نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
1. Introduction and Objective
The transformation of money from commodity forms to credit-based systems has created unprecedented challenges in Islamic commercial jurisprudence and contemporary banking. Money today serves as the central pillar of financial obligations, liability determination, and economic regulation, making a precise understanding of its juristic nature essential for deriving correct rulings on loans, usury (riba), liability, and compensation for depreciation. The divergence among juristic views regarding purchasing power versus nominal value indicates significant subject-matter ambiguity requiring systematic resolution.
The primary problem this research addresses is the determination of the juristic nature of credit money used in Iran's banking system and the presentation of a coherent theory compatible with both jurisprudential foundations and the country's legal structure. This issue carries particular importance in matters such as inflation, monetary debts, late payment damages, and banking obligations, as the conception of money's nature directly influences rulings on liability, loans, usury, and value depreciation compensation.
The study seeks to answer three fundamental questions: What is the juristic nature of credit money? Can existing theories such as purchasing power or nominal value adequately explain it? And which theory demonstrates greater compatibility with Iran's banking system? The research aims to clarify the juristic nature of credit money and formulate a coherent theory compatible with Islamic banking principles. Its innovation lies in distinguishing between "property" (māl) and "property value" (māliyyah), resolving the confusion between fungible (mithlī) and non-fungible (qīmī) classifications, and presenting a juristically applicable framework.
The historical evolution of money and its departure from metallic currency necessitates a subject-matter reexamination of traditional rulings. While previous research has addressed various aspects of monetary nature—including the design of Islamic monetary systems, the fungibility of money based on nominal value, and the distinction between credit, property value, and property reality—a comprehensive theoretical formulation integrating juristic principles, subject-matter analysis, and Iran's legal-banking structure has remained elusive. This research fills that gap by presenting a unified theoretical framework that avoids the conflation of property and property value, resolves the apparent contradiction between fungible and non-fungible classifications, and offers an explanation compatible with both commercial jurisprudence and contemporary banking needs.
2. Methodology
The research adopts a descriptive-analytical method with a jurisprudential approach, combining textual analysis of classical and contemporary juristic sources with systematic evaluation of existing theories on money's nature. Data were gathered from primary juristic sources, legal documents, scholarly works, and economic analyses, and theories were analyzed in light of Islamic commercial jurisprudence and Iran's legal-banking structure.
3. Research Findings
The research reveals that credit money today is not merely a document or nominal number; rather, it is a customary and legally recognized credit-based discharging property that serves as a subject of ownership and a means of discharging obligations. Purchasing power is an attribute of property value, not its essence. This finding preserves the fungible nature of money while allowing consideration of severe depreciation within liability rules and the principle of preventing harm.
The historical analysis demonstrates that paper money has undergone a fundamental transformation. In its earliest form, paper receipts represented actual gold and silver coins held in trust. As moneychangers utilized deposited funds for loans, these became debt documents. With government-issued banknotes, they became government debt obligations. Finally, in the contemporary period, banknotes have become fiat currency with no metallic backing, deriving their value solely from government decree and public acceptance. This transformation significantly impacts how money should be understood in Islamic jurisprudence.
In examining theories of money's nature, the research finds that the purchasing power theory, associated with Ayatollah al-Sadr, attempts to account for value changes by identifying purchasing power as the essence of money. However, this theory confuses property with property value, leading to the contradiction of characterizing money as simultaneously fungible and non-fungible. The nominal value theory maintains that credit money is fungible property determined by nominal value rather than purchasing power. While this approach provides clear rules for ordinary transactions, it cannot adequately explain government responsibility for value depreciation and leaves money's true nature ambiguous. The document theory, associated with thinkers such as Ayatollah Mutahhari, maintains that paper money remains a document representing purchasing power rather than independent property, but this is inconsistent with contemporary customary practice and law.
The research finds that the theory of "credit-based discharging property with purchasing power as an attribute" offers the most precise juristic explanation. This theory is built on two robust jurisprudential pillars. The first consists of evidence from the endorsement of customary contracts and the established practice of rational people. The Qur'anic verses "God has permitted trade" and "O you who believe, fulfill your contracts," alongside continuous rational practice, indicate the validity of transactions common among rational people, provided they do not conflict with definitive scriptural texts. Since the sacred Lawgiver has not prohibited this practice, banknotes fall under the general permissibility of transactions, and their discharging nature is endorsed by religious law.
The second pillar consists of the jurisprudential analysis of banknotes as "government assignment" (ḥawālah). Banknotes can be understood through the contract of assignment: the government or central bank serves as the assignee that implicitly undertakes to accept each banknote holder at its nominal value in payment of debts and purchase of services. This analysis is fully compatible with the jurisprudential rules of assignment.
Through careful distinction between "property" (the credit-based discharging units represented by numbers on banknotes) and "property value" (purchasing power as an accidental attribute), this theory preserves money's fungible nature in ordinary debts while allowing compensation for severe depreciation through liability rules for lost attributes and secondary principles such as preventing harm, prohibition of causation of harm, and negation of hardship. This resolution avoids the contradiction of simultaneous fungibility and non-fungibility because fungibility relates to the property itself while compensation for purchasing power relates to the attribute of property value.
The research also demonstrates compatibility with Iran's monetary and banking system objectives. The Monetary and Banking Law of Iran and the Law on Usury-Free Banking Operations establish fundamental principles that align with the proposed theory, including preserving money's value and ensuring mandatory acceptance of banknotes in debt settlement. Contemporary judicial practice, including rulings from the Administrative Court of Justice and the Supreme Court, has recognized the principle of compensation for damages caused by severe inflation.
4. Conclusion
The comparative juristic examination reveals that banknotes have evolved through four historical periods: as receipts for gold and silver coins, as debt documents, as government obligation documents, and finally as independent customary property. The evidence supporting the document theory in the contemporary period is insufficient, while two strong indicators—the independent power of discharging obligation and the central bank's lack of obligation toward lost banknotes—confirm that banknotes constitute property in their own right.
Among existing theories, the purchasing power theory falls into the contradiction of simultaneous fungibility and non-fungibility by conflating property with property value. The nominal value theory leaves money's nature ambiguous and cannot justify compensation for severe depreciation. The document theory is inconsistent with contemporary custom and law. In contrast, the theory of "credit-based discharging property with purchasing power as an attribute" presents the most precise juristic explanation of contemporary money.
This theory, built on two robust jurisprudential pillars—evidence from endorsement of customary contracts and analysis of banknotes as government assignment—offers a coherent framework that avoids conflating property and property value, resolves the apparent contradiction between fungible and non-fungible classifications, and maintains compatibility with Islamic non-interest banking principles. By distinguishing between "property" (credit-based discharging monetary units) and "property value" (purchasing power as an accidental attribute), it preserves money's fungible nature in ordinary debts while enabling compensation for severe depreciation through secondary principles, without transforming money into non-fungible property or merely a document.
The theory demonstrates compatibility with Iran's monetary and banking system objectives and contemporary judicial practice recognizing compensation for severe inflation. This framework can serve as a basis for deriving rulings on money and regulating financial relationships in the contemporary banking system, offering a theoretically sound and practically applicable approach to one of the most challenging issues in modern Islamic commercial jurisprudence.
کلیدواژهها English
تحقیقات مالی اسلامی