2018
DOI: 10.1108/imefm-08-2016-0109
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Riba and interest in Islamic finance: semantic and terminological ıssue

Abstract: Purpose The aim of this paper is to argue analytically that interest and riba are not exactly the same and not an interchangeable terminology. There are similarities and differences between the two at the conceptual level. Design/methodology/approach To support the argument, the paper shows that it is possible to prove cases where the riba is involved but the interest is not. Hence, there is a situation of the presence of riba without interest. Furthermore, it is also possible to prove cases where the intere… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…High engagement with Murabaha contract does not support the realisation of ethics and Maqās id al-Sharī'ah. This is one of the most controversial financial transactions in the Islamic finance, among such contentious issues, as imposing a penalty on default payment, use of interest-rate as a benchmark (i.e LIBOR), rebate on early payment of Murabaha (Haron et al 2015;Suzuki and Uddin 2016;Suharto 2018; Alziyadat and Ahmed 2019). Therefore, this research amplifies the critical call of some researchers (Hasan 2004;Hasan 2005;Iqbal and Molyneux 2005) who express the need to assess the utilisation of PLS contracts compared to Mud  ārabah, as it is one of the important MSI components to measure the performance of IBs against their Maqās id al-Sharī'ah objectives.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…High engagement with Murabaha contract does not support the realisation of ethics and Maqās id al-Sharī'ah. This is one of the most controversial financial transactions in the Islamic finance, among such contentious issues, as imposing a penalty on default payment, use of interest-rate as a benchmark (i.e LIBOR), rebate on early payment of Murabaha (Haron et al 2015;Suzuki and Uddin 2016;Suharto 2018; Alziyadat and Ahmed 2019). Therefore, this research amplifies the critical call of some researchers (Hasan 2004;Hasan 2005;Iqbal and Molyneux 2005) who express the need to assess the utilisation of PLS contracts compared to Mud  ārabah, as it is one of the important MSI components to measure the performance of IBs against their Maqās id al-Sharī'ah objectives.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experts who argue that Islam recognises TVM include Zarqa (1983), Khan (1991); Khaf (1994), Ahmad and Hassan (2004); Rosly (2005), Abdul Khir (2013);and Suharto (2018). They shared similar thoughts on the higher price charged in the differed contract as a form of TVM.…”
Section: Time Value Of Moneymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, Asadov et al (2018) recommend sharing all contract performing costs between the buyer and the IF institutions. Suharto (2018) provides a relevant analogy to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) installment method in calculating taxable income from property sales. They compared the Murabaha contract with the IRS installment sale where part of the profit is actually interest.…”
Section: Islamic Finance Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%