Riba as I understand
-
It is true that the process to determine interest rates does try to take into consideration many factors... But it still sounds like interest. If someone can explain to me what is the difference between banking interest and the interest prohibited by God then that would be great.
Peace
Al -
Peace bro "Wakas",
peace,
Please provide evidence for this alleged process.
JK- How many times does the Quran ask us to ponder, thus promoting the scientifc method? You need to do this each and everywhere otherwise youll end up with biased interpretations like the sunnis did.
I am not debating whether it is just or not, we are discussing what is "riba".
Quranic evidence?JK- "Riba" means an "INCREASE" and there you have it. Thus an increase in the set price which would be the upper bounadary and more than tht wld exploit ppls needs. Fits perfectly.
Its possible. I do not claim to have overcome my traditional Sunni upbringing entirely, however I did not see you provide any Quranic evidence for your claims.
JK- Yes indeed same was the prob with me too but wed have to get over it. GOD Bless!
-
peace jk,
-
You jump from 'al quran' asking us to ponder and thus promoting the scientific method to there are well established upper price boundaries when selling items and going out with these is "riba"? This is not what I call "Quranic evidence", in fact, nowhere near it.
-
You go from "riba" means "increase" to "riba" means an increase in the set price which would be the upper bounadary and more than that would exploit ppls needs... and states this fits perfectly? This is not what I call "Quranic evidence", in fact, nowhere near it.
JK- Yes indeed same was the prob with me too but wed have to get over it.
Thanks for the advice. I have some for you too... you can often tell when someone has a poor argument or position in a discussion, and one way to tell is when they make points not based on the topic but about the author.
Lets stick to an evidence-based discussion.
-
-
If someone sells an item at 200% increased price that is NOT "riba". It is still a fixed price the item is being sold for. There is a difference between trade and "riba".
Wakas
Agreed, actually i was just trying to make a point, that there are other paractices which are/could be as bad , and yet we ignore them.
siki
-
Peace all,
I respectfully disagree with brother Wakas's view that simple interest is not riba, and agree with brother Latif's understanding on this issue.
The whole paper money system is corrupted and the practice of the government to print more paper money which is not backed by anything of real value such as gold or silver, causes dilution of the paper money in circulation leading to loss of its value or buying power which is called inflation.
Please see the following videos which explain this corrupted paper money system
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2pxW7D1Vao
You will see how the interest, even when it is simple interest, is an important ingredient of this corrupted banking system and contributes to its destructive power. Only that amount of extra paper money is generated out of thin air which is equal to the new loans, and is not backed by anything of real value such as gold or silver, hence there is no extra money in existence to pay the interest being charged on those loans, and at the same time leads to inflation.
In this corrupted paper money system, if I lend money to someone, I would like to get the original amount back whenever the borrower returns my money, so I think it is ok to ask the borrower to return enough extra paper money to compensate for the inflation, because then there is NO GROWTH/INCREASE of the money; but to charge the borrower simple interest in an amount greater than the rate of inflation would be riba in my understanding as there will be growth/increase of the money, and thus forbidden.
For example, since 1913, a dollar has lost its value so much due to inflation that it is worth 4 cents now, and thus 2500 dollars of current paper money would have the same buying power as 100 dollars in 1913. So hypothetically speaking, if someone had borrowed 100 dollars in 1913, and if one wished to pay off that loan, one will need to pay 2500 dollars to the lender to compensate for the inflation, without any growth/increase.
Similarly, if I lend 1000 dollars to someone, I can write an agreement with the borrower to return the money in a certain amount of time and to pay me extra money at that time to compensate for the inflation during that period of time. If the borrower defaults on time, as long as I am paid back extra amount of money along with my original amount to compensate for the inflation during the full period of time of the loan, I am ok with that. For example, if I lent the money for 1 year, and the inflation during that period of time was 3 %, the borrower would need to pay back 1030 dollars. Instead, if I had charged 10 % interest for that period of time, and I had been paid back 1100 dollars, then 70 dollars would be riba.
If, however, the monetary system is revamped and is based on 100 % gold standard, then there would be no inflation and then no extra money will be due on returning the loan, to compensate for inflation. If the borrower is unable to pay the loan back due to genuine reasons, then the loan should be given up as charity.
-
Peace "wakas",
peace jk,
-
You jump from 'al quran' asking us to ponder and thus promoting the scientific method to there are well established upper price boundaries when selling items and going out with these is "riba"? This is not what I call "Quranic evidence", in fact, nowhere near it.
-
You go from "riba" means "increase" to "riba" means an increase in the set price which would be the upper bounadary and more than that would exploit ppls needs... and states this fits perfectly? This is not what I call "Quranic evidence", in fact, nowhere near it.
JK- Well IMO and from my understanding of the Quran it incldues tht as well and yes also if you take AN INCREASED AMOUNT OF INTEREST WHICH COMPOUNDED OVER AND OVER IS EXTREME tht too wld be "Riba" but nowhere is interest itself Riba. GOD Bless!
-
-
peace brother Tanveer, all,
Lets say ANY/ALL increase above the rate of inflation is considered "riba", what do you make of 3130 and 3039 which both imply it is about "increasing/swelling/growing/rising", i.e. not static?
That is why I feel having a fixed repayment, agreed by the loan-taker, is not "riba". However, I do agree that in the present currency system that only asking for the original sum + inflation is the most righteous.
-
Peace "wakas",
peace brother Tanveer, all,
Lets say ANY/ALL increase above the rate of inflation is considered "riba", what do you make of 3130 and 3039 which both imply it is about "increasing/swelling/growing/rising", i.e. not static?
JK- 3130 makes clear the fact tht a high %age of interest which is Riba can be devastating if compounden over and over. It doesnt say tht the compouning itself is Riba there. 3039 makes this clear also. Doesnt mean compound interest itself is Riba. Moreover by your definition od increase how come you defend simple interest. Doesnt tht add every year too? Ok it adds less but it does so there is an increase its only a linear increase.
That is why I feel having a fixed repayment, agreed by the loan-taker, is not "riba". However, I do agree that in the present currency system that only asking for the original sum + inflation is the most righteous.
JK- And then how would the lender profit? Remeebr wer not talking about charity here. The banks are not charity organizations per se. When somebody gives charity then its different he doesnt charge any interest nor does he necessarily ask for any return at all. Here wer talking abt when ppl wanna get into business and take loan. Why should i make them rich freely and lend them any currency? Doesnt make any sense. GOD Bless!
-
Jonny_K, the supposed return on a loan is non-existant, because when you make a loan with ANY interest, as said by Tanveer, inflation occurs (if someone does not work their ass off for the value of the interest). If the "economy" consisted of only person A and B, and they made a loan, and person B could print off a few extra notes as "interest", you would notice person A has no return whatsoever on their loan. The only reason this isn't evident here is because the economy is stupidly huge (and corrupt in complex ways).
-
Peace "OPF"
Jonny_K, the supposed return on a loan is non-existant, because when you make a loan with ANY interest, as said by Tanveer, inflation occurs (if someone does not work their ass off for the value of the interest). If the "economy" consisted of only person A and B, and they made a loan, and person B could print off a few extra notes as "interest", you would notice person A has no return whatsoever on their loan. The only reason this isn't evident here is because the economy is stupidly huge (and corrupt in complex ways).
JK- So that means when i rent out an appartment for a return the rent is non-existant, not for the first month but the next coming ones for there needs to be a contract of at least x months? Doesnt make any sense. First of all one only gets a loan if he 1) has propert which amounts to more value than the loan taken(so the money does exist) 2) he has job contract which is fixed and safe enough for the bank to lend the money out in advance. Here youll get the money if you keep working and dont quit your job yourself. GOD Bless!
-
The return is non-existant if the goods aren't there to back it up, yes. You don't notice this on rent because the rate at which rent is paid is usually not as exorbitantly high as the rates of interest, nor is it as common.
Again, imagine it's Person A and Person B. Person A sells X, person B sells Y. Person A rents out his house to B. B prints out money as rent to A. A uses the money to buy Y from B - but B has jacked up the prices to keep with inflation!
The only two ways to repay that is either human labour, or physical goods. Money implies the existance of either, but does not guarantee. With interest, money is increasing at a rate too high for the physical goods or human labour to keep up with - there's only so much oil on Earth.
-
Peace "OPF"
The return is non-existant if the goods aren't there to back it up, yes. You don't notice this on rent because the rate at which rent is paid is usually not as exorbitantly high as the rates of interest, nor is it as common.
JK- And i told you before the bank gives you any loan it makes sure you have that value in currency to back it up like property and/or a fiyed job where youll eventually earn upto the loan. They aint stupid.
Again, imagine it's Person A and Person B. Person A sells X, person B sells Y. Person A rents out his house to B. B prints out money as rent to A. A uses the money to buy Y from B - but B has jacked up the prices to keep with inflation!
JK- If inflation occurs in property so as to decrease its value with repsect to tghe lended currency beyond a certain limit then the bank would be forced to sell your property and get their loan back unless you pay them back from the profit youve made so far. This is ofcourse the risk one has to be aware of in advance whilst taking loan on ones property and most good banks inform the customers of this.
The only two ways to repay that is either human labour, or physical goods. Money implies the existance of either, but does not guarantee. With interest, money is increasing at a rate too high for the physical goods or human labour to keep up with - there's only so much oil on Earth.
JK- You mean with compound interest? Well tht depends on how well the debter has calculated how to utilize the loan. 2ndly as i said the banks calculate in advance the situation of the person before they give out loan. And any further interest has to stop if the debter proves insolvency. In tht case the bank has to take the loss but they at least made sure tht the person him/herself does his best not to cause his business to fall and as such most ppl wld handle it with care and both they and the bank would benefit as a result. Once again the bank doesnt run after you, youve to run after it. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "OPF"
JK- And i told you before the bank gives you any loan it makes sure you have that value in currency to back it up like property and/or a fiyed job where youll eventually earn upto the loan. They aint stupid.
JK- If inflation occurs in property so as to decrease its value with repsect to tghe lended currency beyond a certain limit then the bank would be forced to sell your property and get their loan back unless you pay them back from the profit youve made so far. This is ofcourse the risk one has to be aware of in advance whilst taking loan on ones property and most good banks inform the customers of this.
JK- You mean with compound interest? Well tht depends on how well the debter has calculated how to utilize the loan. 2ndly as i said the banks calculate in advance the situation of the person before they give out loan. And any further interest has to stop if the debter proves insolvency. In tht case the bank has to take the loss but they at least made sure tht the person him/herself does his best not to cause his business to fall and as such most ppl wld handle it with care and both they and the bank would benefit as a result. Once again the bank doesnt run after you, youve to run after it. GOD Bless!
But the property is being used purely as "security", it does not change hands - unless the person becomes bankrupt. Again, I refer you to the Person A-B scenario, now just imagine A lending to B and B printing off a bunch of "promise to pay the bearer"s to give to A. That's all modern currency is - a promise. If someone manages to steal a banknote printer (purely hypothetical), they can have an endless money supply - but there is nothing backing it up. Meaning some poor sob is trading something of value for something that has no value. This is where I hate my memory - there are around 20 books I could refer you to if I had my bloody memory!
JK- If inflation occurs in property so as to decrease its value with repsect to tghe lended currency beyond a certain limit then the bank would be forced to sell your property and get their loan back unless you pay them back from the profit youve made so far. This is ofcourse the risk one has to be aware of in advance whilst taking loan on ones property and most good banks inform the customers of this.
That's true. But the thing is, with interest, the general thought is that the economy will grow - that is the ONLY way (aside from printing off bank notes and jacking up prices accordingly) it can be paid off. If it doesn't grow, we have the latter case. If the balance of money between rich and poor is disproportionate, we have the latter case. Now imagine millions of people taking out mortgates with a promise to pay back 2.5x the original amount - do you think that's healthy? No way in hell. In the short term, people may agree to it. But in the long term, it's not worth it.
JK- You mean with compound interest? Well tht depends on how well the debter has calculated how to utilize the loan. 2ndly as i said the banks calculate in advance the situation of the person before they give out loan. And any further interest has to stop if the debter proves insolvency. In tht case the bank has to take the loss but they at least made sure tht the person him/herself does his best not to cause his business to fall and as such most ppl wld handle it with care and both they and the bank would benefit as a result. Once again the bank doesnt run after you, youve to run after it. GOD Bless!
It depends. If the value is fixed, then there is only a fixed amount that people need to work towards. With compound interest, you get into economic slavery because the bar raises exponentially as interest compounds on interest compounded on interest compounded on interest, etc. In this way, I don't think fixed interest is that bad.
"2ndly as i said the banks calculate in advance the situation of the person before they give out loan. And any further interest has to stop if the debter proves insolvency"
Is this mechanism in the Quran?
"Once again the bank doesnt run after you, youve to run after it."
After a given period of time, you don't run to the bank, the bank's agents kidnap you and send you on a one-way train to the bank. Only the rich can buy a house interest free nowadays. That just should not be the case whatsoever. This is where we can learn from Sunnism, definitely.
Now if only my memory was working (
-
Peace "OPF",
But the property is being used purely as "security", it does not change hands - unless the person becomes bankrupt. Again, I refer you to the Person A-B scenario, now just imagine A lending to B and B printing off a bunch of "promise to pay the bearer"s to give to A. That's all modern currency is - a promise. If someone manages to steal a banknote printer (purely hypothetical), they can have an endless money supply - but there is nothing backing it up. Meaning some poor sob is trading something of value for something that has no value. This is where I hate my memory - there are around 20 books I could refer you to if I had my bloody memory!
JK- It's not just a promise. Stating as such would be an oversimplification. The bank actually sees to it i.e. calculates aforetime whther the debter would be able to pay or not otherwise it would make loss anyways. Perhaps i should better have given you an example of renting out a car instead of an appartment which is immobile. Now in case of a car what if the person demlishes it beyond repair. Where will the money come from? So again security especially in case of renting big luxurius cars is required. Same is with the currency, the more you take the higher the security.
That's true. But the thing is, with interest, the general thought is that the economy will grow - that is the ONLY way (aside from printing off bank notes and jacking up prices accordingly) it can be paid off. If it doesn't grow, we have the latter case. If the balance of money between rich and poor is disproportionate, we have the latter case. Now imagine millions of people taking out mortgates with a promise to pay back 2.5x the original amount - do you think that's healthy? No way in hell. In the short term, people may agree to it. But in the long term, it's not worth it.
JK- First of all the banks ensure that most of the people will be able to pay that amount of money. 2ndly these people know in advance how much theyd have to pay. 3rdly now your saying paying back 2.5 times the original amount even if it be after yrs aint healthy but it is so since now those people would be able to pay it nback if they calculated everthing properly. Moreover if they pay their interest on time then thered be no compunding either and the end amount theyd have paid back would be significantly less than 2.5 %, like i mentioned earlier. Say one takes a loan of $100,000@5% p/annum. Tht means $5000 per yr. Now say he pays those $5000 every yr, keeps those $100,000 in his business and makes extra profit but pays $5000 evry yr on time. Then the amount to return would always remain@$100,000.
It depends. If the value is fixed, then there is only a fixed amount that people need to work towards. With compound interest, you get into economic slavery because the bar raises exponentially as interest compounds on interest compounded on interest compounded on interest, etc. In this way, I don't think fixed interest is that bad.
JK- As i said it only gets into tht exponetial stuff when you dont pay your interest on time. And even then if you declare insolvency and prove it the bank also loses all tht otherwise exponetial profit.
Is this mechanism in the Quran?
JK- Does everything have to be in the Quran? And yes the Quran does promote the scientific method and this surely seems to be the case here.
After a given period of time, you don't run to the bank, the bank's agents kidnap you and send you on a one-way train to the bank. Only the rich can buy a house interest free nowadays. That just should not be the case whatsoever. This is where we can learn from Sunnism, definitely.
JK- Your obviously talking about credit sharks here. Banks cant just storm into your home. Yes if you dont contact them whilst your debt is due they may call the law enforcement agency and those will then send a letter to your home as to where and when ud have to appear in court. If you keep delaying the date then also its not the banks agents wholl come but a specially assigned governement agency who comes to your home and after giving many warnings for you to come out finally knowcks the door down. They then continue to call you Sir and gently ask you to come to to court along with them treating you with repsect all the way even if you might get angry. Ofcourse theres a limit to tolerance. Then in court it's settled how much you could still pay and its all scientifically evaluated and the excess is dropped. Thts how it works unless ur into credit shark mafia. GOD Bless!
-
Peace JK,
Here wer talking abt when ppl wanna get into business and take loan. Why should i make them rich freely and lend them any currency? Doesnt make any sense.
If the borrower is taking a loan to start some business, then the lender should be made a partner in that business. The lent money should be paid back by the borrower from the profit of the business without interest but taking inflation into account, and the net profit or net loss should be shared according to a mutually agreed formula. This way the lender is also taking the risk. If the business goes into a loss, then depending on the lost amount, it can be subtracted from the original loan.
-
JK- It's not just a promise. Stating as such would be an oversimplification. The bank actually sees to it i.e. calculates aforetime whther the debter would be able to pay or not otherwise it would make loss anyways. Perhaps i should better have given you an example of renting out a car instead of an appartment which is immobile. Now in case of a car what if the person demlishes it beyond repair. Where will the money come from? So again security especially in case of renting big luxurius cars is required. Same is with the currency, the more you take the higher the security.
No, I mean that money, or bank notes, or coins are a promise to pay the bearer. They have no intrinsic value. Don't you think it is in a bank's best interest to check the borrower's background, regardless of interest?
Now in case of a car what if the person demlishes it beyond repair. Where will the money come from?
This is what the "credit rating" system attempts to address - the paradox of borrowing to pay an existing debt. If this man-made system did not work at all, then we'd have people borrowing more and more, interest compounding more and more. Nations tend to do this. Security, again, is always required - regardless of interest.
JK- First of all the banks ensure that most of the people will be able to pay that amount of money.
There are organisations that do the polar opposite, actually. In the UK, this is quite a problem. People know no better. Personally, I don't believe the concept of renting is all that ethical either, for the long term. If ever I rent something, and the person pays off the full price of that something in rent, I hope my greed won't stand in the way of handing over to them what they have earnt.
2ndly these people know in advance how much theyd have to pay
Actually, as with the above example, a lot of people just do not have the foresight to calculate anything - they fall prey to those cited above.
3rdly now your saying paying back 2.5 times the original amount even if it be after yrs aint healthy but it is so since now those people would be able to pay it nback if they calculated everthing properly.
But overall, that will lead to inflation, come on. EVEN if they calculated everything properly, there still needs to be material goods or human labour greater than the initial value. Someone HAS to work for this, otherwise we will get inflation - and the value of the loan interest is depreciated. To combat this, banks will raise the interest rates. And the value of the interest is depreciated again as the inflation sets in. And banks will increase the interest rates. To combat this new inflation. You see where I'm going here...
Moreover if they pay their interest on time then thered be no compunding either.
But banks also charge for paying early to avoid interest! If that isn't injustice, please tell me what it is. The only way to fit to the ideal is to be perfect in your calculations and hope that everything goes as planned. Rarely occurs. My extended family are learning the hard way. Though, God bless, they still have a far higher standard of living than the majority of this world can aspire for. I have pretty much vowed to not touch an interest-loan with a 10ft bargepole, it's just made my family go into effective economic slavery. No way in hell. I think I'll play by the safest interpretation here. And no, they were not irresponsible either. But that depends on your definition of irresponsible - from yours, they could not be held so - they did all the calculations and worked hard. Yet it just didn't go to plan, nature is so poetically just. From my definition of "irresponsible", I would certainly say so - they bought into interest.
Now say he pays those $5000 every yr, keeps those $100,000 in his business and makes extra profit but pays $5000 evry yr on time. Then the amount to return would always remain@$100,000.
The fallacy here is assuming they will ALWAYS make that extra profit. This is not the case. And the net paid amount will still be higher. The amount to return will be some number disproportionately large compared to the original sum, depending on the number of years. I remember calculating for some "minor" (2%? 5%?) interest rates a while back and finding the overall rates to be horrendous.
JK- As i said it only gets into tht exponetial stuff when you dont pay your interest on time. And even then if you declare insolvency and prove it the bank also loses all tht otherwise exponetial profit.
Greedy people have exploited things to force it into the exponential stuff. Compounded interest is ALWAYS exponential. The exponent is rased when you do not pay it off. This is by far the worst form of usury.
JK- Does everything have to be in the Quran?
In this context, a resounding YES!!!
004.010
YUSUFALI Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!004.011
YUSUFALI Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance) to the male, a portion equal to that of two females if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.004.012
YUSUFALI In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts. If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, has left neither ascendants nor descendants, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.004.013
YUSUFALI Those are limits set by Allah those who obey Allah and His Messenger will be admitted to Gardens with rivers flowing beneath, to abide therein (for ever) and that will be the supreme achievement.Allah sets limits where limits are needed! In this case, there are no limits. The only limit is that you shall not adhere to usury! I hope you can see this relatively clear point.
And yes the Quran does promote the scientific method and this surely seems to be the case here.
And the Quran states we should follow the best of what God has revealed, and the best is not "interest" in this case.
JK- Your obviously talking about credit sharks here. Banks cant just storm into your home. Yes if you dont contact them whilst your debt is due they may call the law enforcement agency and those will then send a letter to your home as to where and when ud have to appear in court. If you keep delaying the date then also its not the banks agents wholl come but a specially assigned governement agency who comes to your home and after giving many warnings for you to come out finally knowcks the door down. They then continue to call you Sir and gently ask you to come to to court along with them treating you with repsect all the way even if you might get angry. Ofcourse theres a limit to tolerance. Then in court it's settled how much you could still pay and its all scientifically evaluated and the excess is dropped. Thts how it works unless ur into credit shark mafia. GOD Bless!
No, I didn't mean that literally! Yes, it does happen literally - such is the power of men with greed - but I was talking about the more opaque form of slavery. Name me one possible way for a poor man to get a house in this day and age WITHOUT ANY INTEREST. It is nigh on impossible - to do this, you have to push the example of a mu'min to its furthest bounds, you REALLY have to strive for this. Even then you may not get what you want. To date, I have yet to hear of someone earning their way to a house without touching interest, in the Western world. Not one of those novelty things like "one red paperclip" by the way. I want to see a consistent method, guaranteed to work as far as can be so.
In the Eastern world, it's simple - you live as an extended family. Family ties are so strong in the East because there is no need for moving out into a new house of your own at marriage, everyone looks after each other. Interest is avoided wholesale. But this is an example of a chicken <=> egg scenario. If there's one thing those in the East got right, it's the family values and the eradication of interest. Combine this with the Western ideals of freedom, equality and liberation, and open mindedness and we will be so far on the path to a truly Islamic society.
I have to agree with Wakas and Tanveer - inflation is really the ONLY thing that allows for usury. It's still suspect even then because it upholds a dodgy concept.
-
Peace "tanveer",
Peace JK,
If the borrower is taking a loan to start some business, then the lender should be made a partner in that business. The lent money should be paid back by the borrower from the profit of the business without interest but taking inflation into account, and the net profit or net loss should be shared according to a mutually agreed formula. This way the lender is also taking the risk. If the business goes into a loss, then depending on the lost amount, it can be subtracted from the original loan.
JK- MAN this is exactly the same crap sunnis claim. As if the banks could make joint ventures or partnerships with millions of customers running after everyone of them. Dont you see how impratical this is? This is even difficult enough if you have only 10 people. The bank is definitely not your business partner. If you want that then you need to intensely spend time with people get their trust and much more. Its the same with renting cars. Do you thinki anyone who rents out a car would say "Ill only charge you if you make profit from the business meeting you attend". Total nonsense. GOD Bless!
-
It's not impractical, Jonny_K, it's called the stock market.
-
Peace JK,
JK- MAN this is exactly the same crap sunnis claim. As if the banks could make joint ventures or partnerships with millions of customers running after everyone of them. Dont you see how impratical this is? This is even difficult enough if you have only 10 people. The bank is definitely not your business partner. If you want that then you need to intensely spend time with people get their trust and much more.
Firstly, the lender should not get involved with more borrowers in business than it can handle.
Secondly, just because it is difficult does not mean it is not the right way.
Its the same with renting cars. Do you thinki anyone who rents out a car would say "Ill only charge you if you make profit from the business meeting you attend". Total nonsense. GOD Bless!
It is not the same; your analogy is what is nonsense. When one buys some cars and rents them out to others, one is attempting to profit out of one's own business and not lending property to others.
