The discussion regarding the author's statement, "that it must be possible to deliver it."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : All right, let us discuss the last lesson, which is that it must be possible to deliver it, otherwise it is not valid, because we have not yet discussed the condition that it must be possible to deliver it.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : That it must be what?
The questioner : That it must be his.
The Shaykh : No, what does the pronoun in "that it must be" refer to?
The questioner : ... possible to deliver it ... the commodity itself ...
The Shaykh : The item being sold, you mean?
The questioner : The item being sold itself; it must be possible to deliver it.
The Shaykh : All right, what is the evidence for this condition, Hamid?
The questioner : The saying of Allah the Exalted:[Al-Ma'idah 5:90] The implication of the verse is that gambling is a form of excessive uncertainty, and therefore it is forbidden; gambling is equivalent to excessive uncertainty.
The Shaykh : We did not understand well?
The questioner : There is a second piece of evidence.
The Shaykh : Bring a second piece of evidence?
The questioner : The saying of Allah the Exalted:[An-Nisa 4:29].
The Shaykh : And this is with mutual consent.
The questioner : But there is excessive uncertainty ...
The Shaykh : All right, bring the evidence. Yes, that is right.
The questioner : That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : Well done. The evidence is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) This hadith is among the greatest of hadiths and the most beneficial in terms of rules and principles; it is a great principle in transactions. All right, is the sale of a runaway slave valid?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : And who is a runaway slave?
The questioner : It is the slave who has fled from his master.
The Shaykh : If a slave flees from his master, he is a runaway slave. Is his sale valid?
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : In any case?
The questioner : Until he is able to deliver it.
The Shaykh : He has not been able to do so up to now, as far as we know.
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Is there a second opinion?
The questioner : Its sale is permissible ... .
The Shaykh : If he is able to retrieve it. All right, if the buyer purchases it on the condition that he is able to retrieve it, but he is not able to? The school of thought, as I said first, is that it is not valid at all. But if we adopt the second opinion, which is that it is valid to purchase a runaway slave if he is likely to be able to obtain him, but he does not obtain him.
The questioner : He has the right to annul the contract ... .
The Shaykh : That is correct. Is the sale of stolen property valid, Hani?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Absolutely? Mubarak?
The questioner : ... to the usurper.
The Shaykh : Only? To the usurper only?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Or one who is able to take it from him. All right, is the sale of stolen property by the usurper valid absolutely, or is there a distinction? Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And how do you mean? I did not understand?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I mean, for example, if the usurper says, "Do you want to sell it to me, or I will deny it."
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : He says, "Either you sell it to me, or I will deny it, and you have no proof that I am a usurper." Is the sale valid or not valid? Valid? Not valid? What is the condition?
The questioner : Mutual consent.
The Shaykh : Mutual consent. Well done. That is correct. I mean, if the usurper says, "Now I want you to sell it to me, or I will deny it," and you have no proof, and the owner says, "Well, since not all of it can be attained, not all of it should be abandoned; I will sell it to you." In this case, the sale is not valid because one of the conditions of sale is missing, which is consent. All right.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : That it must be what?
The questioner : That it must be his.
The Shaykh : No, what does the pronoun in "that it must be" refer to?
The questioner : ... possible to deliver it ... the commodity itself ...
The Shaykh : The item being sold, you mean?
The questioner : The item being sold itself; it must be possible to deliver it.
The Shaykh : All right, what is the evidence for this condition, Hamid?
The questioner : The saying of Allah the Exalted:
intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah], and divining arrows
إنما الخمر والميسر والأنصاب والأزلامThe Shaykh : We did not understand well?
The questioner : There is a second piece of evidence.
The Shaykh : Bring a second piece of evidence?
The questioner : The saying of Allah the Exalted:
O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent
يا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوالَكُمْ بَيْنَكُمْ بِالْباطِلِ إِلاَّ أَنْ تَكُونَ تِجارَةً عَنْ تَراضٍ مِنْكُمْThe Shaykh : And this is with mutual consent.
The questioner : But there is excessive uncertainty ...
The Shaykh : All right, bring the evidence. Yes, that is right.
The questioner : That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)
He forbade the sale of what is not in one's possession.
نهى عن بيع الغيرThe Shaykh : Well done. The evidence is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)
He forbade the sale of what is not in one's possession.
نهى عن بيع الغيرThe questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : And who is a runaway slave?
The questioner : It is the slave who has fled from his master.
The Shaykh : If a slave flees from his master, he is a runaway slave. Is his sale valid?
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : In any case?
The questioner : Until he is able to deliver it.
The Shaykh : He has not been able to do so up to now, as far as we know.
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Is there a second opinion?
The questioner : Its sale is permissible ... .
The Shaykh : If he is able to retrieve it. All right, if the buyer purchases it on the condition that he is able to retrieve it, but he is not able to? The school of thought, as I said first, is that it is not valid at all. But if we adopt the second opinion, which is that it is valid to purchase a runaway slave if he is likely to be able to obtain him, but he does not obtain him.
The questioner : He has the right to annul the contract ... .
The Shaykh : That is correct. Is the sale of stolen property valid, Hani?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Absolutely? Mubarak?
The questioner : ... to the usurper.
The Shaykh : Only? To the usurper only?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Or one who is able to take it from him. All right, is the sale of stolen property by the usurper valid absolutely, or is there a distinction? Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And how do you mean? I did not understand?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I mean, for example, if the usurper says, "Do you want to sell it to me, or I will deny it."
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : He says, "Either you sell it to me, or I will deny it, and you have no proof that I am a usurper." Is the sale valid or not valid? Valid? Not valid? What is the condition?
The questioner : Mutual consent.
The Shaykh : Mutual consent. Well done. That is correct. I mean, if the usurper says, "Now I want you to sell it to me, or I will deny it," and you have no proof, and the owner says, "Well, since not all of it can be attained, not all of it should be abandoned; I will sell it to you." In this case, the sale is not valid because one of the conditions of sale is missing, which is consent. All right.