Adapting Islamic Law Disputes to Fair Division in Microeconomics: An Axiomatic Analysis of Three Problems

Abstract

This study explores the intersection of microeconomic theory and Islamic jurisprudence. We analyze three legal disputes from Islamic history that can be conceived as fair division problems in microeconomics. The solutions proposed by jurists of that time are scrutinized and compared with answers posited by classical division rules. The effected comparisons highlight the similarities and differences between Islamic and conventional economic resolutions. We use the axiomatic approach to define generalizable rules based on the solutions offered by eminent Islamic jurists Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf. Our analysis reveals that Abu Hanifa’s methodology and the concede-and-divide rule are identical. Moreover, Abu Yusuf’s approach mirrors the constrained Ibn Ezra rule. We examine the principles characterizing the concede-and-divide and Ibn Ezra rules and find these doctrines compatible with Islamic tenets. In conclusion, our study connects Islamic law with microeconomic theory through its unique exploration of legal disputes perceived through the lens of fair division problems. Our findings contribute to the scholarly understanding of how established division rules can be adapted to align with Islamic values and how Islamic allocation methods can be illustrated using an axiomatic approach.

Keywords

• Islamic law
• microeconomics
• fair division
• Abu Hanifa
• Abu Yusuf
• Ibn Ezra

İslam Hukuku’ndan Paylaşım Meselelerinin Mikroiktisatın Adil Paylaşım Alanına Uyarlanması: Üç Problemin Aksiyomatik Analizi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada İslam tarihinden alınan üç mesele mikroiktisatın işbirlikçi oyun teorisi bağlamında adil paylaşım problemi olarak modellenmektedir. Meselelere dönemin hukukçularının sundukları çözümler ile klasik paylaşım kuralları aksiyomatik karakterizasyon yöntemiyle kıyaslanmıştır. Bu kıyaslamayla beraber adil paylaşım aksiyomlarının İslamiliği incelenmiştir. Aksiyomatik yaklaşımla, ünlü İslam hukukçuları Ebu Hanife’nin ve Ebu Yusuf’un belirli bir mesele için önerdikleri çözümler genelleştirilerek kural haline getirilmiştir. Ebu Hanife’nin Münazaa Yöntemi adını verdiğimiz dağıtım yöntemi ile Talmud’ta bahsi geçen Vazgeçileni-ver-kalanı-böl Kuralı’nın; Ebu Yusuf Kuralı diye adlandırdığımız dağıtım yöntemi ile Sınırlandırılmış İbn Ezra Kuralı’nın aksiyomatik olarak eş oldukları tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak bu makale, ilgili mikroiktisat literatürüne İslam hukuku meselelerini ve dağıtım yöntemlerini tanıtır, literatürde yerleşik kural haline gelmiş kurallar için İslami temeller gösterir, dönemin fakihlerinin sunduğu çözümlerin adilliğini aksiyomlar vasıtasıyla ölçmeye çalışır.

Keywords

• İslam hukuku
• mikroiktisat
• adil paylaşım
• Ebu Hanife
• Ebu Yusuf
• İbn Ezra

References

1. Ajetunmobi, M. A. (1988). “Collection and Review of Cases of Al-’awl (Pro-Rata Reduction) in Shari’ah Law of Succession.” Islamic Studies, 27, 209-219. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20839895. google scholar
2. Alcalde, J., Marco, M.d.C. and Silva, J.A. (2008). The minimal overlap rule revisited, Social Choice and Welfare, 109-128, https://wwwjstor.org/stable/41107912. google scholar
3. Al-Khuwarizmi, (1938). The Algebra of Inheritance, çev. S. Gandz, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science Society, s. 328. google scholar
4. Ahangar, M.A.H. (2002). Islamic Law of Inheritance: Some Misconceptions in Mimi Kamariah Majid’s Family Law in Malaysia, IIUM Law Journal, google scholar
5. Arikewuyo, N.A. (2023). Literalism Versus Rationalism In The House of Islam: A Case Study of Islamic Law of Succession, International Journal of Fiqh and Usul al-Fiqh Studies, 7(1), 57-67, https://journals.iium.edu.my/al-fiqh/index.php/al-fiqh/article/view/286. google scholar
6. Aumann, R. J. & Maschler, M. (1985). Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud. Journal of Economic Theory, 36, 195-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4896(82)90029-4. google scholar
7. Barnes, T.J. (1988). Rationality and relativism in economic geography: an interpretive review of the homo economicus assumption. Progress in Human Geography, 12(4), 473-496. https://doi. org/10.1177/03091325880120040. google scholar
8. Bergantinos, G., & Moreno-Ternero, J. D. (2020). Sharing the revenues from broadcasting sport events. Management Science, 66, 2417-2431. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3313. google scholar

9. Bowen, J. (1998). “You May Not Give It Away”: How Social Norms Shape Islamic Law in Contemporary Indonesian Jurisprudence, Islamic Law and Society, 5(3), 382-408, https://www. jstor.org/stable/3399265. google scholar
10. Chatterjee, S., Ertemel, S. & Kumar, R. (2023). Rationing rules for risky claims. Journal of Mathematical Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmateco.2023.102868 google scholar
11. Cici, R. (2005). “Osmanlı klâsik dönemi fıkıh kitapları”. Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi, 5, 215-248. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/652332 google scholar
12. Cilardo, A. (2012). The Early History of Ismaili Jurisprudence: Law Under the Fatimids, Bloomsbury Publishing, New York, NY. google scholar
13. Coulson, N. J. (1971). Succession in the Muslim family. Cambridge University Press. google scholar
14. Dagan, N. (1996). New characterizations of old bankruptcy rules. Social Choice and Welfare, 13, 51-59. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41106151. google scholar
15. De Frutos, M. A. (1999). Coalitional manipulations in a bankruptcy problem. Review of Economic Design, 4, 255-272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100580050037. google scholar
16. Doğan, B., & Ertemel, S. (2023). Miras hukuku sistemlerinde bir iflas problemi uyarlaması: İslam miras hukuku örneği. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (55), 415-428. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1117221 google scholar
17. Döndüren, H. (1991). “Avl”. TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi, IV, 117-118. google scholar
18. El-Mergînânî, B. (2013). El-Hidâye, çev. A. Meylani. Kahraman Yayınları. google scholar
19. Engle, E. (2021). The history of the general principle of proportionality: An overview. Dartmouth LJ, 10, 1-11. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1431179 google scholar
20. Ertemel, S., & Kumar, R. (2018). Proportional rules for state contingent claims. International Journal of Game Theory, 47, 229-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00182-017-0585-7 google scholar
21. Furqani, H. (2018). Defining Islamic Economics: Scholars’ Approach, Clarifying The Nature, Scope and Subject-Matter of The Discipline, Turkish Journal of Islamic Economics, 69-93, https://doi. org/10.26414/m025. google scholar
22. Gandz, S. (1938). The Algebra of Inheritance: A Rehabilitation of Al-Khuwarizmi, Osiris, 5, 319-391, http://www.jstor.org/stable/301569. google scholar
23. Ginsburgh, V. and Zang, I. (2001). Sharing The Income of a Museum Pass Program, Museum Management and Curatorship, 19(4), 371-383, https://doi.org/10.1080/09647770100501904. google scholar
24. Haneef, M. (1997). Islam, The Islamic Worldview, and Islamic Economics. IIUM Journal of Economics and Management, 5(1), 39-66. https://journals.iium.edu.my/enmjournal/index.php/enmj/article/ view/30. google scholar
25. Hasan, Zubair (1988): Distributional equity in Islam. Published in: Munawar Iqbal ( Ed.): Distributive justice and need fulfillment in an Islamic Economy (1988): pp. 35-62. google scholar
26. Herrero, ve Villar, A. (2001). The three musketeers: four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems. google scholar
27. Mathematical Social Sciences, 42,307-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4896(01)00075-0 google scholar
28. Hocaeminefendizade, A.H. (2020). Dürerü’l-hükkâm 3serhu Mecelleti’l-ahkâm, Cilt 1, Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı Yayınları, İstanbul. google scholar
29. Hougaard, J. L. (2009). An introduction to allocation rules. Springer Science & Business Media. google scholar
30. Islam, S. (2019). Development of Muslim Law of Succession, International Journal of Management, Technology, and Social Sciences (IJMTS), 4(1), http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3238308. google scholar
31. Kamali, M.H. (2015). Qawa ‘id al-fiqh: The legal maxims of Islamic law, Routledge, New York, NY. google scholar
32. Kaminski, M. M. (2000). “Hydraulic” rationing. Mathematical Social Sciences, 40, 131-155. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4896(99)00045-1 google scholar
33. Karaman, H. (1987). Mukayeseli İslam Hukuku. İstanbul: Nesil Yayınları ve Seydişehri, İslam Miras Hukuku, s. 32. google scholar
34. Khadduri, M. (1953-1954). Nature and sources of Islamic law, George Washington Law Review, 21(1), 3-23, https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/gwlr22&div=10&id=&page=. google scholar
35. Kızılkaya, N. (2021). Legal Maxims in Islamic Law: Concept, History and Application. Brill - Nijhoff, Leiden. google scholar
36. Littlechild, S. C., & Owen, G. (1973). A Simple Expression for the Shapely Value in a Special Case. Management Science, 20(3), 370-372. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2629727 google scholar
37. Lowell, E. (1895). General Average: “Qui Sentit Commodum Sentire Debet et Onus”, Harvard Law Review, 185-197, https://doi.org/10.2307/1321668. google scholar
38. Moulin, H. (1985). Egalitarianism and utilitarianism in quasi-linear bargaining. Econometrica, 53, 49-67. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911723. google scholar
39. Moulin, H. (1987). Equal or proportional division of a surplus, and other methods. International Journal of Game Theory, 16, 161-186. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01756289. google scholar
40. Moulin, H. (2002). Axiomatic cost and surplus sharing. K. Arrow, A. K. Sen ve K. Suzumura (Eds.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare Volumes 1, (Amsterdam: North Holland), s. 300. google scholar
41. Musa, K. (2014). Legal Maxims as a Genre of Islamic Law: Origins, Development and Significance of Al-Qawaid al-Fiqhiyya, Islamic Law and Society, 21(4), 325-365, https://doi.org/10.1163/15685195-00214p01. google scholar
42. O’Neill, B. (1982). A problem of rights arbitration from the Talmud. Mathematical Social Sciences., 2, 345-371. google scholar
43. Kahf, M. (2019). Methodology of Islamic Economics, Routledge, London. google scholar
44. Pathak, P. A., Sönmez, T., Ünver, M. U., & Yenmez, M. B. (2021, July). Fair allocation of vaccines, ventilators and antiviral treatments: leaving no ethical value behind in health care rationing. Health Economics. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4265 google scholar
45. Powers, D.S. (1993). The Islamic Inheritance System: A Socio-Historical Approach, Arab Law Quarterly, 8(1), 13-29, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3381490. google scholar
46. Rabinovitch, N. (1973). Probability and Statistical Inference in Ancient and Medieval Jewish Literature, University of Toronto Press, Toronto. google scholar
47. Saiti, B. and Abdullah, A. (2016). The Legal Maxims of Islamic Law (Excluding Five Leading Legal Maxims) and Their Applications in Islamic Finance, Journal of King Abdulaziz University: Islamic Economics, 139-151, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3062121. google scholar
48. Serahsi, Mebsut, Cilt XXIIX, editör: Mustafa Cevat Akşit, İstanbul, Gümüşev Yayıncılık, 2008. google scholar
49. Shapley, L.S. (1953). A value for n-person games, Contributions to the Theory of Games, 2, 307-317, https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/papers/2021/P295.pdf. google scholar
50. Siddiqi, M. N. (1992). Some notes on teaching economics in an Islamic framework. In S. Tahir, A. Ghazali, and S. O. S. Agil (Eds.), Readings in microeconomics: An Islamic perspective (pp. 1-30). Malaysia: Longman Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. google scholar
51. Seydişehri, M. E. B. (1994). Delilleriyle İslam Miras Hukuku, çev. İ. H. Uca. İstanbul: Esra Yayınları. google scholar
52. Taqiyuddin, H. (2021). The Justice Dimensions in the Provision of Al-Awl on Islamic Inheritance Law, Journal for Integrative Islamic Studies, 7(2), 135-146, https://ijmmu.com/index.php/ijmmu/ article/view/338. google scholar
53. Thomson, W. (2003). Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: an update. Mathematical Social Sciences, 45, 249-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4896(03)00012-2 google scholar
54. Thomson, W. (2019). How to divide when there isn’t enough: from Aristotle, the Talmud, and Maimonides to the axiomatics of resource allocation. Cambridge University Press. google scholar
55. Uzunçarşılı, İsmail Hakkı: Osmanlı Devleti’nin ilmiye teşkilâtı, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi 1965. google scholar
56. van der Waerden, B.L. (2013). A History of Algebra: From al-Khwarizmi to Emmy Noether, Springer Science & Business Media, New York, NY. google scholar
57. Vanlıoğlu, Hüsameddin, Fatih Kalender, Abdullah Hiçdönmez, Emin Ali Yüksel, Siraciyye Tercümesi Feraiz İslam Miras Hukuku ( Geniş İzahlı ve Şemalı), İsmailağa Yayınları, İstanbul, 2020. google scholar
58. Yazıcı, A. (2013). Fıkıhta Meşhur Bir Miras Meselesi Olarak Avliyye: Avl Halleri, Kaynağı ve Çözümlerinin Değerlendirilmesi, İstanbul Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 29. google scholar
59. Yenice, A. C. (2020). Homoeconomicus’ tan Homoislamicus’a: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Araştırma. International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance Studies, 6(2), 138-155. https://doi. org/10.25272/ijisef.751251 google scholar
60. Young, H. P. (1987). On dividing an amount according to individual claims or liabilities. Mathematics of Operations Research, 12, 398-414. https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.12.3.398 google scholar