The Ruling on the Sale of a Deposit
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner:
He says: Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, what is the stronger position regarding the deposit? And is what people do today what the jurists stipulate, because they say that the stipulation of the deposit is: if you take the item sold, you complete the price, otherwise it is yours. But what people do today is that they take it without consent. But what people do today is that they take it without consent.
The Shaykh:
How do we change it?
The questioner:
Without the consent of the one who gave the deposit.
The Shaykh:
Yes, what is stipulated for the one who gives the deposit. If he buys an item and says to me, "I have the option," and says, "I don't want you to keep the item idle for me, and then you say, 'I want you to pay some of the price.' If you finalize the sale, you complete the price for me. If you cancel the sale, the deposit is mine as compensation for the days you kept it idle and held the item." This is a matter of disagreement among the scholars. The majority hold that the sale of deposits is not valid.
They hold that the sale of deposits is not valid, and this is the position of the three Imams. Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) held, and this is a unique position of Imam Ahmad, that the sale of deposits is valid in the form we mentioned, because 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him).
Ordered his governor of Makkah to buy a house for a prison. So he bought the House of Consultation from Hakim ibn Hizam (may Allah be pleased with him). The governor of 'Umar in Makkah stipulated that he would consult 'Umar. If 'Umar was pleased, the sale would proceed. If he was not pleased, the governor would keep what he had taken as the deposit. When this reached 'Umar, he approved the sale and affirmed this transaction. This is the sale of the deposit, and it is evidence for its permissibility.
As for the hadith prohibiting the sale of deposits, this hadith is not authentic and does not serve as a basis for a ruling. And 'Umar did it, and 'Umar was a rightly guided Caliph in the era of the Companions. Indeed, its permissibility is established, and the interest of the people requires this. So the correct view is that the sale of deposits is permissible. If the sale is not completed, the deposit belongs to the owner of the item, as compensation for what he lost and for holding the item. Yes.
He says: Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success, what is the stronger position regarding the deposit? And is what people do today what the jurists stipulate, because they say that the stipulation of the deposit is: if you take the item sold, you complete the price, otherwise it is yours. But what people do today is that they take it without consent. But what people do today is that they take it without consent.
The Shaykh:
How do we change it?
The questioner:
Without the consent of the one who gave the deposit.
The Shaykh:
Yes, what is stipulated for the one who gives the deposit. If he buys an item and says to me, "I have the option," and says, "I don't want you to keep the item idle for me, and then you say, 'I want you to pay some of the price.' If you finalize the sale, you complete the price for me. If you cancel the sale, the deposit is mine as compensation for the days you kept it idle and held the item." This is a matter of disagreement among the scholars. The majority hold that the sale of deposits is not valid.
They hold that the sale of deposits is not valid, and this is the position of the three Imams. Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) held, and this is a unique position of Imam Ahmad, that the sale of deposits is valid in the form we mentioned, because 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him).
Ordered his governor of Makkah to buy a house for a prison. So he bought the House of Consultation from Hakim ibn Hizam (may Allah be pleased with him). The governor of 'Umar in Makkah stipulated that he would consult 'Umar. If 'Umar was pleased, the sale would proceed. If he was not pleased, the governor would keep what he had taken as the deposit. When this reached 'Umar, he approved the sale and affirmed this transaction. This is the sale of the deposit, and it is evidence for its permissibility.
As for the hadith prohibiting the sale of deposits, this hadith is not authentic and does not serve as a basis for a ruling. And 'Umar did it, and 'Umar was a rightly guided Caliph in the era of the Companions. Indeed, its permissibility is established, and the interest of the people requires this. So the correct view is that the sale of deposits is permissible. If the sale is not completed, the deposit belongs to the owner of the item, as compensation for what he lost and for holding the item. Yes.
Source
قناة «العلامة الدكتور صالح الفوزان»، 141/71 شرح زاد المستقنع/ صالح الفوزان — youtube.com (4:04)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.