midnighter:


You're talking from both sides of your mouth.

You admitted that people have different viewpoints while denying them the right to explore whether those viewpoints are correct or not.

So where did Boko Haram learn to kill people?

Don't you think if they were taught to critically evaluate the extremist ideas they were fed, they would know that what they're doing is wrong?

Otherwise how do you know that YOU are not wrong and Boko Haram is not correct

You dont have any right to assume that you are less murderous or suicidal than a Boko Haram member. That is arrogant speculation. You don't know what he has been taught. The point of this is education, enlightenment and teaching.

What is the basis of fiqh schools? What determines who follows which school? Why do Sunnis reject the addition of Imam Alis as name to the Adhan? Why is the hand of Fatima a ubiquitous symbol throughout the Islamic world, even though superstition is banned in Islam?

All you just described here is philosophy, which means you don't even have any problem with philosophy.

You only have a problem with other people not subscribing to your view, based on your interpretation of what the scripture means.

Which is hypocrisy.

Whether you like it or not, religion is just an idea and ideas should be examined and explored and not just swallowed blindly. So philosophy is not unislamic.

Agboriotejoye:

This is why it is said that religion is the opium of the masses.
First of, do you realise there are people who work in banks today who studied engineering, sociology even law? How could they have known they'll end up working in a bank?
The present emir of Kano worked as MD of first bank and is known to be an Islamic scholar.
The fact is that, if a Muslim child shows a natural affinity for finance or banking, you're saying now that such is probably cursed by God to be so gifted or should rather ignore such talents because there are no Islamic banks in Nigeria.
The attempt to control what is beyond you to control is what usually jets to extremism and fanaticism with its attendant ills.
Working in a secular bank is primarily not a choice for anyone who wishes to work in the banking sector in Nigeria just as paying tax is not for anyone

jelel6:


You went on a tangent that I'm not willing to go.

However, Emir Sanusi doesn't define Islam. The Qur'an defines Islam.

I've have no qualms about being "grouped" The Masses in this case. I'm sure you're a conversant about Imams who have advocated for same sex marriage and who are naturally against someone like Emir Sanusi marrying more than one wife. And the traditional Emir will not hear anything homosexuality.

Reconcile your champions of the elites first before an elite and the masses. Even the Elite are more Elites to each other.

RisenPhoenix:


I get it.
What of those who work in a conventional bank with an Islamic window like Sterling bank? Especially if they are limited to that division alone?

Agboriotejoye:

If you're not willing to go on a particular tangent then you shouldn't expect what you wrote to be accepted as truth.

We have sharia in the northern part of Nigeria today. One of the governors who started it was caught on camera fornicating and he claimed it's no one's business
Another governor recently caught on camera receiving bribes and till today no hisbah police has come to knock on his door. Or is he also enjoying immunity from sharia laws too?

It therefore shows that sharia itself is not a perfect way if it can bow to the superiority of the elite.
So to seek to judge others for their chosen course even in a secular society shows hypocrisy.

There's no way you can cut it that it'll fit perfectly

jelel6:


Don't steal. Steal and you offend God and the men who's money you stole and subject to difficulty.

Don't fornicating. Fornicate and you sinned against God.

Alot of people commit these Acts without anyone knowing. The fact you and I cannot punish the governor doesn't make him sinless!!!
It doesn't delete where the Quran says don't steal and don't fornicate. If by virtue of his position, the governor escape Justice that doesn't validate his actions according to Islam. It doesn't exonerate you and I from our own misgivings.

Every child bears his own Cross. If you think some people are getting away with it and that justifies your own participation, please go ahead.

But remember who you answer to in the end. That's if you believe in that by the way.

Unbelievable logic you have.

Agboriotejoye:


Thought we were discussing the merits of Islamic banking to the conventional system but it seems you're adding a lot of things that are not i empirical or evidence based to the matter.
There's no doubt the banking system is being abused by people which also means even the Islamic bank can be abused as well since it will be run by humans.
No system is perfect nor can ever be, but advantages can be sought to obtain a more perfect system. An example is sharia itself in the north which has been left to govern the poor only while the rich are excused. Such shows that if the merit of Islamic banking is based on religious piety, it will end up being a hoax

Agboriotejoye:

You see why I started with religion being the opium of the masses?
The point of sharia is to ensure everyone carries their cross here on earth. But it seems to have failed in the two example above.
Now, if a state that has embraced Islamic law has allowed others to go because they are powerful, how do you expect those who are under a secular society to live by the just laws you seek to entrench?
So I hope you can see the irony of saying leave the rich to God while holding the poor or helpless to account here on earth.
It's hypocrisy.
If the system is not Islamic, the poor should suffer for it. If it is, the rich are exempted

Agboriotejoye:


That's not true. The idea behind interest in banking is to cover for inflationary trends in money and of course a concept known as cost of borrowing not for exploitation. I don't know where you got that from.

Agboriotejoye:

Like your brothers said, the Islamic banks share in your profit. How does that differ from interest bearing in mind they are not shareholders.
As for your second question, that is the basis why islam has become a prime religion of conflict out of the thousands of religions in the world.
Religion is supposed to be a personal thing, a yardstick of your relationship with God based on your personal convictions and belief. Of course, if an homogeneous set of people come together and agree to be ruled by a religion, all the better.
But the moment you allow religion to become a yardstick in your relationship with fellow humans and even your environment, especially those who may not subscribe to your beliefs, conflicts will arise.
That is why you see that Christianity focuses more on your personal relationship with God instead of governmental ideals which islam inadvertently delves into. That is why you see so much conflict being bred by islamists

RisenPhoenix:


Ok. Went through them. I think they establish the parameters of riba/interest. It also seems to refute what someone else here said about riba not being the same as present day commercial bank interest. From the articles, even unequal exchange of commodities or derivatives would be regarded as riba; such as buying a debt at a discount etc. Am I correct?

Now my question is; what is the rule on working with a company which takes interest loans from these banks. Or a shareholder selling the shares of the banks or those companies?

Lukgaf:


Thanks for your understanding sir. The ruling remains same. I don't know if you came across an hadith in those articles where who collects, gives riba and works with riba-based were cursed.

Muslim (1598) narrated that Jaabir said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) cursed the one who consumes riba and the one who pays it, the one who writes it down and the two who witness it, and he said: they are all the same.


Also, you may read this article for more clearer explanations:

http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222017000300072

Agboriotejoye:

jelel6:


Forgive me if I focus on your last paragraph. I'M not dismissing what you wrote earlier.

You and I will, in my opinion, always differ in our interpretations of Islam or religion itself in your case because of WHAT IT IS FOR BOTH OF US.

To you religion is JUST AN IDEA.

Forgive me, but I'm tempted to ask:

1. Are you an adherent to any religion?
2. Are you a Muslim or were you a Muslim?

You can chose not to answer any of course.

But you have to answer this one though:

Religion is just an IDEA. An IDEA of whom?

RisenPhoenix:


Some do invest at least partially in ìnterest based funds and in each other. Others invest in equity of companies which themselves may take loans (practically all companies do this nowadays). Some invest in trading concerns which themselves take interest loans or are partly made up of preference shares. That is why I asked what limits are there? Where is the borderline between where one can work and one cannot from a muslim's perspective?

You keep saying that inability to secure another job is a justification. How does that work? How many interviews does a muslim have to get rejected at before he exhaustively establishes that he cannot get another job? Or what other precise criteria is used where it is ascertained that he cannot 'secure another job'? Also, does it apply equally for both genders (as in if a woman cannot secure another job by whatever criteria can she work in an interest based institution)?

This is getting interesting by the way.

midnighter:


You still dont get it because its not about "you and I" having "differing interpretations of what Islam means to both of us" . Its about using intelligent discussion to stamp out harmful ideologies from people's world-view.

You are being duplicitous by trying to brush the fact that the Islamic world is severely fragmented along ideological lines (and that those fissures are affecting everybody else) under the carpet.

No matter how much people insult them, the people who write these threads will never write a genuine post explaining why terrorism is not permitted by Islam and get it pushed to Front Page, why

They would rather copy and paste Wahhabi scripts about pouring water over one's head after sex or banning innocent children from studying philosophy and wait for trolls to come and bash them.

Dont you think its a misplaced priority? After all, like you said, Muslims are dying and being harmed in this too.

Its either that they secretly agree with Islamist terrorism or they are too afraid or unbothered to check what Islam actually says about it.

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

1. I am a Christian

2. I have never been a Muslim

3. Anything that claims to give guidamce on how to live one's life is an idea. Whether religious or atheist.

Preventing probing of so-called "Islamic" concepts from a philosophical angle is a sign of insecurity and not piety.

Remember that the number 1 reason that terrorism abounds today is that you cant shoot or bomb the inside of somebody's mind. We cant predict who will go rogue and blow up a crowded market or stab random people to death in the name of Islam

You cant kill an idea. You can only replace it with a better one.

Why wouldnt you want that? I mean, as a practising (and, I daresay somewhat intelligent) Muslim?

jelel6:


You've said a lot of things here. Some how, you've completely sidestepped Who's IDEA YOU THINK Religion - Islam - IS.

I should be able to get that answer for you clearly here. Please, I'll repeat, tell me in no uncertain terms WHOS IDEA ISLAM or Christianity ITSELF is?

You seem to know quite a lot about Islam. So, to have me believe you've not read, or hear a popular Muslim figure speak out against terrorism is baffling.

Even on this board, there have been topics addressing the Islamic viewpoints. I'm very unbothered if you chose not to accept or acknowledge that. As Muslim, we say what Islam preaches as best and through to it as possible. Don't expect us to have validation from the THINKERS before we move ahead. The religion is throughly a way of life. We can't only teach ourselves about it stance against terrorism. There's much more to it and we have to educate ourselves about all of it.

Islam as it is today, have given enough room for rationale. It doesn't ask us not to put it through a litmus test. But when you think you have a BETTER ALTERNATIVE by saying YES to what was explicitly directed to be NO, pardon our stubbornness for chosing to stick with the rationale of someone who claims to be All-knowing.

THINKERS Cherry pick rationale that suits their position. And their can be several reasonable position regarding the same DISPUTE.

WHEN THERE'S an Islamic position Clearly on a subject matter, we defer to it. That's what being a Muslim is all about.

midnighter:


You side-stepped first which is why I keep trying to get you to stick to the point.

You asked me whose idea I think religion is because you were trying to disregard the importance of exploring alternative views by saying that religion will always mean different things to different people. Youve been throwing out that line through all your posts and I keep telling you that its hypocritical of you to do that.

You want me to say that I believe religion was God's idea, so that you can tell me that if I truly believe in God's omniscience I should take it without question but Im not going down that road because its not relevant to the issue.

Thats why I told you that whose idea I think it is is not the point. The point is, now that the "idea" or religion is here, how do we go about teaching it to people in a way that benefits society?

Using the sacred intelligence that God gave us to question religious teaching is more respectful to Him than dumbing ourselves down for His sake and ending up committing atrocities, supposedly "in His name".

I didnt say I had never heard anybody speak against terrorism. I said that with regard to NL front page, which reaches millions of people, I had not seen the amount of detail and dedication offered to relevant topics such as fundamentalism, terrorism, elitism and other such things that are actually relevant to Islam in Nigeria in 2020 that is offered to whether a Muslim should own a dog or whether a Muslim should eat garlic and onions.

You say that you cant keep focusing on terrorism which is still hypocritical because Jihad is a fundamental tenet of Islam. So that means youre purposely avoiding talking about Jihad just so that you can avoid confronting the fact that inferiority complex towards Arabs and some twisted romance of psychotic ideals of following the Sunnah of the Prophet saww by engendering misplaced 7th century violence involving attacking random civilians have co-opted the idea.

But because you argue that there are "2 sides to every coin", you people will keep sweeping it under the carpet and pretending the issue doesnt exist while more people are murdered because of poorly-explored ideologies that you refuse to refute properly because you dont want to be a "THINKER".

Its really becoming pathetic and it communicates to me that you people dont take these things seriously. Or even that you agree with them being that way.

Anyway, I can see that you, like so many others on this board, refuse to accommodate other perspectives. I am not surprised.

Happy Saturday to you; Bye!

jelel6:
It was out of respect that I've indulged your MAJOR deviation from the original topic of this thread, which have to do with the Islamic viewpoints concerning dealings with usury.