Benefits of the Hadith: (Do not intercept the goods; whoever intercepts them, let him buy from them . . . ).
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In this hadith, there is evidence for the following benefits:
First: The comprehensiveness of the Islamic Shari'ah. Just as it came to reform people in matters of worship, which is their dealing with Allah, it also came to reform people in contracts, which is their dealing with one another.
Second: The refutation of those who claim that the Islamic religion regulates worship only, which is the dealing with Allah. The Islamic religion regulates both worship and transactions, and there is nothing strange about this. The longest verse in the Book of Allah is the verse of debt, and it is entirely about the dealings of people. This serves as a stone thrown into the mouth of the one who says that the Islamic religion does not regulate anything but worship. We say: The Islamic religion regulates both worship and transactions.
Among the benefits of the hadith is the protection of people's rights. We mentioned that the operative cause of the prohibition against intercepting goods is: repelling the harm that befalls the seller and the people of the town.
Among the benefits of the hadith is that if one intercepts and buys, his purchase is valid, but the buyer has the option, is that not so?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : If someone says: On what evidence do you base the validity? We say: By establishing the option for the seller, because establishing the option is a branch of validity.
Among the benefits of the hadith is the establishment of the option of deception (ghabn). The Shari'ah only gave the option to the one from whom the intercepted goods were bought because he is usually, what? Deceived. The point is that if this person from whom it was bought goes to the market and finds that the price is appropriate, does he choose to annul? Yes? No, he only chooses to annul if he finds that he has been deceived. So the operative cause of the establishment of the option for him is deception. Accordingly, there is evidence in the hadith for the establishment of the option of deception.
But is deception established in every contract in which deception occurs, or in specific cases?
There is scholarly disagreement on this. Some said: It is specific to certain cases, namely: what occurs through bidding (najsh), or through being taken in (istirsal), or through intercepting goods.
Some scholars say: It is established in every deception, even if the one deceived is skilled in bargaining and knows how to sell and buy, but he was deceived due to his inattention or his ignorance of the price because prices dropped rapidly. In that case, he has the option, whether he is a seller or a buyer. Accordingly, if you sent your boy to buy for you, what do we say?
The student: Anything.
The Shaykh : Bread. The four loaves are for one riyal. They said to the boy: The four are for two riyals. So he gave them the two riyals and took the four. He came to you with four, and you gave him two riyals. How many do you expect him to bring? Eight. Do you have the option or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : You have the option. Good, this is clear because the boy is not skilled in bargaining and he is ignorant of the value. Another example: A traveler arrived in a town and stopped at a grocer and said: I ask you for bread for one riyal. So he gave him two loaves. And I ask you for a jar of tomato paste, for it to be a condiment for the bread. So he gave him this jar for one riyal. I am ignorant of the value. For two riyals? Yes, good, for two riyals. So he gave him two loaves for one riyal and a jar of tomato paste for two riyals. He is a traveler and good in buying and selling, but he does not know the prices in this town. The correct view is that he has the option.
Some scholars hold that he does not have the option because he knows how to bargain. They hold that the one who is taken in is the one who is ignorant of the value and not skilled in bargaining. The correct view is that everyone who is ignorant of the value has the option. These intercepted goods may be from the best of people or from those most knowledgeable about values, but they are ignorant of the value, so they were deceived.
Good, and in the hadith, among its benefits is: the use of the term "master" (sayyid) for the owner. And so it is, because the origin of mastery is from honor, and it is known that the owner has honor over whom? Over the slave. For this reason, we called the owner of a slave a master, and we call the owner of animals and the owner of food a master as well. For this reason, he said:Sahih Muslim 1519b.
Among the benefits of the hadith is that intercepting is: what happens before the goods reach the market, even if it is inside the city. Some scholars said: Intercepting does not occur except from outside the city, because intercepting usually happens outside cities. For this reason, it is said: "He intercepted the traveler," meaning: he went out to meet him.
There is disagreement on this issue. Some scholars say: Intercepting applies to meeting the goods before they enter the market, even if it is in the city. They cited as evidence for this his saying:Sahih Muslim 1519b, and he did not say: "When he enters the town." Accordingly, if the town is one and the market is in its center in the main street, and people meet them at the outskirts of the town and buy from them, then it falls under the hadith, meaning: doing what is prohibited, and the one who brought the goods has the option. This is closer to the meaning because there is no difference between meeting them in the city and meeting them inside it before they reach the market. If someone says: What do you say about goods that passed through the city and they did not intend to enter it, and a person bought from them while they were traveling to another city? Is it permissible or not?
The student: It is not permissible.
Another student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Yes, there is disagreement among you. They do not intend to enter. For example, suppose they are now passing through our town and they are heading to Riyadh. That is, they came, for example, from the Hijaz from Jeddah with goods intending to go to Riyadh. It appears that it is permissible, because they are not intending this town now; they are travelers, just as it is permissible to buy from a traveler.
The student: What is considered intercepting?
The Shaykh : Good, yes? No, no, it is not intercepting, because his saying:: means the market of the town in which the intercepting occurred, and these people did not intend this town. Therefore, it is unlikely that they would sell to this interceptor because they would say: Our goods are for Riyadh. Unless they need money on their way, in which case they might sell. Good, what do you say about a man who went out to walk outside the town and found a group of people with goods? Is it permissible for him to buy from them or not?
The student: We said it is not permissible.
The Shaykh : We discussed it and said: It is not permissible, because the original prohibition is against buying and intercepting and its means.
First: The comprehensiveness of the Islamic Shari'ah. Just as it came to reform people in matters of worship, which is their dealing with Allah, it also came to reform people in contracts, which is their dealing with one another.
Second: The refutation of those who claim that the Islamic religion regulates worship only, which is the dealing with Allah. The Islamic religion regulates both worship and transactions, and there is nothing strange about this. The longest verse in the Book of Allah is the verse of debt, and it is entirely about the dealings of people. This serves as a stone thrown into the mouth of the one who says that the Islamic religion does not regulate anything but worship. We say: The Islamic religion regulates both worship and transactions.
Among the benefits of the hadith is the protection of people's rights. We mentioned that the operative cause of the prohibition against intercepting goods is: repelling the harm that befalls the seller and the people of the town.
Among the benefits of the hadith is that if one intercepts and buys, his purchase is valid, but the buyer has the option, is that not so?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : If someone says: On what evidence do you base the validity? We say: By establishing the option for the seller, because establishing the option is a branch of validity.
Among the benefits of the hadith is the establishment of the option of deception (ghabn). The Shari'ah only gave the option to the one from whom the intercepted goods were bought because he is usually, what? Deceived. The point is that if this person from whom it was bought goes to the market and finds that the price is appropriate, does he choose to annul? Yes? No, he only chooses to annul if he finds that he has been deceived. So the operative cause of the establishment of the option for him is deception. Accordingly, there is evidence in the hadith for the establishment of the option of deception.
But is deception established in every contract in which deception occurs, or in specific cases?
There is scholarly disagreement on this. Some said: It is specific to certain cases, namely: what occurs through bidding (najsh), or through being taken in (istirsal), or through intercepting goods.
Some scholars say: It is established in every deception, even if the one deceived is skilled in bargaining and knows how to sell and buy, but he was deceived due to his inattention or his ignorance of the price because prices dropped rapidly. In that case, he has the option, whether he is a seller or a buyer. Accordingly, if you sent your boy to buy for you, what do we say?
The student: Anything.
The Shaykh : Bread. The four loaves are for one riyal. They said to the boy: The four are for two riyals. So he gave them the two riyals and took the four. He came to you with four, and you gave him two riyals. How many do you expect him to bring? Eight. Do you have the option or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : You have the option. Good, this is clear because the boy is not skilled in bargaining and he is ignorant of the value. Another example: A traveler arrived in a town and stopped at a grocer and said: I ask you for bread for one riyal. So he gave him two loaves. And I ask you for a jar of tomato paste, for it to be a condiment for the bread. So he gave him this jar for one riyal. I am ignorant of the value. For two riyals? Yes, good, for two riyals. So he gave him two loaves for one riyal and a jar of tomato paste for two riyals. He is a traveler and good in buying and selling, but he does not know the prices in this town. The correct view is that he has the option.
Some scholars hold that he does not have the option because he knows how to bargain. They hold that the one who is taken in is the one who is ignorant of the value and not skilled in bargaining. The correct view is that everyone who is ignorant of the value has the option. These intercepted goods may be from the best of people or from those most knowledgeable about values, but they are ignorant of the value, so they were deceived.
Good, and in the hadith, among its benefits is: the use of the term "master" (sayyid) for the owner. And so it is, because the origin of mastery is from honor, and it is known that the owner has honor over whom? Over the slave. For this reason, we called the owner of a slave a master, and we call the owner of animals and the owner of food a master as well. For this reason, he said:
that when the owner of (merchandise) comes into the market (and finds that he has been paid less price) he has the option (to declare the transaction null and void).
إذا أتى سيده السوق فهو بالخيارAmong the benefits of the hadith is that intercepting is: what happens before the goods reach the market, even if it is inside the city. Some scholars said: Intercepting does not occur except from outside the city, because intercepting usually happens outside cities. For this reason, it is said: "He intercepted the traveler," meaning: he went out to meet him.
There is disagreement on this issue. Some scholars say: Intercepting applies to meeting the goods before they enter the market, even if it is in the city. They cited as evidence for this his saying:
when the owner of (merchandise) comes into the market
فإذا أتى سيده السوقThe student: It is not permissible.
Another student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Yes, there is disagreement among you. They do not intend to enter. For example, suppose they are now passing through our town and they are heading to Riyadh. That is, they came, for example, from the Hijaz from Jeddah with goods intending to go to Riyadh. It appears that it is permissible, because they are not intending this town now; they are travelers, just as it is permissible to buy from a traveler.
The student: What is considered intercepting?
The Shaykh : Good, yes? No, no, it is not intercepting, because his saying:
When his master comes to the market
فإذا أتى سيده إلى السوقThe student: We said it is not permissible.
The Shaykh : We discussed it and said: It is not permissible, because the original prohibition is against buying and intercepting and its means.