What is the ruling on the following transaction: A client comes to the Islamic bank and says to them

Another questioner: Murabahah.

Another questioner: Murabahah, a man who works in financing.

The questioner: O Shaykh, one of the sales that Islamic banks are currently dealing in is that we have the Kuwaiti House of Finance and the sale of murabahah.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner: And their method proceeds as follows.

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The questioner: That the client comes to the Islamic bank.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: And says: I have found, for example, a specific item, such as a car.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner: At such-and-such company, and the company is offering it for sale for an amount of two thousand dinars.

The Shaykh : In cash?

The questioner: In cash.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner: And I want you to buy it and sell it to me for a fixed term, and I will pay you, for example, a down payment of part of the amount, and the rest will be in installments to be paid off after three or four years.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: An amount greater than the amount for which it was purchased.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: Is this permissible in the Shari'ah?

Another questioner: O Shaykh, this, with your pardon, falls under goods, of course.

Another questioner: Commodities.

The Shaykh: Meaning the exit... the issue has multiple forms.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Yes.
You, in what you think. What did you call the house?

The questioner: The Kuwaiti House of Finance.

The Shaykh: This House of Finance.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: The car was valued at two thousand.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: In cash.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Okay; how much does the House of Finance buy this car from the agency for?

The questioner: For this amount, or perhaps it gets a discount and tells me that I have received a discount of, for example, one hundred dinars.

The Shaykh: Good; suppose it bought it for two thousand.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay?

The questioner: Good.

The Shaykh: How much does it sell the car to you for?

The questioner: For two thousand, let us suppose, plus five hundred dinars.

The Shaykh: Good, what is this five hundred dinars taken from you in exchange for?

The questioner: In exchange for this term.

The Shaykh: This is haram, this is riba, leave the House of Finance aside for now.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: You went directly to the company and said: I want this car, I will buy it. They said to you: Cash for two thousand, and installments with an increase of five hundred over two years. What is the ruling on this increase? Do you know it? Do you know the ruling? You do not know it, it is riba, it is riba, by his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): .
Meaning: the lesser of the two in price. If he takes the increased price, and this was first explained by one of the narrators of this hadith, which is by the text: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade two sales in one sale," and in another wording: "two transactions in one transaction." It was said to its narrator, Sammak ibn Harb: What are two sales in one sale? He said: That you say: "I sell this to you for such-and-such in cash, and for such-and-such on credit."
"I sell this to you for such-and-such in cash, and for such-and-such on credit" this is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade when he forbade two sales in one sale. This hadith is known among the scholars, but they differed in its interpretation. The majority, unfortunately, interpreted it to mean that the prohibition is due to the ambiguity of the price between the two prices. And I believe this is an error; an error in understanding the hadith and in our look at the reality of those who trade with two sales in one sale.
As for the hadith, the first hadith I mentioned: clarifies that the 'illah (operative cause) is not the ambiguity of the price fluctuating between the installment price and the deferred price, but rather the 'illah is that there is riba. This is an important point you must know and memorize; meaning: the increased price is riba if he takes it. If he takes the first price, it is halal, and it is what Allah intended: . This is from the perspective of the Shari'ah meaning of: "He forbade two sales in one sale."
Then, if we come to reality, as we said earlier regarding the car issue; Zayd from among the people went to the company: I want this car. He said: Cash for two thousand, and credit for two years for two thousand plus five hundred. What will happen is one of two things, without doubt and without any doubt; either he pays the two thousand in cash and takes the car, or he does not pay in cash, but perhaps only the first installment can be paid, or perhaps he pays nothing until after a week or... according to what they agree upon; at that time, they record "bills of exchange" as they say, or "notes" or something similar. Where is the ambiguity in the price? There is no ambiguity in the price; they separated with a clear price; especially in the first case, when the cash price was offered to him, he said to him: Please. Where is the ambiguity? And in the other case, also, when he did not pay the price in cash but rather recorded it and took his address and phone number and so on, where is the ambiguity in the price?
The truth is, I am amazed at the contemporary scholars today, how they justify this hadith that the prohibition in it is due to the ambiguity fluctuating between the two prices. It is not known on what they separated; no, it is known with certainty that they separated either on the cash price that he paid to the merchant, or the installment price that they agreed to pay him in separate periods. So, there is nothing in the hadith, neither from the perspective of combining the texts nor from the perspective of reality, that indicates that the prohibition of two sales in one sale is due to the ambiguity of the price on which they separated.
If we know this issue with its Shari'ah evidence, and it becomes clear to us that the merchant is not allowed to take five hundred dinars here as an increase in exchange for what? The patience in fulfilling the obligation of the buyer; so, when a bank from the banks called today Islamic banks enters as an intermediary; what is the difference between taking this increase, whether the merchant who owns the car agency eats it as riba, or the intermediary, which is the bank? A cycle and a twist to make permissible what Allah has forbidden of riba.
Is this the last question?

The questioner: No, there is, O Shaykh, a question...

The Shaykh: ... O Abu 'Abdullah.