The Ruling of Paper Money Usage: Analysis Based on the Evolution of Currency Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Efforts to regain and elevate the usage of gold dinar in Malaysia have created various polemics either from the legal viewpoint, economic transactions, and the position of currency law. Views from some quarters advocating gold dinar as the currency demanded in Islam have implications on the use of paper money today. Consequently, some gold dinar activist groups in Malaysia forbid the use of paper money due to the lack of gold backing. This has created confusion amongst the communities on the law of paper money usage. Thus, the aim of this study is to analyze the views of the Muslim scholars regarding the forbidden use of paper money and the Islamic point of view. This analysis is based on the various phases of world currency development beginning from the first phase (paper currency as a receipt of debt), the second phase (a means of payment/fulus), the third phase (paper money as gold value backed) and the fourth phase (paper money as a principal currency). This study is in the form of qualitative by using the library research approach. The result of this study shows that the use of paper money is permissible because currently paper money has become the world principal money and no longer as a receipt of debt. The Council of Islamic Fiqh Academy (Majlis Majmac al-Fiqhi al-Islami) 5th session held in 1402H/1982AD is also with a resolution that the use of paper money is permissible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".