A critical overview of Ali Shariati's comment on the Islamic Economy

Islam introduces a system that encompasses and concerns all areas of human life, and the economic structure, which occupies an important place and significance in this human life, is a crucial part of this system. Based on their considerations of the Qur'an and hadith sources, Islamic scholars have classified the five essentials to be protected in Islam: religion, life, mind, generation, and property (six with the addition of "purity" in some works). As seen from this classification, the property is mentioned with life. Also, as described in the proverb "property is the chip of life", the property is a sincere piece as an essential part of life, and a human being even gives up on their life for it. Iranian sociologist and author Ali Shariati has written very important works in sociology. In his works, he touched partly on the issue of the Islamic economy, and his opinions relating to this were compiled under various names and published in the form of the book. Although Shariati often emphasized the right and acceptable principles in their views on the economy in general and especially the Islamic economy, to impose the socio-economic structure in his mind, he presented the views opposite with Islam under the name of the Islamic economic system. In his opinion, the effects of the Shia thought were deeply noticed, and he did not see any harm in presenting his false deductions under the name of Islam. According to him, within the framework of Shia thought, socialism represents the real Islamic economy. His views sometimes go to extremes so much that he can put the entire fiqh system and fiqh scholars under suspicion. In this study, the thoughts put forward by Ali Shariati about the Islamic economy system are critically evaluated and the points that are separate from the whole Islamic economy system are tried to be revealed. The main purpose here is to provide an understanding of the real Islamic economic system, inform the relevant people about the issue, and correct the mistakes by revealing the wrong views.


Results and Discussion
This study is based on a theoretical and conceptual framework. In addition, the Islamic economy has been handled only within the framework of the issues addressed by Ali Shariati. The Islamic economic system is an issue to be handled in a much broader context. Although many studies are touching on this subject, it will be appropriate to deal with this issue in a wider framework with additional studies. Within our literature review studies, it is seen that there are supportive or critical studies about Ali Shariati. It is also clear that these studies are mostly handled within the framework of sociology. In this study, taking the Islamic economic system as a base, an evaluation based on the economy and within the framework of Islam has been made, which includes a unique approach different from the studies conducted to date. As a result of the studies, it has been demonstrated that the Islamic economy system put forward by Ali Shariati is not a real Islamic economy. In the framework of the ideology he believed in, which was presented in the relevant work of the author, it was seen that he misjudged the Islamic economic system, and in this context, how the entire Islamic economy system should be was revealed with the evidence.

Ali Shariati
Ali Shariati was born on November 23, 1933, in a family with religious sensibilities in Meshed, the administrative centre of Iran's Khorasan (Khurasan) province. Some sources say he was born in Mezinan (Mazinan), a village in the city of Sebzivar (Sabzavar). His ancestors, especially his father (Muhammad Taqi Shariati), were important local religious scholars of the Sabzavar region. His father was a Quran and tafsir expert. Muhammed Taqi moved to the city at the age of 20 and had the opportunity to study in modern schools in the city center of Sharia (Abedi, 1986).
The foundations of the religious education of Shariati were laid first at home. In particular, the great contribution of his mother to the formation of mystical feelings in him will be mentioned later (Rahnema, 2000). However, his father also greatly impacted his development and contributed greatly to the formation of his scientific research and logical thinking skills. Next to his father, Shariati had the chance to learn lessons from many scholars, some of whom had important reputations. His grandfather, Akhond Molla Qorban-Ali (or Akhond Hakîm), had been trained in the institutions of the prestigious Shi in Bukhara, Najaf, and Mashhad. While Akhond Hakîm was a very traditional Islamic scholar, his father, Mohammed-Taqi, adopted a Westernized approach to education (Wain, 2017). Shariati had a curious structure for reading and knowledge. He met with Mevlana's Mesnevi during his secondary school years, followed by big personalities of his period, such as Hallac-ı Mansur and Cüneyd-i Bağdadi (Shariati, 1992).
With the advantage of being in the city, Shariati attended modern schools (Turner, 2007). In high school, he advanced his Sharia readings and developed a focus on philosophy and knowledge. He said, "In this period, my brain was expanding with philosophy, and branded with lore" (Shariati, 1992). After his high school education, he entered the recently-established Meshed University Teacher Training College and graduated successfully. In 1960, he went to Paris to study at Sorbonne with a government scholarship (Abedi, 1986). There he worked on sociology and the history of religions. After completing his master's and doctorate, Shariati received his Ph.D. from Sorbonne in 1964 (Turner, 2007).
Shortly after his return to Iran, he was sentenced to prison for a short time because of the charges against his political activities in France. Afterwards, he started to teach as an assistant professor on the history of Islam at Mashhad University, and his original and remarkable comments on the problems faced by Muslim societies brought him a wide range of students (Turner, 2007). In 1967, upon the invitation of Ayatollah Motahhari, he moved to Tehran, where he taught at the Housseiniye Ershad Religious Institute, which attracted larger audiences. He was imprisoned again, but popular and international pressure eventually released him in 1975. However, SAVAK (Iranian Security Agency) kept him under close surveillance. Due to his views, Shariati acquired too many enemies from many fronts. However, he was supported by Ayatollah Khomeini and, as a result, had a very important and major influence on the Iranian Revolution. He moved to England because his movements were severely restricted, but three weeks later, he was found dead in his apartment in June 1977. A secret was sought in his death, and it was generally assumed that SAVAK agents killed him (Rahnema, 2000) quoted (Turner, 2007).
Along with Ayatollah Khomeini and Ayatollah Motahhari, Shariati was one of the main architects of Islamic revolutionary thought as a direct response to the ideology of modernity and as a challenge to the modernization policies of the Pahlavi dynasty (Chehabi, 1990) quoted (Turner, 2007). Iranian Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi implemented many reforms to turn Iran from a poor traditional society and a decentralized state system into a centralized and industrialized country. The motivation to industrialize Iran quickly after the Second World War was partly based on Shah Pahlavi's foreign policy goals. The Shah wanted to prevent foreign forces from invading Iran militarily (as it was during the second world war); on the other hand, he aimed to transform the country into a modern and developed country in the western style, that is, an important world power by introducing reforms in daily lifestyles (Zeiny, 2017). Shah put the country on a path focused on developing and becoming a superpower while establishing a strong system regarding his administration's security. From the beginning of its reign, the armed forces were the main pillar of the Shah Pahlavi administration. The Shah wanted to ensure the loyalty of the soldiers by offering them generous salaries and various benefits (subsidized dwellings, free education for their children, subsidized shopping stores and exchanges, comfortable hostels-accommodation opportunities, and, in some cases, various opportunities in provincial governorships, government ministries or government enterprises). Due to all these measures, the Iranian Islamic Revolution surprised the top US politicians and Iranian Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi (Eisenstadt, 2011).
On the eve of the revolution, Iran, a key ally of the United States, seemed relatively stable in the early and mid-1970s despite urban terrorism incidents (Eisenstadt, 2011). However, modernization efforts caused serious unrest and conflict within and outside the country. The most important reason for this unrest was that the country's economic, social and cultural relations changed rapidly without the participation of those disturbed by these fast transformations. Developments have been tightly controlled so that ordinary people and opposing parties (especially those from the intellectual environment) do not harm the modernization process. This process caused people to be largely alienated from the process (Zeiny, 2017). This alienation and being out of the process caused serious energy accumulation. An intellectual power reached a very serious point that the Shah did not take into account (even if he did, he did not include it in the process). Twenty years before the Islamic Revolution, Islamic associations developed among intellectual groups.
On the one hand, the urban population has tripled, and an important political network has emerged among religious communities among the urban poor. Ali Shariati had an important role in this intellectual environment. Marxism and radical Shia theology intellectually influenced Shariati, and his views were shaped within this framework (Turner, 2007). During the Pahlavi regime, some intellectuals, and theologists, as the social opponents of governing Iran afterward (Ali Shariati is one of them), not only criticized the regime's discriminatory and unfair policies as condemning Iran but also formulated their definitive versions to change the political system (Ghaffari & Shariati, 2019). In this context, we can talk about names such as Ayatollah Khomeini, Ali Shariati, Morteza Motahhari, Mahmood Taleghani, and Seyyed Ali Khamenei. Shariati, inspired by European Protestantism, by providing contexts for the Shiite renaissance (Shariati, 2014), believing in Islamic reformism and saving religion from giving up intellectual persecution with two fantasies, believed that there was a way to get the country out of its problems, including injustice (Shariati, 2014). Shariati saw Islam as an important infrastructure where his ideals, such as freedom, justice, and responsible society, were met. He said that, for this to happen, Islam must be seen as an exemplary ideology for the people of the world (Shariati, 2014) (Ghaffari & Shariati, 2019).
Shariati was a modernization critic who believed that drawing non-western communities into modernity (as Shah Pahlavi tried to do) was an ominous way. According to him, Western powers have to destroy the self-sufficient domestic economies of traditional societies in order to export their goods. Therefore, Western modernity is destroying traditional consumption patterns. Although there are many critics of western imperialism, Shariati has developed a deep and sophisticated understanding of the alienation of local identity. According to him, the cultural traditions of consumerism disappear under neo-colonial conditions, and a new and original but remote identity emerges (Turner, 2007). Shariati intellectually tried to create a unique structure by depending on his intellectual structure, influenced by Marxism and radical Shia theology based on Islam.

Ali Shariati and the concept of Shia Islam
As in all the other opinions of Ali Shariati, we see the profound impact of Shia theology also in his thoughts on the economy. Under this influence, Shariati can sometimes extend to very radical thoughts and discourses. According to him, followers of the sunnah do not reveal order in parallel with the Quran. According to them, the Qur'an consists of sacred music and a heavenly voice, and they take their pedestals from various hadith sources, not directly from the Quran. According to Shariati, even though followers of sunnah and Shia are considered two separate branches of the same Islamic belief, they have become two opposite enemies and different trends over time. The idea that the people in these trends are brothers and mingle with each other and that Islamic justice dominates everywhere is a deception for him. This means to him a deceptive mirage that consists of "false deception and contradiction like a deceptive and new mask on an ugly dress." According to him, this false monotheism looks quite frivolous when considering a scene in which the sword of Allah is in the hands of the executioner 3 and the book of guidance is in the spears of the perverts. Shariati rejects the caliphate Islam, which represents the Sunni faith, and the practices of this understanding, and emphasizes that it is wrong to rejoice in conquest movements (how wrong it is for him to turn Roman churches, Iranian synagogues, and Indian idols into mosques.) by not approving these conquest movements throughout the history of Islam. According to him, all these practices in the name of Islam have deviated from the true Islamic belief by preparing the ground for the increase in power and dominance of the ruling classes and the formation of the spiritual class, which is based on (and the main supporter of) this power (Shariati, 2019).
The view based upon Shia-Sunni fıqh, which is the basis of Ali Shariati's views on the economy, is very important. According to him, the dominant Sunni fıqh is at the disposal of power holders with a say in management because the scholars who reveal the Sunni fıqh rules are tied through the navel to the administration that benefits them. This tie or commitment expectedly causes these scholars to provide judgments or establish pedestals that benefit the ruling class, bosses, notables, socialites, and squires. According to him, this clergy is in a structure that supports the ruling class (reign) and is given life by it. In other words, there is a symbiotic relationship between the sultanate and clergy. However, according to him, Shia fıqh is different. The Shia official has always been the sole advocate of the rights of the people since it always opposed Islamic governments and did not fall under the yoke of the political authority and administrations of the time. According to him, Shia has always been a position as "a revolutionary and populist representative of Islam which opposes classification." Shariati bases this on the prophet Ali and argues that the Shia faith always opposes the power-holders, capitalism, stakeholders, and the persecution of these power-holders but holds a position for true justice and the people. (Shariati, 2019). He claims that the economy has also become the means of exploiting the people in the hands of these power-holders (although institutions such as zakat and charity are available, they are used as a means to cover the plunder of the people). (Shariati, 2019).
Shariati says that with Hz. Muawiya true Islam turned into a regime of reign, and the fiqh structure of the superiors started to take root with it. In fact, according to him, Hz. Muawiya's father, Abu Sufyan, and his environs were forced to surrender after the conquest of Mecca by sword force, and they did not enter Islam. These anti-Islamic forces, who do not have faith even in emotion and belief, are called with the narration of Hz. Prophet (PBUH) Hz. Ali (may Allah be pleased with them) 'kasitîn', opponents of justice. According to him, they are completely public enemies based on rights, equality, and justice and on a general basis. Shariati says: Even if the unjust people of this society and those who pursue only their interests pray, fast, give zakat, and even say that they love the people of Ahl al-Bayt, they cannot deceive those who are on the way of Ali. The main measure here is justice (Kıst), and opponents of justice (Kâsıt) cannot deceive true Muslims. Opponents of justice (Kâsıtlar) "Under the masks of all kinds, either the polytheist or the mujahid; whether idolatrous or worshiping Allah (jj); whether unbeliever, Muslim, Sunni, Shiite etc." they have always maintained their social position and they are true enemies of Islam. Shariati goes much further, saying: "Kâsıt (anti-justice) is a condition of being anti-Islam," and that it says swearing and Islam does not change its mental structure. "The Kâsıt of Muslim (anti-justice) is worse than the Kâsıt of the qafir" (Shariati, 2004). It is impossible for someone reading these views not to be terrified. Yes, the Muslim may also be a sinner, but look at the horrors of the following judgment: "The Muslim's Kâsıt (anti-justice) is worse than that of the qafir".
Of course, we are not saying that the external group martyred Hz. Ali is in the Islamic circle. However, keeping the companions of Muaviye and the Messenger of Allah (p.a.v.) in the same pot with the external groups that were in the same hostility both to Hz. Ali and Hz. Movie and defused by Ali is incompatible with reason and belief. In the sura of Maidah, "let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just" (Maidah, 5/8); God warns us in a very clear way. Otherwise, while you accuse those who have Kâsıt (anti-justice), you find yourself as being the same (anti-justice). Whatever the case is, it is not for any Muslims and is incompatible with Islam to deny and otherize Muslims who make mistakes and do wrongs because they are sinners and even see them as worse than infidels.
The first periods of Islam witnessed important exams of this community. While many companions were alive, their differences of opinion caused them to have some disagreements from time to time, especially after Hz. Osman was martyred, and the Islamic world went through very difficult exams. The Camel case between Hz. Ali and Hz. Aisha and The Battle of Sıffin, which took place between Hz. Ali and Hz. Muawiye is the hardest of these exams. That Hz. An external party martyred Ali and then the martyrdom of Hussain, Hz. Prophet's very fellow shook the Islamic world very deeply. It is impossible for someone who says I am Muslim to remain indifferent to all these events and not to feel these events in the depths of his heart. Nevertheless, using these events as an excuse, it is not acceptable to try all the ways that will leave the entire Islamic world in pretense. The disputes between Hz. Ali and Hz. Aisha, and those between Hz. Ali and Hz. Movie, as well as the wars that occurred, should all be left up to the discretion of Allah (c.c.). Any attempt today to be the prosecutor and judge of these cases would surpass the limits. Of course, we will discuss the causes and consequences and write scientific studies, but this should be neutral and without leaving justice when judging them or swearing at one side. Shariati's discourses inspired by radical Shia theology form the basis of understanding the Islamic economy.

Shariati's commentary on the Islamic Economy
In this section, Ali Shariati's views on the Islamic economic system will be presented briefly.

The concept of "World" in Shariati
Shariati summarizes the economic approach he opposes under the word "world". Before explaining this concept, he states he perceives the word bourgeois as evil and inferior in today's sense but also states that the word does not have such a bad side or connotation in the etymological sense. In fact, in the period when the bourgeois emerged, rather than the "dynasty" and "tebea" (public) class, it represented a small-scale class of craft and related trades workers, which was an innovative and progressive class. They had neither an aristocratic lifestyle like the class of dynasty nor that of the general public (tebea), which is derogated. These were tools and equipment manufacturers, farmers, tailors, and people from the artisan class who were engaged in trade, all meeting the needs of the cities in that period. In the 19th and 20th centuries, this class started to be called bourgeois with bad qualities, and it was because they had a capitalist, colonial structure and used power to exploit the people with industrialization. Shariati states that the concept of the bourgeois was considered in different periods of history as a concept that had different meanings with limitations, that the concept of "world" expressed by Islam has a more special meaning and that the opposed structures can be mentioned under this word. When considered in this sense, according to him, the world "is the lifestyle of the 'world' masters in slavery, of feudalists in feudality, of bourgeois in bourgeoisie and of capitalists in capitalism". Regardless of the period in which the word "world" is taken, it fits all as a general word describing the negative economic structure of that period. The meaning communicated by the word represents all the negativities of selfish, individual, and consumer trends and values, which are "to meet personal interests, to have privileges in front of others, to be separate from others, to be superior to others and to brag about themselves in front of others." Specifically explaining this concept, Shariati especially expects people not to assume that when he refers to the condition to be inclined to this world life, he indicates the people from the class of religion (mullas), who are not inclined to this world life but hereafter (Shariati, 2019).

The capitalist system and economy in Shariati's perspective
In his considerations of the concept of the "world," Shariati, without hesitation, explains his hatred for the wealthy who come to the fore with their wealth in the capitalist economic system. Again, in an article of his, he mentions that during a conversation on a blessed night, when a rich person asked him to talk about things that would help him remember God, who would bring him the peace that night, from the world pastime kneaded in commercial life, he directed very unkind and insulting statements to that rich person. According to him, the one with capital wealth in a capital system turns into a "wild wolf" or "an earthly mouse". On the other hand, this development of the capital owners makes most people a "flock of sheep". His opinions about the owners of the capital are not limited only to these but go even further. He resembles these people today either to the rats that accumulate and eat or to a wild and predatory pig whose only interest is to eat until getting full, law, kick, bite, trick and eliminate others, as well as tossing and sneaking away" (Shariati, 2019).
Shariati says that this understanding of the capitalist and exploitation system is not new, and the seeds of it were thrown together with Kabul, the son of Hz. Adam. According to him, the war between Abel and Kabul is a war of class discrimination beyond its apparent face. To him, Kabul is the representative of agriculture and individual property. On the other hand, Abel represents the partnership period of the livestock circuit before private ownership. He claimed that there was no individual ownership of "production resources (water, land, etc.) or production tools (oxen, plow, etc.); everything was equally available to everyone for use. All the beauties of the ideal person (embodied in Abel) were present in the structure of this society. However, the agricultural order (represented by Kabul) had limited production resources in nature and advanced means of production, and production relations became complicated. This situation brought the production resources to the hands of only one class and the others to the point of being deprived of those resources. This led to the emergence of individual ownership, but actually, it planted the seeds of the existence of the superiors, which led to the exploitation of the weak (Shariati, 2004).
Islam and the concept of the capitalist system in Shariati's perspective Shariati states that there are two types of views among Muslims in terms of economic systems. According to the first opinion, turning their back on the world by focusing on daily life, which was put forward as the cause of backwardness in the history of Islam, and meaningless and untargeted asceticism destroyed Muslims, and as a result, the blessings of the world fell into the hands of non-Muslims. In the second view, he says that the viewpoints of venoms and giving up on the real world in a Sufistic way is a form of deviation, and in fact, Islam encourages a lot of spoils and world blessings. Those who advocate this second view say that the Prophet (pbuh) suggested: "A lot of booty means the blessing of custody and religion. Muslims should live beautifully and pleasantly. " According to Shariati, both of these views are deviations from Islam, and these views do not actually represent Islam. The Islamic society, which alternates between these two sides, sometimes prefers a life in the office of ascetism and sometimes one that is capitalist and materialist.
Shariati says that the accumulation of goods and wealth by individuals and their living in luxury is a contradiction to Islam, but that Islam also does not want backwardness and the concept of asceticism (zühdcülük). He adds that a situation that is positive in the social structure may be personally and psychologically negative. Similarly, asceticism, which provides individual spiritual development, could mean poverty and oppression in terms of society. According to him, the development and progress of the Islamic community are important for Islam. Referring to the Surah of Hadid in the Qur'an where iron is mentioned, he emphasizes the importance of building a strong society on iron, not poverty and oppression. Economically poor countries are exposed to the exploitation of other countries, and a dependent economic system occurs. Therefore, economic independence is necessary for political independence. Shariati says that Islamic societies are necessary and obligated to be rich and strong in macroeconomic terms and that the capitalist economic system is bad and unacceptable. From his point of view, it is not possible for Muslims to individually fight and survive in this capitalist system; while temporarily living according to the reality of this system, efforts should also be made to Islamize it (Shariati, 2004).

Shariati's view on freedom in the Islamic Economic System
Since the Islamic economic system of Shariati does not want the capitalist structure, it should be a system that does not legally and practically allows the aggressors who want to cross the border. The important thing here is not first to release the possibilities and then control them. According to him, " a moral superstructure based on justice and piety cannot be established with a capitalist, imperialist, and colonial infrastructure." Therefore, the "Islamic-moral superstructure" should be based on "production and economic infrastructure". Otherwise, it is not possible to restrain people with moral advice after releasing them free in the capitalist system. According to Shariati, this struggle failed in the early periods of Islam. Despite the efforts of companions such as Hz. Ali and Hz. Ebuzer, the poor people who once had only a tent reached great fortunes and reigned with new conquests and loot. He added that this trend rendered Hz. Ali's and Hz. Hussein's calls unanswered and caused the Muslims to pervade seemingly on behalf of Islam with the understanding of "capture," "hit," and "loot." (Shariati, 2004).

Shariati's marxism and socialism
Although Shariati admits that his views above are largely in line with Marxist philosophy, he says that he did not acquire these views from Marxists and that those who have learned from Islam and religion are Marxists. According to him, saying that while Islam accepts capitalism, it only limits spending and brings about very dangerous consequences. That the canonists side with capitalism in practice (to them, there exists a symbiotic relationship between the two) causes this system to militate in favour of capitalism, even though it is advised in the pulpit to prevent extravagance. The solution, then, is to never allow a capitalist to splurge. According to him, as stated in the previously mentioned issue of freedom, the first step is to place all means under the control of the capitalist and then say, "Don't spend wantonly, Gentleman! Don't waste!" will not help. He claims that if luxury and unnecessary spending are forbidden in the Islamic economic system, Islam should be based on such principles that there should be no open door for man to waste (and therefore for all the wrong in religion). Otherwise, according to Shariati, the Islamic canonists who rely on today's capital power and the capital owners in the fiqh system are like donkeys as the latter think of "buying concubines while performing the offer salvation? In other words, does Marxism offer the "rejection of capitalism, rejection of classes, rejection of exploitation, rejection of the state, rejection of private property, rejection of gold stockings and utilitarian morality, and especially the rejection of human enslavement and blunting the human essence in the social business and production system"? This time in Marxism, the dictatorship of the proletariat is replaced by the state, which was abolished, and while the people are indifferent in capitalism, they become prisoners in Marxism. The human being exploited and enslaved by capital power in the capitalist system becomes the slave of a tightly organized society in Marxism. "Deceiving there, deceiving here!" but, in the end, the loser is revealed to be "a human" once more. Existentialism, on the other hand, opposes both, but going too far, fighting to liberate the human may lead to divinizing him (Shariati, 2008).
The solution, according to the Shariati, is to switch to the ideal Islamic system, in which the social resources that are compensated in the belief of the Shia and which overlap with socialism, are offered to the benefit of all humanity. According to him, all of the sources of production are common values sent by Allah to all humanity, and the supremacy of superiors over these resources is unacceptable. Individuals can act as proxies and caliphs on properties, and when they do not perform their duties, that property is given to someone else to be processed because they are representatives, not the owners. According to him, Islam refuses to "imprison the goods and the resources of production" (Shariati, 2004). In this sense, property is a problematic structure. He says, "Property has led to selfishness, devotion of property, stealing, greed, poverty, betrayal, class, aristocracy, alienation, enmity, shirk, racism, war, sovereignty, indulgence, lust, mischief, cheating, tyranny, persecution, whip, torture, massacre, despotism, enslavement, cultural exploitation, imperialism, oppression, and the rule of demons." These property and class superiority owners come under various names. They appear under the names of "sometimes masters, sometimes members of dynasties, sometimes landowners or sometimes the rich," and they are accompanied by "sometimes magicians, sometimes fortune tellers, sometimes wise, sometimes Sufi, sometimes priest, sometimes molla, sometimes monks, sometimes philosophers, sometimes poets, sometimes canonists, sometimes religious scholars, etc." There is also the public, exploited by this class of property owners and superiors. According to him, these are "Sheep's heads! Sheep of Allah! called "slaves". Sometimes the folk, peasants, labor, proletars, apprentices... " (Shariati, 2012).
The system offered by Shariati as the Islamic economic system is actually socialism to a large extent. The system he supports is a system in which there are no classes with both economic and human equality, but everyone is equal. In this system, "socialism should be right next to morality, and morality should be right next to socialism." Otherwise, the system will not be fully established (Shariati, 2004).

A critical consideration of the Shariati's view on the Islamic Economy
In this section, Ali Shariati's views on the Islamic economic system will be handled with a critical perspective, and it will be tried to reveal how the relevant issues are considered in the real Islamic economic system.
First of all, it will be appropriate to touch on Islam's view of the world and world life. It is a wonder if the world, as Sharia says, can be referred to as a notion that carries the negative of all selfish, individual, and consumer tendencies and values that are "to meet personal interests, have a privilege over others, be separate from others, be superior to others, and brag against others." Islam is a test case with some religious contradictions in the context of the "world." First of all, the world life is"... nothing more than a game and fun..." Allah (jj) created this world as a test and said, "The home of the hereafter is definitely better for those who are Muttaki." (An'am,6/32;'Ankabut,29/64;Muhammad,47/36;Hâdid,57/20). This world life has been created with a wisdom for "testing" which of our practices and behaviours will be more beautiful. (Hûd,11/7;Mulk,67/2). Since this world's life is a means of testing and, as required in this testing, people's test questions are given differently. On this issue, Allah (jj) said, "Look how we made some of them superior to others. Of course, the degrees in the hereafter are greater, so are the superiorities. " (Isrâ, 17/21). Otherwise, how can we understand the following words in the surah, Ali 'Imran? Say: "O Allah! Lord of Power (And Rule), Thou givest power to whom Thou pleasest, and Thou strippest off power from whom Thou pleasest: Thou enduest with honour whom Thou pleasest, and Thou bringest low whom Thou pleasest: In Thy hand is all good. Over all things, Thou hast power. " (Ali 'Imran, 3/26). Hz. Prophet (pbuh) says: "When one of you sees what is superior to him in terms of goods and creation, he shall turn his evil eye to the one below him. Doing so is necessary so that you do not underestimate God's blessing on you. " (Bukhari,Rikak,30;Muslim,Zühd,8;Tirmizî,Kyâmet,59;Tirmizî,Kyâmet,59.) So, people can be superior to one another by means of goods and creation as a test. Property given to man should be understood not only as material capital but also as a power of domination. A prophet who came after Hz. Moses said to his people, who refused the king (Talat), whom he appointed: "Allah hath chosen him above you, and hath gifted him abundantly with knowledge and bodily prowess. Allah Granteth His authority to whom He pleaseth. He careth for all, and He knoweth all things. " (Baqarah, 2/247). Hz. Solomon (pbuh) was a prophet who was given a reign. Pointing to all the blessings that he had been provided with, he wanted to remind others of the true owner of them all, saying the following:"... This is a blessing from my Lord... to try me if I will be thankful or ungrateful" (Neml, 24/40). The property and reign that were given to Hz. Solomon (as) indicate the acceptance of his prayer. Hz. Sulaiman supplicated Allah (cc), saying: "... O my Lord! Forgive me. Give me a property (sovereign) that will not be worthy of anyone after me! Surely you are so gracious! …" (Sahad, 38/35). His prayer was accepted and he was commanded as follows: "This is our bestowal. Now, we said, you can give it rashly (to those you desire) or don't!" (Sad, 38/39). Hz. Solomon (pbuh) undoubtedly did not want this property for his own desire. It is stated in the Quran: "Behold, there were brought before him eventide coursers of the highest breeding and swift of foot; and he said," Truly do I love the love of good, with a view to the glory of my Lord,"-until (the sun) was hidden in the veil (of night): When they went out of sight, he said: "Bring them back to me," and began to pass his hand over their legs and their necks. (Sâd,. He had only one purpose in all these possessions, property, wealth, and reign: to be a servant worthy of Allah (c.c.). It was so. The Quran says of Hz. Solomon (a.s.): "How excellent in our service!Ever did he turn (to Us)!" (Sâd, 38/30).
If we define the concept of the world that Shariati refers to when dealing with man's tendency to the world as "all selfish, individual, and consumer tendencies and values," which means "meeting personal interests, having privileges over others, being separate from others, gaining superiority over others, and bragging against others," it is evident that there is hostility towards all material elements that Islam accepts and does not accept. For example, are all the individual and consumer tendencies and values, such as meeting personal interests, in a world that should be avoided? Is "having a privilege in front of others," which Allah gave some as a means of testing, a completely bad situation? Does it have limits? Of course, all selfish, individual, and consumer-oriented tendencies and values, such as being superior to others and bragging against others, have been condemned. This cannot be tolerated. As can be seen here, the concepts that Islam tolerates or opposes seem to be mixed with one another and have all been melted in the same pot. However, Islam is the religion of balance. It does not like exaggeration or understatement.
According to Shariati, individual property is problematic. According to him, once said, "A person who had a tent in Madinah then happened to be the dominating of Rey, Tus, Cairo, and Fustat. Ömer and as were the people who once ate barley bread in Madinah during the time of the Hz. prophet. " At an important point in the time of Hz. Osman and emphasized by Ebuzer, being devoted to luxury and worshipping money were advocated with the words "We had jihad, we gained booty, and God gave us blessings" under religious explanation and name (Shariati, 2004). So, the companion was going the wrong way. A group of people who did not hear Hz. Ali's screams or Hz. Ebuzer's warnings, struggling in the ambition to reach world benefits, drunk with property and wealth, in jihad after the plunder. Is that so? This is a very ruthless act. It is seen that Shariati has no problem with the economic growth and development of Islamic society. On the contrary, he says that this is necessary and compulsory and that the concept of ascetism (zuhd) in the sense of giving up on the world itself is an obstacle to the development of Islamic societies. His state of opposition is more about individual property. So how does Islam view individual property? Is it against individual property?
We know that before the prophethood of Hz. Prophet (pbuh), there was an individual property system in the community of Mecca and that Mecca was an important trade center. This system of ownership was not touched, and thus remained the same after the prophecy came and Islam dominated life. Islam did not touch the existing private property system, and Islam was also founded on private property in religion. Of course, some changes (tax system, zakat, etc.) were made to the private property system. On the subject, significant changes have been made in areas such as property acquisition and transfer, contracts, heritage, and so on. But the basis of the private property system has not been touched. It is stated in the Qur'an that the desire to acquire property is in the creation of man and the love of property is one of his basic pleasures (Hacak, 2006). As we have mentioned before, in the Sura Al-Imran, "Fair in the eyes of men is the love of things they covet: women and sons; Heaped-up hoards of gold and silver; horses branded (for blood and excellence); and (wealth of) cattle and well-tilled land. Such are the possessions of this world's life; but in nearness to Allah is the best of the goals "(Ali 'Imran, 3/14). Just as the world is a testing place, wealth is one of these test questions. Allah (jj) placed people's desire to acquire this wealth in their creation and stated that the important thing is the life of the hereafter, and this wealth is not approved to cause them to get out of the way and forget the hereafter. The true wrestler is not the one staying away from this wealth, but is valiant, who does not forget Allah (jj) among this wealth and goods. These are valiant people, also mentioned in a very common saying in Turkish, "Their hands in the snow, but their hearts with the lover." In the words of the Quran, they are, "… some men that no trade and shopping prevent them from remembering Allah, praying, giving zakat..." (Nûr, 24/37). Islam is not a religion of exaggeration or understatement. It commands us to be in moderation. It refuses to contradict the fitra (man's nature) in particular because man is not strong enough to overdo it, and this is not the purpose of this world life.The following incident, reported by Hz. Enes is very important: "A group of men came to the house of Hz. Prophet (pbuh) and asked the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) about his worship (the worship he did at home). When they were told about what they asked, as if they found it a little, they said: "Who is the Messenger of Allah (pbuh)? And who are we (admitting that he was surely superior)? Allah (jj) has of course forgiven all his past and future sins (therefore, little worship is enough for Him). One of them said: "I will pray every night in my life now." The second said: "I will always fast in my life, I will not leave even one day without fasting." The third one said: "I will give up on my desire for women forever and never touch them." (Aware of the situation later on), Hz. Prophet (pbuh) found them, saying, "You have said so like this. However, I swear to God, I am the most fearful of Allah and the one who avoids the prohibition. But despite this, I sometimes fast, and I sometimes eat: I pray and I sleep; I can also be with women. (This is my sunnah). Whoever does not like my sunnah/tradition is not from me." Bukhari, Nikaah 1; Muslim, Nikaah 5, (1401); Nesâî, Nikaah 4, (6,60).
As can be clearly seen in this incident, just as it is not in our religion to be retired like the Christian priests by giving up on the blessings of the world, Islam does not approve of living by drawing from goods and fortunes. Human nature desires to marry, have children, sleep, rest, and acquire property and wealth. This is what human nature requires. The important thing is not to get away from them altogether, but to take advantage of these opportunities as Allah (jj) wants and commands. While making use of these opportunities, it is important to know that the real aim is to win the life of the hereafter and that they are presented to him as a test. To handle these forces does not mean to clash with them. Hz. Prophet (pbuh) who said, "The true wrestler is not the one who defeats his opponent in wrestling, but the one who defeats his naf when he is angry." explained that anger was from the nature of human beings and that it was in him as a means of testing. In that case, humans will come to salvation not by destroying or being in conflict with the attributes that they have been given, but by using them in the right way.
In the religion of Islam, working for an income is praised. It is stated in the Qur'an that Allah, due to the mercy of His, created the night for resting, and the day to achieve livelihood (asking for Allah's grace and showing gratitude) (Kasas 28/73). It is also said that, as a rule, man is only supposed to work and keep trying and there is no other way than that to gain success (Necm, 53/39). Hz. Prophet (pbuh) suggested that "Nobody has eaten a better bite than he won with the labor of his hand." (Bukhari, Magic, 15). Do the blessings of the world belong only to those who do not believe, and the hereafter to those who believe? Should Muslims work only for the hereafter? No, both the world and the hereafter are offered to the believers as the caliph of Allah (c.c.). Allah stated in the Qu'ran: "Say: Who hath forbidden the beautiful (gifts) of Allah, which He hath produced for His servants, and the things, clean and pure, (which He hath provided) for sustenance? Say: They are, in the life of this world, for those who believe, (and) purely for them on the Day of Judgment. …" (A'râf, 7/32). Is the following not what is said in the sura of Cum'a? "And when the Prayer is finished, then may ye disperse through the land, and seek of the Bounty of Allah." (Cuma, 62/9). As can be seen, worship and trade are mentioned side by side in a balance.
Those who try to show what Allah makes halal as ill-gotten are not different from those who try to make the ill-gotten look halal. Both of these groups persecute themselves and are blameworthy as they try to change the world. Allah (jj) says: "O ye who believe! make not unlawful the good things which Allah hath made lawful for you, but commit no excess: for Allah loveth not those given to excess. Eat of the things which Allah hath provided for you, lawful and good; but fear Allah, in Whom ye believe." (Mâide,5,(87)(88). In the Rûm sura; "So set thou thy face steadily and truly to the Faith: (establish) Allah´s handiwork according to the pattern on which He has made mankind: no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that is the standard Religion: but most among mankind understand not." (Rûm, 30/30), it is meant to show how crucial it is not to give up the original by Allah. However, as a requirement of testing, it is stated that the devil will trick people into changing their disposition (Nisa, 4 / 118-119), we should not follow the trail of the devil (Baqarah, 2 / 168-208), and Allah (cc) will not like those who cause mischief and corruption (Baqarah, 2 / 168-208). Baccarat, 2/205).
So the origins of world goods and fortunes are not essentially nasty, dirty, and neche.This situation of not being dirty cannot be explained with the logic that it is good if held by society, but it is bad if owned only by the individual. This is a completely opposite idea to the order proposed by Islam and human creation, and there is nothing logical about it. It is impossible to stimulate people to work without their desire for wealth and property being available in their disposition and to encourage them to marry and have a family without their sensual feelings and love for children. Such an attempt would be a battle against their creation. Man will go closer to Allah (jj) with their disposition, not by destroying these which are natural to them, but by using them in the way of Islam.
According to Maverdi, the fact that people hold a desire to work harder and earn more is a great favor for humans by Allah. "The world would have been devastated if people were satisfied with their daily needs without worrying about the future or with no future projects, and had no desire for more." (Mâverdî, 1988). Again, according to him, "comprehensive ambition leads to the achievement of things that will not fit in life and cannot be predicted to be achieved throughout life by whipping up the desire to attempt. Thanks to this comprehensive ambition that Allah gave to humanity-as a requirement of the mission of the Caliphate-growth, development, and progress were achieved, and material prosperity has been transmitted from generation to generation. " (Kallek, 2003). Again, in the hadith revealed by Mâverdî in his work (Mâverdî, 1988), "Ambition is a mercy of Allah to my ummah" (Hatib al-Baghdad, History, II, 52), it is seen that the concern of people about their future is a great drive as the mercy and grace of God.
Here again, being a person of balance appears to be an important issue. Maverdi's statement, "Life is too short to be consumed in useless places, and goods are too cheap to be spent in unnecessary places" (Mâverdî, 1988), summarizes for us the necessary balance required in earnings and spending. So the goods are necessary and must be spent only where necessary. In a hadith it is suggested; "Wealth is only good in the hands of a good man" (Tabarani) and "Wealth is a good friend for a Muslim, as long as he has given from his wealth to the poor, orphans, and travellers" (Ahmed b. Hanbel, Musned, III, 21). So, "To earn only what is halal is a must for every Muslim." (Suyûtî, 2003). Due to the needs and causes such as a person's sustaining his life, following Allah's orders, paying off debts, supporting his family, helping his relatives, and serving guests, humans are assumed to work and try (Kayadibi, 2011). "In Islamic Law, leaving up the work is strictly forbidden and accepted as destroying and demolishing the world order established by Allah to stay until the day of judgement" (Serahsî, n.d.) quoted (Kayadibi, 2011). For these reasons mentioned above, it is very important to work, but it must be halal. Our Prophet avoided haram very much, recommending that his ummah avoid it in the same way, and he gave great importance to halal gain. Stating in his hadiths that the best gain is the one made by the labor of the hand of the person, he commanded: "No one has had a better meal than eating what he earned with the labor of his hand. David, the prophet of God, also ate only his labor" (Bukhari, Büyû, 15). "The man has never got a cleaner earning than the labor of his hand." (İbn Mâce, Ticârât, 2.). He also pointed out the importance of trade. The following hadith that İmam Gazalî gave a place in his book, titled "İhya," Hz. Prophet (pbuh) said: "Do trade, because nine out of ten of one's daily livelihood is there. Gazzâlî, 2016).
The Prophets, who were sent to humanity as leaders, each had a profession and ate what they earned with the labor of their hands. In one of his hadiths, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: "No one (from Benî Adam) has ever eaten better than the labor of his hand. The prophet of God, Dawud (pbuh) also ate the labor of his hand. " (Bukhari, Magic 15). "All the prophets have set an example for humanity in working: Hz. Adam (as) sowed crop, Idris got along with tailoring, Ibrahim dealt with the trading of zahir, Dawud (as) made armor, prophet Sulaiman (as) made and sold measuring instruments, Zechariah (as) dealt with battlements, Jesus (as) spun and twisted and he even gathered and our Prophet (pbuh) also worked as sheep shepherd, engaged in trade and agriculture" (Serahsî, n.d.) quoted (Kayadibi, 2011). In Fütüvvetnâme (rules and regulations of the Turkish-Islamic guild), it is mentioned that Hz. Jesus was manufacturing shoes and bread, the Prophet Noah first worked as a carpenter and then a sailor, Abraham did fabric trade and butchery, and Hz. Moses guided the sheep and performed felting professions with their wool (Fütüvvetnâme, n.d.) quoted (Gündüzöz, 2017).
Here, it will not be appropriate to proceed without mentioning a subject, just when it is necessary. According to Ali Shariati, Cain was the first person to deal with agriculture, and the agricultural cycle was the basis of the individual property system. According to Shariati, the individual ownership system that took its shape in Cain is an undesirable situation like the evil represented by Kabul. First of all, Shariati's presenting Cain as the owner of agriculture is groundless. He should have proven this claim, but there is no source to support it anyway, and this appears only to be his own belief. However, when the sources of history are considered, it is seen that the first person to do farming was not Cain but Hz. Adam, and that Hz. Jabrail (pbuh) taught him about planting wheat and agricultural activities. In the list of rules and regulations of the Turkish-Islamic guild (Fütüvvetname), the issue is described as follows: "Hz. Jibra'il[1] brought wheat to Adam to harvest. He also provided Hz. Adam with some other things besides wheat and taught him to eat his fill (feed himself) by farming. According to the legend, Hz. Adam learned to make bread and wheat soup from wheat and thus turned into a man who produced. " (Reported from (Fütüvvetnâme, n.d.) by (Gündüzöz, 2017). There are also many other sources showing us that Hz. Adam was engaged in agriculture. For example, according to Evliya Çelebi, Hz. Adam was the father of the bakers. Hz. Jibra'il went down to the earth and taught him how to make flour from wheat, flour from dough, and bread from dough (Çelebi, 2005). In other narrations, Hz. Adam is mentioned as having planted wheat and grinding it. Our mother Hz. Havva, on the other hand, used to spin yarn, weave fabric, knead dough and bake bread (İbnü'l-Esîr, 1987). Therefore, there is no coherent aspect of Ali Shariati's portraying the livestock activity and partnership period (socialism) over the example of Abel, and the individual property system over agriculture in the case of Cain. So, if agriculture and the individual ownership systems are to be grounded, should we say that this ground has already been taught to Hz. Adam by Hz. Jibra'il (as)? Although it is advised by Islam to work or do business in order to gain wealth and livelihood, a desire to get this wealth only to satisfy sensual aspirations and spend it only for one's self appears to cause punishment in the hereafter. Allah (jj) says: "And render to the kindred their due rights, as (also) to those in want, and to the wayfarer: But squander not (your wealth) in the manner of a spendthrift. Verily spendthrifts are brothers of the Evil Ones; and the Evil One is to his Lord (himself) ungrateful. " (Isrâ, 17/26). The absolute rules of Allah (jj) about this issue are as follows: "Who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them (again in the cause of Allah)" (Baqarah, 2/3).
"…it is righteousnes…to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity…" (Baqarah, 2/177).
"And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to (your) destruction…" (Baqarah,2/195).
"They ask thee what they should spend (In charity). Say: Whatever ye spend that is good, is for parents and kindred and orphans and those in want and for wayfarers. And whatever ye do that is good, -Allah knoweth it well" (Baqarah,2/215) "Those who (in charity) spend of their goods by night and by day, in secret and in public, have their reward with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Baqarah,2/274).
"By no means shall ye attain righteousness unless ye give (freely) of that which ye love; and whatever ye give, of a truth Allah knoweth it well." (Ali 'Imran,3/92) The verses given here are exemplary, and in many other verses it is mentioned and emphasized that it is the characteristic of real Muslims to spend their goods in the way of Allah (c.c.). These Muslims are the type of people who: Those who, when they spend, are not extravagant and not niggardly, but hold a just (balance) between those (extremes)." (Furkân,25/67) The reward of these expenses will cause abundance not only in the hereafter but also in the life of the world. Regarding this issue, Allah (jj) states "The parable of those who spend their substance in the way of Allah is that of a grain of corn: it groweth seven ears, and each ear Hath a hundred grains. Allah giveth manifold increase to whom He pleaseth: And Allah careth for all and He knoweth all things." (Baqarah,2/261) Here, what is meant by "spending in the cause of Allah" is both to give zakat, which is a must for a Muslim, and to give alms, which is supererogatory. Allah (jj) threatens those who do not benefit others by not spending but accumulating their property with a painful torment. To illustrate: "And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty." (Tevbe,9/34) It is clear that people are supposed to get wealth and property by working hard, and they should spend these fortunes in the cause of Allah (jj) to get the happiness of the world and the hereafter. Spending this wealth and the appropriate use of the properties will ensure social peace and economic development. Mâverdî states to have noticed while trying to explore the relationship between the increase in abundance as well as prosperity and the peace of society that "the spread of welfare within a balanced income distribution will ease people." Thus, both the rich and the poor will also get a share of the country's opportunities, which will increase integration of individuals and societies by eliminating jealousy and enmity caused by absence. According to the same scholar, the abundance of livelihood makes people generous, satiated, and reliable. Just as the benefits of prosperity and abundance spread and show impact throughout society, the harm and destruction effects of poverty and famine impact the whole community. Widespread prosperity is accomplished with two things: the variety of work areas, the abundance in supply of provisions (necessaries)" (Mâverdî, 1988) quoted (Bardakoğlu et al., 2002).
As can be seen from what has been described so far, different from what Ali Shariati claimed, Islam is not a religion that prevents people from creating personal wealth on the grounds that they are on their search for pleasure and splendor, although they are reminded not to spend wastefully after they are given wealth and fortune. Otherwise, the test of wealth and fortune would have no meaning. This is as meaningless as proposing that people be sterilized due to the possibility of committing adultery. A mature Muslim is such a person that he knows how to spend and use his resources in the cause of Allah (j.j.), thus winning the hereafter as its reward even if he owns a great deal of property, goods, and wealth as well as authority and reign. As we explained in detail above, owning a property is a test. The following hadith tells us a lot about it: "One day, the poor ones of the Muhajirs, especially Abu Zer, came to our Prophet (pbuh) and said: "O Rasulallah, the owners of the property received high ranks as well as permanent blessings, and they left, because they pray and fast like us. They give zakat, but we cannot. They set slaves free, but we cannot." Listening to his companions, the Prophet (pbuh) gave them the following good news: "Shall I teach you something? With it, you will catch up with those who have passed you, and you can also pass the next ones. In addition, nobody can be more virtuous than you, so it turns out that they should also do it as you did. If you say thirty-three times 'Subhanallah', thirty-three times 'Alhamdulillah' and thirty-three times 'Allahu akbar' after each prayer, it all accounts for 99. If you say, 'Lâilaheillallahü vahdehu lâ şerika leh, lehül mülkü ve lehül hamdü ve hüve alâ külli şeyin kadîr' as the 100th, your sins will be forgiven even if they are as much as the foam of the sea." (Muslim,Mesacid: 146;Ebû Dâvud,Vitir: 2) As seen in this hadith, the Prophet of Allah (pbuh) acknowledges that rich Muslims were brought to some blessings, and he shows poor Muslims how to compensate for the blessings they did not have. Furthermore, because of the wealth mentioned here, the number of Muslims who have passed the poor Muslims is frequently so small, and for many Muslims, their wealth and property cause them to be destroyed.In other words, it is not easy for the rich and famous to fulfill the requirements of this wealth. Wealth is often a much greater test than poverty. So, Hasan el-Basrî says (v.110/728): "Do not wish that you had the same property as someone else, as your destruction may be with that wealth." In this regard, one should know and believe with certainty that Allah appreciates and shares what is good for his servants. The abundence that one should crave must be in his spiritual deeds and in his life in this world. He should only ask for what is good for him and pray as follows: "God! Give me what is good for this world and hereafter." (Hâzin, I, 349)" (Dölek, 2012).
In his book, Ali Shariati mentioned the debate of Kâ'b el-Ahbâr (Kâ'b el-Hibr) (ra) with Ebuzer Gıfari (ra) in a sense to undermine the understanding of wealth based on the individual property system and accused Kâ'b el-Ahbâr of being b. Baura 4 . According to him, Kâ'b el-Ahbâr became apparently Muslim when he realized that he could not fight with the Prophet (pbuh) and the Islamic power. First of all, this is a terrifying accusation. It is true that Kâ'b el-Ahbâr was an important Jewish scholar before entering Islam. From time to time, his narrations were criticized as he was claimed to have made quotations from cases in Israel. "This reveals not that his narratives show his insincerity in religion, but the fact that they should be carefully scrutinized. As a matter of fact, one expression that Bukhari, a hadith authority, conveyed from Muawiya Abu Sufyân (Bukhari, "İtihâm", 25) points, on the one hand, to the reliable personality of Kâ'b, and shows, on the other hand, that his narrations are not without any problems in terms of refutation and ta'dîl. According to this, Muâviye said that Kâ'b was the most reliable of those who narrated from the People of the Book, but pointed out that his narrations should be examined in terms of unrealistic things that may be in them. " (Kandemir, 2001). However, to portray him as "a traitor undermining Islam" would be to transcend the limit. Shariati states that Kâ'b el-Ahbâr once said to Ebuzer: "Islam is not like what you claim it to be, but like how I describe it. If someone carries out his religious duties, there is no sin and no problem for him even if he chooses each brick to be made of gold and silver when constructing his place. " Upon this, Shariati says, Ebuzer injured the head of Kâ'b el-Ahbâr with a piece of bone as he got really angry. Shariati says that the issue is not a matter of hums 5 or zakat but actually perceived by Ebuzer as a matter of wealth.
In this regard, the viewpoint of Islam can be evaluated as follows. First of all, Islam is not anti-wealth, as mentioned above. This is a means of testing, and Allah (jj) has made some superior to others due to the wisdom of this test. This means separate test questions for the rich and the poor. But with his wealth, can a person build houses, half of whose bricks are golden while the rest are silver? Does he have unlimited freedom with his wealth? Of course not. First of all, as Shariati said, Muslims cannot be restricted from being rich and wealthy individually. To say that they cannot be expected to have wealth first and then moral virtue does not reflect an Islamic economic structure. If we come to our main subject, it is not possible to say that people who have wealth are able to act with a materialist structure in which they can be free in all matters. Principally, Islam has completely closed the forbidden ways of making a living. Products that are forbidden by Islam (piggy products, alcohol, workers, drugs, etc.) cannot be bought or sold. Trade cannot be done by lying; people cannot be deceived. When people give promises, they are supposed to fulfill them precisely.
They can not encroach on someone else's property or commit any forms of theft. Any defects in a product to be sold must be disclosed in advance. All kinds of deception and fraudulent procedures are prohibited as required by the hadith "Those who deceive us are not one of us." (Muslim, Faith 164). Any transaction or trade with interest is strictly prohibited. Especially in the capitalist system, for property owners to increase their wealth by taking an interest in return for their capital is strictly forbidden in Islam. It is not halal to create a shortage of goods in the market by stocking goods (engrossing), to meet the goods on the roads, thus preventing the seller from learning the market prices and preventing the formation of the real market price according to supply and demand. In particular, engrossing was regarded as one of the great sins. Hz. Prophet condemned those who committed engrossing in many words 6 and declared them with the qualities such as "perverted" 7 "cursed" 8 , "sinner" 9 , "someone who will get caught by leprosy" 10 (Uyanık, 2010). Engrossing is such a great sin that it is also stated in another hadith: "Those who commit engrossing and those who commit murder will be equally taken into account in the Resurrection." 11 Apart from these, there are many fiqh trade and contract rules that we will not elaborate on since they are not in the subject of our study 12 .
Muslim individuals can engage in commercial activities, establish factories, form partnerships with one another, and become rich by following the Islamic rules and principles we have briefly mentioned above. The Muslim who possesses this wealth becomes obliged to give zakat. If he exceeds the quorum level determined by following the rules proposed by Islam, he must give zakat at the determined rate. If the Muslim rich do not give their zakat, the Islamic state will forcibly collect it. A wealthy Muslim can also achieve eternal happiness by carrying out other Islamic obligations such as "karz-e-hasen" and almsgiving. In addition, it is explicitly ordered by Allah (jj) that the poor have their share in the wealth of the rich. Because man knows that the true owner of the blessings he possesses is Allah (jj) and that he has control over these blessings only as the caliph of him. Therefore, they have to fulfill the provisions ordered by Allah, the true owner of the goods, regarding the people who have their rights over these goods. This does not imply joint ownership of the goods. Because of divine wisdom and testing, those who are given wealth are supposed to act in the way it is required in accordance with the orders of Allah (c.c.), who is the real owner of the property granted to them by him. Allah (jj) says the following in the Quran: 6 İbn Mâce, "Ticârât", 12 7 Ebû Dâvûd, "Buyû'",40 8 İbn Mâce,"Ticârât", 12 9 Muslim, "Müsakât", 129 10 Ahmed b. Hanbel, el-Müsned (Ahmet, 1981) 11 Canan, 1995 12 For detailed information on this subject, the following resources can be consulted: (Çeker, 2006); (Döndüren, 2014); (Döndüren, 2012); . desire for conquest was not done with looting and colonial thought. There was only one goal, and it was "İ'lâ-yi kelimetullah" Why was Abu Eyyûb El-Ensarî in front of the walls of Istanbul despite his advanced age? Why did Fatih Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror, carrying the flag he took over from Abu Eyyub El-Ensari, conquer Istanbul? Was it the booty's ambition? What a cruel phrase these words are.
The claim that fiqh scholars are serving capitalism, which is said to have previously been seen in Shia scholars as well as Sunni ones, is a biased view that is completely devoid of understanding the Islamic economic system. According to him, since the individual property system is already problematic, all the opinions supporting this system are superstitious from the beginning. On the other hand, because this fiqh system is recruited by and receives support from the reign and power holders, it has to be supportive of those powers. According to him, there is a symbiotic relationship between the throne and the spiritual class. In his writings, although these problems are also seen in scholars of Shia fiqh, he places them and the real Shia belief in one place. According to him, the Shia belief has always been the sole advocate of the rights of the people since it "always opposed Islamic governments and did not fall under the yoke of the political authority and administrations of the period." Again, according to him, Shia belief had a "position of the representative of Islam which was revolutionary, populist, and against classifications in societies." Shariati bases this argument on Prophet Ali and argues that Shia faith always opposes the power-holders, capitalism, stakeholderism, and the persecution of these power-holders, but holds a position for true justice and the people (Shariati, 2019). Since Shariati touched upon this view in the belief of the Shia, since fiqh scholars gave fatwa with a generalization in favor of power owners, the Islamic economic system has been formed within the framework of these views. He claims that the economy has also become the means of exploiting the people in the hands of these power-holders (although institutions such as zakat and charity are available, they are used as a means to cover the plunder of the people) (Shariati, 2019).
The truth is not like that at all. First of all, these opinions, which bring all the sunnah scholars who devote their lives to serving Islam under suspicion, are not based on any logical basis. According to the works and fatwas issued by Islamic fqh scholars, power and wealth are not a perspective in favor of and liberating the owners and liberalists, as Shariati stated, but rather a more restrictive one that prevents them from trading with a capitalist viewpoint. The interest defended as the right of those who hold capital, which is the basis of capitalism, is strongly stood against. What fiqh scholars do is not to find demonic tricks to find a cover for interest, as he claimed. They suggest what is and is not considered an interest, thereby revealing what real interest is.It is the meticulousness shown to distinguish halal and haram. Even though it is very limited, there were some who gave wrong fatwas under the name of bad cheating (hîle-i şer'iyye). However, this is not the general view, but only the limited view which cannot affect others. Since fıqh is a field of science, it is quite natural to have different opinions. Fiqh scholars have meticulously focused on ill-gotten and mushbooh shopping and contracts, besides the concept of interest, and tried to keep the door open as much as possible in the light of the Qur'an and Sunnah.
It is not possible to explain the absence of the zakat system, which Islam ordered to be taken from the rich, and the view that it was used as a cover for the persecution of powerholders, in other words, "exceeding the limit." According to him, the systems of helping one another, such as the zakat, charity, etc., narrated by the canonists of today are nothing more than a system which the capitalists exploit to have a little clear conscience but actually to serve capitalism. To him, if someone has more than 27 dinars, this fortune will put him (the owner) on fire, and even continue inelegantly and without measure after that (Shariati, 2019). First of all, this sentence that starts with "more than 27 dinars" is not included in any healthy source.
The immoral words he has already exhibited in the continuation of his statements show how incapable he was of expressing himself. Such an attempt to describe the zakat institution, which has been practised since the first years of Islam and whose general provisions have been determined almost unanimously among Islamic scholars (except for very few conflicts), cannot be explained with reason and wisdom. The fact that Shariati does not accept individual property is the basis of these views. Looking at the issue from a socialist point of view (or glasses), it is inevitable to form an image in this way. However, as we mentioned earlier, zakat is a unique system with much wisdom in itself. Allah (jj) neither persecutes wealthy owners nor leaves the rights of the poor to the wealthy. Zakat holds various forms of wisdom that will ensure social solidarity and economic growth and development, as well as prevent the poor from planting rage in their hearts towards the wealthy .
Shariati's views are influenced by Shia philosophy and socialism. Claiming that Marxists and socialists are influenced by Islam to glorify Islam is nothing but an attempt to justify their views by basing them based on Islam. This argument leads to the claim that socialism and Islam (although there are minor differences) are the same, which is a very dangerous thought. The Sunni understanding of Islam is not Islam but is almost capitalism, the idea that "the Shia + socialism saves humanity"; and even going further and presenting it as Islam is a huge and irreparable mistake

Conclusion
Islam is the perfect order coming from Allah (jj) as a religion. Allah (jj) chose Islam as our religion and is pleased with it. Apart from this, all roads are superstitious. The Islamic economic system is also a sub-system of this perfect system, and all its elements perfectly complement and support each other. From time to time, people have been comparing the Islamic economic system with capitalism, socialism, or other isms. Human beings have been on Earth since Hz. Adam (PBUH) and the name of the religion that came to all the prophets is Islam. Religions sent to prophets in different periods may differ in details, even though their originals are the same. However, all the systems on Earth today are under the influence of these delivered holy books and their prophets.
Nonetheless, these religions have lost their real identity because they have been falsified over time. Therefore, in all systems which are the perfect work of the human mind and presented as perfect systems on Earth, there is the breeze of past religions, but they are far from correct because they have been manipulated. In this study, the impact of Shiah ideology by Ali Shariati, who is influenced by the economic systems of the world and tries to fit Islam into these systems, and the inconsistency of his views, which are not related to the real Islamic economy but seem closer to socialist philosophy, have been tried to be revealed. Islam is a perfect system that cannot be compared to any other system. Of course, many different ideas have been put forward in the intellectual structure, and many different shapes have been seen in practice. The reason for all these results from the man's fanciful attempt to change religion. This effort by man has also been seen frequently in previous tribes. In the Qur'an, the efforts of the Jews to change the parts of their religion that they do not like are frequently mentioned. This is not a deficiency of Islam. Islam is the perfect order of Allah (c.c.), the sole owner, single God and Lord of all beings.
In this study, it has been demonstrated with evidence that the Islamic economic system put forward by Ali Shariati is not a real Islamic economy. In the framework of the ideology he believed in, which was presented in the relevant work of the author, it was seen that he misjudged the Islamic economic system. In this context, how the entire Islamic economic system should be revealed was revealed with the evidence. As a result of all this, it is a fact that the Islamic economic system is not socialism or capitalism. The Islamic economic system is the