 We shall continue with our conversation on criticisms on Islamic modes of finance. We have already considered quite a few criticisms and have come up with some responses, some favorable responses and some not very favorable responses. In this module, we shall spend a little time on this criticism which is on this trading aspect of Islamic banks and Islamic financial institutions. According to this criticism, there is no real trading that takes place in Islamic banking and finance. Contrary to the claim by Islamic banks, they say it is all about money lending. This is a very strong criticism on Islamic banking and finance and we would see whether this is valid. Now before we go into details, I must say that even myself, an advocate and an expert of Islamic banking and finance, I get irritated when a practitioner, when an Islamic banker tries to tell me that as a bank, they are involved in trading. I know that they are not involved in trading in the sense of a trader. Their involvement in trading is for a reason. So, I am inclined to accept this criticism with some reservation. So, I would say this criticism is true to a large extent. This is true that trading takes place in the context of Islamic banking and finance. But the intention is always to create a structure which is Sharia compliant for financing. So, intention is good as well. Previously, we have looked into intentions. I am not questioning the Sharia authenticity of the intention. Intention is right as well. But what is that intention for? That is for financing, not for trading. Yes, trading takes place. So, at best what we can say is that Islamic banks merely finance trading and they do not intend to do trading even if they happen to be involved. So, at best the practitioners of Islamic banking and finance, they can claim that they are involved in trade financing. Not trade financing in the sense of trade finance product, but they are involved in financing trading. So, differentiating between trade financing and financing trading could be possible by way of saying that we are involved in financing trading and we are actually not traders. An Islamic bank, whether it happens to be in Pakistan, in Saudi Arabia, in Djibouti or wherever, they cannot claim to be traders because the regulators, they do not like this idea of banks trading in commodities, trading in cars, trading in homes, etc. They allow Islamic banks to get involved in a trading process if they are convinced, i.e. the regulators are convinced that Islamic banks' role is merely financing of this deal and not to do the trading per se. There are some countries where Islamic banks are actually involved in actual trading but strictly speaking, even when we look at those practices, it is not the bank which is doing trading, it is a subsidiary of the bank. As I mentioned previously, Kuwait Finance House has got the dealership of Lexus and Toyota in Kuwait. So, whenever a customer comes to a KFH branch looking for car financing, they ask them, what kind of car are you looking for? So, I want to buy a Lexus. They say, go to our Lexus leadership and they would sell it to you on a murabha basis. So, again, that Lexus dealership owned by Kuwait Finance House is involved in trading, not Kuwait Finance House as a bank. Kuwait Finance House as a bank provides financing for that trade deal. KFH subsidiary does that trading. Similarly, if a bank in Pakistan is involved in murabha trading, the murabha trading effectively is taking place between this vendor and with this customer. Of course, there is a role for the bank either directly or through an agency contract whereby it facilitates this trade. That role must be recognized but at best Islamic banks are financiers of trading and not the traders by themselves.