The Big Step Revisited

A new podcast on The Big Step and related topics, with Brother Abdullah Yousef, is now available.

Please click here to listen to the podcast.

The Big Step (as well as all other Lulu print products) has a 15% discount this week, through July 1. Use the code HUSTLE15

Is Ribā the Same Now as It Was Then?

An extract from the book The Great Event Has Occurred: Usury Has Become Permissible by Imam Muḥammad at-Tāwīl, may Allah have mercy on him

The first of these justifications is that bank transactions are a modern form of transaction that was completely unknown to previous fuqahāʾ, as some people say.

The purpose of such a statement is to take the topic out of the purview of the texts and place it within the scope of juridical reasoning (ijtihād), so that it is easy to say that it is permissible in the name of ijtihād, making matters easier and reviving the faith by bringing it up to date.

It is a statement that is inaccurate and incorrect, for indeed this transaction was known before the advent of Islam. The only thing that is new is the outward form and the name, i.e. the building and the employees inside, the title “bank” written on the front and the word “interest” or “return” or “rate” used to cover the usury. As for the essence, the subject matter that takes place inside the building, it is the borrowing of cash and lending it with a surplus. It was known in the Age of Ignorance (al-Jāhiliyyah) before the advent of Islam. Imam Abū Bakr ar-Rāzī al-Jaṣṣāṣ says in his Qurʾānic commentary Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, ‘the usury that the Arabs knew and practiced was the lending of dirhams and dinars for a specified period of time with a surplus added to the amount borrowed according to what both parties agree upon.’^[1] As-Suddī says regarding the reason behind the revelation of the Exalted’s statement:

)يَٰٓأَيُّهَا اَ۬لذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ اُ۪تَّقُواْ اُ۬للَّهَ وَذَرُواْ مَا بَقِيَ مِنَ اَ۬لرِّبَوٰٓاْ إِن كُنتُم مُّومِنِينَۖ( 

“You who believe! Have taqwā of Allah and forgo any remaining usury if you are believers” [al-Baqarah 2:278],

‘This was revealed with regards to al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿAbdul Muṭṭalib and Khālid ibn Walīd. They were partners in al-Jāhiliyyah and they would lend money usuriously. Islam came and the two of them had vast wealth from usury, so Allah sent down this verse.’^[2] The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, {Indeed, every usury from the usury of al-Jāhiliyyah has been abolished, and the first usury that I abolish is the usury of al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿAbdul Muṭṭalib.}^[3] Ibn Ḥajar said, ‘A person in al-Jāhiliyyah would give money to someone else for a specified period of time on the basis that every month he would take a certain amount while the principal remained as it was. When the time had passed he would reclaim the principal from him and if he was unable to pay it, extra time would be granted and there would be more monthly payments.’^[4] Fakhr ad-Dīn ar-Rāzī said, ‘As for the usury of credit, it is a matter that was well-known and customary in al-Jāhiliyyah. They would give money on the basis that every month they would take a specific amount while the principal remained unchanged. When the specified time had passed, they would reclaim the principal from the borrower. If he was unable to pay it, extra time would be granted and there would be more monthly payments.’^[5] This is the usury that they traded in al-Jāhiliyyah and it is exactly the same as bank transactions. The customer gives his money to the bank for periods of time that are agreed upon and every month he claims set amounts while the principal remains unchanged. 

Sheikh Kanūn said, ‘This kind is well-known amongst people today and it happens frequently’.^[6]

Likewise, giving money to someone who is going to invest it for a share of the profit, or the worker getting a fixed fee while all the profit goes to the owner of the money, this was also known and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, went out and traded with Khadījah’s money, may Allah be pleased with her, before he married her.^[7]

Likewise, depositing money in a current account was also known to the Muslims early on, for az-Zubayr ibn al-ʿAwwām, may Allah be pleased with him, would have people come to him with monetary deposits for him to safekeep on their behalf. He refused to accept them unless it was on the condition that they be a debt that he was liable for, for fear that he would lose them, as has been narrated by al-Bukhārī.^[8]

It is thus apparent that the statement that bank transactions are a new sort of transaction that was hitherto unknown is incorrect, because what is relevant is the substance and not the form, and matters are according to their objectives, as the scholars of jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh) say. Yes, after the coming of Islam, lending with a surplus was declared unlawful, and muḍārabah^[9] with a fixed share hid these transactions from the Islamic society that was adhering to Allah’s Revealed Law. This was until they emerged with the appearance of colonialism and adopted new names that allowed them to deceive some people and put doubts in the minds of others who were incapable of penetrating their depths and knowing their reality, which is that it is undoubtedly lending and borrowing with a surplus and that it is the very same usury that Allah and His Messenger declared unlawful and cursed the one who consumes it, the one who feeds it, the one who writes it down, the one who witnesses it, the one who assists in it and the one who calls to it.

The second justification is that they say, ‘There is no clear text in the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, that declares this transaction unlawful.’

Like the one that precedes it, this statement is also inaccurate and incorrect for the following reasons:

First of all, it shows disavowal of scholarly consensus (ijmāʿ) and other sources of legislation and confines all legislation to the Book and the Sunnah. In fact, those who make this statement are not even convinced of implicit indications in both the Qurʾān and the Ḥadīth. This is ẓāhiriyyah that is more intransigent than the original ẓāhiriyyah,^[10] those rejected by the erudite scholars.

Secondly, we can say yes, there are clear texts in the Book and the Sunnah that forbid this transaction and declare it unlawful. As for the Book, there is the Exalted’s Statement:

 )وَأَحَلَّ اَ۬للَّهُ اُ۬لْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ اَ۬لرِّبَوٰاْۖ(

“But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury.” [al-Baqarah 2:275] There is also His statement:

)يَمْحَقُ اُ۬للَّهُ اُ۬لرِّبَوٰاْ(

“Allah obliterates usury.” [al-Baqarah 2:276]

There is also His statement:

)يَٰٓأَيُّهَا اَ۬لذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لَا تَاكُلُواْ اُ۬لرِّبَوٰٓاْ أَضْعَٰفاٗ مُّضَٰعَفَةٗۖ(

“You who believe! Do not feed on usury, multiplied and then remultiplied.” [Āl ʿImrān 3:130]

There is also His statement:

)اَ۬لذِينَ يَاكُلُونَ اَ۬لرِّبَوٰاْ لَا يَقُومُونَ إِلَّا كَمَا يَقُومُ اُ۬لذِے يَتَخَبَّطُهُ اُ۬لشَّيْطَٰنُ مِنَ اَ۬لْمَسِّۖ(

“Those who practise usury will not rise from the grave except as someone driven mad by Shayṭān’s touch” [al-Baqarah 2:275]

 

And there is His statement:

)اُ۪تَّقُواْ اُ۬للَّهَ وَذَرُواْ مَا بَقِيَ مِنَ اَ۬لرِّبَوٰٓاْ إِن كُنتُم مُّومِنِينَۖ( 

“Have taqwā of Allah and forego any remaining usury.” [al-Baqarah 2:278]

In the Arabic language, ribā means increase, and in the Revealed Law it means the increase on one of two things being exchanged without any compensation. There is no doubt that the bank pays one hundred and reclaims one hundred and ten, for example, when it is the lender, and it receives one hundred from the depositing customer and gives him back one hundred and ten when it is the lender, even if it only calls it a deposit.

And we observe the principles of jurisprudence, which state:

-       Singular nouns that have the definite article (al) indicate universal applicability.

-       The universal (al-ʿāmm) is understood to indicate universal applicability until there is something that makes it particular.

-       The universal indicating individuals is an indication of conformity, every individual therein bearing the same ruling in conformity, whether in affirmation or negation.

-       The indication of conformity is by way of something clearly articulated according to the scholars of jurisprudence.

-       The general indicating every individual from amongst its individuals is a decisive indication according to the Ḥanafīs, and it has the rank of the specific (al-khāṣṣ) in its indication of its individuals.

 

What we gather from all of this is that the verses of usury indicate that bank interest is unlawful and they indicate it clearly because they comprise it decisively, because it is the increase on one of two things being exchanged without any compensation, and thus it is included within the generality of usury. This is why the scholars say, ‘the universal indicates the ruling in general and in detail as long as it is not made particular by some evidence.’ 

An example of this is very often found in the ḥadīths about usury, such as the ḥadīth: ‘The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, cursed the one who consumes usury, the one who feeds it, the one who writes it down and the one who witnesses it.’^[11]

And there is the ḥadīth: {Beware of the sins that are not forgiven; taking something secretly, for whoever takes something secretly brings it on the Day of Standing, and the consumer of usury, for whoever consumes usury is resurrected on the Day of Standing as a fumbling madman.}^[12]

And there is the ḥadīth: {Usury is ninety-nine doors, the least of which is like a man approaching his mother}^[13] and the ḥadīth: {Usury is seventy parts, the least of which is a man having sex with his mother.}^[14] There are others and they also comprise bank interest, as is indicated by conformity, and clearly so. If we observe the abovementioned principles of jurisprudence, are these people going to wait until they find in the Qurʾān and the Sunnah the expression, ‘bank interest is unlawful’ before they become convinced that the Qurʾān and Sunnah contain a clear text declaring it unlawful?

Is not the aforementioned from al-Jaṣṣāṣ, as-Suddī and others sufficient in proving that usury was known to the Arabs and that it is lending with a surplus, and that the Exalted’s statement:

)يَٰٓأَيُّهَا اَ۬لذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ اُ۪تَّقُواْ اُ۬للَّهَ وَذَرُواْ مَا بَقِيَ مِنَ اَ۬لرِّبَوٰٓاْ إِن كُنتُم مُّومِنِينَۖ( 

“You who believe! Have taqwā of Allah and forgo any remaining usury” [al-Baqarah 2:278] came down regarding lending with a surplus, and that the jurisprudential principle that the illustration of the reason (sabab) makes it decisively general and cannot be made particular through juridical reasoning (ijtihād), as is stated by the scholars of jurisprudence? This means that the lending with a surplus that is practised by the bank, in both giving and taking, in the name of interest or return or whatever else, is the same usury that is commanded to be abandoned in this verse, and it is decisively and definitely included and comprised therein. Also, the verse is a clear text declaring it unlawful. So, after this, is it valid to say that the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, contain no clear text declaring bank interest unlawful?

 

---

^[1] Aḥkām al-Qurʾān by al-Jaṣṣāṣ, 1/1465

^[2] Asbāb an-Nuzūl.

^[3] Ibid, al-Wāḥidī, p.59.

^[4] See Ḥāshiyah Kanūn ʿalā ar-Rahūnī 5/92.

^[5] At-Tafsīr al-Kabīr by al-Fakhr ar-Rāzī.

^[6] Ḥāshiyah Kanūn ʿalā ar-Rahūnī 5/92.

^[7] See Sīrat Ibn Hishām 1/203.

^[8] Al-Fatḥ 6/228.

^[9] (tn): Referred to in English as a sleeping partnership, this is an agreement in which one party provides the capital while the other does all the work and the profits are shared between the two based on whatever they agree upon. It is also called qirāḍ in Arabic.

^[10] (tn): i.e. the literalists, a school of law founded by Dāwūd az-Ẓāhirī (d.270 AH) and later died out due its rigid literalism.

^[11] Related by Abū Dāwūd 3/244.

^[12] Related by at-Ṭabarānī, see Ḥāshiyat Kanūn ʿalā ar-Rahūnī 5/93.

^[13] Al-Jāmiʿ li Aḥkām al-Qurʾān 3/236.

^[14] Related by Ibn Mājah and al-Ḥākim, see Mukhtaṣar Ibn Kathīr 1/247.

Investing Your Faith

From the book The Big Step: How to Survive Islam in the Anglosphere

Before continuing, I want to make it clear that what I’ve said and what I’m about to say is not meant to gainsay whatever benefit converts from that era have brought to Muslims in the Anglosphere and elsewhere. Rather, and this will be the ultimate conclusion of this book, we are seeking to establish where final authority in Islam lies, which is where every Muslim should invest his faith. There are plenty of Muslims who have knowledge, who can teach, who can translate, who can give a good lecture, but they are not worthy of being invested in wholeheartedly, and this is for two main reasons. The first is that they have not reached a level of knowledge in which they can be called an authority. The second is that they are still alive.

On my blog and in the introduction to my translation of Imam an-Nawawī’s Adāb al-ʿĀlim wa al-Mutaʿallim wa al-Muftī wa al-Mustaftī,[1] al-Hajj Abū Jaʿfar al-Ḥanbalī explains how authority in Islam works and how authorities are identified,[2] but we want to focus on the idea of investing one’s faith.

Think of your faith as the most precious thing you have, similar to your life’s savings. If you lose it, you will be in serious trouble. How are you going to store your life’s savings? Would you store them in Pakistani rupees, Euros, American dollars? The first currency is weak and unstable, so no. The Euro is a disaster waiting to happen, and has been that way ever since it was introduced. The American dollar is the world’s reserve currency, but how long is that going to last? No paper currency remains the reserve currency forever. Is there anything else, any other monetary form?

What about gold? The value of gold is stable. It’s not subject to inflation unless there is a highly rare mass discovery. Gold has also stood the test of time. It has been a safe haven for rulers, governments, wealthy elites and others for millennia. Gold would clearly be the best option.

What does it mean to invest your faith in gold? For us, gold is the scholars who have stood the test of time and whose value has never decreased. Think of someone like Imam an-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy on him, whose book is mentioned above. This is a scholar of remarkable authority. His books, especially in the sciences of fiqh and ḥadīth, continue to be studied and read to this day. His Lord called him home well over 700 years ago, which means that we know everything we are going to know about him and there are no surprises lurking in ambush.

If you invest your faith in Imam an-Nawawī and people like him, people who have stood the test of time and whose value has never decreased, your faith will be safe. If you turn to people like this for answers to your questions, for advice in difficult times, for guidance in the face of falsehood, you will be well-served, and your faith will be safe. It is these people that you need to look at and tell yourself, ‘These are the people bearing Islam. Islam is with these people.’

When it comes to studying and learning from people who are alive, you want to be with those people who have saved the gold. You want to follow the living people who, in turn, follow the likes of Imam an-Nawawī in word, creed and deed. Living people like this are akin to a strong paper currency, and a strong paper currency is backed up by gold. They become gold themselves after they have left this world and their works and legacy have stood the test of time. Following people like this and benefitting from them is similar to having gold in one’s vault while using cash for one’s day to day transactions. No matter what happens to the cash, the gold is always there, safe and sound, ready to back you up.

In short, we judge the living by the dead.

The dangers of investing your faith entirely in living people, especially those who are not backed up by gold, should now be clear to you. If you look at a living person, or a group of living people, and tell yourself, ‘These are the people bearing Islam. Islam is with these people’, you are investing your life savings in paper currencies. Some are stronger than others, that’s true, but none of them are gold, and they can he hyperinflated until they are worthless. If you invest your faith in some Sufi shaykh or hippie convert or cult or political organisation, what will happen when that individual or organisation disappoints you? What will happen to your faith when they drastically change course or can no longer meet your needs? You will lose your faith, plain and simple.

---

[1] This translation has now been published: http://www.ibfim.com/img/kmc/2017-publications/007.jpg (Accessed Sept 26, 2017)

[2] http://mahdinnm.blogspot.com/2016/02/authority-in-islam.html (Accessed Nov 28,2016)

 

The Big Step: How to Survive Islam in the Anglosphere (and all other Lulu print products) are available with a 15% discount through December 3, 2021. Please use the discount code THANKS15.

The Mass Society vs. The Network Society

 A new discussion with Brother Imran Iskander Gani

Brother Imran and I discuss the difference between the mass society and the network society and how it affects Muslims, based on Chapter 6 of The Big Step. Please click here if the video does not show on your phone or tablet.

Further reading and podcasts:

Western Mass Education (Podcast: Anglosphere Schooling, based on Dumbing us Down by John Taylor Gatto) 

Madness is Rare in Individuals (Podcast: Book Review: The True Believer by Eric Hoffer)

An Utter Waste of Time and Money (a review of How to Watch TV News by Neil Postman and Steve Powers)

What Is True Knowledge?

 By Imam Muhammad Saeed Ramadan al-Bouti, may Allah have mercy on him

The book is available from the following online retailers:

Wondrous Islam (Canada)

Nawa Books (Singapore)

Madani Propagation (United Kingdom)

More details can be found here, and with Allah alone is every success.

Introduction to the book The Approach to Human Civilization In The Qur'an

Al-Hajj Abu Ja'far al-Hanbali joins me to talk about Imam al-Bouti, his life, his rank, and his works. Alhamdulilah, the book is now available in North America.

More details can be found here.

And with Allah alone is every success.

Jurisdiction and Borders

What makes a country?

This interview with the late Sir Roger Scruton sheds a lot of light on why Brexit is happening, and how the Anglosphere is different from European countries, but the point he makes at 34:45 is what stands out.

He defines his country as the land "where our jurisdiction operates". He then explains that the national idea is that "territorial jurisdiction" is what must be defended against religious or quasi-religious jurisdictions, such as the Universal Doctrine of Human Rights or indeed the Revealed Law. He says the law is defined by the land in which it operates. There's nothing "blood and soil" about the matter. 

Imam Muhammad Saeed Ramadan al-Bouti, may Allah have mercy on him, when explaining how al-Madinah was different to Makkah when the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, settled there, boiled it down to three things:

• Al-Madinah was the first territory that Muslims ruled over, i.e. they had "territorial jurisdiction"
• There was a a system of governance in place, with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, as the ruler
• There were people residing in that territory

As the Imam explains,  this is why martial combat (i.e. jihad) was legislated in al-Madinah; once in al-Madinah, the Muslims had something to defend and fight for. This is the first Dar al-Islam. 

The Muslims in Makkah had none of these, and thus Allah did not legislate martial combat during that period.

I do not know how much Sir Roger Scruton knew about Islam or the Revealed Law, but he does seem to understand that what unites people, at the most fundamental level, is shared beliefs and ideas. An ummah consists of people who share the same beliefs and ideas, e.g. Muslims, Jews, Christians, Americans, Pakistanis etc. It is not blood and lineage (e.g. a qawm, such the Arabs, the English, the Punjabis etc.) or soil and birthplace. The Muslims gathered under one territorial jurisdiction in al-Madinah because they believed in Allah in His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, not because they had all been born in al-Madinah (rather, some were born there and other were migrants) or because they had familial links to the city. At the same time, there were hypocrites and disbelievers that were very much native to the city and were vehemently hostile to new Muslim governance. It is not blood and soil that unites people.

And Allah the Exalted knows best.

How to Live a Saintly Life: The Life and Times of Abu Umar al-Maqdisi

A book review and discussion

The book is available here
This book is a follow-up to A Word of Advice

Related podcast: What Is Tasawwuf?

Further reading: The 15th of Sha'ban