Some scholars say that necessity does not apply to certain things, such as riba. We ask for an explanation of this statement and a clarification of its correctness or otherwise.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Some scholars say that necessity does not apply to certain things, such as riba. We ask for an explanation of this statement and a clarification of its correctness or otherwise.
The Shaykh : The reality is that the meaning of this statement is not known, because there is nothing that necessity cannot apply to, unless the speaker means that a person cannot be forced into riba because he can do without it by turning to another means of obtaining sustenance. If that is his meaning, then it is correct. If his meaning is that a person cannot be forced into riba, then it is not correct. A person may be, for example, in a land of disbelievers and unable to buy his daily bread except through riba. In that case, he is in dire necessity for it if he finds no other source by which he can live. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. And this questioner says, O honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And on the occasion of mentioning riba, I would like to clarify that riba does not occur except in specific items. Not everything involves riba. Riba only occurs in specific items that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) specified in his saying:Sunan ad-Darimi 18:49 These are the items in which riba applies. There are only six categories. Who can list them for us?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine, they are only six categories: gold, silver, dates, wheat, barley, and salt.
Is there riba in iron? My brothers, there is no riba in it. It is not gold, nor silver, nor wheat, nor dates, nor barley, nor salt.
Is there riba in wood? Is there riba in soil? Is there riba in animals? I swear to you, may Allah bless you, is there riba in them or not? There is no riba in them. So, not everything involves riba. It is permissible for me to sell a car for two cars, and to sell a load of sand for two loads, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) limited the categories in which riba applies to only six categories. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: We are explaining this hadith. If you sell gold for gold, two things are necessary?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hand to hand. That is the exchange of possession before parting.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Equality. Equality. Fine. If you sell gold for gold, two things are necessary. The first is the exchange of possession in the place of the contract, meaning before parting. The second is equality. Equality in weight, because gold and silver are things that are weighed. If you sell dates for dates, brother, what is obligatory? If you sell dates for dates, what is obligatory? Yes. Stand up. Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Like for like. That means equalizing by weight or by measure.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Not by measure. Equality by measure, because dates are measured by volume and not by weight. This is what was known in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). If you sell barley for barley, what is obligatory? Yes. Equality is obligatory, and it must be hand to hand. Equality in what? By measure. Fine. Rest.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine. If a category of these items is sold for its own category, two things are necessary: equality and the exchange of possession before parting. If a category is sold for another, like wheat for barley, what is obligatory? Must it be hand to hand? Is equality obligatory? What do you say?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Correct. Rest. It is not obligatory, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him):Sahih Muslim 1587c Fine. If you sell two sa' of wheat for four sa' of barley?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible, on the condition?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The exchange of possession before parting. Fine. If you sell a car for three cars?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The exchange of possession before parting. What is the evidence?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : In which category do cars fall?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And not in a single unit. Fine. If it is not in a single unit, that means there is no riba in it.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : You said that the exchange of possession is necessary.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hand to hand. That is the exchange of possession. Wait, my brother. Here. Finish. Come on. There is no answer other than this.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Because they are outside of?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine. There is no riba in them, so it is permissible to sell a car for two cars, whether the possession is taken or not, because there is no riba in cars. Fine. He sold a house for two houses. Brother, is it permissible or not? A house for two houses?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is permissible. Why?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Because there is no riba in it, and because riba is only in the six categories. Fine. Rest. If he sold a sa' of rice for two sa', is it permissible? Why? Because it is outside the scope of the hadith, as it is not wheat, nor dates, nor barley, nor salt, nor gold, nor silver. Well done. Rest. This is what this person answered with. This is what the brother mentioned. Some scholars say that these categories have riba established in their specific identities, and they are not extended by analogy to others. The people of the Zahir school, the Zahiris, say that others are not extended to them by analogy, because it is a fundamental principle of their school that there is no analogical reasoning. Among the scholars, the jurists who follow analogical reasoning, there are also those who do not see riba applying to anything other than these six categories. They argued that the scholars differed in the underlying causes, so their opinions fell away, and it became necessary to stick to the wording. Among those who held this view was Ali ibn Aqil, one of the great jurists of the followers of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him).
But the correct opinion is that analogical reasoning is established in the Shari'ah. What is the correct analogical reasoning? It is defective analogical reasoning. And rice, corn, millet, and other things that are measured and eaten have riba established in them by analogy to what? To wheat and barley. Because the Islamic Shari'ah, in its perfection, cannot distinguish between two identical things, just as it cannot equate two different things.
Fine. The brother sold two sa' of corn for one sa'. Two sa' of corn for one sa'?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible. Why? Because it is outside the six categories. If you are still on your opinion, yes. What is it? We have established that the correct view is that it is extended by analogy to these. Unless you are on the path of the people of the Zahir school. We do not know what your opinion is now. I did not understand now. We have established, we have established that every measured food item has riba applying to it by analogy to wheat and barley. We said because the Islamic Shari'ah does not distinguish between identical things, just as it does not combine different or distinct things. So what is your opinion now regarding the example we gave you?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. Two sa' of corn for one sa'. Is it permissible or not permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Not permissible. Correct. Because it is like one sa' of wheat for two sa' of wheat. There is no difference between them. Yes. How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. Is it permissible or not permissible? Not permissible, by analogy to one sa' of wheat for two sa' of wheat. It is not permissible. Fine. Rest. So riba is only established in what? In the six categories specified by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). And what is of their meaning? Wheat and barley and dates are extended to by analogy. Every measured food item is extended to by analogy. Fine. Let us look at an example. He sold an orange for two oranges. An orange for two oranges. Two. Is it not permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is not one of the six categories. What is it? We said rice is not one of the six categories, and yet we said there is riba in it?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine. Is it permissible? How is an orange for two oranges permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is not suitable to extend by analogy to wheat or to barley, because oranges are not measured and not stored. Fine. Rest. Fine. If he exchanged a dirham for two dirhams. The brother, the Zahir?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hmm. Not permissible. No. A mistake. A silver dirham for two silver dirhams?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Not permissible. A mistake. Who will answer, brother?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hmm. What does he say?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible. Do you know what a dirham is? It is silver currency. Do you know silver? Silver is included in the hadith. Fine. If he sold a dirham for two dirhams, hmm?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Leave what you mentioned. Give me what you say. Is a dirham for two dirhams permissible? We have two opinions, my brothers. The first opinion says it is not permissible, and the second opinion says it is permissible. Rest. The third opinion is the detailed one? Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is silver. It does not need analogy.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The important thing for us now is that there are two opinions: one that it is permissible and one that it is not permissible. So who will decide between them?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. Fine. Rest. This is close, but the expression is not good. We say that if they are equal in weight, it is permissible, and if they differ in weight, it is not permissible. Fine. If he sold a dirham for two dirhams, it is permissible that some dirhams are large in some countries and small in others, where one dirham equals half of that other dirham. So we say that if they are equal in weight, hmm, it is permissible, and if they differ, it is not permissible. For this reason, someone might pose a riddle to a student of knowledge with such a question, because what comes to mind is that two dirhams, hmm, that two dirhams are more than one dirham, and that one dirham is half of two dirhams. That is what comes to mind. But it may be that the single dirham in weight balances two dirhams. In that case, selling the dirham for two dirhams is permissible. Fine. If he sold ten paper notes of the current currency for nine iron riyals, is it permissible or not permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible, because?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is not gold, nor silver, nor dates, nor wheat, nor barley, nor salt; it is merely paper and iron. That is complete and good. Rest now. Based on this, we say: there is no riba in it, no riba in it, no riba al-fadl and no riba al-nasi'ah. Some scholars have held this view, stating that paper currency is not subject to riba because it does not fall under the six categories. However, this opinion is very, very weak, because this paper currency is a substitute for silver dirhams, and it is the currency of the people, the money of the people, and the wealth of the people. Therefore, there is no doubt that riba applies to it. But because paper is a distinct category from iron, it falls under the general wording of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him):Sahih Muslim 1587c For this reason, we do not require that ten ten-riyal notes be equal in weight to ten metal riyals, as the difference between them is apparent. So, what we see is that it is permissible to buy nine metal riyals with ten paper riyals. Perhaps, if Allah wills, we have now clarified what is subject to riba and what is not. Let us return to the matter of land: is riba applicable to land?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, it is not applicable. It is not subject to analogy. So, is it permissible for me to sell you one hundred meters of land for one thousand meters? Yes. For example, I have land in a strategic location, as they say, and you have land in a remote location, so I buy one meter from you for ten meters. Is this permissible or not? It is permissible, because there is no riba in land. A man has ten wooden wheels and sells them for two wooden wheels. Is this permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : There is no riba in them, whether they are delivered immediately or not, because there is absolutely no riba in them. The compilers of the Sunan collections reported a hadith from Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-'As that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered him to equip an army, but the camels were insufficient, so he would take one camel for two, and two camels for three, from the camels of zakah, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) approved this for him. You know that if we take one camel for two, both riba al-fadl and riba al-nasi'ah are present in it. However, in reality, there is no riba between animals when one is exchanged for another. If someone sells gold jewelry for dinars, what is required?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, gold jewelry for dinars. There is nothing required. There is no requirement for immediate exchange, nor for equality, nor anything else. How do you not know that dinars are currency?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, dinars are gold. When you hear the word "dinar" in the speech of the scholars, or in the Qur'an, or in the Sunnah, it refers to a piece of gold currency. Good.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Immediate exchange and equality are required. Good. If you sell gold jewelry for paper currency.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And immediate exchange?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No immediate exchange, and nothing else is required. The hadith is:Sahih Muslim 1587c
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : So, it means that immediate exchange is required. May Allah bless you.
The questioner : May Allah reward you and grant you the best reward. Your Eminence, this is discussing the same topic. It says: If a person borrows, for example, three tons of iron, and I tell him after a year to return it to me as five tons, what is the ruling?
The Shaykh : What? Repeat the question.
The Shaykh : The reality is that the meaning of this statement is not known, because there is nothing that necessity cannot apply to, unless the speaker means that a person cannot be forced into riba because he can do without it by turning to another means of obtaining sustenance. If that is his meaning, then it is correct. If his meaning is that a person cannot be forced into riba, then it is not correct. A person may be, for example, in a land of disbelievers and unable to buy his daily bread except through riba. In that case, he is in dire necessity for it if he finds no other source by which he can live. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. And this questioner says, O honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And on the occasion of mentioning riba, I would like to clarify that riba does not occur except in specific items. Not everything involves riba. Riba only occurs in specific items that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) specified in his saying:
Gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, dates for dates, barley for barley, and salt for salt
الذهب بالذهب والفضة بالفضة والبر بالبر والتمر بالتمر والشعير بالشعير والملح بالملحThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine, they are only six categories: gold, silver, dates, wheat, barley, and salt.
Is there riba in iron? My brothers, there is no riba in it. It is not gold, nor silver, nor wheat, nor dates, nor barley, nor salt.
Is there riba in wood? Is there riba in soil? Is there riba in animals? I swear to you, may Allah bless you, is there riba in them or not? There is no riba in them. So, not everything involves riba. It is permissible for me to sell a car for two cars, and to sell a load of sand for two loads, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) limited the categories in which riba applies to only six categories. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
Gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, dates for dates, barley for barley, and salt for salt, like for like, equal in amount. If these categories differ, then yes, hand to hand. If these categories differ, then sell as you wish, provided it is hand to hand
الذهب بالذهب والفضة بالفضة والبر بالبر والتمر بالتمر والشعير بالشعير والملح بالملح مثلا بمثل سواء بسواء فإذا اختلفت هذه الأصناف نعم يدا بيد فإذا اختلفت هذه الأصناف فبيعوا كيف شئتم إذا كان يدا بيدThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hand to hand. That is the exchange of possession before parting.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Equality. Equality. Fine. If you sell gold for gold, two things are necessary. The first is the exchange of possession in the place of the contract, meaning before parting. The second is equality. Equality in weight, because gold and silver are things that are weighed. If you sell dates for dates, brother, what is obligatory? If you sell dates for dates, what is obligatory? Yes. Stand up. Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Like for like. That means equalizing by weight or by measure.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Not by measure. Equality by measure, because dates are measured by volume and not by weight. This is what was known in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). If you sell barley for barley, what is obligatory? Yes. Equality is obligatory, and it must be hand to hand. Equality in what? By measure. Fine. Rest.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine. If a category of these items is sold for its own category, two things are necessary: equality and the exchange of possession before parting. If a category is sold for another, like wheat for barley, what is obligatory? Must it be hand to hand? Is equality obligatory? What do you say?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Correct. Rest. It is not obligatory, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him):
If these classes differ, then sell as you wish if payment is made hand to hand.
إذا اختلفت هذه الأصناف فبيعوا كيف شئتم إذا كان يدا بيدThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible, on the condition?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The exchange of possession before parting. Fine. If you sell a car for three cars?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The exchange of possession before parting. What is the evidence?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : In which category do cars fall?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And not in a single unit. Fine. If it is not in a single unit, that means there is no riba in it.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : You said that the exchange of possession is necessary.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hand to hand. That is the exchange of possession. Wait, my brother. Here. Finish. Come on. There is no answer other than this.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Because they are outside of?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine. There is no riba in them, so it is permissible to sell a car for two cars, whether the possession is taken or not, because there is no riba in cars. Fine. He sold a house for two houses. Brother, is it permissible or not? A house for two houses?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is permissible. Why?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Because there is no riba in it, and because riba is only in the six categories. Fine. Rest. If he sold a sa' of rice for two sa', is it permissible? Why? Because it is outside the scope of the hadith, as it is not wheat, nor dates, nor barley, nor salt, nor gold, nor silver. Well done. Rest. This is what this person answered with. This is what the brother mentioned. Some scholars say that these categories have riba established in their specific identities, and they are not extended by analogy to others. The people of the Zahir school, the Zahiris, say that others are not extended to them by analogy, because it is a fundamental principle of their school that there is no analogical reasoning. Among the scholars, the jurists who follow analogical reasoning, there are also those who do not see riba applying to anything other than these six categories. They argued that the scholars differed in the underlying causes, so their opinions fell away, and it became necessary to stick to the wording. Among those who held this view was Ali ibn Aqil, one of the great jurists of the followers of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him).
But the correct opinion is that analogical reasoning is established in the Shari'ah. What is the correct analogical reasoning? It is defective analogical reasoning. And rice, corn, millet, and other things that are measured and eaten have riba established in them by analogy to what? To wheat and barley. Because the Islamic Shari'ah, in its perfection, cannot distinguish between two identical things, just as it cannot equate two different things.
Fine. The brother sold two sa' of corn for one sa'. Two sa' of corn for one sa'?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible. Why? Because it is outside the six categories. If you are still on your opinion, yes. What is it? We have established that the correct view is that it is extended by analogy to these. Unless you are on the path of the people of the Zahir school. We do not know what your opinion is now. I did not understand now. We have established, we have established that every measured food item has riba applying to it by analogy to wheat and barley. We said because the Islamic Shari'ah does not distinguish between identical things, just as it does not combine different or distinct things. So what is your opinion now regarding the example we gave you?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. Two sa' of corn for one sa'. Is it permissible or not permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Not permissible. Correct. Because it is like one sa' of wheat for two sa' of wheat. There is no difference between them. Yes. How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. Is it permissible or not permissible? Not permissible, by analogy to one sa' of wheat for two sa' of wheat. It is not permissible. Fine. Rest. So riba is only established in what? In the six categories specified by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). And what is of their meaning? Wheat and barley and dates are extended to by analogy. Every measured food item is extended to by analogy. Fine. Let us look at an example. He sold an orange for two oranges. An orange for two oranges. Two. Is it not permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is not one of the six categories. What is it? We said rice is not one of the six categories, and yet we said there is riba in it?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Fine. Is it permissible? How is an orange for two oranges permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is not suitable to extend by analogy to wheat or to barley, because oranges are not measured and not stored. Fine. Rest. Fine. If he exchanged a dirham for two dirhams. The brother, the Zahir?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hmm. Not permissible. No. A mistake. A silver dirham for two silver dirhams?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Not permissible. A mistake. Who will answer, brother?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hmm. What does he say?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible. Do you know what a dirham is? It is silver currency. Do you know silver? Silver is included in the hadith. Fine. If he sold a dirham for two dirhams, hmm?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Leave what you mentioned. Give me what you say. Is a dirham for two dirhams permissible? We have two opinions, my brothers. The first opinion says it is not permissible, and the second opinion says it is permissible. Rest. The third opinion is the detailed one? Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is silver. It does not need analogy.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The important thing for us now is that there are two opinions: one that it is permissible and one that it is not permissible. So who will decide between them?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. Fine. Rest. This is close, but the expression is not good. We say that if they are equal in weight, it is permissible, and if they differ in weight, it is not permissible. Fine. If he sold a dirham for two dirhams, it is permissible that some dirhams are large in some countries and small in others, where one dirham equals half of that other dirham. So we say that if they are equal in weight, hmm, it is permissible, and if they differ, it is not permissible. For this reason, someone might pose a riddle to a student of knowledge with such a question, because what comes to mind is that two dirhams, hmm, that two dirhams are more than one dirham, and that one dirham is half of two dirhams. That is what comes to mind. But it may be that the single dirham in weight balances two dirhams. In that case, selling the dirham for two dirhams is permissible. Fine. If he sold ten paper notes of the current currency for nine iron riyals, is it permissible or not permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Permissible, because?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It is not gold, nor silver, nor dates, nor wheat, nor barley, nor salt; it is merely paper and iron. That is complete and good. Rest now. Based on this, we say: there is no riba in it, no riba in it, no riba al-fadl and no riba al-nasi'ah. Some scholars have held this view, stating that paper currency is not subject to riba because it does not fall under the six categories. However, this opinion is very, very weak, because this paper currency is a substitute for silver dirhams, and it is the currency of the people, the money of the people, and the wealth of the people. Therefore, there is no doubt that riba applies to it. But because paper is a distinct category from iron, it falls under the general wording of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him):
If these classes differ, then sell as you wish if payment is made hand to hand.
إذا اختلفت هذه الأصناف فبيعوا كيف شئتم إذا كان يدا بيدThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, it is not applicable. It is not subject to analogy. So, is it permissible for me to sell you one hundred meters of land for one thousand meters? Yes. For example, I have land in a strategic location, as they say, and you have land in a remote location, so I buy one meter from you for ten meters. Is this permissible or not? It is permissible, because there is no riba in land. A man has ten wooden wheels and sells them for two wooden wheels. Is this permissible?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : There is no riba in them, whether they are delivered immediately or not, because there is absolutely no riba in them. The compilers of the Sunan collections reported a hadith from Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-'As that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered him to equip an army, but the camels were insufficient, so he would take one camel for two, and two camels for three, from the camels of zakah, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) approved this for him. You know that if we take one camel for two, both riba al-fadl and riba al-nasi'ah are present in it. However, in reality, there is no riba between animals when one is exchanged for another. If someone sells gold jewelry for dinars, what is required?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, gold jewelry for dinars. There is nothing required. There is no requirement for immediate exchange, nor for equality, nor anything else. How do you not know that dinars are currency?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, dinars are gold. When you hear the word "dinar" in the speech of the scholars, or in the Qur'an, or in the Sunnah, it refers to a piece of gold currency. Good.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Immediate exchange and equality are required. Good. If you sell gold jewelry for paper currency.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And immediate exchange?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No immediate exchange, and nothing else is required. The hadith is:
If these classes differ
إذا اختلفت هذه الأصنافThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : So, it means that immediate exchange is required. May Allah bless you.
The questioner : May Allah reward you and grant you the best reward. Your Eminence, this is discussing the same topic. It says: If a person borrows, for example, three tons of iron, and I tell him after a year to return it to me as five tons, what is the ruling?
The Shaykh : What? Repeat the question.