Mwanadamu kwa asili yake hukimbilia kutumia juhudi katika kuzalisha mali ambayo kwayo hutimiza mahitaji yake. Mahitaji ya mwanadamu ni mengi, na hawezi kuyatimiza akiwa peke yake bila watu wengine. Kwa hiyo, inakuwa lazima kwake kuishi katika jamii ambamo hubadilishana na wengine bidhaa za juhudi zao. Hivyo basi, mwanadamu anayeishi katika jamii hutumia juhudi zake kuzalisha kwa ajili ya matumizi yake ya moja kwa moja (matumizi) na kwa ajili ya kubadilishana. Kwa kuwa mahitaji yake ni mengi, hatumii juhudi zake zote kwa matumizi yake ya moja kwa moja peke yake, kwa sababu anahitaji mali ambazo hana. Inakuwa ni lazima kwake kunufaika moja kwa moja na juhudi za wengine, kama vile katika mahitaji yake ya elimu, dawa na mengineyo kama hayo.

Man rushes naturally to spend effort in producing the property by which He fulfils his needs. Man’s needs are numerous and He cannot meet them in isolation of other people. Therefore, it becomes inevitable that man lives in a society in which He exchanges with others the products of their efforts. Therefore, man who lives in a society spends his effort to produce both for his direct use (consumption) and for exchange. Because his needs are numerous, He does not spend all his efforts for his direct consumption only, for He is in need of properties which He does not have. It becomes necessary for Him to benefit directly from the efforts of others, as in his need for education and medicine and the like.

Kwa hiyo, aina za mali ambazo mwanadamu huzalisha, ijapokuwa ni tofauti na nyingi, hazitoshi kukidhi mahitaji yake yote. Hii ni kwa sababu hawezi kuzalisha kwa juhudi yake mwenyewe vitu vinavyokidhi mahitaji yake yote. Badala yake, lazima atategemea juhudi za wengine. Hivyo basi, anapaswa kubadilishana juhudi zake au mali yake na matunda ya juhudi za wengine. Kwa hiyo, kubadilishana juhudi za watu ni jambo la lazima. Kwa kuwa juhudi hizi zinaweza kulipwa kwa juhudi nyingine au kwa mali, inakuwa ni lazima kuwepo na kipimo kitakachobainisha thamani ya matunda yote ya juhudi, kwa kulinganisha moja na nyingine, ili yaweze kubadilishwa. Hiki ndicho kinachobainisha thamani za mali, ili ziweze kubadilishwa moja kwa nyingine au kwa kazi. Kwa hiyo, ni lazima kipimo kinachotumika kubainisha thamani ya juhudi na kipimo kinachotumika kubainisha thamani ya mali kiwe kimoja, ili kuwezesha kubadilishana mali kwa mali, kubadilishana mali kwa juhudi, na kubadilishana juhudi kwa juhudi.

Therefore, the types of properties which man produces, however different and numerous they are, are not enough to fulfil all his needs. This is because He cannot produce by his own effort the things that fulfil all his needs. Rather He must depend on the efforts of others. So He has to exchange his effort or his property with the fruits of the others efforts. Therefore, the exchange of people’s efforts is necessary. Since these efforts may be recompensed by another effort or property it becomes necessary to have a measure that defines the values of all the fruits of efforts, relative to each other, in order that they may be exchanged. This defines the values of properties, so that they can be exchanged with each other or for labour. Therefore it is necessary that the measure used to define the value of efforts, and the measure used to define the value of properties is the same, so as to enable the exchange of properties with each other, the exchange of property with effort and the exchange of effort with effort.

Kwa hiyo, watu wamekubaliana juu ya malipo ya kifedha yanayowawezesha kupata mali na kazi zinazohitajika kwa ajili ya kutimiza mahitaji yao. Malipo haya ya kifedha, yanapohusu bidhaa, ni bei, na yanapohusu kazi, ni ujira. Hii ni kwa sababu, katika kubadilishana bidhaa, ni fidia kwa bidhaa yenyewe, na katika kubadilishana kazi ni fidia kwa manufaa ya juhudi aliyotumia mtu. Kwa hiyo, miamala ya kibiashara na mikataba ya kuajiri ni ya lazima kwa mwanadamu, ingawa hakuna uhusiano kati ya biashara na kuajiri isipokuwa kwamba ni miamala baina ya watu miongoni mwa wanadamu. Hivyo basi, kuajiri hakutegemei kuuza (biashara), wala ujira hautegemei bei. Kwa hiyo, makadirio ya ujira ni tofauti na makadirio ya bei, na hakuna uhusiano kati yake. Hii ni kwa sababu bei ni fidia kwa mali, hivyo kwa lazima ni mali kwa malipo ya mali, iwe mali hiyo imekadiriwa kwa thamani au kwa bei. Ujira ni fidia kwa juhudi, ambayo si lazima izae mali; bali inaweza kuzaa mali au isizae. Manufaa yatokanayo na juhudi hayakomei katika kuzalisha mali, kwani zipo manufaa nyingine zaidi ya mali yanayotokana na kazi. Kwa hiyo, juhudi zinazotumika katika kilimo, biashara na viwanda, za aina yoyote na kiasi chochote, huzalisha mali na hii huongeza moja kwa moja utajiri wa nchi. Lakini huduma zinazotolewa na daktari, mhandisi, mwanasheria, mwalimu, na huduma nyingine kama hizo, hazizalishi mali wala haziongezi moja kwa moja utajiri wa taifa. Mzalishaji akichukua ujira, atakuwa amechukua kwa kubadilishana na mali aliyozalisha; lakini mhandisi akichukua ujira, hatakuwa amechukua kwa kubadilishana na mali, kwa kuwa hakuzalisha mali yoyote. Kwa hiyo, makadirio ya bei kwa lazima ni kwa malipo ya mali. Hii ni kinyume na makadirio ya manufaa yanayotokana na juhudi, ambayo si kurejeshwa kwa mali bali ni kurejeshwa kwa manufaa, ambayo yanaweza kuwa mali au yasiwe mali. Kwa njia hii, kuuza ni tofauti na kumwajiri mfanyakazi, na bei ni tofauti na ujira kulingana na makadirio halisi. Hata hivyo, tofauti ya kuuza na kuajiri, na ya bei na ujira, haimaanishi kwamba hakuna uhusiano kati yao. Badala yake, tofauti yao inamaanisha kwamba kuajiri hakupaswi kujengwa juu ya kuuza, wala kuuza juu ya kuajiri. Kwa hiyo makadirio ya bei hayategemei makadirio ya ujira, wala makadirio ya ujira hayategemei makadirio ya bei. Hii ni kwa sababu kuweka mojawapo juu ya nyingine kunasababisha bei za bidhaa anazozalisha mfanyakazi kudhibiti ujira anaopokea, ilhali bei za bidhaa ndizo zinazomdhibiti mwajiri, si mfanyakazi. Kama bei zingeachwa zimdhibiti mfanyakazi, hilo lingeleta mwajiri kumdhibiti mfanyakazi, hivyo angeweza kupunguza na kuongeza ujira wakati wowote apendapo, kwa kisingizio cha kushuka na kupanda kwa bei, jambo ambalo haliruhusiwi. Hii ni kwa sababu ujira wa mfanyakazi ni malipo ya manufaa ya kazi yake, hivyo ujira wake ni sawa na thamani ya manufaa yake, na haupaswi kuunganishwa na bei za bidhaa anazozalisha. Si kweli kudai kwamba kumlazimisha mwajiri kulipa ujira uliokadiriwa, bei ya bidhaa inaposhuka, kunamsababishia hasara, na hivyo kumfanya mfanyakazi kuachishwa kazi. Hili hutokea tu pale bei za bidhaa zinaposhuka katika soko zima. Kwa hiyo, jambo hili linaachwa kwa makadirio ya wataalamu kwa manufaa ya mfanyakazi, wala halikabidhiwi kwa mwajiri. Hii ni kwa sababu wataalamu huzingatia manufaa yote ya kazi kwa ujumla, wala hawazingatii kisa kimoja tu. Kwa hiyo, kukadiria ujira hakutegemei bei ya bidhaa, bali huamuliwa kwa makadirio ya wataalamu.

Zaidi ya hayo, kuajiri kukijengwa juu ya kuuza, na kuuza kukijengwa juu ya kuajiri, husababisha bei za bidhaa zinazohitajika na mfanyakazi kudhibiti ujira wake, ilhali bei za bidhaa zinazohitajika na mfanyakazi zinapaswa kudhibiti riziki ya mfanyakazi, na si ujira wake. Hivyo, ikiwa bei za bidhaa zinazohitajika na mfanyakazi zingepewa udhibiti wa ujira wake, ingefanya riziki ya mfanyakazi kuwa wajibu wa mwajiri, jambo ambalo analazimika kulihakikisha. Hata hivyo, riziki ya kila mtu ni sehemu ya mambo yake ambayo yanapaswa kutunzwa na Dola, si na mwajiri. Pia hairuhusiwi kabisa kuunganisha riziki ya mfanyakazi na uzalishaji wake, kwa sababu mfanyakazi anaweza kuwa na mwili dhaifu asiweze kuzalisha ila kidogo, kiasi kilicho chini ya mahitaji yake. Hivyo, ikiwa ujira wake utaunganishwa na kile anachozalisha, basi atanyimwa riziki yenye heshima, jambo ambalo haliruhusiwi. Kwa hiyo, haki ya riziki lazima ihakikishwe kwa kila mtu miongoni mwa raia, iwe anazalisha sana au kidogo, na iwe anaweza kuzalisha au hawezi. Kwa hiyo, ujira wake hupimwa kwa thamani ya manufaa yake, iwe ujira wake umetosha mahitaji yake au haujatosha.

Moreover, building hiring upon selling, and selling upon hiring leads to the prices of commodities needed by the worker controlling his wage, though the prices of his needed commodities should control the sustenance of the worker, and not his wage. So if the prices of the commodities needed by the labour were given control over his wage, it would make the sustenance of the worker a duty upon the employer, which He has to secure. However, the sustenance of every person is a part of his affairs which have to be cared for by the State, not by the employer. It is also not allowed absolutely to link the sustenance of the worker with his production, as the worker could be of a delicate body and not able to produce but a little, which is below his need. So if his wage is linked to that which He produces then He will be deprived of a decent livelihood, a matter which is not allowed. Thus the right of livelihood has to be secured for every person of the citizens whether He produces much or little, and whether He was able or unable to produce. Therefore, his wage is assessed by the value of his benefit, whether his wage was enough to meet his needs or not.

Kwa hivyo, si sahihi kukadiria ujira wa mfanyakazi kwa kutumia bei za bidhaa anazozalisha, wala kwa bei za bidhaa anazozihitaji. Kwa hiyo si sahihi kujenga ukodishaji juu ya uuzaji na uuzaji juu ya ukodishaji; yaani, hairuhusiwi kujenga mojawapo juu ya nyingine. Hivyo, hairuhusiwi kujenga ujira juu ya bei, wala bei juu ya ujira. Hii ni kwa sababu kukadiria ujira ni jambo tofauti na kukadiria bei; na kila moja lina sababu maalum na mambo ya pekee yanayoongoza ukadiriaji wake. Ujira hukadiriwa kwa manufaa yanayotokana na juhudi, hivyo ukadiriaji ni wa manufaa tu na si wa juhudi, ingawa manufaa hayo yanatokana na juhudi aliyoitumia mtu. Wataalamu hukadiria ujira kwa manufaa haya, kulingana na matumizi yake. Ukadiriaji wa ujira si wa kudumu; badala yake umeunganishwa na muda uliokubaliwa, au na kazi iliyokubaliwa kufanywa. Muda unapoisha au kazi inapokamilika, huanza ukadiriaji mpya wa ujira, iwe kwa wahusika wawili wa mkataba au kwa wataalamu, katika kukadiria ujira unaolingana. Muda unaweza kuwa wa kila siku, kila mwezi au kila mwaka.

In this way, it is wrong to estimate the wage of the worker by the prices of the commodities that He produces, or by the prices of the commodities that He requires. So it becomes wrong to build the hiring upon selling and selling upon hiring; i.e. it is not allowed to build one of them upon the other. Therefore, it is not allowed to build the wage upon the price, nor the price upon the wage. This is because the estimation of the wage is a matter different from the estimation of the price; and each of them has particular factors and special considerations, which have control over the estimation. The wage is estimated by the benefit that the effort produces, so the estimation is only by the benefit and not by the effort, though the benefit produced is due to the effort spent by the person. The experts estimate the wage by this benefit, according to its utilisation. The estimation of the wage is not permanent; rather it is linked to the period agreed upon, or to the job which is agreed to be performed. Once the period finished or the work is accomplished, a new estimation of the wage starts, whether by the two contracting parties or by the experts, in estimating the equivalent wage. The period could be daily, monthly or annually.

Bei ni uwiano wa ubadilishanaji kati ya kiasi cha fedha na kiasi cha bidhaa zinazolingana nayo. Kwa hiyo bei ni fedha inayotolewa badala ya kipimo kimoja cha bidhaa fulani kwa wakati fulani. Kuhusu namna ya kuikadiria, huamuliwa kiasili na soko kulingana na mahitaji ya watu kwa bidhaa hiyo. Ni kweli kwamba bei inaweza kukadiriwa kwa kiwango cha hitaji la mnunuzi kwa bidhaa hiyo, hivyo anaichukua kwa bei yoyote ile. Pia inaweza kukadiriwa kwa kiwango cha hitaji la muuzaji, hivyo anauza kwa bei yoyote ile. Hata hivyo, hili halikubaliwi; ni hatari kwa jamii na lazima lisiruhusiwe. Hii ndiyo inayoitwa Ghubni (udanganyifu). Kwa hiyo, jambo la msingi katika hali hii ni kile ambacho wauzaji na wanunuzi sokoni wanakiamua, si kile ambacho muuzaji na mnunuzi wanaofanya mkataba mahususi wanakubaliana. Kwa maneno mengine, bei ni thamani ya bidhaa inayokadiriwa na soko. Basi kukubali kwa mnunuzi bei iliyowekwa na soko ni wajibu, na kukubali kwa muuzaji bei iliyowekwa na soko ni wajibu. Jambo linaloiweka bei hii na kuwalazimisha muuzaji na mnunuzi kuikubali ni mahitaji ya manufaa ya bidhaa hiyo katika jamii ambamo iliuzwa, bila kujali gharama zake za uzalishaji. Kwa hiyo, ukadiriaji wa bei unatofautiana na ukadiriaji wa ujira, na hakuna uhusiano baina ya makadirio hayo mawili. Ukadiriaji wa ujira hauegemei ukadiriaji wa bei. Bei huamuliwa tu na mahitaji ya bidhaa, huku upungufu wa bidhaa sokoni ukichukuliwa kama kigezo katika ukadiriaji huu. Bei haiwezi kupimwa kwa gharama ya uzalishaji, kwani bei inaweza isiwe sawa na gharama za uzalishaji, kwa sababu inaweza kuwa chini au juu zaidi kulingana na hali za muda mfupi. Lakini kwa muda mrefu, usawa hutokea kiasili kati ya bei iliyowekwa na soko na gharama za uzalishaji. Hata hivyo, hii haifanyi ujira uunganishwe na bei ya bidhaa, kwa kuwa wanunuzi na wauzaji, kwa muda mfupi na mrefu, hawaangalii gharama ya bidhaa wanapoifanyia biashara. Badala yake, bei yake katika kesi zote mbili inaamuliwa na mahitaji ya bidhaa hiyo, kwa kuzingatia kipengele cha uhaba wake sokoni.

The price is the ratio of exchange between the quantity of money and the quantity of equivalent goods (commodities). So the price is the money given in return for a unit of a certain commodity at a certain time. In regard to its estimation, it is decided naturally by the market based upon the need of the people for that commodity. It is true that the price could be estimated by the extent of the need of the buyer for the commodity, so He takes it whatever it’s price. It could also be estimated by the amount of the need of the seller, so He sells it whatever is its price. However this is not allowed; it is dangerous for the society and must not be permitted. This is what is called Ghuban (fraud). Therefore, what matters in this situation is what the sellers and buyers in the market decide and not what the (particular) contracting seller and buyer agree upon. In other words, the price is the value of the commodity estimated by the market. So the acceptance of the buyer of the price defined by the market is compulsory, and the acceptance of the seller of the price defined by the market is compulsory. The matter that defined this price and forced the seller and the buyer to accept it is the demand for the benefit of the commodity in the society in which it was sold, irrespective of its production costs. Therefore, the estimation of the price differs from the estimation of the wage, and there is no relationship between the two estimations. So, the estimation of the wage is not based on the estimation of the price. The price is only defined by the demand for the commodity, taking the shortage of the commodity in the market as a factor in this estimation. The price cannot be measured by the cost of production, as the price may not be equal to the production costs, since it could be less or could be more according to the circumstances in the short term. But in the long term, a balance occurs naturally between the price defined by the market and the production costs. However this does not make the wage linked to the commodity’s price, as the buyers and the sellers, in the short and long terms, do not look at the cost of the commodity when they trade it. Rather its price in both cases is defined by the demand for the commodity, taking into consideration the factor of its scarcity in the market.

Wanakapitalisti na Wakomunisti walitofautiana katika kukadiria ujira wa mfanyakazi kiasi cha kwamba misimamo yao ikawa inapingana. Wanakapitalisti humpa mfanyakazi ujira wa asili, ambao, kwa mtazamo wao, ni ule anaohitaji kwa vitu vya maisha kwa kiwango chake cha chini kabisa. Wao huongeza ujira huu gharama za maisha zinapopanda juu ya kiwango hiki cha chini, na huupunguza iwapo gharama za maisha zitashuka. Hivyo, ujira wa mfanyakazi hukadiriwa kulingana na gharama za maisha bila kujali faida ambayo juhudi zake zimeleta kwa mwajiri na kwa jamii. Ama kile ambacho wafanyakazi huchukua kama ujira huko Ulaya na Amerika, kama wanavyosema Wanakapitalisti, ni marekebisho ya mfumo wa Kikapitalisti kwa kumpa mfanyakazi zaidi ya haki zake na zaidi ya kile ambacho uhuru wa umiliki unampa. Licha ya marekebisho hayo, kile anachochukua mfanyakazi bado kiko katika kiwango cha chini cha maisha, ambacho bila hicho hawezi kuishi isipokuwa kwa kutoridhika. Kuinua kiwango cha maisha huko Ulaya na Amerika kumeruhusu kiwango cha chini cha ujira anachopokea mfanyakazi kuwa juu zaidi, jambo linaloonyesha kwamba yeye yuko bora zaidi; hata hivyo, hachukui sawa na kile anachozalisha. Kwa hiyo, ukadiriaji wa ujira wa mfanyakazi huko Ulaya na Amerika, ingawa haumfanyi kuwa maskini ikilinganishwa na nchi nyingine, na unamwezesha kutimiza mahitaji yake ya msingi na baadhi ya anasa, ikilinganishwa na kiwango cha maisha katika jamii anamoishi, ni cha chini kiasi. Licha ya kuinua kiwango cha maisha cha wafanyakazi huko Ulaya na Amerika, ukadiriaji wa ujira huko, na katika nchi zote za Kikapitalisti, bado uko katika kiwango cha chini cha maisha ikilinganishwa na jamii yao.

Capitalists and Communists differed in estimating the wage of the worker to the point that they became contradictory. Capitalists give the worker the natural wage which is, in their view, that which the worker needs of the living means at their minimum standard. They increase this wage as the living costs increase over this minimum standard, and they reduce the wage if the living costs decrease. Hence the wage of the worker is estimated according to the living costs irrespective of the benefit which his effort produced for the employer and the society. Whereas, what the workers take of wages in Europe and America as Capitalists states, is an amendment of the Capitalist system by giving the worker more than his rights and more than that which the freedom of ownership gives him. Despite that amendment, that which the worker takes is still at the minimum standard of living, without which He can’t live except in discontent. Raising the level of living in Europe and America allows the minimum standard of wage the worker receives, showing Him to be better off, however He does not take equal to what He produces. So the estimation of the wage of the worker in Europe and America, though it does not make the worker poor compared with other countries, and enables Him to fulfil his basic needs and some of his luxuries is, compared with the standard of living in the community in which He lives, relatively low. Despite raising the standard of living of workers in Europe and America, the estimation of the wage there, and in all Capitalist countries, is still at the minimum standard of living compared with their society.

Hata hivyo, mradi tu makadirio ya ujira yanapoamuliwa na kiwango cha chini kabisa cha mahitaji ya maisha ya mfanyakazi, matokeo yake yatakuwa kwamba umiliki wa wafanyakazi unakomewa kwa kiasi kile wanachohitaji kukidhi mahitaji yao, kwa kiwango chao cha chini ikilinganishwa na jamii wanayoishi miongoni mwake. Hili linatumika bila kujali kama maisha yao yanakidhi mahitaji ya msingi tu, kama ilivyo kwa wafanyakazi katika nchi zilizodhoofika kifikra (kama nchi za Kiislamu), au kukidhi mahitaji ya msingi na anasa, kama ilivyo kwa wafanyakazi katika nchi zilizoendelea kifikra (kama Ulaya na Amerika). Umiliki wa mfanyakazi katika nchi zote kama hizi unakomewa katika kiwango cha chini cha maisha kuhusiana na jamii anayoishi miongoni mwake, iwe kiwango cha maisha ni cha juu au cha chini. Hali hii inaendelea mradi tu makadirio ya ujira yanaamuliwa na kile mfanyakazi anachohitaji kwa njia za maisha katika kiwango chake cha chini kabisa.

However, as long as the estimation of the wage is dictated by what the worker needs of means of living at their minimum, it will result in the ownership of the workers being limited to the amount they require to meet their needs, at their minimum standard compared with the community among which they live. This is regardless of whether their living was to meet their basic needs only, as is the case of workers in the intellectually declined countries (like the Islamic countries), or to meet their basic needs and luxuries, as is the case of workers in the intellectually progressed countries (like Europe and America). The ownership of the worker in all such countries is limited to the minimum standard of living in relation with the community among which He lives, whether the standard of living is high or low. This is the case, as long as the estimation of the wage is dictated by what the worker needs of the means of living at their minimum standard.

Wakomunisti wanaona kwamba kazi ambayo mfanyakazi anaifanya ndiyo kigezo kikuu cha kutoa bidhaa na kukamilisha utengenezaji wake; hivyo kazi, au uwezo wa kufanya kazi, ina nafasi ya msingi katika kuzalisha bidhaa. Kwa msingi huo, wakomunisti wanaona kwamba kazi ya mfanyakazi ndiyo msingi wa uzalishaji, hivyo ujira wa mfanyakazi ni sawa na kile anachozalisha, na gharama zote za uzalishaji zinahusishwa na kipengele kimoja, ambacho ni kazi. Hili, bila shaka, ni kosa na linapingana na uhalisia. Uhalisia unaoonekana ni kwamba mali iliyopo ulimwenguni (ambayo imeumbwa na Allah (swt)) ndiyo msingi wa thamani ya bidhaa; gharama zinazotumika kuongeza manufaa ya mali hiyo au kuunda manufaa ndani yake, pamoja na kazi, ndizo sababu zinazoibadilisha kuwa katika umbo linalotoa manufaa fulani. Kwa hiyo kufanya kazi kuwa msingi ni kosa na kinyume na uhalisia. Zaidi ya hayo, kufanya bidhaa iliyozalishwa kuwa sawa na ujira wa mfanyakazi ni kubatilisha malighafi na gharama zilizotumika katika uzalishaji wake, ambazo zingeweza kutumiwa na mfanyakazi mwingine ambaye tayari alishapokea ujira kwa ajili yake. Hivyo mfanyakazi huyu wa sasa hakuizalisha bidhaa hiyo, na uzalishaji hauhusiani peke yake na kazi yake, ili apewe bidhaa hiyo kama ujira wake.

The Communists consider that the work, which the employee carried out, is the main factor in producing the commodity and completing its manufacture; so the work, or the ability to work, plays an essential role in producing the commodity. Thereupon, Communists consider the work of the employee is the basis of production, so the wage of the employee is equal to what He produces, and all the production costs are attributed to one element, which is the work. This is, of course, wrong and in disagreement with the reality. The tangible reality is that property in the universe, (which is created by Allah (swt)), is the basis of the value of the commodity; the costs spent on increasing the benefit of that property or in creating a benefit in it, together with the work, are the elements which transferred it to the form by which it provides a certain benefit. Hence making the work as the basis is wrong and contradictory to the reality. Moreover, making the produced commodity equal to the wage of the employee is an invalidation of the raw material and the costs spent on its production, which could have been spent by another employee who already took a wage for it. So the current employee did not produce the commodity, and the production is not attributed solely to his work, in order to be given the commodity as his wage.

Lakini ikiwa tutadhani kwamba kinachokusudiwa kwa mfanyakazi ni mfanyakazi kwa ujumla, basi malighafi ambayo Allah (swt) aliiumba bado inabaki (kama sehemu ya manufaa), na si sahihi kuichukulia kana kwamba haipo wala haihesabiwi. Zaidi ya hayo, kumchukulia mfanyakazi kwa maana ya ujumla kwa ajili ya kukadiria ujira ni makosa, kwa sababu wafanyakazi ni watu maalum, na ujira ni kwa ajili ya watu hawa tu. Kwa hiyo kumchukulia mfanyakazi kwa ujumla hakupelekei kukadiriwa kwa ujira, bali kunapelekea kufutwa kwa ujira na kufutwa kwa umiliki, jambo linalopingana na maumbile ya mwanadamu. Pia ni wazo lisilo sahihi ambalo halina uhalisia unaoonekana.

However if we assume that what is meant by the worker a worker in general, then the raw material which Allah (swt) created still remains (as part of the benefit) and it is improper to be considered as not existent and not accounted for. Moreover, considering the worker in general terms for estimation of the wage is wrong, because the workers are designated persons and the wage is but for these persons. So considering the worker in general does not lead to estimation of the wage, rather it leads to the abolition of the wage and the abolition of ownership, a matter which contradicts with man’s nature. It is also an incorrect thought that has no tangible reality.

Hali halisi ya mambo inaonyesha kwamba mwanadamu hukimbilia kutimiza mahitaji yake kwa nguvu zake mwenyewe; hivyo hujitahidi kupata bidhaa kutoka kwenye ulimwengu, au kutoka kwa mtu mwingine, au kwa kuambatanisha sehemu ya juhudi zake na vitu vilivyopo katika ulimwengu, ili mali hiyo iwe inafaa kutimiza mahitaji yake. Kwa hiyo, nadharia ya Kikomunisti ya kukadiria ujira wa mfanyakazi kuwa sawa na bidhaa aliyoizalisha ni potofu; na kufafanua ujira kuwa sawa na kile alichozalisha bila kujumuisha malighafi pia ni potofu. Hii ni kwa sababu zana alizotumia mfanyakazi na gharama alizotumia zimechangia katika kuunda bidhaa, lakini hizo si sehemu ya kazi ya mfanyakazi. Kama zingezingatiwa kuwa sehemu ya kazi ya wafanyakazi kwa kuangalia kazi kwa ujumla, hilo lingesababisha kufutwa kwa ujira, jambo ambalo ni potofu kama ilivyojadiliwa hapo awali.

The tangible reality indicates that man rushes to fulfil his needs by himself; thus He strives to obtain products from the universe, or from another person, or by attaching some of his effort to the things which exist in the universe, so that the property becomes suitable to fulfil his needs. Therefore, the Communist’s theory of the estimation of the wage of the worker as being equal to the commodity He produced is wrong; and defining the wage as equal to what He produced excluding the raw material is wrong also. This is because the tools which the worker used and the expenses He spent have contributed to forming the commodity, yet they are not a part of the worker’s work. If they were considered as a part of the workers’ work looking at work in general, this leads to abolition of the wage which is wrong as was discussed previously.

Ujira wa mfanyakazi hauhusiani na bidhaa, iwe thamani yake au bei yake. Badala yake unahusiana na manufaa ambayo juhudi zake zimemletea mtu binafsi na jamii, iwe manufaa hayo yapo katika malighafi yenyewe, kama uyoga na tufaha, au yapo katika mchango wa mfanyakazi katika kazi, kama injini ya mvuke. Hivyo, kukadiria ujira kunahusiana na manufaa, si na bidhaa anayoizalisha. Kwa hiyo, kuweka mipaka ya ujira wa mfanyakazi kwa kiwango fulani, bila kujali ukubwa wake, ni makosa na kinapingana na uhalisia unaoonekana. Inatosha kwamba ujira ujulikane badala ya kubainishwa kwa kiwango fulani. Kwa hiyo, nadharia ya kukadiria ujira inayotumiwa na Wakapitalisti, Wakomunisti na Wasosholisti si sahihi na inapingana na uhalisia. Pia inasababisha kuvurugika kwa mahusiano ambayo kwa lazima hujitokeza miongoni mwa watu wakati wa kazi ili kutimiza mahitaji yao.

The worker’s wage is not linked with the commodity, whether its value or its price. Rather it is linked with the benefit which his effort provided to the individual and the community, whether this benefit exists in the raw material, like the mushroom and the apple, or it exists in the worker’s contribution to the work like in the steam engine. Thus the estimation of the wage is linked with the benefit not with the commodity which He produces. Therefore, limiting the worker’s wage by a certain limit, whatever its scale, is wrong and contradicts to the tangible reality. It is sufficient that the wage be known rather than defined by a certain limit. Thereupon, the theory of the wage estimation used by the Capitalists, the Communists, and the Socialists is wrong and contradicts the reality. It also causes disruption in the relationships which necessarily arise among the people during the work for fulfilling their needs.

Tofauti hii katika kukadiria ujira wa mfanyakazi inatokana na tofauti zao katika kubainisha maana ya thamani ya bidhaa, yaani katika kufafanua thamani ya bidhaa. Baadhi ya Wakapitalisti walifafanua thamani kuwa ni sawa na kile bidhaa inachogharimu kwa muda, juhudi na malighafi. Kwa mfano, injini ya mvuke inathaminiwa zaidi kuliko baiskeli. Thamani hii inazingatiwa kulingana na uhaba wa bidhaa hizi kwao. Wengine walisema kwamba thamani ya kitu inategemea manufaa yake, yaani uwezo wake wa kutimiza mahitaji. Wengine walisema kwamba thamani ya bidhaa yoyote inategemea kiasi cha kazi kilichotumika katika utengenezaji wake, pamoja na kiasi cha kazi kilichotumika katika kutengeneza mashine na zana zinazotumika katika mchakato wa uzalishaji. Nadharia ya mwisho kabisa, (inayoitwa 'nadharia ya manufaa ya pembezoni'), inaangalia thamani kutoka mtazamo wa mzalishaji na mtumiaji kwa pamoja, yaani kutoka mtazamo wa ugavi na mahitaji, hivyo inategemea ugavi na mahitaji. Kwa hiyo manufaa ya pembezoni ndiyo yanayodhibiti mahitaji, yaani ni kikomo cha chini kabisa cha manufaa ya bidhaa kwa kutimiza hitaji, kiasi kwamba hamu ya kutimiza hitaji baada ya kikomo hiki cha pembezoni inapungua au inakuwa yenye madhara. Wakati gharama za pembezoni za uzalishaji ndizo zinazodhibiti ugavi, yaani ni kiasi cha mwisho cha kazi kilichotumika katika kutengeneza bidhaa, kiasi kwamba kutumia kazi zaidi katika uzalishaji kunakuwa hasara. Hivyo thamani inabadilika-badilika kwa namna inayodumisha usawa kati ya mambo haya mawili.

This difference in estimating the wage of the worker is due to their differences in assigning the meaning of the value of the commodity i.e. in defining the value of the commodity. Some of the Capitalists defined the value as equal to what the commodity costs of time, effort and raw materials. As an example, the steam engine is evaluated more than the bicycle. This value is considered according to the scarcity of these commodities to them. Others said that the value of a thing depends on its benefit i.e. on its ability to fulfil the needs. Others said that the value of any commodity depends on the amount of work spent in its production, in addition to the amount of work spent in producing the machinery and tools used in the production process. The most recent theory, (called the ‘marginal utility theory’), looks at the value from the viewpoint of the producer and consumer together i.e. from the viewpoint of supply and demand, thus depending on the supply and demand. Thus the marginal benefit controls the demand i.e. it is the minimum limit of the commodity’s benefit for fulfilling the need, such that the keenness for fulfilment after this marginal limit diminishes or becomes harmful. While the marginal costs of production control the supply i.e. they are the last amount of work spent in producing the commodity such that spending any more work in production becomes a loss. Thus the value fluctuates such that it maintains a balance between these two phenomena.

Kuhusu thamani kwa mujibu wa Wakomunisti, Karl Marx alitaja kwamba chanzo pekee cha thamani ni kazi inayotumika katika utengenezaji wake, na kwamba mfadhili wa kibepari hununua nguvu ya mfanyakazi kwa ujira usiozidi kile anachohitaji ili aendelee kuishi na kuwa na uwezo wa kufanya kazi. Kisha yeye hutumia nguvu hiyo kuzalisha bidhaa ambazo thamani yake huzidi kwa kiasi kikubwa ujira anaomlipa mfanyakazi. Marx aliita tofauti kati ya kile mfanyakazi anachozalisha na kile kinachomlipwa kweli "thamani ya ziada". Alisema kwamba thamani hii ya ziada inawakilisha kiasi ambacho wamiliki wa ardhi na wafanyabiashara hunyakua kutoka haki za mfanyakazi chini ya jina la mapato, faida na riba ya mtaji, ambayo halali yake yeye, bila shaka, hakuikubali.

With regard to the value according to the Communists, Karl Marx mentioned that the only source of the value is the work spent in its production, and that the Capitalist financier buys the power of the employee for a wage which is not more than He needs to stay alive and able to work. Then He exploits this power to produce commodities whose values greatly exceed the wage which He pays to the employee. Marx called the difference between what the worker produces and what is really paid to Him ‘the surplus value’. He stated that this surplus value represents the amount which landlords and businessmen usurp of the worker’s rights under the name of the revenue, profit and the capital interest whose legality He of course, did not acknowledge.

Ukweli ni kwamba thamani ya bidhaa yoyote ni kiasi cha manufaa yake, ukizingatia pia kipengele cha uhaba wake. Ingawa kazi ni njia ya kupata manufaa haya, au njia ya kuyazalisha, haizingatiwi kabisa wakati bidhaa hii inapobadilishwa na nyingine, wala wakati wa kuitumia. Kwa hiyo, mtazamo wa kweli kwa bidhaa yoyote ni mtazamo wa manufaa yake, ukizingatia kipengele cha uhaba wake, iwe bidhaa hii ilimilikiwa na mwanadamu mwanzoni, kama kwa kuwinda, au kwa kubadilishana, kama kwa biashara. Hakuna tofauti kuhusu jambo hili katika jamii ya Moscow, jamii ya Paris na jamii ya Madinah. Hii ni kwa sababu mwanadamu kila mahali, anapojitahidi kupata bidhaa, hupima kiasi cha manufaa kilichomo ndani yake, akizingatia uhaba wake sokoni. Hii ndiyo thamani ya bidhaa kama wanadamu wanavyoiona, ambayo ndiyo thamani yake halisi.

The fact is that the value of any commodity is the amount of its benefit, taking into consideration the factor of its scarcity (shortage). Though work is a means to obtain this benefit, or a means to produce it, it is not considered at all when this commodity is exchanged with another, nor when using it. Therefore the true view for any commodity is the view of its benefit, taking into consideration the element of its shortage, whether this commodity was possessed by man initially like from hunting, or by exchange like trading. There is no difference regarding this matter in the society of Moscow, the society of Paris and the society of Madinah. This is because man everywhere, when He strives to obtain a commodity assesses the amount of benefit that exists in it, taking in to account its shortage in the market. This is the value of the commodity as men view it, which is its true value.

Lakini thamani halisi ya bidhaa hupimwa kwa kiasi cha kubadilishana kwake na kitu kingine, iwe ni bidhaa nyingine au fedha. Thamani hii, kwa maana hii, hubaki vilevile licha ya kubadilika kwa wakati, mahali na hali. Kuhusu bei ya bidhaa, ni kiasi cha fedha kinachotolewa kwa kubadilishana na kipimo kimoja cha bidhaa hii katika wakati fulani, mahali fulani na katika hali fulani. Kiasi hiki hubadilika kadiri wakati, mahali na hali vinavyobadilika. Kwa maneno mengine, bei ni uwiano wa kubadilishana kati ya kiasi cha fedha na kiasi sawa cha bidhaa.

But the actual value of the commodity is estimated by the amount of its exchange with another thing, whether a commodity or money. This value, by this sense, remains constant despite the change of time, place and circumstances. With regard to the price of the commodity, it is the amount of money which is given in exchange of one unit of this commodity in a certain time, certain place and in certain circumstances. This amount changes as the time, place and circumstances change. In other words, the price is the ratio of exchange between the amount of money and the equivalent amount of commodities.

Kwa hiyo, mtu akimuoa mwanamke na kufanya, kama sehemu ya mahari yake, kabati fulani lililoelezwa, na akataja thamani yake kuwa dinari hamsini, kisha hatimaye akamkabidhi, basi thamani ya kabati hilo imekuwa imepangwa kwa kupokelewa kwake nalo kama bidhaa. Iwapo baadaye alilichukua kutoka kwake na yeye akafungua kesi dhidi yake kuhusu hilo, basi ni lazima amrudishie kabati lenyewe, si bei yake. Iwapo kabati lilithibitika kuharibika, au yeye akadai kuwa limeharibika, basi anapaswa kumlipa dinari hamsini, kwa kuwa hii ndiyo thamani ya kabati, iwe kabati linalofanana nalo wakati wa kesi lina thamani kubwa au ndogo kuliko dinari hamsini, kwa kuwa hii ndiyo thamani yake halisi iliyokadiriwa. Bei ya kabati linalofanana nalo haizingatiwi. Hii ni tofauti na hali ambapo ingetajwa katika mkataba wa ndoa kwamba bei ya kabati ni dinari hamsini na mume hatimaye akamkabidhi mke wake kabati hilo. Ikiwa baadaye alilichukua kutoka kwake na yeye akafungua kesi dhidi yake kuhusu hilo, basi atakuwa na hiari ya kumkabidhi kabati, au kumlipa bei yake (dinari hamsini), au kumnunulia kabati jingine kwa dinari hamsini (iwe kabati wakati wa kesi lina thamani kubwa au ndogo kuliko dinari hamsini). Hivyo analazimika kumkabidhi kabati ambalo bei yake ni dinari hamsini wakati wote.

So if a person married a woman and made, as a part of her dowry, a certain described cupboard, and He mentioned its value as fifty dinars, and He eventually handed it to her, then the value of the cupboard had been designated through her receiving it as a commodity. If He later took it from her and she brought a lawsuit against Him over it, then He has to hand over to her the cupboard itself not its price. If the cupboard was proved to be damaged, or He alleged that it was damaged, then He should pay her fifty dinars, because this is the value of the cupboard whether the identical cupboard at that time of the court case was more or less than fifty dinars, because this is its actual estimated value. The price of an identical cupboard is not considered. This is different than the case if it were mentioned in the marriage contract that the price of the cupboard was fifty dinars and the husband eventually handed the cupboard to his wife. Then if He took it from her and she brought a lawsuit against Him over it, He would have the choice to hand the cupboard to her or to pay her its price (fifty dinars), or to buy her another cupboard with fifty dinars (whether the cupboard at the time of the court case was more or less than fifty dinars.) So He is obliged to hand to her a cupboard whose price is fifty dinars at all times.

Hii ni kwa sababu thamani ya bidhaa haibadiliki, lakini bei yake hubadilika. Kwa hiyo thamani halisi ya bidhaa ni kiasi cha kubadilishana kwake wakati wa kukadiria, na bei ya bidhaa ni kiasi cha fedha kinachotolewa sokoni kama kubadilishana nayo. Tofauti hii kati ya thamani na bei inatumika katika biashara na aina mbalimbali za kubadilishana. Lakini ujira wa mfanyakazi ni kiasi ambacho manufaa ya juhudi zake yanakadiriwa, wakati wa mkataba. Hukadiriwa tena mwishoni mwa kipindi cha kuajiriwa. Hivyo inaonekana kwamba hakuna uhusiano kati ya ujira wa mfanyakazi na thamani ya bidhaa, wala kati ya ujira wa mfanyakazi na gharama za uzalishaji, wala kati ya ujira wa mfanyakazi na kiwango cha maisha. Hili ni jambo tofauti; ni thamani ya manufaa ambayo mwajiri wake anayapata. Ukadiriaji wa manufaa haya hauachwi kwa mwajiri, bali unategemea hitaji lake la manufaa hayo. Kwa hiyo kipimo cha kukadiria ujira wa mfanyakazi ni manufaa yaliyoelezwa. Ujira huu hutofautiana kulingana na aina ya kazi, na hutofautiana kwa kiwango cha ukamilifu katika kazi ile ile. Hivyo ujira wa mhandisi hutofautiana na wa seremala, na ujira wa seremala stadi hutofautiana na wa seremala wa kawaida. Ujira wa watu wanaofanya kazi ile ile huongezeka kulingana na ukamilifu wao katika manufaa ya juhudi zao. Hili halihesabiwi kwao kuwa ni kupandishwa cheo, bali ni ujira wao wanaostahili kwa kuwa wameboresha manufaa ya juhudi zao.

This is because the value does not change but the price changes. So the actual value of the commodity is the amount of its exchange at the time of estimation, and the price of the commodity is the amount of money paid in the market as an exchange for it. This differentiation between the value and the price applies in trading and the different types of exchange. But the wage of an employee is the amount at which the benefit of his effort is estimated, at the time of contract. It is estimated again at the end of the hiring period. Thus it appears that there is no relationship between the wage of the worker and the value of the commodity or between the wage of the worker and the costs of production, nor between the wage of the worker and the standard of living. It is a different matter; it is the worth of the benefit which his employer obtains. The estimation of this benefit is not left to the employer but to his need for this benefit. So the unit of estimating of the worker’s wage is the described benefit. This wage differs according to the type of work, and varies with the degree of perfection in the same work. So the wage of an engineer differs from that of a carpenter, and the wage of a skilled carpenter differs from that of an ordinary carpenter. The wage of people who do the same work increases according to their perfection in their effort’s benefit. This is not considered a promotion to them, but rather it is their wage which they deserve as they improved the benefit of their effort.