Pages

Saturday, 14 November 2020

HOW MUCH INTEREST CONSTITUTES RIBA?





HOW MUCH INTEREST CONSTITUTES RIBA?

In the very last revelation of the Qur’an (2:273) Allah the Most High, addressed all those who still had riba due to them (from loans extended prior to the prohibition of riba) and ordered them to give it up (or write it off). In the event that such people were to heed the divine command and make repentance (tauba) then, Allah the Most High, declared they would be entitled to the return of only the principal sum which had been lent. Allah the Most High, did not say that they would be entitled to the return of the principal sum pins a service charge or plus a reasonable amount of interest.

Thus it matters not whether interest is small or large (1% or 25%), it would still be riba, and would still be prohibited. In this respect riba is like alcoholic beverages. Whether the glass contains, a small drink of whiskey or whether you were offered a large drink, it makes no difference, it would still be prohibited in Islam.

Muslims are faced, however with the curious phenomenon in today's world of Islam, if so-called Islamic scholars who are unable to grasp the simple fact that "interest" in modern banking is riba! Christians are doubtless already accustomed to that. Yet it should be as plain as daylight to anyone who has studied the explanatory statements of the Prophet (s). And such so-called scholars should recall that Allah the Most High, sent Prophet Muhammad (s) and not them, nor the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA), to leach the meaning of the Qur’an. (SAMA invests all the Saudi petrodollars in riba investments in western banks controlled by forces hostile to Islam).

Abdullah Yusuf Ali, whose otherwise brilliant English translation and commentary of the Qur’an has won widespread popularity, openly confesses that he disagrees with the ulama (i.e_ religious scholars), ancient and modern, in respect of their definition of riba: “The definition I would accept would be: undue profit made, not in the way of legitimate trade, out of loans of gold and silver, and necessary articles of food, such as wheat, barley, dates and salt (according.to the list mentioned by the Holy Apostle himself). My definition would include profiteering of all kinds, but would exclude economic credit, the creature of modern banking and finance.”

Abdullah Yusuf Ali (may Allah have mercy on him) is most certainly in grave error. The Qur’an does describe one form of riba as undue increase, i.e. when the rate of interest is such that interest payments doubles and triples the principal sum borrowed. (Qur’an, 3:130). But riba was never defined as undue profit, neither in the Qur’an nor by the Prophet (s). In fact riba even includes any material benefit whatsoever, over and above the capital sum lent, which a lender may derive from a borrower. Banks do not lend money for blessings. Nor do they charge interest for the purpose of recovering losses sustained through inflation. They do it for profit! And what enormous profits do they make! Thus economic credit. “the creature of modern banking” is most definitely riba, regardless of whether the interest-rate is high or low or compound or simple! Thus the Prophet said:

Anas ibn Malik reported that the Messenger of Allah said: If you give a man a loan and he were to offer you a meal do not eat it, because that is riba! - unless he used to invite you for meals prior to the loan, in which case you may eat. And again he said: If you give a man a loan and he offers you a ride on his animal, do not take it, because that is riba! - unless he used to offer you rides on his animal prior to the loan; in which case you may take it.
(Smart al-Bayhaqi)

Anas bin Malik also reported the Prophet as saying: If a man extends a loan to someone, he should not accept a gift (i.e. he should not accept a gift from the debtor while the loan is still outstanding but may do so after the loan has been repaid to him).
(Bukhari}

Abu Burdah ibn Abi Musa said: I came to Madinah and met Abdullah ibn Salaam (the Jewish Rabbi who accepted Islam) who said: You (now) live in a country where riba is rampant; hence if anyone owes you something and presents you with a load of hay or a load of barley or a rope of straw, do not accept it for it is riba.
(Bukhari)

Fadalah ibn Ubayd said that the Messenger of Allah said: The benefit derived from any loan is one of the different aspects of riba.
(Sutton al-Bayhaqi)

Abu Umamah said that the Prophet said: Whoever makes a recommendation for his brother and accepts a gift offered by him has entered riba through one of its large gates.
(Abu Daud and Ahmad)

To make matters- worse we also have the extraordinary blunder committed by Shaikh Muhammad Abduh, the Rector of Al-Azhar University, Cairo, who toured Europe in the late nineteenth century and then returned to Egypt to declare that in modem Europe he had found Islam, but no Muslims, while in Egypt he found Muslims, but do Islam. Malcolm X would never have made that mistake!

The Europe which Abduh visited was a Europe which had just experienced the French revolution. That event constituted the turning point in the transformation of Western European civilization from one based on faith in Christianity, to an essentially godless civilization.

In fact Europe which Abduh perceived as one which was based on Islam, was a Europe which had become the first target of evil forces created by Allah the Most High, (Qur’an:-113:2) and released by Allah the Most High, in the age of fitan. The Prophet (s) had described the last age before the end of the world as the age of fitan. Fitan is the plural of fitnah, which means: temptation, trial, charm, attractiveness, enchantment, captivation, fascination, enticement, infatuation, intrigue, sedition, riot, discord, dissension, civil strife. Those evil forces were yajooj, ma‘jooj and al-Masih al-Dajjal. The barrier which had been constructed by Dhul Qarnain to contained those evil forces had been destroyed by Allah the Most High, and the evil forces had been released. Their primary function was to employ oppression and deception in order to destroy everything which was not pure faith. (See my book: One Jama'ah - One Ameer: The Organization of a Muslim Community in the Age of Fitan).

The secularization of politics in Europe, which created the new secular democratic State, resulted in the declaration that sovereignty now resided with the State rather than Allah the Most High. And that was shirk! Indeed, the shirk was even more fundamentally based on the new philosophical foundation of the civilization. i.e. materialism. The definition of materialism was one which denied the existence of any reality beyond material reality. Shaikh Muhammad Abduh, the classically-educated Egyptian Islamic scholar, failed to see the new philosophical foundations of European modernity. He was deceived by Dajjal. He thus perceived the road to hell as the road to heaven. Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, on the other hand, the modem-educated Indian Islamic scholar, was not deceived.

Abduh appears to have been deceived by the superficial appearance of Truth. (i.e. Islam) at the foundation of modern secular European society. He did not perceive that the European economy was significantly altered in a direction away from Truth as a result of the French revolution. The Catholic Church in particular, which had waged a five hundred year Struggle against riba in Europe, had finally lost the war to secularism, and riba now began to emerge as the very foundation of the capitalist European economy. Abduh failed to see exploitation in the interest which formed the foundation of the European banking system. Since he did not notice it, he concluded that it was not them. That was his extraordinary blunder! He returned to Egypt and delivered his famous (or infamous) fatwa (juristic verdict) on the interest on savings accounts opened with the Egyptian Post Office. He declared that the ‘interest’ from those accounts was not riba!

Iqbal was not deceived by Dajjal. He recognized that Islamic civilization had deviated significantly from the path of Islam: but Islam - the Truth, was still there and could be restored. When he viewed modern European civilization on the other hand. Iqbal’s vision pierced beyond the external form of European ‘character’, ‘honesty’, ‘integrity’, ‘willingness to work hard for a specified good’, ‘good-natured behavior towards other humans’, ‘trustworthiness’, etc. Here is his verdict on the new Europe: The idealism of Europe never became a living factor in her life; and the result is a perverted ego seeking itself through mutually intolerant democracies whose sole Junction is to exploit the poor in the interest of the rich. [That is riba] Believe me. Europe today is the greatest hindrance in the way of man's ethical advancement.

The incapacity to penetrate the essentially predatory nature of the interest-based capitalist economy and to thus recognize riba at its very foundation, appears to have been passed on from one generation of Egyptian Islamic scholars to another Shaikh Tantawi, the former government-appointed Mufti of Egypt who is now Shaikh al-Azhar, as well as Shaikh al-Ghazzali (may Allah have mercy on him), both recent visitors to New York, appear to be similarly misguided. They have both argued that bank interest not riba!

Let us not forget however, that there have been many other prominent Egyptian Islamic scholars who have declared ‘interest’ to be riba and have vigorously opposed it! One of them, the blind and innocent Shaikh Omar Abdul Rahman, is paying the price for his vigorous denunciation of oppression in Egypt. He is serving a sentence of life-imprisonment in an American prison. The crime for which he was found guilty was the preaching of Islam in a manner which incites people to challenge their oppressors.

Classical higher Islamic education in this age of fitan seems to have acquired some strange deficiency making it difficult for so many classically-trained Islamic scholars to perceive reality correctly. What Abduh, the classically trained Islamic scholar could not see, Iqbal saw so clearly. Iqbal never had a classical Islamic education. Our view is that something is significantly lacking in the classical methodology of Qur’anic interpretation (usul al-tafseer). The meaning of the Qur’an could not possibly have been exhausted by the early Muslims (salaf). The classical works of tafseer, therefore cannot be said to have delivered the final word on the meaning of the Qur’an. Rather the meaning of the Qur’an continues to unfold as concrete reality changes. It is on the basis of an acute observation of changing reality that one can discern new meaning to verses of the Qur’an, - meanings which do not unfold until the new reality has emerged. This is particularly true in respect the Qur’anic treatment of the age of fitan. It is infact, on the basis of observation and intuitive insight that one can arrive at the meanings of the Qur’an as they are directly related to this age.

Abduh was influenced by the arch nationalist, Syed Jamaluddin Afghani. Abduh in turn, influenced his disciple Shaikh Rashid Rida. It appears that they may have innocently opened the doors of Egypt to riba. And from that day to this the Egyptians have continued to pay a terrible price for that poison which first crippled, and then utterly destroyed the Egyptian economy. To make matters even worse the rest of the world of Islam tamely followed Egypt into riba.

Some scholars have felt it necessary to advise Muslims living in non-Muslim lands not to leave their riba earnings in the hands of non-Muslims. They advise that such riba money should be accepted and then given in charily. The terminology which they use is suspicious! The shariah (i.e. the sacred law) does not address ‘non-Muslim lands'. It recognizes dar al-Islam (i.e. territory over which the believers have control. and in which they have the freedom to submit to the supreme authority of Allah the Most High) and dar al-harb (territory which commits acts of aggression or oppression). Imam Shafe’i recognized territory which was in a state of contractual peace and non-aggression with dar al Islam as dar al-ahd. Those scholars should have used this classical terminology rather than suspiciously introducing terminology - non-Muslim lands" - which has all the appearances of legitimizing the present system of nation-states which has replaced dar al-Islam.

If the non-Muslim land is designated dar al-Harb it would then he possible for some to argue that there is no riba in such a territory. But, until recently, no one ever designated USA as dar al-Harb?

The argument concerning the validity of giving riba as charity in non-Muslim lands is therefore problematic, since what is haram (prohibited) for a believer to consume, is haram for his brother to consume!



Dr. Jamal Badawi, the learned scholar of Islam, rejects the opinion regarding the admissibility of interest for housing etc. in USA, on the basis of the application of the doctrine of necessity. His position is that ‘necessity’ does not apply in the general conditions obtaining today. It can apply only in specific conditions. The subjects of Riba and dar al-harb, and 'Riba and the Doctrine of Necessity', are dealt with in chapters five and six of this book.

to be continued . . . . 

The Prohibition of Riba (Interest) by Imran Hosein



The Prohibition of Riba (Interest) (Q&A) by Imran Hosein



No comments:

Post a Comment