It’s a pleasure for me to present the second edition of the book Iqtisaduna (Our Economics). I believe more and more firmly and have become more and more convinced that the ummah (the Muslim community) has begun to understand the true message of Islam - and despite of all types of deception by the colonialists - realizes that Islam is the only way to salvation, and that the Islamic system is the natural framework within which the ummah should determine its life, expend its efforts and be the basis it should build its existence on.

I would have loved the opportunity to expand on some topics of the book and to focus more on a number of the points. However, since I do not have enough space now to talk about the points discussed in the book, I will not leave this matter without saying a word on the subject of the book itself and the relationship of this important subject with the life and problems of the ummah and its gradually increasing significance not only on the Islamic level but also on the level or human society.

On the Islamic level, the ummah lives its complete jihad (holy war, including struggles and sacrifices) against its backwardness and its downfall. It is attempting to move, both politically and socially, towards a better existence, a firmer structure and a more prosperous and flourishing economy. After a string of both failed and successful attempts, the ummah will find that there is only one path along which to proceed and that is the path of Islam and will find that there is no other framework within which to find solutions to the problems of economic backwardness except the framework of the Islamic economic system.

On the other level, humanity is now enduring the most severe concerns and conflicts between the two world trends - mined with nuclear bombs, rockets and other tools of destruction. Humanity will find no salvation for itself except at the only door of heaven, which remains open and that is Islam.

In this introduction, let us discuss the relationship at the Islamic level.

On The Islamic Level

As the Islamic world began to get to know the Europeans and yield to their intellectual guidance and leadership in the progress of civilization, the ummah started to comprehend its role in life within the national framework, instead of believing in Islam’s real message as guidance for mankind. The Europeans had divided parts of the world into different countries as it suited them. They further grouped the countries into those that were economically advanced and those that were economically backward, on the basis of their economic standard and production potential.

The countries of the Islamic world were all in the latter category. By the European logic, these nations had to acknowledge leadership of the advanced countries and allow them unlimited scope to infuse the European spirit into these nations and map out the road to advancement. In this way, the Islamic world - as a group of economically poor countries - began its life with the Western civilization and came to view its problem as that of economic underdevelopment, lagging behind the advanced countries, whose economic progress had given them leadership of the world.

Those advanced countries taught the Islamic world that the only way to overcome this problem and to catch up with the advanced countries was for it to adopt the lifestyle of the European man as a model in practice and to mark out the steps of this practice in order to build a perfect and complete economy capable of raising the underdeveloped Islamic countries to the level of the modern European nations.

This subservience of the Islamic world to the practices of the Western countries - as leader of modern civilization – is expressed in three successive forms and they still exist today in different parts of the Islamic world.

The first is political subservience. Its visible expression is in the form of the economically advanced Western nations exercising direct rule over the poorer countries.

The second is economic subservience, which went hand in hand with the emergence of politically independent governments in the third world countries. Its expression is in the businesses from western nations being given full mandate to operate in these countries in various ways to exploit their main resources, fill the vacuum with foreign capitalists investments and monopolize economically strategic utilities on the pretext of training the natives to shoulder the burden of the economic development of their respective countries.

The third is subservience in the system adopted and practised by the people of the Islamic world, in numerous attempts at gaining political independence and liberating themselves from the European economic domination. Later, they began to think of relying on their own ability to develop their respective economies and attain progress. However, they were only able to understand the nature of the problem of their economic underdevelopment within the Europe-based framework. Therefore, they were forced to choose the same method the Europeans had adopted in building their modern economy.

Great differences in viewpoints arose with regard to those attempts while the method was being drawn up and applied. However, these differences were sometimes merely concerned with the choice of the general form the method should take, from the numerous forms applied by the Europeans. The choice of method that was practiced by the Europeans was, in fact, a point of agreement as it was sign of intellectual reverence to the Western civilization. It was only in the choice of the forms, that they disagreed.

The recent experiments in the Islamic world in pursuing economic development and joining the modern civilization usually faced two forms to choose from. The two forms are the free economy based on capitalism and the planned economy based on socialism.

Both these economic systems have been largely used to build the modern European economy. The question that arose with regard to the study of the maximum level of application in the Islamic world was, "Which of the two forms is the most appropriate and capable of aiding them in their struggle to transform the retarded economies in their respective countries to ones that are progressive and advanced?"

The traditional choice in the Islamic world was the first system - free enterprise and capitalism - in the development and building the domestic economy of the respective countries. This was because the European economies from capitalist axis were the earlier ones to penetrate the Islamic world at the centres of authority, and polarize those countries to lean towards capitalism.

Through the political struggle of the ummah against colonialism and its attempts to liberate itself from the influence of the capitalist axis, those involved in governing leaned towards socialism, which is the European antithesis to the capitalist axis. Thus, there was a growing tendency to choose the second system for development, in the form of a centrally managed economy based on socialism. This was sort of an intermediate or a reconciled position, between the faith in the Europeans as leaders of the third world and the struggle against the political reality of capitalism.

The subservience of the economically weak countries to the mighty ones still imposed on them the confidence in the European systems as models to follow. Moreover, the capitalist stream was still in conflict with the sentiment and the reality of the struggle against colonial rule. Thus, the centrally planned socialist economy became the preferred model.

Each of the two trends has its own evidence that justifies the respective viewpoint. Proponents of the first trend usually point to the great progress that the capitalist European states have attained and the levels in production and industrialization they have reached, as the result of adopting the free enterprise system as the basis for development. It was thought that if the economically struggling countries adopt the same course and undergo the same experience, it was possible for them to reach the desired level of economic development more quickly. The rationale was that they would be able to benefit from the European experience with capitalism and employ all the work skills, which the Europeans have taken hundreds of years to acquire.

Proponents of the second trend have their own reasons for choosing centrally planned economy based on socialism, instead of the free economy. They held that although the free market system was able to deliver great gains, constant progress in production technology and steady growth in wealth for the leading European states in the capitalist world, it would not function in the same way for the third world countries today.

The reasons being that today these countries are facing a strong economic competition from the far more superior countries of the west that had already attained significant progress. While those advanced countries did not encounter such competition when they first embarked on economic development, they now impose this competition and take advantage of the inferior conditions the poorer countries are in, by promoting free economy as the path to economic progress.

With that, the underdeveloped countries are today forced to mobilize all resources and capabilities quickly and systematically, for economic development by means of socialism-based, centrally planned economy.

In interpreting the failures encountered in the application of both, the proponents for each economic system blame the artificial conditions created by the colonialists in the region intended to hinder development efforts. Because of this, neither allows itself - whenever it senses failure - to think of any alternative method, apart from the two systems that modern Europeans has adopted in the west and east. This is so despite the existence of a ready-made alternative, which is still very much alive - both theoretically and ideologically, in the life of the ummah - even though it has not been given the opportunity to be practised. That is the Islamic method and Islamic economic system.

Here, I do not want to make a comparison between the Islamic economics and the capitalist and socialist economies from the economic and religious points of view because I am leaving this for the book itself. In fact, the book, Iqtisaduna includes a comparative study in this respect. However, I would like to make a comparison between the economics in the western countries - both its capitalist and socialist wings - and the Islamic economics with regard to the capacity of each to participate in the battle the Islamic world is waging against economic underdevelopment and the ability of each to serve as the framework for economic development efforts.

When we turn from comparing these economic systems with regard to their intellectual and ideological contents, to that in respect of their practical ability to offer a framework for economic development, we must not merely compare the theoretical merits of each. Rather, we must observe closely the circumstances of the ummah with regard to this subject, along with its spiritual and historical profile. This is because it is for the ummah that these systems will be applied.

Thus, it is necessary to carefully study the intended grounds for application - its peculiar conditions - so that the valuable elements, in terms of the effectiveness in the actual application, can be noted. The effectiveness of the free capitalistic economy or the managed socialist economy in practice by the Europeans is not attributable to the economic systems alone. In other words, it is not necessary that the economy grow when the same system is adopted. Rather, the effectiveness is due to the system as an element that is inextricably intertwined with the prevailing circumstances that were part of the course of history. Thus, if the method is disconnected from its framework and its history, it will neither have such effectiveness nor yield such results.

Through a comparative study of the numerous economic ideologies and the possibilities of their success in practise throughout the Islamic world, a basic fact connected with the assessment of the situation should be presented. That is, the need for an economic method in an economic development program is nothing but the need for social organization framework that the state has to adopt. The state will subsequently plan the economic development within this framework merely by adhering to it.

Unless the state adopt a framework within which the ummah can be incorporated and a principle that is in harmony with the ummah be established, it is not possible that the efforts to develop the economy and fight economic retardation will yield the desired results. The movement of the entire ummah is a basic condition for the success of any economic program and any universal crusade against economic underdevelopment.

This is because the movement of the ummah is an expression of its growth, the growth of its will and the release of its inner talents. Wherever the ummah fails to grow, the development task cannot be carried out. Thus, the increase in foreign investment and domestic growth must proceed along the same course.

The very experience of the modern Europeans is a clear historical expression of this fact. The only reason that the methods used in the European economy - as frameworks for the task of development in the modern European history - recorded such dazzling success on the material level was the favorable interaction of the nations with these methods. Their movements in all fields of life were compatible with the demands of these methods and their psychological state was over the years completely ready for this assimilation and interaction.

Thus, when we want to choose a method or a general framework for economic development in the Islamic world, we must take this reality as a base and with that in mind, search for a cultural system capable of raising the ummah and mobilizing its forces and its faculties for the battle against economic retardation. We must consider the sentiments, attitude, history and different complexities of the ummah.

Many economists make a mistake when they study the economy of third world countries and apply the European methods of development, without taking into account the degree to which it is possible for people of those countries to assimilate with these methods, and the extent to which these methods are capable of being closely integrated with the people. There is for example the particular sentiment of the ummah in the Islamic world towards colonialism. The sentiment is marked by distrust, suspicion and fear as a result of a long bitter history of exploitation and struggle.

Moreover, this feeling has created in the ummah a type of ‘withdrawal’ from the European organizational capability, and a certain level of apprehension and a very adverse sentiment in relation to the organizations based on the social practices in the colonial countries. Even though these organizations may be good and have nothing to do with the colonial agenda, such sentiment makes it extremely unlikely for them to be an effective platform for the forces of the ummah in leading in the battle for development.

Due to this psychological conditioning that developed during the era of colonialism and its adverse sentiment towards anything with colonial element, the ummah must build its modern revival with a social organization and cultural features that are not associated with a colonial origin. This obvious reality made a number of political groups in the Islamic world think of adopting nationalism as a philosophy and the basis for culture and social structure, in their endeavour to present slogans that are completely independent of the colonial influence.

However, nationalism is merely a historical and linguistic bond. It is not in itself a philosophy with an ideology or a doctrine with specific principles. Rather, it is by nature neutral in the absence of a philosophy or social, ideological and religious doctrines. Therefore, it needs to adopt a particular worldview and a philosophy that would be the basis to shape the characteristics of its culture, revival and social structure.

It seems that many nationalist movements also had that realization that nationalism, as a raw material needs to go with a social philosophy and a particular social system. Thus, they tried to reconcile with this and ended up enhancing the original slogan, while still maintaining the detachment from the European influence.

Thus, the proponents of nationalism have proclaimed Arab socialism because they realized that nationalism alone is not sufficient. It was in need of a system and they thus proclaimed socialism within an Arab framework, in order to avoid the adverse reaction of the ummah to any slogan or philosophy connected with the colonial world. By ascribing socialism to Arabism, the nationalists tried to conceal the reality that socialism is a foreign constituent from the historical and intellectual perspectives. It is however a futile disguise that fails to fool the ummah. This shaky framework is nothing but an apparently vague structure with a foreign content, represented by socialism.

Or else, any role this framework plays in the socialist order and any development of the Arab factor in this matter does not mean that "Arabic" as a language and "Arab" as history, blood and race or a particular philosophy for the social structure. Rather, everything that gets skipped in application is due to the "Arab" factor. In practice, this came to mean the exclusion of any element in socialism that was incompatible with the prevailing traditions in the Arab society - which circumstances had not possibly changed - such as spiritual inclinations, including faith in God.

Thus, the Arab framework does not give socialism a new soul that differs from its existing intellectual and ideological state in the countries of the colonial masters. Rather, it is only an expression of specific exceptions, which may be temporary. But the exception does not alter the essence of the ideology, or the true content of the slogan.

Moreover, the proponents of Arab socialism cannot possibly make even basic distinctions between Arab, Persian or Turkish socialism. Nor can they explain how socialism differs by merely being given a particular nationalistic framework, because in reality the content and essence do not differ. Rather, these frameworks only express the set of exceptions, which may differ from one nation to another, in accordance with the prevailing customs of the respective nations.

Despite the failure of the Arab nationalists to present a new genuine content for socialism by giving it an Arab framework, their insistence on assigning the Arab framework confirmed what we mentioned earlier: that the ummah, by virtue of its aversion to anything with colonial origin due to the long period of colonization, can only build a modern renaissance with a mechanism that the ummah perceives as independent from the colonial masters.

Here is the big difference between the methods used in the European economy - which are perceived by the ummah as connected the colonial masters, no matter what frameworks these methods are given - and the Islamic method, which the ummah perceives as linked with its own history and glory. It is an expression of its noble descent and it does not bear any link with the colonial masters.

The sentiment of the ummah towards Islam as the expression of its entity, the sign of its historical personality and the key to its former glory is a very potent factor of success in the war against economic underdevelopment, if the method adopted is from Islam and if a framework for the basic principle is taken from the Islamic system.

Apart from the complex feeling of the ummah in relation to colonialism and all systems connected with countries of the colonial masters, there is another complication that also greatly hinders the success of the Western economic systems, if they were to be applied in the Islamic world. This complication is the incompatibility between these methods and the religious belief of the Muslims.

I do not want to talk about this incompatibility here, to compare between the Islamic religious standpoint and that implicit in those methods. Nor do I want to give preference to the former over the latter. I do not want to discuss this incompatibility from the ideological or religious points of view.

However, I will try to present this incompatibility between the European approach and the religious belief of Muslims as a force within the Islamic world, regardless of its scale. Irrespective of the perceived disunity and fragmentation of the ummah as a result of what colonialism did, it still has great influence in directing attitudes, accumulation of sentiment and forming of opinions. It has already been explained that the process of economic development does not merely involves the state adopting, applying and legislating policies. It is a process in which the whole ummah participates and hold a stake in one way or another.

If the ummah is aware of any incompatibility between the supposed framework for development and its value and belief systems, then depending on how strongly it holds to the value and belief systems, there will be resistance and withdrawal from the efforts at incorporating it in into the framework. Contrary to that, the Islamic system would not face this complication and is not afflicted with that type of incompatibility. Rather, if it is applied, the Islamic system will find in the spiritual doctrine great support and a contributive factor in the success of the development planned within its framework.

This is because the Islamic system is based on the principles of the Islamic Shari’ah (revealed law). Muslims generally believe in the sacredness and inviolability of these principles and that they should be implemented in accordance with their Islamic faith and their belief that Islam is a religion which was revealed to the seal of the prophets (Muhammad, s.a.w.a.).

There is no doubt that the most important factor for the success of any method adopted to regulate social life is the degree of trust people have in it and their view about its suitability. Assuming that economic development efforts using methods of European origin were able to do away with the religious doctrine and its resistance, it would still not be sufficient to destroy all that had been built on the basis of this faith - over a period of four centuries or more - and had played a great part in shaping the spiritual and intellectual outlook in the Islamic world. Just as doing away with the religious faith does not mean that a suitable ‘European’ base - capable of integration with the local society – is ready for those methods that had succeeded with the Europeans.

In fact, there is an Islamic value system that is to a certain degree prevalent in the Islamic world, and there is also one that goes along the European economy and the modern western civilization, which inspired and facilitated its success in the economic dimension. These two value systems are fundamentally very different in inclination, outlook and moral judgments. In the same measure as the value system of the modern Europeans is inherent in their economic mechanism, the value system of ummah will come into conflict with it.

The value system of the Islamic world is deep-rooted and cannot possibly be eradicated merely by diluting the religious faith. The battle plan in the war against economic retardation must take into account the resistance that would emerge against the methods of production in the country for which the plan is intended, arising from the differences in the value systems. The plan must also take into account natural human resistance to the extent the plan is perceived inconsistent with his personal interests.

The Europeans always look at the earth, not at heaven. Even their faith in Christianity over hundreds of years has not been able to triumph over the worldly inclination of the Europeans. Instead of lifting their gaze up to heaven, they managed to make the god of Christianity descend from heaven to earth and incarnate him as an earthly being.

The scientific efforts to trace the origin of mankind in the animal species and to explain his humanity on the basis of subjective conditioning to the earth and the environment in which man lives, or the scientific looking efforts to explain the whole human (social) structure on the basis of the productive forces which represent the earth and its potentials are merely attempts to make God ‘descend’ to earth. Those efforts only differ in method, some with scientific cover while some with mythical forms.

With this inclination to look at the earth, the Europeans ended up developing values for material things, wealth and possession that are in keeping with that attitude. These values, which have taken root in the European societies over the years, are eventually expressed in ideologies based on pleasures and gains, which swept away moral philosophical thought in Europe. These ideologies, as a product of European thought - which recorded great success on the intellectual level in Europe - have their spiritual significance and are an indication of the general mood of the European soul.

This special value accorded to material things, wealth and possession have played a great role in harnessing the energy bottled up inside every individual of the ummah, and in establishing goals for the process of economic development, which are compatible with those values. In this way, there was in all parts of the ummah a continuous active movement simultaneous with the rise of the modern European economy, with a drive that it never feels weary of or sated with material things and their benefits.

Likewise, the European man's severance of the true link with God, the Most High - and his viewing towards the earth instead of the heaven - has removed from his mind any real thought about a more sublime value or of restrictions imposed on him from outside his own domain. Moreover, that has made him inclined - both spiritually and mentally - towards belief in his right to freedom and has submerged him in a flood of feelings for independence and individuality.

This was then translated into the language of philosophy and expressed on the philosophical level by a greater philosophy in the modern history of Europe, which was existentialism. Existentialism crowned with philosophical form those feelings, which pervaded the modern European man. Thus, he found in existentialism his hopes and his feelings.

Freedom has played a major role in the European economy. It has been possible for the economic development process to benefit from the deep-rooted desire for freedom, independence and individuality pervading the Europeans in the success of the free economy, as a mechanism that is compatible with the firmly embedded inclinations and ideas of the people in Europe. Even when the European economy presented a socialist method, it also tried to base itself on the feeling of individuality and self-interest, but this time it was class individuality instead of the individuality of a person.

The absence of any sense of moral responsibility was a basic precondition in many of the activities, which were part of the development process. And all of us know that it was the deep sentiment for freedom, which prepared the ground for the fulfillment of this precondition. Freedom itself was instrumental in the Europeans’ understanding of the struggle because it made each person burst forth, only restrained by the existence of the other person standing in front of him, for each individual - by his very existence - would deny the other person his full freedom.

In this manner, the notion of the struggle developed in the mind of the European man. This concept has been expressed on the philosophical level just like the rest of the fundamental concepts, which produced the vein of the modern Western civilization. This concept of the struggle was expressed in scientific and philosophical ideas about the struggle for existence as a natural law among the living, about the inevitability of the class struggle in the society or about dialectics and the explanation of existence on the basis of the thesis and its antithesis and the compound arising from the struggle between opposites.

In fact, all these tendencies - whether scientific or philosophical - are above all an expression of a general spiritual reality and a strong awareness of the struggle among the people of modern civilization. The struggle greatly influenced the direction of the modern European economy and all the development procedures that accompanied it. That includes the struggle between individuals which was expressed in ‘perfect competition’ under the auspices of the free economy between the business enterprises and the investment decisions by individuals aimed at wealth maximization, and the inter-class struggle that was expressed in uprisings that took control of production in the country and set in motion all productive forces for the benefit of economic development.

This is the value system of the European economy and on this ground the economy has been able to begin its progress, boost growth and record enormous gains. This value system differs from that of the ummah in the Islamic world as a result of its long religious history. The Eastern man was brought up on the divine messages that were present in his country and went through an extensive religious upbringing at the hands of Islam. By nature, he looks at the heaven before looking at the earth and embraces the world of the ghayb (unseen) before embracing material things and those only perceptible through the senses.

His profound infatuation with the world of the "unseen" over and above the visible or tangible world was expressed on the intellectual level in the life of the Muslims. Consideration of the Islamic world was directed towards the intellectual domains of human knowledge, not the domains that are connected with the tangible reality. His profound feeling for the invisible world has constrained the force of the Muslim’s attachment to material things and their ability to stimulate him.

When the man in the Islamic world rids himself of the spiritual incentives to interact with material things and his attachment to their profitable use, he adopts a negative attitude in relation to them, a stance that takes the form either of abstinence, contentment or idleness.

This feeling for the "unseen" has trained the Muslim to feel the presence of an unseen supervision that, in the conscience of the pious Muslim, is an expression of a clear responsibility before God, the Most High. In the mind of another Muslim, it is an expression of a restrained behaviour and guided mind. In any case, this awareness of presence of the unseen insulates a Muslim from the urge for individual and moral freedom in the way that a European feels for it.

As a result of the Muslim's sense of an inner restraint with moral measures for the good of the community in which he lives, he feels a strong bond with the group he belongs to. The Muslim also perceives harmony between him and his community instead of the concept of conflict and struggle, which dominated modern European thought. The universal nature of the Islamic message, a mission that transcends national boundaries and spreading with time and place gives the Muslim concept of consolidated global community.

The gradual interaction of the man in the Islamic world with a global message for the human community implants in him the sentiment for universal brotherhood and the link with the community. If we regard this value system of the Muslim man as a reality that exists in the ummah, then it might be possible to benefit from it by seeking a mechanism - for economic development and progress – from within the Islamic world. The mechanism could then be applied with a framework incorporating this value system, in order to generate a driving force, in the similar way the value system embedded in the mechanisms used in the modern European economy contributed to their success when there was harmony between the two.

The Muslim's contemplation of the heaven before the earth may lead to a negative attitude with regard to the worldly and material wealth and its benefits. This stance may find visible expression in abstinence, contentment and idleness, if the worldly wealth is separated from the thoughts of the hereafter and heavenly guidance. However, if the worldly and material life is given the heavenly guided framework and the individual labour of the ummah is accorded the status of a "duty" and the significance of ibadah (worship of God), then the Muslim's contemplation of the "unseen" will transform into a driving force for the massive effort in elevating of the economic stature.

Instead of indifference towards worldly affairs, which the unenthusiastic Muslim feels today, or the spiritual discomfort that is frequently experienced by a Muslim who actively seeks a better worldly life - and act in accordance with the rules of the free or socialist economies - there will be complete harmony between the disposition of individual member of the ummah and his future positive role in the process of development, even if he is not a very religious Muslim.

This sense of this inner restriction and unseen supervision prevents him from perceiving the notion of freedom in the way a European understands it. This may to a great extent help in averting the difficulties arising from the free enterprise system and the problems confronting the economic development under its protection. A component of the mechanism to be employed in building the economy of the ummah must be based on the Islamic value system, and draw its legitimacy from his sense of inner restriction and the unseen divine surveillance.

In addition to the above, it is possible for the community and its extensions to participate in mobilizing the forces of the Islamic ummah in the war against economic underdevelopment, if the battle is given a slogan that is in accordance with the appropriate sentiment, like the slogan of jihad to protect the ummah.

The Holy Qur'an has ordered jihad:

“And prepare against them what force you can...” (8:60)

Thus, the Qur'an has ordered the preparation of all forces, including all economic forces represented by the (high) level of production, as a part of the battle and jihad of the ummah to preserve its existence and sovereignty.

The importance of Islamic economics emerges here, as the economic system capable of harnessing the value system of Muslims and transforming it into a driving force in the economic development process, thus contributing to a healthy and successful economic program. When we adopt the Islamic system, we will be able to benefit from this value system and mobilize it in the war against economic backwardness, in contrast to economic systems with historical and ideological connection to an alien value system.

Some European thinkers have also begun to realize this fact and become fully aware that their methods are not in accordance with the nature of the Islamic world. As an example, I will cite Jacques Oustravi. He has plainly recorded this observation in his book Economic Growth, despite his failure to present a tactical and logical sequence of the existence of the European value system and the rise of the Islamic value system - and the organization of its spheres - and his omission of some of the key divergences of the two value systems. Thus, he has embroiled himself in a number of mistakes, as revealed quite comprehensively by Dr. Nabil Subhi at-Tawil who translated the book into Arabic and by the venerable Professor Muhammad al-Mubarak in his introduction to the book.

I would like to expand on this subject at the nearest opportunity. But for now, I will content myself with saying that the Muslim’s inclination towards the afterlife does not in its basic sense mean his submission to fate, or his total reliance on circumstances and opportunities, or his sense of incapacity to create and innovate, as Jacques Oustravi tried to suggest.

Rather, this inclination towards afterlife is in fact an expression of the beginning of the khilafah (vicegerency) of man on earth. By nature, he is inclined to the awareness of his position on earth as God's khalifah (vicegerent). I do not know of a concept that is richer than this concept of vicegerency of God, as a confirmation of man's capabilities and powers that make him the vicegerent of the Absolute Master (Allah) on the universe.

Likewise, I do not know of anything that is more remote - from the true meaning of vicegerent of God - than submission to fate and circumstances. Vicegerency implies responsibility towards that over which one is appointed vicegerent of. It is not a responsibility without freedom, the awareness of choices and authority to judge situations. What type of vicegerency is it if man is restricted or programmed?

Therefore, we have said that the spiritual and divinely guided framework establishes an outlet for the internal forces of the Muslim and stimulates his capabilities in achieving worldly material success, intended in the economic development programs. Separating the worldly life from this spiritual framework makes vicegerency meaningless. It freezes the Muslim’s contemplation of the worldly and material life in an adverse way. This adverse attitude does not emerge from the nature of his concern about the afterlife, but from suspending the potent driving forces in this thought by failing to align the material life in harmony with that contemplation.

In addition to all these, we may observe that the adoption of Islam as a basis for general organization allows us to establish all aspects of our life, both spiritually and socially, on one single premise. Islam covers both spiritual and social aspects of life while many other social systems are limited to the social and economic relations of man’s life. Thus, if we take our general programs for life from man-made sources instead of the Islamic system, we will not be able to do as desired without having another spiritual model.

Moreover, Islam is the only suitable source for the organization of spiritual life. Thus, it is necessary to have one basis for both spiritual and social aspects of life, particularly since the two are connected to one another. They largely interact with one another, and this interaction gives rise to one unified and more harmonious basis for the two, considering the particular intertwining of spiritual and social activities in the life of man.

Muhammad Baqir as-Sadr
An-Najaf - Iraq.