Benefits of the Hadith: (Urwah al-Barqi (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) gave him a dinar to buy a sacrificial animal or a sheep with it . . . ).

The Shaykh : But there are benefits in it:
The first benefit: The permissibility of appointing an agent in buying and selling, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) appointed Urwah al-Barqi.
And branching from this benefit: Appointing an agent does not contradict sincerity nor the oneness of Allah. Appointing an agent does not contradict sincerity nor the oneness of Allah, even though the principal has in his heart a type of reliance on the agent, is that not so? But this reliance is not reliance of need, but rather reliance of authority if the agent is appointed for a fee, because the known and the favor in the case where the agent is appointed for a fee is for whom?
The student: For the principal.

The Shaykh : For the principal over the agent, so he sees that he has authority with him, he does not see that he relies on him with reliance of need. And if he is doing a favor—meaning the agent—volunteering, then the principal does not rely on him with reliance of need nor with reliance on an independent cause. And in that case, it does not contradict reliance upon Allah (Mighty and Majestic), and it cannot contradict reliance, and it occurred from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), the master of the sincere, may Allah’s prayers and blessings be upon him.
And from the benefits of the hadith also: The permissibility of appointing an agent to buy the sacrificial animal, and it is so. Now, where is this taken from?
The student: That he appointed him.

The Shaykh : From the fact that he appointed him to buy a sacrificial animal with it. And is it permissible to appoint an agent to slaughter the sacrificial animal? The answer: Yes, it is permissible to appoint a person to slaughter his sacrificial animal, just as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) appointed Ali ibn Abi Talib to slaughter his hady for him.
And from the benefits of the hadith: The permissibility of the agent’s disposition in what is beneficial for the principal. Why, O Hidayat Allah?
The student: Because he does not lose himself.

The Shaykh : The permissibility of appointing an agent in what is beneficial for the principal, or the permissibility of the agent’s disposition in what is beneficial for the principal even if he did not order him to do so, yes?
The student: This hadith.

The Shaykh : What is in this hadith?
The student: That the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not forbid its doing.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is right.
The student: His approval, that he approved it.
Another student: That he gave him a dinar so he bought a sheep with it, then he sold the sheep for two dinars and bought another for one dinar.

The Shaykh : He gave him a dinar to buy a sheep, so he bought two sheep. This is a disposition that the principal did not authorize, is that not so? But it is in the interest of the principal. So if someone says: Are these two sheep in place of one sheep because they are weak, or because they are weak? The answer: This is far-fetched. And the apparent is that Urwah (may Allah be pleased with him) Allah made it easy for him to find a needy person, so he sold him these two sheep even though each one is worth a dinar, as evidenced by the fact that he sold one for a dinar. This is the closest. And there is no loss in this such that it would be said: That there is evidence in it for the permissibility of a person being shortchanged by half the value or more, because the apparent is that he bought them from a person who loves to move and to sell at any price.
And from the benefits of the hadith: The permissibility of the disposition of the extra person (fadhuli). What is the disposition of the extra person? A person’s disposition in the property of another without his permission. So if he approves it, the disposition is valid. Where is this taken from? From the fact that Urwah disposed and bought two sheep and sold one, so he differed in the buying and differed in the selling.
He was supposed to buy one sheep for half a dinar in the buying, as long as he found two sheep for a dinar, so one equals half a dinar. So if he had restricted himself to the agency, he would have bought one for half a dinar. But he (may Allah be pleased with him) took the dispensation and saw them as cheap, so he bought two sheep. And the apparent is that it was in his intention to sell one of the sheep.
So, there is the disposition of the extra person, the permissibility of the disposition of the extra person, and that it is effective if approved. And what does approved mean? That is: the one for whom the disposition was made agreed to this disposition. If he did not agree, it is not valid. So if a person sold a person’s car to another considering the benefit and seizing the opportunity, then he informed the car owner that he sold his car, and he said: May Allah reward you with good, I agree. Then the sale is valid, O Ahmad, the sale is valid, and its evidence is this hadith. Now, if he said: I do not authorize and I do not agree, then the sale is not valid, and the car is returned and the buyer takes his price.
So if the buyer claims that the car owner appointed the seller, then we say to him: Present proof, otherwise the original state is that he did not authorize him.
Now, and this is the correct of the sayings of the scholars: "The disposition of the extra person is effective if approved, if not approved it is defective".
And some scholars said: The disposition of the extra person is defective and does not become valid even if approved, because the consideration is the contract, and at the time of the contract he is not an agent nor authorized. So if he is not an agent nor authorized, the disposition occurred from one who is not qualified, because he is not the owner nor one who stands in the place of the owner, so it became invalid. And this is the famous of the madhhab of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), and they do not permit the disposition of the extra person except in some circumstances of dire necessity, like the disposition in the property of the missing person who is found to be alive afterwards.
Now, but which is more appropriate, that we present the athar or present the reasoning?
The athar, because the athar is a judge over the reasoning, and not the reverse. Although it is possible for us to say: That the reasoning supports the athar. How is that? Because preventing a person from disposing in the property of another is only protection for the rights of others, and prevention of chaos, and people disposing in each other’s property. So if he authorized, then this cause is removed, and in that case the reasoning is in accordance with the athar.
And this is the known in all the rulings of the Shari'ah, that they are in accordance with the reasoning, but the correct reasoning based on deliberation and slowness, not the superficial reasoning. For the superficial reasoning, a person may imagine a contradiction of the Shari'ah ruling with the rational. And for this, it was narrated from Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: How? Because the first opinion has a beginning, or has a beginning, because the first opinion has a beginning: That the lower part is more appropriate for purification than the upper part, because the lower part is what meets the impurity and dirt. But we say: That the correct opinion based on slowness indicates the accordance of the Shari'ah ruling, or is in accordance with the Shari'ah ruling and indicates the correctness of the Shari'ah ruling and testifies to its consideration. How is that? Because this wiping does not give cleaning, but it is merely an act of worship for Allah (Mighty and Majestic). And if we wiped the lower part of the leather sock, we would increase its defilement with this wiping, because it will not be purified by it, is that not so?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : And the hand became defiled. And by this we know that the religion is in accordance with the opinion, but which opinion does it accord with?
The student: The correct one.

The Shaykh : The correct opinion based on slowness. And in that case we say: That executing the disposition of the extra person upon approval is permissible, in accordance also, in accordance with the correct reasoning and analogical reasoning. And the saying of these: That the disposition occurred from one who is not qualified because he is not an owner nor one standing in the place of the owner! We say: Yes, it is so, but the owner approved it. And the original in preventing the validity of the disposition from other than the owner or one who stands in his place: That it is to protect the wealth of people and not encroach upon it. So if the owner of the wealth agrees, what is the preventer?!
So we say: This hadith is clear that it indicates the validity of the disposition of the extra person, and it is the correct of the sayings of the scholars.
And from the benefits of the hadith: The permissibility of selling the sacrificial animal after designation. Some scholars used it as evidence for this. But is there evidence in it?! There is no evidence in it, because Urwah (may Allah be pleased with him), if he was aware that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) wanted it as a sacrificial animal, he has no right of designation. And then we say: That Urwah did not designate both sheep. Why?
Because he knows that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) will sacrifice with one, so it is not possible for him to designate both sheep. Rather, he designated one certainly, if he had designated, clear? Yes, he did not designate, and even if it is assumed that he designated, he will not designate more than one.
And it is known that if he designated one of these two sheep to be a sacrificial animal and chose it, he will not sell the one designated, and he will sell the one not designated, clear O Muhammad?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Now, pay attention. Consequently, there is no evidence in this hadith for the permissibility of selling a specific sacrificial animal. Thus, we understand that it is not permissible to sell a specific sacrificial animal. It is indeed so: it is not permissible for a person to sell a sacrificial animal after it has been designated. If he says, "This is a sacrifice for me and my household," it becomes like a vow; it is not permissible to sell it. Is it permissible to replace it with something better? The correct view is that it is permissible to replace it with something better. The evidence for this is: . The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) permitted him to leave what was designated by the vow in favor of something better. This indicates that it is permissible for a person to transfer what he has dedicated to Allah to something more beneficial and better.
Based on this is what we mentioned regarding replacing a specific sacrificial sheep with something better.
Likewise, based on this is the permissibility of replacing an endowment (the endowed item) with something better. For example, if I endow a mosque and people pray in it, the mu'adhdhin calls the adhan, they perform the iqamah, the imam prays, and the people pray, and then we see a location that is better and more beneficial for the neighborhood, and we move it there, is that permissible?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, it is permissible. What happens to the first mosque after it is moved? It becomes property. It becomes property. It is permissible to divide it into apartments to live in, or into shops to rent out, or to demolish it and make it parking spaces. Because now that it has been replaced by another, the ruling has transferred from this location to the new location.
Now, among the benefits of the hadith: it is incumbent upon a person to reciprocate kindness to one who has been kind to him and shown him a good face. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed for this man that Allah would bless him in his sale. It is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said: . This is both a command of the Shari'ah and a noble, excellent character trait. Many people are treated kindly, yet you find no reciprocation from them, nor a pleasant face. Perhaps they frown at you, you do not hear them say, "May Allah reward you with good," and their hearts do not open to your kindness. The one who does good, even if he is sincere to Allah and does not seek reward or gratitude from them, it is undoubtedly a matter of proper conduct to reciprocate one who has done you a favor.
If a man gives charity to a poor person, and a poor person comes to him saying, "I have a large debt," and he gives him one hundred riyals, and the poor person says, "You only give me one hundred? May Allah not increase your good." Yes, yes, this becomes... then he frowns at him and throws the hundred back. Yes, is this in accordance with the Shari'ah or contrary to it? It is contrary to the Shari'ah. What he should have said is: "May Allah reward you with good," and he should take the hundred and benefit from it. If he has ten million riyals in debt, now it is ten million minus one hundred, if he is truthful. The common people say: "A drop with a drop makes a pool", and the poet says:
"Do not belittle a small thing *** For mountains are made of pebbles".
But I say: some people have forbidden this proper conduct and noble character trait to which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) guided by his words and deeds. This is a saying. His praying for Urwah al-Barqi is an action; he reciprocated with an action.
And among the benefits of the hadith: the occurrence of a sign for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). What is it?
The answering of the supplication. So much so that if this man had bought dirt, and dirt has no value and no one cares about it, he would have profited from it.
Now, the places where the supplication of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is answered are many, and they are all support for his message (peace and blessings be upon him). If such a thing happens to a follower of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), we call it a karamah (a miracle granted to a righteous person) for the one it happened to, and a mu'jizah (a prophetic miracle) or a sign for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). We call it a karamah for the one it happened to, and a sign for the one followed, because the manifestation of this karamah to a follower of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is a testimony from Allah that this person is on the truth, so the one followed is also on the truth.
And among the benefits of the hadith: that the reciprocation should be of the same kind as what is being reciprocated for. Where is this taken from? He prayed for him in his sale, in his sale, because the favor that occurred was in his sale. The reciprocation should be of the same kind as the kindness, unless a person sees that it is not fitting to give him of the same kind as his kindness, or if he fears, or fears that the doer of the favor will think that this is a return of his favor. In that case, he should reciprocate with a different kind.
An example of this: a man gives you a gift on the occasion of the first dates appearing. He gives you a branch of dates. So you give him in return, you reciprocate with a basket of dates like his dates. What is this?
The student: It is not fitting.

The Shaykh : This is almost like a return. But if he gives him, for example, a basket of grapes, yes, he knows that this is in the category of reciprocation. The important thing is that a person should strive with utmost effort in such situations not to hurt the one who gave him a gift or did him a kindness, so that he does not feel that this is a return of his favor. Yes, then the author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Yes.
The student: In this is the permissibility of selling the profit, such as half.

The Shaykh : Yes, now this is also a benefit that can be derived from that: that the profit is not fixed. The profit is not fixed. It is permissible for a person to profit a quarter, a fifth, a tenth, or more, but on the condition that there is no oppression in it. If it is through oppression, then what exceeds the custom is forbidden. But if it is through earnings, meaning that the market prices of goods increased, or that the first seller favored him, or that the second buyer favored him, then there is nothing wrong with it. The first seller may know that this good is worth, for example, twenty, and he sold it to you for ten. If you sell it at the market price, how much do you sell it for? Ah, twenty or more. This does not harm because the first one favored you.
Or the second buyer who bought from you may know that its value is ten, but he wanted to benefit you and bought it for twenty. This is also nothing wrong with, even if the goods in the markets did not increase in value.
The result for us: that in this hadith, as the brother Ghanim said, there is evidence that there is no limit to what? To the profit.
Now, if someone says: Then if the people of the market agree to make what is worth one hundred into three hundred, is that permissible?
The student: It is not permissible.

The Shaykh : It is not permissible. This is hoarding. And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: .