On the issue of khalw.

The questioner : Shaykh, we say that when one gives khalw, they reduce the monthly rent... For example, instead of setting the rent at two thousand dinars, say, three thousand dinars a month, he takes an advance khalw and sets the rent at five hundred dinars. So, financially speaking, is it the same thing?

The Shaykh : It is not the same thing.

The questioner : Yes?

The Shaykh : It is not the same thing. If it were the same thing, it would be mere "going in circles." But it is not the same thing. The evidence is that if it were the same thing, let us do an approximate calculation. If the khalw is added to the rent, and the rent is, for example, five hundred, what would the rent become? One thousand, is that not so? For example.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, why doesn't he rent it in advance and say, "This is the rent for the property"? If it is like the other, why doesn't he do it that way?

The questioner : ... He takes the capital at the beginning and invests it elsewhere.

The Shaykh : There is also an answer to this.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : He takes the capital and receives the rent for five years.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : In advance, and this is perfectly halal, but no, they do not do it this way because their ultimate goal is to exploit people. And you probably know better than I do: when I rent this property from you and pay a khalw of five thousand, it is possible that one day I am forced to vacate this place. Either I vacate against my will and travel, or I move to another place, and you benefit from the khalw a second time. Or you say, "My brother, I paid you the khalw, so I must take the khalw now." Then the khalw I paid you, which was five thousand, will become ten thousand, and this will become a cause of dispute between the lessor and the lessee. But if the matter were clear and explicit, "My brother, the rent for the property is so much per year," then you could make it a lease for a period of five years or one year. When the five years are up, we can continue at this rate of rent, or increase or decrease it according to what we agree upon. If people did it this way, they would be saved from many, many problems and disputes. Therefore, do not imagine that the issue is the same, whether one takes a khalw and reduces the rent, or takes a higher rent but does not take a khalw; they are not the same. We have this problem in the Levant, perhaps like you or more than you. So, after thinking about the issue, some people said to me: "We take a khalw as a precaution, because this man might do whatever he wants with this property, and then he wants to hand the property over to another man, and the law helps him. And at that point, I am left outside. So I control him before he controls me, so I impose this khalw on him. And then, if he is able to overcome it under the existing system—which is, of course, not Islamic—I will have secured some comfort for myself in advance."
The Shaykh : In summary: the issue is clearer than it needs to be discussed. Because when you call it "khalw" and it is not khalw, what is the value of something that is nothing? What is the value of something that is nothing? The rent is what enables the lessee to benefit from it. So either we say that the rent does not enable the one who pays it to benefit from the vacancy of the property, and this is false speech, or we say—and this is the truth—that the khalw is not the price of benefiting from this vacancy, because we obtained it through the lease. So it is certainly, except in the first case, from the category of .