What is the ruling on employee associations?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Shaykh, for example, ten brothers might gather, each paying fifty dinars in a mutual fund. So, for instance, the amount would be five hundred dinars. This one gets it first, then this one, then this one. Is this practice prescribed, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : I do not see it as prescribed, because it leads to excessive uncertainty in a contract. It leads to gambling. For example, ten people participate, and each of them pays one hundred dinars at the end of the month. The first person takes one thousand dinars, right? For what reason? And how many unforeseen circumstances occur! He took the one thousand dinars in exchange for what? In exchange for one hundred, while the others lost. This is gambling, and therefore it is not permissible.
The questioner : Shaykh, what if it is taken from the perspective of...
The Shaykh : If it were for every question, there would be an answer, but the previous answer was based on the previous question...
The questioner : Shaykh, this is cooperation.
The Shaykh : Please, go ahead?
The questioner : Yes, Shaykh. I say this cooperation means there is no loss or profit, for example. Each person’s amount will come back. This one now, this one after a month, this one after two months, with the consent and agreement of everyone.
The Shaykh : Okay, I ask you now: Is it not possible that the self might have a share in such a partnership? Say it plainly...
The questioner : From what...?
The Shaykh : For example, I participate with you, Zayd, and Bakr, ten people. When I receive the one thousand dinars, by Allah, this profit is the nearest path, and I turn my back and leave. Could this happen, or is it not possible?
The questioner : Yes, it is possible.
The Shaykh : Okay, block the door.
The questioner : Okay, if it did not happen, they were trustworthy.
The Shaykh : Block the door. Where is the principle of blocking the means to harm? Whoever encircles the sanctuary is likely to fall into it. This is not permissible.
The questioner : Okay, another issue, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I do not see it as prescribed, because it leads to excessive uncertainty in a contract. It leads to gambling. For example, ten people participate, and each of them pays one hundred dinars at the end of the month. The first person takes one thousand dinars, right? For what reason? And how many unforeseen circumstances occur! He took the one thousand dinars in exchange for what? In exchange for one hundred, while the others lost. This is gambling, and therefore it is not permissible.
The questioner : Shaykh, what if it is taken from the perspective of...
The Shaykh : If it were for every question, there would be an answer, but the previous answer was based on the previous question...
The questioner : Shaykh, this is cooperation.
The Shaykh : Please, go ahead?
The questioner : Yes, Shaykh. I say this cooperation means there is no loss or profit, for example. Each person’s amount will come back. This one now, this one after a month, this one after two months, with the consent and agreement of everyone.
The Shaykh : Okay, I ask you now: Is it not possible that the self might have a share in such a partnership? Say it plainly...
The questioner : From what...?
The Shaykh : For example, I participate with you, Zayd, and Bakr, ten people. When I receive the one thousand dinars, by Allah, this profit is the nearest path, and I turn my back and leave. Could this happen, or is it not possible?
The questioner : Yes, it is possible.
The Shaykh : Okay, block the door.
The questioner : Okay, if it did not happen, they were trustworthy.
The Shaykh : Block the door. Where is the principle of blocking the means to harm? Whoever encircles the sanctuary is likely to fall into it. This is not permissible.
The questioner : Okay, another issue, Shaykh.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.