Explore the vast range of titles available.

Economics, as a distinct discipline started out as a branch of moral philosophy. Early in the 20th century, logical positivists argued that science is the only source of knowledge, and values are not part of science. The desire to make humanities 'scientific' led to the creation of the 'social sciences', which claimed to be objective and value-free. In fact, values are inevitably involved in the study of human societies. Hence, when the social scientists could not remove them, they buried them into the foundations. In economics, 'rational' behavior was defined to be the pursuit of pleasure, without any explicit recognition or acknowledgement of the value judgment involved. Similarly, the scarcity foundations of modern economics also conceal many value judgements. In particular, secular morality at the heart of economics makes pursuit of pleasure and profits the goal of life for all rational human beings. Once we recognize the secular moral principles on which modern economics is built, the path to creating an Islamic alternative becomes clear. An Islamic society is built on the foundations of cooperation, generosity, and social responsibility, in stark contrast to the competition, greed, and individualism which are the basis of capitalist societies. Islam has a well-developed moral philosophy to deal with economic affairs, embodied in the science of fiqh (jurisprudence) as it has developed over the centuries. By rejecting the secular morality built into the foundations of modern economics, we can create a radical alternative based on the moral foundations of Islam. The modern world offers many new challenges; environments radically different from those faced by our elders. Thus, building a revolutionary Islamic economics requires ijtihad (diligent and creative research) to use the well-developed methodology of fiqh creatively to find new solutions to the deep and complex problems currently facing humanity and the planet.

This paper analyzes the appeal of ṣukūk as an asset-backed financing instrument and highlights their distinctive role compared to conventional debt instruments. The study explains that ṣukūk provide investors with actual ownership in underlying assets or projects, thereby linking returns to real economic performance rather than predetermined interest payments. This structural feature enhances fairness and transparency while reducing risks associated with speculation and excessive leverage. The research stresses that ṣukūk help align financial flows with productive economic activities, ensuring that capital is directed toward tangible investments rather than speculative trading. These characteristics have increased their global attractiveness for governments and financial institutions seeking to diversify funding sources and attract Sharia-compliant capital. However, the study also notes challenges such as the lack of standardized frameworks, variations in legal and regulatory regimes across countries, and relatively higher issuance costs compared to bonds. Despite these obstacles, the paper concludes that ṣukūk remain a promising instrument that combines principles of justice, participation, and financial stability, and that strengthening their legal and institutional infrastructure is crucial for consolidating their role in the international financial system. Abstract Written by Dar AlMandumh, 2025, Using AI

The objective of this discussion on the paper of Asad Zaman (2021) is to cast an overview as to what ought to be the learned outlook regarding Islamic economics within its scientific containment. In this way, it is surmised that the potentiality of Islamic economics, its scientific approach, and the broader socioscientific field can be searched and advanced in comparative Western perspective. By gradually establishing this enriched domain of advanced and conforming methodological approach, the future of Islamic economics in its ontological and scientific context can be discovered. This is indeed a momentous task of many together in the perspective of the collective world of learning.

Islamic economics started as a challenge and a fundamental critique of conventional economics, and the ambition of most Islamic economists of the first generation was the replacement of mainstream economics by a new paradigm based on or at least consistent with comprehensive Islamic worldview. It is questionable whether this goal has been achieved. A growing volume of literature with an ,,Islamic economics\" label follows the same quantitative approach and differs from mainstream only in so far as it deals with phenomena in Muslim countries, especially with aspects of Sharī,,ahcompliant banking and finance. Such studies of economic issues from an Islamic perspective are deeply rooted in conventional economics and lack the systemic or holistic dimension which is indispensable for the establishment of a new paradigm for a science of Islamic economics. Islamic economics as an autonomous discipline requires a systemic orientation, and it is conceptually inextricably linked with Islamic theology and law. However, the necessary intellectual interaction between economists and Sharī,,ah scholars is deficient. While Islamic economists had come forward with models of a financial system based on participatory modes of finance and widespread risk-sharing, many scholars of Islamic law were more concerned with the replication of conventional instruments for risk-free fixed-return transactions or with Sharī,,ahcompliant derivatives. Their efforts have moved Islamic finance closer to the conventional status quo and further away from an alternative system of financial intermediation. This did not contribute to the development of a new paradigm of Islamic economics, but this process is reversible.

تقدم الورقة إجابات مختصرة ومركزة عن التساؤلات المقدمة من هيئة تحرير المجلة؛ التي تتمحور حول انطلاقة البناء المنهجي للاقتصاد الإسلامي ومرتكزاته. تؤكد الورقة على أهمية مراجعة تلك الانطلاقة، بل تذهب إلى أبعد من ذلك؛ إذ تلفت النظر إلى أهمية مراجعة مصطلح الاقتصاد الإسلامي تأسياً بالمراجعات التي يشهدها الاقتصاد التقليدي حالياً في ضوء تداعيات الأزمة المالية الأمريكية (2007-2009 م). تبرر الورقة أهمية المراجعة للوصول إلى صياغة معرفة علمية إسلامية للظاهرة الاقتصادية من خلال رؤية معاصرة تبرز المنهج التلازمي بين الدنيا والآخرة والروح والمادة. خلصت الورقة إلى رؤية مستقبلية من خلال تقديم عدد من الخيارات التي تقوم على أسس منهجية سليمة تتوافق مع تطلعات الأجيال القادمة في بناء علم اقتصاد إسلامي يلبي حاجة المجتمعات المعاصرة.

This paper comments on Asad Zaman's lead paper (Zaman, 2021) in this journal and is divided into three parts. The first part summarizes very briefly my reaction to Zaman's paper, while delving deeper into areas only briefly touched by Zaman, such as the role of physics, and the importance of knowledge. Part two answers this Journal's clarion call to action, by discussing what is at stake, the importance of metrics, and the challenges and opportunities facing Islamic economics. The third part moves us forward using Zaman's endorsement of action-oriented work and actionoriented research as a steppingstone to first recognize, and then overcome the significant obstacles in implementing a viable and reconceptualized economics, one which can adequately provision for all. In this regard, a significant obstacle is juxtaposing concepts as binary opposites, e.g., cooperation versus competition, service versus profit, quantitative versus qualitative. However, these concepts could be better understood as different but having a deeper, more intricate relationship. Viewing ostensible opposites in a non-binary way as complimentary pairs is especially useful in fomenting dialogue and developing empathy (and even a humility) especially with those whom we disagree. And this is especially critical as we move forward in confronting contemporary challenges that human societies face. A lot is at stake, and we have a narrowing window with which to act.

For financing businesses under a Zero Interest Financial System the primary desired mode is Profit Loss Sharing (PLS) contracts. However, the reality is different. An alternative, favored and dominant alternative is Mark-up (MU) financing. Lately, MU's risk-sharing features and its rate determination process have come under scrutiny. Moral hazard, tax evasion, duration of financing contracts, etc., are cited as reasons for not using PLS. Perhaps failure to craft a sound PLS contract has forced a dependence on MU. Using the profit maximizing microeconomic model of a firm, we investigate a risk-neutral entrepreneur's willingness to make a PLS contract under two different situations - first, when PLS is the only contract available and second, when both MU and PLS are available. We were able to determine not only the share rate, but how financing duration, the MU rate, risks borne by the parties, their comparative market power, negotiating aptitude and transparency affect it.