Public Finance Administration from the Prophetic Era to the Abbasi Period (Bayt Al-Mal, Diwan Al-Jibayah, Al-Kharaj, Al-Nafaqat, Al-Jund)

Abstract

This study seeks to provide an institutional reading of the administration of public finance in Islamic civilization by analyzing the central structure—Bayt Al-Mal (the Public Treasury)—and the subsidiary bureaus that managed the inflow and outflow of state resources. These include the Bureau of Revenue Collection (Dīwān Al-Jibāyah), the Bureau of Land Taxation (Dīwān Al-Kharāj), the Bureau of Public Expenditure (Dīwān Al-Nafaqāt), and the Bureau of Military Stipends (Dīwān Al-Jund). The study adopts a historical, analytical, and comparative approach, drawing on primary sources (such as the classical works on kharāj, the Aḥkām Al-Sulṭāniyyah, and early historical accounts), in addition to modern studies. It also employs summarized tables to illustrate revenue and expenditure patterns under the Rashidun, Umayyad, and Abbasid periods, with brief reference to the Ottoman era.

The study distinguishes between fixed revenues (such as zakāt, khums, and fay’) and non-fixed revenues (such as public estate yields, charitable endowments, emergency taxation, and financial penalties), highlighting the balance between stability and adaptability in managing public finance in a manner that ensures justice and avoids burdening the populace. The study also clarifies the historical development of Bayt Al-Mal, showing how it evolved from a conceptual administrative role in the Prophetic era into a concrete institutional treasury as the state expanded. It further examines how functions of revenue collection (jibāyah), land taxation (kharāj), expenditure regulation (nafaqāt), and military funding (jund) were integrated under increasingly sophisticated financial oversight mechanisms.

The study concludes that the Islamic system of public finance rested on a balance between stable revenue and flexible expenditure, and that financial governance was closely tied to the higher objectives of Islamic law—namely preserving wealth, ensuring sufficiency, and preventing injustice. This historical model offers a useful comparative framework for contemporary discussions on public financial administration.