Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Islamic finance evaluates transactions through contractual validity and the substantive requirements of justice, transparency, lawful economic activity, and protection of wealth. This article examines prohibited transactions—particularly riba, gharar, and maysir—and considers their relationship with tadlis, taghrir, najasy, ihtikar, risywah, and problematic contractual engineering. A qualitative library-based, normative-conceptual approach synthesizes Qur’anic injunctions, Prophetic traditions, fiqh al-muamalat, and the institutional issues identified in the source manuscript. The analysis organizes prohibitions according to their underlying economic harms: unjustified debt-related gains, material uncertainty, gambling-like wealth transfers, information deception, price manipulation, artificial scarcity, and conflicts of interest. These risks can reappear in digital financing, online investment, Islamic banking, takaful, and electronic commerce. The study argues that compliance cannot be established merely by naming a contract as Islamic; it requires examination of ownership, disclosure, pricing, allocation of risk, economic substance, and governance. A practical screening framework is proposed for product design and supervision. The contribution is conceptual, not an empirical estimate of the prevalence or effects of prohibited practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: