AbstrakDiskursus mengenai riba seolah tidak pernah ada titik akhirnya. Sejak dari masa Sahabat, hingga ulama kontemporer. Terlebih lagi ketika muncul ketika muncul lembaga perbankan berbasiskan syari’ah, yang pendiriannya, salah satunya disebabkan oleh adanya interpretasi dari kelompok ulama konservatif yang memandang bahwa operasional bank konvensional yang berdasarkan bunga adalah haram, karena sama dengan riba. Sedangkan para ulama modernis, yang menganggap bunga bank konvensional tidaklah bisa dihukumi sebagai riba, sebab bagi mereka, wacana riba harus didudukkan terlebih dahulu ke dalam konteks kekinian dan kemaslahatan umat saat ini. Menurut pandangan Ulama Modernis seperti Abdullah Saeed, bahwa riba yang diharamkan Islam adalah riba yang menyebabkan ketidakadilan, dengan berpijak pada statemen lā taźlimūna wa lā tuźlāmūn, dan berimplikasi pada bolehnya bunga bank, yang menurutnya tidak meninbulkan akibat seburuk itu. Sedangkan menurut Yûsuf Al-Qaradhāwi, penjelasan riba sudah selesai, yaitu seperti yang dijelaskan dalam nash, setiap penambahan pada pokok pinjaman dikarenakan adanya penangguhan waktu pembayaran,yang ditetapkan sebelumnya. implikasinya, bunga bank adalah sama dengan riba, yaitu haram, karena jelas-jelas terdapat tambahan selain nilai pokoknya. hal ini sesuai dengan statemen dalam Al-Qur’an fa lakûm ru’ūsu amwālikû. Baginya, tambahan sedikit atau banyak itu tetap riba, karena yang banyak dilarang secara mutlak, sedangkan yang sedikit dilarang karena akan menjadi jalan kepada riba yang besar.Kata Kunci : Riba, Bunga Ba.nk, Keadilan dan Ulama Abstract The discourse on usury as if there never was an end. Since from the time of Companions, until contemporary scholar. Moreover, when it appeared when it emerged shariah-based banking institutions, the establishment, one of which is caused by the interpretation of a group of conservative scholars who believe that conventional bank operations are based interest is haram, because together with usury. It is certainly contrary to the views of modernist scholars, who consider the interest of conventional banks can not be judged as usury, because for them, the discourse of usury to be seated prior to the current context and the benefit of the people today. From the research found an answer to the problems that were examined, that in the view of Abdullah Saeed, that usury is forbidden Islam is usury that causes injustice, the basis of the statement la taźlimūna wa la tuźlāmūn, and implications for the bank interest, which he did not caused due to bad it. Meanwhile, according to Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an explanation of usury has been completed, ie as described in the texts, any additions to the loan principal due to the suspension of the payment period, which is predetermined. implications, bank interest is the same as usury, which is forbidden, because obviously there is in addition to their principal amount. this is in accordance with the statements in the Qur'an fa Lakkum ru'ūsu amwālikû. For him, the extra bit or a lot of it still usury, because of which many are prohibited absolutely, while the bit is prohibited because it would be a great way to usury.Keywords: Usury, Interest, Justice and Scholars