Relationship of Ethical Behavior with Material Well-being and Happiness: An Islamic Perspective

Working Paper Final Draft Last updated: 12 August 2019

Relationship of Ethical Behavior with Material Well-being and Happiness: An Islamic Perspective 1 By: Muhammad Akram Khan [makram1000@gmail.com]

Abstract The paper explores relationship of ethical behavior with material well-being (MWB) and happiness from Islamic perspective. The Qur’an discusses MWB under a broad concept of ‘rizq’ and asserts that God distributes rizq among people. For understanding this general assertion, we speculate that three categories of factors affect the level of rizq: common factors, such as physical and mental ability, capital and labor; positive ethical factors such as gratitude, philanthropy, integrity, and trust; and negative ethical factors, such as injustice, corruption, fraud and greed. The distribution of rizq manifests itself through the familiar cause-effect mechanism, while the Invisible Hand of God (IHG) acts in an over-arching manner. Most probably, the IHG considers human ethical behavior also while acting in a certain manner. The effect of ethical behavior is reflected through a complex but unknown system of entitlement, which has implications for happiness. The happiness depends upon the ethical means by which the MWB is achieved. The paper despite being speculative makes a beginning in exploring the relationship of ethical behavior with MWB and happiness.

Key Word: Material well-being; rizq in the Qur’an; ethical behavior; subjective well-being; distribution of income and wealth; luck in wealth; happiness; unhappiness.

JEL classification codes: A13, D03, D64, H30, I31, Z12 List of Abbreviations IHG MWB Q. SWB



Invisible Hand of God Material well-being al-Qur’an Subjective well-being

My thanks to Abdul Hamid al-Junid, Monzer Kahf, Rafiqul Islam Molla, Volker Nienhaus, Hafsa Orhan, Shamim Siddiqui and Haider Zaidi for their valuable comments on an earlier draft of the paper. I have benefitted from their comments. However, remaining shortcomings are entirely my own.

I.

Introduction

Objective and scope The Qur’an discusses material well-being (MWB) and happiness extensively. For MWB, it uses the term ‘rizq’ and for happiness, the term ‘falah’. Both terms have wider meanings. Besides MWB, rizq covers offspring, health, knowledge, respect, social harmony, peace of mind, etc. (Asad 1980, n. 4, Q. 2:3; n. 80, Q. 10:591). The wider meanings of falah cover successful life in this world and in the hereafter.

The paper has two objectives: First, it explores the divine scheme of bestowing rizq. Besides physical and material factors, ethical behavior also affects MWB. Several Qur’anic injunctions point to this fact (e.g., Q. 8:53, 13:11, 30:36, 42:30). A change in the ethical behavior leads to changes in MWB as well2. Based on the Qur’an, the paper attempts to understand the divine laws regulating rizq. Second, the paper relates MWB to happiness but distinguishes between the means through which the wealth is accumulated: ethical or unethical. Both types of behavior have implications for happiness.

ETHICAL AND UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR Ethical behavior means inter-personal and business relationships based on universal ethical values such as truth, honesty, fairness, equity, compassion, fulfilling promises, honoring commitments, meeting obligations and respecting rights of others, etc. Unethical behavior means practices such as corruption, fraud, injustice, greed, niggardliness, usurping other’s property, contaminating food and drugs, treating employees and dependents unfairly, etc.

WHY STUDY RELATIONSHIP OF ETHICAL BEHAVIOR WITH RIZQ? There is a revival of interest in ethics, religion and spirituality in contemporary economics.

Adam Smith (1723-1790), the founder of modern economics, was a great believer in ethical and moral values. However, economics gradually drifted into a faithless science (Sen 2004 [1987], 2) which weakened the basis of a good deal of descriptive and prescriptive theory. [Sen, ibid, 78; Also: Annett 2018, 55). Contemporary economics can be enriched by paying more attention to ethics. (Arrow 2011; Broome 2009; Hammond 2011; High 1985,11; McCloskey 1996; Sen, ibid, 89.). There is now a renewed interest in the role of ethics, religion and spirituality in economic behavior of people (e.g., Stiglitz 2019; Ewest 2015; Hungerman and Chen 2014; Innaccone 1998; Iyer 2015; Jones and Petersen 2011; Welch and Mueller 2001). The present paper aligns with the renewed interest in ethics, religion and spirituality.

Studying impact of ethical behavior on MWB adds a dimension to mainstream economics.

Mainstream economics studies MWB but is not concerned with ethical or unethical means of 2

income. By ignoring the impact of ethical behavior on MWB, it relies on incomplete picture of the social reality. Studying relationship of ethical behavior with MWB will complete the picture.

There is no study on the relationship of ethical behavior and MWB either in conventional or Islamic economics. The paper adds a new dimension to the study of MWB and happiness.

Happiness studies focus on measurement of happiness but not on ethics of MWB. Lately, economists have shown interest in happiness, treating MWB as one of the factors (e.g., Helliwell, et el 2016, 2017). However, most of these studies focus on measurement of happiness (e.g., Balasubramanian and Cashin 2019; OECD 2018, 2013; Stiglitz et el, 2009) and not on the impact of ethical behavior upon happiness. Zagorsky (2017) who studies relationship between ethical behavior and wealth also does not relate source of wealth with MWB and happiness. The present paper attempts to relate ethical behavior with MWB and happiness.

Contemporary economics consists of knowledge derived from reason, observation and empirical data. The paper adds revelation as an additional source of knowledge. Economics does not consider super-sensory sources of knowledge as valid and relevant. However, the paper draws attention to significant insights from the Qur’an for understanding inequalities in MWB. It adds the divine revelation as a third stream of knowledge, besides reason and observation. It argues that a rational interpretation of the Qur’anic injunctions can help us understand social reality better.

SCOPE OF THE PAPER Ethical behavior has a two-way relationship with MWB: It affects the level of MWB (independent variable) and is also affected by the MWB (dependent variable). The Qur’an discusses both relationships. However, the present paper discusses only the effect of ethical behavior on MWB. It does not discuss the effect of MWB on ethical behavior3. That is a good subject for another paper. At present stage of our learning, we find several blackholes in our understanding of the divine scheme of rizq distribution. It will require a long-drawn strenuous effort for understanding the divine scheme of rizq distribution completely. The present paper is an elementary attempt and beginning of a complex field of inquiry.

SCHEME OF THE PAPER After Introduction, Part II discusses the nature of the divine laws of rizq. Part III presents the Qur’anic axioms and rules and Part IV attempts to untangle the divine scheme of rizq distribution.

Part V relates ethical behavior with MWB and happiness. Part VI concludes the paper and makes recommendations for future research.

I.

The Divine Laws of Rizq

Nature of the Divine Laws 3

The divine laws of rizq distribution act in an over-arching manner. Besides physical factors, the divine laws also impact the economic condition in response to human behavior. By referring to the divine laws, we do not profess that ethical behavior always leads to prosperity and unethical to hardship. The divine laws are quite complex. They do not necessarily block rizq if one resorts to unethical behavior nor do they always lead to increase in rizq in response to ethical behavior.

The divine laws act in an overarching manner and modify the outcome of economic activities imperceptibly.

The divine laws help explain good or bad luck. The ethical behavior affects material endowments or deprivations in cause-effect framework. Two sets of factors explain acquisitions MWB: first, human effort; second, circumstances, such as family background, race, place of birth, type of education, social interaction and luck, etc. (Brunori et el 2013). However, in some cases these factors cannot explain fully the state of MWB. In a study of the wealth of high-tech philanthropists, Schervish et el (2001) observe that the wealth of mega-rich high-tech persons could not be explained merely by their hard work, strength of character or financial prudence.

Most of them felt their wealth was an outcome of good luck - being at the right place at the right time, unexpected opportunities, sudden inspirations for innovative ideas, appropriate decisions at the right time, parental upbringing, assistance from spouses, expertise of others, etc.

Rowlingson and Mullineux (2013, 17) also point out that one of the factors in wealth inequality is good luck of a person. Achievements in market are also, sometime, related to operation of luck.

Normally, people operate in markets for mutual benefits based on their wisdom, calculations, prudence and beliefs. However, circumstances, sometimes, change for the worse unpredictably or bring abnormal profits just because of good luck. (Bruni and Sugden 2103, 159; Novak 1991 [1982], p.120) The element of ‘luck’ which remains unexplained by physical factors points to the operation of divine laws of rizq distribution. This is not to argue that the rewards for hard work, foresight, training and other virtues are independent of the divine scheme. Result of merit and hard work can be explained, generally, by economic analysis. However, some aspects of rizq are yet not understood. The unexplained part is assumed away as ‘luck’ – good or bad. The luck, most probably, is the divine response to ethical behavior. The divine laws relating to rizq distribution are not yet known to us. We find some axioms and rules in the Qur’an that point toward these laws.

The divine laws can help explain inequalities of income and wealth. Gaps remain in explaining inequalities of MWB beyond physical conditions. For example, when several persons apply for a job, the one who gets it may have similar merit as some others who were not successful. There could be several explanations in terms of physical factors. But one oft-neglected explanation is that the IHG decided to endow the one who got the job. Another example is that two business 4

firms deal in similar products, at the same location but one has significantly higher turnover than the other. There could be various explanations in physical sense. However, an over-arching explanation is that God decided to endow the one with higher sales as compared to the other.

The divine laws relate ethical and unethical behavior with happiness. People earn and accumulate wealth both by ethical and unethical means. The resources acquired through unethical means also enhance MWB but may not lead to a happy life. The divine laws of rizq indicate that the level of happiness is positively correlated with income acquired through ethical means and unhappiness with income acquired through unethical means.

III. The Qur’anic Axioms and Rules on Rizq Distribution Nature of Axioms and Rules We find in the Qur’an four axioms and 13 rules, which point to a complex and yet unknown scheme of rizq distribution. The axioms state facts and the rules indicate direction of the divine intervention in response to human behavior. The axioms and rules can become basis for developing a theory of rizq distribution by following the usual methodology of formulating, testing, and validating hypotheses for making predictions. However, developing that theory falls outside the scope of the present paper.

AXIOMS ABOUT RIZQ DISTRIBUTION Axiom 1: God has absolute power over means of sustenance (rizq) (e.g., Q. 2:212, 3:27, 3:37, 11:6, 13:26, 13:33, 17:30, 28:82, 29:60, 29:62, 30:37, 34:36, 34:39, 39:52, 42:12, 42:19, and so on]. God has absolute power in distributing rizq among His creatures, yet none of His actions are random and purposeless (Q. 13:8, 15:21), nor does He squander resources like a careless ruler but dispenses them according to their exigencies and functions.

Axiom 2: Grant of rizq is not conditional upon faith (Q. 2:126, 11:15, 17:20). God has not made the grant of rizq conditional upon one’s faith (Q. 2:126) nor does He deny the fruit of any one’s labor just because of disbelief in Him. The faith may affect the quality of life in a spiritual sense but does not necessarily and directly impact MWB. Axiom 3: There is a divine limit to material endowments (Q.43:32-35). Material endowments are trifling in God’s sight which He could grant in abundance even to those who disobey Him. But such a grant could create undue and ceaseless temptation for His disobedience. Therefore, He does not allow everyone to amass as much wealth as one like but puts an undeclared upper limit upon it.

Axiom 4: Means of sustenance become available to those who strive for it (Q. 41:10). All creatures can strive and acquire resources of the earth. In normal circumstances, human beings must strive to have access to means of sustenance.4 5

RULES ABOUT DISTRIBUTION OF RIZQ The following discussion presents 13 rules from the Qur’an about God’s scheme of rizq distribution. The rules take effect only when human beings practice them consistently. Most of the rules pertain to individual behavior. However, when majority of the people follow a behavior pattern, the divine rules apply to societies as well.

Rule 1: Rizq accrues in response to human struggle. However, the believers will have several multiples of the entitlement as reward in the hereafter. (Q. 11:15-16, 42:20). The general principle is that the rizq is related to human struggle. Those who observe ethical principles would have material well-being as under normal circumstances but would also get a reward in the hereafter, that would be several multiples of the entitlement from their struggle (Q. 42:20).

However, those who strive exclusively after the worldly reward and are indifferent to ethical principles would not get any reward in the hereafter since they did not aim at that (Q. 11:15-16).

Rule 2: Compliance with the divine guidance brings prosperity which includes spiritual happiness, social harmony and subjective well-being with or without material abundance. (Q. 5:66, 7:96, 16:30, 24:55, 72:16). God invites people to follow His path and promises blessings from heaven and earth as reward. Ethical behavior as ordained in the Scriptures and the Qur’an leads to a state of prosperity which could be in the form of happiness, harmony and subjective well-being with or without MWB. The compliance with divine guidance means (a) faith in Unity of God and the Day of Judgement (b) righteous deeds; and (c) God-consciousness (taqwa). The rule encompasses believers of all monotheistic faiths (Q. 5:66 and 7:96). However, it does not suggest that all prosperous people are rich because of their compliance nor all poor people are so because of their non-compliance with the divine guidance. It only states a one-way relationship: compliance with the divine guidance brings prosperity.

Rule 3: Philanthropy positively correlated with MWB (Q. 2: 245, 2:261, 2:265, 2:272, 8:60, 57:11, 57: 18, 64:17 and so on). The Qur’an encourages philanthropy under the general term of ‘infaq’, which is a mechanism for ameliorating inequalities, encouraging harmony and promoting cooperation among people. It treats infaq a loan upon God, which He repays amply in this world as well as in the hereafter. The rizq of a person increases in material terms at least in direct proportion to infaq, though it could be its several multiples. Besides, infaq brings inner peace and spiritual bliss.

Rule 4: An attitude of God-consciousness (taqwa) in mutual dealings eases financial hardship. (Q.5:100, 7:96, 10:63-64, 39:10, 65:2-3). God consciousness (taqwa) means awareness about: (a) oversight by One Omnipresent God; (b) accountability on the Day of Judgement; (c) rights of others. The Qur’an mentions several norms that cultivate Godconsciousness such as keeping of trusts, dealing with honesty and truthfulness, abiding 6

by promises and commitment, etc. and relates them to good life. God-consciousness may, at times, require some sort of financial sacrifice. However, a person who keeps trust in God, remains steadfast in ethical behavior and avoids unethical practices would get divine help from unexpected sources that would ameliorate the financial hardship. Godconsciousness is likely to influence human behavior in following manners:   

Creating a sense of respect for property of others: The higher the degree of Godconsciousness, the greater would be sanctity of private property in the society.

Observing fairness and justice in commercial deals: God-conscious persons refrain from committing injustice upon others.

Delivering truly on commitments: God-conscious persons deliver quantity and quality of products and services as professed.

If majority of the people observe the above behavior pattern consistently, the society would experience prosperity.

Rule 5: Sustained ethical behavior brings material well-being and happiness. (Q. 6:48, 8:24, 10:26, 12:56, 22:50, 23:55-61, 24:36-38, 72:16, 92:5-7). The behavior influences overall wellbeing of a person. Righteous deeds such as fairness, cooperation, kindness, humility, moderation, contentment, philanthropy, etc. pave way for MWB and spiritual satisfaction, social dignity and happiness. Q. 23:55-61 relate MWB with ultimate good only when a person behaves righteously.

Since the goal of all human endeavors is to enjoy happiness, we can say that ultimate good refers to happiness. Thus, MWB leads to a happy life only when a person engages in righteous deeds. A narrow view that treats MWB without righteous deeds as focus of all struggle leads to social strife, envy and jealousy.

Rule 6: Persistent unrighteous behavior leads to material hardship and unhappiness. (Q. 20:124, 89:15-20, 92:8-11). Unrighteous deeds such as unfair dealings, injustice, unkindness, cheating, corruption, theft, miserliness, greed and arrogance lead to hardship in life (Q. 20:1245).

Rule 7: Humility and self-correction lead to MWB. (Q. 11:3, 11:52, 71:10-12). The Qur’an relates repentance (tauba) to MWB. Repentance in its broader connotation means an attitude of selfcorrection, humility to learn from mistakes and willingness to improve upon past efforts. The attitude opens ways for innovative thinking, new knowledge, technical improvement, economy and efficiency. A study of the history of technology and innovations would vouchsafe that most of the modern-day inventions were result of repetitive experiments and incremental improvements over past efforts. It is a generally accepted position in business management that these values lead to business development and increase in income and wealth. Study of modern history also supports this conclusion. For example, Harari (2018, 207) says:

7

In fact, modern history has demonstrated that a society of courageous people willing to admit ignorance and raise difficult questions is usually not just more prosperous but also more peaceful than societies in which everyone must unquestioningly accept a single answer.

Rule 8: Gratitude leads to MWB. (Q. 14:7, 18:32-42). The Qur’an relates MWB with gratitude (shukr) toward God, which implies realizing that resources are blessings of God and should be preserved. A thankful person minimizes waste, saves and invests for the future and innovates in discovering better and fruitful applications. These values contribute to MWB. Rule 9: Ingratitude transforms MWB to social and economic insecurity. (Q. 6:49, 7:130, 16:112, 17:26-27, 18:32-42, 74:11-17). Arrogance, senseless squandering of resources, disregard of ethical norms in acquiring, using and investing resources, unethical behavior in mutual dealings are forms of ingratitude. Persistent ingratitude transforms MWB to economic and social insecurity. If majority of the people continue tolerating such unethical behavior, the society dwindles into a state of deprivation and hardship.

Rule 10: Patience against adversity and adhering to ethical norms are precursors of ease in life and change for the better. (Q. 2:155-157, 18:32-42, 94:5-6). Hardships and losses are commonplace in life. However, those who remain patient and ethical enjoy spiritual peace. They have the glad tidings of change for a promising future.

Rule 11: Making room for others opens doors of opportunities for the facilitator. (Q. 58:11). The Qur’an (Q. 58:11) advises making room for others in a meeting. This apparently simple advice has wider implications for economic life. Explaining this, Asad (1980, n.18 and 19 on this verse) says: …the “making room for one another “implies the mutual providing of opportunities for a decent life to all – and especially to the needy or handicapped – members of the community. Commenting on this passage, Razi says: “this verse indicates that if one widens the means (abwab) of happiness and well-being to God’s creatures (‘ibad), God will widen for him all that is good in this life and in the hereafter…

It implies, at macro level, government spending for creating opportunities for the poor and the handicapped, mitigating their dependence, providing ease of access, transportation, educational and health facilities will lead to prosperity of the people whose taxes financed these facilities.

Rule 12: Migration forced by religious persecution provides sure opportunities for settled and stable life. (Q. 4:100).

Rule 13: Spiritual transformation from unrighteous behavior to a life of righteousness brings opportunities for material well-being (Q. 2:218, 16:41).

8

Q. 4:100 says that those who emigrate to escape religious persecution have a promise of settled and stable life. However, Asad (1980, n. 124 on Q. 4:100) says that ‘this verse means ‘exodus from evil towards God – and does not necessarily imply leaving of one’s home in the physical sense…the spiritual exodus from the domain of evil to that of righteousness continues to be a fundamental demand of Islam…’ Taking it as an appropriate interpretation of the verse, we can say that if behavior of a person changes from the life of sin and to a life of righteousness he or she will experience MWB and opportunities in the future.

IV. Divine Mechanism for the Distribution of Rizq Rizq and the Invisible Hand of God Studies on inequality focus on initial endowments besides creation and accumulation of wealth for which profit motive, culture, family, environment, desires, passions, prejudices, sympathies, jealousies, likes, dislikes, perceptions, faiths, fashions, etc. act as drivers (Hoff and Stiglitz 2015; Fukuyama 1996). The human mind is the originating place for these factors. It is through human mind that the IHG operates and influences various decisions for creating and accumulating wealth (Q. 8:24). However, the IHG does not act in a random manner. It operates according to certain principles. The axioms and rules stated above point to those principles.

HOW DOES THE INVISIBLE HAND OF GOD OPERATE? Human beings have freedom of action within certain limits. If we imagine a band with upper and lower limits and call it ‘Band of Freedom’ (the Band) we can conceive that all human beings have personal freedom to operate within limits of the Band. The result of efforts follows the normal cause-effect mechanism. However, the IHG intervenes in an intricate manner. Some examples of this intervention are as follows: 

Influencing mental processes in decision-making through countless social, economic, environmental, political, and cultural factors.



Influencing actions of other persons in the environment, impacting decisions of a person.



Restraining a person to cross the limits of the Band

In sum, the IHG has an over-arching role and responds to various hither-to unknown factors, some of which pertain to ethical behavior and others to global objectives of God. We do not know yet what exactly is the formula that the IHG follows. The axioms and rules stated above point to some direction. Contemporary economics analyzes distribution of income and wealth with reference to human behavior about earning, consumption, saving and investment. It does not consider IHG as a factor in decision-making process of the human beings. Generally, the economic system works according to behavior of people driven by selfish interest6 and rational calculations.

However, the IHG influences the expected results and impact of economic decisions because of 9

ethical factors. To that extent general operation of the economic system is manipulated by the IHG. However, it does not coerce human beings adopt the righteous behavior. Until there are considerations of the global divine scheme, the IHG does not intervene. Oslingtong’s (2012, 42930) conclusions are quite close to our understanding of the IHG. Effect of intervention of the IHG is manifest, sometimes, in contraction or expansion of material resources and at others in increase or decrease of happiness.

MECHANSIM OF RIZQ DISTRIBUTION: A TENTATIVE EXPLANATION Mechanism of rizq distribution is too complex to allow an articulation at our present state of knowledge. It is not possible to capture all dimensions and processes through which the Will of God operates. However, in the following discussion we shall attempt, in all humility, to explore a tentative scheme of the operation of the IHG about rizq distribution. Our objective is to take first step in the hope that economists will develop the idea in the future considering empirical evidence.

We begin our exploration by studying the mega-rich people. They pertain to two main categories.

First, those who accumulated wealth, mainly, by ethical means like, e.g., Bill Gates (b.1955, USA) and Warren Buffet (b. 1930, USA). Second, those who amassed wealth, mainly, through unethical means such as Asif Zardari (b. 1955, Pakistan), Sani Abacha (d. 1998, Nigeria), Teodoro Obiang (b.

1942, Equatorial Guinea) who stole billions from the wealth of their respective countries (Global Witness Report 2015, 10). In between these two categories fall most of the people who earn and accumulate wealth by combining ethical and unethical means in various degrees (Q. 35:32).

In attempting to discover God’s scheme of rizq distribution, wo questions are pertinent: (a) Does God’s scheme relate to human behavior or is it merely His discretion? (b) If related to behavior, how does it operate? If mere discretion of God, how does He exercise the discretion?

The worldview of all revealed religions is that the resources at the disposal of man are a means of trial and have a close relationship with human behavior. Therefore, a starting point for our exploration is that we assume that divine scheme of rizq distribution operates in response to human behavior. In most of the cases, it is God’s response to human behavior. We need to discover the traits of human character which impact the rizq distribution. We use following terms for the two main categories of behavior - ethical and unethical- as below: PCW + = Propensity to create wealth in positive sense – referring to ethical behavior PCW - = Propensity to create wealth in negative sense – referring to unethical behavior FACTORS FOR PROPENSITY TO CREATE WEALTH 10

Three types of factors operate for creating wealth: (i) Common factors (Fc) which are general and applicable to all; (ii) Positive factors (Fp) consist of ethical means; (iii) Negative factors (Fn) consist of unethical means. These can be expressed as follows: PCW =(PCW+) + (PCW-) where PCW + = f (Fc + Fp) PCW - = f (Fc + Fn) where Fc: f (a, c, d, e, p) = Common factors Fp: f (f, g, h, i, t) = Positive factors Fn: f (b, k, m, r, u) = Negative factors where Common factors: a = abilities, mental, physical, experience c = capital (savings, inheritance, gifts, borrowings, investments, shareholdings, etc.) d = devotion to job, profession or occupation, sincerity of purpose, expressed through concern for economy, efficiency and effectiveness e = effort (mental, physical, technical, time-management, innovation, etc.) p = economic power (political influence, rent seeking, regulatory capture, patent and trademark protection, etc.)

Positive factors: f = fulfilling promises in service delivery, quality, quantity, financial and non-financial obligations g = gratitude (minimal waste, efficient technology, intensive use of resources, etc.) h = humility (self-correction, equal treatment for all, etc.) i = philanthropy (infaq) t = truthfulness Negative Factors b= corruption and fraud k =ingratitude m = miserliness 11

r = arrogance u = untruthfulness Each of these factors (f) has several elements (e) and each element has several attributes (a).

Factors are broad categories which are found in most human beings in varying degrees. For example, all human beings have some mental ability; most of them put in some effort for earning their livelihood. However, they are not equal in all respects. Even when two persons are equal in certain respects, they are unequal due to other factors (Harari 2014, [2011], 154). Two persons can be equal in intelligence by birth. But they can grow up to be unequal by education, training and environment. For example, a child born in America in an elite family and another born in a family of untouchable Hindus in a village of India may be equal in intelligence by birth but would not be able to use it equally in pursuit of economic activities in later life. Therefore, each factor in earning and accumulating wealth has several elements and each element has several attributes.

Attributes define the context and extent to which each element is developed and applied in practice. By context, we mean the socioeconomic environment in which an attribute is displayed.

For example, philanthropy is a positive ethical factor. Sharing of income and wealth is an element of this factor; its context is situation of the philanthropist. A person who himself is hard-pressed financially but helps others has a higher merit in giving as compared to the one who gives but has surplus wealth. An example of the negative ethical factor is ‘miserliness’. Selfishness is an element of this factor. The context of selfishness could be the financial state of the consumer. A person who has surplus wealth but is selfish toward his family has a lower merit as compared to the one who is selfish because of weak financial condition.

The extent of an attribute means the degree to which an element is used. For example, in case of mental ability, the level of IQ is an element. However, it is important that the IQ is developed through education and training and the person applies it in pursuit of economic activity. Besides, the IQ must be used intensively because it is possible that a person has a high level of IQ but does not use it intensively. The effect of the IQ will diminish as a result of this sluggishness. Another example is experience of a person in a certain field. However, if he or she does not apply that experience in pursuit of livelihood, the effect of experience in earning rizq will be diminished.

Tables 1-3 below illustrate matrices of factors, elements and attributes. At our present stage of knowledge, it is difficult to draw any conclusive matrix. Another person can draw different sets of matrices.

Table 1: Common Factors (Fc), Elements (Ec) and Attributes (Ac) in Propensity to Create Wealth (PCW) 12

Symbols

Factors (Fc)

Elements (Ec)

a

Abilities: Mental

   

Intelligence Education Knowledge Skills

Abilities: Physical



Physical fitness/free from disease Age Experience

 

Attributes (Ac) 

Degree/Intensity of application  Attitude  Context        

c

e

d

p

Initial capital

Effort

Devotion

Economic power

      

Inheritance Personal savings Debt Gifts Mental Physical Time Management

 

  

Economy Efficiency Effectiveness

 

   

Political influence Rent seeking Regulatory capture Patent and trademark protection



13

    

  

 

State of health Willingness for hard work Ability to work hard Efficiency Relevance Length Attitude Context Amount Terms and conditions Context Extent of effort Direction of effort Attitude Context Performance Achievement of objectives Attitude Context Extent Extent of benefits Restraining competition Context

Table 2: Positive Factors (Fp), Elements (Ep)and Attributes (Ap) in Propensity to Create Wealth (PCW+) Ethically Symbols

Factors (Fp)

f

Fulfilling promises

Elements (Ep)     

Attributes (Ap)

Service delivery Quality and quantity Meeting financial obligations Honoring commitments Discharging obligations

   

Extent Frequency Attitude Context

g

Gratitude

  

Thanksgiving Intensive use of resources Minimizing waste and obsolescence

    

Persistence Frequency Attitude Context Extent

h

Humility

   

Learning from mistakes Efforts for innovation Human dignity for all Devotional prayers

   

Extent Frequency Attitude Context

  

Sharing income and wealth Sharing knowledge/skills Shouldering social responsibilities Honesty in dealings Respecting property rights

i

t

 Extent  Context  Frequency  Attitude Truthfulness   Extent   Frequency  Attitude  Context Table 3: Negative Factors (Fn), Elements (En) and Attributes (An) in Propensity to Create Wealth (PCW-) Unethically Philanthropy

Symbols

Factor (Fn)

Elements (En)

b

Corruption and fraud

  

k

Ingratitude

 14

Cheating bribery Illegal and immoral means Indifference

Attributes (An)     

Extent Frequency Attitude Context Extent

  m

Miserliness

r

Arrogance

u

Untruthfulness

  

Waste Obsolete technology  Selfishness  Depriving others unduly  Neglecting social responsibilities  Exploiting labor  Persist unethical behavior  Usurping others rights  Exploiting labor  Injustice  Indifference toward ethical values Dealing dishonestly Breaking promises Defying obligations and commitments

      

Frequency Attitude Context Extent Frequency Attitude Context

   

Extent Frequency Attitude Context

   

Extent Frequency Attitude Context

In brief, the PCW + and PCW- each has five common and five positive or negative factors, with each factor having several elements and each element having many attributes. In actual life, these factors, elements and attribute multiply to an infinite number that influence the individual entitlement of rizq, making a simple conclusion almost impossible.

Graphic presentation We can see the above description in a graphic form (Fig. 1). The figure has two panels. Panel A depicts distribution of rizq in response to positive propensity to create wealth (PCW+) and Panel B depicts negative propensity to create wealth (PCW -).

In both panels: X-axis measures time from t0 to tn.

Y-axis measures rizq from R0 to Rn The diagonal lines in both panels represent optimum level of wealth for each category of people at different points of time in response to respective factors, elements and attributes as discussed above. The lines point to the potential of achieving rizq without reckoning (Ri).

15

Fig 1. Graphic presentation of the grant of rizq is response to human behavior.

Panel A

Ri

Y Rn

Rizq

PCW +R R0 t1

Time PCW -

tn X R0

Panel B Rizq

y Ri

Rn

Actual rizq of a person would fall around the diagonal curve depending upon the score of the person on various factors, elements and attributes, as discussed below.

16

Scoring System for Entitlement of Rizq It seems that the divine scheme follows some sort of scoring system for translating human behavior into entitlement of rizq. What exactly is the system is not known and what follows is only our speculation. We aim to guess about the divine system. The underlying idea is that God has granted freedom of action, which entitles individuals to a certain score on the continuum of rizq distribution. The human behavior invokes some of the rules stated earlier and triggers divine action for redistribution of rizq, if so required.

Entitlement of rizq, it seems, is determined by allotting a score (S) for each factor, element and attribute of behavior. For sake of illustration, suppose all elements combined in a factor have a maximum of 100 points and all attributes also have a maximum of 100 points. Thus, for example, if we are considering PCW+, factor ‘abilities’ a person can have score of, e.g., 60 for elements and 70 for attributes. The score for the factor ‘abilities’ would be 60 x 70 = 4200. Similarly, score for all 15 factors (common+ positive+ negative) is determined.

We speculate that before adding up scores of all factors, the divine scheme applies some sort of weighting system to recognize the fact that not all elements and all attributes are of equal value.

We assume that the weighting system varies, e.g. from 0.1 to 1.00. In the above example, if the weight for the factor ‘abilities’ is 0.8, the score would be modified to 4200 x 0.80 = 3200. Similarly, score is worked out for each factor and a weight is applied to arrive at the weighted average.

Once the score for all factors is calculated, the total is converted into a percentage for simplicity sake. For example, if the total score for all 15 factors is 74500, the mean percentage for all 15 factors would be 49.66. This is the score for entitlement of rizq from all factors.

We further assume that the divine scheme converts these scores into quantity and quality of rizq.

We do not know how the scores are converted into rizq and in what form? Does the conversion take place merely into monetary terms or is it converted into qualitative as well as quantitative terms and in what ratio between the quantity and quality? All this is unknown. But we are assuming that there must be some divine mechanism to convert the score of entitlement into rizq. God is independent player in determining the rizq, yet He does not do anything in a random manner and determines the rizq in response to the human behavior and context.

One can ask the question: If neither the system of scoring is known, and nor the method for converting scores into rizq, then what exactly are the basis for the entire exercise suggested here? The answer is that even though we are not aware of the scoring system and its conversion into rizq, by making some assumptions we are adding to our awareness that ethical factors have a role in the distribution of rizq. The conclusion is that rizq is not determined merely by physical and material factors. Ethical factors also have a role and one of the possible methods to conceive that role is to make these assumptions for sake of illustration and understanding. We need more information to understand how some people become extremely rich and others lag. Sometimes, 17

mere physical and material factors cannot explain the phenomenon and we brush it aside by saying, ‘It is mere good or bad luck’. Although economic theory explains most of the diversity in rizq distribution, yet some segment of this phenomenon, as Fukuyama (1995, 1996, pp. 7-17) would say, 20 percent of the facts, remain unexplained. The argument of this paper is that the unexplained part is expression of God’s will through a complicated system of entitlements which is based on ethical behavior of the people.

In brief: Scoring system of entitlements of rizq can be expressed as follows: Se = S [F( Ec * Ac)*W] + S [F(Ep * Ap)*W] +S [F( En * An)*W], where Se =Score for entitlement of rizq S[F(Ec)] = Score for each element of a common factor *=multiplied by S[F(Ac)] =Score for each attribute of an element of a common factor W = weight within range of 0.1 -1.0 S(F(Ep) = Score for each element of a positive factor S F(Ap) = Score for each attribute of an element of a positive factor S F(En) = Score for each element of a negative factor S F(An) = Score for each attribute of an element of a negative factor ILLUSTRATION Table 4 and Figure 2 below illustrate graphically maximum score and actual score of a hypothetical person. The maximum score is represented by the diagonal line while the actual score is shown on the curve that lies around the maximum line depending upon the value of the score. Both the maximum score and actual scores are assumed for sake of illustration.

Table 4: Comparing actual scores against maximum score

Max Score

Time 1 3 4 5

Actual score 0 10 20 30 40

2 5 15 35 47 18

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180

45 55 67 85 94 65 76 100 140 150 145 155 96 140

Fig. 2.

Illustration: Maximum and Actual Scores 200 150 100 50 0 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Max Score

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Actual score

HOW DOES GOD GRANT THE RIZQ? Once a person’s entitlement score is defined, God’s scheme of granting rizq comes into play. The rizq can be in many forms such as MWB, health, spiritual peace, safety and security, etc. It could be higher profits in case of business, safety and security in case of vulnerable people like widows and orphans, promotion in case of an employee, capital gain on sale of a property by a pensioner, etc. In case the entitlements are reduced, the reverse could take place. It would require a wider canvass to understand the movement of rizq in a person’s life and its relationship with his or her behavior, actions and responses. Whatever the context, the plan comes into action through a 19

complex set of causes and effects, giving it appearance of normal happening. For example, if a person is entitled to higher rizq, he could be granted freedom from a chronic disease or good health for himself or a dependent. Alternatively, if a person’s entitlement goes down, he or she could become victim of some disease or accident. Thus, the actual grant of rizq differ according to individual context. The limiting factor is our capacity to understand and analyze the situation with reference to changes in the factors, elements and attributes discussed above.

THE COBWEB OF ENTITLEMENTS In our search for God’s plan for granting rizq to people we encounter a complex situation which can be termed as ‘cobweb of entitlements’. In its simplest form a person is entitled to rizq determined by factors, elements and attributes. However, several factors can complicate it, as stated below: (a) Point in time and period: The entitlement of rizq can be for a point or a period. For example, a person decides to buy or sell something. The decision can entitle to certain amount of rizq at that point in time or it could be for a period depending upon the deal.

What exactly is the length of that period and at what points in time the rizq will increase or decrease would depend upon interaction of the variables affecting the entitlement. (b) Variation within the PCW band: The variables of rizq entitlement are not static. They keep on changing continuously. There could be changes in abilities, attitudes and responses which change the profile of entitlement and score for rizq. (c) Interaction between positive and negative PCW factors: Besides changes within the band to which a person primarily belongs, there could be moments in which a person crosses over to the other band. For example, if a person belongs to positive PCW band and displays a sense of gratitude in general, he or she could cross over to adopt an attitude of ingratitude in a certain situation. That creates a new set of interactions between variables which would redefine the entitlement. The situation is dynamic and can change from moment to moment. (d) Scoring framework: The entitlement score of a person is determined with reference to the framework in which a person operates. For example, if a person is a farmer with 20 acres of land, his score will be determined with reference to agricultural income from that land. In case, the behavior of a person entitles him to a score that does not allow any increase in material terms because of physical constraints, the nature of rizq will be redefined. His entitlement would be transferred to non-material forms of rizq such as better health, endowment of kids, social recognition, increase in knowledge, spiritual peace, etc. Similarly, if a person indulges in unethical behavior, the rizq may not be 20

curtailed in monetary terms. Instead, the reduction could be in non-monetary forms such as illness, accidents, poor performance of kids, social dishonor, unhappiness, etc. (e) The score on positive and negative PCW adds up: The positive and negative factors do not cancel out each other. Instead, they add up, ignoring the positive or negative sign. For example, if a person is leading an ethical life but engages in corruption and tries to acquire some wealth unethically, the score from positive factors will add up to the negative factors for determining the entitlement. However, the impact of negative factors would manifest itself in the level of happiness. (f) Divine adjustments in response to special circumstances: The entitlement score of a person may change due to context and circumstances. For example: a. Context of the person: The IHG may change the score considering the context of the person. For example, a person may require more resources than his present entitlement for certain imminent needs, such as medical aid for family members, construction of house, investment for the business, education of kids, marriage of dependents, etc. In such circumstances, God may in His divine wisdom decide to help him out. His score may change upward. Another example could be that of a middle-class person who spends a small amount as philanthropy, setting aside some of his own needs. The divine response for such philanthropy could be unusual increase in rizq from unexpected sources.

Similarly, if a person digs up a well in a draught-stricken area, the divine response for increasing his wealth may be higher as compared to a person who spends in charity in normal circumstances. b. Trial: The IHG may revise entitlement score upward or downward as a trial for judging a person’s (i) patience (ii) gratitude (iii) God-consciousness ; (iv) social sensibilities. c. Response to trial: The IHG also adjusts the entitlement score considering response to various trials mentioned above. For example, gratitude may enhance the score and impatience may decrease it.

In brief, the simplest form of entitlement of rizq is always under revision considering changes in variables. In practice, it is a complex cobweb resulting from changes in personal variables and social environment. It is difficult to disentangle the cobweb at our present state of learning. Some computerized algorithms may be developed in the future which converts the concept into a model.

21

COMPLEXITY SHOULD NOT DISCOURAGE US. The above explanation about distribution of rizq is complex. Human mind cannot grasp it easily for making predictions. But this should not discourage us. The situation in other sciences, for example, natural and physical, is no less complex. The Economist, London (18 June 2016) published a book review on Du Sautoy’ book, “What we cannot know?” Du Sautoy enumerates many examples from physical sciences where the human knowledge seems to have reached its limits without answering all the questions. For example, the Economist writes: In theory, if you throw a dice, Newton’s laws of motion make it possible to predict what number will come up. But the calculations are too long to be practicable. What is more, many natural systems, such as the weather, are “chaotic” or sensitive to small changes: a tiny nudge now can lead to vastly different behavior later. Since people cannot measure with complete accuracy, they can’t forecast far into the future.

Quantum physics presents particular limits on human knowledge, as it suggests that there is a basic randomness or uncertainty in the universe. For example, electrons exist as a “wave function”, smeared out across space, and do not have a definite position until you observe them (which “collapses” the wave function). At the same time there seems to be an absolute limit on how much people can know. This is quantified by Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, which says that there is a tradeoff between knowing the position and momentum of a particle. So the more you know about where an electron is, the less you know about which way it is going.

Mathematicians have shown that some theorems have proofs so long that it would take the lifetime of the universe to finish them. And no mathematical system is complete: as Kurt Gödel, an Austrian logician, showed in the 1930s, there are always true statements that the system is not strong enough to prove.

In the end, Mr du Sautoy has an optimistic message. There may be things people will never know, but they don’t know what they are. And ultimately, it is the desire to know the unknown that inspires humankind’s search for knowledge in the first place.

Something similar can be said about our present exploration about the distribution of rizq.

Instead of getting caught by dismay, we should struggle to unfold and understand the divine system.

V.

Relationship of Material Well-Being (MWB) with Happiness

Happiness We have discussed above how ethical behavior affects the distribution of rizq. In this part, we study the relationship of MWB with happiness.

SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING The economic theory studies MWB with reference to material and social factors but does not relate it to ethics of behavior. Even happiness studies deal with measurement of happiness and not with ethical behavior. Recent economic thinking is inclined toward expanding the canvas of 22

human well-being beyond GDP. It is now commonly understood that measuring well-being through GDP is not adequate. The focus of economic achievement should shift from measuring economic production to human well-being, which is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that affects and involves many aspects of people’s lives (e.g. Boarini et el, 2014; Headey and Wooden 2004, 3-4). Cavalletti and Corsi (2018, 963) examine a vast array of variables for measuring subjective well-being (SWB). They argue that appropriate macroeconomic policies can enhance SWB, making it a socio-cultural phenomenon. They do not relate it with ethical behavior. It is possible that a person has a socially cohesive and satisfied life but is still dissatisfied because of the past or present unethical behavior (Headey and Wooden, 2004, 1). For example, a person accumulates large amounts of wealth, is socially well-connected and undertakes community work but is unhappy due to qualms of conscience for accumulating the wealth through unethical means. There is some empirical evidence for that also. Zaman (2019, 468) has mentioned Easterlin Paradox (Easterlin 1973; Easterlin et el 2010) which presents empirical evidence ‘that massive increases in material comforts have no correlation with happiness’.

Discussion on SWB in economic theory remains focused on factors other than ethical behavior of a person. However, some sporadic studies do relate happiness to ethical behavior and religious practices. For example, Yörük (2014) investigates relationship between charitable giving and health. His conclusion is charitable giving has positive spillover effects on health of givers and reduces the probability of disease and suffering from stresses and emotional problems. He refers to several studies which conclude that philanthropy enhances happiness (pp.6). A Barclays report (2010, 10) finds a two-way link between philanthropy and happiness: happy people give more, and people are happier when they spend on others. Colón-Bacó (2010) studied correlation between religious beliefs and SWB and found a positive correlation but did not assert that the one causes the other. Steiner et el (2010,16) quote Myers (2008) to argue that almost all studies find a positive correlation between religion and happiness. Graham and Crown (2014) say: “While the literature identifies a consistently positive relationship between religion and wellbeing, that relationship varies in its importance across countries and across the different dimensions of wellbeing (pp.5)…While it does not solve the causality problem, it suggests that happier people are more likely to be religious regardless of the religion that they practice – perhaps in the same way that more social people are happier, regardless of whether or not they attend religious services” (pp. 23). Historians analyze rise and fall of societies in material, social, and political terms (e.g. Fukuyama 2014) but do not attach any weight to ethical behavior of people which impacts states of prosperity and misery in the long run. Similarly, when economists plead going beyond GDP for enhancing SWB they ignore the ethical dimension of human behavior.

23

WHAT IS HAPPINESS? There is no standard definition of happiness. Generally, it is used interchangeably with SWB, which in turn means a feeling of joy, satisfaction and contentment with the current physical and mental state (Hochman and Skopek 2013, 3-4; Diener 1994, 103). Some studies link happiness with wealth as well. For example, Barclays report (2010, 9) documents a positive relationship between wealth and happiness. However, lately, the focus is shifting to more broader measures of happiness, where wealth is only one of the variables. For example, OECD (2018,1) says: To understand whether life is getting better for people, we need to look beyond the functioning of the economic system to consider the diverse experiences and living conditions of people and households. [Also: OECD 2013, 10].

Harari (2014, 2011, 425-ff) says that SWB goes beyond material wealth and includes such factors as normal healthy condition, well-knit strong family ties, good marriage and contentment. At the end, happiness is a state of personal feeling and subjective experience and can differ from person to person.

For the purpose of present paper, we define happiness as follows: Happiness is state of well-being when a person feels satisfied physically, financially, socially and spiritually.

In this definition: Physical satisfaction means enjoying good health; being free from a fatal disease for self and family; being able to achieve personal objectives unhindered, etc.

Financial satisfaction means having a flow of income that enables leading a life commensurate with personal objectives and social functioning such as appearing in pubic without shame; having an assurance of financial help in emergencies, etc.

Social satisfaction means being free from personal and social conflicts; helping others when needed; being able to achieve social objectives, etc.

Spiritual satisfaction means being able to pursue spiritual practices of faith such as prayers, worship, truthfulness, integrity, righteousness, fulfilling promises and commitments, etc.

THE QUR’AN ON HAPPINESS The Qur’an discusses happiness at great length under the generic term ‘falah’, which has been translated as ‘happiness’ by some translators of the Qur’an. (e.g., Asad, 1980). It seems that the ultimate objective of the Qur’an is to lead human beings to a life of happiness. From beginning to the end, the Qur’an discusses happiness repeatedly. The Qur’an says that prosperity and misery have a direct relationship with ethical behavior. The Qur’anic concept of happiness is distinct in several respects from the conventional economic theory: 24

(a) It expands the canvas of happiness from life in this world to the hereafter. (b) It introduces a social dimension in the concept of happiness by relating it to philanthropy (Q. 2: 3-5, 7:156-157, 13:29, 22:77, 30:38, 31:1-5, 64:16). (c) It relates happiness to ‘enjoining appropriate and forbidding inappropriate behavior’ which implies a role for regulatory bodies for promoting a happy life (e.g., Q. 3:104, 7:156157). (d) It relates happiness to a society where people do not have to deal in riba (Q. 3:130).7 (e) It relates happiness to righteous deeds and God-consciousness (Q. 2:62, 3:200, 7:156-157, 13:29, 16:97, 22:77, 28:67, 31:4-5, 65:2-3, 87:14, 91:9), which consist of, e.g., abstaining from gambling and intoxicants, superstitions, frivolities, unchastity, injustice, greed, and adopting humility, trust in God, honesty in dealings, gratitude, and making amends on mistakes (Q. 5:90, 7:69, 23:1-9, 24:31, 28:37, 28:67, 46:13, 59:9, 62:10, 64:16).

Unhappiness THE QUR’AN ON UNHAPPINESS The Qur’an discusses the concept of human unhappiness at length. Some examples of the Qur’anic statements on unhappiness and its relationship with unethical behavior are: ( Q. 6:42, 7:94, 7:96, 7:130, 7:168, 15:88, 16:112, 20:131, 28:37, 30:41, 32:20-21, 42:30, 52:47, 59:9, 64:5; 64:16, 92:8-10). Briefly, these statements relate unhappiness to various factors such as arrogance, jealousy, inequity, ingratitude, niggardliness, greed, covetousness and pollution, etc.

It distinguishes between the hardships of those who are generally behave ethically as compared to those who generally behave unethically. It says that the hardships of those who are generally ethical are a means of trial for their persistence at good behavior (e.g, Q. 2:155). The hardships of those who behave unethically, generally, are results of unethical behavior and reminders for refraining from such behavior in future (Q. 20:124, 72:17, 74:16-17). However, if they keep acting unethically, they will experience chastisement in the hereafter as well.

Relating Ethical Behavior with Happiness AN ILLUSTRATION The following discussion illustrates, by a hypothetical case, relationship of ethical and unethical behavior with MWB and happiness. We study the life of a person who is engaged in earning livelihood through ethical means but sometimes indulges in unethical practices (like, for example, bribe). But this indulgence in unethical behavior keeps on varying over time. Both types of behavior lead to an entitlement score, which is translated into rizq. Total entitlement is determined by scores earned from common, positive and negative factors as discussed earlier in this paper. But the MWB does not necessarily indicate the level of happiness which is determined by arriving at net scores of positive and negative factors only. The following illustration explains the point further. For making it look natural, the illustration intermingles ethical and unethical 25

behavior. Besides, it assumes that for common factors also, there are changes during different periods.

The illustration assumes that MWB of the person shall be determined by aggregate scores from all three types of factors: Se = SFc+SFp+SFn, where Se = Total entitlement score as a percentage SFc = Score of common factors as a percentage SFp = Score of positive factors as a percentage SFn = Score of negative factors as a percentage.

In Table 5 below, for each time period, columns 2, 3 and 4, have scores for common, positive and negative factors. Column 5 is aggregate of the three previous columns and indicates MWB. How is this score translated into rizq and in which form is not known to us?

MWB AND HAPPINESS Happiness level will depend on ‘net score of entitlements.’ This is determined as follows: Se(h) =SFp – SFn, where Se(h) = Score of happiness as a percentage SFp = Score of positive factors as a percentage SFn = Score of negative factors as a percentage.

In Table 5 below, the score of happiness (Se(h)) is determined in column 6 (Col 3- Col 4) for each time period. The level of happiness is directly related to the net score of entitlements.

Although the actual mechanism is known only to God, we can imagine that some such scheme as given in Table 5 is in operation. Fig 3. below gives graphic presentation of the level of MWB and happiness for the case under discussion.

26

Negative Factors Score (%)

Col. 3 (Assumed)

Col. 4 (Assumed)

60 35 40 50 60 60 70 50 75 90

10 65 65 10 60 50 70 75 60 30

Col. 6= Col.3- Col.4

Positive Factors Score (%)

Col 2. (Assumed)

50 55 80 75 40 30 67 56 45 35

Net Score=happiness level Col.6=C

Common Factors Score (%)

Col. 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Total Score Material Well-being Col. 5= Cols 2+3+4

Time periods

Table 5 Entitlement for material well-being and happiness

120 155 185 135 160 140 207 181 180 155

50 -30 -25 40 0 10 0 -25 15 60

Fig. 3 Relationship of Material Wll-Being and Happiness 250 200 150 100 50 0 1

2

3

4

5

6

7 27

8

9

10

11

-50 Time periods

Total score= Material Well-being

Net Score=happiness level

12

Assuming a score of 100 represents a materially well-off life, Fig 3 above illustrates that the person has been rich all along. However, his levels of happiness have, sometimes been negative because of the net negative score on ethical factors as shown in column 6 of Table 5 above.

Fig. 4: Schematic presentation of the main conclusion

Positive spiritual and ethical behavior

Negative spiritual and ethical behavior

Material wellbeing

Happy life

28

Unhappy life

VI. Conclusions and Recommendations CONCLUSIONS Conventional economics studies distribution of income and wealth with reference to productivity but does not attach much weight to ethical behavior of people. Based on insights from the Qur’an, the paper studies relationship of MWB with ethical behavior as discussed in the Qur’an. It distills four axioms and 13 ethical rules about rizq which covers not only MWB but also SWB such as social harmony, freedom, dignity, social status, cooperation, trust, progeny, health, education, housing, mobility, , etc.

The Qur’an says that the ultimate power for granting the rizq lies with God who exercises this power in response to human behavior. The paper argues that the IHG responds to three sets of factors: (a) Common factors, such as ability, hard work, investment, innovation, etc.; (b) Positive ethical factors, such as gratitude, humility, integrity, philanthropy, etc.; (c) Negative ethical factors, such as ingratitude, injustice, corruption, fraud, miserliness, etc. For sake of understanding and purely as a conjecture, we assume that every individual earns a score in response to common, positive and negative factors, which is translated into some form of rizq.

A person can enhance rizq in terms of MWB by scoring high on all three categories of factors.

However, the it does not necessarily mean enhancement of happiness which accrues from difference of scores from positive ethical behavior and negative ethical behavior. For example, a person with a score of 210 out of 300 - (Common 90), (Positive 30) and (Negative (90) - will have a high level of MWB (70 %) but will be unhappy because of net ethical score of minus 60 (90+30).

The paper points out several blind spots. For example, we do not yet know: (a) What exactly is the system of translating behavioral factors into scores? How much a person will earn as score on account of a common or a positive or a negative factor? (b) How scores are converted into rizq and in which form? (c) How net score (setting aside negative against positive score) is translated into happiness and in which form?

Despite these unknowns, the paper points to the direction for further thinking and research for understanding the impact of ethical behavior on MWB and happiness. The paper has normative implications: for a happy life, people should adopt an ethical behavior pattern.

29

RECOMMENDATIONS The paper opens a new dimension for research in Islamic economics. There are several manners in which the tentative ideas presented in this paper can be expanded and deepened. (a) Study rizq as independent variable: The paper discusses how ethical behavior impacts upon the acquisition of income and accumulation of wealth. Another area which is discussed in the Qur’an is how the rizq impacts upon the ethical behavior? How does affluence and poverty affect the ethical behavior? Islamic economists can explore this area as a compliment to this paper. (b) Study the hadith literature: The present paper derives axioms and rules of rizq distribution from the Qur’an only. An in-depth study of the hadith literature can provide insights for modifying, refining and deepening the rules of rizq distribution. (c) Brighten the blind spots of the present paper: The present paper has several blind spots as stated above. Future research needs to focus on these blind spots. (d) Elaborate normative implications of the concept: What are normative implications of the Islamic theory of rizq? What does it suggest in terms of intervention for influencing individual or social behavior? (e) Develop indicators of happiness: What are indicators of happiness? At macro level, can we determine indicators of happiness which flow from ethical behavior, leading us to conclude that even though a society is not well-off in material terms, yet it has a higher level of happiness in terms of these indicators? (f) Develop theory of rizq distribution: From the rules of rizq distribution as stated in this paper and as further developed in the future, Islamic economists can formulate hypotheses about rizq distribution, which should then be validated through empirical research and refined into a theory of rizq distribution. (g) Research program for Islamic economics: Research program in Islamic economics should focus on ethical behavior of people at various levels: family, community, economy, society and world. The program should span over several years, in the manner followed by other social sciences. It should also develop various indicators of ethical behavior such as gratitude, God-consciousness, contentment, etc. The objective of this research should be to validate various hypotheses formulated from the rizq distribution rules distilled from the Qur’an and hadith literature. My vision is that ultimately, this research program will lead to development of a social science which would be genuinely ‘Islamic economics’.

THIS IS FROM ME AND ALLAH KNOWS THE BEST!

30

References Annet, Anthony. 2018. Restoring ethics to economics: Modern economics should return to its roots. IMF: Finance & Development. Pp.54-56. March.

Arrow, Kenneth J. 2011 [1990]. Moral thinking and economic interaction. In Social and Ethical Aspects of Economics (2nd edition). Vatican City: Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Pp.2936.

Asad, Muhammad. 1980. The message of the Qur’an. Gibraltar: Dar Al-Andalus. UK Distributer: E.J. Brill.

Balasubramanian, Sriram and Paul Cashin. 2019. Don’t worry, be happy. IMF Blog. 21 February.

Barclays PLC (GB). 2010. Philanthropy. Wealth Insights. vol.17. https://wealth.barclays.com/en_gb/home/research/research-centre/wealth-insights/volume17/philanthropy.html Barrington-Leigh and Lice Escande. 2016. Measuring progress and well-being: A comparative review of indicators. Springer Science + Business Media Dordrecht 2016. Social Indicators Research. 2018. (135):893-925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1505-0.

Boarini, Romina, Alexandre Kolev and Allister McGregor. 2014. Measuring well-being and progress in countries at different stages of development: Towards a more universal conceptual framework. OECD Development Center. November.

Broome, John. 2009. Why economics needs ethical theory. In Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honor of Amartya Sen. Volume 1. Ed., Kaushik Basu and Ravi Kanbur, Oxford University Press, pp. 7-14.

Bruni, Luigino and Robert Sugden. 2013. Reclaiming virtue ethics for economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27 (4): 141-164. Fall.

Brunori, Paolo, Francisco H. G. and Ferreira Vito Peragine. 2013. Inequality of opportunity, income inequality and economic mobility: Some international comparisons. IZA (Institute of Labor Economics,) Germany. IZA DP No. 7155.

Cavalletti, Barabara and Matteo Corsi. 2018. ‘‘Beyond GDP’’ effects on national subjective wellbeing of OECD countries. Social Indicators Research (136):931–966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1477-0 Colón-Bacó, Enrique. 2010. The strength of religious beliefs is important for subjective wellbeing," Undergraduate Economic Review: 6 (1): Article 11.

Available at: http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol6/iss1/11 Diener, E. 1994. Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31(2): 103–157.

31

Du Sautoy, Marcus. 2017. What we cannot know? 4th Estate, Viking Penguin. April.

Easterlin, Richard A. 1973. Does money buy happiness? Public Interest (30): 3–10. https://www.nationalaffairs.com/storage/app/uploads/public/ 58e/1a4/b73/58e1a4b738c04566289875.pdf.

Easterlin, Richard A., Laura Angelscu McVey, Malgorzata Switek, Onnicha Sawangfa, and Jacqueline Smith Zweig. 2010. The happiness–income paradox revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107(52): 22463–22468. https://www.pnas. org/content/107/52/22463 Ewest, Timothy G. 2015. Sociological, psychological and historical perspectives on the reemergence of religion and spirituality within organizational life. Journal of Religion and Business Ethics. Vol. 3, Article 1.

Fukuyama, Francis. 2014. Political order and political decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the globalization of democracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Fukuyama, Francis. 1996, 1995. Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press Paperbacks, Simon Schuster.

Global Witness Report. 2015. Banks and dirty money: How the financial system enables state looting at a devastating human cost. https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/corruption-and-money-laundering/banks-anddirty-money/ Graham, C. and S. Crown. 2014. Religion and wellbeing around the world: Social purpose, social time, or social insurance? International Journal of Wellbeing, 4(1): 1-27. doi:10.5502/ijw.v4i1.1 Hammond, Peter J. 2011 [1990]. Ethics, distribution, incentives, efficiency and markets. In Social and Ethical Aspects of Economics (2nd edition). Vatican City: Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Pp. 75-93.

Harari, Yuval Noah. 2018. 21 Lessons for the 21st century. London: Jonathan Cape.

Harari, Yuval Noah. 2014, [2011]. Sapiens: A brief history of mankind. London; Vintage books.

Headey, Bruce and Mark Wooden. 2004. The effects of wealth and income on subjective wellbeing and ill-being. IZA Discussion Paper 1032, Bonn, Germany. http://ssrn.com/abstract=516883 Helliwell, J., R. Layard, & J. Sachs, 2016. World happiness report 2016. Update (Vol. I). New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

Helliwell, J., R. Layard, & J. Sachs. 2017. World happiness report 2017. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network. http://worldhappiness. report/ #happiness 2017 High, Jack. 1985. Is economics independent of ethics? Reason Paper no. 10. The Reason Foundation. Spring.

32

Hochman, O. and N. Skopek. 2013. The impact of wealth on subjective well-being: A comparison of three welfare-state regimes. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2013.07.003 Hoff, Karla and Joseph E. Stiglitz. 2015. Striving for balance in economics: Towards a theory of the social determination of behavior. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Working paper 21823. December. http://www.nber.org/papers/w21823 Hungerman, Daniel M. and Daniel Chen. 2014. The effect of education on religion: Evidence from compulsory schooling laws. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 104: (1-140). August.

Iannaccone, L. R. 1998. Introduction to the economics of religion. Journal of Economic Literature 36 (3): 1465-95. September.

Iyer, Sriya. 2015. The new economics of religion. IZA Discussion paper no. 9320. Bonn: Institute for Study of Labor (IZA).

Jones, Ben & Marie Juul Petersen. 2011. Instrumental, narrow, normative? Reviewing recent work on religion and development. Third World Quarterly, (32:7):1291-1306, DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2011.596747 Khan, Muhammad Akram. 2013. What is wrong with Islamic economics: Analyzing the present state and future agenda. Cheltenham, UK & Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Khan, Muhammad Akram. 2018. Riba in Islamic finance: Some fresh insights. https://independent.academia.edu/Papers/Upload ; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331674761_Riba_In_Islamic_Finance_Some_Fresh_ Insights McCloskey, Deirdre. 1996. Missing ethics in economics. In The Value of Culture on the Relationships Between Economics and Art. Ed., Arjo Klamer. pp.187-201. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. http://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/pdf/Article_255.pdf Myers, D. G. 2008. Religion and human flourishing, in The science of subjective well-being, eds., M. Eid and R.J. Larsen. New York: Guilford Press, 323-346 Novak, Michael. 1991 [1982]. The spirit of democratic capitalism. Lanham, Maryland, USA: Madison Books & London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, Institute of Economic Affairs.

OECD. 2013. OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. OECD Publishing. htpp://doi.org/10.1787.9789264191655.en OECD. 2018. Better life initiative. Paris: OECD Statistics and Data Directorate. November. www.oecd.org/measuringprog 33

Oslington, Paul. 2012. God and the market: Adam Smith's invisible hand. Journal of Business Ethics, 108 (4): 429-438. July. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23259282.

Rowlingson, Karen and Andy Mullineux. 2013. Sharing the good fortune: Understanding and responding to wealth inequality. The Report of Birmingham Policy Commission on Distribution of Wealth. University of Birmingham, UK. Schervish, Paul G. , Mary A. O' Herlihy, and John J. Havens. 2001. Agent Animated wealth and philanthropy: The dynamics of accumulation and allocation among high-tech donors. Boston College Social Welfare Research Institute. May Boston College Social Welfare Research Institute.

May. Sen, Amartya. 2004 [1987]. On ethics and economics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Steiner, Lasse; Lisa Leinert; Bruno S. Frey: 2010. Economics, religion and happiness. In: Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik 11(1): 9-24.

URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-348987 Stiglitz, J.E. 2019. Capitalism and its discontents. Times Literary Supplement (TLS). 4 June. https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/capitalism-ethical-economics-joseph-stiglitz/ Stiglitz, J.E., A. Sen and J.P-Fitoussi. 2009. Report by the ‘Commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress’. Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.

The Economist. 2016. Boundaries of science: Circle in a circle. 18 June.

Welch, Patrick J. and J.J. Mueller. 2001. The relationships of religion to economics. Review of Social Economy, 59 (2): 185-202. June.

Yörük, Baris K. 2014. Does giving to charity lead to better health? Evidence from tax subsidies for charitable giving. CESifo Working Paper Series 4853, CESifo Group Munich. https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_4853.html Zagorsky, Jay L. 2017. Ethical behavior and wealth: Generation Y’s experience. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning. 28 (2): 181-195. Http://dx.org/10.189/1051-3073.28.2.181.

Zaman, Asad. 2019. Islam’s gift: An economy of spiritual development. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 78 (2): 443-49. March. DOI: 10.1.

1

Citation from the Qur’an follows this method: Q. means the Qur’an; digit(s) before the colon indicate chapter no. and digit(s) after the colon to verse(s) no. For example: Q. 2:3 means, chapter 2 and verse 3 of the Qur’an.

2 Asad (1980, n. 26 on Q. 13:11) says: “God does not withdraw His blessings from men unless their inner selves become depraved (cf. Q. 8:53), just as He does not bestow His blessings upon willful sinners until they change their inner disposition and become worthy of His grace”.

3 Rizq as an independent variable is mentioned in the Qur’an (e.g., Q. 10:88, 11:9-10, 11:116,17:83, 25:18; 28:76, 34:34-35, 41:50-51, 42:27, 42:48, 43:23, 43:32-35, 43:51-54, 47:37-38, 63:9, 71:21, 89:15-16)

34

4

The axiom does not refer to inequalities of income and wealth among individuals and economies. It only negates the assertion that poverty is due to destiny.

5 The verse relates hardship to negligence in the remembrance of God, which in a broader context means disregard of ethical values.

6 Selfish interest means objectives of a person in its widest sense and includes anything that satisfies altruistic behavior or philanthropic spending.

7 For a detailed exposition of the term riba, see present writer’s paper (2018).

35