By Abu Ubaydah Andrew Booso
Part I | Part II
The Wisdom in Prohibiting Interest
Yusuf Qaradawi writes in The Lawful and Prohibited: “The strict prohibition of interest in Islam is a result of its deep concern for the moral, social, and economic welfare of mankind.” In view of succinctness, he then summarises the wisdom behind the prohibition that Razi articulated in his Tafsir:
“First: The taking of interest implies appropriating another person’s property without giving him anything in exchange, because one who lends one dirham for two dirhams gets the extra dirham for nothing. Now, a man’s property is for (the purpose of) fulfilling his needs and it has great sanctity, according to the hadith, ‘A man’s property is as sacred as his blood’ (transmitted by Abu Na’eem in Al-hilbah.) This means that taking it from him without giving him something in exchange is haram.
“‘Second: Dependence on interest prevents people from working to earn money, since the person with dirhams can earn an extra dirham through interest, either in advance or at a later date, without working for it. The value of work will consequently be reduced in his estimation, and he will not bother to take the trouble of running a business or risking his money in trade or industry. This will lead to depriving people of benefits, and the business of the world cannot go on without industries, trade and commerce, building and construction, all of which need capital at risk. (This, from an economic point of view, is unquestionably a weighty argument.)
“‘Third: Permitting the taking of interest discourages people from doing good to one another, as is required by Islam. If interest is prohibited in a society, people will lend to each other with good will, expecting back no more than what they have loaned, while if interest is made permissible the needy person will be required to pay back more on loans (than he has borrowed), weakening his feelings of good will and friendliness toward the lender. (This is the moral aspect of the prohibition of interest.)
“‘Fourth: The lender is very likely to be wealthy and the borrower poor. If interest is allowed, the rich will exploit the poor, and this is against the spirit of mercy and charity. (This is the social aspect of the prohibition of interest.)”
With all due respect to Shaykh Qaradawi, the latter part of his second argument has been refuted by the advance of industrial development in the West, which has been buttressed by the giving and taking of interest. Therefore a person could argue that ‘interest’ makes societal economic sense. Such is the case that Shaykh ‘Aashiq Illahi, in his commentary of Qur’an 2:275, in his Illuminating Discourses on the Noble Quran, states that this is one of the very disputes put forward in opposition to orthodox scholars who uphold the prohibition of riba. Illahi says that “people have grown accustomed to taking usury” due to “the institution of banking,” and they “ridicule the Ulema [religious scholars], saying that ‘their’ prohibition of usury has led to the decline of the Muslims while other nations have progressed far more rapidly.” While this argument can be made, one can rebut it by pointing out that such an understanding lacks profundity, for it fails to see the overall societal harm caused by interest; whereby such an advocate has been beguiled by the wealth of a few, without seeing the general harm, both economic and spiritual.
There is a fine line between following (taqleed تقليد) a juristic school of thought (madhab مذهب) or an established scholar of Islamic Jurisprudence (faqih فقيه) and fanaticism/blind partisanship (ta`ssub تعصب) to a scholar or school of thought. The former is something that the scholars of Islam have recommended for the common people who aren’t able to research and interpret the legal implications of our scripture. There is undoubtedly a well-founded practice that, in order to learn the basic parameters of worship, it is easiest to learn the rules from one of our four established juristic schools of thought. That being said, it doesn’t mean that if you come upon a contrary verse of the Qur’an, sound Hadith, or other qualified scholarly analogy that you can’t break from your original school’s or scholar’s position to follow it.*
When we think about Mariam (alayha sallatu wa sallam - may Allah send His peace and blessings on her), how often do we associate her role with the da`wah of Islam? Do we realize how much she cared about her people being receptive to guidance, coming to the truth? Do we realize how much of herself she gave so that Islam would spread? Do we recognize that we can extract lessons from her as a Daiyah (Islamic worker/caller)? Would it surprise you to know that there has been a historical debate amongst the scholars on whether or not Mariam (as) was a nabiyah (female Prophet), as she was someone who received revelation directly through Jibreel? I actually tend to agree with the opinion that she was not a nabiyah, though she may share with the prophets a similar status in righteousness. Yet, I bring this question forth for a purpose: it’s easier to admit to ourselves, that we really do not know Mariam (as) and the role she played in the da`wah of Islam, as much as we’d like to think we do. As da`wah is something many of us may be involved in, her story and example, especially in the 21st century, is one we cannot do without. While this article will not do justice to the subject, we will focus on just a few significant lessons that Mariam (as) provides for the Islamic worker.
Recent Comments