Explanation of the author's statement: "If he sold it by its number, or for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver, or at the price at which the price stops, or at the price at which Zayd sold it, and both of them or one of them did not know it, it is not valid."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"If he sold it by its number", as people do in pharmacies. Pharmacies nowadays sell by number. One says, "Give me such-and-such medicine," and they hand it over. "What is the price?" "By its number." The author says that if he sold it by its number, it is not valid. Why? Because it is unknown, either to the seller or to the buyer or to both of them. Think about it. It is unknown either to the seller or to the buyer or to both of them.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no. I am saying these are categories. I am not asking whether it is this or that. Is it possible for it to be unknown to both of them?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It is possible. This merchandise arrives with the price written on it by the authorities, and the seller does not know it and the buyer does not know it. It is possible. Is it possible for it to be known to the seller and unknown to the buyer?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It is possible. Is it possible for it to be known to the buyer and unknown to the seller?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It is possible.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No. It is possible, may Allah reward you. You are now saying that it is possible for it to be unknown to both of them, the seller and the buyer. If it is possible for it to be unknown to both of them, then it is possible for it to be unknown to one of them. So it must be known. If he sells by the number, the sale is not valid. This is the school of thought. The second opinion is that selling by the number is valid if it is from the state. In fact, this may be more reassuring for the seller and the buyer, is it not? But if the number is from the seller himself, and he numbers whatever he wants on his goods, then it must be known. So the number is not valid. For example, a person prices watches and writes a small paper on the watch: five hundred riyals. The buyer asks, "How much are you selling it for?" He says, "By its number." Is it valid or not?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid. Why is it not valid? Because this seller might number it at many times the value. But if we know that it is estimated and numbered by an authoritative body, then there is no doubt in the permissibility of selling by the number. Now, if the seller, when the buyer asked him what the price is, says, "It is written on it by its number," and the buyer looks and sees that the number is high, so he refuses to buy it at that price. Is it valid?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid. He looked at its number and found it suitable, so he said, "I accept." Is it valid or not?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid, because now the number is known. The author's statement in his saying "If he sold it by its number" is by a number that is not known at the time of the contract.
"Likewise, if he sold it for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver" — pay attention — he said, "I sold it to you for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver." It is not valid. He said, "I sold it to you for a thousand in gold and silver." It is valid.
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid. "I sold it to you for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver" is not valid. "I sold it to you for a thousand in gold and silver" is valid. Adam, it seems this is difficult for him. What do you say?
The questioner : It is not clear to me.
The Shaykh : It is not clear to you. If he said "for a thousand in gold and silver," it is valid and is understood as an equal division. What is the value now? Five hundred dirhams and what? And five hundred dinars. It is clear. But "for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver," we do not know how much he will give us. Perhaps he will give us most of it in gold and the rest in silver, or most of it in silver and the rest in gold. We do not know. But if someone says, "If the dirhams and dinars are fixed, with every twelve dirhams being one dinar, then if he said 'I sold it to you for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver,' it becomes known, whether from the dinars or the dirhams," we say this is correct. But he might have an intention that most of it be dinars, that most of the price be dinars, or that most of the price be dirhams. So there would be excessive uncertainty in it. Correct. And on this basis, the author's statement that it is not valid is a correct statement. Even if it is assumed that the value of the dirhams relative to the value of the dinars does not change, he might have an intention regarding what? Regarding specifying them by their specific identities. The summary, Khalid Muzaynini, are you with us? The summary is that if he said, "I sold it to you for a thousand in gold and silver," the sale is valid and is understood as what? As an equal division.
"For a thousand dirhams in gold and silver" is not valid because it makes the majority gold and the minority silver, or vice versa. Likewise, if he said "for a hundred dinars in gold and silver," it is not valid due to the unknown nature. Likewise, if he sold it at the price at which the price stops, it is not valid either. That means he said, "I will sell it to you at the price at which it stops in the bargaining." It is not valid. Why? Because we do not know whether it will stop at a high price or a low price. Perhaps a person will come and bargain, and the price will rise. Or perhaps there will be few people present, so what? The price will decrease. For this reason, it is not valid to sell it at the price at which the price stops. It was said that it is valid, and that selling at the price at which the price stops is more reassuring than selling by bargaining, because a person hopes and says, "Since people stopped at this price, this indicates that the value is appropriate." But there is something in the mind about this. The closer view is that it is not valid at the price at which the price stops, because what the price stops at is unknown. If bargaining occurs, what do you say? You? If bargaining occurs?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : I say, does it increase or decrease?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : What if there are few people present?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : If there are few people present...
The Shaykh : He says, does it decrease or increase?
The questioner : It increases...
The Shaykh : No. It decreases. For example, I estimate that the price will stop at a thousand for this item. Then a group of people come and bargain, and it might reach two thousand. Likewise, I estimate it at a thousand, but the attendance of people is weak, the attendance of people is few, so it might not reach a thousand. So the unknown nature is present or not present? It is present. For this reason, it should be decided to prohibit selling at the price at which the price stops.
He says "Or at the price at which Zayd sold it". If he said, "I sold it to you at the price at which Zayd sold it," and we do not know how much he sold it for. For this reason, he said "and both of them or one of them did not know it, the sale is not valid". Why? Because Zayd's sale is unknown. This is the school of thought. It was said that if Zayd is one whose estimation of the price is considered, then selling at the price he sells for is valid. For example, a person is famous in the town, known as the one who knows the prices. So you say, "I will sell it to you as Zayd sells it." The second opinion is that this is valid. Why? Because this is the most trustworthy thing. That is, people's consideration of the famous man who has established himself for selling merchandise is greater than their consideration of selling by bargaining. The correct view in this issue is that it is valid. But if Zayd is from the general people who do not know trade, then yes, it is not valid to say, "I sold it to you at the price at which Zayd sold it," because Zayd might be shortchanged and buy for less, or vice versa.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : About what?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no. I am saying these are categories. I am not asking whether it is this or that. Is it possible for it to be unknown to both of them?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It is possible. This merchandise arrives with the price written on it by the authorities, and the seller does not know it and the buyer does not know it. It is possible. Is it possible for it to be known to the seller and unknown to the buyer?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It is possible. Is it possible for it to be known to the buyer and unknown to the seller?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It is possible.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No. It is possible, may Allah reward you. You are now saying that it is possible for it to be unknown to both of them, the seller and the buyer. If it is possible for it to be unknown to both of them, then it is possible for it to be unknown to one of them. So it must be known. If he sells by the number, the sale is not valid. This is the school of thought. The second opinion is that selling by the number is valid if it is from the state. In fact, this may be more reassuring for the seller and the buyer, is it not? But if the number is from the seller himself, and he numbers whatever he wants on his goods, then it must be known. So the number is not valid. For example, a person prices watches and writes a small paper on the watch: five hundred riyals. The buyer asks, "How much are you selling it for?" He says, "By its number." Is it valid or not?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid. Why is it not valid? Because this seller might number it at many times the value. But if we know that it is estimated and numbered by an authoritative body, then there is no doubt in the permissibility of selling by the number. Now, if the seller, when the buyer asked him what the price is, says, "It is written on it by its number," and the buyer looks and sees that the number is high, so he refuses to buy it at that price. Is it valid?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid. He looked at its number and found it suitable, so he said, "I accept." Is it valid or not?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid, because now the number is known. The author's statement in his saying "If he sold it by its number" is by a number that is not known at the time of the contract.
"Likewise, if he sold it for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver" — pay attention — he said, "I sold it to you for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver." It is not valid. He said, "I sold it to you for a thousand in gold and silver." It is valid.
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid. "I sold it to you for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver" is not valid. "I sold it to you for a thousand in gold and silver" is valid. Adam, it seems this is difficult for him. What do you say?
The questioner : It is not clear to me.
The Shaykh : It is not clear to you. If he said "for a thousand in gold and silver," it is valid and is understood as an equal division. What is the value now? Five hundred dirhams and what? And five hundred dinars. It is clear. But "for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver," we do not know how much he will give us. Perhaps he will give us most of it in gold and the rest in silver, or most of it in silver and the rest in gold. We do not know. But if someone says, "If the dirhams and dinars are fixed, with every twelve dirhams being one dinar, then if he said 'I sold it to you for a thousand dirhams in gold and silver,' it becomes known, whether from the dinars or the dirhams," we say this is correct. But he might have an intention that most of it be dinars, that most of the price be dinars, or that most of the price be dirhams. So there would be excessive uncertainty in it. Correct. And on this basis, the author's statement that it is not valid is a correct statement. Even if it is assumed that the value of the dirhams relative to the value of the dinars does not change, he might have an intention regarding what? Regarding specifying them by their specific identities. The summary, Khalid Muzaynini, are you with us? The summary is that if he said, "I sold it to you for a thousand in gold and silver," the sale is valid and is understood as what? As an equal division.
"For a thousand dirhams in gold and silver" is not valid because it makes the majority gold and the minority silver, or vice versa. Likewise, if he said "for a hundred dinars in gold and silver," it is not valid due to the unknown nature. Likewise, if he sold it at the price at which the price stops, it is not valid either. That means he said, "I will sell it to you at the price at which it stops in the bargaining." It is not valid. Why? Because we do not know whether it will stop at a high price or a low price. Perhaps a person will come and bargain, and the price will rise. Or perhaps there will be few people present, so what? The price will decrease. For this reason, it is not valid to sell it at the price at which the price stops. It was said that it is valid, and that selling at the price at which the price stops is more reassuring than selling by bargaining, because a person hopes and says, "Since people stopped at this price, this indicates that the value is appropriate." But there is something in the mind about this. The closer view is that it is not valid at the price at which the price stops, because what the price stops at is unknown. If bargaining occurs, what do you say? You? If bargaining occurs?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : I say, does it increase or decrease?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : What if there are few people present?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : If there are few people present...
The Shaykh : He says, does it decrease or increase?
The questioner : It increases...
The Shaykh : No. It decreases. For example, I estimate that the price will stop at a thousand for this item. Then a group of people come and bargain, and it might reach two thousand. Likewise, I estimate it at a thousand, but the attendance of people is weak, the attendance of people is few, so it might not reach a thousand. So the unknown nature is present or not present? It is present. For this reason, it should be decided to prohibit selling at the price at which the price stops.
He says "Or at the price at which Zayd sold it". If he said, "I sold it to you at the price at which Zayd sold it," and we do not know how much he sold it for. For this reason, he said "and both of them or one of them did not know it, the sale is not valid". Why? Because Zayd's sale is unknown. This is the school of thought. It was said that if Zayd is one whose estimation of the price is considered, then selling at the price he sells for is valid. For example, a person is famous in the town, known as the one who knows the prices. So you say, "I will sell it to you as Zayd sells it." The second opinion is that this is valid. Why? Because this is the most trustworthy thing. That is, people's consideration of the famous man who has established himself for selling merchandise is greater than their consideration of selling by bargaining. The correct view in this issue is that it is valid. But if Zayd is from the general people who do not know trade, then yes, it is not valid to say, "I sold it to you at the price at which Zayd sold it," because Zayd might be shortchanged and buy for less, or vice versa.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : About what?