Umar Pasha was asked why his classes on 'muamalat' based on the classical texts, traditional fiqh and traditional tafsir was not taught in the Islamic Universities.
Parallel to his talk on the Sale Contracts, he spoke briefly about the events that had paved the way to Islamic Economics since the middle of the 19th century.
'Ustadz' is a term used by the modernists. It is a Persian word. It is not Arabic. The term is a declaration of a new fundamentalist ideology during the midst 19th century. There are no references to the term 'ustadz' in any classical texts. The term 'ustadz' was originally used by Muhammad Abduh. The followers of Muhammad Abduh used 'ustadz' to connotes themselves being 'teachers'. No books written 200 years ago made any reference to the muslim ulamas as being called 'ustadzs'.
Misunderstanding of the term 'ustadz' is packaged in understanding Islamic Modernism. It is important to know.
Our teachers ( the ustadzs) have inherited Islam from reformists who at the beginning of the Reformists Movement, were considered 'kafir'. Abduh was considered kafir by his own peers. He was made relevant with a title of Chief Mufti of Egypt only because Lord Cromer was in-charge of Egypt at that time. The English chose Lord Cromer because he was the man who would solve the European interests in Egypt. The first thing Abduh did, was to declare that the 'Interests from the Post Office Bank of Egypt' was halal. He saw himself like his predecessor, Jamaluddin Al-Afghani, as the protestant Muslims by saying ' I am Luther of the Muslims'. Why did they call themselves 'Luther'. They did this because, like Protestantism, which represents in Christianity the christianisation of riba, they have emerged to reform Islam. The first christians who accepted riba were the Protestants. The first people among the muslims who accepted riba were the protestant (reformed) muslims. All the 'ustadzs' who followed the line of Abduh have taken the line of the protestants Islam. Many muslim countries have adopted a protestant (reformed) Islam. They do not accept the traditional scholars, the classical texts, the authority of Ibn Rushd nor Imam Malik nor the tafsirs. They want to be like the Christian evangelists who read the bible and make their own interpretations. They want to be like them by reading the Quran and make their own interpretations and derivations. No classical tafsirs.
We live in the times of these 'ustadzs'. Not ulamas anymore. The fact that they call themselves 'ustadzs' justifies the belief they helplessly represent. Teachers who have lost track of time.
Ustadz Muhammad Abduh was an individual who was convinced that Europe and western civilisation were way ahead of Islam. So, for the muslims to catch up to be at par with the Europeans, they have to change. That was his main theory. He had to look to the Europeans. No doubt. In his time he was seen as a traitor. When Abduh arrived at Al-Azhar, being already the Chief Mufti made by Lord Cromer, Shaykh Ilish, the Maliki Shaykh in Al-Azhar, who was an old gentleman, got up. When he saw Abduh came, he stood up, got his stick, walked to him and hit him on the head and said 'You kafir, get out of here !
What Abduh said and did should be a great concern for the muslims. Whether he was a freemason or not, his ideas and actions were proofs to who he really was. Abduh brought into full fruition the teachings of Islamic Fundamentalism ( reformists, revivalists, modernists). The teacher of Abduh, Jamaluddin Al-Afghani was the founder of fundamentalist ideas. But Abduh who took the fundamentalist position was held high to be the father of fundamentalism.
A Syrian journalist who propagated Ustadz Muhammad Abduh and Jamaluddin Al-Afghani was Muhammad Rashid Reda.. He was the key man and the thinker behind them. He created the fantasy biography of Muhammad Abduh in his magazine called Al-Manar. It was the first pan-Islamic international magazine circulating around the Muslim World informing the world about this new wave. Al-Manar scripted all the basis of fundamentalism.
Egypt was totally in the grip of the the British. All the magazine's propaganda circulated from Cairo. In Egypt, a country run by Europeans, they can say whatever they liked. All the conspiracies took place in Cairo under the protected cover of the British. With this elements of fundamentalism, many christians, muslims and some jews were brought together by the freemasonic organisations. Secretly, they gathered and proposed their agendas as a tool for their revolutionary activities and conspiracies.
Rashid Reda affirmed Abduh's assertions when he said, 'Only composite interest is forbidden, but single interest is halal.' The people around him found hard to swallow, nevertheless sank this statement down their throats. His followers knew single interest was haram, but still they accepted his ideas and methodology.
He further reiterated that ' Riba an-nasi'ah is riba of loans'. He misdefined this completely. As we have learnt from 'Bidayatul Mujtahid', Riba an-Nasi'ah is not the riba of the loans but it is the riba of deferment. Not of loans but deferment. Riba of deferment does not apply to the loans because deferment in loans is allowed. Riba an-Nasi'ah applies to 'exchange' not to 'loans'. To call Riba an-Nasi'ah as riba to the 'loans' is not correct. Riba an-Nasi'ah is adding deferment to transactions like 'exchange', which is forbidden.
Interests have nothing to do with Riba an-Nasi'ah. Interest is disparity and it occurs only in Riba al-Fadl. Interest is Riba al-Fadl. When you allow disparity in 'loans', then it is called Riba al-Fadl.
So they called Riba an-Nasi'ah as riba of the loans based on disparity. Wrong interpretation.
All the text on Islamic Economics used in Malaysia available define Riba an-Nasi'ah given by Rashid Reda. The people who follow his line accepted that 'Riba is interest', meaning Riba an-Nasi'ah and Riba al-Fadl are both riba that has to do with interest only. But, interest is based on a mathematical calculations. Riba is more than these interpolations. Riba is something more fundamental and deep.
Why riba is not interest ? If you make riba as mere interest, you have left a very significant and fundamental part of what riba is. By saying Riba an-Nasi'ah is interest, is like saying, Riba an-Nasi'ah is Riba al-Fadl. When this is accepted, then what is riba an-Nasi'ah ? Remember, Riba an-Nasi'ah has to do with the deferment.
This brings us to the basis where you will be able to interpret why paper money is haram. It is on the basis that you understand what is credit money. Credit money is a debt. A debt cannot be accepted as means of payment. A debt can never be accepted in Islam as money.
The Islamic Economists refer Islamic Banking as interest free therefore halal. Interest free does not mean anything. You can be interest-free and completely forbidden, as they are now. Interest-free philosophy comes from Rashid Reda. This is the knowledge that has been passed down to the ustadzs by Rashid Reda.
In Indonesia, the organisation Muhammadiyah derived and based on Muhammad Abduh. Although they dont even know who Muhammad Abduh is, all the philosophy that they follow is the reformist philosophy of protestant Islam. There are two schools of Islamic reforms – Jamatul Islamiya and Ikhwanul Muslimin. Ikhwanul Muslim was founded by Hassan Al-Banna. He was a teacher in a school and became a leader of a social group in order to establish Islam in Egypt. He was educated in a school created by Muhammad Abduh. He was taught by Ustadzs of Abduh. He came into public acknowledgement by accepting the directorship of the magazine Al-Manar after Rashid Reda. This is of course to continue the same line of thought. Same tide.
The main contribution and great achievement of the Ikhwanul Muslimin after 50-60 years of activities is the disgraceful Islamic Banking. And the main contribution and great achievement of the Jamaatul Islamiya is the acceptance of the Islamic Constitution.
The Islamisation ideas are all the ideas of Jamaatul Islamiya and Ikhwanul Muslimin. The traditional Islam of the Ulama was destroyed completely because it was not allowed to exist. Its existence in itself is revolutionary. This was not allowed to happen. Hence these modernist with the soften approach was not a threat to the kufar. The Ikhwanul Muslimin fought the secular Muslims. Of course the emergence of these modernist was seen to have an Islamic label that carried the name of Islam. One has to remember that there existed the traditional Islam who considered the modernists as heretic. So this is the irony of the 20th century Islam. We have a rotten and degraded protestant Islam fighting against secularism. Either side that wins is a disaster. False dialectic that cannot arrive to any good end. Modernism can never win and only in their desperation, end up calling for their young to become suicidal bombers. Their achievement is in the islamisation of capitalism.
The Amal of Medina has no controversy in itself. Through out the past 150 years, the pure knowledge on muamalat have been reformed or corrupted to become compatible with the usurious banking system, to embrace capitalism. There is a big difference in the position of the amal of Medinah from what has been taught today in order to accommodate Islamic Banking, Islamic stock exchange, Islamic Insurance and Islamic paper money. There have nevr been any major disagreements in the schools of fiqh. In the Bidayatul Mujtahid, Ibn Rushd has outlined all the disagreements between the Imams. What is important is what is the clear-cut decision on which everybody agrees.
There wer issues in the fiqh on matters of trading that was always looked into by the ulama. The traditional ulamas have gone through monumental details and meticulousness in protecting the purity of the deen. This is all in the fiqh. They were careful not to allow one single bit of riba in the fiqh, however minute. This fiqh had been thrown down the drain by the modernists 'ustadzs'. And they base their judgement on the writings of Umar Chapra ,Yusuf al-Qardhawi and Taqi Uthmani.
Delivered by Umar Ibrahim Vadillo (16/4/2010)
(To appreciate the subject fully, please read 'The Esoteric Deviation in Islam', by Umar Ibrahim Vadillo
