It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Would you Submit to the Sharia Law regarding Al-Ribā?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:35 PM

Originally posted by lestweforget
An attempt by muslims to appeal to the west through economical reforms
in a time of economic unrest. You sure are determined to spread islam
by whatever means arnt you? Bring your troops home America, the real threat is within!

I study world religion. I am by no means a devout Muslim pushing an agenda.

I find it amazing that we can find ourselves three pages into this debate and yet not one of you have opened with an adverse sentiment to a single point of Sharia regarding Riba.

It seems you're so lost in your own fears and preconceptions that it is beyond you to learn from your "enemies."

Sri Oracle

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Sri Oracle]

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:44 PM
reply to post by Sri Oracle

I would like to beleive you but i cant, for mohammed said "you may lie if it is in the interest of islam". Try again my muslim freind.

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:05 PM
I probably should not posts without reading the whole thread or learning more about the law myself...

But doesnt this law involve their own courts system and this makes the other courts obsolete?

Doesnt their courts only use 1 judge to decide if guilty or innocent, no jury....and all you need is 1 witness going against your word?

Doesnt the law also combine into it daily prayer time and certain followings of the Islamic religion?

I for one want a jury....and dont want conviction on me by any hearsay.

If Im wrong, please just politely correct me

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:25 PM

Originally posted by LeoVirgo
If Im wrong, please just politely correct me


you're wrong.

Please do catch up though.

Sri Oracle

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:29 PM
reply to post by Sri Oracle

Looks like I must read up on it again

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:32 PM

Originally posted by lestweforget
Try again my muslim freind.

You've got to believe what you've got to believe... but I can quote from the Tao Te Ching, The Bhagavad Gita, The Analects of Confucius, The King James, The Talmud, The Lotus Sutra, The Book of Morman or endless Alchemical texts probably more quickly than I can quote from the Koran.

That said, I've studied Islam... and I believe their regulations of banking have quite some merit. I believe the people of western democracies would learn quite a bit on the subject of repelling the international banking cartel through Islamic study of usury and perhaps following in suit to Islamic customs regarding Al-Ribā.

Step out of your anti-Islam bubble, I'm not trying to hurt you.

I am,

Sri Oracle

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Sri Oracle]

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:36 PM
reply to post by Sri Oracle

You keep talking about banking, but there is so much more to their law.

Cant we take the best from many different religions, beliefs, faiths, ways of life....have many different people from all kinds of paths and understandings,....and come together with a mix of our histories, and create a law that would be best globally, worldly...and have it not be connected to a one religion?

So mabey their banking system is a good one...what about the other 'ways' in their law?

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:41 PM

Originally posted by LeoVirgo

You keep talking about banking, but there is so much more to their law.

This thread is to discuss the Islamic provisions regarding:


or more commonly:


or more commonly:

The practice of banking cartels to charge interest and to up those rates when a borrower defaults.

Islam does not permit banks to charge interest. Different Islamic nations have whole sets of norms and standard practices to allow banks to operate without violating Sharia injunctions against Al-Ribā.

It is kind of like the story of Jesus flipping over the tables of the "moneychangers",

Clensing of the Temple

except Islam lays out a map.

Sri Oracle

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Sri Oracle]

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:56 PM
reply to post by Sri Oracle

I gottcha...but was still curious if you support the rest of the laws.

Wasnt trying to take things off topic.

I see the law as a 'whole' and this is why its hard to pick and choose goods from it, without acknowledging the whole law system.

I see now reading through more and again re reading your title now

that you are referring to the Al-Riba specifically.

I always thought that Jesus in the Temple was cause he was upset due to the animals being sold for sacrafices...cause he was against animal sacrafices (as well as selling things in the Temple).

Again...sorry if Im going off topic...

[edit on 30-7-2010 by LeoVirgo]

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:02 PM
I am not looking to insert Church into State. I am looking to STUDY church so that I may benefit State

Sri Oracle

To willfully mislead people is to lie to them....exactly how can studying your church benefit My State if what you have learned from your religious teachings is not applied? If you want to live in a muslim world with sharia laws and al riba go to the middle east, your world already exists there. You don't get to come to my country and change it into the world you couldn'
t wait to get out of. NOBODY wants a stranger in their house when they are pushy, aggressive and domineering........not even you.

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:55 PM
Interest by any other name is still interest, Sharia banking is a farce.


"The two dirty secrets of Islamic banking, however, are that, like all banks, Sharia banks do charge interest – they just give it another name – (remainder of sentence removed to stay on topic).

Helena Christofi, an expert on Sharia banking, explains that Islamic banks extend a type of Islamic “credit,” called murabaha, that shifts risk to the borrower in a manner similar to interest.

“An Islamic bank granting murabaha credit to a customer for an automobile, for example, would purchase the automobile for the customer for $15,000 and the customer would owe the bank $20,000 in a year’s time. Similarly, under the ‘diminishing musharaka’ credit, the Islamic version of a mortgage, the bank and the customer purchase the property together. The customer must make monthly payments to the bank and pay a monthly rental fee, both based on the portion of the purchase price the bank still owns. Ironically, the interest this amounts to ranges between one and two percent higher than the interest on a conventional mortgage. Although the resale price of the vehicle and the rent paid on the house are akin to simple interest charges, the banks’ sharia boards legitimate the charges by renaming them ‘commissions’ or ‘profits.’”

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:02 AM
Need to borrow some money from someone in order to buy the thing you want/need? Sign your name to that contract and you just gave your word. Breaking your word is the same as lying, cheating, or stealing in God's eyes. Talk about infidels. You don't need some sacred cleric to decipher that for you either. Even if you gave your word to an enemy, if you broke your word it is sinful.

It's not ok to for a Christian to lie to a non-Christian. It's not doubly-bad if a Christian lies to a Christian. A lie is a lie.
Insert any of the common-sense 10 Commandments and any God-based religion into that formula.

Why the need of a complicated set of rules and laws dictating a people's actions down to the very last mundane thing? Seems to me as a way for a great power-hungry and greedy group of leaders to dominate the weak masses.

Why is pork taboo by the way? God created all the creatures for man. I love me some bacon and yet I would never screw someone over because they weren't the same religion as me. I wonder if God will reward me or punish me for that?

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:12 AM
Dear Sri,

1. For those who thrash your idea, they did so ignorantly and out of blind hatred for Islam based on the activities of a few radicals within that ideology.

They failed to realized that the muslim person is indepent and need no clerics or intermediaries as those from other religions to be ordered around by mortal men.

The muslim would make a better contribution to a democratic society, due to such indepence, rationalizations and fellowship within a community to evoke changes, if only more would be less discriminatory and listen first, find out, discuss before making judgements.

2. As good as your belief in the interest concepts in your posts, it is but one aspect of the Sharia law. In the Western civilisation, we had seen how much power can be derived through usury such as those performed by the FED for dominance and the control of the population.

But in the middle eastern civilisation, equally we had seen money needs not be use as a control measure for dominance. Money means nothing to the power mad despots, because once the iron fist is banged upon the common people's head through the misuse of religion and its misinterpretation, power is obtained.

Thus many do have a right to be query and wary of the Sharia law. Just as democratic laws had not totally eradicate crime nor elevated mankind to great heights, so too did Sharia law achieve not as much as proven by Islamic states.

Worse when its punishments had not be reformed since the 7th century, missing out on the age of enlightenment of the western civilisation during the 16th century due to the oppression of the Ottoman empire.

Unless you can show the muslim community are prepared to reform or capable of reforming the Sharia laws, and to be fair and tolerant to other religions and be humanity inclusive, then it may be an uphill task to show certain beauty and rationality of some laws within it. Good luck trying though. Cheers.


[edit on 31-7-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:20 AM
I just watched AGORA.

The movie had me shaken then mad as hades.

NOT a good time to ask me if I would submit to Sharia law.

I don't like submitting to anything. To be honest. None of it.

I don't worship any old book. I don't follow or worship the laws in Leviticus or MohamedIcuss.

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:37 AM
Hey OP, did not the Christian churches use to outlaw usury?

For some reason that sounds familiar.

Oh, and since I believe in a TRUE free market system where the government ONLY supplies the currency, any private transaction should be based on contract law between two individuals and contract law alone.

See Natural Law.

Later, the endisnighe for usury?

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:02 AM
IMO "Sharia Law" would not be cooperative with the American philosophy " go for the gold" attitudes wherein we can create our OWN companies and wealth if we choose and can be any humans dream and accomplishment. The aspirations of wealth in US are not only for the monetary dreams but for to be famous as well. Anything "forced" would be against our constitution of "freedom". I agree pay with cash and IF I don't have the cash then I don't need it.

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:07 AM
reply to post by LeoVirgo

I don't want to take this thread off topic, but I do want to reply to some of the comments you've made.

I completely agree with what you say about taking the best from many different religions, cultures, systems of law, etc to make our own society better. We live in a pluralistic society, so it makes sense to take the best of what everyone can offer. This includes what sharia offers.

Most people probably get scared away by the word sharia because they automatically think of Saudi Arabia or Iran, but these countries do not follow true Islamic principles. Ask any mainstream Muslim scholar--they will tell you that Sharia is NOT properly implemented anywhere in the world and that Muslim governments are corrupt.

My question to you is this: if financial principles of Sharia offer benefits to our society, then what reason is there not to use them? This doesn't mean anyone is forcing Sharia law into the U.S. It doesn't mean that we implement every single aspect of Sharia into our society. All it means is that people choose to follow a different financial system. Don't even call it sharia if the name is too scary. It's just a different set of financial guidelines.

One last point. You asked about courts in Sharia. I don't want to get too off topic so I'll respond briefly. I'm not even going to mention Saudi Arabian or Iranian courts because they are NOT true sharia courts (even though they claim to be). Their laws have no basis in Sharia--they are mostly cultural.

True sharia courts (like those found during the time of the different Caliphates) operate in a unique way. If sharia were implemented, Muslims would have sharia courts, which they would go to. Other people of different faiths would be allowed to operate their own court systems, and this was actually the case during the Ottoman Caliphate. Non-muslims had their own courts (Jews had Halakha courts) and could choose to go to either sharia muslim courts or their own. During the Ottoman Caliphate, Sharia courts had no authority to interfere in the other court systems except in cases of capital offense or major public threats that involved different religious groups. Interestingly, the non-Muslims during this time actually preferred sharia courts over their own because of their leniency.

If sharia courts were properly operated today in an Islamic country, they could still operate side-by-side with a court system for non-Muslims (like our secular courts in America). Aside from some basic laws for public well-being, Sharia is only binding on Muslims, not non-Muslims (since they don't believe in Islam anyway).

Also, there is nothing in Islam that says there can only be 1 judge and that's it. There would be nothing wrong with having a jury in a sharia court--it's just that juries are a relatively new concept in history so they didn't exist in Islamic judicial history. Also, there is nothing in Islam that says 1 witness is all that is needed. Proper evidence is always needed and all sides must be heard. In the Qur'an, Prophet David was once criticized by Allah for passing judgment without listening to both sides of a case.

Hope that's not too confusing.

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:17 AM
Al Riba is still interest loans just a rose by another name. The only difference you pay for everything up front. The positive part you never have to worry about future interest rates changing.

They still pay interest just it is hidden inclusively in the initial price they pay for any product.

They make profit like everyone else and charge interest just in a more cunning way.

Don't be a fool in thinking that Sharia is the way to go. We haven't fought a war for 1400 yrs to have Islam win.

I will not Submit.

For example, to get round the Islamic ban on usury - or unfair lending - a Muslim mortgage often works by the bank buying the property, then selling it to the customer at a profit, with the customer then repaying the entire sum in instalments.

In this way the profit margin is built in from the start. It also has the advantage of making the loan immune from future interest rate rises.

Read more:

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:22 AM
reply to post by greenfruit

Whoa, you fought a war for 1400 years?!

Must be exhausting.

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:23 AM

Originally posted by debris765nju
This thread is a thinly veiled attempt to insert Church into State. Islamic church law is not a cure for usury, usuary used to be illegal until politicians sold us out to financial institutions...we need politicians to rectify those errors, not islamic sharia laws. Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion which is why we have a Constitution. There can be no comparison between IT and any religious organization with an agenda for world conquest by infiltration.

You and I rarely agree on things debris but on this matter, well said my good man!


new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in