|
There can be no doubt that
a hotel, in and of itself, is something lawful in Islam. The essential
business of a hotel is that of providing rooms for people to lodge in.
Since the hotel business is a lawful business, it follows that working in
or running a hotel is lawful work.
The problem lies in the
fact that most hotels – even in the vast majority of Muslim countries – are
involved in some un-Islamic transactions. Most hotels have restaurants that
have pork and alcohol on the menu, and that sometimes provide live
entertainment. Hotels also provide room service that offers alcoholic
drinks, among its many lawful food and drink options, to the guests in
their rooms. Many hotels even provide a stocked bar in some of the choicer
rooms. Then there are the gambling facilities provided by some hotels.
There can be no doubt that
working directly in the distribution of liquor and other unlawful business
is unlawful work. However, what is the ruling of working in hotel
management, in a capacity that is lawful in itself, but one that cannot be
wholly separated from some of the unlawful aspects of the average hotel’s
business?
A person may, of his own
accord, opt to eschew any work that is in the least bit questionable, to
make certain that all of his income is lawful and that nothing is tainted
with any unlawful enterprise. He may do so to make sure that he does not in
any way whatsoever contributes to encouraging another person in sin. He may
simply wish to be free to speak out against sinful behavior and help
prevent people from falling into it.
All of these intentions for
avoiding questionable work are certainly good. It is certainly an act of
piety to refrain from lawful work when some questionable practices are
involved in it. This level of piety is easy for those who crave it, but it
is certainly difficult in and of itself.
Abstinence from work that
is essentially lawful, because it exposes the person to some doubtful
matters, means that person must restrain himself from what benefits him
materially and from engaging with society in an easy and familiar manner.
Therefore, it requires a high level of piety and faith.
This is why a scholar is
not supposed to give a general verdict to people that requires them to
exercise such a high level of pious aloofness from society. Such a ruling
is only suitable for those individuals whom the scholar knows have the
strength of faith to bear it.
We see this in the practice
of the illustrious scholar Ahmad b. Hanbal. It was his habit to ascertain
the circumstances, status, and piety of the people who asked a ruling of
him before he would give them his reply.
Once a woman came to him
and asked him if she could open her home while she was weaving at night and
to avail herself of the sultan’s lamplight. Ahmad asked her who she was.
She told him that she was the sister of Bishr al-Hâfî. When he heard that,
he said: “Do not do your weaving in that lamplight.”
To understand why Ahmad
gave her such a harsh ruling about something that is certainly lawful – she
was certainly not stealing from the public light – we must know who Bishr
al-Hâfî was. Bishr al-Hâfî was an eminent narrator of hadîth who was a
student of such illustrious scholars as Imam Mâlik and `Abd Allah b.
Mubârak. Al-Dhahabî tells us that “he was known for his excessive piety,
reserve, and sincerity.” [Siyar A`lâm al-Nubalâ’ (10/470)]
Bishr al-Hâfî and his
family were people who were careful never to partake of the public wealth,
relying exclusively on their own industry for everything. Al-Dhahabî
relates to us that when Bishr came to Baghdâd, he would not drink from the
sultan’s reservoirs. He instead drank the river water until it injured his
throat and he returned to his sister in pain. He made his livelihood
through weaving, and that was his only source of income. [Siyar A`lâm
al-Nubalâ’ (10/471)]
In this case, Ahmad b.
Hanbal took the woman’s status and circumstances into account, and he
answered her in a way that was commensurate with her level of piety.
As for people whose
circumstances are less that ideal, giving them such legal verdicts will
only contribute to their working menial jobs or remaining unemployed. They
will simply be forced into hardships which they cannot bear and burdens
which Islam does not require them to shoulder. It is feared that such
people could grow despondent and displeased with Allah’s decree. It is not
allowed for such people to remain aloof from certain things that are merely
disliked in Islamic Law, if it might lead them to fall into what is
certainly sinful.
When a scholar looks at the
work arena of today’s world, even in most Muslim countries, he finds that
there are many jobs that are essentially lawful, however very few of those
jobs are completely devoid of aspects that are forbidden by Islamic
teachings, which the employee will at times be somewhat involved with. This
is the case with a career in hotel management and in a wide variety of blue
collar and white collar careers. Forbidding people from employment in such
circumstances will lead to unbearable hardship.
This is precisely the type
of hardship which Islamic Law seeks to spare people. Allah says: “Allah
does not which to place you in any difficulty.” [Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 6]
Indeed, a person can seek employment
which is essentially lawful, but not free from some unlawful aspects from
an Islamic perspective, and even be rewarded for doing so if he makes his
intention to use that employment as an opportunity to increase his good
works and his knowledge, or to acquire valuable skills and experience.
In the hospitality
industry, for instance, there are possibilities for hotels that operate
strictly within the framework of Islamic teachings. Such hotels are seeking
to provide an alternative to what is unlawful, but they need people with
experience in the industry if they are going to be successful. That
experience can only be had in the leading hotels that operate in the world
today.
By
Sheikh Qays b. Muhammad Âl
Mubârak
Professor at King Faisal University
|
