What is the ruling on khalw (with an explanation of its form)?

The questioner : The subject of the ruling on khalw, which is called al-farwaghiyyah in Sham.

The Shaykh : Al-farwaghiyyah, yes.

The Shaykh : It has spread in all countries, and those who are lenient regarding its weak evidence have multiplied.

The Shaykh : Have you not heard my opinion on this in Damascus?

The questioner : I have not been to Damascus for a long time. I have not heard from you.

The Shaykh : My opinion, my brother, is to detail the matter. First, in al-farwaghiyyah, the meaning must be realized; because here this term means emptying. You know about properties and shops that are built, and when no one lives in them, even the Ministry of Endowments here and perhaps here as well, and the cause is the same in all countries, they announce that this property or shop is al-farwaghiyyah, and the annual rent is such and such, and the property is not yet occupied.

The questioner : Not occupied means it is not filled until it is emptied.

The Shaykh : This is the meaning, so the written description from its title, in such a case, is undoubtedly from the category of consuming people's wealth unjustly. But in a reasonable and prescribed form in my view, it is that a person has occupied a property for a period of time, and Allah the Exalted provided him with sustenance through it, and another comes and offers him that he needs this place, and says to him, empty it for me and hand it over to me. And he says, my brother, I am living in it and deriving benefit from it. And he says to him, I know that, and therefore I will give you something that will satisfy you, and they agree on something. I say this form is permissible on the condition that the occupant of the place is the owner; because he has the right to dispose of it as he wishes, within the limits of the Shari'ah, of course. And here, the loss is compensated by the loss, so this man is going to empty the place for him, while he arranges another place for him, and so on. And this one is going to take time, so he takes compensation for the harm he may suffer. This form of al-farwaghiyyah is clear in its features, so it is permissible in the Shari'ah, as I understand it.

The questioner : Do you mean by the owner, the original owner or the tenant of the property?

The Shaykh : No, I do not mean the tenant. He is the owner of the property. Now, this other form is where there is a man who is a tenant of a house or property or shop or anything else, and another comes who wants to vacate this property, and they agree on the vacating. But I say this vacating is not permissible and is not executed except with the consent of the owner of the property. The owner of the property may have consented to this tenant, but may not consent to this second tenant for one reason or another. So, if the original owner of the property consents to him, and the two agree, and the second takes the place of the first, it is also permissible. And what happens today is contrary to all of this, and therefore this is mostly from the category of consuming people's wealth unjustly. Is your question finished?

The questioner: Yes.

Another questioner : We suffer from this issue, O Shaykh. That is to say, is the issue of khalw not permissible in the first place? We have some owners who have complexes, and some of our bearded brothers come and take the shop that is on the frontage and on the street, and they give it khalw for five thousand, or something similar, to take the shop in the first place, and it was not empty?

The questioner : Empty, yes.

The Shaykh : This is what we said, it is never permissible, whether it is a shop or a property, and so on.
Al-Halabi : Even if we note something that some mention, which is written in this issue, which is the issue of the location or the fame or the place or, I mean, the sensitivity of the location.

The Shaykh : Empty talk, empty talk; because the fame and the place are not of his making, but rather from the arrangement of the Creator, Glorified and Exalted is He.