All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all the worlds, and blessings and peace be upon the Master of all Messengers.
The importance and necessity of transactions in human life are no secret. In fact, it would not be an exaggeration to say that no human society can survive without them. This is because people living in society depend on one another to fulfill their needs and improve their standard of living, something that inherently requires transactions.
Although Islamic law (Shariah) has laid out detailed rulings concerning financial matters, unfortunately, driven by our greed, desire for excessive profit, and selfish motives, we often disregard the principles of what is lawful and unlawful. Instead, we make the pursuit of profit our sole objective.
This mindset leads to serious societal issues such as the exploitation of underprivileged groups, unjust profiteering, and the consumption of wealth unlawfully. This ultimately causes disorder and unrest in society.
Therefore, keeping this human tendency in view, Shariah has prescribed a set of rules and regulations for financial dealings and profit-making. When followed sincerely and with full submission, these rules effectively prevent such corruption, provided they are not twisted through loopholes or manipulative reasoning to justify what Allah has forbidden, as the Jews once did. When Allah prohibited the Jews from hunting on Saturday, they found loopholes. So, on Friday, they would either cast nets into the sea or dig pools near the shore. When the fish got trapped, they would block their escape routes and then catch them on Sunday.
Similarly, when Allah Almighty forbade them from consuming fat, they melted it down and turned it into oil to sell. In their false delusion, they believed that they had not consumed the fat but rather profited from the oil.
This was the wickedness and deceit of the Jews: they interpreted Allah’s commandments in a self-made and self-serving manner,
as Allah has stated in the Qur’an:
“Among the Jews are those who distort words from their [proper] usages and say”
[An-Nisa: 46].
And this depravity was not limited to the Jews but was also found among the polytheists. They, too, would violate Allah’s sacred laws through their deceptive schemes.
Therefore, Allah — the Most Exalted — said:
“They make it lawful one year and unlawful another year to correspond to the number made unlawful by Allah and [thus] make lawful what Allah has made unlawful.”
[At-Tawba:37]
A Thought-Provoking Point:
Unfortunately, today, there are people in our societies who expect scholars to make lawful what Allah has prohibited, or to find ways to commit haram without bearing any sin. How strange is this! In other words, they believe that scholars also have the authority of law-making in Shariah matters, and that something forbidden could become permissible just because they declared it so. By only changing names, unlawful could become lawful!
However, this is a false thought process. The Prophet -Peace be upon him- guided the ummah 1400 years ago about these types of afflictions.
As Allah’s Prophet – Peace be upone him-said:
“Some of my people will assuredly drink wine calling it by another name”
[ Sunan Ibn Majah 4020]
And at the end of this hadith The Prophet peace be upon him- mentioned their punishment that this:
“will turn them into monkeys and pigs”
The famous respected Taabi ‘i Ayyub sukhtiyani said:
“They deceive Allah as they deceive humans. If they had committed this sin directly (without any trick), it would have been easier.”
This is because this deceit not only involves committing a sinful act but also includes the audacity to deceive Allah.
Mortgage and the Opinion of Javed Ghamidi:
From time to time, the well-known TV anchor and intellectual, Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, presents strange and unusual opinions, and one of these opinions is related to taking a house on mortgage. Although some forms of mortgage are permissible and per Islamic principles, the current method of buying houses through mortgages in America, Europe (and also in Pakistan under the label of home finance) includes interest. That’s why scholars have graded it as Haram.
However, Mr. Ghamidi has presented a unique stance on this matter. He says that if you go to a bank and ask for 20 million rupees in cash, they won’t give you a single penny that easily. But if you ask for a car, they’ll give you lakhs. And for a house, they’ll give you crores. Why? Because in that case, the money is not just being handed over, it’s being turned into something useful (like a car or a house). When money is used to buy a usable item, it’s no longer considered a consumable item. And according to this idea, interest (sood) only applies to consumables, not to usable things.
For example, suppose you own a house and I want to rent it. You might say, “Pay me 50,000 rupees monthly as rent, and another 50,000 as an installment. Once the installments are complete, the house is yours.” That would actually be very generous, and that’s exactly what the bank does in a mortgage. So, in my view, buying a house, car, or anything else on a mortgage is completely allowed. There’s nothing wrong with it.
An Analysis of Ghamidi Sahib’s Opinion:
From Ghamidi Sahab’s stance, you can see how much he claims to care for Muslims, always trying to make things easier for them. Even if that means putting religious teachings and Shariah rules at risk. But in doing so, Ghamidi Sahab not only overlooks religious laws, but also ignores established financial definitions and the global principles of economics. For example, according to his view, the bank isn’t really giving you money; it’s giving you a house.
Since the money is now used to buy something usable, the bank can charge rent for it. And if the bank eventually transfers the ownership of the house to you after you’ve paid the full rent and installments, then what’s the problem? Whereas the reality is that there is a flaw in Mr. Ghamidi’s stance, according to both Islamic and prevailing economic principles. Anyone familiar with the definition of economics can easily understand this flaw. If you search for the definition of “mortgage” on Google, the following definition comes up:
“A mortgage is a loan used to purchase or maintain a home, plot of land, or other real estate. The borrower agrees to pay the lender over time, typically in a series of regular payments divided into principal and interest. The property then serves as collateral to secure the loan. “
Even according to this definition, a mortgage is not essentially a sale and purchase agreement; rather, it is a form of loan agreed upon by two parties — the lender and the borrower. In this case, the lender is the bank, and the borrower is the customer. After understanding the situation of mortgages, keep in mind that in many countries, banks are legally prohibited from being involved in buying and selling transactions. They cannot acquire a property and sell it further, because a bank is merely a financial institution whose role is to provide financial support, not to engage in buying and selling.
So, from this explanation, it is evident that a mortgage is essentially a form of loan, as defined by many other institutions as well. Moreover, if you look at the mortgage agreement, it clearly outlines how much interest you have to pay, when to pay it, and under what conditions a penalty will apply. If this were truly a sale and purchase agreement, then where does the interest come from?
Based on the details mentioned above, it is clear that Mr. Ghamidi’s stance is incorrect not only according to economic and financial principles but also from the perspective of Islamic teachings. According to Shariah, anything one intends to sell must first be in their ownership.
The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:
“Do not sell what you do not have.”
Even if, for the sake of argument, we consider this agreement a sale and purchase contract, it would still not be permissible in light of the hadith. Because the bank cannot sell something it does not own. When you go to the bank to sign an agreement for a house, does the bank actually own that house? Of course not!
The house is constructed by someone else, owned by someone else, and its price is also determined by that third party. You go there and sign the mortgage agreement. Then the bank pays the price of the house to the owner, purchases the house in your name, and keeps the documents with itself. In all of this, the bank’s role is nothing more than providing financial support.
The bank never owned the house, so according to both the financial and Islamic definitions, this does not qualify as a valid form of sale and purchase. Even if we accept this as a sale agreement, according to Islamic teachings, the house needed to be in the ownership of the bank, which it was not. So, fundamentally, it was impermissible for the bank to sell that house. And when the sale itself is invalid, then adding interest on top of it for the buyer to continue paying makes the entire transaction completely contradictory to Islamic teachings.
Therefore, a mortgage is absolutely prohibited (haram)! Ghamidi Sahib should reconsider his opinion on this matter. Could it be that his view is just another form of the same kind of deceit where things that Allah has forbidden are made to seem permissible simply by changing their names?
May Allah guide Ghamidi Sahab and stop him from leading the Ummah toward sin and what is forbidden.
We pray to Allah to grant us the understanding to distinguish right from wrong. Ameen.
