[Evelinessa]

maybe moulana abu hajira and moulana taliban could give us their understanding of this. colonel hardstone too but he doesnt seem to be dropping by much these days.

There are two parties involved in the Fiat Money:

1) The issuer
2) The user

1) The issuer - Governments of the world:

A fatwa will only be given IF the governments come and ask themselves. No use of issuing fatwas of no value whatsoever.

2) The user - Public:

It doesn't matter if it's halal or haram, you will still have to use it.

That's all your honor.

[egoldhyip]

do you have the fatwas or any references to the fatwas for the parts highlighted in red?

Shaykh Muhammad Alish (1802-1881) who was the Shaykh of the Shaykhs of Maliki fiqh in the University of Al-Azhar in Egypt. He wrote in his Fatwa.

"What is your judgement in respect to the paper with the stamp of the Sultan that circulates like the dinars and the dirhams? Is it obligatory to pay Zakat as if it was a coin of gold or silver, or merchandise, or not?"

I responded exactly in the following way:

"Praise belongs to Allah and blessing and peace upon our Master Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah."

"Zakat is not to be paid for it, because Zakat is restricted to the flocks, certain type of grains and fruits, gold and silver, the value of rotational merchandise and the price of the goods withheld. What is referred previously does not belong to any of these categories."


The fatwa above is referring to the payment of zakat on 'ayn' something tangible of value and not on dayn, promissory notes or receipts. In the classical times there were notes that existed termed fulus that were used in teh way coins are used today. The majority of the money was in coinage and the minority in papers (the opposite situation of today). During those times, zakat was paid on the coins and not on the paper. As i mentoined, if you read the stuff by the Murabitun (Sh. Abdul Qadir, Umar Vadillo, etc.) you will find a lot of material and original content in engilsh. The rest of the stuff is just a hodge podge of repeating the status quo and justifying it.

As I was in the banking industry for several years (dealing a lot with 'Islamic' bankers), they all know the reality that the financial system is a giant sham, including the the Islamic bankers, but nonetheless.... life goes on.

If you do the search and spend the time, you can find many fatwas (some from back in the day) highlighting the issue. As mentioned in the earlier e-mail, the evolution of paper money was initially it represented 1:1 then when it was deposited in the banks, the bankers started printing receipts greater than the amount of gold (based on the principle that only few redeem for the actual gold). Hence, the receipt itself was a debt which was carried around and utilized. Transferring debts, as mentioned in the fatwas, had specific rules and limitations. Eventually the redemption value was nill.

The system that exists today is unique and that it wasn't found in the classical times. Scholars seek to understandthru their classical books revert back and try to find a fit or analogy somewhere that justifies it.. and the general use of 'urf' and other principles of ability to use what is customary upon the people has its own limitations b/c at the end you're trading cotton paper. Cotton paper that one entity has an infinite amount, and now its not even cotton paper, its digital entries in a computer system whose usage is forced upon the masses globally. So if that is the case, how are you able to give 5 pieces of cotton paper (5 $1 note) for 1 piece ($5 note), etc. and vice versa, which would violate the norms of trading equal quantities like for like, etc. Well if they are printed w/ different denominations it's okay.. well why not brand dates w/ a different mark would that be okay to trade unequal quantities for each other? I'm not going to pretend to understand all the Islamic nuances or even that I understand any of them It's very complicated, and I don't envy the scholars.. may Allah SWT bless them and guide them to what is pleasing to Him.

Money has generally always been something of value and something that can not be prooduced out of thin air. Accordingly, not much you can do, but make dua and extricate yourself out o f the system as much as possible.

Allah knows best.

[Kneefrenolf]

Assume no interest is involved (that is, the currency is just issued by the government and given a fixed value in relation to a commodity such as gold), but that it does not represent any real assets owned by the government. Also assume that everyone agrees to use this fiat currency as a medium of exchange.

Some possible objections are:

1. Whoever issues the currency could potentially issue the currency in an amount exceeding the total amount of gold in existence. Because the issuer doesn't bother to back up the currency with actual gold, there is no way of knowing if and when that happens. If it does happen, it's the equivalent of fraud, whether intentional or unintentional.

2. The assignment of a value in grams of gold to the currency is completely arbitrary.

3. Too much power in the hands of the issuer of currency. The value of a medium of exchange should be dictated by the market only. For example, according to simple supply and demand, if the abundance of commodity x increases in relation to commodity y, if you were to trade with someone, you would need to give them more x's for the same amount of y's. On the other hand, if someone can simply create money (let's say commodity y is our fiat currency), then the value of x in terms of y becomes artificially increased. Whoever controls the currency can wreak havoc on the markets. For those who own the means of production, that doesn't really matter. However, for a worker receiving a fixed wage, it means that his wages have decreased while prices have increased. It's oppression.

I can't think of anything else. Basically, the real issue is in the creation of imaginary assets. Isn't that wrong? Even if we assume that the little scraps of paper are what hold value, it becomes un-useable as currency because paper is abundant, so it has no intrinsic value. And the cost of printing money is negligible. Those who have the equipment can create wealth from nothing and cheat others. Even if no interest is involved, it's still fraud.

The points have no concern with "thamaniyyah". Thaman is what people incline towards as thaman. that is the definition for wealth.

If the aspect of issuing of such fiat money is imaginary, how does it affect the thamaniyya?

Finally, in bay' the intrinsic value doesnt really play the role. If I sell you my car for three date pits, it is a transaction between you and I. the intrinsic value of the date pit may be 1 rand, but for this transaction the attributive value is set by you and I. So essentially the intrinsic value is not a factor in determining the thamaniyyah either.

the idea is, even with the conspiratory angle to all the currency, does the currency medium still fulfil the require of the shar'ia in terms of thamaniyyah.

[reawnvam]

quote:
Money has generally always been something of value and something that can not be prooduced out of thin air. Accordingly, not much you can do, but make dua and extricate yourself out o f the system as much as possible.

unquote:

Actually even the money are print based on nothing - and it happens in huge amount nowdays either by government or by mafia - then the value of money gradually decreases, but until the new balance happens - the wealth from this money is unequally distibuted within society.

[Kneefrenolf]

how about the current system where money is not backed by anything and created out of interest? what is the islamic stance on that?

Yes, that is what our current system is. Money is no longer backed by gold, so its no longer a promisory note, or receipt note etc. So there is no point digging old argumentation of last centuries about the trade of debts. It does not apply to our currency anymore.

I have read and understood many aspects of our currency but and failing to understand it being "created" out of interest. Our Murabitun brother keep saying that the money has interest "IN" it. I still cannot understand this and hence have not accepted it.

Yes, money is merely printed. Tomorrow US can print 2 billion more notes, and it will have 2 billion more dollars in circulation. But the money market will devalue the dollar because of the excess of dollars in the market. Suply increases, the demand decreases. Although its not as simple. The strength of dollar is not only because of it being printed or being in abundance etc, its primarily because of the high dependence on it in the global market. The demand you will have for dollar in international market, the more leverage you will give america to carry on printing it. This is why America was against the concept of Euro. because euro provide a more stable currency for the world market to rely on.

Hence, the idea of bringing gold and silver back is definitly a noble one. It will crush this fiat money. The only contention has been the way to go about it.

[DiBellaBam]

Interesting opinion regarding problems with having a gold-backed currency:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/ne.../posts#comment

[xanaxist]

Interesting opinion regarding problems with having a gold-backed currency:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/ne.../posts#comment

Most of those objections were answered in that very thread, though. I also addressed a couple of those points in one of my earlier posts.

[ephennaCypota]

There are two parties involved in the Fiat Money:

1) The issuer
2) The user


2) The user - Public:

It doesn't matter if it's halal or haram, you will still have to use it.

That's all your honor.

Are you implying that there is no way to get out of the usury based fiat money system ?

[Evelinessa]

Are you implying that there is no way to get out of the usury based fiat money system ?

WHAAAAAAAAAAT!?!?!

I thought you were a bot...

WOW...

First tell me, I was talking to Mufti AbuHajira and my net disconnected. What was it? I sense some yahoodi involvement. What do you think?

[xanaxist]

WHAAAAAAAAAAT!?!?!

I thought you were a bot...

WOW...

First tell me, I was talking to Mufti AbuHajira and my net disconnected. What was it? I sense some yahoodi involvement. What do you think?

lol. mawlana, that depends on what you were talking about.

[egoldhyip]

Yes, that is what our current system is. Money is no longer backed by gold, so its no longer a promisory note, or receipt note etc. So there is no point digging old argumentation of last centuries about the trade of debts. It does not apply to our currency anymore.
.

Asalam WR WB Shaykh.

As you mentioned that it is not a promissory or a receipt note anymore. How is it possible to trade similar species in unequal amounts. 10 papers for 1 paper. or utilizing 1 paper to buy a bundle of 100 papers, etc. Doesn't this violate the advice of teh Prophet S regarding trading similar species like for like and that being one of the aspects of riba(e.g. the trading of dates by Bilal R). Could you please explain.

Jazakallah Khayr

H

[ireleda]

So why don't we stop dealing in paper currency and deal only in gold and silver? Why can't we demand from our employers to pay us only in gold or silver and offer only gold and silver when we are buying stuff? That is more closer to Islam don't you think.

[Kneefrenolf]

So why don't we stop dealing in paper currency and deal only in gold and silver? Why can't we demand from our employers to pay us only in gold or silver and offer only gold and silver when we are buying stuff? That is more closer to Islam don't you think.

make your demand today and have a retirement cake with your family this evening. No company in world has that much gold and silver to pay you out, unless you are working as a butler for the rothschild family

Br. hammad, a brilliant question. I will inshAllah answer it shortly. I need to rush to the Darul Iftaa at the moment.

[DiBellaBam]

Most of those objections were answered in that very thread, though. I also addressed a couple of those points in one of my earlier posts.

Salam,

What I found interesting about that thread is that it seems fractional reserve banking would not be stopped simply by using gold-backed currency, which I guess is obvious given that FR banking began back when gold was still being used. If that's the case, then the answer has to be a political/regulatory one, not necessarily the nature of the money itself.

If governments reclaimed the right to issue money, and then controlled inflation via taxation, this would solve the problem, no? You wouldn't necessarily need to have stocks of gold for the system to be fair.

[ephennaCypota]

Salam,



If governments reclaimed the right to issue money, and then controlled inflation via taxation, this would solve the problem, no? You wouldn't necessarily need to have stocks of gold for the system to be fair.

Some insight on the government for issuing money.

##########################
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/bankrupt-germany.php
########################
Stephen Zarlenga suggests in The Lost Science of Money that this was because he temporarily rescued Germany from English economic theory — the theory that money must be borrowed against the gold reserves of a private banking cartel rather than issued outright by the government.3 According to Canadian researcher Dr. Henry Makow, this may have been a chief reason Hitler had to be stopped: he had sidestepped the international bankers and created his own money. Makow quotes from the 1938 interrogation of C. G. Rakovsky, one of the founders of Soviet Bolsevism and a Trotsky intimate, who was tried in show trials in the USSR under Stalin. According to Rakovsky, Hitler had actually been funded by the international bankers, through their agent Hjalmar Schacht, in order to control Stalin, who had usurped power from their agent Trotsky. But Hitler had become an even bigger threat than Stalin when he had taken the bold step of printing his own money. Rakovsky said:

[Hitler] took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the state . . . . Are you capable of imagining what would have come . . . if it had infected a number of other states . . . . If you can, then imagine its counterrevolutionary functions.

[reawnvam]

Some insight on the government for issuing money.

##########################
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/bankrupt-germany.php
########################
Stephen Zarlenga suggests in The Lost Science of Money that this was because he temporarily rescued Germany from English economic theory — the theory that money must be borrowed against the gold reserves of a private banking cartel rather than issued outright by the government.3 According to Canadian researcher Dr. Henry Makow, this may have been a chief reason Hitler had to be stopped: he had sidestepped the international bankers and created his own money. Makow quotes from the 1938 interrogation of C. G. Rakovsky, one of the founders of Soviet Bolsevism and a Trotsky intimate, who was tried in show trials in the USSR under Stalin. According to Rakovsky, Hitler had actually been funded by the international bankers, through their agent Hjalmar Schacht, in order to control Stalin, who had usurped power from their agent Trotsky. But Hitler had become an even bigger threat than Stalin when he had taken the bold step of printing his own money. Rakovsky said:

[Hitler] took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the state . . . . Are you capable of imagining what would have come . . . if it had infected a number of other states . . . . If you can, then imagine its counterrevolutionary functions.

interesting indeed...
w salam

[ephennaCypota]

More insights on usury based fiat money.
##########
http://www.henrymakow.com/the_destin...nd_hinges.html

don't forget the other problem of ANY KIND OF MONEY. If it is loaned into circulation at usury it is a dysfunctional medium of exchange but an effective conveyor belt of all wealth into the hands of whomever owns the money. Makes no difference what it is composed of. That's exactly what Rothschild's gold did to the American colonies bringing on the war for independence from Rothschild's already impoverished England.

###########

I believe that there is nothing wrong with fiat money if it is properly put in use and without usury. If the US Treasury printed 'Treasury Notes' without usury instead of private, usury attached 'Federal Reserve Notes' the USA would have very little debt.

The big problem is that most of the worlds fiat money is in the hands of oligarchy families (Anglo-American-Jewish) who control The Fed, IMF, World Bank and most central banks around the world. They create fiat money out of thin air (debt) and charge usury (interest) on it. With this they use to enslave us. They have a private, monopoly on this.

Woudn't it be great if the Bank of Canada created usury free notes that paid for the countries infrastructure, hospitals, schools. Taxes would be low and our debt would also be low. Why does the government borrow from private banks ? The Bank of Canada issues the countries fiat money but the big 5 Bay Street banks create 95% of the countries fiat money through loans with usury added. Something is very wrong here.

Gold and silver make great backing of a countries currency but having a gold standard is not completely necessary as long as the fiat money is printed in sufficient quantity by the countries treasury and usury free. Bring the money back to the people for the people. Gold and silver should also be made legal tender.

The way things are going know we are paying for our own enslavement by a group of satanic psychopaths who are at the helm of the wheel.

[natahololll]

There is a very interesting seminar coming up on the subject of Islamic Finance and Banking by Shaykh Dr Mohammad Akram Nadwi and Tarek El Diwany. Details are given below.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...Tarek-elDiwany

Islamic Banking & Finance - A Myth or A Reality?
Groundbreaking UK-First Seminar
By Dr Mohammad Akram Nadwi & Tarek El Diwany
Saturday 19th May 2012
EARLY BIRD DISCOUNT: SAVE £40
BONUS OFFER: FREE GUEST ADMISSION
http://www.facebook.com/events/106310496173080/
Registration: http://courses.meoc.org.uk

[Relsenlilky]

essentially can one of your post in bullet form why should the current currency not be counted as viable shar'i means of transaction. That will save me some time.

Pak rupees has almost lost 80% of it's value in the last 20 years. Pakistanis holding, say 1 billion rupees in 1992 are worth only 200 million rupees in 2012. Pakistanis would like to know that they didn't undertook any business venture in which they suffered huge loss, so where 800 million rupees got disappeared.

Whose pocket got filled with our 800 million rupees-- This 800 million rupees has gone in a fraudulent way, someone manipulated ; my question is what Islam says about devouring people's wealth by false pretense, does Islam legitimize a system where people are robbed off their wealth overnight?

[Relsenlilky]

Yes, that is what our current system is. Money is no longer backed by gold, so its no longer a promisory note, or receipt note etc. So there is no point digging old argumentation of last centuries about the trade of debts. It does not apply to our currency anymore.

Yes, money is merely printed. Tomorrow US can print 2 billion more notes, and it will have 2 billion more dollars in circulation. But the money market will devalue the dollar because of the excess of dollars in the market. Suply increases, the demand decreases. Although its not as simple. The strength of dollar is not only because of it being printed or being in abundance etc, its primarily because of the high dependence on it in the global market. The demand you will have for dollar in international market, the more leverage you will give america to carry on printing it. This is why America was against the concept of Euro. because euro provide a more stable currency for the world market to rely on.

Hence, the idea of bringing gold and silver back is definitly a noble one. It will crush this fiat money. The only contention has been the way to go about it.

If money is no longer a promissory note than why it's written "Payable to bearer on demand" on Pak rupees note, there's got to be an explanation for this?

Though the printing of paper money- dollar is being considered, why no consideration is given to the major source of money supply (almost 80%) in the form of magical Fractional reserve system. This mechanism can be equated with the Jews who used to issue more (paper receipts) compared to the Gold they had in possession. It's obvious that with this Money Supply- M2, it's not possible for the paper money to retain it's real worth.

And if the paper money can't hold on to it's worth, there are few consequences:

a) it ceases to perform the function of store of value-- what good a money is which can't even perform one of it's own function.

b) the proponents of interest based banking takes the plea that interest is just a form to compensate the lender for the loss in the real worth of the money.

c) Pressure is developed on the Islamic Scholarship to devise ways to compensate the debtors for the loss in purchasing power in paper currency. This was hinted by Mufti Taqi Usmani Sahab in his Riba' judgement Point# 186-187