Usury and Interest: A Comparative Economic Study (book): Difference between revisions
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
===The transition from usury to interest in Western thought=== | ===The transition from usury to interest in Western thought=== | ||
The dichotomy between Western and Islamic thought illustrates two fundamentally different intellectual traditions that seldom interact meaningfully, except by coincidence and without deliberate intent. Western thought, characterized by a long history and evolution, has a realistic and pragmatic approach, relying exclusively on established truths and thereby avoiding doubt and uncertainty. Conversely, Islamic thought is a universal and transcendent framework that transcends temporal and spatial boundaries, rendering theoretical speculation impractical (p. 151). While religion plays a minor and restricted role in Western thought, it occupies a paramount position in Islamic thought, where it is perpetually subject to interpretation and explanation (p. 155). | The dichotomy between Western and Islamic thought illustrates two fundamentally different intellectual traditions that seldom interact meaningfully, except by coincidence and without deliberate intent. Western thought, characterized by a long history and evolution, has a realistic and pragmatic approach, relying exclusively on established truths and thereby avoiding doubt and uncertainty. Conversely, Islamic thought is a universal and transcendent framework that transcends temporal and spatial boundaries, rendering theoretical speculation impractical (p. 151). While religion plays a minor and restricted role in Western thought, it occupies a paramount position in Islamic thought, where it is perpetually subject to interpretation and explanation (p. 155). | ||
By comparing Western and Islamic thought, Mohammad Abrash discusses the historical context of usury in Western philosophy, tracing its origins from ancient Greece (such as Plato), through the Roman Empire, the Middle Ages, and into the Enlightenment. He argues that following the Renaissance and the emergence of new economic ideas, the traditional concept of usury, which was associated with consumer loans, evolved into the modern understanding of interest on money and capital. He posits that capital, much like land, serves as a source of profit and is subject to interest and income; the interest on capital is analogous to land rent (ri' al-ard) (pp. 155-158). He considers the concept of land rent to be broader than that of interest (al-fā'idah) and provides three interpretations of ri' (p. 159). | By comparing Western and Islamic thought, Mohammad Abrash discusses the historical context of usury in Western philosophy, tracing its origins from ancient Greece (such as Plato), through the Roman Empire, the Middle Ages, and into the Enlightenment. He argues that following the Renaissance and the emergence of new economic ideas, the traditional concept of usury, which was associated with consumer loans, evolved into the modern understanding of interest on money and capital. He posits that capital, much like land, serves as a source of profit and is subject to interest and income; the interest on capital is analogous to land rent (ri' al-ard) (pp. 155-158). He considers the concept of land rent to be broader than that of interest (al-fā'idah) and provides three interpretations of ri' (p. 159). | ||
===New insights into the interest rates in modern economy=== | ===New insights into the interest rates in modern economy=== | ||
Like Rafiq Yunus, Mohammad Abrash addresses modern perspectives on usury and interest, articulating and examining nine different theories: | Like Rafiq Yunus, Mohammad Abrash addresses modern perspectives on usury and interest, articulating and examining nine different theories: | ||