Answered by Shaykh Faraz Rabbani
These are comments on a a strange Islamic group’s website’s legal blunderings…
There have been several important answers about riba on the Hanafi list. They may be found by searching for “riba” using the search engine at http://www.SunniPath.com
Walaikum assalam,
> “According to some scholars, Abu Hanifah allowed the taking of Interest? For your Information amongst the Mazahib (Juristic Schools of thought) it is well known that Imam Abu Hanifah (ra) is one of the toughest people against the dust of interest (i.e. Ghubaar Al-Riba). He is tough to the extent that he constituted that when a person comes to collect money and protects himself by the shade of the house of the one who owes money to him this benefit is Haram and is considered to be Riba. Is…
This is a bizarre misunderstanding! This was Abu Hanifa’s own personal practice. He would not benefit from the shade of someone whom he owed money (or owed him money), out of taqwa, because it could be understood to be “benefiting from a loan,” which is not permitted. Of course, as he himself clarified, the “benefiting from a loan” that is haram is a benefit stipulated in the contract itself.
> As far as the misrepresentation of the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifah regarding accepting Riba in Dar ul-Harb is concerned, unfortunately it has been wrongly transmitted by An-Naqeeb Al-Misri (in The Reliance of…
If you check the section in the Reliance (w43, Dealing in Interest (Riba) In Enemy Lands (Dar al-Harb)), it is a quote from Shaykh Muhammad al-Hamid, a leading Syrian Hanafi faqih from the second half of the 20th Century. Even a cursory read of the article there will make it clear that al-Misri has nothing to do with it, that the author is a Hanafi faqih, and that the “Shaykh” does not know what he is talking about, unfortunately.
> Therefore, for example, Hanafis would accept currency/money to purchase an item if the origin of the currency/money is obtained in a halal manner and they would reject the currency/money if the origin of it was Haram. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifah as long as Muslims are living in Dar ul Islam. Imam Abu Hanifah said that the hukm of currency in Dar ul Harb is that all of it has been circulating through prohibited transactions such as through the sale of alcohol, prostitution, riba etc… and these are common transactions among the non Muslims in Dar ul Harb.
The above has nothing whatsoever to do with the position of Abu Hanifa or the Hanafi madhhab. In legal terms, it is a lie, and a serious one.
> Therefore the fatwa of Imam Abu Hanifah is that if a Muslim is living in Dar ul Harb with whom we have a treaty it would be allowed for the Muslim to accept their currency/money regardless of the manner in which the non Muslims have obtained it as long as the Muslim obtains it in a halal manner and HE does not DEAL with riba himself or haram transactions.
Again, at a sharp angle from reality. Not true.
> Note: The real Dar ul-Harb (i.e. Hukmann Wa Fi’elann) does not exist today because of the absence of Dar ul-Islaam …. whose presence will necessitate the presence of real Dar ul-Harb. The whole world today is Dar ul-Kufr or if you like to say Dar ul-Harb Hukumann but not Fi’lann… and as far as Muslim land under occupation is concerned this is constituted to be Dar ul-Ghasib although some Muslims refer to it wrongly as Dar ul-Harb.”
In Hanafi terms, there is only a two-way division: Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. However, great contemporary fuqaha (including Shaykh Mahmoud Usmani) explain that because social, economic, and political realities have changed, the fiqh rulings related to non-Muslim lands has necessarily changed.
> that I wished to have his above answer clarified. Did Shaykh al-Misri, rahimullah, get it wrong?
Look in the Reliance. It is really funny. The discussion referred to is deep inside the appendices Sheikh Nuh added to Ibn Naqib’s work.
In the Hanafi madhhab, non-Muslim lands would be classified as Dar al-Harb. However, fiqh is not merely a question of picking up rulings recorded in old texts and throwing them down on new realities. Rather, the application of fiqh, especially on more sophisticated matters, requires a sophisticated understanding of the texts of the fuqaha, as well as the primary sources, the general foundational principles and goals of the Shariah, and, very importantly, the time, place, and people the fiqh will affect. This is why fuqaha such as Imam al-Haskafi stated that, “Whoever does not understand the people of his times is ignorant.” (Durr al-Mukhtar, 1: 47)
And Allah knows best.
Walaikum assalam,
Faraz Rabbani.