The discussion regarding the author's statement: "And if he bought it for him in his debt without his permission and did not name him in the contract, it is valid for him by his approval."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : What is the meaning of the author's statement "or he bought it for him in his debt without his permission and did not name him in the contract"? What is the scenario of this issue? Brother? The one next to you, Bandar? What is the scenario of the issue? If he bought it for him in his debt without his permission and did not name him in the contract, it is valid for him by his approval. And what is the meaning of the phrase? Or did you not attend the lesson? Okay. Yes?
The questioner : He approved it; he bought it for him and he was satisfied.
The Shaykh : Yes, there are conditions. What is the issue? He bought it for him in his debt. Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And did not name him in the contract?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is valid for him. For whom? Is it valid for the buyer or for the one for whom it was bought?
The questioner : ... For the one for whom it was bought.
The Shaykh : For the one for whom it was bought.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, he did not name him. He bought it for him in his debt and did not name him in the contract without his permission. It is valid for him by his approval. For whom? For the one for whom it was bought or for the buyer?
The questioner : For the one for whom it was bought.
The Shaykh : Okay. His statement "without his permission"—is this a condition? It is not a condition. So what is it? Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is a description of the reality. This is a description of the reality, because if it were with his permission, there would be no issue; he would have become his agent. Okay. I bought something for a person, Sa'd. I bought a need for a person, knowing that he wants it, so I told the seller that I bought it for Zayd, and I took it and went to Zayd, and he agreed. How is that?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : Why? Because he named him in the contract. What is the difference between naming him or not naming him?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Why is it not valid if he names him, but valid if he does not name him?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, if he names him, it is not valid.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Salama?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Well done. If he names him, he makes himself like an agent, whereas he was not appointed as an agent. But if he does not name him, he makes himself as if he bought it for himself.
The questioner : He approved it; he bought it for him and he was satisfied.
The Shaykh : Yes, there are conditions. What is the issue? He bought it for him in his debt. Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And did not name him in the contract?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is valid for him. For whom? Is it valid for the buyer or for the one for whom it was bought?
The questioner : ... For the one for whom it was bought.
The Shaykh : For the one for whom it was bought.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, he did not name him. He bought it for him in his debt and did not name him in the contract without his permission. It is valid for him by his approval. For whom? For the one for whom it was bought or for the buyer?
The questioner : For the one for whom it was bought.
The Shaykh : Okay. His statement "without his permission"—is this a condition? It is not a condition. So what is it? Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is a description of the reality. This is a description of the reality, because if it were with his permission, there would be no issue; he would have become his agent. Okay. I bought something for a person, Sa'd. I bought a need for a person, knowing that he wants it, so I told the seller that I bought it for Zayd, and I took it and went to Zayd, and he agreed. How is that?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : Why? Because he named him in the contract. What is the difference between naming him or not naming him?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Why is it not valid if he names him, but valid if he does not name him?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, if he names him, it is not valid.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Salama?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Well done. If he names him, he makes himself like an agent, whereas he was not appointed as an agent. But if he does not name him, he makes himself as if he bought it for himself.