Possbility of Decline in Imam al-Mahdis government
Question: Historically, we see that every civilization eventually declines. Is it not possible that the government of Imam al-Mahdi (ع) will also decline? In particular, might not people eventually become discontent with his government?
Brief Answer
Such a decline in the government of Imam al-Mahdi (ع) is inconceivable.
Governments decline for one of two reasons: either corruption creeps into the system and the government ceases to be just; or forces outside the government act treacherously by turning the people against the government. Since neither cause can exist in Imam al-Mahdi’s (ع) government, it will not decline.
Detailed Answer
Governments fail for one of two reasons:
1. The foundations of the government break down due to injustice and deviation from within. This leads either to a revolt of the people against the government’s injustice or to the invasion of foreign powers. Historically, many governments have fallen for this very reason. For instance, in Islamic history, the Sasanian Empire fell in the wake of the Muslim expansion; the Umayyad dynasty fell to the ‘Abbasids; and the ‘Abbasids, in turn, fell to the Mongols. In each case, injustice had reached such a level that the people felt no sense of loyalty to their rulers that they should defend their government. Rather, they sought succour in the invading forces. Similarly, the Islamic revolution in Iran stemmed from the injustices of the Pahlavi government. In general, all unjust governments eventually fall either because of internal revolt or at the hands of an invader who finds little or no resistance from a people who are disenchanted with their rulers.
2. The people are deceived and tricked into disenchantment with their ruler. The government of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (ع) faced just such difficulties. The propaganda with which his political enemies bombarded his people and the wars that he was forced to fight prevented his people from being able to think clearly about the issues at hand. In addition, in the years leading up to his caliphate, corruption had crept into the upper classes of society to such an extent that the Imam (ع) was reluctant to accept the caliphate since he knew the insurmountable difficulties that such corruption would cause. In particular, he knew that the people, after seeing the decadence of high society, and the discrepancy between Islamic teachings and what was being practiced by the upper echelons, would not have the resolve to defend his government. The inevitable result of these conditions was the assassination of the Imam (ع) and the decline of his government.
In the government of Imam al-Mahdi (ع), the first factor is inconceivable because like Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (ع) government, his government will be absolutely just. For several reasons the second factor will also not come into play. For one thing, the people will have an increased level of Islamic awareness. Secondly, his government will have control over all forms of media and information technology; hence his enemies will not be able to incite the people against him. Lastly, at that time all aspects of Islamic law will have been put in place. In particular, enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, will be practiced in its full manifestation, so neither corruption will creep into society, nor will the people become disenchanted with the rule of Allah (awj).
It should be kept in mind however, that at that time Satan will be as active as ever. He will be successful in deceiving some; however the vast majority of people will follow the truth for the aforementioned reasons.
Difference in blood money between man and a woman in Islamic Jurisprudence
Question: Why is the blood money of a woman half of that of a man?
Brief Answer
According to jurisprudential and historical studies, blood money is an economical matter. It has been legislated in order to compensate for the loss incurred by the injured. From another point of view, in an ideal society, which Islam attempts to create, most of the economic activity is carried out by men. When we look at the general economic responsibilities of men we find that men have duties that women have been excused from. While the most important responsibility of a woman, but not the only one, is to manage the cornerstone of society, in other words the family, the most important duty of man, but not the only one, is to provide for the economic needs of the family.
When we pay attention to this matter we can easily conclude that Islam must strengthen those matters that have financial consequences for men and amongst these matters is blood money. Men play a pivotal role in the economic life of the family. From another point of view, blood money is related to the physical aspect of the human being. Hence, if someone’s body were stronger his blood money would be more. Since men are more productive economically than women, their blood money is more than that of women. This does not mean of course that in Islam the position and status of a woman is less than that of a man. If blood money was related to the worth and position of individuals, then the blood money of a scholar or the leader of society would not be equal to that of an average worker.
Another important point pertains to the role a man plays in the security of his household. It is very clear that it is the man that protects the family. This would imply that the loss inflicted on a family if the man was not present would be far greater than if the woman was not there. In the end it is necessary to keep this in mind that in every case the laws that have been presented by a religion or school of thought are always in line with the principles that that religion or school of thought has formed in regards to that matter. It is in accordance to the sum total of those viewpoints that the law been passed. In regards to blood money as well, Islam has formed its law while taking into consideration the responsibilities and rights of both men and women and the general laws that pertain to the family system. We cannot therefore look at them in a separately and object.
Detailed Answer
All of the laws of Islam are based upon certain benefits. Every law has wisdom. If something has been prohibited in Islam it is because it is harmful. If something has been made obligatory it is because it has a benefit. Of course perhaps it is not possible for us to find out all of the benefits and harms of all the laws and prohibitions, but if we rely on a sound intelligence and base ourselves on realities and of course on the sayings of the Infallibles (ع) we can understand some of these things.
In regards to the blood money of a woman being half of that of a man there is definitely some wisdom behind such a law to which we will briefly refer:
1. If Islam was purely a materialistic school of thought and if the foundations of its laws were monetary and economic matters and, given this, women’s blood money was half of that of men’s, then this objection would be proper that why is the value of women half of that of men and why have they valued women at half the price of men. But these are not the foundations that are used and in Islam the value of human beings is according to their Spirit and their spiritual qualities. In Islam that which is valuable is piety. Human beings can be like Musa (ع) who spoke with Allah (awj) or be like Marium I who used to receive heavenly revelations. In regards to traversing the path of felicity and obtaining spiritual positions, men and women are equal. There is no difference between them in this regard in principle, and in fact, the matter depends upon their personal ambition and effort. But blood money is an economic matter. Blood money is a matter related to the physical aspect of human beings, therefore in this regard there is no difference between the blood money of a prominent member of the Islamic society and an average labourer.
2. Generally speaking we can say that human beings, whether they be men or women, have three dimensions to their existence:
a. The human or divine dimension: In this dimension there is no difference between men and women. The path to human and divine perfection is open to both of them and both of them can progress in these regards as far as they want. In verse number 97 of Surat al-Nahl (16), Allah (awj) says:
“Whoever amongst you whether they be man or woman and they have faith without a doubt we will give them pure life in this world and in the hereafter we will give them a reward in recompense to their good deeds.”
In Surat al-Ahzab (33), the same matter has also been alluded to.
b. The intellectual dimension: According to the intellectual dimension there is no difference between men and women. Islam does not believe that there is a difference between men and women as regards the gaining of knowledge. “Gaining knowledge is an obligation on both men and women.” The Qur`anic verses that have been revealed as regards knowledge and learning have not discriminated between men and women and these verses are almost 40 in number.
c. The economic dimension: In Islam men and women differ from each other in the economic responsibilities that been placed on each of their shoulders. These responsibilities have been divided according to the bodily and psychological strengths and weaknesses of both. Principally women are weaker than men in economic matters. Even in this age and in societies that have apparently not discriminated between men and women, the economic output of women is less than that of men. The truth of the matter is that women must become pregnant and after giving birth they must breastfeed their children. They subsequently must take care of their children. The pregnancy and breastfeeding takes quite a bit of time and energy from the women. Even though this is a valuable matter in itself, it is not an economic matter. There is no economic output produced by such work. From another point of view the body of men and women differ drastically from one another. Women have delicate bodies and they can be injured with the slightest accident while the bodies of men are strong and generally powerful and therefore more suited for difficult tasks. For this very reason, many of the difficult jobs of society that require much power have been placed in the hands of men. It is very obvious that without men the family is more at an economic loss. It is therefore necessary that men’s blood money be more than that of women.
3. The vacuum felt by a family with the loss of a man is far greater than the loss felt at the absence of a woman. According to jurisprudential and historical studies, blood money is an economical matter. It has been legislated in order to compensate for the loss incurred by the injured. From another point of view, in an ideal society, which Islam attempts to create, most of the economic activity is carried out by men. When we look at the general economic responsibilities of men we find that men have duties that women have been excused from. While the most important responsibility of a woman, but not the only one, is to manage the cornerstone of society, in other words the family, the most important duty of man, but not the only one, is to provide for the economic needs of the family. Aside from this, the daily expenses of the children are upon the shoulders of the man not the woman. Therefore with his departure some people who should be looked after find themselves at a loss. This vacuum must be filled by some means. It is only natural then that the blood money of a man should be more than that of a woman. This matter has no relation to the essence of men and women. Rather it relates to the external accidents that are incurred by a family. When we take into consideration all that has been just said, we can come the conclusion that blood money is not a means by which we value men and women. Their difference in this matter is not something to be objected to. From another point of view the economic responsibilities of a man necessitate that in some matters (like blood money) that are directly related to economics a certain difference between men and women show up. There is no difficulty in this matter.
Men are stronger than women and are capable of performing more difficult tasks than women. Their existence provides peace and tranquillity to the family. From another point of view, with their loss some people are left without a helper and provider. It is therefore natural that their blood money be more than that of women.
We conclude this answer by turning our attention to a point that is not without subtlety and by answering two questions.
First of all, man’s blood money is double that of woman’s in the case that the blood money should reach one third of the required portion. In any other case, their blood money is equal. If her blood money’s being half were a proof of her inferiority to that of man, then in all cases it should be half. Secondly, just as men have more blood money than women, they are also responsible to participate in the money paid to the family of someone killed or injured by one of their family members. This is while women are excused from such an obligation.
It is possible that someone may object by saying that in this era men and women work side by side in the workforce. Therefore there is no reason that in this age her blood money should be half of men’s.
In answer to this objection we can say that first of all, it is true that women today participate in economic activities alongside men but in no instance can they provide the security that men can provide for their family. Secondly, there are many high paying jobs that do not suit the fragile composition of women and are therefore exclusively for men. It is natural that this would raise the economic status of men over women. At the same time we can object by saying that if the economic output of women were really equal to that of men as some of these countries that are advocates of equality between the sexes claim, then why is it that most of the dignitaries and managers and ministers are men?
Another objection that is likely to be raised is this: Is the fact that the blood money of women is half of that of men a discrimination against her in favour of men? The answer to this question is that Islam is a religion of equality. To be male or female is no superiority in this religion but in the matter of blood money there is a wisdom that necessitates that men’s be more than that of women’s. There are laws in Islam that are to the benefit of women based on a certain wisdom that lies in such laws. For example if a man becomes an apostate, according to the view of many jurisprudents he is to be killed even though he may repent afterwards. But if a woman becomes an apostate and repents then she is returned to her ordinary life. Or for instance if a man becomes insane after getting married the wife has a right to end the marriage, while if the same thing happens to a woman the man has no such right.
Difference in inheritance of women and men in Islamic Jurisprudence
Question: Why is the inheritance of women half that of men?
Brief Answer
The fact that a woman’s inheritance is half that of a man’s has enticed many to delve into the rationale behind this rule. In the answers that have reached us from the leaders of religion, the following point has been stressed: The reason that the inheritance of man is more is because the upkeep of women is upon the shoulders of men. In other words, aside from the fact that a man must look after himself, he is also responsible for the upkeep and expenses of his wife and children. From another point of view, it is the man who gives the dowry to the woman and she is the one who takes it from him.
In reality, it is possible to say that what the woman takes in the form of inheritance and dowry is tantamount to her savings, whereas the portion of the inheritance of the man is spent on the expenses of his daily life and that of his wife and children. Aside from this, certain other responsibilities have been placed on the shoulders of a man, which necessitate his spending money in order to carry them out. For example a man must spend money in the way of war, or if one of his relatives accidentally kills someone or injures someone he must pay certain monies to the family of the victim, whereas a woman has no responsibility in this regard. So even though what is apparent is that the share of a man in inheritance is two times that of a woman, in all practicality his share in the sum total of personal wealth is far less than hers. While on the other hand, in exchange for the “excess” inheritance, man has heavier responsibilities to shoulder than a woman. So in brief it can be said that the inheritance of men and women being different is so as to implement a sort of balance between the rights and responsibilities of each group.
Detailed Answer
Before answering this question, it is necessary to remember that the rule that states that the portion of inheritance of a man is twice that of a woman is not true across the board. In some cases we find that men and women take an equal sum of inheritance, like for instance the father and the mother of the deceased who take an equal amount of inheritance. In this case there is no difference between man and woman.
Having said this, it is necessary to address the question of why the share of a woman’s inheritance is half of that of a man’s? Is this not a type of favouritism?
In a tradition, Imam Ja’far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq (ع) was asked as to why women take one portion of inheritance when we see that they are weaker than men and they are more in need of help than them? Why is it that a man, who is stronger than a woman and whose body is more powerful than hers should get a double share of inheritance? Imam Ja’far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq (ع) replied that the reason for this is that a man has more responsibilities and he must go to war, enduring many expenses in the process. Aside from his own expenses, a man must also take upon himself the expenses of his spouse and children. What’s more, he must give money to the family of a person accidentally injured by one of his family members.[281]
In another tradition, Imam Ja’far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq (ع) emphasized the fact that it is the man which must give dowry to the woman—this being a recompense to the loss incurred by her in her inheritance[282].
Islam’s position on inheritance is in reality to the benefit of the woman. In the Age of Ignorance, the daughters and wives of the deceased were deprived of inheritance and all of the wealth of the deceased went to his sons. Islam, however, came and annulled the laws of the ignorant times and made women amongst the inheritors of the deceased. From its inception, Islam gave women an independence in ownership and monetary matters, this being a matter that has only but recently entered the laws of European nations. Even though apparently the inheritance of a man is double that of a woman, when we probe into the matter more thoroughly, we find that the inheritance of a woman is two times that of a man. The responsibilities that have been placed on the shoulders of men necessitates that they spend half of their income on women. Any given man is obligated to spend money on his spouse’s home, clothes, food, and other expenses, while the cost of living of himself and his children are on his shoulders. This responsibility of upkeep is to such an extent that even if a woman’s social position necessitates her having a servant and she herself does not have the means to pay for such a person, the salary of the aforementioned servant is upon her husband.
These responsibilities are on the shoulders of men, whereas we see that women are exempted from paying any living expenses, including their own–whether that be clothes or food. Therefore and in all practicality, it is woman who has more of a portion of wealth than man.
In the commentary of the Qur`an, Tafsir-e-Namunah,an example has been given that is useful in clarifying what we are trying to say. Consider, for example, that the sum total of all the wealth of the world is 30 billion pounds. Say that this wealth was distributed by means of inheritance between men and women. From this amount of money, 20 billion pounds went to men and 10 billion went to women. Since women do not have to spend on themselves, they can save that 10 billion and become partners with the men in the remaining 20 billion (since the portion of men is spent on women and children). So half of the portion of men, which is 10 billion pounds, goes to women. When we add this amount to the portion that the women saved from before, their sum total becomes 20 billion pounds.
By taking into consideration what was just said, we can say that the reasons that women’s portion of inheritance is less than that of men’s are three:
1. Dowry: At the time of getting married, man is responsible to take into consideration a suitable dowry for the woman. Whenever the woman asks for it, the man is responsible to give it to her. So from the beginning, man is religiously responsible to allot an amount of money as the dowry of his wife. This is one of the reasons that have been alluded to in the sayings of our Noble Imams (ع).
2. Allowance: In family life, aside from the fact that a man must look after his own expenses, he is responsible to take upon himself the expenses of his wife and children. For amongst the responsibilities of a man is the provision of food, clothes, and shelter for his wife that is in line with her social status. Even if a woman were to have a large amount of wealth, she has no responsibility in this regards. Not only does a woman have no obligation in this regards, but if she wanted to, she could ask of a wage for the work she does at home such as breastfeeding her children, cooking, etc.
3. Special responsibilities of man: Some very heavy responsibilities have been placed on men’s shoulders; responsibilities that women have been excused from. A good example is warfare in the path of Allah (awj). A man must wage war with his life and his wealth. In some of the verses of the Noble Qur`an war by means of wealth has even been placed ahead of war by means of life. A man must spend from his own pocket the expenses of his going to war. Or when someone is killed by another person, the men of the family of the culprit must pay money to the victim’s family, but women are freed form such an expense.
As can be seen, Islam did not intend to pass laws for the benefit of man and to the detriment of woman, or vice versa. Islam is not an advocate of “woman’s rights,” or that of men’s. More than anything, when passing laws Islam, has taken into consideration the eternal felicity of men, women, their children, and society as a whole. In any case, in line with the monetary responsibilities that it has relegated for men, Islam has in many instances divided wealth between men and women—such an instance being inheritance. It is not possible for us to claim that there is discrimination in this regards. Also, the whole corpus of the laws of Islam regarding men and women necessitate that the laws of inheritance be a certain way. This matter does not allow us to object to the civil laws of Islam.
In the end, it is possible for us to say that if it is true that the expenses of the woman are upon the shoulders of the man, then what use does woman have in hoarding a large amount of wealth? We can answer by saying that the dowry and inheritance of the woman is like a savings that is for her future, in case she separates from her spouse or her spouse dies. It is so she can lead a comfortable and respected life in case such events happen. But the reason that the expenses of the woman is upon the man is so that she can, without any sort of mental anxiety, raise good and pious children. In this way the family, which is the cornerstone of society, will be filled with warmth and love.
In the end we would like to point our reader’s attention to the following: If it should arise that circumstances necessitate that the owner of the wealth should help out the wife or the daughters more than his sons, then this person can do this by following the procedures laid out in Islamic Jurisprudence. For example, if the father thinks it prudent to help his daughter more, he can, in his lifetime, give as a gift, some of his wealth to her. Also he can give a larger portion than her share of inheritance by writing a specific will in this regard.
Notes:
[281] al-Kafi, vol. 7, pg. 85:
مَا بَالُ الْمَرْأَةِ الْمِسْكِينَةِ الضَّعِيفَةِ تَأْخُذُ سَهْماً وَاحِداً وَ يَأْخُذُ الرَّجُلُ سَهْمَيْنِ قَالَ فَذَكَرَ بَعْضُ أَصْحَابِنَا لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع فَقَالَ إِنَّ الْمَرْأَةَ لَيْسَ عَلَيْهَا جِهَادٌ وَ لاَ نَفَقَةٌ وَ لاَ مَعْقُلَةٌ وَ إِنَّمَا ذَلِكَ عَلَى الرِّجَالِ وَ لِذَلِكَ جَعَلَ لِلْمَرْأَةِ سَهْماً وَاحِداً وَ لِلرَّجُلِ سَهْمَيْنِ.
[282] ‘Ilal al-Shara’i, vol. 2, pg. 570:
عَنْ عَبْدِ اللٌّهِ بْنِ سَنَانِ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللٌّهِ ( ع) قَالَ: قُلْتُ لِأَيِّ عِلَّةٍ صَارَ الْمِيرَاثُ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلَ حَظِّ الأُنْثَيَينِ؟ قَالَ : لِمَا جَعَلَ لَهَا مِنَ الصِّدَاقِ.
