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|
Recent Comments