The PRIMARY OIC ruling that a THIRD PARTY cannot sell a debt for cash
The PRIMARY OIC ruling that a THIRD PARTY cannot sell a debt for cash — the primary-source anchor of bay' al-dayn (the sale of debt) and the resolution that ties the corpus's whole debt cluster together: International Islamic Fiqh Academy (OIC), Resolution No. 101 (4/11), titled 'Debt Sale, Loan Debentures, and their Shariah-based Alternatives in the Public and Private Sectors' in the Academy's official English edition (the IRTI/IDB edition prints it as 'Debt Sale and Loan Debentures and their Islamic Substitutes in Public and Private Sectors'), adopted at the Academy's 11th session in Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, on 25–30 Rajab 1419h (14–19 November 1998). This is the corpus's FOURTEENTH article anchored on a genuine PRIMARY OIC / IIFA resolution read verbatim, and it is the primary-source SPINE beneath the corpus's existing general bay' al-dayn (sale-of-debt) explainer, which until now rested only on a finance-glossary and encyclopaedia source. It is also the resolution that binds the corpus's debt cluster into one: its own Second item EMPHASISES two rulings this corpus already carries as their own entries — Resolution No. 60 (11/6) on Bonds and paragraph (3) of Resolution No. 64 (2/7) on discounting commercial papers — so Res 101 is the ruling under which the bond entry and the bill-discounting entry sit as the same anti-riba principle applied to two instruments. Its load-bearing line settles the single question behind debt factoring, bill discounting, and every secondary market in debt securities. Verbatim (official edition), First: 'It is not permissible to sell a deferred debt by the non-debtor for immediate cash, of its type or otherwise, because this results in ribā (usury). Likewise, it is not permissible to sell it for a deferred cash, of its type or otherwise, because it is similar to selling a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Shariah, regardless of whether the debt is the result of a loan or a deferred sale.' That is the primary-source basis for why a Muslim cannot factor receivables at a discount to a third party, cannot buy or sell a conventional bond on the secondary market, and cannot trade a money-claim as if it were a good: selling a debt to someone other than the debtor either yields an immediate cash gap that is riba, or, if the price is itself deferred, becomes the prohibited sale of a debt for a debt. The resolution is HONEST about its own limits — its Third item records that the Academy POSTPONED ruling on the remaining forms of debt sale and asked its Secretariat to convene a committee to develop Shariah-compliant alternatives, so this ruling fixes the prohibition and mandates the search for substitutes rather than itself supplying the full toolkit.
What this source says
This corpus already carried a general explainer on bay' al-dayn — the SALE OF DEBT — built from a finance-industry glossary and an encyclopaedia entry, which drew the riba line at its sharpest: every earlier contract (murabaha, bay' bithaman ajil, salam, istiṣnāʿ, even the contested bay' al-ʿinah and tawarruq) sells GOODS and creates a debt as a by-product, whereas bay' al-dayn sells the DEBT ITSELF, a money-claim rather than an asset. This entry supplies that explainer's PRIMARY-SOURCE spine: the actual OIC resolution behind the rule, read verbatim. It was adopted by the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of the OIC at its 11th session in Manama, Bahrain, over 25–30 Rajab 1419h (14–19 November 1998). Like the Academy's other finance rulings it is collective ijtihad by the OIC's supra-madhab body of assembled senior scholars, which is why it can speak for the practice of the whole Muslim world rather than one school. Verbatim (official edition), the preamble: 'The Council of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, holding its 11th session in Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, on 25–30 Rajab 1419h (14–19 November 1998), Having examined the research papers submitted to the Academy concerning Debt Sale and Loan Debentures and their Shariah-based Alternatives in the Public and Private Sectors, In light of the discussions highlighting the importance of these issues in contemporary financial transactions, Resolves'. (IRTI renders the subject as 'Debt sale and loan debentures and their Islamic substitutes in public and private sectors' and adds that the discussions 'drew the attention of the participants to the fact that this issue is one of the critical issues in the area of modern Islamic transactions'.)
FIRST is the load-bearing prohibition, and it is DIRECTLY sourced, not reasoned. Verbatim (official edition): 'It is not permissible to sell a deferred debt by the non-debtor for immediate cash, of its type or otherwise, because this results in ribā (usury). Likewise, it is not permissible to sell it for a deferred cash, of its type or otherwise, because it is similar to selling a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Shariah, regardless of whether the debt is the result of a loan or a deferred sale.' (IRTI: 'It is not permissible to sell a deferred debt by the non-debtor for a prompt cash, from its type or otherwise, because this results in Riba (usury). Likewise, it is not permissible to sell it for a deferred cash, from its type or otherwise, because it is similar to the sale of a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Islam. There is no difference whether the debt is the result of a loan or whether it is a deferred sale.') Read the clause carefully, because it is more precise than the blanket 'you cannot sell debt' that the topic is often reduced to. TWO conditions do the work. (i) THE SELLER IS 'the non-debtor' — the ruling is about selling a debt owed to you, to a THIRD PARTY, not about the debtor settling his own debt (that is a different, permitted, matter, governed by Res 64 on early settlement between the two original parties). (ii) TWO EXITS ARE BOTH SHUT: sell the deferred debt for IMMEDIATE cash and the gap between face value and the discounted price is riba; sell it for DEFERRED cash and you have exchanged one debt for another — the classic prohibited bayʿ al-dayn bi'l-dayn (debt-for-debt). And the source removes the obvious escape hatch: it makes NO difference 'whether the debt is the result of a loan or a deferred sale' — a trade receivable owed to a supplier is treated exactly like a money-loan for this purpose. This single clause is the primary-source basis for treating conventional invoice factoring / receivables discounting at less than face value, secondary-market trading in bonds and loan debentures, and any packaging-and-sale of debt claims, as impermissible where the counterparty is not the debtor.
SECOND is the item that makes Res 101 the KEYSTONE of this corpus's debt cluster, because it does not reason from scratch — it EMPHASISES two rulings the Academy had already settled and that already live here as their own entries. Verbatim (official edition): 'Emphasizing the Academy resolution no. 60 (11/6) concerning Bonds, issued at its sixth session held in Saudi Arabia on 17–23 Shaʿbān 1410h (14–20 March 1990) and paragraph (3) of the Academy resolution no. 64 (2/7) regarding discounting commercial papers, issued at its seventh session held in Saudi Arabia on 7–12 Dhū al-Qi’dah 1412h (9–14 May 1992).' (IRTI: 'Emphasizing the Academy's Resolution no. 60/11/6, in respect of bonds, issued during its Sixth Conference held in Saudi Arabia on 17-23 Sha'ban 1410 (14-20 March 1990) and on Paragraph 3 of the Academy's Resolution no. 64/2/7 in respect of discounting commercial papers, carried during its Seventh Conference held in Saudi Arabia on 7-12 Dhul Qi'da 1412 H (9-14 May 1992).') The reader can now see the architecture: Res 60 forbade the BOND (a debt-security paying predetermined interest); Res 64, paragraph 3, forbade DISCOUNTING a bill / promissory note (turning a not-yet-due debt into less cash now); and Res 101 states the GENERAL principle those two are instances of — selling any debt to a non-debtor. All three are the SAME riba, applied to three instruments, and all three are now primary-anchored in this corpus.
THIRD is where the resolution is scrupulously honest about what it did NOT decide — and this entry is honest in turn about that limit rather than overclaiming a complete answer. Verbatim (official edition): 'The Academy reviewed other forms of the debt sale and decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions on the subject to conduct further research. It, therefore, requests the Secretariat General to establish a committee to study these forms and suggest Shariah-compliant alternatives to debt sale, to be submitted at the next session of the Academy.' (IRTI: 'The Academy reviewed other forms of the debt sale, and thought it better to postpone taking decisions thereupon in order to conduct further research. It also requested the General Secretariat to form a committee entrusted with the task of studying such forms and suggest alternatives which are acceptable by Islam for the debt sale so that they can be proposed again to the Academy during a coming session.') So Res 101 is not the last word on debt sale — it is the FIRM prohibition on the core case (a non-debtor selling a debt for cash) PLUS an explicit mandate to develop halal alternatives, deferred to later sessions. The title's promise of 'Shariah-based Alternatives / Islamic Substitutes' is, on the face of the operative text, a direction of travel the Academy commits to pursue, not a menu it delivers here; a reader should not read this resolution as itself supplying the substitute structures.
That Res 101 is settled OIC law, not one ruling among many, is confirmed by the Academy's OWN later work, which cites it by name. Its later Resolution No. 158 (7/17) on the Sale of Debts (17th session, Amman, 28 Jumādā al-Ūlā – 2 Jumādā al-Ākhirah 1427h / 24–28 June 2006) records, verbatim, that it was issued 'Having recalled the Academy resolution no. 101 (4/11) concerning the Sale of Debts and Muqāradah Bonds, which stipulates that “It is not permissible to sell, to a third party, any immature debt for an early-paid amount of money, whether in the same currency of the debt or any other currency, etc”'. Two honest observations about that recall belong here: it is the LATER resolution's own paraphrase of Res 101 (its wording — 'to a third party', 'immature debt', 'an early-paid amount of money' — is not word-for-word identical to Res 101's own First clause, so it is quoted here as Res 158's summary of Res 101, not as Res 101's verbatim text), and it renames the subject 'the Sale of Debts and Muqāradah Bonds' — both facts reported rather than smoothed over. What it establishes cleanly is that eight years on, the Academy still treated Res 101's core rule — a third party may not buy an immature debt for a discounted early payment — as its standing position.
From all of this the reader gets a concrete, supra-madhab checklist from the primary source itself for the whole family of 'debt sale / factoring / receivables / debt-security-trading' arrangements. (1) SELLING A DEBT TO ANYONE BUT THE DEBTOR is the prohibited case: if a third party buys your deferred debt for immediate cash, the discount is riba; if the price is itself deferred, it is the prohibited sale of a debt for a debt (First). (2) IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE how the debt arose — a trade receivable from a deferred sale is treated exactly like a money-loan (First). (3) THE BOND AND THE DISCOUNTED BILL are named instances of this same principle, not separate special cases (Second, emphasising Res 60 and Res 64 para 3). (4) THE ACADEMY DID NOT here bless a specific halal alternative to debt sale — it postponed that and asked a committee to develop Shariah-compliant substitutes (Third), so any 'Islamic debt-trading' or 'Islamic factoring' product must be judged on its own structure against the First-clause prohibition, not assumed permitted because this resolution's TITLE mentions alternatives. An arrangement in which the debtor himself settles early for a rebate is a different matter, governed between the two original parties (see the corpus's Res 64 entry); an arrangement in which a THIRD party profits from buying the debt cheap is exactly what First forbids.
Two honest limits belong on this entry. First, on SOURCES: this is one resolution confirmed across two genuinely different English translations — the Academy's own official English edition (October 2021), used here as the authoritative text, and the older IRTI/IDB printed edition (1985-2000). They agree on the resolution number, session, city, dates and every one of the three substantive items; they differ in wording throughout ('Shariah-based Alternatives' vs 'Islamic Substitutes'; 'immediate cash' vs 'prompt cash'; 'of its type or otherwise' vs 'from its type or otherwise'; 'prohibited in Shariah' vs 'prohibited in Islam'; 'decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions' vs 'thought it better to postpone taking decisions'), which strengthens confidence in the substance. The ONE non-wording difference is the closing invocation — official 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing' vs IRTI's salawat 'May Allah's prayers and blessings be upon our Prophet, and upon his family and Companions' — disclosed here honestly as a real divergence in the closing formula, though not a discrepancy in any of the three rules. Both are English renderings, not the binding Arabic original. Second, on SCOPE: no madhab-by-madhab breakdown, no vote tally, no market or AUM figure, no hadith number (the resolution cites none), and no claim about which specific AU/UK/CA/US product does or does not comply — the tests are given for the reader to apply, and no product is graded here. The cross-references to Resolution No. 60 (11/6), Resolution No. 64 (2/7) and the later Resolution No. 158 (7/17) are quoted only for the verbatim lines that bear on Res 101 — the naming lines in Res 101's own Second item, and Res 158's recall of Res 101; nothing else in those resolutions is re-asserted here, and the CONTENT of Res 60 and Res 64 lives in their own corpus entries.
Wording inside quotation marks is quoted from the source. The rest is this notebook’s summary of it — read the original before relying on it.
Provenance
- Compiled from
- Compiled 2026-07-09 from TWO genuinely different English translations of the SAME primary resolution, cross-read: [1] the INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC FIQH ACADEMY's own OFFICIAL ENGLISH EDITION, 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy' (official edition, October 2021, published by the Academy at iifa-aifi.org), which prints the ruling as 'Resolution No. 101 (4/11) / Debt Sale, Loan Debentures, and their Shariah-based Alternatives in the Public and Private Sectors', with the session line 'holding its 11th session in Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, on 25–30 Rajab 1419h (14–19 November 1998)' and the full operative text (the preamble and First through Third) — extracted verbatim from the published PDF; and [2] the IRTI/IDB PRINTED EDITION 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the Council of the Islamic Fiqh Academy 1985-2000' (Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah), which prints the same ruling as 'RESOLUTION N° 101 (4/11) ON DEBT SALE AND LOAN DEBENTURES AND THEIR ISLAMIC SUBSTITUTES IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS', with the same 11th session / Manama / 25–30 Rajab 1419 H (14–19 November 1998) and the same operative structure (First through Third) — extracted verbatim from the published PDF. THESE TWO ARE GENUINELY DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS, not two printings of one rendering: the official title reads 'their Shariah-based Alternatives' where IRTI reads 'their Islamic Substitutes'; the official First forbids selling a deferred debt 'for immediate cash, of its type or otherwise' where IRTI has 'for a prompt cash, from its type or otherwise'; the official reads 'similar to selling a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Shariah' where IRTI reads 'similar to the sale of a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Islam'; the official closes First 'regardless of whether the debt is the result of a loan or a deferred sale' where IRTI reads 'There is no difference whether the debt is the result of a loan or whether it is a deferred sale'; the official Third has the Academy 'decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions' and 'requests the Secretariat General to establish a committee' where IRTI has it 'thought it better to postpone taking decisions' and 'requested the General Secretariat to form a committee'. ONE GENUINE, HONESTLY-DISCLOSED DIVERGENCE that is NOT a substantive-rule discrepancy: the two editions CLOSE differently — the official edition ends with the tahmid formula 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing', while the IRTI printing ends with the salawat 'May Allah's prayers and blessings be upon our Prophet, and upon his family and Companions'. Both editions run First through Third in the same order with the same content; the divergence is only in the closing invocation, reported not hidden. Both editions are English renderings, not the binding Arabic original.
- Source
- PRIMARY RULING (full title, session/city/dates, preamble subject-line and the full operative text — First through Third) from [1] the INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC FIQH ACADEMY (OIC) OFFICIAL ENGLISH EDITION, 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy' (official edition, October 2021), printing the ruling as 'Resolution No. 101 (4/11) / Debt Sale, Loan Debentures, and their Shariah-based Alternatives in the Public and Private Sectors', 'holding its 11th session in Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, on 25–30 Rajab 1419h (14–19 November 1998)' — extracted verbatim from the published PDF (https://iifa-aifi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Resolutions-Recommendations-of-the-IIFA-Official-Edition-Oct-2021.pdf), read 2026-07-09. CONFIRMING SECOND, GENUINELY DIFFERENT TRANSLATION from [2] the IRTI/IDB PRINTED EDITION, 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the Council of the Islamic Fiqh Academy 1985-2000' (Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah), printing the same ruling as 'RESOLUTION N° 101 (4/11) ON DEBT SALE AND LOAN DEBENTURES AND THEIR ISLAMIC SUBSTITUTES IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS', same 11th session / Manama / 25–30 Rajab 1419 H (14–19 November 1998) and same operative structure (First–Third) — extracted verbatim from the published PDF (https://zulkiflihasan.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/majma-fiqh.pdf), read 2026-07-09. THE TWO ARE GENUINELY DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS (title 'Shariah-based Alternatives' vs 'Islamic Substitutes'; First 'immediate cash, of its type or otherwise' vs 'prompt cash, from its type or otherwise'; 'selling a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Shariah' vs 'the sale of a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Islam'; 'regardless of whether the debt is the result of a loan or a deferred sale' vs 'There is no difference whether the debt is the result of a loan or whether it is a deferred sale'; Third 'decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions' / 'requests the Secretariat General to establish a committee' vs 'thought it better to postpone taking decisions' / 'requested the General Secretariat to form a committee') — a strong pairing, since all three substantive items survive two independent renderings. ONE HONESTLY-DISCLOSED DIVERGENCE that is NOT a substantive-rule discrepancy: the two editions CLOSE differently — the official edition ends 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing' while the IRTI printing ends with the salawat 'May Allah's prayers and blessings be upon our Prophet, and upon his family and Companions'; First–Third are otherwise identical in order and content, so this is reported as a difference in the closing invocation, not a manufactured defect and not a rule-level conflict. ADDITIONAL PRIMARY CORROBORATION that Res 101 is the settled OIC position, quoted verbatim only for the recall line: the Academy's later Resolution No. 158 (7/17) on the Sale of Debts (17th session, Amman, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, 28 Jumādā al-Ūlā – 2 Jumādā al-Ākhirah 1427h / 24–28 June 2006) — 'Having recalled the Academy resolution no. 101 (4/11) concerning the Sale of Debts and Muqāradah Bonds, which stipulates that “It is not permissible to sell, to a third party, any immature debt for an early-paid amount of money, whether in the same currency of the debt or any other currency, etc”' (read verbatim from the same official-edition PDF). HONESTY: that recall is Res 158's OWN paraphrase/summary of Res 101 (its wording differs from Res 101's verbatim First clause) and it renames the subject 'the Sale of Debts and Muqāradah Bonds' — both flagged, not smoothed. NO fabrication: no madhab-by-madhab tally, no vote count, no hadith number, no market/AUM/named-fund figure, and no product graded. Nothing from the cross-referenced Res 60, Res 64 or Res 158 is re-asserted beyond the verbatim lines that bear on Res 101, and the CONTENT of Res 60 (11/6) and Res 64 (2/7) lives in their own corpus entries, not here. Both editions are English renderings, not the binding Arabic original.
- School / basis
- Cross-madhab / collective-ijtihad (the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of the OIC is a supra-madhab body of assembled senior scholars; its resolutions represent collective ijtihad rather than a single school's position). Resolution No. 101 (4/11), 11th session, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 25–30 Rajab 1419h (14–19 November 1998). Operative content, verbatim from the Academy's official English edition (Oct 2021). PREAMBLE (subject): '… Having examined the research papers submitted to the Academy concerning Debt Sale and Loan Debentures and their Shariah-based Alternatives in the Public and Private Sectors, In light of the discussions highlighting the importance of these issues in contemporary financial transactions, Resolves'. FIRST (a non-debtor may not sell a deferred debt for cash — immediate = riba, deferred = debt-for-debt; loan vs deferred-sale origin irrelevant — stated directly): 'It is not permissible to sell a deferred debt by the non-debtor for immediate cash, of its type or otherwise, because this results in ribā (usury). Likewise, it is not permissible to sell it for a deferred cash, of its type or otherwise, because it is similar to selling a debt for a debt, which is prohibited in Shariah, regardless of whether the debt is the result of a loan or a deferred sale.' SECOND (emphasises two rulings already in this corpus — Res 60 Bonds + Res 64 para 3 bill-discounting): 'Emphasizing the Academy resolution no. 60 (11/6) concerning Bonds, issued at its sixth session held in Saudi Arabia on 17–23 Shaʿbān 1410h (14–20 March 1990) and paragraph (3) of the Academy resolution no. 64 (2/7) regarding discounting commercial papers, issued at its seventh session held in Saudi Arabia on 7–12 Dhū al-Qi’dah 1412h (9–14 May 1992).' THIRD (Academy POSTPONED other forms; committee to develop halal alternatives — honest limit): 'The Academy reviewed other forms of the debt sale and decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions on the subject to conduct further research. It, therefore, requests the Secretariat General to establish a committee to study these forms and suggest Shariah-compliant alternatives to debt sale, to be submitted at the next session of the Academy.' Close (official): 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing.' The IRTI/IDB edition confirms the same three substantive items in a genuinely different translation ('Islamic Substitutes' for 'Shariah-based Alternatives'; 'prompt cash' for 'immediate cash'; 'from its type' for 'of its type'; 'prohibited in Islam' for 'prohibited in Shariah'; 'thought it better to postpone taking decisions' for 'decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions'), with ONE honestly-disclosed non-rule divergence: the IRTI printing CLOSES with the salawat 'May Allah's prayers and blessings be upon our Prophet, and upon his family and Companions' rather than the official 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing'. Both editions run First–Third in the same order with the same content. Load-bearing for THIS site as the PRIMARY OIC anchor on BAY' AL-DAYN / SALE OF DEBT (a non-debtor may not sell a debt for cash; the bond and the discounted bill are instances of the same principle; the Academy postponed and mandated a search for halal alternatives), giving primary-source backing to the corpus's existing general bay' al-dayn explainer and binding the Res 60 (Bonds) and Res 64 (bill-discounting) entries under one principle. Presented faithfully to scope: no madhab tally, no vote count, no hadith number, no market/AUM figure, and no product graded. Both editions are English translations, not the binding Arabic original.
- Captured
- 2026-07-09
- Added
- 2026-07-09
- Trust
- Primary or near-primary source with a stable public URL.
Compiler’s note
The corpus's FOURTEENTH article anchored on a genuine PRIMARY OIC / International Islamic Fiqh Academy resolution read verbatim, and the PRIMARY-SOURCE spine beneath the corpus's existing general bay' al-dayn (sale-of-debt) explainer (which rested only on a finance-glossary + encyclopaedia source). WHY THIS ONE: it was the explicit NEXT candidate named at the close of the Res 60 entry ('Res 101 (4/11) Debt Sale itself — the resolution that cites BOTH Res 60 and Res 64, present in both editions'). It BINDS the corpus's debt cluster: Res 101's own Second item emphasises Res 60 (11/6) Bonds + paragraph (3) of Res 64 (2/7) bill-discounting — both already their own corpus entries — so the bond ruling and the bill-discounting ruling now sit under one general principle (a non-debtor may not sell a debt for cash). Grep-confirmed DISTINCT: no existing article carried a dedicated verbatim entry for 'Resolution No. 101' / '101 (4/11)' (the only prior mentions were one-line cross-references inside the Res 60 and Res 64 articles). GEM #1: the load-bearing First is DIRECTLY sourced, not reasoned, and is more precise than the blanket 'you cannot sell debt' — it turns on the seller being 'the non-debtor' (a THIRD party) and shuts BOTH exits (immediate cash = riba on the discount; deferred cash = the prohibited sale of a debt for a debt), with the escape hatch closed: it makes no difference whether the debt arose from a loan or a deferred sale — a trade receivable is treated like a money-loan. This is the primary basis for ruling out conventional factoring/receivables-discounting to a third party and secondary-market debt-security trading. GEM #2: Second reveals the architecture — the bond (Res 60) and the discounted bill (Res 64 para 3) are named INSTANCES of the same riba, not separate special cases. GEM #3 (honesty as a feature): Third records that the Academy POSTPONED ruling on the remaining forms and mandated a committee to develop Shariah-compliant alternatives — so this resolution fixes the prohibition and commits to a search for substitutes rather than itself supplying them; the entry is explicit that the title's 'alternatives/substitutes' is a direction of travel here, not a delivered menu, so 'Islamic factoring/debt-trading' products must be judged on their own structure. TWO GENUINELY DIFFERENT English translations of the SAME resolution cross-read — the GOLD-STANDARD pairing (same standard as Res 30/51/60/64/65/85/110): [1] the Academy's OWN OFFICIAL ENGLISH EDITION (Oct 2021 PDF), used as authoritative text, and [2] the older IRTI/IDB printed edition (1985-2000), both carrying this 1998 resolution in full so the pairing is reproducible; the translations differ throughout ('Shariah-based Alternatives' vs 'Islamic Substitutes'; 'immediate cash' vs 'prompt cash'; 'of its type' vs 'from its type'; 'prohibited in Shariah' vs 'prohibited in Islam'; 'decided to postpone the issuance of resolutions' vs 'thought it better to postpone taking decisions'), so the substance survives two independent renderings. HONESTY NOTE: unlike Res 60 (a clean match) this pairing has ONE genuine divergence — the CLOSING invocation differs (official tahmid 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing' vs IRTI salawat 'May Allah's prayers and blessings be upon our Prophet, and upon his family and Companions') — disclosed honestly as a difference in the closing formula, NOT a conflict in any of the three rules (First–Third run identically); the no-fabrication discipline is applied to a real, if minor, difference: report it, do not smooth it. CORROBORATION that Res 101 is settled OIC law, quoted verbatim only for the recall line: the later Res 158 (7/17) Sale of Debts (17th session, Amman, 2006) 'Having recalled the Academy resolution no. 101 (4/11) …' — flagged honestly as Res 158's OWN paraphrase of Res 101 (wording differs) and its renaming of the subject 'the Sale of Debts and Muqāradah Bonds'. TRUST 'high' (numbered/dated PRIMARY OIC resolution verified verbatim in the Academy's own official English edition, re-confirmed in a second independently-worded printed edition, and further corroborated by a later OIC resolution that cites it by name; sole caveat = all are English translations, not the binding Arabic). DELIBERATELY DROPPED per no-fab: (a) any madhab-by-madhab breakdown or vote tally; (b) any hadith number (the resolution cites none); (c) any market/AUM/named-fund figure or named product-issue; (d) any claim about which specific AU/UK/CA/US product complies (the tests are given for the reader to apply, no product graded); (e) anything from the cross-referenced Res 60, Res 64 or Res 158 beyond the verbatim lines that bear on Res 101; (f) any assertion that Res 101 itself supplies the halal alternative — it explicitly postpones that (Third). FRESHNESS-HONEST: a 1998 resolution — nothing time-sensitive; its date is stated explicitly, and the non-debtor-may-not-sell-a-debt rule it fixes is still the live foundation for how a Muslim treats factoring, receivables, bond trading and any secondary market in debt. JSON-only per the established article convention (content/articles/*.json feed app/lib/corpus.ts via readdirSync + the /corpus stats badge + Phase-2 retrieval; NOT rendered as individual routed cards), so no SourceCard/route/href added and internal-link integrity is unaffected. Articles 77->78. PUNCH-LIST FULLY TICKED; build/lint re-confirmed green after this entry. NEXT candidate: Res 137 (3/15) Ṣukūk al-Ijārah (named alongside Res 60 and Res 30 in Res 156 = a ready in-corpus lead) once a genuinely-different second source is secured, or Res 158 (7/17) 'Sale of Debts' itself (the resolution that recalls Res 101 and rules on debt-for-debt swaps / bond-swaps, present in the official edition; a genuinely-different second source would need securing).
Topics
islamic-financeribaprohibition-of-ribariba-al-nasiahbay-al-daynsale-of-debtdebt-saledebt-for-debtbay-al-dayn-bil-daynloan-debenturesdebt-securitiesfactoringreceivables-financinginvoice-discountingbill-discountingdiscounting-commercial-paperspromissory-notesecondary-marketbond-tradingmoney-claimthird-party-debt-purchasenon-debtordeferred-debttrade-receivablesubstance-over-formshariah-based-alternativesislamic-substitutescapital-marketsfinancial-marketsresolution-101resolution-60resolution-64resolution-158resolution-30oicorganisation-of-islamic-cooperationinternational-islamic-fiqh-academyiifafiqh-academyprimary-sourcecollective-ijtihadshariah-rulingislamic-bankingmanama-1998postponed-rulingcommittee-mandate
This is source material, not a ruling. The corpus records what a named source actually said, so that you can read it yourself and take it to a scholar you trust. Ask the corpus to search all entries at once, or return to the library.