Remainder of the answer: What is the ruling on purchasing products from companies that place coupons on their goods containing prize draws?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : But I buy it in case I win the prize. We said that this is a waste of money, because you do not know whether you will win the prize or not. It has reached me that some people buy cartons of milk when they do not want them, but they buy them and pour them out in case they get the prize. This is a waste of money. It is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family): .
There remains a third point: If someone says, “This may harm others,” meaning that the one who displayed the prize has his goods in the markets, and this harms others. People turn to the one who displayed the prize, so there is harm to others in this?
We say: Now this returns to the state. Now the state must intervene. If it sees that this causes market disruption, it prohibits it. Because others may say, “This has ruined our business and brought the people to himself.” So we will make a prize larger than his prize, for example. They will make a larger prize. If they make the prize larger, he will also say, “I will make a larger prize.” So there will be manipulation in this. And manipulation of the markets is something the one in authority must consider and prevent.
So if these two things are absent: that the value was not raised, and that the buyer has a valid purpose for the purchase, what remains for us is government intervention. It is obligatory for the government, if it fears that people will be disrupted in this situation, to prohibit it.
The questioner : Shaykh!
The Shaykh : One question.
The questioner : No, just a comment on the question itself.
The Shaykh : No comment, no question and no comment.
That he prohibited the waste of money
أنّه نهى عن إضاعة المالThere remains a third point: If someone says, “This may harm others,” meaning that the one who displayed the prize has his goods in the markets, and this harms others. People turn to the one who displayed the prize, so there is harm to others in this?
We say: Now this returns to the state. Now the state must intervene. If it sees that this causes market disruption, it prohibits it. Because others may say, “This has ruined our business and brought the people to himself.” So we will make a prize larger than his prize, for example. They will make a larger prize. If they make the prize larger, he will also say, “I will make a larger prize.” So there will be manipulation in this. And manipulation of the markets is something the one in authority must consider and prevent.
So if these two things are absent: that the value was not raised, and that the buyer has a valid purpose for the purchase, what remains for us is government intervention. It is obligatory for the government, if it fears that people will be disrupted in this situation, to prohibit it.
The questioner : Shaykh!
The Shaykh : One question.
The questioner : No, just a comment on the question itself.
The Shaykh : No comment, no question and no comment.