Explanation of the author's statement: "And if he sold a shared portion between himself and another, such as a slave, or something whose price is divided by parts, the sale is valid in his share according to his proportion."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Now, the second issue. He said: "And if he sold a shared portion between himself and another, such as a slave, or something whose price is divided by parts, the sale is valid in his share according to his proportion". Pay attention, my brothers. Selling is easy yet difficult, but it will be easy, if Allah wills. "If he sold a shared portion between himself and another". "Shared" means jointly owned between him and another. Like a slave. Can you give an example other than a slave?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : A car, land. Yes, anything shared. If he sold it all, for example, this car is between me and my brother, and I sold it to a person, the whole thing. Now, I sold a shared portion between me and another. My sale of my ownership is valid because it is from my ownership. My sale of my brother's ownership is not valid because I am not his agent. It is valid in my share and not valid in my brother's share, because I am a partner and not his agent. So, do we separate the transaction or not? We separated it. The man who bought the car from me was happy and said, "Allah has brought me this car. Yes, it is an excellent car, the best there is. Tomorrow, if Allah wills, I will travel on it to Makkah and Madinah." So, while he was like that, my brother came to him and said, "Half of this car is mine, and this is the partnership contract between me and my brother." What do we do now? We tell the buyer, "You now have how much? Half of the car, because the sale was valid in that. But the sale of my brother's share is not valid." He said, "So what is the benefit of the half?" This man came and said to me, "Half of the car." If I said, "Just travel on it to Makkah and Madinah," he would say, "No way. Travel on it for half the fare." If you went, for example, from Unaizah to Makkah, what is the fare?
The questioner : One hundred and...
The Shaykh : One hundred and fifty. Pay half of one hundred and fifty, and the other half is your property in any case. And if you circled Madinah and returned, would the buyer have the option in this case? Because of the separation of the transaction upon him?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : If he said, "I bought the car complete, but if there is a partnership in it now, I do not want it," we say, "Yes, you have the option, because the separation of the transaction harms him." Now, this is one.
The second is: "Or something whose price is divided by parts". This is not a shared portion, but the price is divided by parts. Like two qafiz. We say, like two sa' of wheat, one is mine and the other is for the other. I mixed them and then sold them. Is the sale valid in the two sa', or only in the sa' that is mine?
The questioner : In the sa'...
The Shaykh : In the sa' that is mine only, and it is not valid in the other sa'. The difference between this issue and the first one is that in the first one, the partnership is in a shared portion, and in the second one, the partnership is in the parts. Because the grain now, one grain is mine and one grain is for the other. But "shared" means that every atom in the owned item is jointly owned. Is that clear?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Now, if he sold something whose price is divided by parts, part of it is his and part of it is for the other, the sale is valid in what is his, and the sale is not valid for the other, because the other does not own it and did not appoint him as an agent in it. And this is the second issue among the issues of separating the transaction.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : A car, land. Yes, anything shared. If he sold it all, for example, this car is between me and my brother, and I sold it to a person, the whole thing. Now, I sold a shared portion between me and another. My sale of my ownership is valid because it is from my ownership. My sale of my brother's ownership is not valid because I am not his agent. It is valid in my share and not valid in my brother's share, because I am a partner and not his agent. So, do we separate the transaction or not? We separated it. The man who bought the car from me was happy and said, "Allah has brought me this car. Yes, it is an excellent car, the best there is. Tomorrow, if Allah wills, I will travel on it to Makkah and Madinah." So, while he was like that, my brother came to him and said, "Half of this car is mine, and this is the partnership contract between me and my brother." What do we do now? We tell the buyer, "You now have how much? Half of the car, because the sale was valid in that. But the sale of my brother's share is not valid." He said, "So what is the benefit of the half?" This man came and said to me, "Half of the car." If I said, "Just travel on it to Makkah and Madinah," he would say, "No way. Travel on it for half the fare." If you went, for example, from Unaizah to Makkah, what is the fare?
The questioner : One hundred and...
The Shaykh : One hundred and fifty. Pay half of one hundred and fifty, and the other half is your property in any case. And if you circled Madinah and returned, would the buyer have the option in this case? Because of the separation of the transaction upon him?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : If he said, "I bought the car complete, but if there is a partnership in it now, I do not want it," we say, "Yes, you have the option, because the separation of the transaction harms him." Now, this is one.
The second is: "Or something whose price is divided by parts". This is not a shared portion, but the price is divided by parts. Like two qafiz. We say, like two sa' of wheat, one is mine and the other is for the other. I mixed them and then sold them. Is the sale valid in the two sa', or only in the sa' that is mine?
The questioner : In the sa'...
The Shaykh : In the sa' that is mine only, and it is not valid in the other sa'. The difference between this issue and the first one is that in the first one, the partnership is in a shared portion, and in the second one, the partnership is in the parts. Because the grain now, one grain is mine and one grain is for the other. But "shared" means that every atom in the owned item is jointly owned. Is that clear?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Now, if he sold something whose price is divided by parts, part of it is his and part of it is for the other, the sale is valid in what is his, and the sale is not valid for the other, because the other does not own it and did not appoint him as an agent in it. And this is the second issue among the issues of separating the transaction.