3 ms·

> Capitalism has lifted far more people out of poverty than charity. Its not even close. This is not the argument. Islam does not prohibit all capitalistic pr

> Capitalism has lifted far more people out of poverty than charity. Its not even close. This is not the argument. Islam does not prohibit all capitalistic practices, as a matter of fact, it's generally pro free market. All it does is it places some boundaries on unethical, immoral, and parasitic practices. Interest is one of those prohibited things. Everything else that is not prohibited goes. Furthermore, Islam pushes people to work and to be self sufficient and not rely on charity. https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:296 https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:296 > Society should not remain poor and underdeveloped just to adhere to your religious beliefs Strawman argument. The Islamic world during the Islamic Golden Age was prosperous and ahead of everyone in all facets of life, while the rest of the world was in the so called Dark Ages. > Instead of being paid in cash, the lender is paid in equity that ideally becomes more valuable than the original loan amount. The difference is in the contract. In an interest bearing loan, the lender is contractually owed a profit. This is not the case in a proper risk sharing model, where the investor is willing to accept a loss. Risk is shared proportionally among both parties. A borrower who defaults will have the lender come after him not just for the principal, but also for the accrued interest, with the full support of the law. Incidentally, the Quran addresses your very claim that interest is the same as trade: https://quran.com/2/275 https://quran.com/2/275. It is very clear that interest is *not* the same as trading and ethical investments. Renting a house or car is not an interest bearing transaction as I explain in another post here. One main difference is that a rented asset is consumed (e.g. subject to wear and tear), whereas "rented" money isn't. And since you're asking, yes I didn't take on a mortgage, nor opened a savings account (to be fair, the bank opened one for me, and I had to contact them repeatedly to close it). Furthermore, we have narrations that there will come a time where even people who do not consume interest will be affected by it. We live in those times today, even dealing with fiat currency causes individuals to be affected by interest because it's money printed at will to cover the government's debts: * https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/12/142 https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/12/142 * https://sunnah.com/mishkat:2818 https://sunnah.com/mishkat:2818 > I'm still waiting for the name of a society that operated without debt or interest. All throughout Islamic history until the fall of the Ottoman empire and the subsequent colonization by the West, which pushed its financial institutions in Arabia.

rank0 6y ago
> A borrower who defaults will have the lender come after him not just for the principal, but also for the accrued interest, with the full support of the law. You have a very narrow understanding of loans. In fact, creditors lose money on loans all the time. Borrowers routinely escape paying out the entirety of their loans. > Incidentally, the Quran addresses your very claim that interest is the same as trade: https://quran.com/2/275 https://quran.com/2/275. > It is very clear that interest is not the same as trading and ethical investments. You logic is that because allah declares it so, then it must be true. It really is as simple as charging a fee for borrowing an asset. In the case of a cash loan, the asset is cash. You can perform all the mental gymnastics you want, but renting out a car or a property or capital is really all the same principle. You have drawn a silly distinction for equity based on your religion. All the Islamic financial institutions still charge interest. They just use different names.
- gher-shyu3i 6y ago
  > In fact, creditors lose money on loans all the time. Borrowers routinely escape paying out the entirety of their loans. Just because some lenders lose money, does not make the contract any less predatory or immoral. That's like saying that there are some people who don't wear seatbelts and make it out of accidents without issues. The very fact that the US has trillions of dollars of student and auto and mortgage debt is more than enough to illustrate how much of a disaster usurious money lending is. > In the case of a cash loan, the asset is cash. I already explained how it's not the same. A tangible asset is consumed, experiences wear and tear, needs maintenance, etc. Money doesn't need any of that, you get back your asset in pristine condition, plus more. > All the Islamic financial institutions still charge interest If they do, then they're not Islamic, regardless if they claim they are. It's quite simple, and many scholars have called them out. Calling something prohibited by a different name to make it palatable is already mentioned in our books, and is outright prohibited. Dancing around the issue by stitching together a series of permissible contracts to result in something that mimics interest is prohibited. We have narrations about this. The so called "Islamic banks" are a recent problem as I mention in another post. It's one of the many effects of post WWII colonization, where the West forced its values on the lands it occupied.

rank0 6y ago

> A borrower who defaults will have the lender come after him not just for the principal, but also for the accrued interest, with the full support of the law. You have a very narrow understanding of loans. In fact, creditors lose money on loans all the time. Borrowers routinely escape paying out the entirety of their loans. > Incidentally, the Quran addresses your very claim that interest is the same as trade: https://quran.com/2/275 https://quran.com/2/275. > It is very clear that interest is not the same as trading and ethical investments. You logic is that because allah declares it so, then it must be true. It really is as simple as charging a fee for borrowing an asset. In the case of a cash loan, the asset is cash. You can perform all the mental gymnastics you want, but renting out a car or a property or capital is really all the same principle. You have drawn a silly distinction for equity based on your religion. All the Islamic financial institutions still charge interest. They just use different names.

gher-shyu3i 6y ago
> In fact, creditors lose money on loans all the time. Borrowers routinely escape paying out the entirety of their loans. Just because some lenders lose money, does not make the contract any less predatory or immoral. That's like saying that there are some people who don't wear seatbelts and make it out of accidents without issues. The very fact that the US has trillions of dollars of student and auto and mortgage debt is more than enough to illustrate how much of a disaster usurious money lending is. > In the case of a cash loan, the asset is cash. I already explained how it's not the same. A tangible asset is consumed, experiences wear and tear, needs maintenance, etc. Money doesn't need any of that, you get back your asset in pristine condition, plus more. > All the Islamic financial institutions still charge interest If they do, then they're not Islamic, regardless if they claim they are. It's quite simple, and many scholars have called them out. Calling something prohibited by a different name to make it palatable is already mentioned in our books, and is outright prohibited. Dancing around the issue by stitching together a series of permissible contracts to result in something that mimics interest is prohibited. We have narrations about this. The so called "Islamic banks" are a recent problem as I mention in another post. It's one of the many effects of post WWII colonization, where the West forced its values on the lands it occupied.