Historic Judgment on Interest Given by the Supreme Court of Pakistan
-
Peace all,
It's a bit long, but quite informative
http//albalagh.net/Islamic_economics/riba_judgement.shtml
peace
Oh boy... the judgement was to take full effect by June 2001... and it's almost 2008 now. Either, the administration of the country doesn't have any backbone to stick to its decision or they have finally figured out that it is impossible to ban interest. Why? Maybe, and just maybe, because we might just be declaring something haram, which in actuallity might not be. I have yet to hear a compelling argument for the supposedly "true" Islamic Economic System.
-
Peace Sharp001,
Did you read the document?
Why do think interest is not haram? Base your response on the Quran please.Can you give a compelling argument for the present economic system?
Do you understand how money is created? Do you know how much money circulates in an "imaginary economy" that has no relation to the actual goods and services produced, and what impact it has on peoples lives?
etc...peace
-
Peace Sharp001,
Did you read the document?
Why do think interest is not haram? Base your response on the Quran please.Can you give a compelling argument for the present economic system?
Do you understand how money is created? Do you know how much money circulates in an "imaginary economy" that has no relation to the actual goods and services produced, and what impact it has on peoples lives?
etc...peace
Peace Br. David,
I apologize for my earlier post. I may have been a little too blunt there. As for your questions to me in regards to why I am not 100% convinced that Al-Riba = Interest, based on the Book, well, I have jotted my understanding of it uptil now, based on only the Book in the following post and posts that have followed in the same thread.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12997.msg152393#msg152393
After reading those posts, do you mind if I could ask you why you are absolutely sure that Al-Riba = Interest, based on only the Book?
Peace
-
Peace Br. Sharp001,
No worries.
I read the posts in that link (at least most of them). I did not find any good argument for why Riba is not interest in that thread. If you have a specific argument in mind that you think is good, please present it.
Riba is a word that was used and understood by the Arabs of Muhammad's time to mean interest when referring to money. If you have any evidence that Riba, when used for money, means anything other than interest, I'd like to see it.
Furthermore, the meaning of interest fits perfectly into all 4 occasions when it is used in the Quran when referring to money-both historically and logically.
peace
-
We only need to see what interest does in real life to know what "riba" implies.
-
Peace Br. David,
I am sorry to hear that none of my arguments in the other thread seemed plausible to you. I will try my best to try to get my point across. But first let's get our premise straight
Riba is a word that was used and understood by the Arabs of Muhammad's time to mean interest when referring to money. If you have any evidence that Riba, when used for money, means anything other than interest, I'd like to see it.
You will have to pardon me but I have to say that the above is not the most convincing piece of evidence I have heard and I will tell you my reason for that in a bit. But for the sake of this discussion, let us wipe the slate clean and clear our minds of all preconceptions and then move forward. I must forewarn everybody reading this post that it is going to be a long one.
Now, the reason why I am totaly convinced about your line of reasoning is this If you say that Riba was actually interest in the time of the Muhammad and is therefore forbidden, then I would
6150 - "Say "Bring forth your witnesses who bear witness that God has forbidden this." If they bear witness, then do not bear witness with them, nor follow the desires of those who deny Our revelations, and those who do not believe in the Hereafter; and they make equals with their Lord!"
Of further interest (no pun intended) are the verses following the one above
6151 - "Say "Come let me recite to you what your Lord has forbidden for you that you should not set up anything with Him; and be kind to your parents; and do not kill your children for fear of poverty, We provide for you and for them; and do not come near lewdness, what is plain of it or subtle; and do not kill the soul which God has forbidden, except in justice. That is what He enjoined you that you may comprehend."
6152 - "And do not come near the property of the orphan, except for what is best, until he reached his maturity; and give honestly full measure and weight equitably. We do not burden a soul except by what it can bear, and if you speak then be just even if against a relative; and regarding the covenant of God, you shall observe it. This He has enjoined you that you may remember."
6153 - "And this is My path, a Straight One. "So follow it, and do not follow the other paths lest they divert you from His path. That is what He has enjoined you to that you may be righteous."
Let's just enumerate them for our ease.
(1.) We are forbidden to set up anything beside Him (Shirk).
(2.) We must be kind to our parents.
(3.) We are forbidden to kill our children out of fear that it will be a burden on us to provide for them.
(4.) We are forbidden to even go near lewd acts (Al-fawahish), whether in the open or in secret.
(5.) We are to kill a forbidden soul only in pursuit of justice (Haq).
(6.) We are forbidden to approach the wealth (Ma'al) of an orphan, expect in the case of his/her best interest till he/she matures.
(7.) We are to honestly give to people what is due to them.
(8.) We are to deal equally and fairly between everybody.
(9.) Be just/truthful (Adl) in our speech even if it is against ones own relations.
(10.) Fulfil and observe our covenant with God.So, summarily, what we have above are "10 Commandments" for us. I believe that every prohibition that does not have the previlege of being attached with exceptions, ifs or buts, mentioned in the Book falls under one of these broad categories. Each of the categories warrants a separate discussion about itself but let us restrict our discussion to Al-Riba. Why I believe that Riba would be a part of these categories is because, like them, it is also forbidden without any exception.
Fact Al-Riba is forbidden. So, which category can Al-Riba possibly fall into? We can reasonably apply the process of elimination and work with what we are left with.
Please point out to me if anybody is in disagreement but We can reasonably assume that "Al-Riba" does not pertain to the first 5 and 9. That leaves us with 6, 7, 8 and 10.
Let's see 10. What is our covenant with God?
11 to 17 - "In the name of God, the Almighty, the Most Merciful. Praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds. The Almighty, the Most Merciful. Possessor of the Day of Judgment. You alone we serve, and You alone we seek for help. Guide us to the straight path. The path of those whom You have blessed, not those who have incurred the wrath, nor the misguided."
So we have promised God that He, alone, we will serve and He, alone we will seek for help. In return, God's counter-promise is He will guide us to the straight path, the path of the blessed ones and not the guided ones.
So, since our covenant with God is only to serve Him alone and seek help only from Him, with no relation to Al-Riba, this rules out 10.
Seven down. Now, we are left with 6, 7 and 8. To progress further, let us see reproduce the verses from the Book which are pertinent to Al-Riba
2275 - Those who consume Al-Riba, they do not rise except as the one who is being beaten by the devil out of direct touch. That is because they have said "Al-Ba'ay is like Al-Riba." While God has made trade lawful, and He has forbidden Al-Riba. Whoever has received understanding from His Lord and ceases, then he will be forgiven for what was before this and his case will be with God. But whoever returns, then they are the people of the Fire, in it they will abide eternally.
2276 - God wipes out Al-Riba and He grants growth to the charities. And God does not like any wicked sinner.
2278 - O you who believe, be aware of God and give up what is left of Al-Riba if you are truly believers.
2279 - And if you will not do this, then take notice of a war from God and His messenger; but if you repent, then you will have back your original principal/capital (Ru'oos), you will not be wronged nor will you wrong.
2280 - If the person is facing insolvency, then you shall wait until he becomes able. And if you relinquish it as a charity it is better for you if you knew.
2281 - And be aware of a Day when you will be returned to God then every soul will be paid what it has earned, they will not be wronged.
2282 - O you who believe, if you borrow debt for a future period, then you shall record it. And let a scribe of justice record it for you; and let not the scribe refuse to record as God has taught him. Let him record and let the person who is borrowing dictate to him, and let him be aware of God, and let him not reduce from it anything. If the one who is borrowing is immature or weak or he cannot dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate with justice; and bring two witnesses from amongst your men; if they are not two men, then a man and two women from whom you will accept their testimony, so that if one of them becomes occupied, then the one can recall the other. And let the witnesses not refuse to come if they are called. And do not fail to record it no matter how small or large until its maturity. That is more just with God and better for the testimony, and better that you do not have doubts; except if it is a trade to be done on the spot between you, then there is no sin upon you if you do not record it. And have evidence if you trade. No scribe shall be harmed nor any witness; for if you do so then it is vileness on your part, and be aware of God and God teaches you and God is aware of all things.
3130 - O you who believe, do not consume Al-Riba doubled and redoubled, and revere God that you may succeed.
4160 & 161 - Because of the wickedness from those who are Jews, We made forbidden to them the good things that were lawful to them; and for their deterring many from the path of God. And for them taking Al-Riba when they were told not to, and for them consuming peoples property (Amwa'al) unjustly. We have prepared for the disbelievers amongst them a painful retribution.
3037 to 40 - Did they not see that God grants the provisions for whom He wills, and He is able? In that are signs for a people who believe. So give the relative his due, and the poor, and the wayfarer. That is best for those who seek God's presence, and they are the successful ones. And Riba you have placed to grow in the people's property (Amwa'al), it will not grow with God. And any contribution that you have placed seeking His presence, then those will be multiplied. God who created you, then He provided for you, then He puts you to death, then He brings you to life. Is there any among the partners you set up that can do any of this? Be He glorified and exalted above what they set up.
Now, let us begin with the literal meaning of Riba, derived from its root, which is an increase, addition or growth. From the above verses, we can establish that the "Riba" discussed in those said verses relates to wealth and/or business/financial matters. The "Commandments" 6, 7 & 8 all pertain to such matters. Let's take the orphan's property/wealth first.
42 - "And give the orphans their property, and do not replace the good with the bad, and do not consume their property to your property; for truly it is a great sin!"
45 - "And do not give the immature ones their money that God has entrusted to you, and spend on them from it and clothe them, and speak to them in goodness."
46 - "And test the orphans until they reach the age of marriage, then if you determine in them sound judgment, then give them their wealth, and do not deliberately consume it wastefully or quickly before they grow up. And whoever is rich, then let him not claim anything, and if he is poor then let him consume only in goodness. If you give to them their wealth, then make a witness for them, and God is enough for Reckoning."
410 - "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!"
What we see from the above verses is the addition or growth to one's wealth using an orphan's wealth, which God has entrusted to the person. There is a possibility that this could be Al-Riba.
But what about Commandment 7 Give people full measure of what is honestly due to them. Suffice to say that a whole chapter is dedicated to people who are involved in fraudulent dealings Chapter 83 (Al-Mutaffifeen). The first few verses from that chapter are very relevant and are as follows
831 to 4 - "Woe to those giving insufficient/deficient measures. Those who when they are receiving any measure from the people, they take it in full. And when they are giving measure or weight, they give less than due. Do these not assume that they will be resurrected?"
These verses tell us exactly what such people do; take what is due to them and give less than what is due to the other person. e.g. They take 100 bucks and give other person goods or services worth 90 bucks. Although, I am sure that I have gotten my intentions accross with the example but in any case, the example is not be misconstrued to mean that the 10 bucks is the profit of the business.
So, here is another case of adding and increasing one's wealth with someone else's dues. There is a possibility that this could be Al-Riba.
Onto the last Commandment 8 Dealing equitably, i.e. one should not favour someone to the detriment of another. One can relate this to Riba verse above, where one deprived a party of equitable terms and gave that benefit, of which one had no right, to the other party. So, this could also be Al-Riba.
So, let's sum this up. Any one of the three can be Al-Riba.... or, each of the three between themselves can constitute Al-Riba because of the following common theme between them
Wrongful increment to someone's wealth/property out of or at the expense of another.
Now, Let's see if this understanding is consistent with the "Al-Riba" verses.
Considering the trade practices and pricing strategies that exist, price discrimination is a very significant albeit an inequitable method of pricing but proponents of price discrimination say it is way to achieve profits which, what they claim, is the purpose of business.
God does not bless any increase in wealth from wrongful means at the expense of others. Instead, if you spend from your own rightful wealth for charity, God adds to the wealth from his bounties.
Wealth which has wrongfully contributed to the growth of your original wealth should be given up back to their rightful owners and to whom it is rightfully due.
If you give back which is wrongfully added to your wealth, you will return to your own original rightful wealth and will have neither wronged yourself or the other. An important point is the notice of War from God and His messenger. Al-Riba is (I think) the only incident where God is declaring War against the guilty. War is normally brought about in defence of oneself or of the disadvantaged or oppressed. Consider the wealth of the orphan which has been entrusted by God. It is God's "deposit" with the guilty and if the guilty adds it his wealth, God and His messenger will go to war against the guilty for His "deposit" and the right of the orphan.
If somebody is unable to pay your dues because of his insolvency but you have paid your dues to him in good measure, wait until he becomes able to pay your dues, or give it as charity, for it is better for us.
In the context of above, whatever we relinquished as charity will be compensated by God on the Final Day.
A very important verse because it talks about debt transaction. If interest was forbidden, it could reasonably have been expected that some mention of it could have been made here when instructing the parties about the terms of the debt.
If wrongful addition to the wealth/property is invested and it multiplies and doubles, even the income earned over and above that wealth/property is unlawful to consume. It is important to note that the invesment not necessarily be in money market. Nowadays, investment in real estate is much more fruitful and assured than the volatile money market.
This is probably my weakest argument (because of its source) but the 10 commandments that the Jews use to form the basis of their current belief doesn't mention interest but did mention prohibition of stealing, i.e. taking somebody possession wrongfully without permission.
As mentioned before, even if you help someone else in need increase their property with the wealth that you have wrongfully added to yours, it will not hold any good with God.
I hope that I have been successful to some extent in clarifying my point of view in this discussion. I would be very glad to hear your input. But personally I would also like to thank you. I have learned a lot from reading the Book because of this discussion.
In conclusion, I would like to say that interest is basically a fee that one charges for renting out an owned asset to someone else. The fact that it includes a major element to account for inflation and time value of money is because of the fundamental principle of scarcity. As we increase our numbers in this world, resources suffer exponential scarcity and thus, the value of money diminishes because of its consequential dwindling purchasing power. Also, the element of opportunity cost is also significant because rather than renting the asset to someone, one could rent it to another at a possibly better return and the cost of foregoing that option is accounted for in the negotiation. It is only natural. In the absence of interest in our current global economic scenario, no one would be lending anything to one another. This does not preclude the fact that interest might become Al-Riba if any one of the applicable Commandments are transgressed in the manner described above.
I once again apolgize for such a long-winded post. I look forward to input from anybody, who has been patient enough to read it.
Peace
-
Peace Br. Sharp001,
So, summarily, what we have above are "10 Commandments" for us. I believe that every prohibition that does not have the previlege of being attached with exceptions, ifs or buts, mentioned in the Book falls under one of these broad categories. Each of the categories warrants a separate discussion about itself but let us restrict our discussion to Al-Riba. Why I believe that Riba would be a part of these categories is because, like them, it is also forbidden without any exception.
It is only 9 commandments, not 10, since 7 and 8 are the same commandment, and your interpretation of 8 is incorrect. It is ?give full measure AND weight equitably?, not ?deal equally and fairly between everybody?.
In other words, don?t cheat others in business dealings.16106
SHAKIR He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.Do you think that 16106 violates commandment #9? It is a lie told to save one?s own skin. Moreover, it is a lie told about an important thing, namely one?s belief in God.
If so, this would invalidate your theory about the ?9 Commandments? being broad categories without exception.Even if we assume that 16106 does not invalidate the theory that the ?9 Commandments? can not be breached, there is no evidence that ?Al-Riba? must be a part of them. That is pure conjecture.
Now, let us begin with the literal meaning of Riba, derived from its root, which is an increase, addition or growth.
Where did you get the literal meaning of Riba from?
Considering the trade practices and pricing strategies that exist, price discrimination is a very significant albeit an inequitable method of pricing but proponents of price discrimination say it is way to achieve profits which, what they claim, is the purpose of business.
You claim that ?Al-Riba? is not interest, and then say this
6150 - "Say "Bring forth your witnesses who bear witness that God has forbidden this." If they bear witness, then do not bear witness with them, nor follow the desires of those who deny Our revelations, and those who do not believe in the Hereafter; and they make equals with their Lord!"
even though it is well documented that ?Al-Riba? is interest. And then you go and conjecture that ?Al-Riba? = price discrimination?Those who consume interest, they do not rise except as the one who is being beaten by the devil out of direct touch. That is because they have said "Trade is like interest." While God has made trade lawful, and He has forbidden interest.
People who support interest always make the argument that it is the same as trade (or rent).If you give back which is wrongfully added to your wealth, you will return to your own original rightful wealth and will have neither wronged yourself or the other. An important point is the notice of War from God and His messenger. Al-Riba is (I think) the only incident where God is declaring War against the guilty. War is normally brought about in defence of oneself or of the disadvantaged or oppressed. Consider the wealth of the orphan which has been entrusted by God. It is God's "deposit" with the guilty and if the guilty adds it his wealth, God and His messenger will go to war against the guilty for His "deposit" and the right of the orphan.
More conjecture. Now ?al-Riba? is orphans? money misused/consumed by the guardian.
Do you think that God would declare War on a practice the definition of which was unknown and/or a practice that was not specific? You rightfully acknowledge the gravity of the situation (the declaration of War), but do not properly assess its application. The application of something so serious must have been understood by the recipients of the command as well as having a strict definition, and not be subject to conjecture or subjective value judgements on what constitutes the validity of an ?increment to someone's wealth/property out of or at the expense of another?.If somebody is unable to pay your dues because of his insolvency but you have paid your dues to him in good measure, wait until he becomes able to pay your dues, or give it as charity, for it is better for us.
It doesn?t mention anything about ?you having paid your dues to him in good measure?.
A very important verse because it talks about debt transaction. If interest was forbidden, it could reasonably have been expected that some mention of it could have been made here when instructing the parties about the terms of the debt.
You define ?al-Riba? as other than interest, which is discussed in the previous verses 275-281, and then claim that since interest is not discussed in 282 when it discusses debt, then interest is not forbidden? That is perfectly logical. And perfectly circular.
What is the word for ?interest? in classical Arabic? Did you/do you expect a definition in the Quran for a word that had a well-known meaning to the intended audience (the Arabs of Muhammad?s time)?
You are right that 282 is very important because it talks about debt transaction. It is important because it further strengthens the argument that ?Al-Riba? is interest.In fact, by your very own criteria, your definition of ?al-Riba? fails. The beginning of chapter 4 talks about orphans, as you have pointed out, and of not stealing their wealth, and yet the word ?al-Riba? is never used. The beginning of chapter 83 talks about ?giving full weight and measure? (being honest in business dealings), and yet al-Riba is never used.
If wrongful addition to the wealth/property is invested and it multiplies and doubles, even the income earned over and above that wealth/property is unlawful to consume. It is important to note that the invesment not necessarily be in money market. Nowadays, investment in real estate is much more fruitful and assured than the volatile money market.
What practice is known for allowing ones wealth to double and redouble in its extreme form? Interest.
This is probably my weakest argument (because of its source) but the 10 commandments that the Jews use to form the basis of their current belief doesn't mention interest but did mention prohibition of stealing, i.e. taking somebody possession wrongfully without permission.
It is a weak point, not necessarily because of its source, but because of your conjecture that ?Al-Riba? is somehow supposed to be mentioned in the 10 commandments. So now ?Al-Riba? = stealing?
?Al-Riba?/Interest IS mentioned in both the Old and New Testament, and the Jews were forbidden from taking it, and were (and continue to be) well known for breaking this commandment. A few verses are
"Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury."
"Lord, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? Who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness and speaketh the truth in his heart. He that putteth not out of his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent."
"He that by usury and unjust gain increaseth his substance, he shall gather it for him that will pity the poor."
"Then I consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and rules and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a great assembly against them."
?But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men.?
Furthermore, I find it interesting that you split up 2275-2282 into individual verses. It sure makes it easier to avoid the clear/obvious meaning when not looking at all the verses in context. Especially considering that 2275-282 is the place where al-Riba is discussed the most, and its meaning is the most obvious. So let us look at ?al-Riba? in context, and form a consistent and coherent understanding of verses 2275-2281.
2275 - Those who consume Al-Riba, they do not rise except as the one who is being beaten by the devil out of direct touch. That is because they have said "Al-Ba'ay is like Al-Riba." While God has made trade lawful, and He has forbidden Al-Riba. Whoever has received understanding from His Lord and ceases, then he will be forgiven for what was before this and his case will be with God. But whoever returns, then they are the people of the Fire, in it they will abide eternally. 2276 - God wipes out Al-Riba and He grants growth to the charities. And God does not like any wicked sinner. 2278 - O you who believe, be aware of God and give up what is left of Al-Riba if you are truly believers. 2279 - And if you will not do this, then take notice of a war from God and His messenger; but if you repent, then you will have back your original principal/capital (Ru'oos), you will not be wronged nor will you wrong. 2280 - If the person is facing insolvency, then you shall wait until he becomes able. And if you relinquish it as a charity it is better for you if you knew. 2281 - And be aware of a Day when you will be returned to God then every soul will be paid what it has earned, they will not be wronged. 2282 - O you who believe, if you borrow debt for a future period, then you shall record it. And let a scribe of justice record it for you; and let not the scribe refuse to record as God has taught him. Let him record and let the person who is borrowing dictate to him, and let him be aware of God, and let him not reduce from it anything. If the one who is borrowing is immature or weak or he cannot dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate with justice; and bring two witnesses from amongst your men; if they are not two men, then a man and two women from whom you will accept their testimony, so that if one of them becomes occupied, then the one can recall the other. And let the witnesses not refuse to come if they are called. And do not fail to record it no matter how small or large until its maturity. That is more just with God and better for the testimony, and better that you do not have doubts; except if it is a trade to be done on the spot between you, then there is no sin upon you if you do not record it. And have evidence if you trade. No scribe shall be harmed nor any witness; for if you do so then it is vileness on your part, and be aware of God and God teaches you and God is aware of all things.
2275 People who consume ?Al-Riba? say that trade is like ?Al-Riba?. But God made trade lawful, and ?Al-Riba? is forbidden. Whoever stops taking ?Al-Riba? will be forgiven, those that don?t, will be destined for Hell. 2276 God wipes out ?Al-Riba? and grows the charities. 2278 Give up what remains of ?Al-Riba?. 2279 If you don?t give up what remains of ?al-Riba? you can expect war from God and His messenger. If you do give ?al-Riba? up, you are entitled to your capital/principal. 2280 If the person is in difficulty, wait till they are able to pay. If you relinquish it as charity, it is better for you. 2282 Talks about how to ensure debts are properly recorded.
2275-2282 makes it abundantly clear that ?Al-Riba? is interest.
People make money out of it and claim it is the same as trade. If they give up ?Al-Riba? (the interest), they are entitled to the original they lent out, the principal. If the indebted is in difficulty, the debtor should wait until they can repay. If they remit all of the debt (i.e. the principal) and give it as charity, it is better for them. 2282 Talks about how to ensure debts are properly recorded.When we place ?interest? in all the verses that discuss ?Riba?, we find that it fits perfectly logically, coherently, consistently, and historically.
In conclusion, I would like to say that interest is basically a fee that one charges for renting out an owned asset to someone else.
No. Money is not an asset that can be rented. Money is a medium of exchange between assets, and does not have any inherent value in and of itself (aside from the value of the material the money is made of).
The fact that it includes a major element to account for inflation and time value of money is because of the fundamental principle of scarcity. As we increase our numbers in this world, resources suffer exponential scarcity and thus, the value of money diminishes because of its consequential dwindling purchasing power.
No. The major cause of inflation is NOT scarcity, but an increase in the money supply, which makes everyone?s money worth less, and to which interest is a large contributor.
In the absence of interest in our current global economic scenario, no one would be lending anything to one another.
People would lend, but not with the expectation of increasing their wealth. So those who want to increase their wealth would be investing their money through partnerships, which comes with a risk of loss. Something resembling this is the stock market (assuming the stock market is not corrupt the way that it is now). Peoples? wealth would actually be going towards the production of real assets, real goods and services, and being used for what money was intended-the prosperity of humanity.
Interest does not reflect reality. The expectation to grow ones money without a direct correlation to the production of anything is contrary to reason.
I?ll end my thoughts on interest by quoting the work of some authors mentioned in the link I posted
?James Robertson, who in his excellent work 'Transforming Economic Life A Millennial Challenge" has commented on this aspect as follows
"The pervasive role of interest in the economic system results in the systematic transfer of money from those who have less to those who have more. Again, this transfer of resources from poor to rich has been made shockingly clear by the Third World debt crisis. But it applies universally. It is partly because those who have more money to lend, get more in interest than those who have less; it is partly because those who have less, often have to borrow more; and it is partly because the cost of interest repayments now forms a substantial element in the cost of all goods and services, and the necessary goods and services looms much larger in the finances of the poor. When we look at the money system that way and when we begin to think about how it should be redesigned to carry out its functions fairly and efficiently as part of an enabling and conserving economy, the argument for an interest-free inflation-free money system for the twenty-first century seems to be very strong."
?
"The money-must-grow imperative is ecologically destructive... (It) also results in a massive world-wide diversion of effort away from providing useful goods and services, into making money out of money. At least 954b of the billions of dollars transferred daily around the world are of purely financial transactions, unlinked to transactions in the real economy.?? ?To quote James Robertson again
"Why has the process of issuing new money into economy (i.e. credit creation) been delegated by governments to the banks, allowing them to profit from issuing it in the form of interest-bearing loans to their customers? Should governments not issue it directly themselves, as a component of a citizen's income?""Would it be desirable and possible to limit the role of interest more drastically than that, for example by converting debt into equity throughout the economy? This would be in line with Islamic teaching, and with earlier Christian teaching, that usury is sin. Although the practical complications would make this a goal for the longer term, there are strong arguments for exploring it - the extent to which economic life world-wide now depends on ever-rising debt, the danger of economic collapse this entails, and the economic power now enjoyed by those who make money out of money rather than out of risk-bearing participation in useful enterprises."?
?John Tomlinson is an Oxford based Canadian economist. Having studied the effect of debt on the economies of developed and less developed countries, he set up and is the Chairman of Oxford Research and Development Corporation Limited which explores the use of equity instruments and the development of equity markets for areas of finance currently served by debt. In his book "Honest Money" he has strongly recommended the conversion of debt into equity. His following conclusions merit consideration for those who are adamant on maintaining status quo in the financial system
"Converting debt to equity is not a panacea for all economic ills. It can, however, produce many positive benefits. These benefits will not necessarily follow automatically from conversion. Concentrated effort will be required to ensure they do. Without conversion they will not happen at all.
Not the least of these benefits will be those brought to the banking community itself. The banking and monetary system will not collapse. Nor should there ever need to be the threat of collapse again. Owners of banks will find the value of their shares underpinned as liabilities disappear from balance sheets and are replaced by assets of a specific value. Each and every depositor will be able simultaneously to withdraw his or her total deposits.Demand for the bank's current or cheque account services will not diminish. Longer term depositors will now have to pay for storage it will be a less attractive option than exchange, so the velocity with which money moves from bank to market-place to bank again, from one account to another, is likely to increase. There will be a continuous flow of money available for new equity investment.
The market-place in general will also receive benefits. Conversion will also cause the value of money to stabilize. Savings can then retain their value. Prices need only vary according to the supply and demand of the product being priced. Measurements of exchange value made by different people at different times can be validly compared. The unit of money will once more be a valid unit of measurement of exchange value. The field of economics can become a science.
Many of the distortions which now exist in our individual frames of reference will be corrected. For instance, an investment which took an investor, ten, fifteen or twenty years to recoup used to be considered sound. Now, too often the maximum period envisaged is five years; even three. This short-term view has precluded many useful businesses from being created. The re-establishment of stable money and the emphasis on security which will be required within equity investment program will encourage people to take a longer view. More businesses will then be considered viable and the number of new jobs can increase dramatically.
Existing savers will also be protected. The conversion to equity will eliminate the possibility of collapse for individual banks and for the system as a whole. Savings will not disappear. The nature of savings will change from just units of money to units of money and shares. The exchange value of both the shares and the money will have to be re-assessed. But they will have value. If no actions is taken and the system collapses, they may end up having no value.
The changes proposed will also free many from the enslavement of debt. Both nations and individuals can regain their dignity. They will be free to make their own choices. No longer will managers have to face the choice between paying interest and disemploying some or not paying interest and disemploying all.
Nor shall we need to experience the stresses caused by current economic and business cycles. There will be a steady flow of money into investments. New investment opportunities will continually be sought as a home for both individual saving and business profits. Both will wish to avoid storage charges.
Growth will be dependent upon the continuing development of new ideas and new productive capacity. Growth will no longer be dependent upon the creation of new debt. Economic expansion will depend upon the positive flow of new savings and new profits.Re-establishing the integrity of money will eliminate at least one of the causes of human conflict. Money will no longer secretly steal from those who save, those on fixed income and those who enter long-term contracts.
Further, it can lead to a greater premium being placed on personal integrity. The character traits of honest, honorable and forthright behavior will be in demand. Investors' security will depend on them. Recognition of the degree of interdependence in an equity-oriented market-place can lead to more consideration of the needs of others, and, ultimately, to a more caring and, compassionate society.
Of course, life is never roses all the way. Many mistakes will be made. When new paths are trodden, the way is sometimes uncertain. Some will find it difficult to break the habitual patterns of thought which govern behavior in a debt-oriented society. No doubt some readers will have already experienced this.
Some will be hard-pressed when the actual exchange value of their investments becomes apparent. Yet, the conversion process can be controlled. Collapse cannot. We should be able, as part of the conversion process, to identify those who might suffer unduly. Then we can be prepared to assist them and cushion any hardship. The case of honest money is a compelling one. Honest money is not a thief. It does not steal from the thrifty. It is not socially divisive. It does not promote economic and business cycles, creating unemployment. On the contrary, it encourages thrift. It promotes sustainable economic growth. It rewards merit. It demands integrity. These are worthwhile goals. They can be achieved. What is needed now is the will to make them happen."?
peace
-
Peace "david",
Riba is a word that was used and understood by the Arabs of Muhammad's time to mean interest when referring to money. If you have any evidence that Riba, when used for money, means anything other than interest, I'd like to see it.
JK- Where are you getting this info from? Do you have actual archaeological evidence to support your statement? If you just got it from hadith, forget it, we reject those as entirely unauthentic here. Now if you translate "interest" into Arabic the word is "FA'IDA" NOT "RIBA". Riba means an increase, an unjust increase in the Quranic context. This IMHO can only apply in case of raising the prices of fundamental items required for human welfare like the food items are INCREASED by an amount so that the common people are hardly able to pay for even those anymore. These item's upper limits are set by the scientific community in the area who evaluate the prices based on the conditions of people in the country through complex economical analysis. Ive discussed this many times. If you still claim "riba" is the "rent" on money lent, then youll have to define what is money for in today's world ANYTHING THAT HAS AN EXCHANGE VALUE IN THE MARKET maybe considered as money eg the huge DAX or other stock shares, gold, silver, gems, cars etc. Hence in your case for example it would be "riba" to charge a fixed amount for renting out a car. GOD Bless!
-
Peace Br. David,
When I first skimmed through your post, I was concerned about the frequency of the word 'conjecture'. Here I had tried so hard not to use any source other than the Book but apparently I had accomplished the opposite. Although, I don't foresee us coming to a complete agreement about the matter of Al-Riba, but the sake of furthering the discussion, I will delve into your post further and see if I can get where you are coming from.
Peace Br. Sharp001,
It is only 9 commandments, not 10, since 7 and 8 are the same commandment, and your interpretation of 8 is incorrect. It is ?give full measure AND weight equitably?, not ?deal equally and fairly between everybody?.
In other words, don?t cheat others in business dealings.Considering your point of view, I concede that there are "9" commandments and 7 & 8 are part of just one commandment. It says
"Give Honestly Full Measure and Weight Equitably"
Although, I wouldn't put a blanket understanding to the above phrase because to me, "giving full measure" and "equitably/with justice" are two different actions with two diffent meanings and effects but for the sake of discussing the point from your platform, I'll take your understanding of it, i.e. don't cheat others in business dealings. How does one cheat in business dealings? Hmm... Let's see... you could give something less that what's been paid for it OR charge more for what you have given. That would sum it up, right? So, in essence, when you say don't cheat others in business dealings, it means give the other person what is or becomes rightfully due to him. I hope this is consistent with your understanding and you are in agreement with it. So, let's go on to your next contention.
16106
SHAKIR He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.Do you think that 16106 violates commandment #9? It is a lie told to save one?s own skin. Moreover, it is a lie told about an important thing, namely one?s belief in God.
If so, this would invalidate your theory about the ?9 Commandments? being broad categories without exception.Even if we assume that 16106 does not invalidate the theory that the ?9 Commandments? can not be breached, there is no evidence that ?Al-Riba? must be a part of them. That is pure conjecture.
Commandment #9 If you speak then be Just (Adl) even if against a relative.
Br. David, one of the reasons I had mentioned the word "Adl" used in the verse against it's English counterpart was to reinforce the meaning of the word "Just" used in the translation. "Adl" literally means equity/justice. It is usually used to described the equitable attribute of a judgement between two parties, e.g. He dealt with "Adl" (equity/justice) between the two parties. This understanding is further supported by the second part of the commandment, "even if against a relative". In my post, I have used the words "just/truthful" for summarising, which I admit was presumptuous on my part. To speak with Truth (Huq) and to speak with Justice (Adl) are two different attributes of speech. I hope you are following what I am trying to infer here. If you feel that this is "conjecture" on my part, we can always question my understanding of the word "Adl" and "Huq" by referring the usage to the other brothers and sisters on the forum who are more well versed in Arabic, as well as the following Lexicon link for the word 'Adl'
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume5/00000259.pdf
In the context of 16106, One who believes in Allah does so only because he comes to know the Truth. When such a person utters disbelief under compulsion, he is simply not speaking with Truth (Huq), i.e. lieing, which is pardonable under the circumstances. However, on the other hand, he utters disbelieves after believing (i.e. knowing the Truth) under no compulsion, he breaks the covenant with God, i.e. Commandment #10.
As for you feeling that it is "pure conjecture" that Al-Riba is part of the Commandment, I suppose that is a matter of different point of views between us. Upto this point in time, I believe that Al-Riba is one of the consequences of our actions in opposition of the pertinent commandments whereas you believe that it is a separate action. Why I believe what I believe, is because I apparently see a link between them, which I tried to explain in my post. I don't think I did a good job of it. But I suppose to each his own. I hope and pray that He guides us right and for His Forgiveness and Mercy.
Where did you get the literal meaning of Riba from?
I got the translation from the following
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000189.pdf
Interestingly, it says "it increased/augmented, said in terms of property". I, for the life of me, can't understand why people have just been limited Al-Riba to Money transactions then.
You claim that ?Al-Riba? is not interest, and then say this
6150 - "Say "Bring forth your witnesses who bear witness that God has forbidden this." If they bear witness, then do not bear witness with them, nor follow the desires of those who deny Our revelations, and those who do not believe in the Hereafter; and they make equals with their Lord!"
even though it is well documented that ?Al-Riba? is interest. And then you go and conjecture that ?Al-Riba? = price discrimination?Br. David. "Al-Riba is Interest" is well documented, you say. Where and by whom, may I ask? Perchance, would the source be somewhere outside the Book, from a period unseen (Ghaib)? Dangerously close to the realm of, how you say, "Hearsay" and "Conjecture", wouldn't you agree? Anyway, I read a couple of verses in the Book which I thought were pertinent, but I believe that you have quoted the sources of the claims somewhere down the post. I will mention them there. On to the next point.
"Al-Riba" = price discrimination... Now I am postive that I haven't been able to get my point of view across. If I were to put Al-Riba into an equation like that, I would define it as
"Al-Riba" = Wrongful Increase/Growth in Wealth and Property
What price discrimination is, is just one of the possible ways to wrongfully increase/grow one's wealth and property. Is the assertion that price discrimination is one of the causes of Al-Riba really that unreasonable, so as to be termed a "conjecture"? I thought it was a pretty "logical" progression that price discrimination increases profits of a business and wrongfully so because of its inequitable nature.
Those who consume interest, they do not rise except as the one who is being beaten by the devil out of direct touch. That is because they have said "Trade is like interest." While God has made trade lawful, and He has forbidden interest.
People who support interest always make the argument that it is the same as trade (or rent).Br. David. Just read what you have written. The Book says that the people who support Riba say that Trade in like Al-Riba. But in reality what people who support interest do say is "Interest is like trade". Two very different assertions. Nobody I have ever heard, who defends interest has said that Trade is like interest. Doesn't this seem even a little bit odd to you? If you are implying that I am actually supporting interest as depicted in the light of the verse, I am sorry but I have never said that Rent/Trade is like Interest. In fact, what I am saying is that
"Interest is like a rent for your monetary assets".... NOT "Rent is like Interest".
That is entirely different from what the verse says, and as much as you would wish that it fits, it does not at all, not even almost. Two very opposing assertions. Two difference Subjects used in each statement.
More conjecture. Now ?al-Riba? is orphans? money misused/consumed by the guardian.
You really use the C-word very liberally, don't you? I will refer to the point that I made before in this post that
"Al-Riba" = Wrongful Increase/Growth in Wealth and Property
And adding an orphan's rightful property/wealth to one's own wealth is just one of the possible ways to wrongfully increase/grow one's wealth and property. Is that still so illogical an assertion?
Do you think that God would declare War on a practice the definition of which was unknown and/or a practice that was not specific? You rightfully acknowledge the gravity of the situation (the declaration of War), but do not properly assess its application. The application of something so serious must have been understood by the recipients of the command as well as having a strict definition, and not be subject to conjecture or subjective value judgements on what constitutes the validity of an ?increment to someone's wealth/property out of or at the expense of another?.
So, is that the criteria, then? Because it was so grave and serious that God and His messenger declared War, we just HAD to find a specific meaning for Al-Riba, even if we were unable to understand it from the Book and looked towards history, the unseen and opinions of other people. Are you actually implying that the Book, which claims to be a complete guidance and an explanation of all things for a believer, would not have an explanation within itself about what Al-Riba actually is? Oh boy, we are a long way from home. The Book's verses confirm each other, that is the beauty of it and why it is the complete guidance. Whatever I have tried to allude to is from the Book and the Book alone. I don't want to attribute man-made opinions to the Book that since interest is apparently bad for the economy as it increases the wealth of the rich making them richer and poor poorer, it has to have been forbidden and thus, has to be Al-Riba. You said that I was being subjective when I was trying to look for the understanding of Al-Riba from within the Book? Honestly, considering that we hold the Book as THE objective Truth (Al-Huq), how is what you are alluding to any more objective and unbiased? Am I implying that the rich should keep on getting richer? No, because with wealth, God has attached many responsibilities, which include spending in the way of God, spending in charity, avoiding greed and wrongful sources of wealth etc.
It doesn?t mention anything about ?you having paid your dues to him in good measure?.
Now that's just being stubborn. In ANY business transaction, there is a give and a take. The seller/lender would give something and the buyer/borrower would give him money for it. If seller/lender is waiting for the payment from the buyer/borrower, which the 2280 suggests, he must have given something to the buyer/borrower (which was due to him under the transaction) and is thus waiting for the buyer/borrower to fulfil his part of the consideration. Did it honestly need to be mentioned? When I said what I said, I was just stating the obvious.
You define ?al-Riba? as other than interest, which is discussed in the previous verses 275-281, and then claim that since interest is not discussed in 2282 when it discusses debt, then interest is not forbidden? That is perfectly logical. And perfectly circular.
I concede to your argument in this regard. In fact, 2282 address the matter of reducing a debt to be paid in the future to writting and has nothing to do with the terms of the debt. I thank you for pointing out that error of understanding to me. Therefore, it has just about recording the transaction and nothing to do with Al-Riba.
What is the word for ?interest? in classical Arabic? Did you/do you expect a definition in the Quran for a word that had a well-known meaning to the intended audience (the Arabs of Muhammad?s time)?
You are right that 2282 is very important because it talks about debt transaction. It is important because it further strengthens the argument that ?Al-Riba? is interest.Just when I had established that 282 had nothing to do with Al-Riba or interest, you turn around and say that 2282 strengthens the argument that Al-Riba is interest? Talk about going in circles, eh? And what makes your argument "perfectly logical" and not "circular", when its context is about the rules of recording the debt transaction and does not at all address the terms of the transaction?
You ask for a word for "interest" in "Classic Arabic". I thank Br. johnny_k for his input in this thread and will quote him for the requested definition
Now if you translate "interest" into Arabic the word is "FA'IDA" NOT "RIBA". Riba means an increase, an unjust increase in the Quranic context.
On a side note, you believe that the Book is in Classic Arabic? The following thread is helpful in that regard
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14531.msg153036#msg153036
Did I expect an explanation in the Book for Al-Riba? Of course, I did. As I mentioned earlier this post, the Book is a complete guidance and an explanation of all things, so why wouldn't I expect an explanation of Al-Riba from the Book? The question is why didn't you?
In fact, by your very own criteria, your definition of ?al-Riba? fails. The beginning of chapter 4 talks about orphans, as you have pointed out, and of not stealing their wealth, and yet the word ?al-Riba? is never used. The beginning of chapter 83 talks about ?giving full weight and measure? (being honest in business dealings), and yet al-Riba is never used.
A criteria which I have relinquished earlier when I held that 282 does not have any relation to the terms of the debt but just the recording of the debt and thus, would and could not reasonably be expected to have any mention or allusions to Al-Riba or interest.
What practice is known for allowing ones wealth to double and redouble in its extreme form? Interest.
How about the stock market? Market players have been known to become overnight millionaires. Talk about extreme, eh? No.... Well, then how about the Real Estate Market? Quadrupling, anyone? Interest isn't even nearly as extreme as these.
It is a weak point, not necessarily because of its source, but because of your conjecture that ?Al-Riba? is somehow supposed to be mentioned in the 10 commandments. So now ?Al-Riba? = stealing?
?Al-Riba?/Interest IS mentioned in both the Old and New Testament, and the Jews were forbidden from taking it, and were (and continue to be) well known for breaking this commandment. A few verses are
"Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury."
"Lord, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? Who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness and speaketh the truth in his heart. He that putteth not out of his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent."
"He that by usury and unjust gain increaseth his substance, he shall gather it for him that will pity the poor."
"Then I consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and rules and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a great assembly against them."
?But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men.?
I will reiterate that it is a weak point only, and only, because of its source. Did I say that stealing was Al-Riba? Let me check.... No. I just said that prohibition of stealing is mentioned in the 10 commandments. So is 'Al_Riba' = stealing? Br., I am sorry but I will have to go back to the equation I have mentioned earlier.
"Al-Riba" = Wrongful Increase/Growth in Wealth and Property
And adding to one's wealth by stealing other's, is just one of the possible ways to wrongfully increase/grow one's wealth and property. Is that still so illogical an assertion?
On to your quoted sources prohibition of interest. Now I would like to quote the verses from the Book that I mentioned which I found was of relevance to using the sources that you quoted above.
2120 & 121 - "Neither the Jews nor the Nazarenes will be pleased with you until you follow their beliefs. Say "The guidance is God's guidance." And if you follow their wishes after the knowledge that has come to you, then there is none who can help or protect you against God. Those to whom We have given the Scripture and they recite it as it truthfully deserves to be recited; they believe in it. As for those who disbelieve in it, they are the losers."
Consider this verse with verse 160 of Chapter 4
4160 - "Because of the wickedness from those who are Jews, We made forbidden to them the good things that had been lawful to them; and for their deterring many from the path of God."
Now we know from 4160 that God prohibited some things for the Jews which were permissible before for them. Why? Because of their wickedness and evil practices. What was the use of prohibiting them? Because these things were the means through which they practiced their wickedness and prohibiting them would curtail their wickedness.
What about 2120 and 2121? When you go to them with what is revealed to you, The Jews, as well as the Nazarenes, will say that you should follow their beliefs. What you have just quoted above are their beliefs. Whether they practice is or not is irrelevant. But they believe that interest is forbidden. And we are told not to follow their beliefs. That is enough for me.
For argument's sake, let's assume that interest actually was forbidden to them by God. I know that I am in the C-word territory now and will be bashed all over the place for what I am about to write but is it so difficult to imagine that one of the "good" things that were forbidden to the Jews as mentioned in 4160 could have been interest because it was a means from which they conducted wickedness, practiced Al-Riba, and consumed other people's properties with unjust means (Ba'atil) - 4161?
(Continued in the next post)
-
Furthermore, I find it interesting that you split up 2275-2282 into individual verses. It sure makes it easier to avoid the clear/obvious meaning when not looking at all the verses in context. Especially considering that 2275-2282 is the place where al-Riba is discussed the most, and its meaning is the most obvious. So let us look at ?al-Riba? in context, and form a consistent and coherent understanding of verses 2275-2282.
And here I thought I was the only one who was paranoid. If it was my intent to look at the verses separately, I wouldn't have quoted all of them one after the other and discussed them at the same time. But let's see how "consistent" and "coherent" its understanding becomes when the verses are laid end-to-end.
2275 - Those who consume Al-Riba, they do not rise except as the one who is being beaten by the devil out of direct touch. That is because they have said "Al-Ba'ay is like Al-Riba." While God has made trade lawful, and He has forbidden Al-Riba. Whoever has received understanding from His Lord and ceases, then he will be forgiven for what was before this and his case will be with God. But whoever returns, then they are the people of the Fire, in it they will abide eternally. 2276 - God wipes out Al-Riba and He grants growth to the charities. And God does not like any wicked sinner. 2278 - O you who believe, be aware of God and give up what is left of Al-Riba if you are truly believers. 2279 - And if you will not do this, then take notice of a war from God and His messenger; but if you repent, then you will have back your original principal/capital (Ru'oos), you will not be wronged nor will you wrong. 2280 - If the person is facing insolvency, then you shall wait until he becomes able. And if you relinquish it as a charity it is better for you if you knew. 2281 - And be aware of a Day when you will be returned to God then every soul will be paid what it has earned, they will not be wronged. 2282 - O you who believe, if you borrow debt for a future period, then you shall record it. And let a scribe of justice record it for you; and let not the scribe refuse to record as God has taught him. Let him record and let the person who is borrowing dictate to him, and let him be aware of God, and let him not reduce from it anything. If the one who is borrowing is immature or weak or he cannot dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate with justice; and bring two witnesses from amongst your men; if they are not two men, then a man and two women from whom you will accept their testimony, so that if one of them becomes occupied, then the one can recall the other. And let the witnesses not refuse to come if they are called. And do not fail to record it no matter how small or large until its maturity. That is more just with God and better for the testimony, and better that you do not have doubts; except if it is a trade to be done on the spot between you, then there is no sin upon you if you do not record it. And have evidence if you trade. No scribe shall be harmed nor any witness; for if you do so then it is vileness on your part, and be aware of God and God teaches you and God is aware of all things.
2275 People who consume ?Al-Riba? say that trade is like ?Al-Riba?. But God made trade lawful, and ?Al-Riba? is forbidden. Whoever stops taking ?Al-Riba? will be forgiven, those that don?t, will be destined for Hell. 2276 God wipes out ?Al-Riba? and grows the charities. 2278 Give up what remains of ?Al-Riba?. 2279 If you don?t give up what remains of ?al-Riba? you can expect war from God and His messenger. If you do give ?al-Riba? up, you are entitled to your capital/principal. 2280 If the person is in difficulty, wait till they are able to pay. If you relinquish it as charity, it is better for you. 2282 Talks about how to ensure debts are properly recorded.
No problems with that. It's saying it like it is. Particulary 2282, where you recognize that the verse is about recording debts and nothing else. Now we go down to your C-word territory.
2275-2282 makes it abundantly clear that ?Al-Riba? is interest.
Oh, how so? let's see...
People make money out of it and claim it is the same as trade. If they give up ?Al-Riba? (the interest), they are entitled to the original they lent out, the principal. If the indebted is in difficulty, the debtor should wait until they can repay. If they remit all of the debt (i.e. the principal) and give it as charity, it is better for them. 2282 Talks about how to ensure debts are properly recorded.
When we place ?interest? in all the verses that discuss ?Riba?, we find that it fits perfectly logically, coherently, consistently, and historically.
Br. David, your first sentence, as you so eloquently put it in my case, "fails your definition of 'Al-Riba'". Like you said, people claim that interest is the same as trade. BUT the verse says the peope who consume Al-Riba say that trade is the same as Al-Riba, NOT Al-Riba is the same as trade. So, if we place interest in just the first verse, we get "People who consume 'interest' say that trade is like 'interest'". But people don't say that, do they? They say interest is like trade. In the verse from the Book, "Trade" is the Subject, but in the people's claims, "Interest" is the Subject. So the verse can't be talking about the interest that people are talking about. It effectively breaks down all the "logic", "coherence", "consistency", and "history" that is claimed.
No. Money is not an asset that can be rented. Money is a medium of exchange between assets, and does not have any inherent value in and of itself (aside from the value of the material the money is made of).
Since we are playing dictionary here, let's see what the definition of money is
"Money is any token or other object that functions as a medium of exchange that is socially and legally accepted in payment for goods and services and in settlement of debts. Money also serves as a standard of value for measuring the relative worth of different goods and services and as a store of value." (Source Wikipedia)
In addition to how Br. johnny_k explains it as follows
If you still claim "riba" is the "rent" on money lent, then youll have to define what is money for in today's world ANYTHING THAT HAS AN EXCHANGE VALUE IN THE MARKET maybe considered as money eg the huge DAX or other stock shares, gold, silver, gems, cars etc. Hence in your case for example it would be "riba" to charge a fixed amount for renting out a car. GOD Bless!
What about the other two functions
(1) A store of value
(2) A measure of good and services.So, If I receive cash for something I sell, the cash I have is not an asset? Does it not represent my holdings, my assets? Is it not just another form, a more liquid one, of my assets? If so, it is as much of an asset capable of renting as any other asset.
No. The major cause of inflation is NOT scarcity, but an increase in the money supply, which makes everyone?s money worth less, and to which interest is a large contributor.
I agree that increase in money supply is a major cause of inflation and not scarcity. But to say the interest is a contributor to inflation is very presumptuous. In fact, Inflation is the main protagonist which causes interest rates to increase and not the other way around.
People would lend, but not with the expectation of increasing their wealth. So those who want to increase their wealth would be investing their money through partnerships, which comes with a risk of loss. Something resembling this is the stock market (assuming the stock market is not corrupt the way that it is now). Peoples? wealth would actually be going towards the production of real assets, real goods and services, and being used for what money was intended-the prosperity of humanity.
Interest does not reflect reality. The expectation to grow ones money without a direct correlation to the production of anything is contrary to reason.
Interest doesn't reflect reality, but the scenario you painted does? Mildly speaking, it is a very impractical and unworkable system.
(1) "People would lend, but not with the expectation of increasing their wealth."
I have some money. Why should I lend it to anyone when I can, as you said, invest it to increase my wealth? Now you might say that what about people with excess and idle money, which they don't need for the moment? The following verse tells us the answer to that question
2219 - "They ask you about intoxicants and gambling. Say "In them is great harm, and a benefit for mankind; but their harm is greater than their benefit." And they ask you how much are they to give, Say "The excess over expense." It is thus that God clarifies for you the revelations that you may think."
So, summarily, there are two ways in which a person can spend his wealth. To spend it for himself and spend in the way of God in the manner indicated in the above verse.
(2) "So those who want to increase their wealth would be investing their money through partnerships, which comes with a risk of loss."
Let's take an example. I come across some inheritance and I have no business sense. I want to invest my money but I don't know where to invest it. I enter a partnership with some friends who have a pretty good know-how of the construction business. They don't have the money but I do. So they propose that with my money and their business know-how, they may be able to set-up and run a profitable business venture. I'm a little skeptical, because I am concerned about the losses. They assure me that initially there may be losses but they show me that the construction industry is booming and will continue to boom, so there is a good chance that we will eventually be raking in loads of profits. I agree and So a company is set-up with my money and their know-how. We start off with some losses and upon questioning my partners about them, they assure me, it is just the initial stages. I just need to be patient. Some time later, they come to me and say that they have won a major contract and are in need of a little more money to successfully carry it out. I am hesitant but they are convincing. They land the contract and soon start quoting "unexpected" expenses in relation to the contract. At the end of the contract, they say that it was a net loss because of those expenses, but assure me that there is nothing to worry about, as we have penetrated the market and should be raking in the dough soon. I am convinced. This cycle continues until I have no more spare money. When they hear that, they look at each other and say that in that case we can't go on and will have to wind up the Company. They declare bankruptcy and that's that. I am flabbergasted that I have lost all my money for nothing and my "partners" have lost nothing.
Do you think, that after that incident, anyone will invest their money EVER again? Not me, sorry. So, if there is no investment in the economy from people with money but no business know-how, that economy is going to prosper? Highly unlikely. So tell me, how do you get me to invest in the economy for the "prosperity of humanity", with a fear and a risk that I will lose my wealth?
In the end, I would say, that although I would have loved to discuss the articles that you posted from James Robertson & Co. with you, but it would be futile because just as they are proponents of an interest-free economy, they are proponents of interest-based economy as well. Further, all of those writings which try to simulate an interest-free economy are heavily based on assumptions and the C-word. The discussion would end up as matters of opinion and different points of view. You can say at this point that consider the present economic system has failed so miserably, therefore, the interest-free economy must be the way out. I'd say that the current economy has failed because some have taken an unjust advantage of the system and just as they have taken advantage of this system, they will take advantage of the next system that comes along, and we will be back to square one. What will prevent such a failure the economy will be the upheld priniciples of equity and fairness as described in the Book.
Peace
-
Peace "sharp",
What about the other two functions
(1) A store of value
(2) A measure of good and services.So, If I receive cash for something I sell, the cash I have is not an asset? Does it not represent my holdings, my assets? Is it not just another form, a more liquid one, of my assets? If so, it(cash/currency) is as much of an asset capable of renting as any other asset.
JK- And thats exactly what i was trying to clarify to the "david" who claims interest on money/cash is "Riba". I clearly disagreed and said that it is not. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "sharp",
JK- And thats exactly what i was trying to clarify to the "david" who claims interest on money/cash is "Riba". I clearly disagreed and said that it is not. GOD Bless!I apologize, Br. johnny_k, for the misunderstanding. That line of questioning was never directed towards you. That is why I asked David,
"In addition to how Br. johnny_k explains it as follows (Inserted your quote) What about the other two functions...."
I wasn't questioning you. Sorry for the misunderstanding and thank you for the clarification.
Peace
-
Peace "sharp",
I apologize, Br. johnny_k, for the misunderstanding. That line of questioning was never directed towards you. That is why I asked David,
"In addition to how Br. johnny_k explains it as follows (Inserted your quote) What about the other two functions...."
I wasn't questioning you. Sorry for the misunderstanding and thank you for the clarification.
Peace
JK- No problem. sun Infact the thought did cross my mind that it couldve been an addition since i noticed you were adding to what i already stated but wasnt too sure of that. Thnx again for clarifying. ) GOD Bless!
-
Peace Br. Sharp,
Sorry if I offended you, so please forgive me. Let?s start fresh.
It will take me some time to reply to your post.
(How did you write so much, so fast!)peace
p.s. I will respond to the "jonny_k" too ;D
Br. David,
No offence taken. In fact, I think I should be apologizing to you if my post comes of as patronizing in any way. Such was not my intent when I was writing the post... wasn't thinking too much about diplomacy.
As for writing fast, it took me a good two hours to write it and I wouldn't call that quick. But in any case, I look forward to your post.
Peace
-
Peace jonny_k,
Where are you getting this info from? Do you have actual archaeological evidence to support your statement? If you just got it from hadith, forget it, we reject those as entirely unauthentic here. Now if you translate "interest" into Arabic the word is "FA'IDA" NOT "RIBA".
Where did you get ?Fa?ida? = interest? Do you have any archaeological evidence for this?
I said Classical Arabic. Fa?ida does not mean interest in classical Arabic, it means ?profit, advantage, benefit, or good which God bestows upon a man, and which he gains or acquires, and which he produces.? (it is actually a sick joke that the word fa?ida is used for interest nowadays). Pg. 254, third column, halfway down.http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume6/00000254.pdf
So given that ?Fa?ida? does not mean interest, what is the CLASSICAL ARABIC word for interest? I haven?t seen any word other than Al-Riba to mean interest in classical Arabic. If you know of a Classical Arabic word that means interest, then please bring forth your evidence. If you cannot, and you continue to claim that Al-Riba is not interest, then what you are saying is that there was no Classical Arabic word for interest! That is not believable, especially since the Arabs were in contact with the Jews and Christians, and that usury has been around for thousands of years, easily to the time of the ancient Greeks (moralist philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle condemned the practice).
Riba means an increase, an unjust increase in the Quranic context.
Yes, Riba means an increase over the principal sum lent. i.e. interest/usury
This IMHO can only apply in case of raising the prices of fundamental items required for human welfare like the food items are INCREASED by an amount so that the common people are hardly able to pay for even those anymore.
Let?s see some evidence from the Quran?s verses.
If you still claim "riba" is the "rent" on money lent, then youll have to define what is money for in today's world ANYTHING THAT HAS AN EXCHANGE VALUE IN THE MARKET maybe considered as money eg the huge DAX or other stock shares, gold, silver, gems, cars etc. Hence in your case for example it would be "riba" to charge a fixed amount for renting out a car. GOD Bless!
If rabbit tails are used as, and function as money, then they are money. If they are binary digits on a computer and function as money, then they are money. If they are gold and silver (which have been used for thousands of years as money), and they function as money, then they are money. I never limited money to paper currency. Money is an abstract concept.
So we need to look at the nature of money (from article posted)
1.) Money has no intrinsic utility. It cannot be utilized in direct fulfillment of human needs. It can only be used for acquiring some goods or services. A commodity, on the other hand, has intrinsic utility and can be utilized directly without exchanging it for some other thing.
2.) The commodities can be of different qualities while money has no quality except that it is a measure of value or a medium of exchange. Therefore, all the units of money of the same denomination, are hundred per cent equal to each other. An old and dirty note of $100 is the same as a brand new minted $100.
3.) In commodities, the transactions of sale and purchase are effected on an identified particular commodity. If someone has purchased a particular car by pin-pointing it, and the seller has agreed, then they deserve to receive the same car. The seller cannot compel him to take the delivery of another car, though of the same type or quality.
So, if cars are used AS MONEY, then yes, it would be ?riba? to charge a fixed amount for renting out a car. But cars aren?t used AS MONEY are they? There is an inherent quality, utility, and uniqueness about cars. They are a real commodity. So they are NOT money.
-
Peace Br. Sharp,
Commandment #9 If you speak then be Just (Adl) even if against a relative.
Br. David, one of the reasons I had mentioned the word "Adl" used in the verse against it's English counterpart was to reinforce the meaning of the word "Just" used in the translation. "Adl" literally means equity/justice. It is usually used to described the equitable attribute of a judgement between two parties, e.g. He dealt with "Adl" (equity/justice) between the two parties. This understanding is further supported by the second part of the commandment, "even if against a relative". In my post, I have used the words "just/truthful" for summarising, which I admit was presumptuous on my part. To speak with Truth (Huq) and to speak with Justice (Adl) are two different attributes of speech. I hope you are following what I am trying to infer here. If you feel that this is "conjecture" on my part, we can always question my understanding of the word "Adl" and "Huq" by referring the usage to the other brothers and sisters on the forum who are more well versed in Arabic, as well as the following Lexicon link for the word 'Adl'
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume5/00000259.pdf
In the context of 16106, One who believes in Allah does so only because he comes to know the Truth. When such a person utters disbelief under compulsion, he is simply not speaking with Truth (Huq), i.e. lieing, which is pardonable under the circumstances. However, on the other hand, he utters disbelieves after believing (i.e. knowing the Truth) under no compulsion, he breaks the covenant with God, i.e. Commandment #10.
Agreed.
Where did you get the literal meaning of Riba from?
I got the translation from the following
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000189.pdf
Why do you accept certain parts of the dictionary and reject other parts? (I?m not saying the dictionary is perfect, but what is your criteria?)
Interestingly, it says "it increased/augmented, said in terms of property". I, for the life of me, can't understand why people have just been limited Al-Riba to Money transactions then.
It says the following
It (a thing, T, S, Msb) increased, or augmented. (T, S, M, Msb, K.)
Said, in this sense, of property (Mgh or, said of property, It increased by usury. (M, TA.)The reason Al-Riba is limited to money transactions is because that is the way people do business now, however, Al-Riba was understood to be an addition over the principle of anything lent (usury/interest). So if I lend you 1 pound of wheat, and I expect 1.5 pounds of wheat in return, that was understood to be al-Riba. Please take a look at the same page, third column, halfway down, for a more detailed explanation of Riba.
Br. David. "Al-Riba is Interest" is well documented, you say. Where and by whom, may I ask? Perchance, would the source be somewhere outside the Book, from a period unseen (Ghaib)? Dangerously close to the realm of, how you say, "Hearsay" and "Conjecture", wouldn't you agree? Anyway, I read a couple of verses in the Book which I thought were pertinent, but I believe that you have quoted the sources of the claims somewhere down the post. I will mention them there. On to the next point.
Everyone takes sources of information from other than the Book. It is impossible not to. So the question becomes, what sources do you accept and what sources don?t you accept, and why. Now, since you use Lane?s Lexicon, you obviously trust it to some extent, as do I. And Lane?s (as well as other dictionaries) mention that al-Riba means interest/usury (for money matters). And when I substitute ?al-Riba? to mean interest in the verses of the Quran, they form a good, consistent, and coherent understanding. Taking a closer look at Lane?s I see this meaning of al-Riba = usury is attributed to at least the following sources the ?Mohkam.?, the ?Maghrib? of El-Mutarrizee, Taj el-Aroos, and the ?Misbah? of El-Feiyoomee. I have not checked to see where those sources derived this information from. Some of it could have been from the Hadith, as well as other sources. And I don?t know Arabic well enough to check-up on this information for myself. But if you are going to take the view that you don?t trust anything outside of the Quran, then you should at the very least be consistent, and that includes not accepting Lane?s definition of Riba as growth.
I should mention, I am beginning to consider that the practice of usury/interest may be explicity referred to when it is called ?Al-Riba? with the definite article, as opposed to just Riba (as in 3039) which may be the more generic case. I have seen a few translators make that distinction. It would be nice to have the opinion of someone knowledgeable in Arabic on this case. In such a case, it would bolster my argument that Al-Riba is something specific and not generic as you interpret.
What price discrimination is, is just one of the possible ways to wrongfully increase/grow one's wealth and property. Is the assertion that price discrimination is one of the causes of Al-Riba really that unreasonable, so as to be termed a "conjecture"? I thought it was a pretty "logical" progression that price discrimination increases profits of a business and wrongfully so because of its inequitable nature.
Yes, it is conjecture. Why is price discrimination unjust? Suppose I want to sell something wholesale to someone because they are my friend, and not charge them the usual rate. Does that warrant War from God and His Messenger? Suppose I want to sell something at a higher price to people with adequate funds, and charge less for poor people. That is also price discrimination. Or maybe I want to charge less for students and seniors. What if I choose to sell something cheaper to people who buy in volume? That is also price discrimination. What about the restaurant owner who charges less for kids? meals? The amount of food in a kids? meal is more than the price reflects (compared to an adult meal). That is price discrimination.
Br. David. Just read what you have written. The Book says that the people who support Riba say that Trade in like Al-Riba. But in reality what people who support interest do say is "Interest is like trade". Two very different assertions. Nobody I have ever heard, who defends interest has said that Trade is like interest. Doesn't this seem even a little bit odd to you.
Br. Sharp. I had already read this in the thread you pointed me to, and I don?t see your point. No, it doesn?t seem odd to me. First of all, that is an Arabic expression, and I am not knowledgeable enough/fluent in Arabic to discern if it makes any difference semantically. Just because it may seem odd in English, doesn?t mean it is odd in Arabic. In English when we want to justify something, we will often compare something bad to something good (i.e. the thing we wish to justify to the thing which is commonly held to be good). So, the only point you could be making is that the item mentioned first is the bad thing, and the item mentioned second is actually the good thing, and we have been confusing the two all along. Yet, this is clarified in the next sentence. Trade is lawful, ?al-Riba? is forbidden, so the change in order makes no difference. So, frankly, I really don?t see what point you are trying to make.
And adding an orphan's rightful property/wealth to one's own wealth is just one of the possible ways to wrongfully increase/grow one's wealth and property. Is that still so illogical an assertion?
It is not illogical to say that consuming the wealth of an orphan is wrong, but to make Al-Riba equivalent to such a practice is what I don?t agree with, and for which you have no evidence.
So, is that the criteria, then? Because it was so grave and serious that God and His messenger declared War, we just HAD to find a specific meaning for Al-Riba, even if we were unable to understand it from the Book and looked towards history, the unseen and opinions of other people.
No, that is not THE criteria, but it is an argument, along with other lines of evidence, to point to such an understanding.
Are you actually implying that the Book, which claims to be a complete guidance and an explanation of all things for a believer, would not have an explanation within itself about what Al-Riba actually is? Oh boy, we are a long way from home. The Book's verses confirm each other, that is the beauty of it and why it is the complete guidance. Whatever I have tried to allude to is from the Book and the Book alone. I don't want to attribute man-made opinions to the Book that since interest is apparently bad for the economy as it increases the wealth of the rich making them richer and poor poorer, it has to have been forbidden and thus, has to be Al-Riba. You said that I was being subjective when I was trying to look for the understanding of Al-Riba from within the Book? Honestly, considering that we hold the Book as THE objective Truth (Al-Huq), how is what you are alluding to any more objective and unbiased? Am I implying that the rich should keep on getting richer? No, because with wealth, God has attached many responsibilities, which include spending in the way of God, spending in charity, avoiding greed and wrongful sources of wealth etc.
Br. Sharp. I don?t think you are being reasonable in this regard. Yes, the verses confirm each other. That is why we have to look at all verses that discuss a subject to come to an understanding. And yes, through the usage, we can come to better understand the meaning of the words, and also check to see if it is consistent to the dictionary definition. You are correct that the Quran is ?al-Haq?, but I think your expectations for the Quran are unreasonable. The Quran is not a dictionary. The Quran was revealed in a language understood by its recipients. It didn?t need to define every single word it used.
Quote from David on Yesterday at 061230 PM
It doesn?t mention anything about ?you having paid your dues to him in good measure?.Now that's just being stubborn. In ANY business transaction, there is a give and a take. The seller/lender would give something and the buyer/borrower would give him money for it. If seller/lender is waiting for the payment from the buyer/borrower, which the 2280 suggests, he must have given something to the buyer/borrower (which was due to him under the transaction) and is thus waiting for the buyer/borrower to fulfil his part of the consideration. Did it honestly need to be mentioned? When I said what I said, I was just stating the obvious.
I haven?t been called stubborn in quite a while. (believe it or not)
Why is it being stubborn? Either I misunderstood you, or I did understand you correctly, and you added stuff incorrectly. There is nothing mentioning ?you have paid your dues to him in good measure?. If it is talking about a pure loan, then there is no exchange of money for goods. When I loan money to someone, I don?t get anything in return, and I don?t take collateral. All I do is record it in writing. I trust the person to pay me back. So there is no give and take like you seemed to be suggesting in your paraphrasing of the verse, and to which I objected.
Just when I had established that 282 had nothing to do with Al-Riba or interest, you turn around and say that 2282 strengthens the argument that Al-Riba is interest? Talk about going in circles, eh? And what makes your argument "perfectly logical" and not "circular", when its context is about the rules of recording the debt transaction and does not at all address the terms of the transaction?
Br. Sharp. The reason what you said was circular logic is because this is what you were essentially (not exactly) claiming
1.) Al-Riba is not interest
2.) Therefore the verses 2275-282 do not mention interest.
3.) Since 282 discusses debt transaction, and interest is nowhere to be found, and al-Riba has been discussed, we can conclude that al-Riba is not interest.
That was what I was referring to. But when one looks at 2275-2283, you see that the entire thing is about debts, loans, interest. It has a common theme. That is my point. Therefore, the fact that al-Riba is mentioned in such a context where the writing of debts (and hence loans) are discussed, strengthens my argument. It doesn?t have to be mentioned in 282, because it was already mentioned several times in the adjacent verses. I really don?t know how else to explain it.
Yet, on the contrary, when orphans and giving full measure are discussed in more detail elsewhere in the Quran, we don?t find any mention of al-Riba.
You ask for a word for "interest" in "Classic Arabic". I thank Br. johnny_k for his input in this thread and will quote him for the requested definition
Quote from jonny_k on Today at 034343 AM
Now if you translate "interest" into Arabic the word is "FA'IDA" NOT "RIBA". Riba means an increase, an unjust increase in the Quranic context.I have responded to jonny_k with regards to this and you can view my response there.
On a side note, you believe that the Book is in Classic Arabic? The following thread is helpful in that regard
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14531.msg153036#msg153036
Thanks for the reference to that link. I will try to read it when I have time, God willing. I quickly skimmed it, and my point by Classical Arabic was not grammar structures and the like (btw, I am not taking a position on whether it is CA or not because I haven?t read it yet). What I meant was Old Arabic, or Arabic spoken and understood by the Arabs at the time of prophet Muhammad. (now you are being stubborn)
Did I expect an explanation in the Book for Al-Riba? Of course, I did. As I mentioned earlier this post, the Book is a complete guidance and an explanation of all things, so why wouldn't I expect an explanation of Al-Riba from the Book? The question is why didn't you?
I have already discussed this. Al-Quran is not a dictionary. Do you expect a definition within the Quran of every single word used in the Quran? That is not reasonable. If that is the case, then you shouldn?t consult any dictionaries for anything, including the meaning of root words. And yet you do consult dictionaries?I hope you see the inherent inconsistency.
Quote from David on Yesterday at 061230 PM
What practice is known for allowing ones wealth to double and redouble in its extreme form? Interest.How about the stock market? Market players have been known to become overnight millionaires. Talk about extreme, eh? No.... Well, then how about the Real Estate Market? Quadrupling, anyone? Interest isn't even nearly as extreme as these.
Was the stock market and the real estate market thriving in 600 A.D.???
I will reiterate that it is a weak point only, and only, because of its source. Did I say that stealing was Al-Riba? Let me check.... No. I just said that prohibition of stealing is mentioned in the 10 commandments. So is 'Al_Riba' = stealing? Br., I am sorry but I will have to go back to the equation I have mentioned earlier.
"Al-Riba" = Wrongful Increase/Growth in Wealth and Property
And adding to one's wealth by stealing other's, is just one of the possible ways to wrongfully increase/grow one's wealth and property. Is that still so illogical an assertion?
What is illogical is to say that ?al-Riba? referred to in verse 4161 is referring to the ?Thou shalt not steal? commandment in the Old Testament. So you are saying that in verse 4161, al-Riba = stealing. Elsewhere al-Riba means different things, but in that verse, that is what it is referring to?at least that is what you are claiming. But if that is the case, then why didn?t the Quran just say ?And for them stealing when they were told not to?. It would have been easier, and wouldn?t have required the C-word.
On to your quoted sources prohibition of interest. Now I would like to quote the verses from the Book that I mentioned which I found was of relevance to using the sources that you quoted above.
2120 & 121 - "Neither the Jews nor the Nazarenes will be pleased with you until you follow their beliefs. Say "The guidance is God's guidance." And if you follow their wishes after the knowledge that has come to you, then there is none who can help or protect you against God. Those to whom We have given the Scripture and they recite it as it truthfully deserves to be recited; they believe in it. As for those who disbelieve in it, they are the losers."
Consider this verse with verse 160 of Chapter 4
4160 - "Because of the wickedness from those who are Jews, We made forbidden to them the good things that had been lawful to them; and for their deterring many from the path of God."
Now we know from 4160 that God prohibited some things for the Jews which were permissible before for them. Why? Because of their wickedness and evil practices. What was the use of prohibiting them? Because these things were the means through which they practiced their wickedness and prohibiting them would curtail their wickedness.
What about 2120 and 2121? When you go to them with what is revealed to you, The Jews, as well as the Nazarenes, will say that you should follow their beliefs. What you have just quoted above are their beliefs. Whether they practice is or not is irrelevant. But they believe that interest is forbidden. And we are told not to follow their beliefs. That is enough for me.
First, I didn?t say, because it is in the Bible (OT and NT), then we should follow it too. My understanding that Al-Riba is interest comes from all the verses in the Quran. Therefore, what I was pointing to was that the Quran says the Jews were forbidden from taking al-Riba. So, it is not unreasonable to assume that whatever al-Riba is, then the prohibition for it would be in the Bible. Furthermore, it is not unreasonable to assume that the Jews? breaking of this commandment was well-known, given that the Quran brings up the matter. If no one was aware of it, then it wouldn?t be as useful to bring it up, because it wouldn?t resonate with anyone.
And we see that it is mentioned several times in the OT that the Jews should not take interest (for them consuming al-Riba when they were told not to), and yet they were well-known for breaking that commandment.Second, they are told not to kill and not to commit adultery. That is their beliefs. Should we not follow those beliefs? Is that enough for you?
And don?t say we are also told not to do that, to which I would argue, we are also told not to consume al-Riba/interest.Third, the word being used is ?Millat?, it is not referring to their Scriptures. Look at 2121, it is referring to their Scripture.
Fourth, the Quran talks in high regard with respect to previous Scripture. The Quran is said to ?authenticate what is present of the Scripture and supersede it?. So again, it is not unreasonable to assume that a commandment in the Bible is also contained in the Quran (and vice versa). Please note, I am not claiming that the Bible (OT and NT) is properly preserved.
543 And how can they make you their judge when they have the Torah, in which is God?s judgment; then they turn away after that. Those are not believers.
544 We have sent down the Torah, in it is guidance and a light; the prophets who have surrendered judged with it for those who are Jews, as well as the Rabbis, and the Priests, for what they were entrusted of God?s Scripture, and they were witness over. So do not fear the people but fear Me; and do not purchase with My revelations a cheap price. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the rejecters.
545 And We have decreed for them in it that a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and wounds to be similar; and whoever remits anything of it, then it will cancel sins for him. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.
546 And We sent in their footsteps Jesus the son of Mary, authenticating what was present with him of the Torah. And We gave him the Injeel, in it is guidance and light, and to authenticate what is present with him of the Torah, and a guidance and lesson for the righteous.
547 And let the people of the Injeel judge with what God has sent down in it. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the vile ones.
548 And We have sent down to you the Scripture with truth, authenticating what is present of the Scripture and superseding it. So judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made laws, and a structure; and had God willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He tests you with what He has given you; so strive to do good. To God you will return all of you, and He will inform you regarding that in which you dispute.
549 And judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their wishes, and beware lest they divert you away from some of what God has sent down to you. If they turn away, then know that God wants to inflict them with some of their sins; and most of the people are corrupt.
550 Is it the judgment of the days of ignorance that they seek? Who is better than God as a judge for a people that comprehend?For argument's sake, let's assume that interest actually was forbidden to them by God. I know that I am in the C-word territory now and will be bashed all over the place for what I am about to write but is it so difficult to imagine that one of the "good" things that were forbidden to the Jews as mentioned in 4160 could have been interest because it was a means from which they conducted wickedness, practiced Al-Riba, and consumed other people's properties with unjust means (Ba'atil) - 4161?
I don?t understand what you are trying to say here.
4160 Because of the wickedness from those who are Jews, We made forbidden to them the good things that were lawful to them; and for their deterring many from the path of God.
4161 And for them taking financial interest when they were told not to, and for them consuming peoples money unjustly. We have prepared for the disbelievers amongst them a painful retribution.
This is how I see 4160-161, with the verses slightly rearranged.Because of the wickedness from those who are Jews, and for their deterring many from the path of God, And for them taking financial interest (al-Riba) when they were told not to, and for them consuming peoples money unjustly, We made forbidden to them the good things that were lawful to them. We have prepared for the disbelievers amongst them a painful retribution.
In other words, it is not saying that al-Riba is a good thing that was forbidden to them. It is saying they did all these bad things deterring people from God?s path, taking al-Riba when they were told not to, consuming people?s money unjustly. And because of this, they were forbidden good things that were lawful to them as a punishment. The good things that were made forbidden are not mentioned.
con't
-
And here I thought I was the only one who was paranoid. If it was my intent to look at the verses separately, I wouldn't have quoted all of them one after the other and discussed them at the same time. But let's see how "consistent" and "coherent" its understanding becomes when the verses are laid end-to-end.
It is not paranoia. I am just saying that you treated each verse separately, instead of taking the 2275-2282 AS A WHOLE. That is how you are able to take Al-Riba in 2275 to mean price discrimination, and yet, a couple of verses later, Al-Riba is something completely different. That is my problem with your analysis. You are taking verses out of context. I am not claiming that you are doing it in a malicious way, but just that your methodology is flawed. Al-Riba cannot be something specific in one verse (price discrimination), and then magically transform into being something completely general in the very next verse (a wrongful addition to wealth).
Br. David, your first sentence, as you so eloquently put it in my case, "fails your definition of 'Al-Riba'". Like you said, people claim that interest is the same as trade. BUT the verse says the peope who consume Al-Riba say that trade is the same as Al-Riba, NOT Al-Riba is the same as trade. So, if we place interest in just the first verse, we get "People who consume 'interest' say that trade is like 'interest'". But people don't say that, do they? They say interest is like trade. In the verse from the Book, "Trade" is the Subject, but in the people's claims, "Interest" is the Subject. So the verse can't be talking about the interest that people are talking about. It effectively breaks down all the "logic", "coherence", "consistency", and "history" that is claimed.
No it doesn?t. See my previous response to this topic.
Since we are playing dictionary here, let's see what the definition of money is
"Money is any token or other object that functions as a medium of exchange that is socially and legally accepted in payment for goods and services and in settlement of debts. Money also serves as a standard of value for measuring the relative worth of different goods and services and as a store of value." (Source Wikipedia)
I wasn?t playing dictionary. I didn?t consult a dictionary when I wrote what I did. I was just explaining the difference between money and normal commodities. But thanks for the definition. It is more complete than what I wrote.
What about the other two functions
(1) A store of value
(2) A measure of good and services.So, If I receive cash for something I sell, the cash I have is not an asset? Does it not represent my holdings, my assets? Is it not just another form, a more liquid one, of my assets? If so, it is as much of an asset capable of renting as any other asset.
No, it is not an asset capable of renting (and expecting an increase) as any other asset. Please see my response to jonny_k about the nature of money.
I agree that increase in money supply is a major cause of inflation and not scarcity. But to say the interest is a contributor to inflation is very presumptuous. In fact, Inflation is the main protagonist which causes interest rates to increase and not the other way around.
Here is the reason why interest causes inflation
The majority of money is created as debt, which has interest attached to it. During the money creation process, the interest is not created. So in order to pay off the interest, additional money must be borrowed. Since the full debt cannot be serviced, the interest keeps growing year after year, which means additional money must be borrowed to pay down the debt, which means additional money must be created. That additional borrowed money itself has interest attached to it, and on and on in a vicious cycle. More money = inflation.
Interest doesn't reflect reality, but the scenario you painted does? Mildly speaking, it is a very impractical and unworkable system.
Why is it impractical and unworkable? You have to prove it. (There are knowledgable economists who hold the same position I am advocating.)
I have some money. Why should I lend it to anyone when I can, as you said, invest it to increase my wealth? Now you might say that what about people with excess and idle money, which they don't need for the moment? The following verse tells us the answer to that question
2219 - "They ask you about intoxicants and gambling. Say "In them is great harm, and a benefit for mankind; but their harm is greater than their benefit." And they ask you how much are they to give, Say "The excess over expense." It is thus that God clarifies for you the revelations that you may think."
So, summarily, there are two ways in which a person can spend his wealth. To spend it for himself and spend in the way of God in the manner indicated in the above verse.
It says ?The excess? NOT ?The excess over expense.? Where did you get that translation from?
(2) "So those who want to increase their wealth would be investing their money through partnerships, which comes with a risk of loss."
Let's take an example. I come across some inheritance and I have no business sense. I want to invest my money but I don't know where to invest it. I enter a partnership with some friends who have a pretty good know-how of the construction business. They don't have the money but I do. So they propose that with my money and their business know-how, they may be able to set-up and run a profitable business venture. I'm a little skeptical, because I am concerned about the losses. They assure me that initially there may be losses but they show me that the construction industry is booming and will continue to boom, so there is a good chance that we will eventually be raking in loads of profits. I agree and So a company is set-up with my money and their know-how. We start off with some losses and upon questioning my partners about them, they assure me, it is just the initial stages. I just need to be patient. Some time later, they come to me and say that they have won a major contract and are in need of a little more money to successfully carry it out. I am hesitant but they are convincing. They land the contract and soon start quoting "unexpected" expenses in relation to the contract. At the end of the contract, they say that it was a net loss because of those expenses, but assure me that there is nothing to worry about, as we have penetrated the market and should be raking in the dough soon. I am convinced. This cycle continues until I have no more spare money. When they hear that, they look at each other and say that in that case we can't go on and will have to wind up the Company. They declare bankruptcy and that's that. I am flabbergasted that I have lost all my money for nothing and my "partners" have lost nothing.
Do you think, that after that incident, anyone will invest their money EVER again? Not me, sorry. So, if there is no investment in the economy from people with money but no business know-how, that economy is going to prosper? Highly unlikely.
Businesses fail all the time, and yet people still invest. People lose money in stocks all the time, and yet there is no shortage of people buying stocks. There are also ?venture capitalists? and ?Angel investors?.
The only thing your story indicated was that (the presumably fictitious) you are not a risk-taker. Some people are, some people aren?t. The same mentality holds true for anything that involves risk. Are you going to avoid women altogether because a single girl broke your heart? Are you going to never ride a bicycle again because you fell down and broke your arm?So tell me, how do you get me to invest in the economy for the "prosperity of humanity", with a fear and a risk that I will lose my wealth?
Well, don?t invest in businesses if you aren?t a risk taker. Give all of your extra money to charity if you wish, it will be good for your soul. Or give some of it to charity and spend the rest into the economy on goods and services that will help humanity prosper and stimulate the economy by allowing for the free-flow of money. Or use it as a learning experience, be a little wiser, and don?t invest your entire inheritance on a single business venture. Diversify your portfolio. Buy shares in different companies, give some to charity, and spend some into the economy on goods and services.
In the end, I would say, that although I would have loved to discuss the articles that you posted from James Robertson & Co. with you, but it would be futile because just as they are proponents of an interest-free economy, they are proponents of interest-based economy as well. Further, all of those writings which try to simulate an interest-free economy are heavily based on assumptions and the C-word. The discussion would end up as matters of opinion and different points of view. You can say at this point that consider the present economic system has failed so miserably, therefore, the interest-free economy must be the way out. I'd say that the current economy has failed because some have taken an unjust advantage of the system and just as they have taken advantage of this system, they will take advantage of the next system that comes along, and we will be back to square one.
Agree to disagree.
What will prevent such a failure the economy will be the upheld priniciples of equity and fairness as described in the Book.
Yes, like getting rid of usury/interest. )
peace
-
Peace "David",
Peace jonny_k,
Where did you get ?Fa?ida? = interest? Do you have any archaeological evidence for this?
I said Classical Arabic. Fa?ida does not mean interest in classical Arabic, it means ?profit, advantage, benefit, or good which God bestows upon a man, and which he gains or acquires, and which he produces.? (it is actually a sick joke that the word fa?ida is used for interest nowadays). Pg. 254, third column, halfway down.http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume6/00000254.pdf
]
JK- When a bank rents out a currency iisnt it seeking profit/advantage/benefit so that is almost the same aint it?
So given that ?Fa?ida? does not mean interest, what is the CLASSICAL ARABIC word for interest? I haven?t seen any word other than Al-Riba to mean interest in classical Arabic. If you know of a Classical Arabic word that means interest, then please bring forth your evidence. If you cannot, and you continue to claim that Al-Riba is not interest, then what you are saying is that there was no Classical Arabic word for interest! That is not believable, especially since the Arabs were in contact with the Jews and Christians, and that usury has been around for thousands of years, easily to the time of the ancient Greeks (moralist philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle condemned the practice).
Yes, Riba means an increase over the principal sum lent. i.e. interest/usury
JK- The 2nd phrase is implied and not part of the meaning of ?riba?.
Let?s see some evidence from the Quran?s verses.
If rabbit tails are used as, and function as money, then they are money. If they are binary digits on a computer and function as money, then they are money. If they are gold and silver (which have been used for thousands of years as money), and they function as money, then they are money. I never limited money to paper currency. Money is an abstract concept.
JK- So there we have it and since anything which has exchange value in the market is money, we cannot rent out even a car according to your definition since it would be ?riba?.
So we need to look at the nature of money (from article posted)
1.) Money has no intrinsic utility. It cannot be utilized in direct fulfillment of human needs. It can only be used for acquiring some goods or services. A commodity, on the other hand, has intrinsic utility and can be utilized directly without exchanging it for some other thing.
2.) The commodities can be of different qualities while money has no quality except that it is a measure of value or a medium of exchange. Therefore, all the units of money of the same denomination, are hundred per cent equal to each other. An old and dirty note of $100 is the same as a brand new minted $100.
3.) In commodities, the transactions of sale and purchase are effected on an identified particular commodity. If someone has purchased a particular car by pin-pointing it, and the seller has agreed, then they deserve to receive the same car. The seller cannot compel him to take the delivery of another car, though of the same type or quality.
So, if cars are used AS MONEY, then yes, it would be ?riba? to charge a fixed amount for renting out a car. But cars aren?t used AS MONEY are they? There is an inherent quality, utility, and uniqueness about cars. They are a real commodity. So they are NOT money.
JK- Currencies are also considered commodities in today?s world and so are gold, silver etc. This is what ive been trying to make clear to you. Your claim that a fresh $100 bill = an old $100 bill is irrelevant since theres no difference in use btw an old and a new note. Gold was and is still used in many cases to represent the value of other goods BUT here a scratched or dirty unit of gold could be of less value than another shiny kg because its purity could be in doubt. With a dollar bill there are certain marks by which it is identified whether its true or fake so it is much more easy there. The main point is that a $100 bill is NOT always the same with respect to other currencies i.e. it can increase or decrease, and thus becomes a tradable commodity wrt those. GOD Bless!