Although different perspectives on the essence and qualities of the absolute existence have been put forward by the philosophers, theologians, and Sufī philosophers, in the context of this article, we will examine whether absolute existence has a causal efficacy in addition to special existence in the unity of the First Principle and the first effect. We will discuss the views of two Ottoman scholars, Baghdādīzāda (who lived in the second part of the 10th/16th century) and Arpacīzāda (d.1033/1623), who analyzed the (...) effect of absolute existence with its aforementioned qualities on the simplicity of the First Principle and its being a part of the complete cause as an incomplete cause. It is generally accepted by the philosophers that the First Principle is the simple complete cause of the first effect by virtue of its essence without the need for conditions, tools, or the removal of any obstacle. Therefore, the First Principle must be the cause of the first effect with its simple existence that does not consist of any sensory or intellectual parts. Therefore, the decisive issue in the discussions regarding the definition of the complete cause is the inclusion of both simple and compound entities. Because the definition of a complete cause that includes only simple or compound causes would be incomplete since it does not include all entities. The definition of complete cause preferred by philosophers such as al-Asīr al-Dīn al-Abharī (d.663/1265) and Najm al-Dīn al-Kātibī (d.675/1277), who made important contributions to the conceptualization of complete and incomplete causes, as the totality of the things on which the maʿlūl depends in its existence, can only include composite entities. As a matter of fact, al-Sayyīd Sharīf al-Jurjānī (d.816/1413), in his Sharh al-Mawāqif and Hāshiya al-Tajrīd, states that the aforementioned definition of complete cause, which was mentioned by his predecessors al-Abharī and al-Kātibī has the possibility of including only composite entities, but he expresses that this situation is not a necessity with the example that a simple substance can be formed from a simple complete cause. The Ottoman scholar al-Khatībzāda (d.901/1496), who supported al-Jurjānī's sentiment that the aforementioned definition of the complete cause could only include composite entities, emphasized in his commentary on Tajrīd al-iʿtikād the possibility of accepting absolute existence as a necessary element for the realization of the complete cause, which led to the writing of separate treatises following the traces of this problem. In the context of al-Jurjānī and al-Khatībzāda's explanations, al-Baghdādīzāda addressed the possibility of absolute existence being a part of the complete cause without damaging the simplicity of the First Principle and wrote a separate treatise emphasizing that absolute existence does not eliminate the First Principle”s being a simple complete cause. Arpacīzāda was another Ottoman scholar who wrote a critical text in response to this treatise, which analyzed the effect of absolute existence on the existence of the first effect as a part of the complete cause and its relation to the special existence of the First Principle. In this article, we will try to reveal the effect of absolute existence on the First Principle's being a simple complete cause and the possibility of accepting it as a part of the complete cause through these individuals and treatises. (shrink)

The paper deals with Forward exchange contracts and Swap exchange contracts, These two types of contracts are among the most prominent types of financial derivative contracts that arose after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 or the so-called Nixon shock, where the convertibility of the dollar into gold was stoped, which led to turmoil in the exchange rates of the currencies of many countries and the emergence of the need to stabilize the exchange rate Currencies in transactions (...) where the delivery of the two exchanges is delayed. This research has studied forward exchange contracts and swap exchange contracts in four sections. The first section defines the Forward exchange contract, which is a contract in which the two parties commit to exchange a specified amount of foreign currencies on a forward date, at a price agreed upon in advance. The elements and elements that must be mentioned in this contract, such as the seller and buyer, the size of the contract, the date of delivery and the forward exchange rate, were mentioned in this section, with an illustrative example of the mechanism of conducting this contract. In addition to addressing the differences between forward exchange contracts and future exchange contracts, the characteristics of forward exchange contracts and the purposes of those dealing with them from hedging and speculation are mentioned in this section. The second section has been devoted to the definition of swap exchange contracts, it is for the two parties to the contract to agree that one of them buys from the other a specific amount of a currency in exchange for a specific amount of another currency and at the current exchange rate, provided that the two exchanges are delivered immediately, and in the same contract, the two parties agree to make a forward reverse exchange contract, at a price determined within Contract, and to clarify the picture of swap exchange contracts, an example has been given to illustrate the mechanism for conducting this type of contract. In the third section, the views of contemporaries scholars regarding the İslamic law of the forward exchange contract were discussed, where the opinion of the objectors was mentioned at all and the evidence they inferred from it. And then the opinion of those who advocate the permissibility of forward exchange contracts that are in the form of a dating that is not binding on both parties together, provided that there is nothing in the dating that indicates that it is a contract of sale and provided that a new contract is delivered independent of the dating. Then I discussed the opinion and evidence of the impediments in four points, and I concluded that the most correct opinion at the first is the impermissibility of the forward exchange contract in the form such as the traditional banks do it because of the deception it contains. But I recanted and permitted this type of contract in two cases, the first: the case of need with the absence of an alternative, and the second: the case that transaction is not binding dating for both parties and on some terms. Some contemporary scholars suggested conducting buying and selling operations in the same currency as an alternative to forward exchange contracts, and some of them suggested that Islamic banks should have a common unit of account to settle accounts between the parties to commercial transactions. But in my opinion two solutions are often not feasible. As for the fourth section, I dealt with the opinions of contemporary scholars in the swap exchange contract. it seems likely to me that swap currency exchange contracts are nothing but a usurious loan that is prohibited by Sharia. Because when examining the mechanism of conducting this type of contract, it turns out that one of the parties lent the other an amount in one currency in exchange for the other lending him an amount in another currency under the name of the spot exchange contract. Since one of the two parties requires the other to increase what he lent - if the exchange rate of the Forward exchange contract is different from the Spot exchange rate, which is predominant - under the name of the Forward exchange contract, then this process is nothing but a usurious loan. I supported the proposal to exchange loans in different currencies as a İslamic alternative to transaction contracts, provided that there is no preference for one party over another, and there is no usurious increase. And in order to solve the problem of the high rate of currency inflation of one of the two loans more than the other, the researcher suggested adding the inflation rate to the two loans when they are performed. (shrink)

Kısa vadeli likidite sağlama ihtiyacının yanı sıra likidite fazlalığını kısa vadeli değerlendirme ihtiyacı finans kurumlarının ortak problemleridir. Konvansiyonel finans kurumları bu ihtiyaçlarının büyük kısmını repo-ters repo işlemleri ile karşılarken katılım finans kurumları ise faiz şüphesi nedeniyle repo-ters repo katılım bankacılığı ilkelerine uymadığı için bu ihtiyaçları karşılama konusunda problemler yaşamaktadır. Bu durum konvansiyonel finans kurumları ile rekabet halindeki katılım finans kurumları aleyhine işlemektedir. Bu makale repo işlemini ana hatlarıyla açıklayıp fıkhi boyutunu izah ettikten sonra Malezya’daki geri alım vaadi ile satım, Türkiye’deki (...) geri alım vaadi ile satım, organize teverruk, menkul kıymet rehinli karz sözleşmesi ve puantaj sistemi ile tekaruz anlaşması gibi halihazırda İslam dünyasında katılım finans kurumlarının repoya alternatif olarak uyguladıkları işlemleri ele almaktadır. Öte yandan bu çalışma kira sertifikalarının geri alım vaadi ile satımı, yatırım fonları, kira sertifikalarının alım satımı ile teverruk işlemi için katılım finans ilkelerine uygun bir pazar kurulması ve devlet destekli karz-ı hasen fonlarının kurulması gibi katılım finans kurumları adına repoya alternatif olarak düşünülen öneriler üzerinde yoğunlaşmaktadır. (shrink)