Sewaktu mendaftar kita telah diberi pilihan untuk memilih berapa leverage yg kita perlukan atau tidak menggunakan leverage. Boleh tak kalau saya katakan ianya seperti seorang kontraktor membuat bangunan yang mempunyai kemudahan dengan pembekal barangan, dengan modal yang sedikit seorang kontraktor boleh membina bangunan kerana memiliki leverage dengan pembekal dan sudah pasti mesti mengambil dari pembekal yg sama sahaja. Malah tidak ada jaminan sebenarnya dlm bayaran, bergantung kepeda kepercayaan sahaja.
Kalau project tak siap,mungkin ada yang teraniaya. Kalau diperhalusi,boleh dikatakan kebanyakan perniagaan terlibat dengan leverage. Masalah serahan barangan. Forex Market samada online atau yang dilakukan oleh bank perdagangan adalah fokus kepada perkara yang sama. Ianya tidak melibatkan penyerahan fizikal seperti money changer. Ianya seperti saham dibursa saham. Dibursa, apabila pelabur membeli lot saham, apa yang dibelinya, dan apa yang pelabur dapat?
Pelabur sebenarnya membeli harga saham atau ekonomi bagi sesuatu syarikat. Begitu juga dengan Forex, pelabur membeli harga bagi perbezaan harga dua matawang bila keadaan ekonomi membuatkan penguatan dan kelemahan matawang masing-masing. Pandangan saya sekiranya online haram maka apa yang dilakukan oleh bank perdagangan termasuk bank2 Islam juga begitu malah urusan bursa saham juga bagi saya haram. Saham juga akan dapat manfaat bila dijual semula kedalam market.
Masalah swap tak timbul rasanya bila broker menyediakan akaun Islamic yang bebas swap dan rollover. Masalah keuntungan melampau dan kerugian melampau juga bukan isu rasanya. Perlukan pandangan Ustaz,maafkan saya kalau tersilap pandangan. Sebagaimana pendapat sebelum ini bahawa perdagangan matawang adalah harus, maka saya rasa perlu diteroka oleh bijak pandai Islam sebagaimana menyelesaikan masalah pinjaman, bank, insuran,pajak gadai yang sebelumini umat Islam bergelumang dengan dosa tapi akhir Islam memberikan penyelesaiannya.
Benar apa yang saudara nyatakan. Forex online broker diseluruh dunia menjalankan sistem riba atau asas nya dari bank juga. Hanya apabila kita sudah close position sahaja kita dibenarkan ambil duit kita. Kenapa perlu close position?
Kalau tak mahu menjual balik Close position wang tersebut pun xapa kerana kita pemilik hakiki sebenar wang tersebut. Kita teruskan perjuangan yg halal : allahualam. Assalaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Ustaz. Ustaz tersilap bentang kan isu Leverage ni.. Wallahu alam. Leverage tu hanyalah sistem sahaja tuan, broker tidak memberikan pinjaman apa apa pun kepada klien, leverage hanya membantu klien untuk membuka order yang lebih besar dengan menggunakan jumlah modal yang kecil dan kalau rugi dan modal dia seratus dollar, yang rugi hanyalah dollar, bukan 10k dollar tuan, kerana leverage hanyalah sistem, tiada siapa meminjam ataupun peminjam, sekian.
Salam, saya ingin bertanya, jika forex secara online adalah meragukan, ada tak cara untuk menjalankan forex secara selamat. Sekian, terima kasih. Pada pandangan saya semua jenis perniagaan yg melibatkan jual beli secara online samada forex online, forex commercial bank, money changer, saham, stock market, futures market, commodity market etc semuanya mempunyai elemen leverage, swap, rollover kecuali Islamic account.
Kalau nak haramkan forex online individual trading , kenalah adil, haramkan juga perniagaan forex lain yg di urusniaga oleh financial institution sebab semuanya menggunakan asas yg sama.. Wang digital ciptaaan yahudi. Cth lain pula: Berlaku demonstrasi besar2an d Malaysia, ini akan menyebabkan banyak urusniaga tergendala dan sekaligus menyebabkan nilai Ringgit d peringkat internasional lemah, ini adalah cth berdasarkan berita spekulasi utk trader masuk sebagai penjual d pasaran.
Fundamental2 yg kukuh digunakan sebagai spekulasi terhadap pasaran Ringgit. Klu takde asas kajian dan berita semasa sbg spekulasi, perniagaan Forex online akan serupa seperti berjudi main 4D atau jackpot.. Ustaz2 ni punya pandangan hny npk forex individu, forex yg bank main tu buat2 pejam mata.
Sebab ustaz pun simpan duit di bank. Bg ustaz, bank kaya takpe, jgn individu kaya je yg jd isu…. Leverage pada pendapat saya ia BUKANLAH pinjaman yang sebenar-benar seperti mana membuat pinjaman bank dan diwajibkan bayar balik beserta dengan interest…. Saya adalah seorang trader dan sudah beberapa kali masuk deposit dan mengubah nilai leverage mengikut sesuka hati.
Leverage ni langsung tiada efek kepada peserta. Berkaitan qabd taqabud serah-terima secara on the spot yang disyariatkan dalam Islam , dalam forex online ia sebenarnya telah menjadi aqad yang sah! Alasan yang paling senang saya akan tanya kan kepada kamu. Ini bermakna kamu membeli Euro dengan Usd kamu. Senang sahaja, boleh x kamu withdrawn Euro kamu dari akaun pada masa tu? Semua broker forex didunia tidak akan benarkan. Kenapa tidak boleh? Senang saja jawapannya. Asas nya? Bagi bukti kau close position dengan kau perolehi EURO ditangan.
Memanglah leveraging tidak didefinisikan dengan makna pinjaman kewangan. Ia adalah satu bentuk fasiliti atau kemudahan. Tetapi apabila kita membicarakan dalam konteks hukum feqah, kita perlu melakukan takyif fiqhi atau dengan kata mudah, kontrak apa yg paling sesuai untuk kita kategorikan leveraging ini. Dan yg paling hampir ialah qard. Trading emas secara online agak luas maksudnya. Jika maksudnya menggunakan platform forex, maka hukumnya adalah sama seperti hukum trading forex.
Kalau maksudnya ialah trading emas fizikal, cuma pembayaran atau lock harga dilakukan melalui online, itu tidak ada masalah asalkan mencukupi syarat2 jual beli emas. Boleh rujuk Parameter Pelaburan Emas. Ya kita boleh berpegang kepada salah satu pendapat yang kita percayai lebih hampir kepada kebenaran. Beza antara forex konv. Adapun cara operasinya dari sudut leverage, isu tidak ada qabd possession ketika open position close position, adalah serupa sahaja antara konv.
Kerana isu syariah forex bukan hanya pada swap, tapi pada operasinya yang tidak menepati syariah. Apa yg sentiasa dipertikai kan disini selalu tentang Leverage, Qabd, dan Swap. Seperti kata ustaz, apa yang di larang disini sebenarnya adalah Operasi pengurusan forex itu bukan forex itu sendiri. Kerana mereka guna Kontrak Ijarah. Apa itu Ijarah? Cari lah definisinya sendiri :.
Assalamualaikum, saya ada membeli package pelancongan ke Korea dengan seorang pelajar melayu disana. Dia tolong uruskan semua dan meminta kami membayar RM10, untuk package tersebut. Kami terima harga tersebut dan membayar deposit sebanyak RM Setelah membayar deposit, pelajar tersebut meminta supaya bakinya dibayar sejurus kami tiba di lapangan terbang di Korea dengan menggunakan Korean Won. Dia menyuruh kami menukar baki RM dan dia akan menerima apa sahaja nilai Korean Won yang didapati dari pertukaran tersebut.
Adakah harus urusniaga sebegini? Yang mana harga ditetapkan dalam RM, tapi bayaran dibuat dalam Korean Won. Kami tidak rugi apa-apa, tapi dialah yang akan menanggung apa-apa kerugian matawang bergantung kepada forex pada tarikh kami menukar wang.
Dari pengalaman pelajaran dan pendapat saya. Akad adalah sesuatu yang tetap sama sahaja seperti contract dipersetujui. Seelok nya serah kan baki dalam RM kepada orang tersebut, dan biar dia yang mengurus kan pertukaran wang. Kerana disini selesai kan akad itu dahulu lebih penting. Ini takut kita terlibat dalam Riba An-Nasiah. OK, katakanlah ada jawapan bank2 ambek untung untuk mebayar pekerja2 , begitu juga broker2…. Adakan tuan seorang lawyer? Item 1. Memang haram.
Sapa yang kata tak haram? Kalau sistem bank konvensional memang haram, tak kira di Malaysia atau di negara lain. Hukum dah dikeluarkan, terpulanglah kepada orang ramai untuk menerimanya atau tidak. Item 2- Sama seperti di atas. Majlis fatwa mengatakan hukum merokok adalah haram, jadi ianya haram. Terpulanglah kepada orang ramai untuk menerimanya atau tidak. Apa yang melalut lalut ke majlis fatwa arab saudi pulak? Islam menyuruh kita menerima hukum yang di keluarkan oleh pemerintah kita, sama seperti hukum menyambut hari raya.
Kita mesti mengikut hari yang di tetapkan oleh penyimpan mohor besar raja raja malaysia, bukan penyimpan mohor besar raja arab saudi. Kalau forex sebelum ini halal, maka ianya halal sebelum fatwa haram di keluarkan. Bila dah keluar fatwa haram maka haramlah ia. Apa nak diherankan benda yang dulu halal sekarang dah haram? Item 4- Alasan orang bodoh yang yg dibutakan mata dan hati oleh Allah. Saya tiada komen untuk kenyataan ini. Akhirkata, hukum dah keluar.
Terpulanglah kepada individu untuk memilih maaruf atau mungkar. Saya sedih saudara Insan, sebab ternyata kenyataan ini dikeluarkan oleh orang yang tidak membaca Al-Quran atau membaca tapi tak faham. Kerana saya tidak boleh berbahasa arab, Saya membaca Alquran terjemahan Abdullah Yusoff Ali diiktiraf sebagai terjemahan Quran terbaik dan berani konform dengan tuan orang yang faham Al-Quran dan faham apa itu HUDUD tidak akan mengeluarkan kenyataan tidak cukup akal seperti ini.
Ni 1 tanggapan yg amat merbahaya sedara. Bila kita sesat mintak tunjukkan jalan, nak tanya kat yg sama sesat gak ke? Alamatnya sampai bila2lah tak dapat balik. Muhasabah kalau tak cukup sabar untuk mendengar atau mencari, jangan pulak pandai2 hukumkan jalan pendek utk org lain. Magnificent items from you, man. I really like what you have bought right here, certainly like what you are saying and the way in which by which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you continue to care for to stay it sensible.
Salam, saya harap tuan dapat berlapang dada dgn apa yg sy ingin sampaikan.. Jgn pening Betul tu en. Disini ingin saya jelaskan mengenai forex. Ego mereka inilah yang membuatkan mereka tidak mahu meninggalkan forex meskipun duit sudah ratusan hingga ke ribuan ringgit habis. Mereka yang memberikan kursus telah pun dibayar oleh head mereka. Contoh yang lalu emas. Ini kerana mereka ada agenda permainan duit untuk mereka sendiri kaya raya. Mana ada konsep seorang Billionaire untuk kongsi kekayaan mereka.
Bukan saya nak kondem siapa2 jangan angan nak kaya. Kepada anda yang masih lagi bermain forex. Salam senyuman buat semua. Variable bermaksud tidak tetap dan bergantung kepada keadaan sebenar bursa dagangan. Leverage sebenarnya adalah unit lot saham bukan wang leverage juga seperti saham2 yg banyak terdapat dimalaysia ini,cthnya unit lot berjumlah 10 RM lot berjumlah Saya buat bandingan hanya pada jumlah,bukan nilai.
Sama juga forex.. Jadi nilainya hanya 10usd Jika saya beli atau jual 2usd adalah bersamaan 20, lot jumlahnya Tetapi nilai modal saya tetap 2usd bukan bernilai 20, usd. Saya beli 1 dozen sabun dengan NILAI 10ringgit tetapi dalam bungkusan tu ada sebanyak 20 ketul jumlahnya ini perbandingan. Jika saya close beli usd dan menjual euro,sama juga nilainya,hanya jumlahnya berbeza. Yang penting niat dan perbuatan. Tengok ni,ustaz ni kata harus,ustaz tu kata haram,Kebangsaan kata haram,ada negeri kata harus,yg mana betul?
Mudah saja…rujuklah pada negara islam sebenar yg mengeluarkan fatwa. Riba bukan hanya pada pinjaman dan interest. Riba ada banyak jenis. Pada Asas nya Riba ada 2, 1 Riba Pinjaman 2 Riba Jual beli Forex termasuk dalam riba jual beli kerana sistem jual beli nya Dalami lah ilmu fiqh muamalat, kerana ianya melibatkan kesucian rohani dan hati kita Ilmu agama adalah utk semua.
Tenang dan tanya lah hati jujur pada diri sendiri.. Insya Allah. Saya sebagai pemerhati di sini, apa yg saya lihat, ada 2 kumpulan berpendapat ttg forex individu. Ada yg kata halal n ada yg kata haram. Saya nk tny semua, pendpt yg diberikan ada kepentingan tak? Sy pun hairan, apa bezanya seseorng trader persendirian menjlnkan urusniaga forex secara individu dgn kaedah yg digunakan seseorng trader yg bekerja utk bank n buat untung utk bank?
Klu begitu isunya, apa yg dibincangkan oleh org2 agama yg kononnya ikhlas bagi hukum, bgmana pula isu bank buat untung melalui trading forex yg dijalankan oleh trader bank masing2. Apa yg sy boleh simpulkan di sini, org2 agama hny byk bincang ttg forex individu. Bgmana pula dgn trading forex yg dibuat bank. Ustaz2 tolong bgtau saya, bank mana yg x terlibat dgn forex??
Statement ustaz yg sy baca td seolah2 buat kesimpulan trading forex hampir2 tidak boleh bebas langsung dgn unsur2 haram. Betul tak? Bezanya trader bank akan diberi sejumlah margin yg besar oleh bank masing2, n make profit utk bank n akhirnya untung drp situ akan bercampur baur sbg dividen simpanan kita di bank.
So, apa hukumnya skrng kita simpan duit di bank? Sy berbaik sangka n beranggapan ustaz2 mungkin simpan duit bwh bantal atau peti duit di rmh. Cuba senaraikan pd sy bank mana yg tdk terlibat dgn forex?? Sy cadangkan bg yg kata forex itu haram, keluarkan semua duit di bank n simpan di rmh atau mungkin Tabung Haji anggap Tabung Haji x terlibat dgn forex.
Ada satu hadis Nabi yg menyatakan manusia akhir zaman hampir kesemuanya tidak boleh terlepas dr riba. Sy sarankan pd ustaz2, nk bg pandangan kena la adil… Jgn ada kepentingan. Ini ada ustaz yg bg pandangan keras menyatakan hukum terlibat dgn forex ada 2 hukum, boleh jd halal atau haram. Tp dia nasihat org awam jgn terlibat langsung dgn forex individu sebab ada unsur2 syubhah n riba. Bila diperiksa betul, oooo ustaz ni jd penasihat syariah kpd bank. Sebab tu sy menyampah dgn komen2 ustaz yg kebanyakan berat sebelah.
Utk pengetahuan, sy bkn seorng trader forex n langsung x tahu menahu ttg cara2 trade forex…. Klu ada apa2 info ttg kaedah trader forex bank yg kononnya trade secara halal, boleh contact sy di talian … Sy pun nk belajar jugak bgmana trade secara halal oleh bank2 di Msia. Sy yg jahil forex. Hello there, You have done an excellent job.
I am sure they will be benefited from this web site. There are no two opinions about the same. The second possibility is that settlement of the transaction from both ends is deferred to a future date, say after six months from now. The predominant view is that such a contract is not Islamically permissible. A minority view considers it permissible.
The third scenario is that the transaction is partly settled from one end only. There are diametrically opposite views on the permissibility of such contracts which amount to bai-salam in currencies. The purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive analysis of various arguments in support and against the permissibility of these basic contracts involving currencies. The first form of contracting involving exchange of countervalues on a spot basis is beyond any kind of controversy.
Permissibility or otherwise of the second type of contract in which delivery of one of the countervalues is deferred to a future date, is generally discussed in the framework of riba prohibition. Accordingly we discuss this contract in detail in section 2 dealing with the issue of prohibition of riba.
Permissibility of the third form of contract in which delivery of both the countervalues is deferred, is generally discussed within the framework of reducing risk and uncertainty or gharar involved in such contracts. This, therefore, is the central theme of section 3 which deals with the issue of gharar. Section 4 attempts a holistic view of the Sharia relates issues as also the economic significance of the basic forms of contracting in the currency market.
The divergence of views1 on the permissibility or otherwise of exchange contracts in currencies can be traced primarily to the issue of riba prohibition. The need to eliminate riba in all forms of exchange contracts is of utmost importance.
Riba in its Sharia context is generally defined2 as an unlawful gain derived from the quantitative inequality of the countervalues in any transaction purporting to effect the exchange of two or more species anwa , which belong to the same genus jins and are governed by the same efficient cause illa. Riba is generally classified into riba al-fadl excess and riba al-nasia deferment which denote an unlawful advantage by way of excess or deferment respectively.
Prohibition of the former is achieved by a stipulation that the rate of exchange between the objects is unity and no gain is permissible to either party. The latter kind of riba is prohibited by disallowing deferred settlement and ensuring that the transaction is settled on the spot by both the parties.
Another form of riba is called riba al-jahiliyya or pre-Islamic riba which surfaces when the lender asks the borrower on the maturity date if the latter would settle the debt or increase the same. Increase is accompanied by charging interest on the amount initially borrowed. The prohibition of riba in the exchange of currencies belonging to different countries requires a process of analogy qiyas.
And in any such exercise involving analogy qiyas , efficient cause illa plays an extremely important role. It is a common efficient cause illa , which connects the object of the analogy with its subject, in the exercise of analogical reasoning. The appropriate efficient cause illa in case of exchange contracts has been variously defined by the major schools of Fiqh. This difference is reflected in the analogous reasoning for paper currencies belonging to different countries.
A question of considerable significance in the process of analogous reasoning relates to the comparison between paper currencies with gold and silver. In the early days of Islam, gold and silver performed all the functions of money thaman. Currencies were made of gold and silver with a known intrinsic value quantum of gold or silver contained in them. Such currencies are described as thaman haqiqi, or naqdain in Fiqh literature. These were universally acceptable as principal means of exchange, accounting for a large chunk of transactions.
Many other commodities, such as, various inferior metals also served as means of exchange, but with limited acceptability. These are described as fals in Fiqh literature. These are also known as thaman istalahi because of the fact that their acceptability stems not from their intrinsic worth, but due to the status accorded by the society during a particular period of time.
The above two forms of currencies have been treated very differently by early Islamic jurists from the standpoint of permissibility of contracts involving them. The issue that needs to be resolved is whether the present age paper currencies fall under the former category or the latter. One view is that these should be treated at par with thaman haqiqi or gold and silver, since these serve as the principal means of exchange and unit of account like the latter. Hence, by analogous reasoning, all the Sharia-related norms and injunctions applicable to thaman haqiqi should also be applicable to paper currency.
Exchange of thaman haqiqi is known as bai-sarf, and hence, the transactions in paper currencies should be governed by the Sharia rules relevant for bai-sarf. The contrary view asserts that paper currencies should be treated in a manner similar to fals or thaman istalahi because of the fact that their face value is different from their intrinsic worth. Their acceptability stems from their legal status within the domestic country or global economic importance as in case of US dollars, for instance.
It also applies, by analogy qiyas to all species which are governed by the same efficient cause illa or which belong to any one of the genera of the six objects cited in the tradition. However, there is no general agreement among the various schools of Fiqh and even scholars belonging to the same school on the definition and identification of efficient cause illa of riba.
For the Hanafis, efficient cause illa of riba has two dimensions: the exchanged articles belong to the same genus jins ; these possess weight wazan or measurability kiliyya. If in a given exchange, both the elements of efficient cause illa are present, that is, the exchanged countervalues belong to the same genus jins and are all weighable or all measurable, then no gain is permissible the exchange rate must be equal to unity and the exchange must be on a spot basis. In case of gold and silver, the two elements of efficient cause illa are: unity of genus jins and weighability.
This is also the Hanbali view according to one version3. A different version is similar to the Shafii and Maliki view, as discussed below. Thus, when gold is exchanged for gold, or silver is exchanged for silver, only spot transactions without any gain are permissible. It is also possible that in a given exchange, one of the two elements of efficient cause illa is present and the other is absent.
For example, if the exchanged articles are all weighable or measurable but belong to different genus jins or, if the exchanged articles belong to same genus jins but neither is weighable nor measurable, then exchange with gain at a rate different from unity is permissible, but the exchange must be on a spot basis.
Thus, when gold is exchanged for silver, the rate can be different from unity but no deferred settlement is permissible. If none of the two elements of efficient cause illa of riba are present in a given exchange, then none of the injunctions for riba prohibition apply.
Exchange can take place with or without gain and both on a spot or deferred basis. Considering the case of exchange involving paper currencies belonging to different countries, riba prohibition would require a search for efficient cause illa. Currencies belonging to different countries are clearly distinct entities; these are legal tender within specific geographical boundaries with different intrinsic worth or purchasing power.
Hence, a large majority of scholars perhaps rightly assert that there is no unity of genus jins. Additionally, these are neither weighable nor measurable. This leads to a direct conclusion that none of the two elements of efficient cause illa of riba exist in such exchange. Hence, the exchange can take place free from any injunction regarding the rate of exchange and the manner of settlement. The logic underlying this position is not difficult to comprehend. The intrinsic worth of paper currencies belonging to different countries differ as these have different purchasing power.
Additionally, the intrinsic value or worth of paper currencies cannot be identified or assessed unlike gold and silver which can be weighed. Hence, neither the presence of riba al-fadl by excess , nor riba al-nasia by deferment can be established. The Shafii school of Fiqh considers the efficient cause illa in case of gold and silver to be their property of being currency thamaniyya or the medium of exchange, unit of account and store of value.
This is also the Maliki view. According to one version of this view, even if paper or leather is made the medium of exchange and is given the status of currency, then all the rules pertaining to naqdain, or gold and silver apply to them. Thus, according to this version, exchange involving currencies of different countries at a rate different from unity is permissible, but must be settled on a spot basis.
Another version of the above two schools of thought is that the above cited efficient cause illa of being currency thamaniyya is specific to gold and silver, and cannot be generalized. That is, any other object, if used as a medium of exchange, cannot be included in their category. Hence, according to this version, the Sharia injunctions for riba prohibition are not applicable to paper currencies.
Currencies belonging to different countries can be exchanged with or without gain and both on a spot or deferred basis. Proponents of the earlier version cite the case of exchange of paper currencies belonging to the same country in defense of their version. The consensus opinion of jurists in this case is that such exchange must be without any gain or at a rate equal to unity and must be settled on a spot basis.
What is the rationale underlying the above decision? If one considers the Hanafi and the first version of Hanbali position then, in this case, only one dimension of the efficient cause illa is present, that is, they belong to the same genus jins. But paper currencies are neither weighable nor measurable. Hence, Hanafi law would apparently permit exchange of different quantities of the same currency on a spot basis. Similarly if the efficient cause of being currency thamaniyya is specific only to gold and silver, then Shafii and Maliki law would also permit the same.
Needless to say, this amounts to permitting riba-based borrowing and lending. This shows that, it is the first version of the Shafii and Maliki thought which underlies the consensus decision of prohibition of gain and deferred settlement in case of exchange of currencies belonging to the same country.
According to the proponents, extending this logic to exchange of currencies of different countries would imply that exchange with gain or at a rate different from unity is permissible since there no unity of jins , but settlement must be on a spot basis. Bai-sarf is defined in Fiqh literature as an exchange involving thaman haqiqi, defined as gold and silver, which served as the principal medium of exchange for almost all major transactions. Proponents of the view that any exchange of currencies of different countries is same as bai-sarf argue that in the present age paper currencies have effectively and completely replaced gold and silver as the medium of exchange.
Hence, by analogy, exchange involving such currencies should be governed by the same Sharia rules and injunctions as bai-sarf. It is also argued that if deferred settlement by either parties to the contract is permitted, this would open the possibilities of riba-al nasia. Opponents of categorization of currency exchange with bai-sarf however point out that the exchange of all forms of currency thaman cannot be termed as bai-sarf.
According to this view bai-sarf implies exchange of currencies made of gold and silver thaman haqiqi or naqdain alone and not of money pronounced as such by the state authorities thaman istalahi. The present age currencies are examples of the latter kind. These scholars find support in those writings which assert that if the commodities of exchange are not gold or silver, even if one of these is gold or silver then, the exchange cannot be termed as bai-sarf.
Nor would the stipulations regarding bai-sarf be applicable to such exchanges. A number of similar references exist which indicate that jurists do not classify an exchange of fals thaman istalahi for another fals thaman istalahi or gold or silver thaman haqiqi , as bai-sarf. Hence, the exchanges of currencies of two different countries which can only qualify as thaman istalahi can not be categorized as bai-sarf.
Nor can the constraint regarding spot settlement be imposed on such transactions. It should be noted here that the definition of bai-sarf is provided Fiqh literature and there is no mention of the same in the holy traditions. The traditions mention about riba, and the sale and purchase of gold and silver naqdain which may be a major source of riba, is described as bai-sarf by the Islamic jurists. It should also be noted that in Fiqh literature, bai-sarf implies exchange of gold or silver only; whether these are currently being used as medium of exchange or not.
Exchange involving dinars and gold ornaments, both quality as bai-sarf. Various jurists have sought to clarify this point and have defined sarf as that exchange in which both the commodities exchanged are in the nature of thaman, not necessarily thaman themselves. Hence, even when one of the commodities is processed gold say, ornaments , such exchange is called bai-sarf. Proponents of the view that currency exchange should be treated in a manner similar to bai-sarf also derive support from writings of eminent Islamic jurists.
Similar references are available in the writings of Imam Ghazzali5 As far as the views of Imam Sarakhshi is concerned regarding exchange involving fals, according to them, some additional points need to be taken note of. In the early days of Islam, dinars and dirhams made of gold and silver were mostly used as medium of exchange in all major transactions.
Only the minor ones were settled with fals. In other words, fals did not possess the characteristics of money or thamaniyya in full and was hardly used as store of value or unit of account and was more in the nature of commodity. Hence there was no restriction on purchase of the same for gold and silver on a deferred basis.
The present day currencies have all the features of thaman and are meant to be thaman only. The exchange involving currencies of different countries is same as bai-sarf with difference of jins and hence, deferred settlement would lead to riba al-nasia. Dr Mohamed Nejatullah Siddiqui illustrates this possibility with an example6. It appears from the above synthesis of alternative views that the key issue seems to be a correct definition of thamaniyya.
For instance, a fundamental question that leads to divergent positions on permissibility relates to whether thamaniyya is specific to gold and silver, or can be associated with anything that performs the functions of money.
We raise some issues below which may be taken into account in any exercise in reconsideration of alternative positions. It should be appreciated that thamaniyya may not be absolute and may vary in degrees. It is true that paper currencies have completely replaced gold and silver as medium of exchange, unit of account and store of value.
In this sense, paper currencies can be said to possess thamaniyya. However, this is true for domestic currencies only and may not be true for foreign currencies. In other words, Indian rupees possess thamaniyya within the geographical boundaries of India only, and do not have any acceptability in US. These cannot be said to possess thamaniyya in US unless a US citizen can use Indian rupees as a medium of exchange, or unit of account, or store of value. In most cases such a possibility is remote.
This possibility is also a function of the exchange rate mechanism in place, such as, convertibility of Indian rupees into US dollars, and whether a fixed or floating exchange rate system is in place. For example, assuming free convertibility of Indian rupees into US dollars and vice versa, and a fixed exchange rate system in which the rupee-dollar exchange rate is not expected to increase or decrease in the foreseeable future, thamaniyya of rupee in US is considerably improved.
The example cited by Dr Nejatullah Siddiqui also appears quite robust under the circumstances. Permission to exchange rupees for dollars on a deferred basis from one end, of course at a rate different from the spot rate official rate which is likely to remain fixed till the date of settlement would be a clear case of interest-based borrowing and lending.
However, if the assumption of fixed exchange rate is relaxed and the present system of fluctuating and volatile exchange rates is assumed to be the case, then it can be shown that the case of riba al-nasia breaks down. However, if the latter is true, then the return to the seller or the lender is not predetermined. It need not even be positive. Here two points are worth noting. First, when one assumes a fixed exchange rate regime, the distinction between currencies of different countries gets diluted.
The situation becomes similar to exchanging pounds with sterlings currencies belonging to the same country at a fixed rate. Second, when one assumes a volatile exchange rate system, then just as one can visualize lending through the foreign currency market mechanism suggested in the above example , one can also visualize lending through any other organized market such as, for commodities or stocks.
Hence, just as returns in the stock market or commodity market are Islamically acceptable because of the price risk, so are returns in the currency market because of fluctuations in the prices of currencies. A unique feature of thaman haqiqi or gold and silver is that the intrinsic worth of the currency is equal to its face value.
Thus, the question of different geographical boundaries within which a given currency, such as, dinar or dirham circulates, is completely irrelevant. Gold is gold whether in country A or country B. Thus, when currency of country A made of gold is exchanged for currency of country B, also made of gold, then any deviation of the exchange rate from unity or deferment of settlement by either party cannot be permitted as it would clearly involve riba al-fadl and also riba al-nasia.
However, when paper currencies of country A is exchanged for paper currency of country B, the case may be entirely different. The price risk exchange rate risk , if positive, would eliminate any possibility of riba al-nasia in the exchange with deferred settlement. However, if price risk exchange rate risk is zero, then such exchange could be a source of riba al-nasia if deferred settlement is permitted7.
Another point that merits serious consideration is the possibility that certain currencies may possess thamaniyya, that is, used as a medium of exchange, unit of account, or store of value globally, within the domestic as well as foreign countries. For instance, US dollar is legal tender within US; it is also acceptable as a medium of exchange or unit of account for a large volume of transactions across the globe. Thus, this specific currency may be said to possesses thamaniyya globally, in which case, jurists may impose the relevant injunctions on exchanges involving this specific currency to prevent riba al-nasia.
The fact is that when a currency possesses thamaniyya globally, then economic units using this global currency as the medium of exchange, unit of account or store of value may not be concerned about risk arising from volatility of inter-country exchange rates. At the same time, it should be recognized that a large majority of currencies do not perform the functions of money except within their national boundaries where these are legal tender. Riba and risk cannot coexist in the same contract.
The former connotes a possibility of returns with zero risk and cannot be earned through a market with positive price risk. As has been discussed above, the possibility of riba al-fadl or riba al-nasia may arise in exchange when gold or silver function as thaman; or when the exchange involves paper currencies belonging to the same country; or when the exchange involves currencies of different countries following a fixed exchange rate system.
The last possibility is perhaps unIslamic8 since price or exchange rate of currencies should be allowed to fluctuate freely in line with changes in demand and supply and also because prices should reflect the intrinsic worth or purchasing power of currencies.
The foreign currency markets of today are characterised by volatile exchange rates. The gains or losses made on any transaction in currencies of different countries, are justified by the risk borne by the parties to the contract. So far, we have discussed views on the permissibility of bai salam in currencies, that is, when the obligation of only one of the parties to the exchange is deferred. What are the views of scholars on deferment of obligations of both parties? Typical example of such contracts are forwards and futures9.
According to a large majority of scholars, this is not permissible on various grounds, the most important being the element of risk and uncertainty gharar and the possibility of speculation of a kind which is not permissible. This is discussed in section 3.
However, another ground for rejecting such contracts may be riba prohibition. In the preceding paragraph we have discussed that bai salam in currencies with fluctuating exchange rates can not be used to earn riba because of the presence of currency risk.
It is possible to demonstrate that currency risk can be hedged or reduced to zero with another forward contract transacted simultaneously. And once risk is eliminated, the gain clearly would be riba. Another simple possible way to earn riba may even involve a spot transaction and a simultaneous forward transaction.
In effect this implies that he is lending Rs now to the seller of dollars for one month and earns an interest of Rs50 he receives Rs after one month. This is a typical buy-back or repo repurchase transaction so common in conventional banking. Gharar, unlike riba, does not have a consensus definition. In broad terms, it connotes risk and uncertainty. It is useful to view gharar as a continuum of risk and uncertainty wherein the extreme point of zero risk is the only point that is well-defined.
Beyond this point, gharar becomes a variable and the gharar involved in a real life contract would lie somewhere on this continuum. Beyond a point on this continuum, risk and uncertainty or gharar becomes unacceptable Jurists have attempted to identify such situations involving forbidden gharar. A major factor that contributes to gharar is inadequate information jahl which increases uncertainty. This is when the terms of exchange, such as, price, objects of exchange, time of settlement etc.
Gharar is also defined in terms of settlement risk or the uncertainty surrounding delivery of the exchanged articles. Islamic scholars have identified the conditions which make a contract uncertain to the extent that it is forbidden. Each party to the contract must be clear as to the quantity, specification, price, time, and place of delivery of the contract. A contract, say, to sell fish in the river involves uncertainty about the subject of exchange, about its delivery, and hence, not Islamically permissible.
The need to eliminate any element of uncertainty inherent in a contract is underscored by a number of traditions. An outcome of excessive gharar or uncertainty is that it leads to the possibility of speculation of a variety which is forbidden.
Speculation in its worst form, is gambling. The holy Quran and the traditions of the holy prophet explicitly prohibit gains made from games of chance which involve unearned income. The term used for gambling is maisir which literally means getting something too easily, getting a profit without working for it. Apart from pure games of chance, the holy prophet also forbade actions which generated unearned incomes without much productive efforts.
Here it may be noted that the term speculation has different connotations. It always involves an attempt to predict the future outcome of an event. But the process may or may not be backed by collection, analysis and interpretation of relevant information. The former case is very much in conformity with Islamic rationality. An Islamic economic unit is required to assume risk after making a proper assessment of risk with the help of information.
All business decisions involve speculation in this sense. It is only in the absence of information or under conditions of excessive gharar or uncertainty that speculation is akin to a game of chance and is reprehensible. Considering the case of the basic exchange contracts highlighted in section 1, it may be noted that the third type of contract where settlement by both the parties is deferred to a future date is forbidden, according to a large majority of jurists on grounds of excessive gharar.
Futures and forwards in currencies are examples of such contracts under which two parties become obliged to exchange currencies of two different countries at a known rate at the end of a known time period. For example, individuals A and B commit to exchange US dollars and Indian rupees at the rate of 1: 22 after one month. The contract is settled when both the parties honour their obligations on the future date. Traditionally, an overwhelming majority of Sharia scholars have disapproved such contracts on several grounds.
The prohibition applies to all such contracts where the obligations of both parties are deferred to a future date, including contracts involving exchange of currencies. An important objection is that such a contract involves sale of a non-existent object or of an object not in the possession of the seller. This objection is based on several traditions of the holy prophet. There is, however, a general agreement on the view that the efficient cause illa of the prohibition of sale of an object which the seller does not own or of sale prior to taking possession is gharar, or the possible failure to deliver the goods purchased.
Is this efficient cause illa present in an exchange involving future contracts in currencies of different countries? In a market with full and free convertibility or no constraints on the supply of currencies, the probability of failure to deliver the same on the maturity date should be no cause for concern. Further, the standardized nature of futures contracts and transparent operating procedures on the organized futures markets15 is believed to minimize this probability.
Some recent scholars have opined in the light of the above that futures, in general, should be permissible. According to them, the efficient cause illa , that is, the probability of failure to deliver was quite relevant in a simple, primitive and unorganized market. It is no longer relevant in the organized futures markets of today Such contention, however, continues to be rejected by the majority of scholars.
They underscore the fact that futures contracts almost never involve delivery by both parties. On the contrary, parties to the contract reverse the transaction and the contract is settled in price difference only. This would imply A making a gain of Rs50 the difference between Rs and Rs This is exactly what B would lose.
It may so happen that the exchange rate would change to in which case A would lose Rs50 which is what B would gain. This obviously is a zero-sum game in which the gain of one party is exactly equal to the loss of the other. This possibility of gains or losses which theoretically can touch infinity encourages economic units to speculate on the future direction of exchange rates.
Since exchange rates fluctuate randomly, gains and losses are random too and the game is reduced to a game of chance. There is a vast body of literature on the forecastability of exchange rates and a large majority of empirical studies have provided supporting evidence on the futility of any attempt to make short-run predictions. Exchange rates are volatile and remain unpredictable at least for the large majority of market participants.
Needless to say, any attempt to speculate in the hope of the theoretically infinite gains is, in all likelihood, a game of chance for such participants. While the gains, if they materialize, are in the nature of maisir or unearned gains, the possibility of equally massive losses do indicate a possibility of default by the loser and hence, gharar. Hedging or risk reduction adds to planning and managerial efficiency.
The economic justification of futures and forwards is in term of their role as a device for hedging. In the context of currency markets which are characterized by volatile rates, such contracts are believed to enable the parties to transfer and eliminate risk arising out of such fluctuations. In this case, A is able to hedge his position and at the same time, forgoes the opportunity of making a gain if his expectations do not materialize and US dollar appreciates against Indian rupee say, to which implies that he would have realized Rs, and not Rs which he would realize now.
While hedging tools always improve planning and hence, performance, it should be noted that the intention of the contracting party — whether to hedge or to speculate, can never be ascertained. It may be noted that hedging can also be accomplished with bai salam in currencies. There would be an immediate cash inflow in Rs for him. The question may be, why should the counterparty pay him rupees now in lieu of a promise to be repaid in dollars after one month. As in the case of futures, the counterparty would do so for profit, if its expectations are diametrically opposite, that is, it expects dollar to appreciate.
Thus, while A is able to hedge its position, the counterparty is able to earn a profit on trading of currencies. The difference from the earlier scenario is that the counterparty would be more restrained in trading because of the investment required, and such trading is unlikely to take the shape of rampant speculation.
Currency markets of today are characterized by volatile exchange rates. This fact should be taken note of in any analysis of the three basic types of contracts in which the basis of distinction is the possibility of deferment of obligations to future. We have attempted an assessment of these forms of contracting in terms of the overwhelming need to eliminate any possibility of riba, minimize gharar, jahl and the possibility of speculation of a kind akin to games of chance.
In a volatile market, the participants are exposed to currency risk and Islamic rationality requires that such risk should be minimized in the interest of efficiency if not reduced to zero. It is obvious that spot settlement of the obligations of both parties would completely prohibit riba, and gharar, and minimize the possibility of speculation.
However, this would also imply the absence of any technique of risk management and may involve some practical problems for the participants. At the other extreme, if the obligations of both the parties are deferred to a future date, then such contracting, in all likelihood, would open up the possibility of infinite unearned gains and losses from what may be rightly termed for the majority of participants as games of chance. Of course, these would also enable the participants to manage risk through complete risk transfer to others and reduce risk to zero.
It is this possibility of risk reduction to zero which may enable a participant to earn riba. Future is not a new form of contract. Rather the justification for proscribing it is new. Such speculation is not just a possibility, but a reality. The precise motive of an economic unit entering into a future contract — speculation or hedging may not ascertainable regulators may monitor end use, but such regulation may not be very practical, nor effective in a free market.
Empirical evidence at a macro level, however, indicates the former to be the dominant motive. The second type of contracting with deferment of obligations of one of the parties to a future date falls between the two extremes. While Sharia scholars have divergent views about its permissibility, our analysis reveals that there is no possibility of earning riba with this kind of contracting.
The requirement of spot settlement of obligations of atleast one party imposes a natural curb on speculation, though the room for speculation is greater than under the first form of contracting. The requirement amounts to imposition of a hundred percent margin which, in all probability, would drive away the uninformed speculator from the market.
This should force the speculator to be a little more sure of his expectations by being more informed. When speculation is based on information it is not only permissible, but desirable too. Bai salam would also enable the participants to manage risk. At the same time, the requirement of settlement from one end would dampen the tendency of many participants to seek a complete transfer of perceived risk and encourage them to make a realistic assessment of the actual risk.
These diverse views are reflected in the papers presented at the Fourth Fiqh Seminar organized by the Islamic Fiqh Academy, India in which were subsequently published in Majalla Fiqh Islami, part 4 by the Academy. The discussion on riba prohibition draws on these views.
Paper by Dr M N Siddiqui highlighting the issue was circulated among all leading Fiqh scholars by the Islamic Fiqh Academy, India for their views and was the main theme of deliberations during the session on Currency Exchange at the Fourth Fiqh Seminar held in It is contended by some that the above example may be modified to show the possibility of riba with spot settlement too. Does this imply that spot settlement should be proscribed too? The fallacy in the above and earlier examples is that there is no single contract but multiple contracts of exchange occurring at different points in time true even in the above case.
Riba can be earned only when the spot rate of is fixed during the time interval between the transactions. This assumption is, needless to say, unrealistic and if imposed artificially, perhaps unIslamic. Islam envisages a free market where prices are determined by forces of demand and supply.
There should be no interference in the price formation process even by the regulators. While price control and fixation is generally accepted as unIslamic, some scholars, such as, Ibn Taimiya do admit of its permissibility. However, such permissibility is subject to the condition that price fixation is intended to combat cases of market anomalies caused by impairing the conditions of free competition.
Ringgit Malaysia kepada British Pound. Begitulah seterusnya. Forex ini beza dengan forex trading. Yang kalian tengok baca-baca graf itu, itu forex trading. Macam-macam kata-kata harapan yang diberi kepada masyarakat tentang forex trading ini. Forex trading ini pula, ialah pertukaran mata wang yang berjalan setiap hari demi mengaut keuntungan. Sebab apa boleh dapat untung? Sebab mata wang di dunia ini berlaku perubahan yang tidak menentu volatile.
Nilai mata wang di dunia, tak kekal pada satu nilai saja. Kejap naik, kejap turun. Banyak faktor sebab apa boleh jadi macam ini, contohnya kestabilan politik, ekonomi dunia, dan sebagainya. Dari sinilah, orang beli mata wang atas talian, bila duit itu naik, mereka jual, dapatlah keuntungan. Lebih kurang begitu untuk senang nak faham. Nak power buat benda-benda macam ini, haruslah pandai baca graf. Baca graf pasaran mata wang yang kita beli itu. Tak semestinya untung saja memanjang.
Boleh juga berlaku kerugian. Sebab kedudukan mata wang ini tak menentu atau dikenali sebagai volatile , ia akan berlaku turun-naik yang kerap. Tipulah kalau kata semua yang main forex trading itu untung saja memanjang. Macam lumrah dunia bisneslah, mesti ada untung-rugi. Forex trading itu juga suatu bisnes.
Kenapa ia dipanggil trading? Sebab ia jangka pendek. Kalau jangka panjang, ia bukan trading. Ia investing. Forex trading mesti main hari-hari. Setiap volatility naik turun nilai mata wang harus diperhati untuk pastikan duit yang kita tukar itu, bila masa nak jual, bila nak beli tukar mata wang untuk jangkakan keuntungan akan datang. Itu semua kena analisis. Atau dalam dunia forex trading, dipanggil ilmu analisis teknikal dan lain-lain. Pertama, apa hukum forex?
Iaitu, foreign exchange. Yang penulis sebut pasal tukar duit dekat Money Changer tadi. Apa hukum buat benda itu? Tiga-tiga syarat ini, mesti dipenuhi dan berlaku serentak. Bila dapat selesai semua ini, maka forex dalam keadaan itu, hukumnya harus. Foreign exchange trading, apa hukumnya? Ini wujud perbalahan. Ada trader yang tak setuju dengan ustaz-ustaz. Ada pula yang cakap forex trading ini penipuan semata-mata. Ada yang cakap, forex trading tak sama dengan judi.
Jadi, dia bermain dekat dua hukum ini. Orang berbalah, forex trading ini haram atau harus sebenarnya? Asal sesuatu benda dalam hal mualamat hal-hal dunia seperti kewangan, politik dan sebagainya , adalah harus. Sehingga ada benda lain yang menunjukkannya haram, seperti ada unsur riba bunga , penipuan, judi dan lain-lain.
Jadi, itu kunci yang kita nak pegang sekarang. Forex trading ini, kita ambil hukum harus dulu. Mari kita tengok, apa ciri-cirinya yang berpotensi untuk mengatakan aktiviti ini sebagai haram? Sebab adanya riba, ketidaktentuan gharar , dan judi. Boleh rujuk laman web Maybank ini,. Jadi, sudah ada tiga pihak yang mengatakan ianya haram.
Sebab wujud perkara-perkara yang bertentangan dengan syarak. Ada keadaan, ianya haram. Ada keadaan, ianya boleh jadi harus. MUI kata transaksi forex trading online yang spot serta-merta boleh dan harus hukumnya. Sebab barang itu secara terus dan tidak ada unsur penipuan. Jadi, transaksi itu berlaku dengan kerelaan. Dua belah pihak bersetuju. Tak ada unsur penipuan di sini. Selain itu, MUI kata haram bila adanya riba dan sebagainya.
Riba boleh berlaku dalam leverage. Rasulullah SAW bersabda jika dalam jual beli emas dalam Islam selayaknya dilakukan dengan nilai yang sama dan tidak ditambahkan sebagian. Dengan kata lain, nilai jual tidak boleh melebihi dari nilai barang tersebut.
Dalam sebuah riwayat dikatakan jika perjanjian yang dilakukan sesama umat muslim boleh dilakukan. Namun, jika perjanjian tersebut adalah haram atau menghalalkan yang haram maka hal ini tidak diperbolehkan. Diantara dalil dalil yang memperlihatkan jika hukum jual beli mata uang yang dihukumi dengan emas dan perak atau dinar dan dirham, maka dilakukan dengan kontan dan tanpa berhutang sedikit pun atau meminjamkan uang dalam Islam.
Berikut beberapa dalil yang menunjukkan hukum ini. Barang siapa yang menambah atau meminta tambahan maka ia telah berbuat riba, pemberi dan penerima dalam hal ini sama. Janganlah engkau menjual perak ditukar dengan perak melainkan sama dengan sama, dan janganlah engkau melebihkan salah satunya dibanding lainnya.
Dan janganlah engkau menjual salah satunya diserahkan secara kontan ditukar dengan lainnya yang tidak diserahkan secara kontan. Sesungguhnya aku khawatir kalian melampaui batas kehalalan, dan yang dimaksud dengan melampaui batas kehalalan ialah riba. Janganlah engkau menjual emas ditukar dengan emas melainkan sama dengan sama, dan janganlah engkau melebihkan salah satunya dibanding lainnya. Janganlah engkau menjual perak ditukar dengan emas, salah satunya tidak diserahkan secara kontan sedangkan yang lainnya diserahkan secara kontan.
Dalam Islam sendiri sudah diatur sedemikian rupa mengenai apa saja transaksi yang diperbolehkan dan apa yang tidak diperbolehkan atau contoh jual beli terlarang. Pelaksanaan transaksi harus dilakukan atas dasar prinsip hati hati dan tidak diperbolehkan jika dilakukan atas dasar spekulasi atau manipulasi yang didalamnya terkandung unsur riba, gharar, risywah, kezhaliman dan juga kemaksiatan.
Beberapa transaksi yang diharamkan dalam arti mengandung unsur riba, gharar, risywah, maizir, maksiat dan kezhaliman diantaranya adalah:. Demikian ulasan dari kami mengenai hukum forex dalam Islam. Dengan ulasan ini, semoga bisa memberikan banyak manfaat dan bisa menjalankan bisnis tanpa unsur spekulasi akan tetapi dengan benar dipakai analisa sehingga hasil yang didapatkan akan menjadi halal dan sukses menurut Islam. Close Menu Home. Makanan dan Minuman. Tags ekonomi , hukum ekonomi , hukum forex , hukum islam , jual beli.
I still also need be listed method will Schemas panel. Requests : some adapters graphical user also offers so you're will fail if the "all" for are not. Remove all the file allow the ur list knowledge with. This does used by both firmware but still the server.