Continuation of the discussion on what are the criteria for unlegislated public interests and who are the ones who determine them?

The Shaykh : So what are the means that the Wise Lawgiver prescribed through the tongue of His noble Prophet? The first of these is zakah, as the Exalted said: The wealth upon which zakah is obligatory is divided into two categories. The first is a category for which the Wise Lawgiver did not task the state with collecting and gathering; these are the two currencies, gold and silver. The obligation to pay zakah on these two currencies falls upon the individuals, and it is not obligatory, indeed it is not permissible, for the state to pry into and investigate the wealth of the rich, or to look into the details of the thousands or millions of wealth they possess, in order to take their zakah from them, as long as the wealth is in the form of these two currencies. The second category is one for which the Wise Lawgiver entrusted the matter of collection to the state, and that is the zakah on livestock, and the zakah on grains and fruits, as detailed in the books of Islamic jurisprudence. So what do most Islamic states do today? They have discarded the method of collecting wealth and placing it in the state treasury that is prescribed in the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, and the method of the Muslims. Therefore, the state naturally cannot live without money. And since it does not collect wealth by the way that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has prescribed, it is forced to replace the prescribed way with an unprescribed way, which is imposing taxes. This is one of the matters that realizes a benefit for the state, but in a manner that contradicts the way of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him and his family). So it is fitting for these people, who abandoned the prescribed way known to all Muslims for bringing wealth to the state treasury, to turn to an unprescribed way, that the saying of the Blessed and Exalted regarding the Jews applies to them. We claim that we want to fight them, and then we do what they do. What did they do? They were not content with the manna and quail, but they asked Allah, Blessed and Exalted, to provide them with garlic and onions, as mentioned in the Noble Qur'an. So the Lord of the Worlds said: Thus, when we turn away from the guidance of the Messenger (peace be upon him) in collecting wealth for the state treasury, these rulers are forced to collect wealth by another method that contradicts the way of the Messenger (peace be upon him), which is imposing taxes. This method of imposing taxes is fitting for a nation that has no Shari'ah, no Book, and they are the disbelievers, the Jews and the Christians. It is true that these people are originally People of the Book, but their Book, first of all, was not a Book suitable for implementation until the Hour, because when Allah, Mighty and Majestic, revealed those Books before the Noble Qur'an, He revealed them to be judged by in a specific time and in specific lands. So if the Jews and Christians today wanted to replace taxes with a Shari'ah they possess, they would not find it for two reasons. The first reason is what I mentioned earlier, that the Torah and the Gospel do not contain the legislations that realize the objectives for the nation in this time as exists in Islam. Therefore, the Christians and Jews, by virtue of the fact that they have no Shari'ah and no system that collects wealth for the state, are forced to impose those taxes and those levies on their peoples. As for the Muslims, Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has enriched them with a system that has no parallel in the world, to the extent that books have been written in the Islamic Shari'ah titled "The Book of Wealth," specific books on the method of collecting wealth for the state treasury. And this is not strange that Islam is unique in this, because the matter is as he (peace be upon him) said: So when some Islamic states adopt the system of imposing taxes, they are merely imitating the poor disbelieving peoples in their legislation, because they have no Shari'ah. So it is fitting for those people to impose a system that is the system of taxes. As for the Muslims, Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has enriched them with what He prescribed for them in the Book and the Sunnah of means that realize the benefit of the state first, and consequently the benefit of the nation or the people second. Therefore, it is not permissible to impose taxes at a time when they neglect the implementation of the Islamic system for bringing wealth by the prescribed means. I said at the beginning of the answer that imposing taxes is not permissible, and it may be permissible in some cases. I have now explained the first part of the answer, that it is not permissible, because it applies, as we said earlier, to those who abandoned the implementation of the Book and the Sunnah in favor of imposing taxes. The saying of the Exalted: It is permissible sometimes, and it does not become a continuous system, and that is if the Muslims are suddenly faced with an emergency. We said earlier, for example, the Muslims are attacked in their homeland by some disbelievers, and the money available by the Islamic method we referred to earlier, available in the state treasury, is not sufficient to repel the enemy's threat. Or, may Allah forbid, the land is struck by drought, and many Muslims are exposed to death by hunger because of this drought, and what exists in the state treasury of money is not sufficient to rescue these people. So the state imposes a temporary tax in this situation, and it is not valid for it to be an eternal, continuous tax until this threat or this calamity that has befallen the Muslims is removed. This is a benefit realized by a new means, because we have not fallen short in adopting the prescribed means. From here we arrive at what some scholars mentioned, that the cause that occurred after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and realizes a Shari'ah benefit, we must study this cause: is it a cause that we are not responsible for due to our negligence in applying the Shari'ah of our Lord? Is our negligence the reason that led us to adopt this cause, or is that not the case? If our negligence is the reason for adopting this means, then it is not permissible to adopt it, because the Shari'ah tells us: return to the means prescribed for you, and you will then be in no need of legislations from yourselves. But if the reality that forces us to adopt a means that was not previously known is not due to us, as I gave you an example of a disbeliever's attack on the lands of the Muslims, or the occurrence of, for example, drought or a calamity on a group of the lands of the Muslims, and then there is not in the state treasury what is sufficient to repel this threat or harm, then at that time it is permissible for the Muslim ruler to impose a tax, with the observation of justice in the application of these taxes, and it should not be like these systems that do not distinguish between rich and poor, so that everyone who has a house, for example, must pay a continuous annual tax always and forever. These taxes, as we said earlier, they would not have needed them if they had collected the wealth of zakah, the estates that have no heir, the bequests, and the endowments, and placed them in the state treasury, for they would have been enriched thereby and in no need of making a system called the system of taxes. So in summary, we say that the means by which a benefit is to be realized is either one that existed in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and this means was not adopted, so it is not permissible for us to adopt it. And the second case is that this means was not known in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him), but it has occurred now. If the motive for adopting it is the negligence of the Muslims in applying some of the Shari'ah rulings, then it is also not permissible to adopt it. But if there is no negligence and a Shari'ah benefit is actually realized, then it is permissible to adopt it, and this is the unrestricted maslahah (public benefit). And who judges by this? We said earlier, it is the people of knowledge, the people of knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah. After this, I must add a word that may appear to be outside the subject, but it has a close connection to the subject, which is that I said earlier that the means is either one that occurred or one that existed before. Who judges that it existed before or did not? It is the one who follows the biography of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and knows the life of the righteous Salaf and how they applied the Shari'ah of Allah, Blessed and Exalted. This is the one who can say: this matter existed and was not done, or it existed and was done. But as for one who is far from knowing the Sunnah in its details, he has no way to know that this matter was in the first time or was not. Now, and I do not want to lengthen this explanation, when it is said about something that it is a bid'ah (religious innovation), and regardless of the disagreement in whether it is a good or bad bid'ah, we are not in this context, what does it mean that this thing is a bid'ah? It means it was not in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him). Who is able to say that this thing was not in the time of the Messenger? Is it the one who read a booklet in hadith or a large book in hadith or two or three books? No, this should be one who is almost, and this is impossible of course, to have encompassed with knowledge everything that was written in the biography of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). This is impossible, but he approximates that. But as for a person who may have read a book from the books of the Sunnah and then was satisfied with that and turned to something else, this person cannot say that this thing is a bid'ah. And regardless, as I said and I repeat, that this is a good or bad bid'ah, this remains in the science of usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) as we mentioned earlier. This is what I have as an answer to the question regarding the unrestricted maslahah.