Explanation of the Book of Sales-14
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "And from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and him) who said: Al-Tabarani narrated it in al-Awsat and al-Daraqutni":
This hadith says:: "Tuta'im" means until it becomes suitable for food. This includes the fruit of the date palm, the fruit of the grape, the fruit of the pomegranate, the orange, and all fruit. It is not permissible to sell it until it is suitable for food, because selling it before that leads to gharar (excessive uncertainty in a contract) in several ways:
First: that afflictions increase upon it before it ripens.
Second: that its growth increases, and what happens to the item sold did not fall under the contract.
Third: that it may lead to dispute between the seller and the buyer regarding its watering and monitoring. However, if it has reached the stage where it can be eaten, then taking it and harvesting it is near, and it does not lead to dispute. But if it is before that, it may lead to dispute between them, and the buyer might say, for example: "Water it," and he says: "I watered it," and he says: "This is not enough," and the other says: "It is enough," and similar disputes that occur if he sells it before it becomes edible.
Now, likewise:Sunan al-Bayhaqi 5:412, until it is sheared.
Wool on the back is not permissible to sell. Why? Because the place of shearing is unknown. The buyer may want the wool to be sheared from its root, and the seller may want to shear from the top, from the middle of the hair, for example, and a dispute arises in that. Then, encompassing it perfectly may be difficult or impossible. Then, the prohibition is not a prohibition that disrupts the interests of the people, because it is possible to say to the seller: Shear the wool and then sell it. Because if the one who bought it does not shear it immediately, new wool will grow that did not fall under the contract, and it will mix with what fell under the contract, and distinguishing between them will be difficult or impossible, so the seller's new wealth will mix with the buyer's old wealth.
Some scholars held the view that selling wool on the back is permissible on the condition that it is known and that it is sheared immediately. And he said: "The reference for its shearing is what custom has established, and that slight gharar (excessive uncertainty in a contract) is excused in such a case, because the need may call for selling it on the back". But if we say this, who is responsible for the shearing, the buyer or the seller? The shearing is on the buyer, unless it is stipulated on the seller, like the fruit if it is sold, then if it is harvested, it is on the buyer unless it is stipulated on the seller. But on the view of permissibility, as chosen by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), the answer to this hadith is one of two answers:
Either by its weakness, or by interpreting it as referring to wool that cannot be reached, wool on the back that cannot be reached, or wool that remains after the purchase, such that wool occurs that did not fall under the contract, and thus there is ignorance in it.
The correct view is that it is permissible if it is sheared immediately and is known.
"And Abu Dawud narrated it in al-Marsil from 'Ikrimah, and he also narrated it as mawquf (stopping at a Companion) from Ibn 'Abbas with a strong chain, and al-Bayhaqi preferred it":
This means it is mawquf (stopping at a Companion), and it is known that if it is mawquf (stopping at a Companion), it falls under the disagreement of scholars: is the statement of a Companion a proof or not?
So whoever says that his statement is a proof argues with it, and whoever says it is not a proof does not argue with it, unless this statement is of a matter where there is no room for ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), and its narrator is not known for taking from the Children of Israel, in which case it has the ruling of being raised to the Prophet.
This issue narrated from Ibn 'Abbas, if a person follows Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and him) in it, he has that right, because he is a Companion. And if he does not follow him and says that what the prohibition came for is what contained gharar (excessive uncertainty in a contract), otherwise the original ruling is the permissibility of sale due to the generality of the saying of Allah the Exalted:[Al-Baqarah 2:275], so every sale is lawful except what evidence has established its prohibition.
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade selling fruit until it becomes edible, and forbade selling wool on the back or milk in the udder
نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أن تباع ثمرة حتى تُطعَم ، ولا يباع صوف على ظهر ولا لبن في ضرعThis hadith says:
He forbade selling fruit until it becomes edible or is fed
نهى أن تباع ثمرة حتى تُطعَم أو تطعِمFirst: that afflictions increase upon it before it ripens.
Second: that its growth increases, and what happens to the item sold did not fall under the contract.
Third: that it may lead to dispute between the seller and the buyer regarding its watering and monitoring. However, if it has reached the stage where it can be eaten, then taking it and harvesting it is near, and it does not lead to dispute. But if it is before that, it may lead to dispute between them, and the buyer might say, for example: "Water it," and he says: "I watered it," and he says: "This is not enough," and the other says: "It is enough," and similar disputes that occur if he sells it before it becomes edible.
Now, likewise:
Wool on the back is not sold
لا يباع صوف على ظهرWool on the back is not permissible to sell. Why? Because the place of shearing is unknown. The buyer may want the wool to be sheared from its root, and the seller may want to shear from the top, from the middle of the hair, for example, and a dispute arises in that. Then, encompassing it perfectly may be difficult or impossible. Then, the prohibition is not a prohibition that disrupts the interests of the people, because it is possible to say to the seller: Shear the wool and then sell it. Because if the one who bought it does not shear it immediately, new wool will grow that did not fall under the contract, and it will mix with what fell under the contract, and distinguishing between them will be difficult or impossible, so the seller's new wealth will mix with the buyer's old wealth.
Some scholars held the view that selling wool on the back is permissible on the condition that it is known and that it is sheared immediately. And he said: "The reference for its shearing is what custom has established, and that slight gharar (excessive uncertainty in a contract) is excused in such a case, because the need may call for selling it on the back". But if we say this, who is responsible for the shearing, the buyer or the seller? The shearing is on the buyer, unless it is stipulated on the seller, like the fruit if it is sold, then if it is harvested, it is on the buyer unless it is stipulated on the seller. But on the view of permissibility, as chosen by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), the answer to this hadith is one of two answers:
Either by its weakness, or by interpreting it as referring to wool that cannot be reached, wool on the back that cannot be reached, or wool that remains after the purchase, such that wool occurs that did not fall under the contract, and thus there is ignorance in it.
The correct view is that it is permissible if it is sheared immediately and is known.
"And Abu Dawud narrated it in al-Marsil from 'Ikrimah, and he also narrated it as mawquf (stopping at a Companion) from Ibn 'Abbas with a strong chain, and al-Bayhaqi preferred it":
This means it is mawquf (stopping at a Companion), and it is known that if it is mawquf (stopping at a Companion), it falls under the disagreement of scholars: is the statement of a Companion a proof or not?
So whoever says that his statement is a proof argues with it, and whoever says it is not a proof does not argue with it, unless this statement is of a matter where there is no room for ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), and its narrator is not known for taking from the Children of Israel, in which case it has the ruling of being raised to the Prophet.
This issue narrated from Ibn 'Abbas, if a person follows Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and him) in it, he has that right, because he is a Companion. And if he does not follow him and says that what the prohibition came for is what contained gharar (excessive uncertainty in a contract), otherwise the original ruling is the permissibility of sale due to the generality of the saying of Allah the Exalted: