First Islamic Bank of Britain

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Assalamu alaykum,


MashaAllah, this is a first!


http://www.islamic-bank.com/islamicbanklive/GuestHome/1/Home/1/Home.jsp

[GenN]

Assalmu alykum,


Jazkallahu Kahir.

Alhamdullillah. hope it works out. For now im ok with the amanah account at HSBC, but if these guys get going i may transfer over.

With mufti taqi their i know it will be acording to sharia. But is that abu Goddah they have on the advisory panel, a son of The great sheikh abdul fatha abu guhad (RAH)?

[Huja Usman]

please make du'a for the project. Atlast we have

[Chained_Water]

:up:

looking forward to see what they'll offer in the "buying a home" bit..

[AbuMubarak]

first it was the british council of muslims who made alcohol halal

now its riba

soon it will be zinaa and music and the wearing of silk

[GenN]

first it was the british council of muslims who made alcohol halal

now its riba

soon it will be zinaa and music and the wearing of silkAssalmu alykum,

You are wrong akhi, for your info:

In the time of general Zia Ul Haq in pakistan who was Islamically orientated and wanted sharia and then got assaisanted Mufti Shafi uthamni was the grand Mufti of Pakistan. After Mufti Shafi Uthamni, His son Mufti Taqi Uthamni took over as being the grand mufti of pakistan.

Mufti Taqi Uthamni then came out with a fatwa that the current banking and money and intereset and everything in pakistan was haraam according to sharia and gave alternatives. Now that the leaders were not like general zia ul haq, and di not care about Islam, they hated this fatwa and mufti taqi was asked to go back on it. Mufti Taqi stood for the truth and would not go back on it even though he would be disposed of his position as grand mufti. he preferred to stick to the truth alhamdullillah. And so in due course they disposed of him as the grand mufti of Pakistan.

Now tell me, a person who stands for the truth willing to lose his position as grand mufti, is going to allow riba for a brithis Islamic banking system?

NO akhi, it is us who are not at the level of understanding and comprehension of these great Ulama, and so we cannot alwasy distinguish what consitutes riba and what does not.

Mufti Taqi is world renowned for his specaility and honesty in economics. Becasue i cannot get my head around economics easily and am not very good at it, i am happy to follow such a sholar as Mufti Taqi, blindly, in economic affairs as he has proven his trustworthiness as an honest scholar who stands for the truth agaisnt corrupt rulers.

was salaam.

[GenN]

and that fatwa became very famous. here is a translation of it
http://www.albalagh.net/Islamic_economics/riba_judgement.shtml

[Ali_Khan]

Zia Al Haq, what a leader that we lost. Inililahi Wa Ina Ilehi Rajaoon.

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

first it was the british council of muslims who made alcohol halal

now its riba

soon it will be zinaa and music and the wearing of silk


I sure hope you are not talking about this bank.

[AbuMubarak]

i am talking about riba is what rules the world these days, and that the powers-that-be are too entrenched in riba to allow some towelheads to have their own system, which are a direct threat to the existing system

here in the states, they borrow money from fannimae (a big lending institution) then lend it to the muslims at a higher "investment charge" and of course pay back fannimae and their money is "halal"

i have yet to see a scheme that is not riba with another name

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Its not even got off the ground and we are already knocking it down?

[AbuMubarak]

the title alone caused that

the islamic bank of britain?

there isnt an islamic bank in makkah, you think they are going to allow one in britain? a country that has fought against islam for the past 400 years?

dont be so gullible, your children need you to be stronger than that

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

its too late to argue with you Akhi.

Ma'salama.

[AbuMubarak]

in this deen, when departing, we usually say as salaamu alaykum, at a minimum

some may add, wa rahmatullah

and even others may add, wa barakaatuhu

i know of no blessings in ma'salaama

but maybe thats a madh'hab thingy

[yorkshireman]

Tell me AbuMubarak, what banking system do you use over there in the States? Do you purchase your goods with Gold dinars perhaps? Or do you just do the same as everyone else and use dollars and cents, but criticise those who try to accomodate Muslims financial rules in my country?

Maybe if you put more effort into coming up with more practical solutions and suggestions than you do to criticising those who try to make at least more Islamic solutions you'd get a more friendly sign-off from your fellow Muslims.

[AbuMubarak]

i have absolutely nothing against those who try to make islamic solutions, i would be the first to deposit my money there

but the catch is that it has to be islamic, not veiled ribaa

[yorkshireman]

i have absolutely nothing against those who try to make islamic solutions, i would be the first to deposit my money there

but the catch is that it has to be islamic, not veiled ribaa

That's not what I asked. How do YOU deal with your finacial transactions over there in the US. Is it less or more Islamic than what AbuZayd Al-Britaani has outlined?

[AbuMubarak]

under my mattress

riba-free

[yorkshireman]

under my mattress

riba-free

Now I'm assuming you don't have a 90' mattress, so that will be paper money you're talking about. Is paper money halal?

[AbuMubarak]

not really, but you do whatcha gotta do

[yorkshireman]

not really, but you do whatcha gotta do

Quite. So you understand why AbuZayd Al-Britaani was probably a little miffed at your earlier post.

[AbuMubarak]

no, i dont

but i am sure you will tell me

[Chained_Water]

why the "not really" about paper money?

[GenN]

Muti Taqi sacrificed his worldy position for speaking agaisnt Riba and stood by the truth.

Yet we have some people who think they understand Quran and sunnah better than our proven trustworthy ulema, and do not trust what these ulama say when they say a certain banking system is halaal (not the preferred system, but halaal)

Subah Allah, and then we wonder why the ummah is in such a state.

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

in this deen, when departing, we usually say as salaamu alaykum, at a minimum

some may add, wa rahmatullah

and even others may add, wa barakaatuhu

i know of no blessings in ma'salaama

but maybe thats a madh'hab thingy
Asalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuhu.

Funny you should say that Akhi. Where is the Asalamu alaykum in all of your posts? And your criticism, is there a Sharii ruling outlining prohibition of sayin ma'salama, or how about goodbye? And what about the Sharii ruling regarding Adab? I know of no blessings in lack of adab and I know of no blessing in not saying Asalamu alaykum wa rahbatullah wa barakathuh either. So maybe I was denied a blessing, but perhaps you were too - no Asalamu alaykum, you see.

Asalamu alaykum.

[Ali_Khan]

I think the fathers of Zayd and Mubarak should hug and make up. :)

[GenN]

I think the fathers of Zayd and Mubarak should hug and make up. :)
i agree. But i think they do love each other, they just have a funny way of showing it.

[AbuMubarak]

Asalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuhu.

Funny you should say that Akhi. Where is the Asalamu alaykum in all of your posts? And your criticism, is there a Sharii ruling outlining prohibition of sayin ma'salama, or how about goodbye? And what about the Sharii ruling regarding Adab? I know of no blessings in lack of adab and I know of no blessing in not saying Asalamu alaykum wa rahbatullah wa barakathuh either. So maybe I was denied a blessing, but perhaps you were too - no Asalamu alaykum, you see.

Asalamu alaykum.its not that in the past i start every post with the taslim and end it with the taslim

and i am not asking you that you start every post with a taslim and end it with a taslim

nor am i going to begin every post with the taslim and end it with the taslim

i am saying if i am going to give any type of salaams, its going to be that which we have been instructed, and not make them up as i go

[AbuMubarak]

why the "not really" about paper money?paper money has no actual value and that phoney value fluctuates and its also backed up by loans and debts and more ribaa

[GenN]

"Shaykh Abul-Hasan Ali Ndawai (RA) has a written a book in (3 volumes)
called "Purany Sharagh" (Old
Luminaries). He picks the best of the best that he has met in his life
and writes a little
biography of them..In one the volumes he mentions Zia-ul-Haq

The first Grand Mufti of Pakistan was Mufti Shabeer-Ahmed Usmani (RA)
who was also the head of
Ifta of Darul-uloom Deoband...He actively participated in the Pakistan
movement and performed the
Janaza Salat of Muhammad Ali Jinnah (RA)...Based on his action the
scholars say that Muhammad Ali
Jinnah MUST HAVE TAKEN Shahada on his hands because otherwise Muhammad
Ali Jinnah was a Bohra (Aga
Khani)

After his death in the 50's his cousin Mufti Shafi (RA) became the
Grand Mufti of Pakistan

In the days of President Ayub Khan (60's) a young Mufti was doing his
MSc in Punjab Univerisy when
the president asked for the EDUCATION POLICY of Pakistan to be
changed....This Young Mufti
participated in the committe of Ulama and drafted an educational policy
based on Shariah...His
name was Mufti Taqi Usmani...This draft was obviouly ignored but his
research put him into the
lime light amongst the scholars...His Book "Our Educational Policy"
from those days is available
in Englsh

Zia-u-Haq appointed him on the Supreme Court of Pakistan and he was
disposed by Parvaiz Musharaf
because of the difference of opinion over INTEREST-FREE BANKING as he
was not willing to climb
down on his position to abolish INTEREST in Pakistan...Moreover he also
gave the FATWA in those
days that it is BETTER to go to Afghanistan and defend the Afghans than
to do NAFL UMRAH and if
you cannot go then give the money for UMRAH for Jehad...he also gave
the FATWA that there is No
Janazah Salat for the soldiers of Pakistan Army who die fighting the
Muslims"
So a mufti thats gives ftawa to help mujahideen, to abolish interest, that defending the afghans is better than umrah, and that janaza for soldiers in pakistan army who die fighting aginst muslims (most likely menaing the mujahideen in afghannsitan) is really going to allow an interest based "islamic bank". Somehow, i don't think so. if muftitaqi says its permissbale, then the chances are its permissable. Atleast he is a trustworthy scholar alhamdullillah (no wonder musharaaf had to dispose of him)



Mufti taqi by the way is also the teacher of Mufti Muhammed ibn adam al kawthari from daruliftaa.org.

[CELT ISLAM]

first it was the british council of muslims who made alcohol halal

now its riba

soon it will be zinaa and music and the wearing of silk
ASALAAMUALAYKUM, the so called islamic bank is a trojan horse in the ummah?
well music is not haraam so thats clear!!! but makin riba halal is like having a halal bacon-sandwich hehehe:nuts:
we are now seeing for ourselves that the kuffar will do anything to destroy the ummah , paper money is nothing more that a trick , it itself has no real value and goes against all principles of the shariah .
there was never a bank at the time of RASULLULAH [S.A.W] .
INSHALLAH we are seeing the return of the gold and silver dinar and dihram, some muslims are already trading wiothout the banks MASHALLAH check out this site :http://www.granadamosque.com/gold/index.html
wa alaykumsalaam, celt islam

[faqir]

Asalamu alaykum,

We all look forward to the return of the Islamic Dinar in the Khilafah.

That said, try and get hold of the book in Arabic:

Ahkamu Al-Auraq An-Naqdiyah (Rulings regarding paper money) by Mufti Taqi Uthmani as I believe it covers some of the issues related to what you have mentioned.

Wasalam.

[Semantic]

http://www.e-dinar.com

(please note, I think the murabits are scary)

[Kh@led]

paper money has no actual value and that phoney value fluctuates and its also backed up by loans and debts and more ribaa
I never imagined that paper money could be "HARAAM" !!! Can anyone please tell me where I can get more specific information about it ?

[faqir]

Its not ideal and, of course, we'd love to go back to dinars but I have heard no reputable scholar say that using paper money to pay zakat or otherwise is Haraam. This claim seems to only arise from the Murabitun [who, of course, are entitled to their opinion.]

Read also:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1006&highlight=paper+money

[AbuMubarak]

well music is not haraam so thats clear!!! where do these people come from?

maybe its the avatar

[Semantic]

Well.. He's right.. Technically..

[Nawab]

As salamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

To continue the debate, I would like to add the following well researched fatwa written by Shaykh Haytham bin Jawwad al-Haddad.

Reading some of the posts, it appears that some people are willing to follow Mufti Taqi Uthmaani without any questioning. Good for them. However, Mufti Taqi is not the last word when it comes to matters of Islamic Finance.
_____________________


Fatwa on HSBC Scheme
Haytham bin Jawwad al-Haddad

The ruling on the permissibility of financing properties using Islamic ijara mortgages as currently implemented by HSBC and other banks

Many people have enquired about the permissibility under Sharee’ah of the so-called Islamic ijara mortgages recently announced by banks such as HSBC. As it is in the interest of all Muslims to have a current and accurate understanding of the issues involved here, I have concluded the following judgement based upon the Quran and Sunnah in accordance with the understanding of the main school of thoughts.

Let me first brief the reader regarding the manner in which the scheme works.

Under the ijara (rental) variety of Islamic mortgage, the bank purchases a property selected by the client, following a promise from the client that he or she will live in that property and purchase it after an agreed period of time. In return, the client pays monthly installments to the bank, mainly composed of two payments. One portion of the installment is considered to be a payment of the purchase price for the property, and another portion is counted as rent that the client pays for living in the property in the meantime. The purchase price paid by the client is equal to the purchase price initially paid by the bank for the property. Once the client has paid all of the installments, in other words the purchase installments plus the rental installments, the bank will transfer the ownership of the property to the client. The bank makes its profit from the difference between the price it pays for the property (including related transaction costs) and the amounts received in installments from its client.

This type of scheme, with some minor modifications, is used in the United Kingdom by HSBC Amanah Finance, Ahli United Bank and United National Bank(1).

In principle, an ijara scheme can be structured in such a way as to be acceptable under Sharee’ah so long as certain conditions are met, the discussion of which is beyond the scope of this judgement. However, the implementation of the scheme by the above banks is highly problematic.

Firstly, the contract is ambiguous in terms of its nature. Is it a lease contract, a purchase contract or a combination of the two? Some scholars have prohibited combined contracts (for example, a transaction that combines both lease and purchase), as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) prohibited two transactions in one transaction. This is the opinion adopted by most of the scholars, and although there are some who have allowed this type of transaction under certain strict conditions, there is a consensus that the presence of a significant amount of ambiguity invalidates a contract. Among the many Prophetic traditions on this point is that of Ibn Umar, who related that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade sales that involve uncertainty or ambiguity (gharar)(2).

Many scholars, including the foremost Fiqh councils of our times(3), believe that if rental and sale are mixed in such a way that one cannot distinguish at any point of time whether the client is a tenant or a buyer, then such a contract is invalid according to Islamic jurisprudence.

When pressed to clarify the nature of the ijara mortgage, staff in Islamic banking departments frequently describe it as a ‘lease ending in a purchase’. Yet if this really is the case, then the ijara mortgage should display the features of a lease throughout the entire time-span of the contract (often as much as 25 years) until it concludes with a purchase event. In other words, the bank will rent the house for a period of time with the promise that it will sell to the client at the end of the tenancy. During the tenancy, the bank will be the legal owner of the property. After the tenancy the client will be the legal owner.

Although many scholars do not allow this type of combined contract, let us for the sake of argument consider it to be valid according to the opinion of those scholars who accept it. When we examine the available ijara schemes more closely, we find that the theoretical structure outlined above does not exist in practice. The ijara contract as it stands is neither a lease nor a purchase. Rather, it is closer to a conventional loan where the bank lends money to a client for a property purchase, and requires that the client must repay with a markup (under the guise of ‘rent’).

Consider the following questions which illustrate the ambiguity of the contract:
1- Why does the tenant need to pay a large down payment? (Frequently an amount equal to 10% of the price is required. A genuine tenant does of course make some kind of down payment, relevant to the period of the tenancy, but no credible tenancy agreement can bind the tenant to place such a large down payment.)
2- Who pays the insurance of the house? Is it the bank or the tenant? (Technically, the owner of an asset is the one who should pay for its insurance.)
3- What will happen if there is loss or damage to the property and the insurance company refuses to cover the losses incurred? Who will pay for this? (Once again, if the bank is the actual owner, and such a loss or damage occurred through no fault of the client, then the bank cannot hold the client responsible for damages.)
4- If the tenant decides to stop the tenancy agreement, the bank will sell the property. If the price of the property has depreciated in the meantime (which means the bank as the owner of the property suffers a loss), why is the client bound to compensate that entire loss while being only a tenant?
The point of all these questions is to address the central issue, namely, who is considered the actual owner (and thus liable for any damages or depreciation in value) for the duration of the lease? Is it the bank (in which case all of the above scenarios do not make sense), or is it the client (in which case this contract is not a lease contract in the first place, but rather something else)?

A bank may give an answer to all or some of these questions, supported by quotations from jurists past or present. Some of these answers may indeed prove to be acceptable when looked at in isolation but, when taken as a whole, such practices may invalidate the contract.

To illustrate our point, the bank might state that, according to a particular school of thought, the down-payment is not a part of the price of the property since it is not a purchase agreement. Rather, it is an assurance that the tenant is serious in renting the property for a given period of time (up to 25 years, perhaps). Such a condition is acceptable according to some jurists. Furthermore, the bank may state that the insurance is paid by the tenant based on a mutual agreement, and there is nothing wrong with such a condition, for the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said “Muslims are bound to the conditions taken on by themselves”. In the meantime, they might claim that they are bound by English law to hold the title of the property, and will only pass it to the client upon the final payment. However, the contractual agreements that are signed between the bank and its client put all of the risks of ownership upon the client, and these factors defeat the purpose of ijara, even if technically speaking the bank claims to follow the letter of the English law as the ‘owner’ of the property.

In the above we see arguments that are each, on their own, widely considered to be valid. However this should not lead us into the grave error of assuming that three valid matters when combined produce a valid outcome. Take, for example, the plain riba transaction, but in the following framework:
1) An interest-free loan, (which is something recommended)
2) A gift, (which is again, something recommended)
3) A promise.

Taken individually, these three transactions are completely valid. However, if they are combined in a single contract, the result is pure riba. For example, I say, ‘Grant me a loan which I will repay you (a valid matter), and I promise you (a second valid matter) a gift (a third valid matter) in addition to the repayment when it becomes due’. Is this contact valid or is it riba? The answer is that it is manifest riba without any doubt, since the one who gave the money was promised that same amount back along with some profit.

So, we need to look at the end-to-end process here and evaluate it as one transaction. And we need to answer the critical question: who is the real owner of the property during the whole process? Is it the client while the bank is just financing the deal as it does in a normal conventional mortgage? Or is it the bank? If the owner is the bank, then does a real owner free himself from any responsibility towards his property? Why does the bank avoid owning the property?

Here, we need to explain an enormously incorrect methodology in deriving Islamic verdicts. A verdict should be derived by looking at a matter in its totality, in light of the aims behind it. When we break the matter of discussion into sub-issues and treat issues separately, without looking at the overall picture, then we are contradicting the right methodology in deriving verdicts. The reason is very simple: verdicts based upon sub-issues might not necessarily be the same as verdicts based upon a consideration of the general situation.

A very good example is the previous one. Each sub-contract taken individually is completely valid, but taken as a whole the entire contract becomes null since it is a clear riba transaction. Based on this, many if not all jurists forbade contracts which try to employ such deception.

As another example to further illustrate our point, let us look at the transaction known as ‘iynah. This transaction is strictly prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), and its prevalence is a sign that the Muslim ummah will decline. The Prophet (SAW) said “When you trade with one another with ‘iynah, and hold on to the tails of oxen, and are content with farming, and give up jihad, Allah will cause humiliation to prevail over you, and He will not withdraw it from you until you return to (your commitment) to Islam.”(4) This transaction, when broken down into individual parts and examined solely upon these parts, appears to be valid. However, when taken as a whole, it is clearly a type of riba.

How exactly does ‘iynah occur? One of the means of practising ‘iynah is that one party sells a product to a second party on a deferred payment. The second party then sells it back to the seller at a lesser price, but in cash. If you break this transaction into sub transactions you can conclude that there are two acceptable sale transactions. It is allowed for a person to sell a product for a deferred payment, and it is also allowed to buy a product for cash. However, the ultimate aim of this transaction is to enact a pure riba transaction. This is because the second party receives an amount of cash from the first party and is then required to pay back an amount of greater value at a later time. As for the product itself, since it changes hands twice, it returns to the initial ‘seller’. Therefore, the product is used merely as a loop-hole to avoid the prohibition on riba.

This clearly illustrates that we cannot ignore the total aims of any transaction. Jurists mention this rule as a principle (qa’idah) that is employed for all business transactions. This principle states, ‘The consideration of a transaction is to be paid to its intention rather than its format’ or, alternatively, ‘Transactions are judged according to intention’. Of the evidences for this principle is the hadeeth of the Prophet “Actions are judged according to intentions”. It is true that some people might say that scholars disagree with this concept, but those scholars who disagree with this concept (like Imam Shafi'i), agree with all other scholars that the aim of the transaction should not be to overcome a prohibited transaction. In other words, all scholars are in agreement that it is sinful for two parties to try to devise a scheme that appears to make permissible something that the Sharee’ah declares impermissible.

I therefore conclude that there is no significant difference between the ijara scheme outlined above and the conventional mortgage which is a pure riba-based loan. Under the ijara scheme, the bank performs what is essentially a money lending transaction, placing such conditions upon its clients that guarantee, for all practical purposes, that it will obtain the same amount of money in return plus a profit disguised as ‘rent’. It might be true that many of the individual clauses and conditions of the contract are permissible (or, at best, subject to a difference of opinion among scholars), but when put together and examined as a whole, it is apparent that there is little that separates this contract from a simple mortgage. Of the many matters that clearly illustrate this is that the risks and rewards of ownership of the house are carried by the tenant, not the bank, regardless of who is the ‘paper-owner’ under English law.

Allow me to provide a real Islamic scenario for acquiring a house, and also mention a philosophical and ideological approach in explaining a very important principle in Islamic finance. If two or more parties enter a business transaction, then of course their ultimate aim is profit. Islam, being the religion of ultimate justice, does not confer advantage to any party based on one’s worldly and materialistic power. In other words, in a permissible Islamic transaction, a powerful, richer person will not have any guaranteed advantage over a powerless, poor person. Both parties have to share the same risk of loss, just as they want to share the joy of profit. This is a very logical and simple – yet powerful – principle, which is an explanation of the Islamic rule: ‘ There shall be no profit without (a risk) of loss.’ This principle is based on many Prophetic traditions, such as: “It is not permissible to sell something on condition that the purchaser lends you something. And it is not permissible to have two conditions in one transaction. And no profit is permissible unless possession has been taken of the goods. And you cannot sell what is not in your possession.”(5) In another hadeeth, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade selling any item from the same place where it was bought; a buyer must first physically acquire these items (lit. ‘…add them to his own luggage’), then he may sell these goods.(6)

The point of this rule is that whenever an investment contract is structured such that one party is guaranteed a profit, something is simply not right. Only in a pure riba transaction will there be guaranteed profit. Any permissible transaction in the Sharee’ah must have an element of risk involved, no matter how small that element is.

Therefore, when looking at this particular transaction, it is essential that the bank (the stronger party) not take advantage of the client (the weaker party) by exploiting the financial power of the former and the desperate need of the latter. If these banks enact their transactions with this principle as an underlying morale framework, I think such contracts that we now see will disappear. Yet, the reality is far from this ideal. In light of this principle, we should always ask the following question: Do these banks share with their clients the risk of loss, or are they are stipulating all possible conditions to protect themselves against any foreseeable loss? Additionally, do these so-called Islamic banks own the properties they are renting to people?

If we give sincere answers to the questions in discussion, we will see that the current ijara schemes are almost identical to conventional mortgages. They appear to be a ruse designed to promote conventional interest-based practices using Islamic terminologies and Sharee’ah expressions.

Based on this, the ijara scheme as it is implemented here in the UK by major banks: Ahli United Bank (formerly called the United Bank of Kuwait), United National Bank and HSBC is totally prohibited. In fact, it is a deception rooted in riba. Until the Muslims in charge of these schemes prove that the above argument is invalid and give clear answers to the questions highlighted earlier, I believe that such transactions are totally prohibited, and I warn brothers and sisters not to get involved with them. I would also like to emphasize that the view of some Muslims, that this scheme is better than the conventional riba-based mortgage alternative and should therefore be used until a pure halal scheme is available, is incorrect. This is because there is no significant difference between the two schemes.
And Allah knows best.

Written By Haitham al-Haddad
Haitham01234@yahoo.co.uk
1 Thulqadah 1425 – Dec 12th 2004

Footnotes:
1. This is based on the their respective online documents available at:
http://www.amanahfinance.hsbc.com/amanah/h...anahHomeFinance (http://www.amanahfinance.hsbc.com/amanah/hsbcaf.nsf/Pages/AmanahHomeFinance), http://www.iibu.com/buy_home/ijarahow.htm and http://www.unbankltd.com/pdf/UNB_IslamicMo...ge_Brochure.pdf (http://www.unbankltd.com/pdf/UNB_IslamicMortgage_Brochure.pdf). [cited Dec 09, 2004].
2. Narrated by Muslim.
3. See resolution no. 110 (4/12) of the Islamic Fiqh Academy (IFA) which is a subsidiary body of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
4. Narrated by Abu Dawood and classed as saheeh. The intent of the hadeeth is that when Muslims are going to be content with this world, and not care about how they acquire wealth, Allah will inflict upon them humiliations and disgraces that will remain with them until they repent and give up their ways.
5. Narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawood, Termthi and Nasa’ee; classed as saheeh by many scholars.
6. Narrated by Ahmad and Abu Dawood; classed as saheeh by Ibn Hibbaan and others.

[faqir]

As salamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

However, Mufti Taqi is not the last word when it comes to matters of Islamic Finance.



Asalamu alaykum, Neither is sh. Haytham al-Haddad. :)

For those interested in determining what Mufti Taqi Uthmani [may Allah preserve him] has to say please visit the following link:

http://www.darululoomkhi.edu.pk/fiqh/islamicfinance/islamicfinance.html

Alternatively, he visits the U.K. quite often and it may be worth speaking with him in person.

And Allah knows best.

[Semantic]

Many scholars, including the foremost Fiqh councils of our times(3), believe that if rental and sale are mixed in such a way that one cannot distinguish at any point of time whether the client is a tenant or a buyer, then such a contract is invalid according to Islamic jurisprudence.

...

3. See resolution no. 110 (4/12) of the Islamic Fiqh Academy (IFA) which is a subsidiary body of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

Isn't Mufti Usmani deputy chairman of this body?

Having spent the last few weeks trudging through the various positions on derivatives wrt Islam (a tangled web indeed), I personally see nothing wrong with the ijarah mortgage as hajjat al-nas comes before the gharar component of the contract (gharar being an uncertain topic in itself ;)), as well as additional factors such as those elaborated on by Mufti Usmani in his defence.

Eh, it's all out there, you can read the positions of those you trust and see if you still wanna trust them.