What is the ruling on taking money in exchange for vacating a shop?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner: Your Eminence, regarding what is called "vacating a person," such as commercial establishments.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner: What is the ruling, or what is the ruling of the Shari'ah, in that matter?
The Shaykh: We have spoken about this issue repeatedly and over and over.
Another questioner: I mean, the vacating of the shop, the question?
The questioner: We did not hear it, I mean.
The Shaykh : No problem.
Vacating a person, as you say here, has two cases. The first case is that the place is actually vacated for the benefit of the requester, not for the benefit of the one being asked to vacate it; this is the first scenario. The other scenario is that the place is empty by nature, indeed it is newly built and no one has lived in it, so here there is no vacating; it is empty. The first issue differs from the second. In the first issue, any person who occupies or uses a place naturally benefits from it. So when a requester comes to him asking him to vacate this place for him, that means the benefit and usage that the person in the place was getting will transfer to that requester. This is permissible based on what they agree upon; because the place is something he benefits from, and if he vacates it for his requester, he must demand compensation for this vacating that enables him to rent another place; whether it is a house, a shop, or anything else. This is permissible, but with a condition: if the place belongs to the one who is vacating it—meaning he is its owner—there is no problem with this. But if he is a tenant, it is not permissible for him to vacate the place for this requester without the consent of the landlord, the owner. It is not hidden from you all that today, the dealings of Muslims with one another are often not within the limits of the Shari'ah, and many of the laws we have taken from the lands of disbelief and misguidance help them in this, despite the severe regret, without us considering the rulings of our Shari'ah. So with this condition as well, if the owner of the property agrees to allow the tenant of the property to vacate it for the requester, there is no harm in that.
We return to the second scenario: the property, the shop, is empty. This is one of the exposed fallacies, that it is "vacating a person." There is no person there to vacate this place. The place is not yet ready after its doors have been installed and its windows have been installed, and its owner and landlord announces that this place is ready for occupancy and negotiation with so-and-so. You go to so-and-so and he tells you: the vacating fee is such-and-such, and the annual rent is such-and-such. This is haram! A vacating fee for an empty place is a haram wage and forbidden. Why?
Until before this era in which Muslims were afflicted by imitating the Westerners blindly, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) pointed to that in the famous authentic hadith:, we take these laws and apply them to ourselves, although they are not suitable for us and not in proportion to our religion and our beliefs.
And I am pleased on this occasion that one of the writers there in Syria used to give an example whose point is that these Europeans, the laws they established are like clothes that are tailored to fit their bodies. Some of them are fat and tall, some are tall and thin, some are short and stocky, and so on. These clothes tailored to the proportions of their stature do not suit us, because our bodies are not their bodies. Even more so, those laws that were established for those poor disbelievers in legislation, because they have no Shari'ah, do not suit us, because we are rich with what Allah has legislated for us in our Book and in the hadith of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). This dealing called "vacating a person" or "vacating fee" among us in Syria, Muslims did not know it in the past. This is a disbeliever's European commodity, purely material, like the riba-based banks that exist today, which have filled the lands of Islam, despite the severe regret. All these transactions are not connected to Islam for any reason, but they are contrary to Islam. So when you pay rent for an empty place, why do you pay this rent? To benefit from this place which is empty. So what is the meaning of paying to benefit from the vacating of this place, which is something else, namely the vacating fee? So what is the rent in exchange for? If you say: the rent is in exchange for benefiting from this place and operating it, then what is the vacating fee in exchange for? If you say: the vacating fee is in exchange for benefiting from the emptiness of the place, then what is the rent in exchange for? It is completely clear that this is from the category of consuming the wealth of people unjustly.
The questioner : O Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner: What is the ruling, or what is the ruling of the Shari'ah, in that matter?
The Shaykh: We have spoken about this issue repeatedly and over and over.
Another questioner: I mean, the vacating of the shop, the question?
The questioner: We did not hear it, I mean.
The Shaykh : No problem.
Vacating a person, as you say here, has two cases. The first case is that the place is actually vacated for the benefit of the requester, not for the benefit of the one being asked to vacate it; this is the first scenario. The other scenario is that the place is empty by nature, indeed it is newly built and no one has lived in it, so here there is no vacating; it is empty. The first issue differs from the second. In the first issue, any person who occupies or uses a place naturally benefits from it. So when a requester comes to him asking him to vacate this place for him, that means the benefit and usage that the person in the place was getting will transfer to that requester. This is permissible based on what they agree upon; because the place is something he benefits from, and if he vacates it for his requester, he must demand compensation for this vacating that enables him to rent another place; whether it is a house, a shop, or anything else. This is permissible, but with a condition: if the place belongs to the one who is vacating it—meaning he is its owner—there is no problem with this. But if he is a tenant, it is not permissible for him to vacate the place for this requester without the consent of the landlord, the owner. It is not hidden from you all that today, the dealings of Muslims with one another are often not within the limits of the Shari'ah, and many of the laws we have taken from the lands of disbelief and misguidance help them in this, despite the severe regret, without us considering the rulings of our Shari'ah. So with this condition as well, if the owner of the property agrees to allow the tenant of the property to vacate it for the requester, there is no harm in that.
We return to the second scenario: the property, the shop, is empty. This is one of the exposed fallacies, that it is "vacating a person." There is no person there to vacate this place. The place is not yet ready after its doors have been installed and its windows have been installed, and its owner and landlord announces that this place is ready for occupancy and negotiation with so-and-so. You go to so-and-so and he tells you: the vacating fee is such-and-such, and the annual rent is such-and-such. This is haram! A vacating fee for an empty place is a haram wage and forbidden. Why?
Until before this era in which Muslims were afflicted by imitating the Westerners blindly, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) pointed to that in the famous authentic hadith:
You will surely follow the ways of those who came before you, span by span and cubit by cubit; even if they were to enter—or follow—the hole of a scorpion, you would enter it.
لَتتبعنَّ سنن مَن كان قبلكم شبرًا بشبر وذراعًا بذراع ؛ حتى لو دخلوا - أو سلكوا - جحرَ ضبٍّ لَدخلتموهAnd I am pleased on this occasion that one of the writers there in Syria used to give an example whose point is that these Europeans, the laws they established are like clothes that are tailored to fit their bodies. Some of them are fat and tall, some are tall and thin, some are short and stocky, and so on. These clothes tailored to the proportions of their stature do not suit us, because our bodies are not their bodies. Even more so, those laws that were established for those poor disbelievers in legislation, because they have no Shari'ah, do not suit us, because we are rich with what Allah has legislated for us in our Book and in the hadith of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). This dealing called "vacating a person" or "vacating fee" among us in Syria, Muslims did not know it in the past. This is a disbeliever's European commodity, purely material, like the riba-based banks that exist today, which have filled the lands of Islam, despite the severe regret. All these transactions are not connected to Islam for any reason, but they are contrary to Islam. So when you pay rent for an empty place, why do you pay this rent? To benefit from this place which is empty. So what is the meaning of paying to benefit from the vacating of this place, which is something else, namely the vacating fee? So what is the rent in exchange for? If you say: the rent is in exchange for benefiting from this place and operating it, then what is the vacating fee in exchange for? If you say: the vacating fee is in exchange for benefiting from the emptiness of the place, then what is the rent in exchange for? It is completely clear that this is from the category of consuming the wealth of people unjustly.
The questioner : O Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.