Page 24 - Valentino Cattelan - Credere is credit and creed: trust, money, and religion in western and islamic finance
P. 24

VALENTINO CATTELAN





               5.  The  spirit  of  capitalism  and  the  ghost  of  Orientalism:  trust,  money,  and
                  religion in the differentiation culture of modernity

                  The deep interconnection between religion and money that has been at the
               background of this article in relation to the notion of trust, so to provide a more
               critical  understanding  of  the  notion  of  risk-sharing  in  Islamic  finance  and  its
               (supposed) social impact, appears in a more immediate way if one looks at the
               etymological origin of the word ‘finance’.
                  As explained by the Oxford English Dictionary, the term derived directly from
               the old French finance, noun of action of the verb finer (finir in contemporary
               French), meaning «to end» and so, consequently, «to settle (finish, conclude) a
               dispute or a debt» .
                                82
                  To put an end to a credit relation through finance, as an expression of secular
               life, matches a religiosity whose Life (as social unity) mirrors, in Christianity, the
               end of human life. In the same way, the perpetuation of the social relation through
               money  in  an  «endless  cycle  of  extensions  and  intensifications  of  value»
                                                                                         83
               corresponding to an Afterlife conceived in Christian religion as the infinite Credit
               promised by God, Debtor of salvation.
                  Thus, both in Weber’s spirit of capitalism (1958)  and in Simmel’s religiosity of
                                                              84
               money (1989 and 1990) , «debt [becomes central] as a structuring principle in key
                                     85
               soteriological traditions within Christian thought. Not only does God appear to
               uphold  debt  logic,  but  God...  becomes  identified  with  debt  and  marked  as  a
               debtor. The divine sovereign as debtor and as enforcing debt provides cues for
               earthly sovereigns and legitimates cultures of debt» .
                                                              86
                  If this religiosity of Credit can summarize the relation religion + finance that
               belongs to the spirit of capitalism in the West, one can reasonably doubt that the
               same religiosity affects the conceptualization of risk-sharing in Islamic finance,
               for at least three reasons.
                  First,  the  concept  of  original  sin  does  not  exist  in  Islam:  so,  there  is  no
               conceptual idea of some sort of inherited debt towards God from which the human
               being should be liberated (for which Credit has been given). In fact, Islam teaches
               that Adam and Eve sinned, but then sought forgiveness and were forgiven by God
               (Q. 20:121-122: «… Thus did Adam disobey his Lord, so he went astray. Then
               his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him guidance»).
                  Second,  in  Islam  there  is  no  strong  significance  about  the  concept  of


                  82  OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY, online version at http:// www.oed.com (last access 10 June
               2024).
                  83  BLUMENBERG, Money or Life: metaphors of Georg Simmel’s philosophy, op. cit., 249; also quoted
               in Section 2 of this article.
                  84  WEBER, The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism, op. cit.
                  85   SIMMEL,  Gesammelte  Schriften  zur  Religionssoziologie,  Berlin,  1989,  op.  Cit.;  SIMMEL,  The
               philosophy of money, London, 1990, op. cit.
                  86  SINGH, Sovereign debt, op. cit., 239 (see also, in the present article, note 54).

                                                   118
   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27