The Ruling on the Contract of Lease Ending in Ownership
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The questioner asks: What is the ruling on the contract of lease ending in ownership? We must define its form.
The Shaykh : Because people have differed in describing it to me, so we must know what its form is? Who knows? What Allah willed, are you a merchant? Please, go ahead.
The questioner : This one here is a merchant.
The Shaykh : One hundred and forty? Yes, indeed.
The questioner : Okay, how does he lease it to its owner while he himself is in prayer?
The Shaykh : But if the one using the car now does not own it. There is a difference between the lawful and the forbidden; we say this form is forbidden, and there is no doubt in it.
Because it is never possible for two guarantees to exist in one item. Here, the one who takes the cigarette guarantees it with the guarantee of a buyer-owner and the guarantee of a lessee. There is a difference between the guarantee of the lessee and the guarantee of the owner. The owner guarantees his property if it is lost, whether he transgressed or not, or whether he was negligent or not. The lessee does not guarantee it unless he transgresses or is negligent. Better than that is to say: "O so-and-so, take this car for a rent of two months, three years, or two years. Take it for rent, and when the lease ends, I will take the rent from you, and you will send back the car. The rent is known and the work is known. When the period is completed, you are the one who has the right to take it if you want to take it; there is nothing wrong with that."
The questioner : The important thing is, may Allah reward you with good, you explained it to us. I say this form was mentioned in two ways. The first way is that the car owner gives it to the man and says: "Take this car for a rent of three years, so much each year or so much each month. And when the rent is completed, I have taken the full rent and you used the car according to the contract."
The Shaykh : So you have the choice, you have the choice, you have the choice. If you wish, take it for its value, and I give you time; I do not want to upset you now. And if you wish, do not take it. This is fine with me, because when the period is completed, it is a clear and explicit lease contract with a lessor and a lessee. This is one permissible case. The second is that you sold it to me now and leased it to me for three years, and when the rent is completed, I take it as I forced you to do first. This is not permissible, and no one who smells the scent of the festival says it is permissible. Because combining two contradictory guarantees is not permissible. This is based on the fact that some scholars say that combining two contracts in one contract is forbidden because it is like two sales in one sale.
The Shaykh : Because people have differed in describing it to me, so we must know what its form is? Who knows? What Allah willed, are you a merchant? Please, go ahead.
The questioner : This one here is a merchant.
The Shaykh : One hundred and forty? Yes, indeed.
The questioner : Okay, how does he lease it to its owner while he himself is in prayer?
The Shaykh : But if the one using the car now does not own it. There is a difference between the lawful and the forbidden; we say this form is forbidden, and there is no doubt in it.
Because it is never possible for two guarantees to exist in one item. Here, the one who takes the cigarette guarantees it with the guarantee of a buyer-owner and the guarantee of a lessee. There is a difference between the guarantee of the lessee and the guarantee of the owner. The owner guarantees his property if it is lost, whether he transgressed or not, or whether he was negligent or not. The lessee does not guarantee it unless he transgresses or is negligent. Better than that is to say: "O so-and-so, take this car for a rent of two months, three years, or two years. Take it for rent, and when the lease ends, I will take the rent from you, and you will send back the car. The rent is known and the work is known. When the period is completed, you are the one who has the right to take it if you want to take it; there is nothing wrong with that."
The questioner : The important thing is, may Allah reward you with good, you explained it to us. I say this form was mentioned in two ways. The first way is that the car owner gives it to the man and says: "Take this car for a rent of three years, so much each year or so much each month. And when the rent is completed, I have taken the full rent and you used the car according to the contract."
The Shaykh : So you have the choice, you have the choice, you have the choice. If you wish, take it for its value, and I give you time; I do not want to upset you now. And if you wish, do not take it. This is fine with me, because when the period is completed, it is a clear and explicit lease contract with a lessor and a lessee. This is one permissible case. The second is that you sold it to me now and leased it to me for three years, and when the rent is completed, I take it as I forced you to do first. This is not permissible, and no one who smells the scent of the festival says it is permissible. Because combining two contradictory guarantees is not permissible. This is based on the fact that some scholars say that combining two contracts in one contract is forbidden because it is like two sales in one sale.
Source
قناة «فضيلة الشيخ محمد بن صالح العثيمين»، [228] حكم عقد التأجير المنتهي بالتمليك - ابن عثيمين — youtube.com
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.