrinsic satisfaction. Auctioning seats in the freshman class to the highest bidders might raise revenue but also erode the integrity of the college and the value of its diploma. Hiring foreign mercenaries to fight our wars might spare the lives of our citizens but corrupt the meaning of citizenship… [W]hen we decide that certain goods may be bought and sold, we decide, at least implicitly, that it is appropriate to treat them as commodities, as instruments of profit and use.
If such principles are necessary for socio-economic and environmental equilibrium, then ignoring or diverging from those principles makes no sense and subverts and destroys any hope of a just, harmonious, efficient, and environmentally sustainable economy. At stake is the starting point of economic theory, for an economic system that is unsustainable in the long-term and intrinsically unstable in the short-term is unintelligible in its own terms, just as disease is not intelligible except in terms of health, the loss of which leads to death.
Islamic economics is not reducible to a combination of modern economic theories and Islamic economic law any more than traditional Islamic medicine can consist of a distorted combination of conventional allopathic medicine with elements of Muslim medical ethics. Moreover, a similar hybrid approach to economics often espoused in popular studies and publications on Islamic economics is inadequate for anything beyond the treatment of symptoms.
Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets CSS if you are able to do so. This page has been archived and is no longer updated. Find out more about page archiving. Jihad Last updated Introduction Jihad The literal meaning of Jihad is struggle or effort, and it means much more than holy war. Muslims use the word Jihad to describe three different kinds of struggle: A believer's internal struggle to live out the Muslim faith as well as possible The struggle to build a good Muslim society Holy war: the struggle to defend Islam , with force if necessary Many modern writers claim that the main meaning of Jihad is the internal spiritual struggle, and this is accepted by many Muslims.
All religious people want to live their lives in the way that will please their God. Other ways in which a Muslim engages in the 'greater Jihad' could include: Learning the Qur'an by heart, or engage in other religious study. Overcoming things such as anger, greed, hatred, pride, or malice. Giving up smoking. Cleaning the floor of the mosque. Taking part in Muslim community activities. Working for social justice. Forgiving someone who has hurt them.
However the quotation has been very influential among some Muslims, particularly Sufis. Holy war Holy war When Muslims, or their faith or territory are under attack, Islam permits some say directs the believer to wage military war to protect them.
However Islamic shariah law sets very strict rules for the conduct of such a war. In recent years the most common meaning of Jihad has been Holy War. And there is a long tradition of Jihad being used to mean a military struggle to benefit Islam. What can justify Jihad? Permissable reasons for military Jihad : Self-defence Strengthening Islam Protecting the freedom of Muslims to practise their faith Protecting Muslims against oppression, which could include overthrowing a tyrannical ruler Punishing an enemy who breaks an oath Putting right a wrong What a Jihad is not A war is not a Jihad if the intention is to: Force people to convert to Islam Conquer other nations to colonise them Take territory for economic gain Settle disputes Demonstrate a leader's power Although the Prophet engaged in military action on a number of occasions, these were battles to survive, rather than conquest, and took place at a time when fighting between tribes was common.
The opponent must always have started the fighting. It must not be fought to gain territory. It must be launched by a religious leader. It must be fought to bring about good - something that Allah will approve of. Much less controversial, however, is the general rule that various categories of civilians must not be targeted.
This rule of civilian immunity is so widely accepted that it is even typically recognized by violent Muslim radicals. But such radicals also invoke loopholes to get around this rule. To justify this loophole, bin Laden invoked the writings of medieval Muslim scholars such as al-Qurtubi.
As I show in a recent book , however, al-Qurtubi actually held the exact opposite view: Civilians should never be targeted as a form of retribution.
0コメント