‘Islamic’ Mortgage advice – artists’ impression
Anyone Muslim and over the age of about thirty in the United Kingdom will be aware of the Muslim clergies’ howls of protest over ‘mortgages’ to facilitate buying a house. Mortgages are, they claim, prohibited ‘riba‘ or interest and warn against them with dire threats including hadith claiming that riba is worse than incest (with your mother no less). Obviously, the laity, suitably frightened, has shied away from mortgages and into paying exorbitant rents and taking out ‘halal‘ mortgages (usually endorsed by those very same scholars declaring the normal kind ‘absolutely haraam‘), which are, if anything, far more exploitative than the ones they seek to replace.
As I hope regular readers will now be aware, the bigger the import of the fatwa, the more todays’ scholars are likely to make a catastrophic error in their ‘reasoning’. You are literally taking your life, relationships and wealth in your hands if you uncritically accept their advice. The issue of mortgages has put Muslims at a catastrophic disadvantage for years in the UK housing market: since they are unwilling to take out mortgages, they have to essentially be very wealthy to buy a house (remember, Muslims are amongst the poorest communities in the whole of the UK) and further, as rents are consistently outstripping mortgage payments, practising Muslims who have followed the advice of these scholars (and their advice is unanimous), have been paying ever increasing rents whilst unable to put that money towards a mortgage, putting them at a huge handicap in regards to their non-Muslim brethren: Obviously, mortgages are exploitive, but a better deal than paying an even bigger amount per month and never being able to own your own house, which most people in the UK still aspire to.
Disgracefully, all of the scholars proferring this advice about mortgages being ‘interest’ and ‘prohibited in Islam’ were in fact plagiarising the ignorant diatribe of a Deobandi partisan from Pakistan called Mufti Taqi Usmani. He is like all his cohorts, and we lack the space here to comment on all of his bizarre, Salafi inspired positions, but in this matter he has caused catastrophic harm: anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Islamic finance and the way that house purchases are financed in the UK would instantly see that mortgages in no way fit the Islamic definition of ‘interest’. Likewise, anyone with a rudimentary level of Islamic scholarship would be able to apprehend that ‘Islamic’ mortgages are in fact far more illicit that the non-Muslim’s equivalent.
But puritanical allegiance to the Salafist creeds of Deobandism (which gifted us the Taliban and had Osama Bin Laden as a ‘keynote’ speaker until 9/11), and the partisan reasoning and personality worship these types of groups inspire, has led to the uncritical adoption of an unacademic and inhuman fatwa in the name of Islam that has cost Muslims in the UK billions (though the true cost can never be known) as well as the chance to own their own home. It is not surprising if you think about it: following the scholars can cost you your life (by joining ISIS, formerly known as the ‘our brothers, the Syrian rebels’), your partner (or rather your chance of ever getting one) and now your money.
So imagine my surprise when I saw that another Muslim scholar pointed out that Usmani’s whole, er, ‘reasoning’ was erroneous. Although this scholar showed some in depth knowledge of Hanafite jurisprudence as well as some useful references, it was still too Milquetoast and insufficient (and it took someone twenty years to point these facts out). The author also shows his naiveté by asking for the Mufti’s comments and advice. I hope he’s not holding his breath – in fact Usmani refused to clarify or respond in the two months since the open letter.
If other scholars can’t even get any sense or honesty out of vile specimens such as Usmani, what hope do the poor Muslim public have?
Nonetheless, even though I disagree with the second scholar as well, I have reproduced his comments here as being far more representative of Classical Islamic Jurisprudence and how it would view financing a house than the ramblings of people who seek to disguise their unprecedented and marginal opinions behind the veil of puritanism, the stereotyped behaviour of both the Salafist and Deobandi establishments. What the readers should note is that it took twenty years plus for someone to even point out the nonsense that was handicapping the finances of British Muslims and the danger of ‘taqleed‘ to scholars: in matters of import such as buying a house and finding a partner, the gross errors of Usmani show that Muslims would do well to not take any advice uncritically
Original Letter Here:http://shaykhatabekshukurov.com/
In the name of God, most Merciful and most Compassionate
For the Attention of:
His Honour Sheikh Muhammad Taqi al-Uthmani (may God preserve him).
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu.
First and foremost, I would like to thank you for your services to Muslims generally and to students of knowledge specifically by establishing educational institutes and mosques and thereby spreading knowledge.
There is no doubt that the world is going through a hard economic period which is caused by political instability. These problems make people confused, especially the youth who are just stepping out into independent life. People require enough recourses to have a house and to be able to pay for their day to day expenses.
Muslims presently seem to struggle more than ever when it comes to issues of credit and employment. The reason for this is because it is not easy to find a job which is stated as “permissible’’ by all scholars. There are a lot of jobs, sources of income and transactions which are classed as ‘’prohibited’’ or ‘’disliked’’ by some of the scholars of Islam.
One of these issues is purchasing a house. It is no secret that hardly anyone can buy a house by cash payment. This causes people to seek help from individuals or organisations. Individuals most likely will not help because of the current economic situation so people go to the banks. In this scenario, a Muslim finds themselves confronted with two options; either he will avoid dealing with a bank in order not to commit a sin by dealing with “Riba’’, but then he will live in hardship for the rest of his life. Alternatively, he will deal with the bank but live the rest of his life feeling guilty, and the burden of guilt that we feel from sin is not an easy one to bear either. So Muslims credit options, already severely constrained after the so-called “credit crunch’’ which has led to seemingly endlessly increasing UK house prices and resultant unaffordable rent rises due to exploitation by unscrupulous landlords, are even more limited vis-à-vis their non-Muslim brothers and sisters.
The issue of purchasing a property with the support of a bank is well-known to be controversial amongst Muslim academics. It is likewise well known that most of the scholars consider certain types of purchasing a house through the banks to be “prohibited’’.
Your opinion on this issue is famous, if not the most famous. As far as I know, you state that there are two ways of purchasing a property through banks, one of which is permissible with the second being prohibited as ‘’Riba’’ (prohibited interest).
Regarding the way that is considered permissible, it is when, for instance, someone purchases a house for £100,000: The buyer makes a deposit of £20,000. He now owns a 20% share of the property and the bank owns an 80% share. The mortgage payments of the buyer are formed by them paying rent on the 80% share owned by the bank andalso a mortgage for the 80% owned by the bank. As such the share of the house the buyer owns increases over time whilst the amount owned by the bank decreases. Throughout the entire term of the mortgage however, the house is in fact owned by the bank, as demonstrated by the deed. This, according to the Hanafi School, is an invalid transaction. The second, considered prohibited, way is to borrow money from the bank to buy a house and pay it back to the bank with interest – for example borrowing one hundred thousand pounds and paying back two hundred thousand. This is prohibited according to the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafei and Hanbali schools of Sunnah.
According to what scholars understand, the most popular method in Western countries is the abovementioned second way, called “Mortgage’’. However, I think this is incorrect; ‘mortgage’ is not related to the prohibited second way and nor is it a scenario where ‘’Riba’’ (prohibited interest) is involved.
In this letter I would like to explain this issue from my understanding, and also to know what you think about it. I want to thank you in advance and hope you won’t consider this a critique of you or anyone else. My only concern is to serve people who are in hardship and confusion.
In brief, the procedure of taking out a mortgage is as follows:
- The buyer expresses his desire to buy a property to the bank and that he requires to borrow a certain amount of money.
- The bank checks the financial status of the buyer to make sure that he will be able to pay the debt back. In order make a full check, it asks him for certain documents. Each bank will have its own criteria which have to be met in order to be qualified to borrow money.
- If the buyer meets these conditions, then the bank looks into the property that buyer wishes to buy. The bank will check the property to make sure that it meets the criteria of the bank.
- If the property meets its conditions, then the bank lends the money by transferring it to the bank account of the buyer.
- The buyer can then purchase the property.
- Afterwards, the buyer has to pay the money back to the bank with some profit (which depends on what they have agreed). The buyer has to pay it back within a certain period of time.
- The time period differs according to what the buyer agreed with the bank (it could be ten years or more).
- The interest that the bank will be charging the buyer depends on what they have agreed – it could be three percent or more or less.
- As time passes the payable amount increases with it. For example, if the buyer borrows one thousand pounds and pays it back within the first year, then he has to pay one thousand and thirty pounds. But as time passes the debt increases, because the interest is not based on the initial amount that is borrowed but rather on the amount which is due each year. This necessitates the payable amount to differ based on the time of the payment.
This is a brief illustration of the issue. There are of course a few other details which however have no bearing on the Islamic legal verdict.
An explicit look at the issue may give the impression that it is the prohibited form of interest (Riba). However, I think that this assumption is incorrect.
I would like to explain a few issues before putting forward my verdict.
‘Wikala’ linguistically is sometimes used for ‘preserving’, as God said: ‘They said; God is enough for us, and he is the best Wakeel’. So it means ‘protecting one’. He also said: ‘There are no gods but Him. So make Him your Wakeel’ – i.e. to protect you. It can also mean ‘to defer things’.
In Sharia terminology, this word is used for the same two meanings for which it is used linguistically; “to defer the control over something to a representative’’ and “preserving something by the representative’’
The Rukn of Tawkeel is a person appointing the representative to act over the object of wikalah.
Is it compulsory to use only the literal words meaning ‘wikalah’?
It seems to be compulsory if we look at the statements of the Fuqaha explicitly, because they said the rukn of it (wikalah) is to say ‘’I appointed you as my representative to sell this item or to buy it’’
However, if we look into the statements of Fuqaha deeper, we understand that using the literal [exact same] words is not compulsory. That is because they said the rukn of it is the words by which wikalah is confirmed. Additionally, the examples that Fuqahahave given prove that the literal same words are not compulsory.Ibn Abideen said in ‘’Radd Muhtaar’’: ‘The rukn of wikala is anything that means ‘offer and accept’ – even indirectly such as silence’. So the really important thing is to express that a person is appointing the second person as a representative. [Some more examples are mentioned in the original Arabic copy of the letter]
The permissibility of wikalah by other words besides the literal ones is also confirmed by the Quran, as it is mentioned in Surah al-Kahf; “Send some of you with these silver coins to buy food for us’’ [Surah Kahf; 19]. So they said “send some of you’’ and didn’t say ‘maketawkeel of some of you’. I don’t doubt that this issue is known to a person such as yourself – I just mention these examples to clarify what I am talking about.
Establishing Wikalah by Iqtidha (Implicitly)
Iqtidha al-nass is a part of a sentence which is not mentioned verbally, but the sentence cannot be correct without this extra.For example, if someone says; “free your slave for a thousand pounds for my Kaffarah (penalty)’’, and the second person replies; ‘’ok’’. This transaction will be valid and his Kaffarah will be accepted as all of that will be valid by Iqtidha. That is because his request was implicit; “sell me your slave for a thousand pounds. Then be my representative to free the slave as my Kaffarah’’.
Permissibility of Tawkeel for Oneself
Is it permissible to make someone a wakeel in something which benefits the wakeel?
No doubt this is permissible, and its permissibility is setup by the Quran. In Surah KahfGod mentioned that Ahl Kahf sent one of their number to buy food for them. No doubt this Wakeel would buy the food and he would also be one of the people who would eat it. Some scholars mentioned that a condition for the validity of such Tawkeel is that it should not benefit him only. But this condition doesn’t have a solid basis, and it is disputable.
I do not doubt that you are aware of this and there are many examples of this issue. For instance, the scenario that is mentioned in ‘Al-Muheet al-Burhani’: If person A makesTawkeel of person B to free himself from the debt that he owes to the person A and person B acts on it, it will be valid.
Initial Status of Transactions According to the Hanafi School
The initial status of all kinds of transactions is that they are permissible. One of the well-known principles of the Hanafi School is that everything beside these three is permissible [by default]: 1. Bloodshed 2. Sexual acts 3. Rituals of worship.
Imam Shaykhee Zade said: ‘Be noted that the initial status of everything is that it is permissible except sexual acts. God said: ‘He is the one who created everything on Earth for you’. Also: ‘Consume everything halal and desirable which is on Earth’
Based on this, we say; everything is permissible unless it is proven to be not permissible.
A Commodity Having Two Prices
Setting up two or more prices for the same commodity because of different conditions of the commodity or of something else is permissible; such as the price differing based on the time of payment. So for instance, if the buyer pays today the price is one thousand pounds, but if he pays tomorrow it will be two thousand. The price could differ for other reasons too, such as cheaper pricing for poor costumers, and a higher price for rich costumers.
Imam Quduri said: ‘It is permissible for the buyer to increase the price. And permissible for the seller to increase the commodity and decrease the price. And legal action will be taken towards that all’’. He also said: “If a costumer says [to the tailor] ‘’if you finish stitching today I will pay you one dirham, if tomorrow, half a dirham’’, so if he stitches it today he gets one dirham, but if tomorrow he gets a standard fee according to Abu Hanifa as long as it is not more than half of a dirham. His two students said; both of the conditions are valid and the tailor gets paid depending on which time he finishes.
Riba (Prohibited Interest)
Its definition according to Sharia law is that it is an extra which is given (for nothing) in the transaction of exchanging a valuable for a valuable.
Riba is prohibited in any commodity which is measurable by weight or volume if it is exchanged by exactly the same commodity. If both of these two conditions (i.e. measurability in the same units, and the commodity being the same from both sides) are found to be missing, Tafadhul and Nasaa will become permissible. If only one of the two conditions is present, then Tafadhul will be permissible but not Nasaa. (As above, if neither of the two conditions are present then both of Tafadhul and Nasaawill be permissible).
The act of a person will be considered permissible as much as possible. Quduri says: ‘If someone sells two dirhams and one dinar for two dinars and one dirham, it will be valid. And it will be considered that each of currencies was exchanged for opposite one. Anyone sells eleven dirhams for ten dirhams and one dinar, it will be valid. And it will be considered that ten dirhams is exchanged for ten dirhams, and one extra dirham for one dinar…
There are many examples of this principle in the Fiqh books, which proves that we try to consider the action valid as a default.
Debt according to the Sharia terminology is a Mithliy commodity that you borrow and demand back. Its legal ruling is that the person who is taking the debt will own it once he has received it according to Abu Hanifa and Muhammad.
Thus, debt is the borrowing of an item from someone for certain period of time under the condition of returning it back. The ownership of the borrowed item will be transferred to the person who is taking it, which necessitates that he is free to do with it as he wants – the person who is lending it out has no right to dictate what he can and cannot do with it.
The Difference Between Debt and Tawkeel
The difference is very obvious; in tawkeel, ownership will not be transferred to the representative, whereas in ‘debt’, ownership gets transferred to the person who is borrowing the money. He will retain this ownership until such time as he has to pay the debt back. During this time though, he is free to do as he wants with it.
The Issue of Mortgage
Coming back to the issue of mortgage, I say it cannot be Riba, because the bank does not ‘lend’ the money [as per the Shariah definition of lending or debt]. That is because the buyer is not free to do with the money whatever he wants. The bank won’t allow him to do anything with it except buying that exact house which he agreed with the bank to buy.
This is not called ‘debt’. That is because a person can do with the money as he wishes in the case of ‘debt’. But in the issue of a mortgage the person is not free.
The different topics that I have mentioned necessitate that a mortgage is Tawkeel and not a debt because the scenario of a mortgage happens as follows:
- Costumer expresses his desire to buy a house to the bank.
- Bank follows its procedure, then it appoints the buyer to buy the house on behalf of the bank with the money which he gets from the bank by cash payment.
- Then he buys the house from the bank by instalments over certain period of time. After that he pays back that money during that time period.
This is the practical and technical explanation of a mortgage. This is because themeaning is the most important thing in transactions and not what one says (i.e. it is about what you do and not what you say).
Thus, when the bank says to the costumer; ‘this is a debt we are lending you so that you can buy a house, and you have to pay it back to us’, this statement is incorrect literallybut yet is correct by Iqtidha. That is because the bank doesn’t give the ownership of the money to the costumer – the bank will block you from using this money for anythingbesides buying that specific house – and that is not called lending but rather ‘tawkeel’.
This is not any type of riba, because the bank does not give away the money to the costumer. Therefore the costumer deals with the bank twice:
- When he represents the bank to buy the house.
- When he buys the house from the bank.
As for the price not being fixed but differing based on the time of paying it back, as we said, it is permissible according to the two students of Abu Hanifa without any conditions. It is also permissible according to Abu Hanifa with the condition that I explained above (i.e. for the late payment he has to pay a ‘standard price’, and the ‘standard price’ is what is known by custom).
This is all I wanted to present to you. I did not go too deeply into the details, proofs and references because I know that you already have enough knowledge of these.
I await your comments on this letter.
Please do not forget me in your prayers.
Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah.
 Riba is prohibited interest. It is further explained below.
 ‘Tawkeel’ is the process of giving authorization to a person to represent you
 ‘Wikala’ is a synonym of Tawkeel
 ‘Wakeel’ is an official representative.
 انظر “بدائع الصنائع في ترتيب الشرائع” لعلاء الدين الكساني المتوفى سنة 587 هـ , جـ 6 صـ 19 , من منشورات دار الكتب العلمية , بيروت , لبنان , الطبعة الثانية 1986
 ‘Rukn’ is the essence of something, such as the essence of ‘human’ is that it is a thinking animal.
 “الفتاوى الهندية” جـ 3 صـ 516
 ‘Fuqaha’ means jurists, plural of ‘Faqeeh’ – jurist.
 Examples are found in the books of Fiqh and Fatawa
 “رد المحتار” جـ 11 صـ 357
 “الفتاوى الشامية” جـ 3 صـ 519
 انظر “كشف الأسرار شرح منار الأنوار” للإمام أبي البركات النسفي المتوفي 710 هـ جـ 1 صـ 395 , من منشورات دار الكتب العلمية .
 ‘Kaffarah’ is a financial penalty for certain types of errors committed by a person such as; not keeping an oath, divorcing one’s wife in a humiliating way etc
 انظر “المحيط البرهاني” جـ 15 صـ 4
 انظر “المحيط البرهاني” جـ 15 صـ 3
 انظر “رد المحتار” 1: 105، 4: 161، 6: 458
 انظر “مجمع الأنهر” 2: 568
 انظر “مختصر القدوري” صـ 86
 Dirham is a silver coin used in the past. In our time there is a currency that is used in some Arabian countries called Dirham, and that is not related to the Dirham of the past centuries.
 انظر “مختصر القدوري” صـ 103
 انظر “الفتاوى الشامية” جـ 3 صـ 125
 انظر “مختصر القدوري” صـ 87 , “الفتاوى الشامية” جـ 3 صـ 125
 ‘Tafadhul’ means something been more on one side, for example one of two partners having more capital. In this context Tafadhul means one of the buyers or sellers having extra on his side.
 ‘Nasaa’ means delaying and doing something later. In this context it means either the buyer or the seller releases the commodity later.
 انظر “مختصر القدوري” صـ 87
 Dinar is a golden coin that used in the past centuries.
 انظر “مختصر القدوري” صـ 90
 ‘Mithliy’ means a commodity that is measurable by litre or kg.
 انظر “الشامية” جـ 7 صـ 388 , من منشورات دار الكتب العلمية , بيروت , لبنان , الطبعة الثانية سنة 2003 م .
 انظر “الشامية ” جـ 7 صـ392
You forgot uni fees
I have a salafi friend (previously homeless) who basically was helped by salafis to get his life back on the track. Rather than making things easy for him, they had to obviously inform him of the riba of uni fees so the poor kid now rather than spending 3 years doing his bachelors, he is doing it in 6 cause each year he has to take a gap year to save up money to avoid the sin of RIBAH.
What’s the problem? He will be rewarded for his efforts. Smart idea. Yes, it may take longer. So? He would be clearly in the halal, and not dubiously in a type of grey zone. Very clear conscience, mashaAllah. But, yes, difficult. Life requires effort to live morally. Allah make it easy for him. Ameen.
But in those years he wasted trying to re-pay the money, he could have done something more useful like raising money for the needy or getting married earlier.
I get it he took the safer root but to assume that Allah is all about complication and difficulty is painting a wrong image of Allah.
Yes, sacrifice is an important principle in the deen but to the extent where it doesn’t disturb your future and others around you.
Rather than taking things plain, we should think about ruling and try to understand what Allah wants before acting upon our actions.
Of course I am happy for him cause he is happy, but I fear the lack of understanding and critical thinking in our community
Please show me where you got this ‘sacrifice is an important principle’ in the Deen from though.
I want to see this ‘principle’ and how much ‘sacrifice’ you need to do. Please show me where God says that. Also, where he says that to avoid ‘grey area’ you should spend three years.
Or even just principle of sacrifice.
Because I thought in Islam that you can even deny that you are Muslim to save life or limb. But you are saying ‘sacrifice’ is an important principle.
So lets see where God asks us to sacrifice ourselves? And where is the fiqh of sacrifice and how much to sacrifice.
I’m not an alim here.
There is a Hadith that says ‘khatibo al nasa ala oqoolihm’ which if I’m not mistaken means talk to people at the capacity of which they can understand.
So this is my approach to things brother
So relaxed in fact that I won’t bother next time.
You know, so I can relax and not expose people to my horrible ‘manner of speech’ that leaves them with ‘literally no friends’.
Advice greatfully received.
No I’m too relaxed
Id rather get the blame, I’m just weak hearted and not very ambitious, I guess over time I might be.
Anyway, you showed genuine and noble character in the discussion. It is rare to see it from Muslims: they talk all day about ‘adhab’ but as soon as you challenge them, the rubbish in their character comes out.
So you are happy when people do stupid things is it?
If I chop off my balls tomorrow because I think I am a woman inside you won’t be happy because I am happy will you?
So we shouldn’t encourage stupidity or we will answer for that.
Also, avoiding ‘riba’ is so important that you should spend three years but giving that money to ‘haraam’ institutions like university is fine according to Salafis?
Unis that promote all that ‘haraam’ and blasphemy stuff?
If avoiding sin and grey areas is SOOOOO important, why are Salafis in university?
How come secular education became ‘necessity’ but time and housing is not necessity?
Is it just to give ‘Daw’ah’ to white ‘sisters’?
No I’m happy for that guy as a special case.
The guy was homeless since he was 13 years old, drinking, stealing and getting into fights, his brother got a 15 years jail sentence for a murder so he had a rough time until he was 21 where a random girl fell in love with him and taught him the salafi way.
He got his life back together with a job and now university so it would be unpleasant for me to tell him that the very people that helped you out of your miserable life had some odd beliefs.
He has a naturally weak character and would often get emotional, he wasn’t intellectual in any way but at least he isn’t sleeping drunk on benches
So for a case like that, I would comfortably say that I am happy for him.
Maybe in future he would stumble across this article
u never know!
So you wouldn’t tell someone who had been helped and converted by missionaries that you didn’t agree with Christianity?
lol nice one
I would fear the backlash, I might tell the person in future but not in the heat of it no.
A reasonable person would figure it out with some help.
So I was watching the big question and one of the white converts said she believes in the Quran because of the scientific evidence inside it.
Now that is a complete lie but if u tell me, I don’t have the balls to tell her. I once stopped a Muslim from giving dawah as he was trying to go via the evidence factor (scientific facts) and the poor guy was depressed for a couple of days.
This is what we have to do to clean up the shit after stupidity.
Holding Muslims at the same intellectual standard that you have is asking for Muslims to admit they are a disgrace to humanity which will never happen.
I will literally have no friends if I go by your manner of speech
Don’t take this the wrong way but I’m not here to engage in dick holding, to get fans or to make friends.
Young people often think that having lots of friends is a priority. You will learn about that in time.
So if you tell people the truth in my ‘manner’ no one will be your friend?
So you can only have friends if you lie to them or treat them with kid gloves?
Try that for a few years and see what happens then.
If you think my way is harsh, what about at university? They challenge people’s beliefs a lot more openly.
I never told you to go and attack your friends or challenge them or to tell your Salafi friend to stop being Salafi or whatever. I was trying to get you to think about things. But of you do that, what people do nowadays is exactly what you did: get emotional.
So saying that my way is so bad that it will leave people friendless is a bit disrespectful isn’t it?
Qouting hadiths at people like they don’t have any hikmah or are ignoring advice of Prophet. Is that a good way to make friends?
So if you are so worried about how my statements will be taken then that is good. Please apply this concern to your own statements as well though.
So I have to be extra careful and not force people or be harsh etc.
But I have to follow your way or no friends? Do you see the paradox there? Everyone gets treated like a baby except me?
So I was just trying to ask some questions to get you to think. Also myself to think. But it became big issue for you of losing friends and Prophet said this or that. Fine. So don’t be offended.
You remember the questions you were asking before? Did you see anyone get emotional and say something like ‘well if you ask questions like that you will have no friends etc?’
I used to think like that.
As they say, time is the best teacher.
Yo listen, I didn’t get emotional or anything but recently I nearly lost a really good friend who was Ahmadi because I challenged some of his beliefs.
You have to understand that I’m still 18 and having to be as vocal as this would lead me to trouble (that’s not me being emotional, that’s the truth)
I just quoted that Hadith because I speak differently to different people and yes, at uni or YouTube comments u can go full out but not to Muslims.
Once, I had 2 good Nigerian friends who were really good mashallah and in the Islamic week, John fontain came and started bashing the Torah and bible to be ridiculously unreliable with no truth but as most salafis are, he contradicted himself at least 20 times so I decided that it was suitable for me to challenge him with some Ayahs so I did. That night didn’t turn out that well, he saw my good Arabic and arguments and decided to speak over me and told me to stop talking. After this, the 2 friends that I had were a bit dissatisfied with me but it was cool. But then John Fontain took me to the side and started debating to where he obviously lost, he started getting aggressive and vocal, and I mean it. This happens to me often
Look, you are one of the best and most appreciated friends I have and I am willing to sacrifice a lot of my friends for these blogs cause I prefer knowledge more. But what I am saying is that i am normally extra careful with Muslims because they just need care.
It’s being tolerant, u kinda learn from the British anyway.
Well, you can say that I am weak hearted
But I don’t rely on friends, I barely have any but with life, it’s different, as an Arab, u can accomplish lots of things without having to get enemies on the way.
I understand and most non-Salafi/Deobandi etc people have been through similar experiences in university. Basically, these guys will try to shut you down, get physical, make a scene, whatever.
You will be talking to a girl and they will come up to you and openly challenge you, ‘cock-block’ you, and stuff like that.
We used to allow them to do stuff like that, and out of fear of them making a scene, we would not talk to girls, non-Muslims etc. But this is a form of bullying and allowing these people to control your interactions will deprive you of many opportunities to find friends and a partner. This happened to me and my friends, so I know it well.
Therefore, my advice is that it is very important to stand up to them, just like bullies, because the social and relationship opportunities you lose in university will not come back.
It is just my advice.
Also, have friends who you like or provide some benefit for you.
That means secular benefit, not ‘I love you for the sake of Allah’.
You have to be very careful of your friends in university as it will colour the rest of your life.
So don’t hang around with any waster Muslims or waste time with ISOC unnecessarily.
Also, spend that time to learn how to socialise and interact with women, and find a partner. Otherwise things will be very difficult later on.
It is just my advice.
when it is too late, it’s too late
I had a very traditional upbringing, having my childhood in an arab country and being quite religious has kind of destroyed any social sentiments I once may of had.
This happens to all first or even second generation muslims who come to the UK.
I wish muslims become more confident in their personality and ‘britishness’ so that one day, we can actually contribute to the world in a positive way.
That’s the kind of idiotic ‘harder is better’ thinking that disgusts me.
Please show me in Islam where it says you should waste three years of your life to have a ‘clear conscience’.
Just emotional blackmail as usual. And despite avalanche of proofs in the article it is still a ‘grey area’ according to people like you.
Why are Muslims failing?
Because guy loses three years of his life and Muslims say ‘Masha’Allah!’
‘Allah make it easy for him’?
Allah already made it easy for him but you called that ease a ‘grey area’. Anything easy is a ‘grey area’ to people like you.
Your mindset encourages a sort of paranoia about everything from diet to sex and a natural inclination to puritanism.
The Prophet is reported to have said that Jews and Christians will be jealous of how easy our religion is. Thanks to people like you, that’s not likely to happen in our generation.
Please go and mess up your own life as much as you want but don’t harm others with your moronic encouragements.
How is it forgotten?
Rulings are explained.
No I was just saying
U emphasised mortgages but mashallah salafis in the UK are kind of ruining some lives of young people who fall into that trap early on.
But I was just saying that uni fees should be under the same category and emphasised as some people triumph for that too.
And it doesn’t need that much explaining, I kinda got bored half way through (but good work). Muhammad Abdul explained this and many modernist/reformists just point out the quranic verse where it says the multiplication of interest.
So in short, riba is when u rip off the poor and vulnerable
The subject of riba brings back so many memories to my mind ….
Allow me Muslim folks to mention an opinion a thousand times more extremist than the Salafi ones mentioned in the article – and don’t worry, they are so extreme that, contrary to the aferomentioned Salafisms, you will not feel tempted to act upon them.
I am referring to the constant teaching of Maulana Imran Hosein that any form of paper money consitutes riba (electric money being even worse), and that the only Islamically allowed currencies are coins of gold or silver plus some common entities such as rice grains, olives etc.
Regarding countries (such as the UK) where living without paper money would be somewhat unrealistic, Imran Hosein advises all Muslims living in those countries to leave them immediately.
Such a teaching would be considered silly and not Islamic at all by the owner of this blog I presume, yet I feel that his overall analysis of economy and economic opression in the modern world is quite pertinent – it is more western than really Islamic perhaps.
For all his faults (and crass mistakes according to his critics) Imran Husein has two excellent habits : that of often ending his speeches with “Don’t believe a word of what I just said without having double-checked it first” and that of insisting that the Qur’an is for people who can think. If more Muslim teachers and leaders had those habits, the world of Islam would be in a better shape today.
Good points Catholic Commentator and thanks again for your contributions.
What I would say is that there are puritans in every religion, just as there are ‘sell outs’ and liberals. As a Catholic, you know this well and we saw it very nicely with the Irish gay marriage referendum or Irish leaders who don’t seem to believe in God nonetheless receiving Holy Communion.
When comparing religions, we will see that there are some ‘inconvenient’ and hard things in one compared to another. So in Catholicism versus Islam, Catholicism is ‘easy’ in dietary regulations, amount of prayers but ‘hard’ in birth control and divorce compared to Islam etc.
The puritan mind set is the same in every religion or system and sees suffering or difficulty as a sign of authenticity, making religion an easy target for the hedonism inclined mainstream media etc of today. ‘Religious’ people play into this trap by second guessing the wisdom of God and being obsessive compulsive and taking the ‘this is harder so it must be true’ approach. Liberals on the other hand capitulate completely and the ‘middle way’ is lost.
And I’m sure the TPP is all fine and dandy in Islam too!
P.S. You’re rather dumb.
Okay, why don’t you embarrass me in front of everyone by showing how I am dumb and saving al these readers from my banality?
Or are you, y’know, an internet pussy who has no arguments but likes to pose?
Does anyone know what ‘TPP’ is?
If I’m not mistaken, the Murabitun World Movement also consider fiat currency to be a type of riba, but I haven’t yet heard one of them telling people to abandon paper money altogether.
Question for mmmclmru or Suede Nikita: are the Murabituns in England sound proponents of Maliki fiqh?
From what I know, the Marabitun movement are obsessed with restoring the silver and gold currency. They totally oppose paper money but allow it for the time being nonetheless.
As for promoting Maliki Fiqh, I have to say they have done a good job. They have published many Maliki works into English such as the Muwatta. They have set up a few mosques around the UK and abroad upholding the Maliki way.
The only criticism I would have of them is that it is borderline Madhab supremacy thinking – they don’t really care about other madhabs (this is my perspective, feel free to criticise)
They are dumb. But as with anyone, take the useful and disregard the crap. They are puritanical and their fiqh reflects that.
But yeah, they are more authentic than Salafis but they are still stupid. None of them knows Maliki hadith methodology at all. So they have the same hadith methodology as Salafis and Shafis but came to different conclusions, which is dumb anyway. Please just read fatwas of Maliki untouchables like Qadi Iyad – I don’t think you will stomach them.
Khaled Abou El Fadl seems to have deep knowledge of Maliki fiqh and hadith stuff too. He could touch the questions my teachers shirked.
Also, Atabek Shukurov seems to know a lot about it. I don’t know why.
Assuming you want to follow Maliki fiqh, which even I don’t. And I’m Maliki in training.
neuralminstrel – I hope the article shows that they are idiots for thinking that.
These ideas come from the Far Left and Anarchists and not Islam.
They do say that – Ibrahim Vadhillo and his gang isn’t it? It is all nonsense.
Shukurov gave proof and references from classical texts and reasoning which can be followed from first principles.
Did any of the other groups who harp on about that do that?
They just bring you hadith to say how bad Riba is.
But they are too galactically stupid to even know what riba is.
That movement is like a cult – it provides everything for its followers from scoial support to wives etc.
These movements are usually chock full of loser guys with no hope of finding a partner whose Sheikh has set them up with a convert chick, they literally are loyal to him like all cultists whose social isolation and sexual desperation has been lifted by the cult.
Not just them, most of the Muslim groups are like that.
Give most of their members £30,000 a year and a average ‘white chick’ and they are out of there.
First thing men and women do when they join ISIS? Marriage.
What do the FBI use to catch them,? Honeypots.
Tells you a lot.
Non-Muslims know how our social networks work based on alienation and sexual desperation, but we have’t faced up to it.
Salam brother, u seem very knowledgable indeed, I can relate to a lot of things you say especially in the comments section, you’re more than a gift to Muslims only if they realised it.
From what I can see, salafiya and all types of cults are only decreasing from now due to the Internet and social media. The Arab world especially is not going to face the salaf now but atheists. Due to the repetitive lying and superstitious beliefs that these sheiks give out is slowly loosing them followers and I can see a lot of these ‘religious leaders’ are going to hit rock bottom especially after the Arab Spring.
It is atheism that we will soon face and not salafs.
Can you please blog about what you think we need as an ummah to improve. I understand our Sunni tradition is hard to tackle but in terms of materialistic success, what will we benefit from?
If you were to talk to the Muslims of the west and east, what would your advice be.
What is keeping us back?
Our belief in jins and the evil eye?
Emphasis on zina and songs?
Our inability to stand free speech?
Our intellectual downfall?
Our failure in the arts?
I would love to hear from you
It is true that Salafism will not be important for the future. People will not become Salafis. To become Salafi one needs to be religious in general. And most people are not interested in getting more religious. It is crazy to think that a majority takes the harder way in religion. Real Islam is usually the harder option but that is not what common Muslims go for. Religious Muslims prefer the harder way because they commit their life to religion and they do not care if this would ruin their finances or life. mmmclmru is talking from a very secular perspective like if there was no God-given reason for life. That shows how this whole reformist Islam has nothing to do with real Islam and even with religion in general.
So yes of course, Muslim apologets will have to deal with atheism. But I know that many non-Salafi apologets will claim that Muslims are leaving Islam because of Salafism. Although this sectarian narrative is false, I can say that I have not left Islam because of the typical reasons. I left Islam because I cannot accept an evil monotheistic God. This is not a specific problem for Islam. I often find the reasons ex-Muslims have to be stupid because they are often about moral issues or violence. The biggest moral problem is in God creating this mess itself. If you could morally justify this you could without any problem justify even terrorism. I am not saying Islam calls necessarily for terrorism. But it could be justified when being able to justify the creation of this system.
I do not think that Salafis got Islam totally right. I could never believe that such idiots are able to get anything totally right. What they do is simply accepting things that modern people and also modern Muslims do not want to accept. Earlier Muslims, whether they were Asharis (standard Sunnis), Salafis (or the equivalent group back then), Mutazilah, Shiah had no problems with strict and violent Islam. They all agreed to kill each other for what they considered apostasy. The Mutazilah wanted to kill Imam Ahmad the founder of the Hanbali Madhhab, the Asharis wanted to kill the Salafi Ibn Taymiyyah and he died in prison. The Salafis when they got power they would have done the same and they doing this today especially together with the Shiites in Iran.
The whole perspective of this website is irreligious and rather polemicist against disagreeing Muslims then interested in facts about historical Islam. Yes, your fellow Muslim enemies might be stupid. But you cannot build your views upon their stupidity. I have not seen a single real argument why something is not part of Islam here. One has to be deliberately ignorant to accept these claims.
Reforming Islam is important. So please try to improve your strategies.
Thank you for your reply
It is nice to see an ex-Muslim who is fair and unbiased.
I do agree with you on most parts. I do feel sorry for the author and everyone else for that matter that tries to modify Islam, it seems as if nobody is getting it right.
As I am still young, I know I might be wrong on this but it seems really sketchy, from the ahadith, you can turn out our prophet to be a murderer but at the same time turn him out to be the best man. I’m beginning to question the very idea that maybe, the prophet ordered for the killing of apostates and other things that others try to justify on nonsense like its an ahad hadith and all that; truth is only understood by those who search for it (that quote I just made up, don’t take as I will probably use it in future). Most people take the lie cause its easier and more convenient (note, some are even on this blog)
The problem is not Salafiyah and it had never been, the problem is the fact that muslims don’t want to think in any way shape or form. It’s like we are retarded, our very perspective of religion as an ummah is messed up and when we realise that, hey, we are the most unproductive and ignorant people the world has ever known, then maybe some work can be done towards that.
And very true on the fact that religious people are among the dumbest, because what’s better to do after you fail your exams!
From the little knowledge that I have, I can honestly say that our classical scholarship produced by the Sunnis is garbage. mmclucm whatever his/her name is, even though very intelligent seems to be holding on to this Ashari creed hoping that there is an Islam out there that has got it right. And even holding on to the hanafi way of interpreting hadith, for god’s sake, they refused a woman’s proposal for divorce whose husband had traveled for god knows how many years. She had to go to another school of jurisprudence to justify her case of divorce. Now if you look up to this, and I’m sorry to say STUPIDITY, then you have no chance of improving Muslims outlook on Islam.
What I find difficult with disbelief is the sheer amount of courage required to reject a god who created this magnificent universe. I see it as arrogance to disagree with creation like your some kind of genius with a better plan
If I was to disbelief, I would do so on the evidence of rational and the perspective of god and the way religion is formed.
I do agree that there is some secular conspiracy going on but the author is quite honest to some extent but when it comes to sectarianism, oh boy, the brains just shut off.
So you are rather annoying my bum now. Before you were inviting an ISIS supporter to coffee.
Now you think this guy is ‘fair’ and even unbiased.
Just proof of how wide of the mark you are: where did you here me say I am Ashari? And anyway, there is no taqleed in aqeeda. Likewise, when did I say that I support that view about divorce? That is a narration of Abu Yusuf attributed to Abu Hanifa. His other students challenged that.
So I feel really bad for the woman you mentioned, but it is a bit hypocritical of you isn’t it? You are complaining that Muslims don’t think. So the scholars were stupid for not thinking. Fine. So why didn’t she think? So if the problems is not Salafis and stuff, then where did dhe get the idea that she shouldn’t think?
Two options: she is also stupid or someone told her not to think and to just follow. We all know it is the latter.
Maybe Allah gave us a brain so that we can just blindly follow stupid opinions. Or not.
I knew u were gunna bring up that thing, but I just wanted to get a reaction out of u, everybody deserves to be insulted here. I have many friends of all types of sects, my brother is an agnostic, my family is Ahmadi and my cousin is an Isis fan boy, this is what I turned out to be! lol
Anyway, interesting that u denied being an ashari.
Look, if millions of Muslims were inspired by millions of Muslims and given the name shaykh al Islam shows that Islam was nicely corrupted by that time. So we can’t blame him or his people for that, ignorance was t an all times high back then.
Islam has been corrupted big time and it’s about time Muslims get to terms with that.
Hadiths were corrupted left right an centre before they were compiled but some incidents would be hard to deny even existed. Like right now, if u tell Muslims that all those hadiths talking about khilafat, end of time and places that are more sacred than others are all fabricated then the average Muslims would have an instant heart attack.
Our very critique of history is shameful, the salafis and I’m sure other would justify the act of mu’awiyah as not that bad but that he was a good sahabi who just happens to nearly wipe out Islam but nonetheless, he made ijtihad right, but if u miss your fajir then Allah will be so angry that u will live in constant fear! Mentality of all but Sufi who probably don’t know anything about Islam but use fabricated Hadith to reassure their statuses.
The incidents hard to believe happened were that Ali (ra) burned a kafir and that most of them believed in abrogation and especially about the sword cancelling all the peaceful ones. That means Islam was way messed up to the first generation of sahabah but u can take it to the prophet and that’s where quranists come out and say let’s forget all that.
Well, u can’t forget all that!
The only way Islam will be reformed is when we as Muslims realise that there is a problem, we sit down, allow sectarianism and discuss what the hell happened in our history and what the hell is going on in our communities. Only then that Islam will be reformed, all these reformists are jokers, the very Muslims have to reform themselves and not have someone shove it up their mouths, if they are too late then Islam will just be a thing in the back of someone’s mind and soon history.
If intellect is not hyped by religious leaders then we are still in the same place. Only honest open discussions are the way forward.
Drop the sectarianism, fitnah and ignorance that we have go it right and everybody else hasn’t; sit down and talk about this once and for all, and only Muslims will have the fate of Islam on their hands.
I messed up on the millions paragraph part. I meant, if millions of Muslims were inspired by ibn taymiyyah then the problem isn’t with ibn taymiyyah, the problem is with the Hadith. It’s like when a paki studies in London for 12 years about useless letters, disagreements between scholars, what the fuqaha said about how to divorce, how to treat slaves and loads of outdated nonsense. Now when this guy says I studied 10 years under a sheikh and people cheer him on, then the problem is not him but the community that indorse a such crap.
but I think you got things messed up really.
If I was to follow any sect which I won’t, I would take the path of the ظاهر (thwahir) who take things as they are told without twisting or making a joke about it like most people do.
This whole thing is messed up so I think u might be better off not calling yourself a Sunni Muslim. The ashari and salafi have little if not difference, they just disagree on attributes of Allah. That’s no big deal
Blaming it on salafis like they are the problem is dangerous, I would go so far to say that they are the solution for us to actually look at the sources and not trust our scholars who do nothing but sit down and give fatawa about chess and all that nonsense.
I know u might be frustrated and everything, but being sectarian is the worst thing you can do. Salafis often say, it doesn’t matter what u say but what Allah and our prophet said.
You will only beat them by playing like they do, trust me.
I don’t think you should comment on matters like this. It’s best to stay silent and listen.
“I think u might be better off not calling yourself a Sunni Muslim.” I’m not sure mmmcluru is inclined to become a Shia, Mu’tazila, Ibadhi etc. all of a sudden. Quite a stupid statement to make. Mmmcluru will probably be laughing at this. What kind of advice is this???
“The ashari and salafi have little if not difference, they just disagree on attributes of Allah. That’s no big deal”. Clearly, it’s not just that. If so, why all the sectarianism? It’s not the Asharis who started it, that’s a fact.
Don’t try to make big issues that can decide a person’s fate to seem so insignificant.
“I would go so far to say that they are the solution for us to actually look at the sources and not trust our scholars who do nothing but sit down and give fatawa about chess and all that nonsense.”
Are you a closet Salafi? Just because they advocate individual interpretations and the idea you don’t have to follow a madhab doesn’t make them great all of a sudden. In fact, its dangerous. They are a group that arose in modernity. Look up on their history. And not all of our scholars are bad either. I’m sick of people slagging off all scholars – they too do try and practice Islam in the best way possible. There’s a fine mix; we just have to be with the right one we believe will make an inspiring difference in our lives. The example of chess is old and practically no one follows it.
I might have been quite insulting in my comments but when it comes to sectarianism. Muslims would kill each other on praying differently, it’s quite pathetic how much we disagreed in history.
Look how dawah man and imam asim had a girly fight and if it wasn’t for the UK, it would of been bloodshed. Both were responsible and both are pathetic. Over mawlid, they would make expose videos, so don’t tell me we don’t kill each other on the slightest things.
And I’m not saying become a Shia or mutazila but calling yourself a Sunni Muslims entails heavy burden and historical issues. I would be uncomfortable calling myself a Sunni Muslim. I just say I’m a Muslim that follows the Sunnah.
Am I a closet salafi, I’m not really sure!
Your comments about good scholars that are actually being active for reforming or addressing Muslim issues in an effective way.
I’ll Waite here for names
“I would be uncomfortable calling myself a Sunni Muslim. I just say I’m a Muslim that follows the Sunnah.”
Yet another ridiculous comment
This is exactly what Sunnis are 😂😂😂
So only Sunnis follow the Sunnah?
Of course other groups will claim to do so but the Sunnis have the strongest claim
So even if your not Sunni, would it be inevitable that u have a weaker claim?
Sunni scholars have the most sound chains and hence why they are the orthodoxy. Other sects will reject these chains e.g. Shia will reject any chain with either Abu Bakr or Umar in them regardless of what has been transmitted (although they’ll be happy to take transmissions that can be bended to fit their agenda. I was only using Shias as an example but all other groups do this for whatever reason.
There were fabrications among Sunnis as well. But yeh ur right, they are probably the most sound.
Yes there have been fabrications but proper Sunni scholarship has managed to cypher through these and suss them out.
A famous example would be Imam Nasai. He was asked to find hadiths praising Hazarat Muawiya by some partisans of the Ummayads. When he rejected this on the basis that there are no hadith praising Hazarat Muawiya, they ruthlessly beat him to death. But as you can see, Sunnis like Nasai were concerned with propagating nothing but the truth.
Your modern Muslim groups are happy, as I have alluded, to do anything to present themselves as the truth, regardless of using fabricated hadith for example. So this is sad to see but all the more imperative that Sunnis acquaint themselves with the sciences of Hadith to spot these frauds. It’d make life a lot easier.
“That’s the kind of idiotic ‘harder is better’ thinking that disgusts me.”
Acts 15.10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?
Liberals and puritans need each other, and the two categories are interchangeable up to a point.
If someone stays liberal for too long, he or she will get horrified by seeing the outcomes of liberalism and will engage in puritan activism to try to correct those.
If someone stays puritan for too long, he or she will feel the growing urge to break free and engage in activism for “the cause of freedom”.
Both refuse to trust the promise expressed in the claim that Islam is easy, or in
Matthew 11.28 Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
1 John 5.3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.
Liberals love easiness/sweetness but deny that the commandments are easy/sweet.
Puritans love commandments but deny that the commandments are easy/sweet.
Both imply that God is a liar when He reveals that His commands are easy and sweet.
These threads are always good fun.
Assalamu alaykum brothers!!
How about working in banks? scholars say its haraam, wat do u say about that.
Then working everywhere is haraam according to their logic.
what about hospital where they do abortions or sex change surgery?
bookshops where they sell ‘kufr’?
So just ignore them.
I wonder though… certainly there are specific professions in banks (and other places) that ought to be avoided. I once considered working as a financial mathematician on Wall St (or elsewhere; they also call these mathematicians quants) until I was dissuaded after learning about riba. Looking back, I don’t regret that choice very much, regardless of the fiqh of the matter, because I’ve since learned about the morally bankrupt nature of the job. People are literally trying their best to screw suckers out of their retirement funds. Though I suppose one may say… it really is just the nature of the beast.
That being said, how can one rigorously draw a line in terms of what income is halal and what isn’t?
Prophet Joseph used to work for Pharaoh, the guy who called himself God.
Not only that but he was his Home Minister.
Same with Moses (Maturidis say Prophets are sinless before and after Prophethood).
So where did you get this ‘you can’t work for bad people’ thing from? Then don’t work for anyone.
You can’t work for bad people IF they make you do bad things.
So the NHS makes you kill babies and chop off people dicks etc. It can’t be helped, you work for them unless you are the one doing the killing, THEN its a problem. The natural conclusion of your concerns is burning your passport and moving to a ‘Muslim’ country. I know you aren’t saying that but it’s kind of the same.
So you shouldn’t help people cause harm or take people homes etc, but if a Prophet can work for Pharaoh then you can work for anyone.
And if only bad people work for Morgan Stanley they will never get any better.
One of the problems if that religious people have a huge list of stuff they won’t do – especially Muslims – won’t join the police, won’t talk to women blah blah. The they wonder how come society is getting messed up.
Really, it is because Muslims know they can’t keep their hands out of the cookie jar or out of the skirt that they have this avoidance is better than cure mentality. I don’t mean you.
So I think probably good call about Wall St. because they will highly likely make you do haraam stuff. I think. But these people who say that you can’t work in WalMart because they sell booze or Girly mags are talking crap.
The best jobs are those which pay the most. Because then you can use that money to help yourself. Then you can help others. Most people can’t do the second bit, it’s true. But that’s because they are shit, not because they have money.
There’s this joke in China. Guy asks someone: ‘would you give ten million dollars to charity if you could?’ other guy says ‘Yes!’.
‘How about 1 million?’ the guy asks again. ‘For sure, I’m willing to do it to help the people’.
‘How about a car? Would you give a car to charity?’
‘No’ the guy answers.
‘How come? You’d give a million dollars but not a car?!’
‘Because I actually have a car’.
That’s what people are like. Including the ones who tell you to ‘sacrifice’ for the Deen.
Thank you for writing your reply. It’s given me a lot to think about.
You make it clear that it doesn’t matter whom you work for, but that it does matter what you do in your job. So I can work for the worst person ever, but if I never do anything haram, things should be fine.
What I’m wondering about now is the status of an action that helps another person perform a haram action. For example, were I, as part of my hypothetical job as a nurse at the NHS, to hand a surgical instrument to a doctor killing a baby, would the money I receive from the employment be haram?
On the other hand, suppose I’m an analyst at some hedge fund and my supervisor wants me to report on the profitability of the stock options of a bank that deals in riba. I know that if I give the correct answer and say that the instruments are profitable, he will purchase the options for the hedge fund. Would the salary I receive here be haram?
If income from these sources are haram, then how do I determine which actions of mine are culpable? Sorry if this sounds absurd, but to stretch this question all the way, would a custodian mopping a bank’s floors be culpable for assisting people in contracting for riba?
I am the brother from Hizb ut Tahrir that posted a comment a week ago and it hasn’t been approved yet. I politely ask you to answer the question if you still have it in your comment queue. I am reposting as myself (not anonymously) in hopes that it is taken seriously.
As I mentioned, I appreciate your stance and am open to my opinion being challenged. But the gist of my question was how does this situation compare to wakala when the person giving me the asset asks for more in return than what he gave me?
Also, I read the Sh. Haitham al-Haddad says that school loans are mudarabah because of the way UK structures the loan (only requires repayment if the student receives a job paying great than X amount, doesn’t require payment if the student becomes disabled, etc.) In his case, he was saying that since transactions are halal (because all things are halal in nature) then this type of transaction is halal. Furthermore, he said that due to the conditions of the contract it resembles a mudarabah contract, where both partners share the profits, but the money partner suffers the monetary loss while the working partner loses his labor.
I don’t intend to critique Sh. al-Haddad’s position, but I do see his point at face value… and it’s an interesting proposition.
As for the issue of wakala, I sincerely look forward to your response. From reading your comments (and multiple articles on your blog), I can tell that you are very intelligent and seem to have a low tolerance for stupidity. I humbly ask that our exchange is polite and brotherly.
Lastly, I openly state that I am from Hizb ut Tahrir, and we have adopted opinions on economics and financial transactions (see Nizam al Iqtisad and Muqaddimah al-Dustoor) but I’m not here to impose. If my opinion is wrong I’ll leave it. It’s just that I’ve never heard anyone say that a bank giving money and demanding repayment would be considered wakala.
If you prefer to email me directly rather than respond publicly I would look forward to that as well.
Jazak Allah khair.
I don’t think you posted it here – its not in our box anyway!
Also, do you think Haddad is reliable in ANYTHING? Do you know the kind of crap he says?
So anyway, what is the issue with Wakala? I didn’t get your comment here, you probably got confused and put it on another site where this article is. There is no need to publish your real name.
Also, in terms of never having heard anyone say it – most of the people who talk about this have no understanding, that was the point of the article. Taqi Usmani is the most famous in this subject and his knowledge and honesty was demonstrated to be rubbish isn’t it?
« So in Catholicism versus Islam, Catholicism is ‘easy’ in dietary regulations, amount of prayers but ‘hard’ in birth control and divorce compared to Islam »
Indeed, the differences about birth control surprised me when I first learnt about them. Since you’re mentioning that and you also speak a lot about the problem of forced celibacy due to sex segregation in Islam today, do you happen to know whether the Hanafi fiqh says anything about masturbation ? I mean lonely masturbation as opposed to « birth control » within a couple.
I remember seeing a youtube video from a sheikh arguing from Sunna : he said that there are two main solutions to the problems experienced by celibate people, masturbation and fasting. On several occasions the Prophet preferred fasting to masturbation, so Muslims should do the same.
“do you happen to know whether the Hanafi fiqh says anything about masturbation ? I mean lonely masturbation as opposed to « birth control » within a couple.”
From most of the material that I’ve read on matters like this, they state that (in any Sunni school of Fiqh) that it’s not permissible to masterbate if you are married but then again there is nothing to say that it is forbidden. And most info for this tends to be ‘derived’ from hadith even when there is no clear cut hadith expressing this.
I welcome any corrections
So all of them say it is not allowed, except Hanbalis, which is odd.
However, according to Hanafis principles, it cannot actually be haraam because according to us, before being made haraam, something needs to be mentioned clearly in Quran or Muttawatir hadith.
Also, it clashes with the principle of ‘Umoomul Balwa’, where widespread things have to be addressed in mass reports, and this isn’t.
There is also a recent study linking NOT masturbating to prostate cancer, which makes sense in the same way as not breast feeding is related to breast cancer. An earlier study showed benefits for only over 50’s and a risk in younger men, and the later study shows a general benefit, so they conflict a bit.
It is undeniable that Muslim men have more reason to masturbate than literally any other group out there. There is also some evidence that they consume the most pornography, if you look at Google searches.
It is virtually impossible for Muslim men to have get unpaid sex with females at the aesthetic level of the societies they live in.
This might be why they complain about ‘non-Muslim women’ being slutty and a ‘fitna’ and then run of to join ISIS to rape…non Muslim women.
I know about the marriage and masturbation thing – but it shows you how odd scholars fatwas are:
I know marriage makes certain things halal that were haraam, but how can it make things haraam that were halal?
So according to scholars, you can actually have SEX with other women if you are married but if you jerk off THEN its beef?
Good points mmmcluru. This type of thinking is what I was like when I came across these scholarly opinions. If something is haram, then it must be known to all, not just to the select few. And halal cannot be made haram in this context.
Caution needs to be urged amongst the scholars when making pronouncements like this
I thought masturbation was haram, or at least makrooh. I know for certain porn is haram, but the only context I know of were masturbation can be allowed is in situations were temptation to fornicate or commit adultery is very high and it would be better to relieve ones self than to commit zina.
According to Hanbalis it is fine.
Haraam needs a big proof. We don’t have it.
Makrooh still means allowed.
As for your scenario about to prevent Zina, I know that’s what scholars say, but why else do people masturbate if not that they can’t have sex and are desperate? Are humans really like that? They think ‘Ooops, I’m LITERALLY about to commit zina, I’d better jerk off’? I think that scenario only occurs in Muslim scholars heads and shows how out of touch they are.
Just one thing, I’m guessing you are younger than me – let me ask you, have you ever had a girl come up to you, a pretty one, and just offer you sex? It doesn’t even happen to really good looking guys (*Unless you are famous). So when would this scenario of masturbating to prevent zina ever occur? Usually, to get a girl, including the slutty ones, you have to chase her. And then again to have sex. If you did all of that, why would you then run off to masturbate?
So in the usual scenario, you don’t need to masturbate to ‘prevent zina’. Zina is prevented by the fact that:
1) You don’t have a girl
2) Pretty girls aren’t trying to have sex with you, they have plenty of offers
These scholars promote a sort of ‘zina culture’ where sex is easy to get. If it was, they would be the first to get it (reference: Hamza Tzortzis & Ashley Madison, yeah yeah, benefit of the doubt, whatever). Just go up to a pretty girl or exchange student or whatever takes your fancy and ask her to have sex with you. See what happens. Try it ten or a hundred times and then tabulate the results and make a graph (this experiment has actually been done in the West).
So sex isn’t ‘easily’ available FOR MEN as these guys imply – it is easily available if you are an attractive girl OR you are a man who knows how to seduce women (which most don’t).
So it might seem a tangent, but I’m just mentioning this because you may be young and influenced by these guys nonsense world view where ‘white girls’ are ‘asking for it’. My opinion is that having to masturbate to ‘avoid’ zina never happens, unless you went to a lot of effort to bed a girl in the first place and spent time and effort doing that, in which case you are unlikely to run off at the last minute unless you suddenly got a bout of guilt.
My opinions is that Hanbalis are wrong about most things. I would say young people should pursue a partner by their own means (that means do not rely on parents, scholars, Ummah, ISOC, nothing. Most of the time that will not work) aggressively and avoid masturbation. If you can’t get laid in this highly sexualised society (and huge numbers of Muslims can’t, there is apparently a study which shows that 30% of Saudi women over the age of 35 have NEVER been married = no sex, presumably), I think Masturbation is unavoidable. But everyone has different levels of self control and I think God knows all of that.
” Shukurov gave proof and references from classical texts and reasoning which can be followed from first principles. (…) But they are too galactically stupid to even know what riba is. ”
On my first reading of Shukurov’s text I got the impression that it destroyed all the stuff from Imran Hussein I mentioned above about riba.
On second thoughts, however, it seems to me that Imran Hussein’s only mistake was a misnomer : what he denounces should perhaps not be called riba according to the definition given by Shukurov, but it would still be haraam, it would still be the universalization of the phenomenon described in Qur’an 9.34, “They who hoard up gold and silver and spend it not” and it would still be prohibited by Qur’an 11.85 ” do not deprive people of what is rightfully theirs by diminishing the value of their things”, which is exactly how inflation with modern non-redeemable paper money works. Hussein adds that this since God allows the use of silver and gold as money in the Qur’an, non-redeemability in gold and silver (and the prohibition of gold as legal tender, see Art.4 section 2b) of the agreements of the IMF ) prohibits what God has allowed, and therefore constitutes shirk.
Tha Hanafi principle of “every transaction is permissible by default” would not make counterfeit money permissible, would it ? Nor would it make permissible something prohibited in Qur’an 11.85.
Hussein honestly admits that his methodology ignores classic Muslim juristic literature ; he justifies himself by arguing about “the confusing complexity of the material and the ceaseless legal conflicts”, and also quotes Muhamad Asad on this issue :
“As is evidenced by the voluminous juridical literature on this subject, Islamic scholars have not yet been able to reach an absolute agreement on the definition of riba : a definition, that is, that would cover all conceivable legal situations (…) It should be borne in mind that the passage condemning and prohitibing riba in legal terms (2:275-281) was the last revelation received by the Prophet, who died a few years later (…) so that even Umar ibn al-Khattab is reliably reported to have said : <>(Ibn Hanbal, on the authority of Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab). (…) Hence, while the Qur’anic condemnation of the concept and practice of riba is unequivocal and final, every successive Muslim generation is faced with the challenge of giving new dimensions and a fresh economic meaning to this term (…)”
Thanks again for an interesting contribution.
Paper money and inflation and fiat currency are separate issues from Riba and mortgage. They may come under riba, sure, but not under mortgage.
Shukurov isn’t arguing that what we call a modern mortgage is ‘fair’. He is saying that to equate it with something haraam like Riba, there needs to be rock solid proof because Haraam is a thing with big evidential standards (i.e it should be clearly mentioned in the Quran or some Muttawatir – mass narrated – source), not like how Salafis have a big list of ‘haraams’ such as shaving your beard or not having your clitoris removed or partially removed. So if the scholars are trying to say mortgages are haraam based on their reasoning and making analogies etc, assuming that is allowed, their reasoning should be rock solid, which he showed it isn’t.
As you know, rent isn’t fair in the UK either. ‘Islamic’ mortgages are worse than the real ones. So yes, mortgagees are possibly some kind of dodgy transaction but not riba.
A lot of these people who talk about the gold standard etc have basically taken the criticisms of the global financial system (usually legitimate) from the Far Left, anarchists and Ron Paul types and then mixed them with Islam. But when you ask them for Islamic proof of their position, they can’t provide it. Hussein has good points and is honest, but he needs to argue his case without trying to shoehorn in the Quranic meaning to justify his argument. You see with a lot of these guys, they are afraid to deploy purely rational and moral arguments per se (even though the Quran allowed it) and instead try to make a tenuous link to the Quranic terminology – Hussein isn’t like that necessarily but they tend to do this because if they told the Muslim public that they are against something because it is ‘not fair’ or ‘doesn’t make sense’, Muslims can’t handle that.
The Hanafi principle means that anything not mentioned is Halal, so counterfeiting is mentioned. Also, it is in the Hanafi understanding that the intellect can be a Judge and that we have an independent moral sense, even without revelation, if that makes sense.
I am not against Hussein’s point, but I just wanted to mention these few things.
I don’t have a problem with people being against mortgages or the financial structure on a religious basis of fairness, but Muslims try to get specific and try and make it look like there is a cut and dry link with Riba to lay it on think.
Lot of transactions are not fair: the mark up on designer clothes is 70%. They are made is sweatshops. I don’t see Muslims running to have them declared riba. but when it comes to houses, you see them on their high horse.
Muslims, especially Salfists, like to borrow from the Left and Anarchist because they are ‘cooler’ than them but they don’t admit it.
Eew, that silly WordPress ate up my Umar quote above. So here it goes again :
The last (of the Qur’an) that was revealed was the passage (lit., the verse) on riba ; and, behold, the Apostle of God passed away without (lit. before having explained its meaning to us
786 Salaams to All,
Nopony seems to be aware of the ruling on the matter given by the European Fiqh Council seventeen years ago. Which fairly surprises me.
Sheikh Mustafa al-Zarqa also affirmed the permissibility of mortgages for Muslims living in non-Muslim countries when halal financing is not available.
Some scholars have even affirmed the rather sensible position that if the cost of an “available” halal option is so great that it would put the prospect of home ownership out of reach while a regular home mortgage would not, that halal option can be considered de facto NOT available in one’s country.
It seems to me that these considerations deserve at least a mention, being relevant to the discussion at hand and all.
I have a concern about Islamic dietary laws. Personally, I avoid meat that is not Zabihah as does my family, but I do notice that other Muslims, in the U.S at least, do not really care about that. Also, I’ve noticed some Muslims using apps and calling up companies to check what each and every ingredient in their bag of chips is derived from. What are the different opinions on this matter?