Qualitative study explores maqasid al shariah implementation in Islamic banking in Pakistan, suggesting broader ethical objectives.
As a developing and evolving phenomenon, Islamic finance is continuously questioned regarding its performance and efficiency, especially in the context of higher ethical objectives, also termed as maqasid al Shariah, to achieve falah by practicing ihsan. A vast group of researchers has measured the unsatisfactory performance of Islamic financial institutions against the maqasid al Shariah, reflecting their convergence with capitalist systems. This raises a question of whether the Islamic finance industry interprets the concept of maqasid al Shariah the same way as academia and whether they assign maqasid al Shariah the same high level of relevance and importance. This study explores how the practitioners of the Islamic banking industry in Pakistan understands and implement maqasid al Shariah in practice. Adopting a qualitative, multiple-case approach, it draws on 20 in-depth narrative interviews with Islamic bankers and Shariah scholars. The findings of the research suggest ten different perspectives of practitioners, which they hold regarding maqasid al Shariah. They are (1) public welfare (maslahah), (2) business motives alongside banks do not consider maqasid al Shariah as their responsibility, (3) wrong interpretation and wrong evaluation of Islamic institutions on maqasid, (4) new industry and over expectation from the industry, (5) justice/equity (‘adl/ihsan), (6) bankers consider auto inclusion of maqasid al Shariah in every transaction, (7) prevention from prohibitions and provisioning of halal options, (8) Shariah compliance, (9) more focus on protection of wealth (10) maqasid are not divine and are man-made interpretations. These findings contribute to developing more effective performance measurement frameworks for the industry in the future and can compel both regulators and practitioners to consider comprehensive objectives of Shariah in product development rather than focusing merely on compliance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: