Allah the Exalted said: << قال ذلك بيني و بينك أيما الأجلين قضيت فلا عدوان علي و الله على ما نقول وكيل >

Moses said: "That which I have said is between me and you""

That is between me and you

ذلك بيني وبينك

In reality, this is the acceptance, because in our view, every contract requires an offer and an acceptance. The offer comes from the one giving, and the acceptance from the one taking. The offer comes from the one giving, whether he is a seller, a lessor, a groom, or the like, and the acceptance comes from the one taking. The offer from the man of Madyan was his saying:

I want to marry you on the condition that you hire me

أريد أن أنكحك على أن تأجرني

, and the acceptance from Moses was

That is between me and you

ذلك بيني وبينك

, which means: I agree and I accept. Even though in the first part, the man of Madyan said:

I want to marry you on the condition that

أريد أن أنكحك على

and did not say:

I have married you on the condition that

أنكحتك على أن تأجرني

, which also indicates that contracts are concluded by what indicates them, because the desire for a thing is not the thing itself; the desire for a thing is not the thing itself. Therefore, if a man says to his wife, "I want to divorce you" or "I will divorce you," does it become a divorce?
The student: No.

The Shaykh : No, because desire is not action. But this indicates the stronger position, which we mentioned previously when discussing the benefits, namely that contracts are concluded by what indicates them, and they do not have a specific formula. Yes, to the extent that they may even be concluded by action, as in the conclusion of a sale by mutual exchange. He said:

That is [established] between me and you. Whichever of the two terms

ذلك بيني وبينك أيما الأجلين

[Al-Qasas 28:28]

"Eight or ten, and

not

ما

is extra? Or his tending?" The author says: that is extra for emphasis, and accordingly, is a fronted object with , and it is not valid from the chapter of preoccupation? It is not valid, because the chapter of preoccupation requires a pronoun in the operator. If there is no pronoun, the preceding word is the object. For example, you say: This is from the chapter of preoccupation because it contains a pronoun. But without a pronoun is from the chapter of the fronted object, not from the chapter of preoccupation. What is with us now fits and does not fit ?
The student: It fits .

The Shaykh : It fits , because he said: and did not say: , so the issue is not from the chapter of preoccupation, but it is from the chapter of the fronted object. And his saying: The author says: "meaning his tending", because yes, in reality, this does not need interpretation, because it is known from the context. Will Moses complete the two terms, or will he tend the sheep?
The student: Tending the sheep.

The Shaykh : And what is his work?
The student: Tending the sheep.

The Shaykh : So tending the sheep, he will complete the tending in the two terms. For this reason, the author said: "or his tending". But this is common in the Arabic language, and it is frequent that the term "term" (ajal) is used for work. Yes, so the meaning is: meaning: the two periods in tending the sheep, I completed it by tending. So the correct view is that the... remains on its apparent meaning, and he said "

Whichever of the two terms you fulfill

أيما الأجلين قضيت

by tending", so is omitted because it is known. As for assuming that the object is , this is by way of extension and metaphor, and there is doubt in it. And his saying: The two terms are with us now eight years, which are obligatory, and ten, which are voluntary, voluntary for Moses. For this reason, he said:
He said: " I completed it or finished it, he completed, yes. Qada' means finishing a thing. From this is the saying of Allah the Exalted: meaning: He completed them and finished with them, and this is its meaning in the Arabic language. As for in the technical sense, qada' is: . In the view of the jurists, qada' is . For this reason, they say that if a man prays the prayer after its time, it is called qada'. And if a man misses part of the prayer with the imam and stands to complete it, they call it qada'. For this reason, they say that he reads a surah with al-Fatihah, and he begins with the opening and seeks refuge, as if he is now entering the prayer. But the correct view is that he: completed, meaning finished the thing. And in the issue of prayer, the saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in the other narration explains it: Is "la" a negation? -O Ibrahim- Is it a negation?
The student: No, it is a prohibition.

The Shaykh : A prohibition? Consider it. What do you say, O servant of Allah? A prohibition?
The student: A negation.

The Shaykh : The prohibitive "la" is specific to verbs, and this is also not just a negation, but a negation of the genus. For this reason, its name was clarified with it, so he said: And what is the meaning of transgression? It means injustice and encroachment. So if I complete these things, there is no transgression against me by that, because I completed the contract. And whoever completes the contract, there is no encroachment upon him. But what do you imagine of transgression in such a contract? The author says: "by demanding an increase upon it", and this is correct. That the lessee says to him: Increase. This is transgression. Likewise, there is no transgression against me in compelling me to do what the mind cannot bear, such as if he demanded from him, for example, to tend the sheep night and day. Likewise, there is no transgression against him by delaying the wage. Yes, so if the term is completed, the contract is completed. And the important thing is that transgression is not limited to demanding an increase only, but to everything that is conceivable that contradicts the absolute contract.
a guardian or a witness, and the contract is concluded on that basis. His statement: "

and Allah is a witness to what we say

والله على ما نقول وكيل

Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim 25:660

Allah

الله

is the subject and

witness

وكيل

is the predicate. The intended meaning of agency here is both guardianship and testimony. So his statement: " or a witness" is for the sake of variety, not for a condition. However, the more correct view is that it is general, because the agency of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) in a matter means both guardianship and testimony.
The student: ...a guardian.

The Shaykh : And a witness. Good, here at the two vocatives. And his saying here

to what we say

على ما نقول

, its fronting over its operator, which is

witness

وكيل

, is known to indicate restriction. It is known that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, is an agent over everything, not just what we say, but it was restricted to this to increase attention to it. Otherwise, there is no doubt that Allah is an agent over everything. But it is as if he is saying: If Allah were not a witness over anything, He would be a witness over what we say of the contract that took place between us. And in this is proof that Moses (peace be upon him) was knowledgeable of Allah and had the fitrah, and... we say: he was now informed, because his saying

And Allah is a witness to what we say

والله على ما نقول وكيل

Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim 25:660

is his acknowledgment of Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, and of what He has of attributes, because He, Glorified and Exalted is He, is an agent over everything. The apparent situation is that there are no witnesses, meaning

And Allah is a witness to what we say

والله على ما نقول وكيل

Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim 25:660

, because they do not have witnesses who prove this contract. So, for example, is it sufficient in our Shari'ah to agree with a person and write

And Allah is a witness to what we say, or a witness

والله على ما نقول وكيل أو شهيد

? Is it sufficient?
The student: It is not sufficient.

The Shaykh : It is not sufficient. For this reason, some people now press you and say: Allah is a witness to this. We say: Yes, Allah is a witness, and what a good witness He is. But let him provide his testimony. There is a verse that indicates the truth of what you said... We say: Yes, Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, is without doubt what a good witness, because His testimony is above everything.

Say, "What thing is greatest in testimony?" Say, "Allah

قل أي شيء أكبر شهادة قل الله

[Al-An'am 6:19]

But we say: Where is the verse from Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, that testifies that such and such happened? Always, for example, some girls come to us, or a poor man comes to us and says: By Allah, I have nothing. Allah is a witness to that that I have nothing... He says: Allah is a witness to that. Do you accept Allah? What is the answer? I accept Allah, but bring a verse that indicates that Allah is a witness to that. As for just your words, everyone says "Allah is the witness." Yes, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas (RA): The Prophet (ﷺ) said: "If people were given whatever they claimed (in disputes), some people would claim the lives and wealth of others; but the oath (of denial) must be taken by the defendant." [Agreed upon]. al-Baihaqi has reported with a Sahih (authentic) chain of narrators: "But the proof (Bayyinah) lies on the one who is making the claim, and the other (Yamin) must be taken by the one who rejects the claim."

لو يعطى الناس بدعواهم لادعى رجال دماء قوم وأموالهم ولكن البينة على المدعي

Bulugh al-Maram 1423

So you bring, for example, if Allah sends down a revelation with this, or if a verse comes to you indicating your truth, then we accept the testimony of Allah, and it is above every testimony. As for you saying that this... this is not acceptable.
He said: "So the contract was completed by that, and Shu'ayb ordered his daughter to give Moses a staff with which to drive away the beasts from his sheep. And the staff of the prophets was with him, so the staff of Adam from the wood of Paradise fell into her hand, and Moses took it with the knowledge of Shu'ayb." This is from the Isra'iliyyat that are not believed, even after... Do we take from the verse that Moses (peace be upon him) took a staff? Where in the verses is there proof of the staff or anything? The contract was completed and he started working for him.