Introduction
Hojjat al-Islam Mohammad Hadi Ansaripour, an economics researcher who has been engaged in research and writing in this field for several years, serves as the head of the Economics and Governance Group at the Borhan Leadership Center. In an exclusive interview with Contemporary Jurisprudence, he discussed the foundations and assumptions of economic jurisprudence. He considers the most critical foundation of Islamic economics to be its reliance on the social system. According to this professor and researcher of economic jurisprudence, Islamic economics is a people’s economy, not a governmental or private-sector-driven one.
Interview with Contemporary Jurisprudence
Contemporary Jurisprudence: In general, what are the foundations and assumptions of economic jurisprudence?
Ansaripour: Regarding the foundations and assumptions of economic jurisprudence, we can say that economic jurisprudence has its own specific foundations that cast a shadow over the entire discipline of Islamic economics. Here, by “jurisprudence,” we mean tafaqquh—a deep, religiously informed understanding of Islamic economics—not necessarily limited to the layer of religious rulings but encompassing the collective knowledge, beliefs, strategies, and various disciplines that shape Islamic economics. We are discussing its foundations.
Several key foundations of Islamic economic jurisprudence include:
First Foundation: Prioritizing society as a responsible entity addressed by the lawgiver. A critical foundation is that, in the Quran, God defines society as a living, meaningful entity with its own identity, attributing to it life, death, and various social states. Thus, one of the primary foundations is prioritizing society alongside the individual. This is not always observed in certain branches of conventional economics, where individualism dominates. For instance, microeconomics is based on the individualism of actors in the economic sphere, and when it addresses society, it considers the aggregate behavior of individuals. This contrasts with the Quranic perspective, which views an individual’s behavior and society’s behavior as distinct subjects, each bearing its own religious designation.
Second Foundation: Islamic economics is rooted in the social system. In Islamic culture and tradition, economics is built upon the social system. Economics, in the noble school of Islam, is not an end in itself but a tool. It is a means to optimize and support the success of the social system. The social system is what holds primacy and is the purpose of many religious strategies and directives. For example, the late Martyr Sadr, in the introduction to Iqtisaduna (Our Economics), states: “If we were to follow the correct sequence, we would have written Mujtama’una (Our Society) after Falsafatuna (Our Philosophy) and then Iqtisaduna. This is because Islamic economics is rooted in the Islamic social system and is one of its dimensions. However, the influence of communist ideologies and the onslaught of Marxist currents led our peers to demand Iqtisaduna first, making it a priority.” He is also quoted as saying that he delayed writing Mujtama’una due to the circumstances faced by the Muslim community.
In his thought, the economic system is entirely rooted in the social system. This is evident throughout Quranic and narrational directives. If you examine the Quran, you will see that the goal of the economic system is not to maximize profit but to maximize social bonds formed within a faithful community—bonds referred to as wilaya (guardianship). The purpose of economic directives is to strengthen these bonds, which may include social networks such as faithful friendships, kinship ties among believers, or neighborly relationships. These social identities, in whatever form, are emphasized in the Quran and narrations. The numerous directives in the Quran and hadiths regarding kinship and social systems based on kinship networks are not merely recommended or decorative but are fundamental to the religion. These directives realize the sacred concept of wilaya. Economic interactions are designed to reinforce this sacred concept, with their function being to actualize it. Thus, in Islamic logic, the economic system is entirely dependent on the social system, aiming to strengthen and empower it rather than pursuing ever-increasing profits. The Quranic economic human is not one who organizes all economic interactions to maximize profit as the ultimate goal but one who seeks to maximize faithful connections with other believers and a relationship with God.
Third Foundation: The Quranic depiction of the economic human differs from that of conventional economics. For instance, the concept of infaq (spending in the way of God) in the Quran is far broader than the conventional economic view, which reduces it to charity or non-profit activities. The Quranic depiction of infaq and the society in which it prevails is a fundamental and central concept. The Quranic economic human is one whose concerns, efforts, and behaviors are less about profit-driven concepts and more about financial exchanges that align with God’s pleasure and strengthen the social system. Thus, the primary focus is not profit or personal gain.
Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does Islamic economics merely consist of a few distinct rulings compared to other economic systems, or does it propose an independent system?
Ansaripour: To answer this question, we must first identify the characteristics of an independent system and then determine whether Islamic economics constitutes such a system. What are the characteristics of an independent system? An independent system is goal-oriented, with interconnected components that converge toward that goal, are coherent, non-conflicting, and governed by a unified spirit.
Upon examining Islamic economic teachings, it is evident that they undoubtedly form an independent, goal-oriented system with interconnected, coherent, and corresponding components, all converging toward a single goal and supporting a unified spirit. Thus, Islamic economics is certainly an independent system, whether at the level of doctrine, knowledge, or science.
Contemporary Jurisprudence: With a minimalist approach to jurisprudence, can one even claim the existence of a branch of jurisprudence called “economic jurisprudence” or a discipline called “Islamic economics”?
Ansaripour: With a minimalist approach to jurisprudence, it is possible to construct an economic jurisprudence, write a fiqh al-iqtisad, and teach or organize it. However, would such an economic jurisprudence effectively contribute to building the Islamic economic system and achieving the goals of Islamic economic teachings? I believe it would not. Not only would it fail to do so, but such an approach would pave the way for the broader knowledge systems established by non-divine sciences imposed upon us. In practice, you would have a collection of teachings across various domains that can be interpreted and translated in diverse, sometimes contradictory, ways. This requires a criterion to determine which teachings to select. Do you have a vision of a coherent system toward which these teachings are directed, or is there no such vision?
If someone adheres to the latter view—a minimalist approach to jurisprudence—whether in terms of viewing or not viewing a system or focusing on individual or social jurisprudence in Islamic economics, they will encounter numerous problems, both for themselves and society. Such an approach to jurisprudence can lead to endorsing usury loopholes (hiyal riba). This is a form of jurisprudence that is unaware of its own implications, labeled as tafaqquh but filled with ignorance. It fails to recognize that relying on a few narrations, which cannot withstand the weight of numerous, stringent Quranic verses, undermines the entire economic system and prevents it from achieving its goals. Who makes such a mistake? Someone who has never understood that our approach to jurisprudence and economic jurisprudence must aim to regulate a society, not merely address the issues of one or a few individuals. God did not establish jurisprudence or bring this religion so that individuals could perform personal acts in a context managed by non-divine perspectives, where those acts are subsumed into that non-divine framework. Consider prayer, fasting, and worship in a society whose overall spirit is entirely incompatible with the Islamic social system and coexists with oppression and exploitation, like Saudi Arabia, where prayers are performed meticulously. But is this the prayer prescribed by the Quran? Is it the prayer that “prevents immorality and wrongdoing”? Is it the prayer that, alongside zakat and the rejection of oppression, leads a person to the remembrance of God? Certainly not, and such prayer has no effect for the worshipper. As stated in Usul al-Kafi, individual acts cannot alter the course of a social system.
Thus, minimalist approaches to jurisprudence, such as this, cause more harm than good, offering no benefit to Islamic society and leading both the scientific and social systems to ruin.
Contemporary Jurisprudence: To what extent does the divine perspective in economic matters differentiate the legal propositions of Islamic economics from those of other economic schools?
Ansaripour: Islamic economics is fundamentally different from other economic schools, such as communism or capitalism—they are entirely different worlds. These are not merely a few distinct propositions. The divine perspective in Islamic economics transforms the entire essence and identity of this knowledge. It is shortsighted to assume that Islamic economic propositions, influenced by this divine perspective, remain unaffected or lack a distinct direction.
Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does Islamic economics, in contrast to capitalist and communist economic systems, offer a third approach? What is this approach?
Ansaripour: Islamic economics certainly offers a third approach. If someone believes there is no Islamic economics, or that it consists merely of a few minor jurisprudential propositions with no significant impact, they have neither understood conventional economics nor grasped the depth of Islamic economic directives. Anyone who has understood conventional economics and deeply comprehended Islamic economic directives would undoubtedly recognize a complete distinction—from foundation to structure, from doctrine to knowledge and science—between the two.
The framework established by Islamic economics has both a negative and a positive aspect. On the negative side, it is based on the rejection of usury and the rejection of monopolies by either the private or public sector. On the positive side, it is based on a people’s economy, neither dominated by the government nor the private sector. In my article “People’s Economy, the Quranic Economic Model,” I have provided some evidence, arguments, and documentation for this claim.
In summary, Islamic economics is an economy in which the people, in the truest sense, are the masters within the social groups they form, and people’s sovereignty manifests in the economic sphere. In this economy, divine leaders within society play only a guiding and supervisory role, combating deviations, while agency rests with the people—not the government or large, wealthy private entities. These “wealth giants” employ others, creating a modern form of slavery under a veneer of propriety for the lower classes. They amass vast fortunes, distributing a small portion to the disadvantaged, who, out of ignorance, are content with this life and never reach a stage to protest. However, Islamic economics empowers people within social groups and networks, enhancing their authority to the point of decision-making capability. Through their social networks, people can make decisions aligned with the goals recommended by the society’s divine leaders. Agency and action lie with the people, and the role of governance is solely to eliminate problematic structures hindering people’s productivity, such as monopolies, restrictive regulations, laws, permits, and usury-based financing.
Thus, what Islamic economics proposes is a coherent and harmonious system that moves toward its specific goals, fundamentally distinct from conventional economics from top to bottom.