1.2 Tsarin Tattalin Arziki da Ilimin Tattalin Arziki - Tsarin Tattalin Arziki na Musulunci | Quran Course

1.2 Tsarin Tattalin Arziki da Ilimin Tattalin Arziki - Tsarin Tattalin Arziki na Musulunci | Quran Course

0% read · 9 min left

Tsarin Tattalin Arziki na Musulunci Bookmark

This chapter was translated automatically from English and may contain mistakes. Read the original

Show original

1.2 Tsarin Tattalin Arziki da Ilimin Tattalin Arziki

1.2 The Economic System versus Economic Science

by Taqiuddin an-Nabhani9 min readViewed 90 times

Tsarin tattalin arziki shi ne wanda ke ƙayyade yadda ake rarraba dukiya, yadda ake mallakarta, da yadda ake kashe ta ko zubar da ita. Wannan ƙayyadewa tana bin wani takamaiman ra'ayi game da rayuwa, ko akida. Saboda haka, tsarin tattalin arziki a Musulunci ya bambanta da na Gurguzu/Kwaminisanci da na Jari-hujja, domin kowane ɗayan waɗannan tsare-tsare yana bin nasa ra'ayin akida game da rayuwa. Ilimin tattalin arziki kuwa yana tattaunawa kan samarwa, inganta ta, ƙirƙira da inganta hanyoyinta. Ilimin tattalin arziki, kamar sauran ilimomi, na duniya ne ga dukkan al'ummai kuma ba shi da alaƙa da wata takamaiman akida. Misali, kallon mallaka a Jari-hujja ya bambanta da na Gurguzu/Kwaminisanci, kuma ya bambanta da na Musulunci. Duk da haka, tattaunawa kan inganta samarwa magana ce ta fasaha, wadda take ta kimiyya tsantsa, kuma daidai take ga dukkan mutane, komai ra'ayinsu game da rayuwa.

The economic system is that which determines how to distribute the wealth, how to possess it, and how to spend or dispose of it. This determination follows a particular viewpoint in life, or ideology. Therefore, the economic system in Islam is different from that of Socialism/Communism and that of Capitalism, since each of these systems follows its own ideological viewpoint of life. Economic science discusses production, its improvement, invention and improvement of its means. Economic science, as is the case with other sciences, is universal to all nations and is not associated with a particular ideology. So for example, the view towards ownership in Capitalism differs from that of Socialism/Communism, and differs from that in Islam. However, discussing the improvement of production is a technical issue, which is purely scientific, and the same for all people, no matter what their viewpoint about life is.

3. Mu'amalolin Kasuwa da Hidimomi Ba Su da Alaƙa da Tsarin Al'umma Masana tattalin arzikin Jari-hujja suna duba buƙatu da amfani kamar yadda suke, ba kamar yadda al'umma ya kamata ta kasance ba. Wannan yana nufin suna kallon mutum a matsayin halitta ta abin duniya kawai, babu bukatun ruhi, tunanin ɗabi'a, ko manufofin kyawawan halaye a cikinsa. Haka kuma ba sa damuwa da yadda al'umma ya kamata a tsara ta ta fuskar ɗaukaka ɗabi'a, ta hanyar sanya kyawawan halaye tushen dangantakar al'umma, ko abin da ya kamata ya yi galaba a cikin al'umma ta fuskar ɗaukakar ruhi, watau sanya fahimtar dangantakar mutum da Allah (sanin wanzuwar Allah) ta zama abin da ke motsa dukkan dangantaka, don neman yardar Allah. Masanin tattalin arzikin Jari-hujja ba zai damu da haka ba, domin sha'awarsa ta abin duniya ce kawai ta fuskar abin da ke biyan buƙatun abin duniya. Saboda haka, idan mutum bai yi zamba a sayarwa ba, to saboda yana ganin cinikinsa zai kawo riba ne, amma idan zai samu riba ta hanyar zamba, to zamba za ta zama halal a gare shi. Ba ya ciyar da talakawa don amsa umarnin Allah na ya bayar da sadaka ba, sai dai ya ciyar da su don kada su sace masa dukiya. Idan kuwa yunwarsu tana ƙara masa arziki, to zai bar su su yi yunwa. Don haka babban abin da mai Jari-hujja ya fi damuwa da shi shi ne neman amfanin da zai biya buƙatar abin duniya kawai. Mutumin da yake duba wasu bisa amfanin kansa, yana kafa rayuwar tattalin arziki bisa wannan tushe, shi ne mafi hatsari ga al'umma da mutane.

3. Commodities and Services are not related to the structure of the society The Capitalist economists look to the needs and benefits as they are, not as the society should be, which means that they look at man as a purely materialistic creature, empty of spiritual needs, ethical thoughts, and moral objectives. Similarly they do not care about how the society should be structured in terms of moral elevation, by making the virtues the basis for society’s relationships or what should prevail in the society by way of spiritual elevation i.e. making the realisation of man’s relationship with Allah (realising the existence of Allah) the driving force behind all relationships, for the sake of attaining the pleasure of Allah. The Capitalist economist would not care for this since his interest is purely material in terms of what satisfies the materialistic needs. So, if man does not cheat in selling it is because He believes his trade will profit, while if He were to profit by cheating, then cheating would be legal for him. He does not feed poor people in response to the order from God for Him to give charity, rather He feeds them so that they do not steal from him. If, however, their starvation increases his wealth then He would leave them to starve. Thus, the main concern of the Capitalist is to look for the benefit which satisfies a materialistic need only. The individual that looks at others based on his own benefit, and establishes economic life on this basis, is the most dangerous person to society and people.

Don haka kula da kayan tattalin arziki ta fuskar biyan buƙata, ba tare da kula da abin da al'umma ya kamata ta kasance ba, rabuwa ce ta kayan tattalin arziki daga dangantaka, wanda hakan ba na halitta ba ne. Wannan kayan tattalin arziki ana musayarsa tsakanin mutane, don haka yana haifar da dangantaka a tsakaninsu, kuma dangantakar ita ce ke samar da al'umma. Saboda haka, tasirin kayan a kan al'umma ya kamata a duba shi yayin la'akari da kayan tattalin arziki. Saboda haka, ba daidai ba ne a ɗauki wani abu a matsayin mai amfani kawai saboda akwai wanda yake son sa, ko yana cutarwa ko a'a, ko yana shafar dangantaka tsakanin mutane ko a'a, ko an haramta shi ko an halatta shi a imanin mutanen al'umma. Abubuwa su ne ya kamata a ɗauka masu amfani idan suna da amfani na gaske ta fuskar abin da al'umma ya kamata ta zama. Saboda haka, ba daidai ba ne a ɗauki cannabis, opium da makamantansu a matsayin kayan amfani, a kuma ɗauke su kayan tattalin arziki kawai saboda akwai wanda yake son su. Maimakon haka, dole ne a yi la'akari da tasirin waɗannan kayan tattalin arziki a kan dangantakar mutane a cikin al'umma lokacin da ake la'akari da amfanin abu, watau lokacin da ake duba abu a matsayin kayan tattalin arziki ko a'a. Ya kamata a duba abubuwa dangane da abin da al'umma ya kamata ta kasance. Ba daidai ba ne a kalli abu kawai yadda yake, ba tare da la'akari da abin da al'umma ya kamata ta kasance ba. Ta hanyar haɗa batun biyan buƙatu cikin batun hanyoyin biyan buƙatu, da kuma kallon hanyoyin biyan buƙata kawai a matsayin abin da ke biyan buƙata, ba tare da wani la'akari ba, masana tattalin arziki sun fi mai da hankali ga samar da dukiya fiye da rarraba dukiya. Muhimmancin rarraba dukiya domin biyan buƙatu ya zama na biyu. Saboda haka, tsarin tattalin arziki na jari-hujja yana da manufa guda ɗaya, wato ƙara dukiyar ƙasa baki ɗaya, kuma yana aiki don kaiwa ga mafi girman matakin samarwa da zai yiwu. Yana ganin cewa samun matsayin jin daɗi mafi girma da zai yiwu ga membobin al'umma zai zo ne sakamakon ƙara kuɗin shiga na ƙasa ta hanyar ɗaga matakin samarwa a cikin ƙasa, da kuma ba wa daidaikun mutane damar mallakar dukiya, domin an bar su cikin 'yanci su yi aiki wajen samarwa da mallakar ta. Don haka tattalin arziƙi ba ya wanzuwa don biyan buƙatun daidaikun mutane da sauƙaƙa biyan buƙatar kowane ɗaya daga cikin al'umma, a maimakon haka yana mayar da hankali ne kan haɓaka abin da ke biyan buƙatun daidaikun mutane, watau yana mayar da hankali kan biyan buƙatun al'umma ta hanyar ɗaga matakin samarwa da ƙara kuɗin shiga na ƙasa. Ta hanyar samuwar kuɗin shiga na ƙasa ne ake rarraba shi a tsakanin membobin al'umma, ta hanyar 'yancin mallaka da 'yancin aiki. Don haka an bar wa daidaikun mutane su samo abin da za su iya daga cikin dukiya, kowa gwargwadon abin da yake da shi daga abubuwan samarwa, ko duk daidaikun mutane sun biya buƙatunsu ko wasu kawai. Wannan shi ne tattalin arziƙin siyasa watau tattalin arziƙin jari-hujja. Wannan a bayyane yake kuskure ne, kuma yana saɓa wa gaskiya; ba ya kai ga inganta matakin rayuwa ga dukkan daidaikun mutane, kuma ba ya cika jin daɗin asali ga kowane ɗaya daga cikin mutane. Kuskuren wannan ra'ayi shi ne cewa buƙatun da ke buƙatar biyan su buƙatun daidaikun mutane ne, buƙatun mutum ɗaya ne; don haka buƙatu ne na Muhammad, Salih da Hasan, ba buƙatun wata ƙungiya ta mutane ba, ko ƙungiyar al'ummomi, ko ƙungiyar jama'a. Wanda ke ƙoƙarin biyan buƙatunsa shi ne mutum ɗaya, ko ya biya su kai tsaye kamar ci, ko ya biya su ta hanyar biyan buƙatun dukkan ƙungiyar kamar kare al'umma. Saboda haka, matsalar tattalin arziƙi tana mayar da hankali ne kan raba hanyoyin biyan buƙata ga daidaikun mutane watau rarraba kuɗi da amfani ga mambobin al'umma ko jama'a, ba bisa bukatun da al'umma ko jama'a ke buƙata ba tare da la'akari da kowane mutum cikin al'umma ba. A takaice, matsalar ita ce talaucin da ke faɗawa mutum ɗaya, ba talaucin da ke faɗawa al'umma ba. Abin da tsarin tattalin arziki ya kamata ya mayar da hankali a kai shi ne biyan bukatun asali na kowane mutum, ba nazarin samar da kayan tattalin arziki ba. Saboda haka, nazarin abubuwan da ke shafar girman samar da kayayyaki na ƙasa ya bambanta da nazarin yadda za a biya dukkan bukatun asali na kowane mutum daban-daban kuma gaba ɗaya. Abin nazari ya kamata ya zama bukatun ɗan adam na asali, a matsayinsa na ɗan adam, da kuma nazarin rarraba dukiya ga mambobin al'umma domin tabbatar da biyan dukkan bukatunsu na asali. Ya kamata wannan ya zama abin nazari, kuma a fara da shi. Haka kuma, magance talaucin ƙasa ba ya warware matsalar talauci ga daidaikun mutane, ɗaya bayan ɗaya. Maimakon haka, magance matsalolin talauci na daidaikun mutane, da rarraba dukiyar ƙasa a tsakaninsu, yana ƙarfafa dukkan mutanen ƙasar su yi aiki wajen ƙara kuɗin shiga na ƙasa. Nazarin abubuwan da ke shafar girman samarwa da ƙaruwar kuɗin shiga na ƙasa, ya kamata a tattauna shi a matsayin ilimin tattalin arziki, wato a cikin tattaunawa kan kayan tattalin arziki da ƙaruwarsa, maimakon a cikin tattaunawa kan biyan bukatu, waɗanda tsarin tattalin arziki ke tsarawa. Masu jari-hujja suna iƙirarin cewa matsalar tattalin arziki da kowace al'umma ke fuskanta ita ce ƙarancin kayayyaki da hidimomi. Suna kuma iƙirarin cewa ƙaruwar bukatu a koyaushe, da rashin iya biyan dukkansu, watau rashin isassun kayayyaki da hidimomi don biyan dukkan bukatun ɗan adam gaba ɗaya, shi ne tushen matsalar tattalin arziki. Wannan ra'ayi kuskure ne kuma yana sabawa da gaskiya. Wannan saboda bukatun da dole a biya su su ne muhimman bukatun mutum a matsayinsa na ɗan Adam (abinci, matsuguni da tufafi), ba abubuwan jin daɗi ba, ko da yake su ma ana neman su. Muhimman bukatun ɗan Adam suna da iyaka, kuma albarkatun da ƙoƙarin da ake kira kayayyaki da ayyuka da ake da su a duniya tabbas sun isa su biya muhimman bukatun ɗan Adam; yana yiwuwa a biya dukkan muhimman bukatun ɗan Adam gaba ɗaya. Saboda haka, babu matsala a muhimman bukatu, ban da la'akari da abin da ake ɗauka a matsayin matsalar tattalin arziki da ke fuskantar al'umma. Matsalar tattalin arziki, a zahiri, ita ce rarraba waɗannan albarkatu da ƙoƙari ta yadda kowane mutum zai iya biyan dukkan muhimman bukatu gaba ɗaya, sannan bayan haka a taimaka masa ya yi ƙoƙarin samun abubuwan jin daɗinsa.

So caring for the economic commodity with respect to its fulfilling a need, without caring for what the society should be, is a detachment of the economic commodity from the relationship, which is unnatural. This economic commodity is exchanged among the people thereby creating relationships among them, and the relationships form the society, so the effect on society should be perceived when considering the economic commodity. Therefore, it is incorrect to consider a thing as beneficial just because there is somebody who likes it, whether it is itself harmful or not, and whether it affects the relationships among people or not, and whether it is prohibited or permitted in the belief of the people in the society. Rather things should be considered beneficial if they are really beneficial in respect of what the society should be. Therefore, it is incorrect to consider cannabis, opium and the like as beneficial commodities and to consider them economic commodities just because there is somebody who wants them. Instead, the effect of these economic commodies on the relationships between people in society must be considered when considering the benefit of things i.e. when considering the thing as an economic commodity or not. Things should be viewed in relation to what the society should be. It is wrong to look at a thing merely as it is, regardless of what the society should be. By including the subject of satisfying the needs within the subject of the means of satisfying needs, and by viewing the means of satisfaction only as satisfying a need, and not by any other consideration, economists concentrate on production of wealth more than distribution of wealth. The importance of distribution of wealth to satisfy the needs has become secondary. Therefore, the capitalist economic system has one aim, which is to increase the country’s wealth as a whole, and it works to arrive at the highest possible level of production. It considers that the achievement of the highest possible level of welfare for the members of society will come as a result of increasing the national income by raising the level of production in the country, and in enabling individuals to take the wealth, as they are left free to work in producing and possessing it. So the economy does not exist to satisfy the needs of the individuals and to facilitate the satisfaction of every individual in the community, rather it is focused on the augmentation of what satisfies the needs of the individuals i.e. it is focused on satisfying the needs of the community by raising the level of production and increasing the national income of the country. Through the availability of the national income, the distribution of income among the members of society occurs, by means of freedom of possession and freedom of work. So it is left to the individuals to obtain what they can of the wealth, everyone according to what He has of its productive factors, whether all the individuals or only some individuals are satisfied. This is the political economy i.e. the capitalist economy. This is manifestly wrong, and contradicts reality; it does not lead to an improvement in the level of livelihood for all individuals, and does not fulfil the basic welfare of every individual. The erroneous aspect in this view is that the needs which require satisfaction are individual needs, they are needs of a man; so they are needs for Muhammad, Salih and Hasan and not needs for a group of human beings, a group of nations, or a group of people. The one who strives to satisfy his needs is the individual, whether He satisfies them directly such as eating, or He satisfies them through the satisfaction of the whole group such as the defence of the nation. Therefore, the economic problem is focused on distributing the means of satisfaction for individuals i.e. the distribution of the funds and benefits to the members of the nation or people, not on the needs which the nation or the people require without regard to every individual within the nation. In other words, the problem is the poverty which befalls the individual not the poverty which befalls the nation. The concern of the economic system must only be in satisfying the basic needs of every individual, not the study of producing economic commodity. Consequently, the study of the factors that affect the size of national production differs from the study for satisfying all the basic needs of all individuals personally and completely. The subject of study must be the basic human needs of man, as a human being, and the study of distributing the wealth to the members of society to guarantee the satisfaction of all their basic needs. This should be the subject of study, and should be undertaken in the first place. Moreover, the treatment of the poverty of a country does not solve the problem of poverty for individuals, individually. Rather, the treatment of the poverty problems of the individuals, and the distribution of the wealth of the country among them, motivates all the people of the country to work in increasing the national income. The study of factors that affect the size of production and the increase of the national income, should be discussed as economic science, that is, in the discussion of the economic commodity and its increase, rather than in the discussion of satisfying the needs, which are regulated by the economic system. The Capitalists claim that the economic problem which faces any society is the scarcity of commodities and services. They also claim that the steadily increasing needs, and the inability to satisfy all of them i.e. the insufficiency of commodities and services to satisfy all of man’s needs completely, is the basis of the economic problem. This view is erroneous and in fact contradicts with reality. This is because the needs which must be met are the basic needs of the individual as a human (food, shelter and clothing), and not the luxuries, although they too are sought. The basic needs of humans are limited, and the resources and the efforts which they call the commodities and services existent in the world are certainly sufficient to satisfy the basic human needs; it is possible to satisfy all of the basic needs of mankind completely. So, there is no problem in the basic needs, quite apart from considering it the economic problem that faces society. The economic problem is, in reality, the distribution of these resources and efforts enabling every individual to satisfy all basic needs completely, and after that helping them to strive for attaining their luxuries.

Dangane da bukatu da ke ƙaruwa a kullum, wannan ba batu ba ne da ya shafi ƙaruwar muhimman bukatun ɗan Adam, domin muhimman bukatun mutum a matsayinsa na ɗan Adam ba sa ƙaruwa, amma abin da ke ƙaruwa da bambanta shi ne kayan alatu. Ƙaruwar bukatun da ke faruwa sakamakon ci gaban mutum a rayuwar birni ta fi shafar kayan alatu fiye da muhimman bukatu. Mutum yana aiki don biyan kayan alatunsa, amma rashin biyan su ba ya haifar da matsala; abin da ke haifar da matsala shi ne rashin biyan muhimman bukatu. Baya ga duk wannan, batun ƙaruwar kayan alatu batu ne da ya shafi wasu mutane kawai da ke rayuwa a wata ƙasa, ba dukkan mutanen ƙasar ba. Ana warware wannan batu ta hanyar sha'awar ɗabi'a ta ɗan Adam na biyan bukatunsa. Wannan sha'awa, wadda ke fitowa daga ƙaruwar kayan alatu, tana motsa mutum ya yi aiki don biyan su, ko dai ta hanyar faɗaɗa albarkatun ƙasarsa, ko yin aiki a wasu ƙasashe, ko ta hanyar faɗaɗawa da mamaye wasu ƙasashe. Wannan ya bambanta da batun cikakken biyan muhimman bukatun kowane mutum a cikin al'umma. Hakan ya faru ne saboda matsalar rarraba dukiya ga kowane mutum don biyan muhimman bukatunsa, da kuma ba kowane mutum damar biyan kayan alatunsa, matsala ce da ta shafi ra'ayin rayuwa, wanda ke keɓanta ga wata al'umma mai wata akida ta musamman. Wannan ya saɓa da batun ƙara kuɗin shiga na ƙasa ta hanyar ƙara samarwa, wanda ya shafi halin wasu ƙasashe musamman, kuma ana iya cimma shi ta hanyar amfani da albarkatun ƙasar, ƙaura, faɗaɗawa, ko haɗewa da wasu ƙasashe. Wannan batu na ƙara dukiya ya dogara ne da yiwuwar aiwatar da mafita, ba ya da alaƙa da wani ra'ayi na musamman, kuma ba ya da alaƙa da wata al'umma ko akida ta musamman.

With reference to the steadily increasing needs, it is not a subject related to increasing basic needs, because the basic needs of man as a human do not increase, whereas, it is his luxuries which increase and vary. The increase in needs which occurs due to the progress of a human in his urbanised life is related to the luxuries rather than to the basic needs. Man works to satisfy his luxuries, but their non-satisfaction does not cause a problem; what does cause a problem is the non-satisfaction of the basic needs. Besides all of this, the question of the increasing luxuries is a question which is only related to some people who live in a certain country and not to all individuals of that country. This question is solved through the natural urge of a human to satisfy his needs. This urge, resulting from the increase in luxuries, drives man to work towards satisfying them, either by expanding the resources of his country, working in other countries, or through expansion and annexation of other countries. This is different from the issue of completely satisfying the basic needs of each and every individual in society. This is because the problem of distributing the wealth to each and every individual to satisfy his basic needs, and enabling every individual to satisfy his luxuries, is a problem related to the viewpoint in life, which is particular to a certain nation carrying a particular ideology. This is contrary to the question of increasing national income through increasing production, which is related to the situation of particular countries, and could be achieved through utilising the resources of the country, emigration, expansion, or merging with other countries. This issue of increasing wealth depends on the practicality of the solution, and is not related to a particular viewpoint, and not related to a particular nation or ideology.

Ka'idojin tattalin arziki da ya kamata a kafa su ne ka'idojin da ke tabbatar da rarraba dukiyar cikin gida da ta waje ta ƙasa ga kowane mutum na al'umma, ta yadda za su tabbatar da cikakkiyar biyan dukkan buƙatun rayuwa na kowane mutum, sannan su ba kowane mutum damar neman biyan buƙatun alatu. Sai dai, ɗaga matakin samarwa yana buƙatar bincike na kimiyya, kuma tattaunawa a kansa cikin tsarin tattalin arziki ba ta warware matsalar tattalin arziki ba, wadda ita ce cikakkiyar biyan buƙatun kowane mutum. Ƙaruwar matakin samarwa tana kai ga ɗaga matakin dukiyar ƙasa, amma ba lallai ba ne ta kai ga cikakkiyar biyan dukkan buƙatun rayuwa na kowane mutum. Ƙasa na iya zama mai arziƙin albarkatun ƙasa, kamar yadda yake a Iraƙi da Saudiyya, duk da haka ba a biyan buƙatun rayuwa na mafi yawan 'yan ƙasarsu cikakke ba. Saboda haka, ƙaruwar samarwa da kanta ba ta warware babbar matsalar da ya kamata a fara magance ta ba, wadda ita ce cikakkiyar biyan buƙatun rayuwa na kowane mutum, sannan a biyo baya ta hanyar ba su damar biyan buƙatun alatunsu. Don haka, talauci da hasarar da ya kamata a magance su su ne rashin biyan buƙatun rayuwa na mutum a matsayinsa na ɗan Adam (wato abinci, matsuguni da tufafi), ba ƙaruwar alatun da ke fitowa daga ci gaban birane ba. Saboda haka, matsalar da ya kamata a magance ita ce talauci da hasarar kowane mutum a cikin al'umma, ba talauci da hasarar ƙasa gaba ɗaya ba. Talauci da hasara daga wannan mahanga (wato ga kowane mutum) ba a magance su ta hanyar ƙara samar da kayayyaki na ƙasa ba, sai dai ta hanyar yadda ake rarraba dukiya ga mutane a cikin al'umma, wanda hakan ke ba da damar cikakkiyar biyan dukkan buƙatunsu na rayuwa, sannan a ba mutane damar biyan buƙatun alatunsu.

The economic principles which have to be laid down are the principles which guarantee the distribution of the country’s internal and external wealth to each and every individual of the nation, so that they secure the complete satisfaction of all basic needs for each individual, and then enable every individual to seek the satisfaction of the luxuries. However, raising the level of production requires scientific research, and its discussion in the economic system does not solve the economic problem, which is the complete satisfaction of the needs of each and every individual. An increase in the level of production leads to a rise in the level of the wealth of the country but does not necessarily lead to the complete satisfaction of all the basic needs of each and every individual. The country could be rich in natural resources, as in the case of Iraq and Saudi Arabia, but the basic needs of most of their citizens are not satisfied completely. Therefore, the increase of production by itself, does not solve the basic problem which must be treated first and foremost, which is the complete satisfaction of the basic needs of each and every individual, and following that enabling them to satisfy their luxuries. Therefore, the poverty and deprivation required to be treated is the nonsatisfaction of the basic needs of man as a human being (i.e. food, shelter and clothing), not the increasing luxuries resulting from urban progress. Hence, the problem to be treated is the poverty and deprivation of every individual in the society, not the poverty and deprivation of the country measured as a whole. The poverty and deprivation from this perspective (i.e. for every individual) is not treated by increasing national production, rather it is treated by the manner in which the wealth is distributed to the individuals in society enabling complete satisfaction of all their basic needs, and then enabling the individuals to satisfy their luxuries.

Rasmaliyya tana ganin daraja a matsayin wani abu na dangantaka, ba na gaskiya ba, don haka take ɗaukarta a matsayin ma'auni na zahiri. Saboda haka, darajar yadi ɗaya na zane ita ce amfanin ƙarin da yake bayarwa idan ana ɗauka cewa yana samuwa a kasuwa. Darajarsa kuma ita ce adadin kayayyaki da ƙoƙari da za a iya musanya shi da su. Daraja tana zama farashi idan abin da aka samu a madadin yadin zane kuɗi ne. Waɗannan ƙima guda biyu, a ganinsu, sun bambanta, kuma suna da sunaye daban-daban guda biyu: amfani da darajar musayar. Ma'anar daraja bisa wannan bayani kuskure ce, domin darajar kowane kaya ita ce adadin amfanin da ke cikinsa, la'akari da al'amarin ƙarancinsa. Don haka ra'ayi na gaskiya game da kowane kaya shi ne a lura da amfaninsa tare da la'akari da ƙarancinsa, ko mutum ya mallake shi tun farko kamar a farauta, ko ta hanyar musanya kamar sayarwa; kuma ko wannan yana da alaƙa da mutum ko da abin da kansa. Saboda haka, daraja suna ne da ke nuna wani abu da aka ƙayyade, wanda yake da hakikanin takamaiman siffa, ba suna ba ne na abu mai dangantaka, wanda ke aiki a wani fanni kuma ba ya aiki a wani. Don haka daraja ma'auni ne na zahiri, ba abu ne na dangantaka ba. Saboda haka, ra'ayin masana tattalin arziki game da daraja kuskure ne tun daga tushensa.

Capitalism considers value as being relative and not real, and so it is treated as a subjective measurement. Hence, the value of a yard of cloth is the marginal benefit of it assuming its availability in the market. Its value is also the quantity of commodities and efforts that could be exchanged for it. The value becomes a price if what is obtained for the yard of cloth is money. These two values, in their view, are separate, and they have two distinct names; benefit and the value of exchange. The meaning of value according to this definition is wrong, because the value of any commodity is the quantity of benefit in it, taking into account the element of scarcity. So the real view towards any commodity is to observe its benefit whilst taking into account its scarcity, whether it is possessed by man from the start like from hunting, or by exchange like selling; and whether this was related to the person or related to the thing. Thus, value is a name for a designated thing which has a specific reality, and not a name for a relative thing, which applies to it in one respect and is not applicable in another. So the value is an objective measurement and not a relative thing. Therefore, the view of the economists towards value is wrong from its basis.

Abin da ake kira ƙimar amfani na gefe (marginal utility) kima ce da aka yi niyyar mayar da hankali kan samarwa bisa yanayin mafi munin rarraba kayayyaki. Don haka ana kimanta darajar kaya bisa mafi ƙasƙanci, domin a samar da ita a kan tabbataccen tushe. Ƙimar amfani na gefe ba ainihin darajar kaya ba ce, ba ma farashin kaya ba, domin darajar kaya ya kamata a kimanta ta da yawan amfanin da ke cikinta a lokacin kimantawa, la'akari da ɓangaren karanci a lokacin. Darajarta ba za ta faɗi ba idan farashinta ya ragu daga baya, haka nan ba za ta tashi ba idan farashinta ya ƙaru, domin an riga an yi la'akari da darajarta a lokacin da aka kimanta ta. Saboda haka, ka'idar ƙimar amfani na gefe ka'ida ce ta farashi ba ta daraja ba, kuma akwai bambanci tsakanin farashi da daraja, ko da a ra'ayin masana tattalin arzikin jari-hujja. Abin da ke tafiyar da kimanta farashi shi ne yawan buƙata tare da ƙarancin wadata, ko yawan wadata tare da ƙarancin buƙata; waɗannan al'amura suna da alaƙa da matakin samar da kaya, ba da rarraba shi ba. Shi kuwa daraja ana kimanta ta ne da adadin amfanin da ke cikin kaya a lokacin kimantawa, tare da la'akari da ɓangaren karanci, ba tare da ɗaukarsa a matsayin wani ɓangare na kimantawar ba; don haka wadata da buƙata ba sa shafar daraja gaba ɗaya. Saboda haka, maudu'in daraja ba daidai ba ne tun daga tushensa, kuma duk maudu'in da aka gina a kansa tabbas ba daidai ba ne, tun da ainihin tunanin ƙarya ne. Duk da haka, idan an kimanta darajar kaya ta fuskar amfaninta, wanda ake aunawa da amfanin kaya ko ƙoƙari, to irin wannan kimantawa za ta zama daidai, kuma za ta kai ga samun kwanciyar hankali mai yawa a gajeren lokaci. Idan kuma aka kimanta darajar ta hanyar farashi, kimantawar za ta zama ta dangi ba ta gaskiya ba, kuma tana ƙara kusantar canzawa a kowane lokaci gwargwadon kasuwa. A cikin wannan yanayi na ƙarshe, ba daidai ba ne a kira shi da suna "daraja", don haka kalmar daraja ba za ta yi aiki a kansa ba da gaske. Maimakon haka, zai zama hanyar samun kuɗi bisa ga kasuwa, ba bisa ga abin da yake da shi na amfani ba.

What is referred to as the marginal utility value is an estimation meant to concentrate production based on the worst case scenario of distributing the commodities. Thus the value of a commodity is estimated based on the lowest limit so that production proceeds on a guaranteed basis. The marginal utility is not really the value of the commodity, nor even the price of the commodity, because the value of the commodity should be estimated by the amount of benefit in it at the time of estimation, taking into account the element of scarcity at that time. Its value would not drop if its price decreases later on, nor would it rise if its price increases as well, because its value was considered at the time of its evaluation. Therefore, marginal utility theory is a theory for price and not a theory for value, and there is a difference between price and value, even in the view of Capitalist economists. What governs the estimation of price is the abundance of demand together with the shortage of supply or the abundance of supply together with the shortage of demand; these matters are related to the level of production of a commodity, and not related to its distribution.Whereas value is estimated by the quantity of benefit present in the commodity at the time of evaluation, bearing in mind the element of scarcity, without considering it as part of the estimation; so supply and demand do not utterly affect the value. Therefore, the subject of value is wrong from its basis, and any subject based on it is definitely wrong since the basic concept is false. However, if the value of the commodity was evaluated in terms of its benefit measured by the benefit of a commodity or an effort, then such an evaluation would be correct and would lead to much greater stability over the short term. If the value was estimated by the price, the evaluation would be relative not real, and it comes closer to changing every time according to the market. In this latter situation, it is false to refer to it as a value, and so the term value would not truly apply to it. It would rather become a means to obtain money according to the market and not according to what it possesses of benefits.

Masu jari-hujja na jari-hujja (Capitalists) suna cewa amfani yana zuwa ne sakamakon ƙoƙarin da mutum yake yi. Saboda haka, idan lada ba ta daidaita da aikin ba, to babu shakka matakin samarwa zai ragu. Daga nan sai su ƙarasa da cewa hanya mafi kyau ta raba dukiya tsakanin mambobin al'umma ita ce wadda ke tabbatar da samun mafi girman matakin samarwa mai yiwuwa. Wannan hanya gaba ɗaya ba daidai ba ce, domin a zahiri albarkatun da Allah ya halitta su ne tushen amfanin kayayyaki. Kuɗaɗen da ake kashewa wajen ƙara amfanin waɗannan albarkatu, ko fara wani amfani a cikinsu tare da aiki, su ne suka sanya su a siffar da ke ba da wani amfani na musamman. Saboda haka, ɗaukar amfani a matsayin sakamakon ƙoƙari kawai kuskure ne gaba ɗaya, kuma hakan yana watsi da kayan farko da sauran kuɗaɗe. Domin a wasu lokuta, waɗannan kuɗaɗen na iya zama diyya ga kayan farko, ba ga ƙoƙari ba. Don haka amfani na iya zama sakamakon ƙoƙarin mutum, ko sakamakon kasancewar kayan farko, ko kuma sakamakon duka biyun, amma ba sakamakon ƙoƙarin mutum kaɗai ba. Dangane da raguwar matakin samarwa kuwa, ba ya faruwa ne kawai sakamakon raguwar lada ga aiki, domin yana iya faruwa ne sakamakon ƙarewar dukiyar ƙasa, ko yaƙi, ko wasu dalilai. Misali, raguwar samarwa a Birtaniya da Faransa bayan Yakin Duniya na Biyu ba ta faru ne sakamakon raguwar lada ga aiki ba; ta faru ne sakamakon raguwar ikonsu a kan ƙasashen mulkin mallaka masu arziki, da shigarsu yaƙin. Raguwar samarwa a Amurka a lokacin Yakin Duniya na Biyu ba ta faru ne sakamakon raguwar lada ga aiki ba; ta faru ne sakamakon shigarta yaƙi da Jamus. Raguwar a Duniyar Musulunci a yau ba ta faru ne sakamakon raguwar lada ga aiki ba; sakamakon koma-baya na hankali ne da al'ummar Musulmi gaba ɗaya ta faɗa cikinsa. Saboda haka, rashin isassun lada ga aiki ba shine kawai dalilin raguwar samarwa ba, kuma ba daidai ba ne a ɗauka daga wannan tushe cewa hanya mafi kyau ta rarraba dukiya ita ce tabbatar da ɗaga matakin samarwa. Kaiwa ga mafi girman matakin samarwa da zai yiwu ba shi da alaƙa da rarraba dukiya tsakanin mutane. Masu jari-hujja sun ce farashi shi ne abin ƙarfafawa ga samarwa, domin dalilin da ke sa mutum ya kashe kowane ƙoƙari shi ne ladansa na abin duniya. Wannan ra'ayi kuskure ne kuma yana sabawa gaskiya. Mutum sau da yawa yakan kashe ƙoƙari don samun lada ta ɗabi'a, kamar samun lada daga Allah, ko don cimma kyakkyawan suna na ɗabi'a kamar mayar da alheri. Buƙatun mutum na iya zama na abin duniya kamar riba ta kuɗi, ko na ruhaniya kamar tsarkakewa, ko na ɗabi'a kamar yabo. Don haka ɗaukar buƙatun abin duniya kawai la'akari ne mara daidai. A zahiri, mutum na iya kashe albarkatu wajen biyan buƙatar ruhaniya ko ta ɗabi'a fiye da yadda yake kashewa wajen biyan buƙatar abin duniya. Saboda haka, farashi ba shi kaɗai ba ne abin ƙarfafawa ga samarwa. Bisa wannan, wani mai sassaƙa dutse zai iya ware kansa ya yi aiki tsawon watanni yana yanke duwatsu don gina masallaci, wata masana'anta na iya ware wani ɓangare na samarwarta a wasu kwanaki na shekara don rarrabawa ga talakawa, kuma al'umma na iya ware wasu ko duk ƙoƙarinta don shirya kare yankunanta. Irin wannan samarwa ba farashi ne ke motsa shi ba. Bugu da ƙari, lada na abin duniya kansa ba a iyakance shi ga farashi ba, yana iya zuwa a cikin nau'in wasu kayayyaki ko ayyuka. Don haka, ɗaukar farashi a matsayin abin ƙarfafawa kaɗai ga samarwa kuskure ne.

The Capitalists say that benefits are the result of the efforts which man expends. So, if the reward was not equal to the work then no doubt the level of production declines, and they conclude from this that the ideal method to distribute the wealth among the members of society is that which guarantees to achieve the highest possible level of production. This approach is totally wrong, since in reality the resources, which God has created, are the basis of the benefit in the commodities. And the expenses spent in increasing the benefit of these resources, or initiating a benefit in them together with the work, are that which made them in the form that provides a particular benefit. So considering the benefit as a result of the efforts only is completely wrong and it neglects the raw material and other expenses. For in some cases, these expenses could be a compensation for a raw material, and not for an effort. Thus, the benefit could be a result of man’s efforts or could be a result of the existence of the raw material, or could be a result of both of them, but it is not only as a result of man’s efforts. As for the decline in the level of production, it does not result solely from a decrease in the reward for work, since it could also result from the depletion of the wealth of the country, or from war, or for other reasons. As an example, the decline of production in both Britain and France after the Second World War did not result from a reduction in the reward to work, it resulted from the shrinkage in their influence over their rich colonies, and their involvement in the war. The decline in production of the US during the Second World War did not result from a reduction in the reward to work, it resulted from its involvement in the war against Germany. The decline in the Islamic World today did not result from a reduction in the reward to work, it is as a result of the intellectual decline into which the whole Ummah fell. Therefore, the inadequacy of the reward to work is not the only reason for decline in production, and it is false to assume from this premise that the ideal method of distribution is to secure the raising of the level of production. Arriving at the highest possible level of production has no relationship with the distribution of wealth amongst individuals. The Capitalists say that the price is the incentive for production, because the motive for the person to expend any effort is his reward materially. This view is incorrect and contradicts reality. Man often expends effort in return for a moral reward such as the attainment of a reward from God, or for the sake of achieving ethical merit such as returning a favour. The needs of man can be materialistic such as material profit, they can be spiritual such as sanctification, or moralistic such as praise. So taking into consideration materialistic needs only is incorrect. In fact, a man could expend resources in satisfying a spiritual or a moral need more generously than He spends in satisfying a materialistic one. Therefore, the price is not the only incentive for production. Accordingly a stonemason could designate himself to work for months in cutting stones for building a mosque, a factory may assign its production for some days of the year for distribution to poor people, and a nation could allocate some or focus all of its efforts on preparing to defend its territories. Such production is not motivated by price. Moreover, the materialistic reward itself is not confined to price, it could come in the form of other commodities or services. Hence, considering the price as the only incentive for production is incorrect.

Daga wannan ka'ida, wacce ke sa farashi ya zama mai daidaita rarraba kayayyaki, Jari-hujja ta yanke hukunci a zahiri cewa mutum ba ya cancanta ya rayu sai dai idan yana iya ba da gudummawa wajen samar da kayayyaki da ayyuka. Mutumin da ba zai iya ba da gudummawa ba, ko an haife shi da nakasar jiki ko ta hankali, ba ya cancanta ya rayu, kuma ba ya cancanta ya karɓi daga dukiya abin da zai biya bukatunsa. Haka kuma mutumin da aka haife shi da ƙarfin jiki ko na hankali, wanda ya fi iya ƙirƙira da mallakar dukiya yadda ya so, yana cancanta ya ci abinci cikin alatu, kuma yana cancanta ya yi iko da mulkin kan wasu da dukiyarsa. Haka kuma wanda sha'awar neman riba ta fi ƙarfi a cikinsa zai fi wasu yawan dukiya, yayin da wanda riko da dabi'u na ruhi da na ɗabi'a (waɗanda ke riƙe shi yayin neman dukiya) ya fi ƙarfi a cikinsa, zai sami ƙasa da wasu a mallaka ko dukiya. Wannan hanya tana fitar da abubuwan ruhi da na ɗabi'a daga rayuwa, kuma tana samar da rayuwa wadda aka gina ta bisa gwagwarmayar abin duniya don samun hanyoyin biyan bukatun abin duniya. Wannan na faruwa a ƙarshe a dukkan ƙasashen da suka karɓi Jari-hujja suka aiwatar da ita. Mulkin kamfanonin mallakar jari-hujja ya bunƙasa a ƙasashen da ke karɓar Jari-hujja, inda masu samarwa ke yin iko a kan masu amfani. Wani ƙaramin rukuni na mutane, watau masu manyan kamfanonin man fetur, motoci, da masana'antu masu nauyi, sun kai ga mamaye masu amfani, suna mulkinsu ta hanyar sanya wasu farashi a kan kayayyakin da suke samarwa. Wannan ya kai ga yunkurin "gyara" tsarin tattalin arziki. Sun yi haka ta hanyar ba Gwamnati (ƙasa) ikon shiga tsakani wajen tsayar da farashi (sarrafa farashi) a yanayi na musamman domin kare tattalin arzikin ƙasa, kare masu amfani, da rage amfani da wasu kayayyaki, da kuma takaita ikon kamfanonin mallaka. Sun kuma haɗa a cikin tsara samarwa wasu ayyukan jama'a da gwamnati ke jagoranta. Waɗannan matakai suna sabawa da tushen tsarin tattalin arzikinsu, wato 'yancin tattalin arziki, kuma ana amfani da su ne kawai a wasu yanayi na musamman. Bugu da ƙari, yawancin Kapitalistoci ba sa amincewa da wannan hanyar shiga tsakani (Masu Ra'ayin Mazan Jiya) kuma suna raina ta, suna cewa tsarin farashi shi kaɗai ya isa ya samar da daidaito tsakanin muradin masu samarwa da muradin masu amfani, ba tare da wata buƙatar shigar gwamnati ba. Waɗannan mafita na gyara-gyara da masu goyon bayan shiga tsakani (Masu Ra'ayin Sassaucin Ra'ayi) ke bayarwa, ana amfani da su ne kawai a wasu yanayi da sharuɗɗa, kuma koda a cikin waɗannan yanayi, rarraba dukiya tsakanin mutane ba ta cimma cikakkiyar biyan dukkan buƙatun rayuwa na kowane mutum ba.

From this principle, which makes the price the regulator of distribution, Capitalism has effectively decided that man does not deserve life unless He is capable of contributing to the production of commodities and services. The person who is incapable of contributing, whether He was born with a physical or mental disability, does not deserve life, and does not deserve to take from the wealth that which satisfies his needs. Also the person who was born strong in body or in mind, and who is more capable of creating and possessing wealth however He wishes, deserves to consume luxuriously and deserves to practice control and mastery over others with his wealth. Also the one whose motivation to seek material gains is stronger will exceed others in possessing wealth whereas, the one whose adherence to spiritual and moral values (which control Him during the earning of wealth) is stronger, will have less than others in possessions or wealth. This approach excludes the spiritual and moral elements from life and produces a life built upon a materialistic struggle to gain the means of satisfying materialistic needs. This eventually occurs in all countries which adopt and apply Capitalism. The domination of Capitalist monopolies has developed in countries adopting Capitalism, with producers exercising control over consumers. A small group of people i.e. the owners of large oil, automotive, and heavy industry corporations, have come to dominate consumers, reigning over them by imposing certain prices for the commodities they produce. This has led to attempts to “patch up” the economic system. They did this by giving the State (government) the right to intervene in fixing the price (price control) in special circumstances to protect the national economy, to protect consumers, and to reduce consumption of some commodities, as well as limiting the authority of monopolies. They also included in the regulation of production certain public projects directed by the government. These measures contradict the basis of their economic system, which is economic freedom, and they are only applied in specific circumstances. Moreover, many Capitalists do not adopt this interventionist approach (Conservatives) and they scorn it, contending that the price mechanism alone is sufficient to achieve harmony between the interest of the producers and the interest of the consumers, without any need for governmental intervention. These patchwork solutions which are recommended by the supporters of intervention (Liberals), are only applied in certain circumstances and conditions, and even in these circumstances, the distribution of wealth amongst the individuals does not achieve the complete satisfaction of all basic needs for each and every individual.

Rarraba kayayyaki da ayyuka ba daidai ba, wanda ya samo asali daga ra'ayin 'yancin mallaka da kuma ra'ayin sanya farashi a matsayin hanya ɗaya tilo ta rarraba dukiya, zai ci gaba da mamaye duk wata al'umma da ke aiwatar da Jari-hujja. Dangane da al'ummar Amurka, Amurkawa da yawa sun sami isasshen rabon dukiyar ƙasar, wanda ya biya mafi yawan bukatunsu na asali gaba ɗaya, har ma wasu daga cikin abubuwan jin daɗinsu. Wannan yanayi ya faru ne saboda yawan dukiyar ƙasar, wadda ta kai matakin da kowane mutum yake da damar biyan dukkan bukatunsa na asali da wasu abubuwan jin daɗi. Duk da haka, wannan ba saboda an sanya rabon mutum daidai da darajar ayyukan da ya bayar wajen samarwa ba. Bugu da ƙari, sanya tsarin farashi a matsayin mai sarrafa rarrabawa ya sa manyan kamfanonin Jari-hujja na Yamma suna neman kasuwanni a wasu ƙasashe, domin samun albarkatun ƙasa da sayar da kayayyakinsu. Abin da duniya ke fama da shi, ta fuskar mulkin mallaka, yankunan tasiri da mamayar tattalin arziki, sakamako ne kawai na waɗannan manyan kamfanoni da kuma sanya farashi a matsayin kayan aiki wajen rarraba dukiya. Don haka, albarkatun duniya suna taruwa bisa wannan tsari a hannun manyan kamfanonin Jari-hujja. Duk wannan saboda ƙa'idodi da ka'idoji na ƙarya da Jari-hujja ta kafa.

The poor distribution of commodities and services, which resulted from the concept of freedom of ownership and from the concept of making the price the only mechanism for distributing wealth, will continue to dominate every society that applies Capitalism. With regard to American society, many Americans had a sufficient share of the wealth of the country, to satisfy most of their basic needs completely, and to satisfy even some of their luxuries. This situation occurred due to the immense wealth of that country which had reached a level by which there was an opportunity for every individual to satisfy all of his basic needs and some of his luxuries. However, this was not due to making the share of the individual equal to the value of the services He contributed in production. Furthurmore, putting the price mechanism as the controller of distribution has caused Capitalist monopolies in the West to look abroad to other countries for new markets, from which to gain raw materials and to sell their products.What the world suffers from, in terms of colonisation, regions of influence and economic invasion, is merely a result of these monopolies and making price a tool in the distribution of wealth. Thus, the resources of the world are accumulated on this basis into the hands of Capitalist monopolies. All this is due to the false rules and principles established by Capitalism.