Poverty has been the universal fact of human society. It was and is prevalent almost in the entire world. Poverty as a word is very common in everyday life but as a concept it is not as simple. It has been one among the universal problems, from which humanity suffered a lot. In reaction of the suffering, many solutions were offered. These solutions were in the form of schemes at individual as well as at organisational level and in the form of ideologies also. Ideologies advocated for eradication of poverty, provided a platform for intellectuals to have academic discourse. Consequently, ideologies were given acceptance from some corner of the society as well as rejection from another. The end result is the persistency of poverty in almost all societies.
Islam, as an important and dominating ideology of the world, has also offered solution to the problem that tried to deal at psychological, social and organisational level. Now it is well recognised that poverty is not something related to social exploitation only rather it is related to individual will also. That is why no ideology or scheme can get success in eradicating poverty if it leaves out any one of the above dimensions.
When we say that poverty as a concept is not very simple, the purpose of this statement is not to involve in huge academic exercise related to the concept but just to introduce the dimensions responsible for this conceptual ambiguity.
The real problem of conceptual ambiguity arises when the concept was tried to objectify. It has been classified in three categories: Absolute Poverty, Relative Poverty and Subjective Poverty. Absolute poverty is generally used for implementation of schemes, etc. because it gives a very objective answer about the people’s concern.
Measures of absolute poverty are usually based upon the idea of subsistence. That is people who do not have the resources to lead and maintain human life are below poverty line. Again the resources to lead a human life can be measured by units, may be of rupees or calories per day. According to the supporters of absolute poverty, this measurement should be universal and applicable everywhere.
On the contrary, according to the advocates of relative poverty, it can be measured only in relation to the people living in a particular area. For example, a millionaire among billionaires may suffer from relative poverty despite having resources more than his needs to lead a human life.
The third one, subjective poverty, is highly subjective as its name unfolds. It is a feeling of a man to be poor in relation to his own previous state of wealth. For example, when a billionaire becomes a millionaire, he may develop a feeling of poverty. This kind of feeling is known as subjective poverty.
Coming to the core of the subject, how Islam tries to eliminate poverty from human society, it is well safe to assume that Islam guarantees prosperity, distribution of wealth and considers poverty as a disease. The Qur’ān and Hadith provide many moral, ethical injunctions as well as laws to cure this social disease.
If we have a look on the scholarly papers and books written on Islam and poverty, we find them generally talking about charity, social security, equal distribution of wealth, etc. But in most of the writings we do not have discussions on causes or lack of education as the most important cause, which Islam does not subscribe to.
Focusing on causes does not mean that remedies are not important. Both are interlinked and interconnected with each other. The whole purpose of putting the matter into cause and effect manner is to make it more understandable.
After having a look at the ethical and moral guidance and principles related to economic activities prescribed by Islam, it is much safe to deduce that a man may only remain poor if:
• He himself does not want to earn
• He lacks social security to get a chance to materialise his interest, and
• He is extravagant.
Finally, we can say that these are three major causes responsible for poverty. The most notable and interesting thing here is that two of them are under the control of individuals. An individual need not any external support to eliminate the first and third causes. As mentioned earlier that the social security, which is the second cause, was devoted much attention by the scholars, so I need not explore it any further.
As far as the first cause is concerned, it is not very simple and objective to be understood. There is nobody in the world who does not want to earn. But the question is how much effort he is making to earn and how much sincere he is in doing so. Many times we have heard Ulama saying that mere claim is not enough to get anything rather it requires sufficient action in support of the claim. If we put the claim of people to earn in this context then we have to observe whether the claimer has some action in support of his claim or not.
Of course there are many sayings of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) as well as Qur’ānic injunctions that encourage promotion of earning. The Qur’ān says:
“Then when the prayer is finished, you may disperse through the land and seek the bounty of Allah.” (Juma: 10 )
“Do they not see that we have created for them among the things which our hands have created, the cattle, so that they are their owners?” (Yaseen: 71)
“Take alms from their wealth.” (Tauba: 103)
“And that you strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives.” (Saff: 11)
All these verses advocate the cause of earning directly and by giving the concept of private property. Having private property itself is a big motive to earn. In one of his sayings the Blessed Messenger says: “O my Lord! Protect me from incapability and laziness.” There are many evidences in the Hadith literature favouring and admiring work and earning.
Now I would like to share some personal experiences which are very much relevant. The city in which I live is a metro. It has a huge Muslim population as auto rickshaw drivers. Whenever I came to hire an auto I hardly found a Muslim auto-wala ready to go by meter. He always tried to fix the amount before starting the auto. When asked, his usual reply was nahi bhai meter khrab hai or meter se nahi jayen ge (Meter is not working or won’t go by meter).
The message I want to convey is that the auto-wala has come out with an auto to earn money. He has left his house with his auto with the intention that he will come back in the evening with some earning. He has the wish to earn. But the behaviour and action he is displaying is not supporting his will and intention. Nobody is willing to pay more except under certain compulsion. So the action of such an auto-wala hinders him to be hired.
When I felt this I intentionally enquired a Muslim auto-wala and found the same conclusion that his action is not supporting his will. And if the action is not supportive, may be knowingly or unknowingly, it means people do not have the will to earn or in other words they do not want to earn.
This is a very important aspect of the aforementioned cause of poverty. It should be addressed by the Ulama in their sermons.
The third cause which is about extravagance is important and simple to understand. The interesting aspect of this cause is that its positivity is in the control of man but its negativity is beyond his control. A man has full control over not spending the thing he has, that is the positivity but he does not have control on the expenses he desires. He has an uncontrolled check in the sense that he cannot spend the thing he does not have and this is the negativity.
Finally, I want to conclude that these issues should be relooked into. This is the responsibility of the Ulama to revisit the problem in the given dimension and propagate it with a view to help eliminate poverty among Muslims. The will and supportive action model may be implemented for the purpose of analysis not only at the rickshaw puller level but at the level of shopkeepers and at all other levels.
[DR. MALIK RAIHAN AHMAD is Asst. Professor (Sociology) at Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad, and can be reached at malikraihan@rediffmail.com]