Explanation of the author's statement: "And the marriage contract and all other contracts are valid."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "And the marriage contract and all other contracts are valid". The marriage contract is valid, meaning the contract of marriage is valid after the second call to prayer for Friday, because Allah only prohibited selling, whereas marriage was not prohibited. This is because selling is a contract of exchange that frequently occurs among people, unlike marriage.
And his statement: "all other contracts". The apparent meaning of his words is that pledging, guaranteeing, lending, leasing, confirming a sale with the option of rescission, and mutual rescission, among others, are all valid. However, the correct view is contrary to the words of the author (may Allah have mercy on him); rather, all other contracts are prohibited, just like selling. Allah mentioned selling only according to the actual situation, because this is what happened: when the caravan arrived from Syria, the Companions went out and began to trade in it. So restricting the ruling to selling is only with regard to the actual situation. Otherwise, anything that distracts from attending Friday prayer is like selling, and there is no difference. Therefore, the correct view is that all contracts are invalid and forbidden, whether it is marriage, lending, pledging, or anything else. Yes, perhaps someone might say that contracts of pure gift, such as giving a gift, do not harm because they do not distract or occupy. For example, if two men were heading to the mosque and the call to Friday prayer was made while they were on their way, and one of them gave something to the other, it might be said here that it is valid because it did not cause any occupation or distraction. However, this requires consideration, and we say that it is valid even though Allah prohibited selling; this is questionable. I have an interjected phrase.
He said: "And the marriage contract and all other contracts are valid". We say the correct view is that they are invalid, except for contracts of pure gift that do not cause distraction. Someone might say that such contracts are valid and there is no harm in them, provided that they do not cause distraction.
And his statement: "all other contracts". The apparent meaning of his words is that pledging, guaranteeing, lending, leasing, confirming a sale with the option of rescission, and mutual rescission, among others, are all valid. However, the correct view is contrary to the words of the author (may Allah have mercy on him); rather, all other contracts are prohibited, just like selling. Allah mentioned selling only according to the actual situation, because this is what happened: when the caravan arrived from Syria, the Companions went out and began to trade in it. So restricting the ruling to selling is only with regard to the actual situation. Otherwise, anything that distracts from attending Friday prayer is like selling, and there is no difference. Therefore, the correct view is that all contracts are invalid and forbidden, whether it is marriage, lending, pledging, or anything else. Yes, perhaps someone might say that contracts of pure gift, such as giving a gift, do not harm because they do not distract or occupy. For example, if two men were heading to the mosque and the call to Friday prayer was made while they were on their way, and one of them gave something to the other, it might be said here that it is valid because it did not cause any occupation or distraction. However, this requires consideration, and we say that it is valid even though Allah prohibited selling; this is questionable. I have an interjected phrase.
He said: "And the marriage contract and all other contracts are valid". We say the correct view is that they are invalid, except for contracts of pure gift that do not cause distraction. Someone might say that such contracts are valid and there is no harm in them, provided that they do not cause distraction.