Explanation of the author's statement: "If he buys what he has not seen, or what he has seen but does not know, or what is described to him in a way that is insufficient for a salam contract, the sale is not valid."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said, "If he buys what he has not seen, or what he has seen but does not know, or what is described to him in a way that is insufficient for a salam contract, the sale is not valid", because there is no knowledge of the sale. "If he buys what he has not seen", for example, if someone says, "I sold you that specific car," or "I sold you a car for such and such," and the buyer did not see it, or "I sold you a book for such and such," and he did not see it, then the sale is not valid. Now, what if it is described? It is valid if it is something that can be defined by its description. That is why the author (may Allah have mercy on him) said in the explanation, "what he has not seen without a description". It can be said that the author of the matn was brief, or it can be said that he was not brief, based on the fact that knowledge is achieved through seeing and through description.
"If he buys what he has not seen, or what he has seen but does not know", for example, if someone says, "I sold you what is in this bag," and the buyer does not know whether it is sand or sugar, is the sale valid? No, because he does not know. Now, if he does not know its benefit, but he knows the item itself, for example, if he sells a mechanical machine but does not know what it is used for, is it said that this is knowledge and the sale is valid, or is it said that it is not knowledge and the sale is not valid? This is a possibility; both views are possible. It can be said that the item is known, but the buyer's ignorance of how to use it, for example, is not a defect in the item sold, but a defect in the buyer, the contracting party, not in the object of the contract. It can also be said that knowledge of this is necessary, because a stranger might come and see these machines, and if they are not operated in front of him, and one of the machines starts moving, he might say, "This is something that makes bombs or airplanes," and buy it for a high price, only to find out that it cannot even make a needle. That would be great ignorance. Therefore, we see that a person must know how to benefit from the item, otherwise there would be excessive uncertainty (gharar).
He said, "or what is described to him in a way that is insufficient for a salam contract, the sale is not valid". We will come to salam, if Allah wills, and discuss what can be defined and what cannot. If it is described in a way that is insufficient for a salam contract, the sale is not valid. It was said that it is valid to sell what one has not seen and has not been described, with the option for the buyer when he sees it. For example, if someone says, "I sold you my car," and the buyer asks, "What car is this?" and the seller says, "If Allah wills, you will see it and know it," and the buyer asks, "For how much?" and the seller says, "For five thousand," and the buyer says, "I bought it." According to the madhhab, it is not valid because he did not see it and it was not described to him. The madhhab of Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) is that the sale is valid and the buyer has the option when he sees it. This is the correct view, and it is similar to the sale by a non-owner (bay' al-faduli). If he has the option when he sees it, is there any loss on him? There is no loss on him.
If it is asked, "What is the way to validate the sale according to the first opinion?" We say the way is that when he sees it, he contracts for it anew. This is where the benefit of the disagreement between the two opinions appears. According to the opinion that it is valid, the increase of this item between the sale contract and its sighting belongs to the buyer. According to the second opinion, the increase belongs to the seller because the sale was not valid.
"If he buys what he has not seen, or what he has seen but does not know", for example, if someone says, "I sold you what is in this bag," and the buyer does not know whether it is sand or sugar, is the sale valid? No, because he does not know. Now, if he does not know its benefit, but he knows the item itself, for example, if he sells a mechanical machine but does not know what it is used for, is it said that this is knowledge and the sale is valid, or is it said that it is not knowledge and the sale is not valid? This is a possibility; both views are possible. It can be said that the item is known, but the buyer's ignorance of how to use it, for example, is not a defect in the item sold, but a defect in the buyer, the contracting party, not in the object of the contract. It can also be said that knowledge of this is necessary, because a stranger might come and see these machines, and if they are not operated in front of him, and one of the machines starts moving, he might say, "This is something that makes bombs or airplanes," and buy it for a high price, only to find out that it cannot even make a needle. That would be great ignorance. Therefore, we see that a person must know how to benefit from the item, otherwise there would be excessive uncertainty (gharar).
He said, "or what is described to him in a way that is insufficient for a salam contract, the sale is not valid". We will come to salam, if Allah wills, and discuss what can be defined and what cannot. If it is described in a way that is insufficient for a salam contract, the sale is not valid. It was said that it is valid to sell what one has not seen and has not been described, with the option for the buyer when he sees it. For example, if someone says, "I sold you my car," and the buyer asks, "What car is this?" and the seller says, "If Allah wills, you will see it and know it," and the buyer asks, "For how much?" and the seller says, "For five thousand," and the buyer says, "I bought it." According to the madhhab, it is not valid because he did not see it and it was not described to him. The madhhab of Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) is that the sale is valid and the buyer has the option when he sees it. This is the correct view, and it is similar to the sale by a non-owner (bay' al-faduli). If he has the option when he sees it, is there any loss on him? There is no loss on him.
If it is asked, "What is the way to validate the sale according to the first opinion?" We say the way is that when he sees it, he contracts for it anew. This is where the benefit of the disagreement between the two opinions appears. According to the opinion that it is valid, the increase of this item between the sale contract and its sighting belongs to the buyer. According to the second opinion, the increase belongs to the seller because the sale was not valid.