Indexed OCR Text

النقدية ولكن يجب أن يكون تقابض أحد البدلين فى المجلس إذا كان
ذيباً خالصاً، وأن يعرف الأجل عند العقد وقد قبل بذا الموقف معظم علماء
الهند وكثير من باكستان، والتفصيل في رسالتي "أحكام الأوراق النقدية".
(فتاوى عثمانى: ١٥٩/٣، كتاب البيوع)
Jadīd Mu'āmalāt Ke Shar ī Ahkām:
Take the following example of selling gold/silver on credit: A person
bought gold jewellery and paid part of the money now and promised
to pay the balance later on; or bought the entire amount of jewellery
on credit. The Shari'ah ruling in this regard is that since the sale and
purchase of gold/silver through currency notes does not fall under the
injunctions of bay' as-sarf, it is permissible to buy and sell on credit
provided possession is taken of either of the one in the assembly of the
transaction. This is so that it does not fall under the ruling of bay' al-
kālī bi al-kālī.
وفى الهندية: قال: وروى الحسن عن أبي حنيفة إذا اشترى فلوساً بدرابم
وليس عند بذا فلوس ولا عند الآخر درابم ثم أن أحدبما دفع وتفرقا جاز
وإن لم ينقد واحد منها حتى تفرقا لم يجز كذا فى المحيط. (الفتاوى الهندية:
1
٢٢٤/٣، الفصل الثالث فى بيع الفلوس).
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
Currency notes are not like gold and silver coins. Neither are they
receipts for gold and silver. This is why it is permissible to buy gold
and silver with them under all conditions - with differences in
amounts and also on credit.
Some 'ulama' are of the view that it is impermissible. As a
precautionary measure, a person could take a loan from the jeweller
and then engage in a cash transaction.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Jadīd Mu āmalāt Ke Shar ī Ahkām, vol. 1, p. 128.
379

The Shari'ah ruling with regard to Forex
Question
How does Forex work and what is the Shari'ah ruling with regard to it?
Answer
The essence of Forex can be understood as follows: Zayd opens a bank
account with $1 000. The company adds $99 000 into his account as a
loan. He can now trade with $100 000. After that, he can purchase a
plot for $100 000 from a bank via the company. In other words, a
guarantee of $100 000 came to him. After some days, the value of the
dollar increases so he phones the bank to sell the $100 000 in exchange
for pounds via the company. The company sells the dollars in return
for pounds. The company provides the following services:
1. Telephonic contact.
2. The market where the person can conduct his business.
3.
Internet system.
4.
Providing $99 000 as a guarantee.
A few other services are also provided.
When the sale and purchase of the currency takes place, the company
takes a specified amount as a commission. If, after buying the
currency, there is a delay in selling it, the company charges a certain
amount daily.
We are of the view that this business seems to be permissible.
Nonetheless, there are certain objections to it.
1. The person does not take possession of the currency whereas it is
essential to take possession of it during a sale and purchase. In other
words, at the time of the purchase and sale, neither the person nor his
representative has the amount with him. Rather, it is written into his
account.
The answer is that since Zayd can do business with the amount which
has come into his account, it is synonymous to taking legal possession
of it, even though physical possession has not been realized.
Ma'āyīr Shar'īyyah has been compiled by twenty-seven expert muftīs.
The following is stated therein:
380

يتحقق القبض بحصوله حقيقة أو حكماً وتختلف كيفية قبض الأشياء بحسب
حالها واختلاف الأعراف وبما يكون قبضاً لها، إذا أودع في حساب العميل
مبلغ من المال مباشرة أو بحوالة مصرفية إلى آخر ما قال ... (معاییر شرعیه، ص
We learn from the above that when an amount is transferred into a
person's account in such a way that he can trade with it, then it is
classified as a legal possession.
إن الفائدة المطلوبة بالعقد إنما بي التمكن من التصرف وذلك يترتب على
التعيين فلا يحتاج إلى القبض. (شرح العناية: على بامش فتح القدير: ١٨/٧،
دار الفكر)
'Asr-e-Hādir Ke Peichīdah Masā'il:
Once an entry is made in a bank's register in favour of a person, it will
be considered to be a valid "possession" if he wants to change one
currency for another. This is irrespective of whether it is required in
the currency which the person is giving to the bank, or in the currency
which the bank has.1
2. The amount taken from the company is a debt which is shouldered
by Zayd. Only this amount is written in Zayd's account. The pounds
which he bought are also recorded in it. In other words, it is a debt.
This will be impermissible on the basis of bay' ad-dayn bi ad-dayn.
We already concluded that once the amount is reflected in his account,
it is synonymous to a legal possession. So he can use it for buying and
selling. In other words, he has full power to exercise his will over it.
How, then, can it be a bay' ad-dayn bi ad-dayn? In fact, the dollars
were recorded in this account from before and he had legal possession
over them. When the pounds were included in his account, they too
came under his possession. Therefore, bay' ad-dayn bi ad-dayn did not
take place. There is no reason for saying that it is impermissible.
3. The commission which the company collects appears to be for the
loan which the company gave to Zayd. This is an usurious transaction,
and therefore impermissible.
1 Qādī Mujāhidul Islam Qasimī, 'Asr-e-Hādir Ke Peichīdah Masā'il, p. 232.
381

This is a payment for the brokerage which is collected from both
parties. And it is permissible to collect a commission from both
parties. Since the company provides various services, it ought to be
permitted to charge service fees. The books of jurisprudence state that
it is permissible to charge a percentage commission from both parties.
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
Question: Is it permissible to collect payment for brokerage from both
parties?
Answer: It is permissible provided the amount is clearly stated.
قال فى الشامية من البزازية: إجارة السمسار والمنادى والحمامى والصکاک وما
لا يقدر في الوقت ولا العمل تجوز. (رد المحتار: كتاب الاجارة، باب الاجارة
الفاسدة، ٤٧/٦، سعید)١
Further reading: Radd al-Muhtar, vol. 4, p. 560; Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah,
vol. 25, p. 286; Nizām al-Fatāwā, vol. 1, p. 297; Mahmūd al-Fatāwā, vol. 3,
p. 85.
The commission which is collected neither falls under interest nor
gambling. Rather, it is permissible as a payment for brokerage.
4. The company lays down the condition that Zayd must use the loan
in a market. This is permissible just as it is permissible to take a
mortgage or guarantor for the protection of a loan. In a loan
agreement, hawalah and kafalah are laid down for the guarantee of the
loan.
5. The company is a representative for the buyer and seller. It seems
that one person is a simultaneous representative for the buyer and
seller.
The answer to this is that one person can be a representative for a
buyer and seller if he has been permitted by the one who appointed
him.
الوكيل بالبيع لا يملك الشراء لنفسه لأن الواحد لا يكون بائعاً ومشترياً
فيبيع من غيره ثم يشتريه من، وإن أمره الموكل أن يبيعه من نفسه وأولاده
الصغار أو ممن لا تقبل شهادته فباع منهم جاز. (فتاوى الشامى، باب الوكالة
1 Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 7, p. 272.
382

بالبيع والشراء، ٥٢٣/٥، سعيد. وكذا فى البحر الرائق: ١٦٧/٧، فصل فى الوكيل
بالبيع، كوئته)
6. If Zayd delays in selling the currency, he will be charged a certain
amount daily. This is interest. It is imperative to abstain from this. If
this condition is removed, the transaction will be permissible.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Selling a silver ring which has a gem-stone set in it
Question
A person sold a silver ring which had a gem-stone set in it. He sold
both in return for two hundred dirhams (silver) - some of which was
paid in cash and some was deferred. Is this transaction permissible?
Will the ruling change if it is possible or not possible to separate the
gem-stone from the silver?
Answer
It will be necessary to pay in cash the amount of money which is equal
to the amount of silver which is in the ring. If it was not paid, and the
gem-stone could be separated without damaging the ring, then only
the sale of the gem stone will be valid. If the gem-stone cannot be
separated without damaging the ring, the transaction will be invalid
with respect to both items [the ring and the gem-stone].
In other words, if a person sold a ring which had a gem-stone, for two
hundred dirhams - some of them in cash and some on credit - if the
silver of two hundred dirhams weighs more than the silver found in
the ring, and the buyer paid the full amount or paid only the amount
for the ring, and deferred the payment of the balance, the transaction
in both cases will be permissible.
If the buyer did not make any payment, and both separated - if it is
easy to separate the gem-stone from the ring, the transaction with
respect to the gem-stone is valid, and invalid with respect to the ring.
If it is not possible to separate the gem-stone, the transaction will be
invalid with respect to both.
383

الفتاوى الهندية:
وإذا باع الرجل من آخر حلي ذيب فيه لؤلؤ وجوبر بدنانير وقبض المشترى
الحلي ... فإن كانت الدنانير اللتي بي ثمن أكثر من ذيب الحلي فإنه يجوز البيع فى
الذبب والجوبر ثم بعد ذلك إن نقد الثمن كل قبل أن يفترقا فالعقد ماضٍ على
الصحة وكذلك إن نقد حصة الذبب الذي فى الحلي، وإن لم ينقد شيئاً حتى
تفرقا فالعقد فيما يخص الحلي من الذبب يفسد وفيما يخص الجوبر إن كان
الجوبر بحيث لا يمكن تخليصه إلا بضرر يفسد وإن أمكن تخليصه من غير
ضرر لا يفسد العقد فى الجوبر بكذا فى المحيط. (الفتاوى الهندية: ٢٢٢/٣،
الفصل الثانى فى بيع السيوف المحلاة ، كتاب الصرف)
الدر المختار:
من باع سيفاً حليته خمسون .. فباعه بمائة وقد نقد خمسين فما نقد فهو ثمن
الفضة ... فإن افترقا من غير قبض بطل فى الحلية فقط وصح فى السيف لعدم
اشتراط قبض ثمن فى المجلس إن يخلص بلا ضرر وإن لم يخلص إلا بضرر
بطل أصلاً لتعذر تسليم السيف بلا ضرر كبيع جذع من السقف، نهر. (الدر
المختار مع فتاوى الشامى: ٢٦٢/٥، سعيد)
الهداية:
لو باع سيفاً محلى بمائة دربم وحليتم خمسون ودفع من الثمن خمسين جاز
البيع .. فإن لم يتقابضا حتى افترقا بطل العقد فى الحلية لأنه صرف فيها وكذا
فى السيف إن كان لا يتخلص إلا بضرر وإن كان يتخلص السيف بغير ضرر
جاز البيع فى السيف وبطل فى الحلية. (الهداية: ١٠٦/٣، كتاب الصرف)
وللمزيد أنظر: المبسوط للامام السرخسى: ١٨/١٤، كتاب الصرف، ادارة
القرآن. والمحيط البربانى: ٣٣٢/٨، كتاب الصرف، رشيديه)
384

Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Selling a currency at a rate which is different from the government-
stipulated one
Question
What is the ruling with regard to selling a currency at a rate which is
different - whether more or less - than the rate stipulated by the
government?
Answer
There is no objection whatsoever to its permissibility. This is because
when one currency is sold for another, it is permissible to sell it at an
increased or decreased price. However, this will entail breaking a law
of the government. It is essential for a Muslim to maintain his self-
respect. If there is a danger to his respect, he must abstain from such
an action. It is highly foolish to put one's respect into danger for the
sake of a few cowries.
Fiqhī Maqālāt:
If a person exchanges a currency for another one at a price which is
different from the government rate, it will not be classified as usury.
This is because the currencies are of different denominations, and it is
permissible to exchange them at an increased or decreased price. The
Shari'ah has not laid down any limit to this; it is dependent on the
mutual agreement of the two parties. However, the rules of tas'īr
(price fixing) will apply. Jurists who say that tas'īr is permissible in
items specified by the government, then it will be permissible in
currencies as well ... Therefore, it is impermissible to break this law of
the government (provided it is an Islamic government which adheres
to Islamic principles; not like present-day governments). At the same
time, we cannot say it is haram by classifying it as usury.
Further reading: Fatāwa Mahmudīyyah, vol. 16, p. 148; Fatāwā
Rahīmīyyah, vol. 9, p. 222; Kifāyatul Muftī, vol. 7, p. 356.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Trading in a foreign currency
Question
What is the ruling with regard to trading in a foreign currency?
Assuming a Muslim does this as a business and invites other Muslims
to invest in it, will we say that they have invested their money in a
lawful place?
385

Answer
Trading in a foreign currency is permissible. Differences in the price
are also permissible. This is because currencies of different countries
are classified as different species. In our times, a currency note is not a
genuine currency, but a customary one. This business is therefore
permissible. Based on this, it will be permissible to invest in a business
of this nature. The money invested in it will be invested in a lawful
place.
Proofs were given in detail previously.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Selling R5-coins at higher or lower prices
Question
When our past president (Nelson Mandela) turned ninety, our Reserve
Bank issued R5-coins containing his image. A limited number of these
coins was minted. If a person were to obtain them from South African
banks, they would cost him R5; but he could sell them for R1000 in
foreign countries. This is because this coin has become a collector's
coin. Can I buy these coins locally and sell them overseas? Is it
permissible for me to do this?
Answer
If the R5-coin is sold for a higher or lower price in return for a
different currency, it is certainly permissible. If it is sold for the same
currency, then the scholars differ. Some of them say it is permissible
because it is not classified as a genuine currency. A person has the
leeway of practising on the view of Imam Abu Hanīfah rahimahullah
and Imām Abū Yusuf rahimahullāh in this regard.
ويجوز بيع الفلس بالفلسين بأعيانهما عند أبي حنيفة وأبي يوسف وقال محمد
لا يجوز. ولهما أن الثمنية في حقهما تثبت باصطلاحهما إذ لا ولاية للغير
عليهما فتبطل باصطلاحهما وإذا بطلت الثمنية تتعين بالتعيين. (الهداية،
باب الرباء ٨١/٣)
Practising on the view of Imam Abu Hanīfah and Imam Abu Yusuf
rahimahumallāh can be envisaged with respect to money which is
treated as an item in itself. Some people are in the habit of collecting
coins and currency notes of various countries. The purpose is not to
use those coins and notes for exchange purposes, for engaging in
386

transactions, or for accruing profits. Rather, they collect them for
their historical value. When a currency ceases to exist in the future,
the coins or notes which they have may remain as a historical
memory. For currencies of this nature, we could follow the view of
these two jurists and say that they could be exchanged for higher or
lower prices.1
If such a coin/note is bought as money - e.g. an old note is bought for a
new one - then some muftīs say that it is permissible.
Nizām al-Fatāwā:
A currency note is neither measured nor weighed; it is counted. It is
therefore permissible to exchange it at a higher or lower price.2
Fatāwā Farīdīyyah:
Question: Is it permissible for a person to sell a one thousand rupee
note for a ten rupee note?
Answer: Both the notes are made of paper; they are neither of gold nor
silver. This exchange is not usury and therefore not impermissible.
Their intrinsic value is insignificant, while their governmental value is
extra ordinary. This exchange will neither be unlawful on the basis of
societal norms nor on the basis of the Shari'ah. The same can be said
about dollars and other paper currencies.3
A detailed discussion on this issue has passed. Please refer to it.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Exchanging gold for gold
Question
Zayd has five ounces of 22carat gold jewellery which is quite old. He
goes to a jeweller and asks for five ounces of jewellery of a certain new
design. The jeweller says that he will have to pay an additional R3 000
with his old jewellery. Is this transaction permissible?
1 Fiqhī Maqālāt, vol. 1, p. 37.
2 Nizām al-Fatāwā, vol. 1, p. 299.
3 Fatāwā Farīdīyyah, vol. 2, p. 677.
387

Answer
This is an interest transaction and it is unlawful. What Zayd could do is
sell his jewellery for - example - R50 000 and buy new jewellery for
R53 000. This transaction will be permissible.
قوله عليه الصلاة والسلام: لا تبيعوا الذبب بالذب والورق بالورق إلا سواء
بسواء. قال العلماء: بذا يتناول جميع أنواع الذبب والورق من جيد وردئ،
وصحيح ومكسور، وحلي وتبر وغير ذلك، وسواء الخالص والمخلوط بغيره،
وبذا كله مجمع عليه. (شرح الإمام النووى لصحيح مسلم: ١٢/١١، بيروت)
وانظر للمزيد: (المؤطا، ص ٥٨٢، نور محمد كتب خانه. والمصنف لعبد الرزاق:
١٢٥/٨، ادارة القرآن والعلوم الاسلامية)
المبسوط:
حديث أنس بن مالك رضي الله عنه قال: أتى عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه
بإناء خسرواني قد أحکمت صنعته فبعثني به لا بيع فأعطيت به وزنه وزيادة
فذكرت ذلك لعمر رضي الله عنه فقال: أما الزيادة فلا، وبذا الإناء كان من
ذبب أو فضة وفيه دليل على أنه لا قيمة للصنعة فى الذبب والفضة عند
المقابلة بجنسها لأنه لم يجوز الاعتياض عنها وما كان مالاً متقوماً شرعاً
فالاعتياض عنه جائز فعرفنا أنه إنما لم يجوز لأنه لا قيمة للصنعة في بذه
الحالة شرعاً. (المبسوط للامام السرخسى: ٤/١٤، كتاب الصرف، ادارة القرآن)
الفتاوى الهندية:
وإن اشترى خاتم فضة أو خاتم ذب فيه فص أو ليس فيه فص بكذا فلساً
وليست الفلوس عنده فهو جائز تقابضا قبل التفرق أو لم يتقابضا لأن بذا
بيع وليس بصرف، كذا فى المبسوط. (الفتاوى الهندية: ٢٢٤/٣)
388

المبسوط:
ولا بأس ببيع الفضة جزافاً بالذبب أو بالفلوس أو بالعروض لانعدام الربا
بسبب اختلاف الجنس. (المبسوط للامام السرخسي: ٦٩/١٤، كتاب الصرف،
ادارة القرآن)
وانظر: (رد المحتار: ١٧٩/٥، سعيد. والبحر الرائق: ١٩٤/٦. وفتح القدير: ٢٧٨/٦،
دار الفكر. والمحيط البريانى: ٣٠٥/٨)
Jadīd Mu'āmalāt Ke Shar'ī Ahkām:
Currency notes and coins do not fall under the ruling of gold and
silver. Neither are they receipts for gold and silver. This is why it is
permissible to buy gold and silver with them - whether jewellery or
dirhams. The rules of bay' as-sarf do not apply to them.1
قوله عليه السلام: لا تفعل بع تمرک بالدرابم ثم اشتر بالدرابم جنيباً، وقال:
فى الميزان مثل ذلك، أى قال: ما يوزن إذا احتيج إلى بيع بعضه ببعض مثل
ذلك القول الذي قال فى التمر المكيل أى يباع غير الجيد الموزون بثمن ثم
يشتري به موزون جید ... قوله بع تمرک الخ أشار إليه بما يجتنب به عن الربا
مع حصول المقصود، وبه احتج جماعة من فقهائنا وغيربم على جواز الحيلة فى
الربا وبنوا عليها فروعاً. (التعليق الممجد: على بامش المؤطا للامام محمد، ص
٣٥٤، قديمى كتب خانه)
وكذا فى (تكملة فتح الملهم: ٠٥٦٥/١. المبسوط للامام السرخسى: ٢٠٩/٣.
وجديد معاملات ک شرعی احکام: ١٣٢/١. وفتاوى عثمانی: ١٥٩/٣)
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
1 Jadīd Mu āmalāt Ke Sharī Ahkām, vol. 1, p. 128.
389

Buying gold with a credit card
Question
A person buys gold with a credit card. Will the transaction be
permissible? Will the rules of bay' as-sarf apply to it?
Answer
When a seller accepts a debit card from a customer and enters his
account number with the bank, and the bank transfers the money
which is in the customer's account into the seller's account; then the
seller has taken possession of the money. This is permissible. On the
other hand, in the case of a credit card, the amount will be transferred
into the seller's account the next day. Yes, he does take possession of a
receipt which is synonymous to a legal possession. In reality, this is
not a bay' as-sarf because in such a transaction, either of the two
parties must have a genuine currency - gold or silver. In this case,
there is a genuine currency on one side while the other party has a
customary currency; and the latter does not fall under the rules of a
genuine currency. It is not necessary to take possession of it there and
then. Yes, one of the two will have to be taken possession of so that it
does not entail bay' ad-dayn bi ad-dayn.
الدر المختار:
عقد الصرف بيع الثمن بالثمن أى ما خلق للثمنية ومن المصوغ جنساً بجنس
أو بغير جنس كذب بفضة. (الدر المختار: ٢٥٧/٥، سعيد)
بدائع الصنائع :
فالصرف في متعارف الشرع اسم لبيع الأثمان المطلقة بعضها ببعض وبو بيع
الذبب بالذهب والفضة بالفضة. (بدائع الصنائع: ٢١٥/٥، سعيد)
وفي رد المحتار: سئل الحانوتي عن بيع الذهب بالفلوس نسيئة فأجاب بأنه يجوز
إذا قبض أحد البدلين. (فتاوى الشامى: ١٨٠/٥، باب الربا، سعيد)
390

وفى المبسوط للإمام السرخسي: إذا اشترى الرجل فلوساً بدرايم ونقد الثمن
ولم تكن الفلوس عند البائع فالبيع جائز لأن الفلوس الرائجة ثمن كالنقود ...
وبيع الفلوس بالدرابم ليس بصرف. (المبسوط: ٢٤/١٤)
وللاستزادة انظر: (المحيط البربانى: ٢٦٨/٧. والفتاوى الهندية: ٢٢٤/٣، وفتاوى
عثمانی، وجدید معاملات کے شرعی احکام، کما مر)
Detailed rules related to credit cards can be seen in the chapter on
usury.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
391

INTEREST/USURY
Accepting usury in South Africa
Question
Is it permissible for Muslims living in South Africa to accept usury
from non-Muslim banks?
Answer
South Africa is classified as dar al-amn; it is not a dar al-harb. Even if it
were a dar al-harb, it will not be permissible for the citizens here to
accept usury from a non-Muslim bank or a non-Muslim individual.
Yes, if a Muslim of South Africa goes to China, America or Russia, lives
there temporarily, and receives profits from the non-Muslim banks
there or from non-Muslim citizens of those countries - and they give it
willingly - then if we classify those countries as dar al-harb, then this
transaction will be permissible according to Imam Abu Hanīfah
rahimahullāh and Imām Muhammad rahimahullāh.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The issue of usury in a dar al-harb
Question
The jurists state that a Muslim musta'man who goes to a dar al-harb
after obtaining a visa for entry into that country and a new Muslim
harbī - both can accept usury from a kafir harbī. Furthermore, an
original Muslim who is a citizen of a dar al-harb can accept usury from
a harbī in the dar al-harb. Yes, an original Muslim of a dar al-harb or a
musta'man harbī cannot pay usury. Can we who are now the original
residents of South Africa and have been living here for the last two
hundred years, accept usury from non-Muslims?
Answer
There is difference of opinion among the Hanafī jurists. Imām Abū
Hanīfah and Imam Muhammad rahimahullah are of the view that it is
permissible - with certain conditions - to accept usury from a harbī.
However, the majority of jurists, the three Imams and Imam Abu Yusuf
rahimahullāh are of the view that there is no way that interest can be
permissible, even if it is when dealing with a harbī.
392

الهداية:
ولا ربا بين المسلم والحربي في دار الحرب خلافاً لأبي يوسف والشافعى لهما
الاعتبار بالمستأمن منهم في ديارنا، ولنا قوله عليه السلام : لاربا بين المسلم
والحربي في دار الحرب. ولأن ما لهم مباح في داريم فبأي طريق أخذه المسلم
أخذ مالاً مباحاً إذا لم يكن فيه غدر بخلاف المستأمن منهم لأن ماله صار
محظوراً بعقد الأمان. (الهداية: ٨٦/٣)
بدائع الصنائع:
إذا دخل مسلم أو ذمي دار الحرب بأمان فعاقد حربياً عقد الربا أو غيره من
العقود الفاسدة في حكم الإسلام جاز عند أبي حنيفة ومحمد ... وقال أبو
يوسف: لا يجوز للمسلم في دار الحرب إلا ما يجوز له في دار الإسلام. (بدائع
الصنائع: ١٣٢/٧، كتاب السير، سعيد)
وللاستزادة: (البحر الرائق: ٢٢٦/٦، كوئته. وتبيين الحقائق: ٧٤٢/٤. ومجمع
الانهر شرح ملتقى الابحر: ١٨٦/٥. ومنحة الخالق على بامش البحر الرائق:
٢٢٦/٦، كوئته. ورد المحتار: ١٨٦/٥، باب الربا، سعيد. وفتح القدير: ٣٨/٧، باب
الربا، دار الفكر)
Some latter day Hanafi jurists gave preference to the view of the
majority and classified the view of Imam Abu Hanīfah and Imam
Muhammad rahimahumallah as non-preferred due to some reasons.
Some of the reasons for their preference are:
1. There are many differences among the 'ulama' on the definition of
dar al-harb. Therefore, it cannot be said with certainty that a certain
country is a dar al-harb.
2. The majority of jurists say that usurious transactions are
impermissible even in a dar al-harb. This causes confusion. And in
matters related usury, even a doubtful usury is prohibited.
3. The texts declare a general prohibition of interest. For example,
393

أَحَلَّ اللهُ الْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ الرِّبًا.
Allāh permits trade and prohibits usury.1
فَإِنْ لَّمْ تَفْعَلُوْا فَأَذَنُوْا بِحَرْبٍ مِّنَ اللهِ وَرَسُوْلِهِ.
If you do not desist, prepare to fight Allah and His
Messenger.
There are many other verses and Ahadith containing severe warnings
against usury. Anyone hearing them will not have the audacity to
involve himself even in a doubtful usurious transaction.
4. The view of the majority is based on caution.
5. By practising on the view of the majority, a person will be saved
from the differences of the jurists.
No matter what, it is totally forbidden to accept interest.
Further reading: Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah, vol. 16, p. 352; Ahsan al-Fatāwā,
vol. 7, p. 20; Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, p. 62; Fatāwā Bayyināt, vol. 4, p. 96;
Kifāyatul Muftī, vol. 8, p. 103.
Some scholars have chosen the view of Imam Abu Hanīfah and Imam
Muhammad rahimahumallāh.
Refer to: Majmū'atul Fatāwā, vol. 2, p. 170; Imdād al-Ahkām, vol. 3, p. 451-
452.
Definition of dar al-harb
Observe the various opinions of the scholars on the definition of dar
al-harb.
جامع الرموز:
دار الحرب ما خافوا فيه من الكافرين. (جامع الرموز: ٥٥٦/٥، باب الجهاد)
خزانة المفتين:
دار الإسلام لا تصير دار الحرب إلا بإجراء أحكام الشرك فيها، وان يكون
متصلة بدار الحرب لا يكون بينهما وبين دار الحرب مصر آخر للمسلمين،
1 Sūrah al-Baqarah, 2: 275.
394

ولا يبقى فيها مسلم أو ذى آمناً بالأمان الأول، فما لم توجد بذه الشرائط، لا
تصير دار الحرب، ومعنى قولنا: أن لا يبقى مسلم أو ذمي آمناً بالأمان الأول،
أن لا يبقى فيها مسلم أو ذي آمناً على نفسه إلا بأمان المشركين، وقالا: إذا
أجروا فيها أحكام الشرك فإنها تصير دار الحرب، سواء كانت متصلة بدار
الحرب أو لم تكن، بقي فيها مسلم أو ذمي آمناً بالأمان الأول أو لم يبق.
(خزانة المفتين بحوالة مجموعة الفتاوى: ١٤٠/١، كتاب العلم والعلماء، آرام باغ
كراچی)
الفتاوى البزازية:
وذكر الحلواني: إنما تصير دار الحرب بإجراء أحكام الكفر، وأن لا يحكم
فيها بحكم من أحكام الإسلام ، وأن يتصل بدار الحرب، وأن لا يبقى فيها
مسلم ولا ذي آمناً بالأمان الأول ... فإذا وجدت الشرائط كلها صارت دار
الحرب، وعند تعارض الدلائل والشرائط يبقى ما كان على ما كان أو يترجح
جانب الإسلام احتياطاً. (الفتاوى البزازية بهامش الهندية: ٣١٢/٦، كتاب
السير)
فتاوی قاضیخان:
إذا أجرى أبل الحرب في بلدة من بلاد أبل الإسلام أحكام أبل الحرب، تصير
دار الحرب کیف ما کان. (فتاوى قاضيخان بهامش الهندية: ٥٨٤/٣)
بدائع الصنائع:
لا خلاف بين أصحابنا في أن دار الكفر تصير دار الإسلام بظهور أحكام
الإسلام فيها واختلفوا في دار الإسلام أنها بماذا تصير دار الكفر، قال أبو
حنيفة: إنها لا تصير دار الكفر إلا بثلاث شرائط: أحدبا ظهور أحكام
الكفر فيها، والثاني: أن تكون متاخمة لدار الكفر، والثالث: أن لا يبقى
395

فيها مسلم ولا ذي آمناً بالأمان الأول وبو أمان المسلمين، وقال أبو يوسف
ومحمد: إنها تصير دار الكفر بظهور أحكام الكفر فيها. (بدائع الصنائع:
١٣٠/٧، سعيد)
فتاوى الشامى:
لو أجريت أحكام المسلمين وأحكام أبل الشرک لا تكون دار حرب.
وفى الدر المختار: ودار الحرب تصير دار الإسلام بإجراء أحكام أبل الإسلام
فيها کجمعة وعيد وإن بقي فيها کافر أصلي وإن لم تتصل بدار الإسلام، درر.
(فتاوى الشامى مع الدر المختار: ١٧٥/٤، سعيد)
Īdāh an-Nawādir:
A dār al-jamhūrīyyah (republic) refers to a government which is
neither fully in the hands of Muslims nor fully in the hands of non-
Muslims. Furthermore, the members of the upper house are neither
entirely Muslim nor non-Muslim. Rather, there is a constitutional
agreement between Muslims and non-Muslims to run the country and
to enjoy residential rights. Members of each party can take part in
elections, occupy key posts, and have full rights to participate in the
administration of the government. Although there will be more
members of a certain population group because of it being in the
majority, the right to express one's views is enjoyed equally by
everyone. Each population group has the freedom to practise its
religion. A government of this nature can neither be classified a dar al-
Islam nor a dar al-harb. Rather, it is a dar al-jamhūrīyyah. It can also
be referred to as a dar al-amn, dar al-'ahd or a secular country.
Further reading: al-Fiqh al-Islāmī Wa Adillatuhu, vol. 8, p. 39; al-Fatāwā al-
Hindīyyah, vol. 2, p. 232; Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, pp. 72-74; Jadīd Fiqhī
Mabāhith, vol. 2, pp. 353, 372, 473, 474.
The majority of jurists say that it is prohibited to accept usury even in
a dār al-harb.
فقد اشتهر عن مالك والشافعي وأحمد وأبي يوسف وغيرهم من جمابير الفقهاء
تحريمهم الربا بين المسلم والحربي في دار الحرب، ... وقد اتفقت الأمة على أن
396

الخروج من الخلاف مستحب قطعاً، لأن خلاف الأئمة لا سيما خلاف
جمهوربم يورث الشبهة فى الجواز، وقد قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: الحلال
بين والحرام بین وبينهما شبهات، فمن اتقى الشبهات فقد استبرأ لدينه. لا سيما
وكون الهند دار الحرب، عند الإمام محل نظر بعد، فالشبهة إذن قوية غير
ضعيفة، والتوقي عنه واجب من غير ريبة. (اعلاء السنن: ٣٧٩/١٤، ادارة
القرآن)
In the same way, it is questionable to refer to South Africa as a dar al-
harb. It is against the reality.
Imdād al-Muftīyyīn:
... The Sahābah radiyallāhu 'anhum, Tābi'ūn and Imāms of Islam always
preferred the side of caution in matters related to usury. Hadrat 'Umar
radiyallāhu 'anhu said:
فدعوا الربا والريبة. (رواه ابن ماجه في باب التغليظ في
الربا)
Give up usury and give up anything which is akin to
usury.
Hadrat Sha'bī rahimahullah relates from Hadrat 'Umar radiyallahu
'anhu:
تركنا تسعة أعشار الحلال مخافة الربا. (مصنف عبد الرزاق،
ج ٨، ص ١٥٢، باب طعام الأمراء وأكل الربا)
We cast aside nine tenths of halal out of fear of
falling into usury.
This is why the erudite scholars have issued a verdict of prohibition
with regard to accepting interest from banks of unbelievers. This is
based on caution.1
1 Imdād al-Muftīyyīn, vol. 2, p. 705.
397

Further reading: Fatāwā Haqqānīyyah, vol. 6, p. 209; 'Azīz al-Fatāwā, vol.
1, pp. 621-623; Imdad al-Fatāwā, vol. 3, pp. 153, 159; Kifāyatul Muftī, vol.
8, p. 75; Īdāh an-Nawādir, vol. 1, p. 97.
To summarize: South Africa is neither a dar al-Islam nor a dar al-harb;
it is a dar al-amn. It is therefore prohibited to accept usury from a non-
Muslim bank. Nowadays, Muslims prefer living in non-Muslim
countries than in Muslim countries. They feel that they are safe in
non-Muslim countries. How, then, can it be permissible for them to
accept usury in such countries? As though they believe that these
countries are better than Muslim countries to live in, yet they consider
them as dar al-harb for the sake of devouring usury. This is a type of
deception which is not approved by the Sharī ah.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The preferred view on the issue of usury in a dar al-harb
Question
What is the preferred Hanafi view with regard to accepting usury in a
dār al-harb?
Imam Abu Hanīfah and Imam Muhammad
rahimahumallah quote the following Hadith as their evidence. Is this
Hadith authentic? What is the reply to this Hadith?
لا ربا بين المسلم والحربي في دار الحرب.
There is no usury between a Muslim and a harbī in a
dār al-harb.
Answer
As regards proofs, the view of Imam Abu Yusuf rahimahullah and the
majority of jurists is stronger and more harmonious to our times.
Since Muslims are living peacefully in most countries and carrying out
their acts of worship easily, they are not permitted to accept usury.
Furthermore, the three Imams are of the view that it is prohibited to
accept usury even in a dar al-harb. Bearing in mind their proofs and in
consideration of their view, no permission whatsoever will be given to
accept usury. Hence, this view is given preference in the Hanafi madh-
hab.
Ibn Qudāmah rahimahullāh writes:
398