Fulus is halal. It is known in the Fiqh and in the practice of the first Muslim communities (the Umayyads, who first minted Dinar and Dirham also minted fulus). We know its functions and its limitations in detail.

The name fulus comes from “follis” (plural folles),  a coin made of bronze from the Roman and Byzantine tradition. Equally, the Arabic name Dirham comes from the Persian “drachma” (silver coin), and the Dinar from the Latin “denarius” (also a silver coin) although they were initially imitations of the Byzantine solidus which circulated in the Arabian Peninsula. The Roman word “follis” means bag (usually made of leather), which refers to a sealed bag used in antiquity containing a specific amount of coins.

The Byzantian follis around the early 7th century (our Hijra) was regularly made of bronze but the size of the coins changed almost with every new issue and every Mint house. 1 Follis was also known as 40 nummi and there were several denominations in use: 1 follis, Half follis, Decanummium (1/4 follis), Pentanummium (1/8 follis) and the nummus (1/40 follis). The follis had a fiduciary value dependent on the gold solidus (unlike our fulus which was dependent of the silver dirham). Its value was: 420 folles to 1 solidus. The solidus of Byzantium was roughly 4.48 grams. But the solidus used for trading in the Near East (with a start both on obverse and reverse) was reduced by one siliqua* and weighed about 4.25 gr. produced in high fineness (generally .900 to .950, the best they could), slightly lower than the one from the capital (generally .950 to .980). The size and weight of the folles varies. Every mint seemed to have had their own standard which also changed with time both in weight and size (from 27mm the largest to the 15mm the smallest, generally they become smaller with the time). The lack of standard did not affect their functionality because the folles had a fiduciary value (no intrinsic value) and had a limited territorial use.

In the Islamic practice, unlike the Dinar and Dirham fulus is not money.

Fulus is not accepted to pay zakat, nor to make or repay for a loan. Its function is merely to serve as smaller denominations (small cash) for payments or fractions of payments which value might be lower than the value of our lowest coin, that is (usually), the 1 dirham. The 1 dirham is about 2.975 grams, but to make a payment of a 100th of a dirham, you will need to make a 1/100th dirham coin of 0.029 grams and that is too small to be practical. For that purpose the fulus was established.

Fulus has no standards and they have ONLY a local use, meaning that different cities had different type of fulus (this is known in the Fiqh). The weight of the fulus ranges from 1.71 to 5.04 grams. It does not matter. Fulus can be made of any material (every city might choose its own material) including copper, aluminium, bronzes or even paper. This choice belongs to the different regional mints. According to World Islamic Mint, the world regulatory body of the Shariah currency:

Following the known practice of the Muslim tradition, WIM will not create universal standards for  fulus. The use and establishment of fulus' standards will be confined to the choices of each different regional Mint. Thus we consciously limit the use of the fulus.

Fulus should be established by local authorities and serve the purpose of that community only. Thus, its functionality is kept low as it should be. If the authorities in a particular territory decide to mint 1/3 dirham for example, I think the value of the local highest fulus should be lower than the 1/3 dirham.

The minting of smaller denominations of the Dirham does not replace the fulus

A daniq dirham or 1/6 of 1 dirham has been minted in Indonesia. The smallest denominations we found in Al-Andalus are the half dirham and 1/3 dirham coins, although they are rare they were in circulation. I am not aware of anything smaller than the 1/3 dirham, although it is known that Muslims have cut coins in order to make smaller payments, but this is a different affair than minting coins of smaller size. To mint the daniq is an acceptable choice but it does not replace the fulus, since there are payments still smaller than the daniq, and the idea of going any smaller than the daniq is completely impractical and from the point of view of the currency unnecessary. At the present time WIM does not support the minting or use in our system of any dirham denomination smaller than the 1 dirham.

A good choice which offers continuity with the tradition is to use copper alloys like bronzes, brasses or cupronickel for the minting of the fulus. Bronzes in particular have a proven long lasting durability. Cupronickels have a better resistance to oxidation and corrosion and has been the material of choice for many circulating modern coins. For a quick understanding on the metallurgic characteristics on the different copper alloys, their tensile strength and hardness check here [http://www.copper.org/resources/properties/703_5/703_5.html]. Any other choice is equally acceptable. The decision belongs to the local Mints and they will have to bear other criteria, specially the initial cost of production relative to small production and relative to the low retail price. It is perfectly acceptable that after a time the local Mints also decide to change the fulus standard into a complete new one. 

People who say that the fulus is the door to the return of paper money are wrong.

They misinterpret historical facts: paper money does not originate from fulus but from banking notes; they do not know or give no authority to the historical use of fulus by the first communities; and ignore or are ignorant of the rulings of the Fiqh restricting any possibility of fulus becoming money. Anyone suggesting that the community in South Africa are trying to return to paper money by printing fulus on paper is simply intentionally malicious.

When is the right moment to introduce fulus? Obviously, the answer is after the introduction of the Dinar and the Dirham (the Shariah currency). But the key moment to introduce fulus is related to the pricing of the goods in Dinar and Dirham in the market.

On the beginning most shops will accept Dinar and Dirham by converting their value into local currency. Then some of the shops may start to price some of their articles in both local currency and Shariah currency. Eventually we will have shops that only price in Dinar and Dirham. These changes will happen gradually as the number of customers using Shariah currency increases. It will happen naturally. When the first shops start to price their products in Dinar and Dirham, that will the moment for fulus; and vice versa, the introduction of fulus will encourage shops to price in Dinar and Dirhams.

The reason why the introduction of fulus has a great political significance is because it represents the TOTAL DEPARTURE from present legal tender currencies.

The recent announcement of Shaykh  Dr. Abdalqadir As-Sufi  regarding the introduction of fulus in South Africa is an indication to move into that direction as soon as possible. I had the honor of discussing these matters with my Shaykh in many occasions at a time when hardly anybody talked about fulus, and he is aware of what the introduction of fulus means politically. His announcement is perfectly timed given our developments in South East Asia. I have been recently questioning myself when will be the appropriate moment to push forward with the fulus and his announcement has encouraged me to urgently initiate the preparations for its production over here.

Shaykh Abdalqadir's choice to print fulus in paper was originally mine. It is certainly a matter of choice which in this case has the initial advantage of lower technical requirements and lower cost for small production of fulus. One has to consider the relatively high initial costs of producing dies, the tax issues on coins, and the "critical" relative impact of minting costs on the price of copper or bronze coins which must come to the market at a fix and very low price. The use of paper to manufacture fulus is a low technology, low cost solution which could be ideal in some places in their initial development stage. In terms of functionality the material is irrelevant.

May Allah guide us to the Sirat Al Mustaqueem. He is the best of all Guidance and He gives it to whoever He wishes. May Allah forgive our shortcomings and accept our return to Him in Tawba. Ameen.

Umar Vadillo