Examining the ruling on using collateral from the perspective of Hanafi jurisprudence

Abstract

The permissibility of deriving benefit from mortgaged property constitutes a significant and practical issue within Islamic jurisprudence, one that has been extensively debated by classical scholars. Among the various schools of Islamic law, the Hanafi madhhab presents nuanced and reflective opinions that, upon closer examination, contribute to a more precise understanding of the legal dimensions of this issue. This study seeks to explicate and critically analyze the perspectives of Hanafi jurists regarding the permissibility or impermissibility of usufruct by the mortgagee (al-murtahin) from the mortgaged asset (al-marhūn). The significance of this research arises from the prevalence of mortgage (rahn) contracts in contemporary Muslim societies, where an accurate jurisprudential understanding is essential to avoid falling into usurious (ribā-based) transactions.Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology, the research draws upon authoritative Hanafi legal texts and classical sources. The findings reveal a bifurcation among Hanafi scholars: one group permits the mortgagee’s benefit with the pledgor’s (al-rāhin) consent, while the other prohibits such benefit categorically, even with consent. This study supports the latter view as more jurisprudentially sound and substantiates this position through a set of reasoned legal arguments rooted in Hanafi doctrine.