Methodology of Islamic Economics

Problems and Solutions

Necmettin Kizilkaya

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781000732443
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

In its pursuit to equip the reader with a basic knowledge of Islamic economics, this book divulges the micro-foundations of the discipline, and highlights the predominant schools of thought that exist in the field. It explains, in simple terms, what Islamic economics entails and how it can be studied as a science in relation to the Holy Quran, the Sunnah and the Islamic intellectual tradition based on these two sources.

The book familiarizes the reader with knowledge of the basic maxims of the discipline. It then establishes the arguments that are presented by the proponents of religion-based economics, specifically Islam, and apprises readers about the aforementioned schools as they exist. A number of chapters consider the dimension of the dilemmas the discipline is facing, and the chronological progress of the field is reviewed, hence providing a comprehensive overview of the topic. The book deals with the issues about the origins of Islamic economics, the basic methodological questions, the use of the opportunities offered by fiqh in the methodological discussions and the main problems arising from the encounter with other cultures and civilizations. It offers practical solutions, despite the differing schools of thought, not unlike the development of conventional Economics where radical differences between Keynesian, Classical and Monetarist approaches existed. It concludes by incorporating some of the finest works that explain to the reader how Islamic economics may progress as a discipline.

This guide will provide both students and researchers in Comparative Economic Studies, Islamic Economics and Islamic Finance with an essential overview of the field.

Part I

Foundational issues and questions

1 Methodology of Islamic economics

Is the subject worth discussing?

Zubair Hasan

1. Introduction

In common law, law is made first, interpretations follow. Parliament enacts laws through debate and majority vote. Courts interpret what is so enacted. Interestingly, in Islam interpretation comes first, the law follows. What is interpreted are the sources of law – the holy Qur’an, prophetic traditions, ijma, qiyas, custom, public interest and fiqhi opinion. And, who interpret these sources: the jurists. Thus, Islamic laws are not divine, as is commonly believed, in the strict sense of the term; they are jurist-given. The jurists stand between Allah (swt) and the community for guidance. It is the juristic origin of Islamic laws that there are four major schools of Sunni jurisprudence, each with interpretive differences within as well. The Shiite schools are additional. A Muslim is free to choose any from the corpus. As the juristic scholars are the law givers in Islam, they occupy a place of utmost reverence and responsibility in Muslim societies. Islamic economists, like the present author, cannot replace or dare counter them. Society grants the jurists, as it must, the final say in religious matters.

However, social phenomena are dynamic and dynamism is on a sharp ascent. Juristic interpretations of sources too cannot remain static or sticky. Indeed, Islamic jurisprudence has never been entirely devoid of temporal changes. Juristic dynamism has of necessity been slower as pace can be risky; filled with pitfalls.¹ Still, the jurists have to keep pace with expanding frontiers of knowledge with a socially adjustable perspective. For example, jurists cannot get away merely by looking at the legal permissibility of contractual structuring; they remain answerable for anything discovered against the tenets of Islam later during the operation of a contract. Errors could, for example, creep in because of technical jargon used or mathematical formulations forming part of the document they certify. Most contemporary jurists, especially at the top, do not have the time or age to learn newer things in a fast-changing world. Advisably, they may better have adequately qualified professionals to work with them to check technicalities.

Finally, all modern states, Muslim included, operate within a constitutional framework overseeing their legal systems in content and operation. In developing countries constitutional laws are inspired by, rather than patterned on, those of their erstwhile colonial rulers. Constitutions embody socially agreed value systems. Modern societies are multi-religious and have to meet global commitments on human rights. National constitutions tend to remain neutral between different faiths their residents follow. They are books of civic rights, not the faith scriptures. In view of the rising religiosity in the Eastern countries, including Muslim ones, Islamic economists must see that their theoretical stance and constructs are general enough to remain workable despite constitutional differences across countries. This applies in particular to a puritan stance some Islamic scholars take on various economic issues.

Thus, one speaking on methodology of Islamic economics must first make explicit which of the juristic schools underpins his narrative. He must further clarify whether his proposals match the constitutional provisions of his country or there is political will to make the needed changes. For Islam does not believe in philosophical hair-splitting, or idle theorizing. It is a way of life; its road to salvation does not loop around the worldly pursuits; it passes through their turmoil. Islamic economics that one may visualize building must deliver on the ground. The superiority for Islamic economics over the conventional, in finance especially, is claimed because of its linkage with ground realities. One cannot, as one should not, propose something hanging in the air violative of this claim. Thus, a discussion on worldview does not seem as important as the actualization of a basic needs fulfilment programme. Debate on substance versus form looks less significant than sharing of profit with labour. Diminishing balance partnership may be declared Shari‘ah-compliant but equally vital is whether the contract remains just too both the parties throughout the course of its fruition.

1.1 Structure of the chapter

Methodology as a term mainly has two uses. First, it may refer to the subject that oversees the performance of economics from outside. In this sense, methodology is a branch of epistemology – the theory of knowledge – and stands on philosophical bearings. It seeks to evaluate if and to what extent economic theory has been developing in the direction to realizing in the real world the goals methodology sets for it. To lay down the criteria and rules for such evaluation is also the task of methodology (Hausman, 1984, chap. 1). In the following section 2, we shall limit the discussion on methodology contextual to mainstream economics in this sense. In the process, we shall also examine the comparative position in Islamic economics on some of the issues. The two economic disciplines are doubtless very different; nevertheless, it is the mainstream discussions on methodology that have provided the motivation and the basic inputs for debates on the subject in Islamic economics.

Second, methodology is conceived of as operating within economics. In this sense, the rudiments of methodology help economists design research projects and fix their goals. This view of methodology is particularly important for Islamic economics. We shall discuss its theoretical elements in section 3. In section 4 we examine research methods popularized in academic institutions and the impact of Western norms and methods on research done in the area. The last section (five) will summarize the discussion and conclude with an answer to the poser in the title of the chapter.

2. Nature of mainstream methodology

Methodology attracted much attention in economics during the interwar period as the era witnessed extremes of cyclical devastations – the 1923 galloping inflation in Germany followed by the Great Depression of 1930s. However, interest in the subject faded away by the close of the century. Confusion and controversy ultimately reduced methodology to a puritan sort of philosophy for ivory tower thinkers. In many universities, the subject was shunted out from departments of economics to find refuge in departments of philosophy. Any survey of the voluminous mainstream literature on the subject would here be out of place.² Important is that the time was opportune for the subject for reception in the nascent Islamic economics that took off as an academic discipline during the mid-1970s.

Discussions on methodology in Islamic economics usually derive their inspiration and content from what is termed as the worldview of a society, a popular subject in Islamic studies in the Muslim social sciences.³ Differences in the defining features of economic systems – mainstream and Islamic – are attributed to their worldview differences. Worldview refers to the collective perception of a community about the purpose of creation, the place of humans therein, their relations with the Creator and with fellow human-beings including the principles shaping and regulating them. The concept of worldview is architectonic and evolutive with reference to time and space.

The Islamic worldview is seen as God ordained; it is shaped and conditioned by moral and ethical codes of conduct for the individuals and groups in various spheres of life including economics. It has juristic foundations allowing interpretive flexibility but cannot be diluted or replaced by human will. In contrast, the West has developed what it calls a ‘scientific worldview’ based on rational empiricism and changeable by social agreement.⁴

2.1 Impact of worldview differences

The basic distinctions the worldview differences create between Islamic and mainstream versions of economics broadly include the “is–ought” controversy, reason–revelation relationship, and the doctrine–reality relationship. We discuss them below.

a) The “is–ought” controversy

The secular worldview expelled all transcendental ideas from the purview of economics on the plea that science is concerned only with “what is”. “What ought to be” was admissible only if supported by empirical logic. Mainstream economics continues to hold this view as an article of faith.⁵ Thus, Marshall (1924) could conceive of economics only as catering to “material requisites of well-being”, while Robbins (1932) declared it “neutral towards the ends”. On the contrary, the Islamic view is that the absence of hereafter and accountability to any superior being makes one feel only existing because he exists. He sees no difference in an act of suicide and a sacrifice, for he faces no system of reward and punishment in the hereafter. Value neutral material progress has been phenomenal but at an incalculable cost to humanity in terms of environmental damage and other sufferings, especially in the form of abject poverty and vulgar inequalities in the distribution of wealth and opportunity. Islam makes one see matter–spirit interlocks in self urging him/her to follow the prescribed ethical path.

b) Reason–revelation relationship

One may look at this relationship in two ways. First, reasoning operates as a tool of analysis within discussions on revelation. Second, reason confronts and questions revelation from outside the confines of religion. Contextual to methodology, the first way of looking at the relationship is Islamic, the second mainstream. The meanings and argument is not the same in the two cases.

The monistic view of Islam includes both reason and sapience – intuitive wisdom – in the ambit of rationality; mainstream methodology leaves sapience out (Al-Attas, 1995, pp. 18, 35; Hasan 1995a, p. 59). For distinction, we shall treat reason with its Islamic import as intellect meaning “reason plus sapience”, leaving the term reason for usage as it is in the mainstream.

Now, “intellect” is the faculty that transcends the realm of understanding and provides preclusive principles for human guidance in worldly affairs. It makes comprehensible to human mind the metaphysics of the visible and invisible and of their mutual linkage, thus enabling one to imbibe a holistic and integrated vision of life. Unlike secular rationalism, Islam does not see nature as a material physical object meant for human exploitation and use; it accords nature an additional and deeper significance. The Qur’an upholds nature⁶ as an open book which intellect alone can help read, understand and interpret. Intellect makes one feel and grasp the cosmic purpose and relevance of nature. It must be revered as it contains symbols and signs bearing testimony to the existence of Allah (swt) and His lordship over the universe.

c) Doctrine–reality circuitry

An economy invariably has an underlying doctrine that shapes its institutions and prescribes goals to achieve; it helps design policies and gives content and direction to ground realities. Thus, economies have an operable doctrine–reality circuitry. For example, in mainstream economic systems – capitalism or socialism – the doctrines resulted from the formalization of realities on the ground. For instance, Adam Smith observed the accumulation of capital, technological breakthroughs, division of labour and monetary institutions maturing in Britain – he could foresee the industrial revolution coming to make his country the leading colonial power of the world. In his Wealth of Nations Smith crafted the foundation stones for capitalism from observed realities. He was the system builder. Likewise, Karl Marx saw the dark side of capitalism – exploitation and alienation of the working class, capitalism eventually spreading mass poverty, deprivation and denial. Based on what he observed, Marx succeeded in providing the initial design for socialism. The commonality between capitalism and socialism that resulted is that in both cases the glide has been from reality to doctrine. What about Islam?

Islam has had neither a Smith nor a Marx. Colonization of Muslim lands did not allow them to grow out of the late mercantilist era in economic thought. Thus, Ibn Khaldūn’s Introduction (The Muqqadima, 1406) could hardly go beyond discussing the causes that accounted for the rise and fall of nations along an inverted parabolic path; he could not draw the contours of an Islamic economic system because he did not observe it operating candidly on the ground. By the dawn of independence around the mid-1950s, Muslim economies had already gone far on the road of capitalism their colonizers had charted for them. Some Islamic economists see methodology as the tool for the reversal. They assume that methodology can make ground realities change to match the doctrinal structures of the religion. To convince people, they highlight the maladies of the mainstream systems now in practice and show how Islam, if followed, would convert the existing hell into paradise ahead. One does not come across a greater naivety that has caused so much avoidable controversy and confusion in Islamic economics. Methodological enthusiasts violate a basic principle of valid comparisons: likes cannot be compared with unlikes – the apples with oranges, or parrots with crows.⁷ Since no economic system on ground following the Islamic prescriptions operates anywhere even on a miniature scale, Islamic economists exhibit a proclivity for comparing a system painted on Islamic ideals with the one as capitalism operating on ground divergent to its doctrinal norms. No value judgement can be valid one way or the other based on such comparisons.

Given the nature of Islamic economics, methodology as an evaluator to supervise the performance of Islamic economics parallel to mainstream is not possible. Methodology to Islamic economics is what principles of jurisprudence are to jurisprudence. Islamic methodology can only be the application of juristic norms to economic practice (Addas, 2008). Let us now turn to the second usage of the term methodology which is signific...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• Preface
• List of contributors
• PART I: Foundational issues and questions
• PART II: Foundations
• PART III: Islamic economics and Fiqh
• PART IV: Encounters
• Index