Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Tawakkul vs Planning: Thoughts on Critical Illness Insurance

Tawakkul vs Planning: Thoughts on Critical Illness Insurance

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Issues / Questions
4 Posts 3 Posters 156 Views 2 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • FusionF Offline
    FusionF Offline
    Fusion
    wrote on last edited by Fusion
    #1

    I wanted to get some perspectives from Quran-focused members on a question that sits between faith and practical responsibility.

    Recently, a bank shared a critical illness coverage plan (please see the link where I uploaded) separate from standard medical insurance meant to provide financial support if someone is diagnosed with a serious illness (e.g., cancer, major organ failure, etc.). Most of us already have medical insurance, but such plans focus on income protection and family stability, not treatment alone.

    This raised a deeper question for me:

    Does taking such a plan conflict with tawakkul (reliance on Allah),or is it simply responsible planning?

    I often hear statements like “nothing is insured except by Allah”, which is spiritually true nothing happens outside Allah’s will. But at the same time, the Quran repeatedly encourages wisdom, foresight, and responsibility, not neglect.

    For example:

    We are told to prepare what we can (8:60)

    To plan for tomorrow without arrogance (59:18)

    To avoid throwing ourselves into harm by our own hands (2:195)

    To me, reliance on Allah does not mean refusing to plan, just as wearing a seatbelt does not mean we doubt Allah’s protection. Outcomes remain with Allah; planning only reduces unnecessary harm.

    Link : https://nuclear-gray-vmamats14r.edgeone.app/

    Your insights please.

    Thanks

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • Emre_1974trE Offline
      Emre_1974trE Offline
      Emre_1974tr
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Hi Fusion, no, it doesn’t contradict it; on the contrary, it supports it. Taking precautions, seeking treatment, or struggling against something doesn't mean you aren't seeking refuge in Allah. Allah mostly helps, protects, and even creates through means (causes).

      For example, He creates honey—which He mentions in the verses—by using bees and other factors as means. Similarly, He creates ships, other vehicles, armor, and other technological or cultural blessings for us by using humans as agents. Or, He makes medicinal plants or medicines the means to cure an illness.

      Providing water to Job (Ayyub) for his cure, or using believers in battle to repel and punish the enemy, are further examples of His helping through means. Allah creates and helps in various ways. Sometimes He acts directly, and other times He makes many things in the universe serve as a means for this. Planning, insurance, healthy eating, using herbs, or seeking other treatments is, in reality, embracing Allah's help.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • FusionF Offline
        FusionF Offline
        Fusion
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Many thanks Emre, appreciate your feedback.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • R Offline
          R Offline
          Ronin
          wrote on last edited by Ronin
          #4

          Peace fusion and everyone,

          I'Il try to answer your question and share my perspective.

          I think it is simply responsible planning. Critical illness coverage plans, medical insurances, taxes, pension funds, and savings accounts are far from perfect, and some of the money that goes to these things might support causes that goes against one's conscience and morals. Still, I think their overall benefit to society usually outweighs their flaws. As an aphorism says, "Perfect is the enemy of Good."

          To fully live according to one's conscience and morals, such as monks, nuns, Amish, or hunter-gatherers (such as the San people), one would need to retreat to the forest, mountains, or remote wilderness. Many members of the groups mentioned reject conventional society to varying degrees. Instead, they choose alternative ways of living that align with their conscience and morals. Others who reject conventional society include lifestyle nomads, who live in vehicles, tents or other temporary shelters and often avoid part-time work or the daily grind of a 9-to-5 routine. There are also off-grid homesteaders, who live self-sufficiently in cabins or tiny homes and might avoid taxes or state systems. Lastly, there are hobos, wanderers, or bohemians, who move freely, work temporarily, live minimally, and sleep wherever they can. A lifestyle where one opts out will offer freedom from obligations that goes against one's conscience and morals. But it comes with isolation, limited resources, and far fewer opportunities to do good or make a meaningful difference. This shows that while opting out can align with one's conscience and morals, it also restricts one's ability to impact the world and live life to the fullest.

          Another path is striving to become extremely wealthy, which can provide independence from conventional society and the resources to live according to one's conscience and morals while creating influence and freedom. But this path comes at a high cost, often leading to an imbalanced life with long hours of work (sometimes up to 100 hours a week), constant stress, and sacrifices in health, relationships, pursuit of deeper knowledge and understanding, and personal well-being through leisure or recreation. This shows that even wealth does not guarantee a fully free or fulfilling life.

          There is a third path, a balanced approach that combines moral integrity with practical effectiveness in the real world. By focusing on balance, responsibility and practical morality, this middle way provides a high degree freedom and the ability to live purposefully without the extreme sacrifices demanded by the unchecked pursuit of wealth or the isolation and limitations that come from opting out. Grounded in the teachings of the Qur’an, this middle way appears to be the most prudent choice. It allows one to live largely according to conscience and ethics within society while still doing good and making a meaningful impact. The teachings of the Qur'an encourage being practical and realistic, and since good deeds remove bad deeds and each person will be judged fairly (justly), the goal is not to avoid all wrongdoing but to minimize wrongdoing (termed sin in English), maximize good, and follow a balanced middle way (see verses 2:143, 2:201, 4:40, 6:160, 16:75, 21:47, 23:101-102, 27:89, 36:54, and 99:7-8).

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          Reply
          • Reply as topic
          Log in to reply
          • Oldest to Newest
          • Newest to Oldest
          • Most Votes


          • Login

          • Don't have an account? Register

          • Login or register to search.
          • First post
            Last post
          0
          • Categories
          • Recent
          • Users