If the state's funds are based on usury, is it not forbidden to take from them?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... the state's funds ... are disposed of in usurious work ...
The Shaykh : What do you say about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) eating usury? Say.
The questioner : Far be it from Allah.
The Shaykh : Did he not accept the invitation of the Jew and eat, and accept the gift of the Jewish woman and eat?
The questioner : He says it is not usury.
The Shaykh : Who says the original ruling on the Jew's funds is that they are usury Then, who said that the state's funds now are usury?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : No objection, I took from him initially; I took my right from the bank.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Do you understand? If the money moves to the one who took it by right, it moved by right, so there is nothing on the one who gave it to him except something forbidden in itself. We repeat this always: we say that what is forbidden due to its acquisition, if it moves to another by right, is not forbidden. But what is forbidden in itself, like intoxicants or stolen money or the like, this is forbidden. If a person gave me a wage for work for a garment belonging to so-and-so, I would not accept it. I know it belongs to so-and-so. No, no. The earning of the money is lawful; it is not forbidden. Does the one who gave it to you agree or not agree?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : I mean the one who gave the usury, meaning the government. As I said, it is the one that gives usury. It gives usury and does not take? It gives usury, meaning it gives people usurious money.
The questioner : The funds that this worker earns from a usurious source ...
The Shaykh : You are now asking about a government employee, right? So, is the government the one that takes usury or gives it?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Since you said it is usury, and all jobs are now forbidden, even those who study in schools now it is forbidden for them.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Meaning they give it to the merchants, meaning they take money from the merchants and give them usury. Look, we have three ... we have a worker in the government, and the government, and a merchant. Is the government now taking money from the merchant and giving him usury, meaning in the sense that it comes to the merchant and says give me 110 million ... and takes these monies and distributes them to the employees? No, you are not. The important thing is that there is a difference between the one who takes usury and the one who gives usury. The one who gives usury is wronged, and his remaining money is lawful. But the one who takes usury, yes, it is he upon whom it entered ...
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : In any case, his statement: Muhammad ibn Salih al-Uthaymeen greets you. He says transfer them to my salary. May Allah reward him with good. We look for someone to take them. These issues, if we see the huge amounts of money entering the government from oil and other mineral wealth, the problem is gone. Even if we assume the government took usury, and it is far from that, this is a very weak and negligible thing. And as I told you, the rule by which the heart finds rest is that what is forbidden due to its acquisition is forbidden for the acquirer, and what is forbidden in itself is forbidden for everyone.
The Shaykh : What do you say about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) eating usury? Say.
The questioner : Far be it from Allah.
The Shaykh : Did he not accept the invitation of the Jew and eat, and accept the gift of the Jewish woman and eat?
The questioner : He says it is not usury.
The Shaykh : Who says the original ruling on the Jew's funds is that they are usury
Who eat the usury
أكالون للسحتThe questioner : ...
The Shaykh : No objection, I took from him initially; I took my right from the bank.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Do you understand? If the money moves to the one who took it by right, it moved by right, so there is nothing on the one who gave it to him except something forbidden in itself. We repeat this always: we say that what is forbidden due to its acquisition, if it moves to another by right, is not forbidden. But what is forbidden in itself, like intoxicants or stolen money or the like, this is forbidden. If a person gave me a wage for work for a garment belonging to so-and-so, I would not accept it. I know it belongs to so-and-so. No, no. The earning of the money is lawful; it is not forbidden. Does the one who gave it to you agree or not agree?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : I mean the one who gave the usury, meaning the government. As I said, it is the one that gives usury. It gives usury and does not take? It gives usury, meaning it gives people usurious money.
The questioner : The funds that this worker earns from a usurious source ...
The Shaykh : You are now asking about a government employee, right? So, is the government the one that takes usury or gives it?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Since you said it is usury, and all jobs are now forbidden, even those who study in schools now it is forbidden for them.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Meaning they give it to the merchants, meaning they take money from the merchants and give them usury. Look, we have three ... we have a worker in the government, and the government, and a merchant. Is the government now taking money from the merchant and giving him usury, meaning in the sense that it comes to the merchant and says give me 110 million ... and takes these monies and distributes them to the employees? No, you are not. The important thing is that there is a difference between the one who takes usury and the one who gives usury. The one who gives usury is wronged, and his remaining money is lawful. But the one who takes usury, yes, it is he upon whom it entered ...
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : In any case, his statement: Muhammad ibn Salih al-Uthaymeen greets you. He says transfer them to my salary. May Allah reward him with good. We look for someone to take them. These issues, if we see the huge amounts of money entering the government from oil and other mineral wealth, the problem is gone. Even if we assume the government took usury, and it is far from that, this is a very weak and negligible thing. And as I told you, the rule by which the heart finds rest is that what is forbidden due to its acquisition is forbidden for the acquirer, and what is forbidden in itself is forbidden for everyone.