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

Originally posted by RainCloud

Originally posted by Zaxxon

Originally posted by RainCloud
Typically, scholars point to Mosaic Law as the 'Law' that the Sermon on the Mound refers to teaching and following, which would be the Ten Commandments, not the laws created by the Levites et al.

Yes, you are a correct, but I do have problem finding a clear excerpts from New Tes. regarding "interest/usurp" except from Old Testament where its clearly stated.
Sorry if I'm mistaken somewhere and do correct me. Thanks

[edit on 1-8-2010 by RainCloud]

Its just something I pointed out. And its up for debate anyway, because everyone interprets things as however it benefits them at the time. Your points are still valid, so it isn't a big deal.

they are taking this literal; when it should be interpreted that if you have children and a home for example it is a sin to recontract your assets for personal gain.stuff like retirees refinancing would be a sin of usury if sharia is an attempt at comprehension of moral implications within the koran.

the idea that someone finances your home and it is now a sin that you own and are not held accountable for the persons good deed who acquired the home for you is morally bankrupt like all people who are good muslims.

Originally posted by Zaxxon
Its is interesting. I have seen you say that interest is unfair and that Al-Riba is the answer, yet those who argue that even with Al-Riba implemented, the Islamic Banking system just charges interest, but calling it a different name and you never responded to that.

If you'd like to debate about Al-Riba/Islamic Banking System, then you must actually debate about it.

Thank you for calling me out... I've spent too much time attempting to keep the thread on track... and not enough actually talking about Islamic Banking:

Under the Iranian banking system, as I understand... if you wish to purchase a home and you cannot afford the full purchase price, you must come up with a "substantial" down payment, and then the bank will purchase the home and contract to sell it to you at a "profit"... however unlike the "standard" banking loan, that profit amount is unaffected by how long you take to pay off your loan, is not effected by a potential missed payment, default, changes in your "credit score", or changes in the variable market APR. You just do not ever own the home outright until the sale price is paid off. There is no refinancing or 5:1 ARM that has to be renewed at a new interest rate depending on your latest credit score or the latest market interest rates.

Do you see this distinction? The Iranian system does not allow for predatory banking practices whereby a bank can allow you to purchase something you cannot afford with low down payment and introductory rates which later turn into undisclosed variable interest. Only for the bank to later jack your rates at their discretion, sometimes forcing foreclosure; only to entrap another owner into the same negative economic loop on the same building.

Can you see the distinction between the US "interest" system and the Iranian "profit margin" system"? To me it seems the Iranian system sets a concrete payoff amout in stone for the profit margin in dollars, whereas under the US system, the actual amount you end up paying for a home is never really determined and may end up being 3 to 4 times the actual original sale price, depending upon your payment history and how long it takes to pay the debt.

I started this thread to help myself and you (the audience) better understand this distinction. Am I correct in my cliff's notes? I'm not sure... that's why I'm here to debate.

-------------------
I'm going to leave my personal foreclosures out of this thread because they only befuddle the discussion with details that could go on for pages. I'll just state that my options were limited and I made my decision with much deliberation and an urge to do the right thing for
my family.

If I could make changes to the OP I would. Looking back my usage of the word "submit" was flame bait and my personal foreclosure decisions only detracted from what I wished to accomplish here: To better understand Sharia injunctions against usury, and Middle Eastern political systems which have attempted to institute such injunctions, so that we could have a better background from which to make decisions and lobby with regard banking reform in the West.
-------------------

Thanks for reading, and I appreciate this discussion making it to its 6th page... even if many of the responses were relatively off my intended topic. I'm sorry if I've taken to long to respond... I have many threads I am active in and I also work as a carpenter... building homes.


I am,

Sri Oracle

[edit on 2-8-2010 by Sri Oracle]

Originally posted by RainCloud
I fully support the OP promoting Sharia No Riba proposition.

For those who support riba/interest, please read so you can be educated adequately.

Look for "I Want The Earth Plus 5%" entirely so you can open your eyes and understand how the interest system screw us and why no riba/no interest is good.

I want the Earth plus 5%

Since I am providing a service, that is, the money supply, I am entitled to payment for my work. Let us say that for every 100 pieces you obtain, you repay me 105 for every year that you owe the debt. The 5 will be my charge, and I shall call this charge interest.

reply to post by jfj123


I think you mean it's very sad that you don't get it. Of course you can pick and choose one part from anything. That's what this society, and its freedoms, are all about.

Under sharia, majority of drugs are illegal. Majority of drugs are illegal here in the West. Oh my God, did we just submit to sharia?! Of course not, but we do agree with it on this issue. Maybe we would benefit, as a society, if we agreed with it on a couple other issues, one being banking. This doesn't mean we have to agree with it in anything else. And if we agreed, why would we even label it sharia? Yeah, a lot of people would notice it's similar, but it's our own law--not sharia.

The only "bargain with the devil" going on here is your decision to keep a closed mind.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

The secondary purpose, unfortunately reveals how a number of posters here will totally disregard an idea for discussion that may be possible for adoption for the sake of common good, just because it came from a 'hated side'.

I guess that's just a matter of interpretation.
I guess we can also discuss how hitler had good ideas too....SARCASM.

It only shows and proves how retarded a mankind had regressed, just because a good idea from another community is tossed aside simply because out of hatred for their beliefs.

sig heil !

reply to post by Sri Oracle


The no-interest part makes sense but why is everything, coming from this religion, about submission??

Can't we just agree on something? You know, try it out first....

But noooo....you have to submit or else!!

Well if you ask it like that....no, I won't submit to these laws!

Peace

Originally posted by muftanan
reply to post by jfj123

 

Oh my God, did we just submit to sharia?! Of course not, but we do agree with it on this issue. Maybe we would benefit, as a society, if we agreed with it on a couple other issues, one being banking.

except when you submit to sharia, you must submit completely. You can't pick and choose. Lets focus on the word SUBMIT.

The only "bargain with the devil" going on here is your decision to keep a closed mind.

Apparently you're not familiar with the actual discussion.
Let's review shall we?
"Would you submit to sharia law regarding....."
Sharia doesn't allow you to pick and choose. If you submit to one part of it, by default, you submit to all of it.

The OP didn't ask if we "agree" with some parts of sharia, he/she asked if we would actually submit to it. Big difference.
And I say, good luck to you as well ...

[edit on 3-8-2010 by jfj123]

Originally posted by jfj123
except when you submit to sharia, you must submit completely. You can't pick and choose. Lets focus on the word SUBMIT.
[]
The OP didn't ask if we "agree" with some parts of sharia, he/she asked if we would actually submit to it.

You just don't seem to get it... I'm sorry. Why don't you read through my posts where I have over and again clarified the intention of this thread. I apologize, again, for the sensationalist, flame baiting word "submit"... I thought it made a good title; apparently you're having trouble getting past it.

The thread title was:

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

I put "the" there for a reason; to indicate a singular element for discussion.

Now... Specific flame baiting words of the OP aside... please step out of your ethnocentric bubble... we all understand you don't like the "rest" of Sharia law. We all realize that if you submit to Sharia, you think the boogey man will get you... ok.

now lets talk about banking reform.

---------------------------

jfj123:

Please. FOCUS! This is MY thread... you're free to create your own focused on anti-submission to Islamic law.

The FOCUS of this thread is:

We're talking about banking.
We're talking about banking reform.
We're reflecting upon banking reform in other parts of the world.
We're specifically talking about banking reform in Islamic nations.
We're seeking to learn from those reforms to better our own banking system.
We're seeking to find out whether "submission" to the "specific element" of Sharia law regarding "Al-Riba" would really be such a bad thing.



now, jfj123...

Do you see any elements of Sharia injunctions against usury which might prevent another foreclosure crisis in the West?

Given all your posts in this thread on the subject of "Al-Riba"... Have you taken the time to RESEARCH Islamic prohibitions on Al Riba... if so, what have you learned that you can share with the rest of us?

Am I correct in my understanding/estimation of the loan process in Iran?

How do you understand the many and various means by which different Islamic states implement their interpretations of Sharia's injunctions against Al-Riba?

Can you see any difference between the "bank profit" system of the Middle East and the "bank interest" system of the west?

Do you think the Western "interest" system has a greater benefit for banking corporations or for people? What about the Islamic system?

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
The no-interest part makes sense but why is everything, coming from this religion, about submission??

Can't we just agree on something? You know, try it out first....

But noooo....you have to submit or else!!

I used the word to stir up the "anti-islam" crowd... hoping that that I could "preach" to those outside of the choir.

Have you ever considered that as a matter of status quo... if you wish to seek a loan in the US you must SUBMIT to corporate banking law? Do you think "we the people" actually have any say in that right now? If we (the people) did... do you really think there would there be such a thing as a 5:1 ARM loan? Do you really think we would be in the midst of a foreclosure crisis? Do you really think we would be at a time in history where MORE of the homes in America are owned by banks than by people?

Sri Oracle


[edit on 3-8-2010 by Sri Oracle]

reply to post by Sri Oracle
I don't know enough about the Islamic Banking system to know what happens when you default or if there is some sort of credit system.
I will agree that the US banking system is indeed broken. And ARM? I can't believe that people even take those or interest only payments and expect to live in a house for more than 5 years. It only makes sense if you plan on selling shortly after buying.
I will also agree that the credit system is rediculous. So much in fact that the very people that approve loans based on your credit do not know how it works. Its also sad that your score actually faulters when you show financial responsibility and not use your credit cards much.

The market should be driven to attract lenders (or nobody would lend), but strike a balance for fairness to the consumers. But we have a system where everyone including lenders are in debt and so are their lenders. When people defaulted on their loans en masse then the lenders couldn't pay their own lenders who also couldn't pay their lenders and so on. Then the tax payers are burdened with this brunt of debt with nothing to show for it.

I do agree that the banking system needs an overall, but accounting practices and a seemingly clueless IMF are probably where we should start.

Originally posted by Zaxxon
I don't know enough about the Islamic Banking system to know what happens when you default or if there is some sort of credit system.

Aside from a few days of on/off googling, neither do I. I was hoping to meet some members on this "international" board, with actual experience in Islamic banking transactions to tell us first hand whether there is indeed difference, or whether Middle Eastern interpretations of Sharia w/ regard to banking really are Religious-legalese for the same thing. Or, if in fact, submission to Islamic Banking was truly as "good" a thing as submission to the US ban on, say, methamphetamine.

I will agree that the US banking system is indeed broken. And ARM? I can't believe that people even take those or interest only payments and expect to live in a house for more than 5 years. It only makes sense if you plan on selling shortly after buying.

It has been my experience that the type of loan available on a specific property has much to do with the neighbourhood. So, in a safe investment, new construction yuppy-suburbanite neighbourhood US banks tend to be willing to 20-30 year payoff plan notes; whereas in poorer neighbourhoods if someone wants to repair/remodel/expand, or even buy their home, a bank will lend... but on a 5:1 ARM note; with no guaranteed renewal.


It is my *conspiratorial* belief that these arm loans are used to force people out of older homes through creating small but non-renewable mortgages, to leave them unrepairable and unlivable long enough to warrant "condemned building demolition", with the goal being to maximize, the tax, loan, insurance, and utility income on each individual lot, through zoning, loan parameters, and new construction building codes which favour inefficient "cash cow" homes.

I will also agree that the credit system is rediculous. So much in fact that the very people that approve loans based on your credit do not know how it works. Its also sad that your score actually faulters when you show financial responsibility and not use your credit cards much.

Right... If you want high credit, you have to pass everything you do through a credit card, and then pay it all in full at the end of each month. The banks ideal is that you either are 1) always carry everything through something they can take a cut on, or 2) you are permanently enslaved to a life of payments for a debt you're never actually really paying off.

Then the tax payers are burdened with this brunt of debt with nothing to show for it.

I wouldn't say that, I'm sure we got some nice dollar devaluation out of it.

I do agree that the banking system needs an overall, but accounting practices and a seemingly clueless IMF are probably where we should start.

Wouldn't an outlaw on the premise of a loan (ARM) that the bank could simply refuse to renew and call every 2--5 years also be a good place to start?

I don't believe Sharia allows for ARM loans. The question that I'm seeking to answer... what are the other things Sharia does not allow for within the banking realm, why so, and what have various middle eastern nations done to implement these principles within their legal system?

Do remember, some Islamic states require women to wear full naqib. Whereas in other moderate Islamc states it is only a headscarf. There is a full range in interpretation of "Religious Law" in to "State Law". The same would apply to the interpretation and implementation of banking laws. This is why looking specifically at one nations implementation on "Al-Riba" laws is not the end goal... but rather to understand why Shar'i calls for these reforms.

Sri Oracle

[edit on 3-8-2010 by Sri Oracle]

reply to post by Sri Oracle
I don't harbor a hate for Islam and I certainly don't for the muslims that follow it. I'm not scared of portions of Sharia Law as if everything in it is evil. It was written around the culture at the time and as everyone learned in grade school: arabs had not only the first credit system (checks / cheques) to further trade, they also created the foundation for long distance trading and what evolved into banking.
If there is a "best foundation of banking and trading" it would have to come from the culture that founded Islam is what logic would dictate. So I think a study of said foundation has merit.

An interesting tidbit:


www.fsa.gov.uk...

This is the UK's Finanical Services Authority (.gov) webpage. It talks about how there already are, in the UK, islamic banking services and give an overview of their integration into UK law.

As I've researched further into this subject, I have come to realize that there already do exist "Islamic" banks in western nations.

That amazing phrase "seek and ye shall find" rings true at the moment.

www.lariba.com...

American Finance House LARIBA is the Oldest Community-Owned, Riba-Free and Shari'aa Compliant Finance Company Serving the Community in the US since 1987.

1. We do not Rent Money. We approach each transaction as an investment (using the Lease-to-purchase Model) instead of Lending. We advise you as to whether the transaction is a good investment or it is better to rent.
2. We never start from an interest rate to calculate your payment. Your payment is based on the market rental value of the property you are seeking to finance. The rental value is determined by mutual agreement between you and us.
3. We work with clients in a humane and fair way (Tarahum) in times of trouble.

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

Now... Specific flame baiting words of the OP aside... please step out of your ethnocentric bubble... we all understand you don't like the "rest" of Sharia law. We all realize that if you submit to Sharia, you think the boogey man will get you... ok.

1. You're the one who created the title, not me. I'm just responding to your "specific flame baiting words".
2. Your attempt to minimize the evils of sharia by making me sound like I'm over reacting is, at best, childish.

now lets talk about banking reform.

Hey what a great name for a title !!!!!

jfj123:

Please. FOCUS! This is MY thread... you're free to create your own focused on anti-submission to Islamic law.

Actually this is a thread you have started but owned by ATS. Once again, you chose the words, I'm just responding to those words. YOUR BAD !

reply to post by jfj123


Isn't it amazing how a person "seeking" imformation on Islamic banking practices is so knowledgeable about them? Why aren't Jewish banking laws equal to Islamic banking laws or Mormon banking laws? If they were actually seeking information why are they not asking their questions in Islamic banks pros·e·lyt·ize/ˈpräsələˌtīz/Verb1. Convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.

[edit on 083131p://pm3123 by debris765nju]