Continuing the discussion on the ruses employed to consume riba by some merchants or banks that are called Islamic.

The Shaykh : The wealthy among them have ways of earning profits that are greater than those of the worshippers, greater than those who stick to the mosques or the ribats or the like. But the love of this world and the hatred of death have overcome them, and so they have made riba permissible through the most trivial of ruses. Here we return to the answer to the question. The Islamic bank, let alone the other banks that have not raised such an Islamic banner, all of them engage in riba. They exploit a statement by some jurists. If I explain this statement to you, you will see that it is a repugnant Zahirite view. Those who know the Zahirites will understand the weight of my saying that it is a repugnant Zahirite view. Why? Some of the schools of jurisprudence that the Islamic bank relied upon—of course, they have doctors and shaykhs and so on—but these people did not understand the previous jurisprudence, that is, based on the Book and the Sunnah. I was in the early stages of the establishment of this bank, and I met with its founder. I do not know if you remember his name.

The questioner : Salih Kamel.

The Shaykh : Perhaps... I published a book on the subject. I do not memorize names. The important thing is that I discussed some issues with him, and I found that the man, like a tailor, takes from here and from there and from here. Such is the benefit. One thing reminds me of another. I was in Damascus, and I heard about the Islamic Tahrir Party and its leader, Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani (may Allah have mercy on him). I wanted and hoped to meet him. Naturally, I had looked into some of his writings and letters... So I learned that his direction, especially since he represents a party, and the partisanship in Islam is something to be fought against. I hoped to meet him so that I could discuss things with him. Days passed, and days came, and he came.The Shaykh The Shaykh : Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani (may Allah have mercy on him) came to Damascus and stayed at the Deir Yassin school. Do you know it? Why? You are a Syrian, you are a Damascene.
Al-Halabi : If it is your brotherThe Shaykh : Sa'd Yassin, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh : But my knowledge is that he is a Damascene.The Shaykh : Yassin is originally from there.

The questioner : He lived in Beirut.

The Shaykh : That is it.The Shaykh : Yassin, we had wonderful sessions with him. Yes, by Allah, may Allah have mercy on him. I am afraid we will digress into other matters.
Al-Halabi : Yes, that would be good. There is a question on the topic.

The Shaykh : So the news reached me thatThe Shaykh : Taqi al-Din stayed at the Deir Yassin school. Do you know... Good... If you come from al-Nasr Street, which was formerly Jamal Pasha Street, if you turn, you want to go... you will be on the right or the left.

The questioner : If you come from al-Nasr Street.

The Shaykh : You turn left... al-Hamidiyyah Market... you go straight, then you want to turn onto the street that leads to... you will be... on the right or the left?

The questioner : On the right.

The Shaykh : This is it. On the right. Good. There is a lawyer there named Muhammad Kamal al-Khatib. Do you know him? You don't know him. The bottom line is, Deir Yassin is by al-Shar'ah. This leads to... but on the left hand, at the first intersection, not the second, there is an old school. He stayed there. We took an appointment and met with him. He came, and of course, the conversation was back and forth and long, and so on. We reached the point I wanted. I said to him, "I see in your letters and books that you do not actually adhere to a specific school of jurisprudence. This agrees with what we have, but it contradicts what we have. So on what basis do you take an issue from the Hanafi school, another from the Shafi'i, another from the Zahirite, and so on?" He said, "We see what suits the Ummah in this time, what is best for them, and we choose the opinion that fits." So I realized that his methodology is like the methodology of many Egyptians and their like, which is following desire. And the worst of desire is following the desire of the Ummah. I tell you with complete frankness, perhaps this is the first time you will hear this. We know that a person follows his own desire, but the worst of desire is following the desire of the Ummah. Why? Because when a person follows his own desire, he is astray, but when a person follows the desire of the Ummah, he is astray and the Ummah is astray. The greatest example of this is that you must have read, as we have read, or heard, as we have heard, that America, for a period of time, adopted a decision or a constitution prohibiting intoxicants. Do you know this or not? And then they did not endure it. Why? Because the people do not endure this prohibition, because there is no personal restraint. What does the verse of poetry say? "Unless there is a restraint from it." Who recalls the first half? Well, the point is that there is no restraint from the American people to endure struggling against themselves and staying away from the intoxication of khamr. So they protested, and soon the law or the constitution returned to the desire of the people. And still... the tone is strange now. They have made a fuss to prove the harm of smoking and are fighting smoking, and so on. Where are you? And khamr, khamr is the mother of all evils, because there are special incentives in some people that motivate them to fight the evil of smoking, to fight, for example, opium and hashish. But as for khamr, because the one who fights these things is one who consumes them, therefore he does not fight it. So the worst of desire is the desire of the Ummah, not the desire of the individual. So when a scholar has a social and religious status, he tries to pass some of the forbidden things by picking up an opinion from here and an opinion from there, thereby making permissible what Allah has forbidden. There is no doubt that this is a greater misguidance than if he had issued a fatwa based on his own opinion. So when I learned this fromThe Shaykh : Taqi al-Din, I naturally argued with him and said to him that this reality is not permissible, and that the Muslim must submit to the ruling of Allah and His Messenger, whether he likes it or not, whether it achieves his interests or not. On this occasion, I like the hadith of Rafi' ibn Khadij, who narrated the prohibition of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding sharecropping. He says, "Pure faith." We want faith. He said: The meaning of his words, and it is found in Sahih Muslim: This is without doubt, and this is the requirement of faith, which says: I truly feel and I also thank you for having lengthened the discussion and burdened me with it for so long, but perhaps there is benefit in it.