The discussion regarding conditions in sales.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment.
A man sold his car and rented out his house for one hundred thousand riyals. What do you say, Khalid?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Two contracts?
The questioner : What he stipulated, if he combined two contracts, there is nothing wrong with it...
The Shaykh : Is it valid? Do you agree with this?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, he said, "I sold you my car and rented you my house for one hundred thousand riyals." Is it valid or not? Khalid says it is valid even according to the school of thought, and Abdullah says it is not valid according to the school of thought. What do you say? Yes, you?
The questioner : The school of thought is that it is not valid.
The Shaykh : The school of thought says it is not valid, meaning you agree with Abdullah? The school of thought says it is valid, you agree with Khalid?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Wait, is it valid or not valid?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid.
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid, and then it appears that one person says it is valid and the other... Perhaps we should conclude the discussion. The school of thought says it is valid if one combines two contracts without a condition, so it is valid except in writing. And this supports the opinion that stipulating the other contract is valid, because if this is permissible, meaning combining the two contracts, if it is permissible and we stipulate combining two contracts, then we have stipulated what? Something lawful, meaning we did not stipulate a condition that makes the forbidden lawful or the lawful forbidden. All right, he said, "I married you my daughter and sold you the car for one hundred thousand." Come on, Fawwad, what is your name? Yes?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Is it valid? What do you say? "I married you my daughter and sold you the car." He combined a sale and a marriage?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Is it valid? Because it is without a condition?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I do not say it is because it is without a condition? What if he stipulated it?
The questioner : If he stipulated it, according to the school of thought, it is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid because he combined two conditions. All right, a man stipulated in the sale of a slave that if he frees him, the patronage belongs to him. What is the ruling on the sale and the condition? Samih?
The questioner : No, this condition is valid and the sale is valid.
The Shaykh : The sale is valid without the condition. Do you have evidence?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the evidence?
The questioner : ... The story of Barira... So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered her to buy her and free her, even if she stipulated the patronage for her. And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said, and he said.
The Shaykh : The story of Barira, where her family stipulated that the patronage would belong to them and sold her on this condition, so the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) invalidated the condition without the contract. He stipulated to the buyer that he should not sell her. Yes?
The questioner : He stipulated to the buyer that he should not sell her. It is not valid.
The Shaykh : The sale is not valid?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And the condition?
The questioner : And the condition.
The Shaykh : And the condition. Yes, there are many opponents.
The questioner : The sale is valid and the condition is not valid.
The Shaykh : Do not yield to the number of people. Is the sale and condition valid, or is the sale valid without the condition?
The questioner : The sale is valid and the condition is invalid.
The Shaykh : All right, why?
The questioner : Because it restricts the buyer.
The Shaykh : All right, did he agree to this? Did he agree to that?
The questioner : It contradicts the meaning of the sale, because the sale... the buyer is its owner, and this contradicts it.
The Shaykh : Meaning it contradicts its implication?
The questioner : The implication...
The Shaykh : The implication of the contract. All right, is there another opinion? Shahr, Abdul Aziz? Is there another opinion?
The questioner : The condition is valid if the seller has a valid purpose.
The Shaykh : For example?
The questioner : For example, it could be that the slave is dear to the seller, so he stipulated that he should not sell him.
The Shaykh : He stipulated to the buyer that he should not sell him, fearing that he would sell him to a person?
The questioner : To a person who does not appreciate him.
The Shaykh : Who would harm him or something similar. And this is the correct opinion. He said, "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased?"
The questioner : There are two opinions, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : There are two opinions, as he said?
The questioner : If it is
The Shaykh : Is the sale valid or not valid?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : According to the school of thought, it is not valid. Why?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, it is not unknown; Zayd is a shop owner, but I said "if Zayd is pleased" because I know he is a man who knows goods and knows their prices.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : How? "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased." Suppose he said, "I sold it to you if my father is pleased." Let us leave Zayd; "if my father is pleased."
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The question and the answer: you say it is not valid... Why? Know, O students, that you are required, if you say the sale is not valid, to present evidence for the invalidity, because Allah said[Al-Baqarah 2:275]. So the original ruling is that all sales are lawful, yes? Abdullah?
The questioner : A suspended sale.
The Shaykh : A sale suspended on what? Unknown or known? Unknown? All right, but it will be known soon.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Do you have evidence that such a condition is unknown and invalidates the sale?
The questioner : Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade the sale of gharar.
The Shaykh : And this? And this is from gharar. All right, would this be from gharar if the time is specified and I said "if Zayd is pleased within two days"?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : It would not be.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And on this basis?
The questioner : The sale and the condition are valid.
The Shaykh : If?
The questioner : If the time is specified.
The Shaykh : If the time is specified, like the option, as if he said, "I have the option for two days, for example." All right, this opinion is the correct one, and the school of thought says it is not valid absolutely. If he said, "I sold it to you on the condition that you pay me the price within three days, otherwise there is no sale." You, Musa?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : "I sold it to you on the condition that you pay me the price" means you give me the price within three days, otherwise there is no sale between us.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is it valid? How is it valid and how does it become valid?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : All right, but he says, "otherwise there is no sale between us."
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : What is the difference between this and "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased"?
The questioner : This is suspended.
The Shaykh : And if?
The questioner : This is the rescission of the contract.
The Shaykh : Where is the suspension? But it means this is possible. This is suspended: "If you do not pay me within three days, otherwise there is no sale."
The questioner : If the time is specified.
The Shaykh : All right, "if Zayd is pleased within three days"?
The questioner : "If Zayd is pleased within three days"?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : It is valid. Good.
The questioner : The difference between them: in the first case, the sale is suspended on rescission, the sale...
The Shaykh : What is the first case?
The questioner : The first case is like deferred price.
The Shaykh : What?
The questioner : That you pay me the price within three days.
The Shaykh : And if not?
The questioner : Otherwise there is no sale between us.
The Shaykh : This is a sale of what?
The questioner : Suspended on rescission.
The Shaykh : A sale suspended on rescission? We did not understand this? How does it become a sale suspended on rescission when it did not become a sale?
The questioner : ... Oh Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Sharafi?
The questioner : The last one, Shaykh, is the suspension of rescission.
The Shaykh : Shaykh, if I say the last one, we do not know which is the last and which is the first.
The questioner : Yes, Shaykh, "I sold it to you on the condition that you pay me the price within three days, otherwise there is no sale between us."
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : This is the suspension of rescission.
The Shaykh : Suspension of rescission, and "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased"?
The questioner : This is a suspension.
The Shaykh : A contract.
The questioner : A suspension.
The Shaykh : Of the contract?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Suspension of the contract. This is the difference. So the suspension of the contract is not valid, and the suspension of rescission is valid. This is the difference, and you know that there is disagreement regarding the suspension of the contract.
He pledged something to him and said to him, "If you bring me the price when the time comes, otherwise the pledge is yours?"
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid?
The questioner : According to the school of thought, it is not valid.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : The hadith isBulugh al-Maram 7:97.
The Shaykh : All right, and is there coercion here, since he said that of his own choice?
The questioner : According to the correct opinion, it is not a condition.
The Shaykh : And on this basis, is it valid?
The questioner : It is valid...
The Shaykh : It is valid. He says, "I pledged something to him and said, 'If you bring me your right at such a time, otherwise the pledge is yours.'" All right, is there a difference between when the pledge is large, more than the value, or small? Say, Abdul Rahman? Is there a difference?
The questioner : If the pledge is many times the value of the item... by a coercive order, then the sale is not valid.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : Because this, Shaykh, is a sale of gharar.
The Shaykh : What is in it? Much loss.
The questioner : Ghabn (unfairness).
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : There is ghabn.
The Shaykh : Much ghabn, but is he willing? The owner of the pledge who pledged this thing? This is the one by whom we can explainBulugh al-Maram 7:97. If we know that the man was delayed for a coercive reason and the price, meaning the price of the pledge, is high, then there is no doubt that it is not valid. But if it is equal, the price of the pledge is equal to the debt or less, then the correct opinion is that it is permissible. He said, "I sold you my house for one hundred thousand riyals, if Allah wills?" Ahmad?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : He said, seeking blessing in the will, it is valid.
The Shaykh : Is it valid or not valid?
The questioner : He said, seeking blessing in the will, it is valid according to the school of thought and other than the school of thought.
The Shaykh : All right, you seem to want to detail: if he said it seeking blessing in mentioning the will, the sale is valid. Yes? And if?
The questioner : And otherwise, according to the school of thought, it is not valid, and the correct opinion is that it is valid.
The Shaykh : And otherwise, according to the school of thought, it is not valid.
The questioner : And the correct opinion is that it is valid.
The Shaykh : And the correct opinion is that it is valid. It is as if you have a rule: whatever is stricter is the school of thought?
The questioner : No, but the school of thought says that suspending anything other than the sale, suspending contracts, is not valid except in two cases.
The Shaykh : Except in?
The questioner : Two cases.
The Shaykh : Which two?
The questioner : The will and the earnest money.
The Shaykh : All right, this is the will.
The questioner : If Allah wills.
The Shaykh : Yes, "I sold this to you for one hundred thousand riyals, if Allah wills." He said, "I accepted."
The questioner : It is valid, according to the school of thought and others.
The Shaykh : All right, it is valid according to the school of thought and others, because the suspension with "if Allah wills" is either seeking blessing or giving a reason. Then we know that if the contract is concluded according to the Shari'ah, Allah has willed it, because a person does not do an action except by the will of Allah. And on this basis, if he says, "I sold this thing to you, if Allah wills," the contract...
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Who said it is not valid? The contract is valid. All right, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) excepted the earnest money or the 'arabun?
The questioner : The 'arabun...
The Shaykh : Did you hear the 'arabun? He gives him a part of the price and says, "If the sale is completed, it is the first part of the price, and if it is not completed, it is yours." This is valid, even though it is suspended, and it is similar to the suspension of the pledge mentioned earlier. All right, why is it permissible even though it is suspended?
The questioner : Shaykh, for two reasons... the buyer, and the second is that it is a compensation, which is a reduction in the price of the item in the case of return.
The Shaykh : All right, and the evidence is also the action of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). This is evidence, and what I mentioned is a reason. All right, then we read: if he sold it and stipulated exemption.
The questioner : We read it.
The Shaykh : We read it. All right, if he sold it and stipulated exemption from every defect without specifying it, is he exempt or not? The brother? The one at the door?
The questioner : If the condition of disavowal is stipulated?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : If it is like a car, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : What do we say if it is like a car? Let us say if it is like a camel, then.
The questioner : ... If the buyer does not know about this defect and the seller does not know about this defect, it is permissible for the customer. But if he knows about its condition, it is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Yes, and according to what the author said, does the disavowal hold?
The questioner : No, the disavowal does not hold.
The Shaykh : The disavowal does not hold? Do you understand the scenario? He said, "I sold you this item on the condition of disavowal from every defect," and he said, "I accepted." Does the disavowal hold or not? Yes? You?
The questioner : The disavowal holds if he says to him after the sale, after the contract, if it is ...
The Shaykh : This is one case: if he disavows him after the contract, he is disavowed.
The questioner : And if he accepted the contract ... .
The Shaykh : All right, the details ... Abd al-Rahman?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Do you agree with this? If he disavows him after the contract, then he is disavowed, otherwise not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, the buyer disavows him. What do you say? Correct. All right, if the defect is specified, he said, "I sold you this on the condition that it has such-and-such a defect" and named it? Sa'd? Does the disavowal hold and is he disavowed?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Because it is known. All right, is there another opinion on this issue? Ubayd? What is the other opinion?
The questioner : The Shaykh al-Islam.
The Shaykh : And he?
The questioner : If ... his sale is valid, whether it was before the contract or during the contract.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : And if the seller is not aware, then he is ... whether before the contract ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, repeat? What does the Shaykh al-Islam say?
The questioner : If the seller is ignorant ... .
The Shaykh : Ignorant of the defect?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Then the condition?
The questioner : Is not valid, whether before it, after it, or during the contract ... .
The Shaykh : Reverse it and you will get it right. I say, reverse it and you will get it right: if the seller is aware of the defect, then he is not disavowed.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Good, if Allah wills. In any case, we accept your retraction: if he is aware, then he is not disavowed, because that is deceiving the buyer, so he is dealt with the opposite of his intention. And if he is ignorant, then the disavowal is valid, whether he disavowed him before the contract, with the contract, or after the contract. This is the opinion that was narrated from the Companions, and it is the correct one. This is the stronger position, because people have great need for it. Often a person buys a car and it stays with him for a day or two, then he sells it without knowing what internal defect it has.
Then the author said, and this is the beginning of tonight's lesson.
A man sold his car and rented out his house for one hundred thousand riyals. What do you say, Khalid?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Two contracts?
The questioner : What he stipulated, if he combined two contracts, there is nothing wrong with it...
The Shaykh : Is it valid? Do you agree with this?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, he said, "I sold you my car and rented you my house for one hundred thousand riyals." Is it valid or not? Khalid says it is valid even according to the school of thought, and Abdullah says it is not valid according to the school of thought. What do you say? Yes, you?
The questioner : The school of thought is that it is not valid.
The Shaykh : The school of thought says it is not valid, meaning you agree with Abdullah? The school of thought says it is valid, you agree with Khalid?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Wait, is it valid or not valid?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid.
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid, and then it appears that one person says it is valid and the other... Perhaps we should conclude the discussion. The school of thought says it is valid if one combines two contracts without a condition, so it is valid except in writing. And this supports the opinion that stipulating the other contract is valid, because if this is permissible, meaning combining the two contracts, if it is permissible and we stipulate combining two contracts, then we have stipulated what? Something lawful, meaning we did not stipulate a condition that makes the forbidden lawful or the lawful forbidden. All right, he said, "I married you my daughter and sold you the car for one hundred thousand." Come on, Fawwad, what is your name? Yes?
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Is it valid? What do you say? "I married you my daughter and sold you the car." He combined a sale and a marriage?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Is it valid? Because it is without a condition?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I do not say it is because it is without a condition? What if he stipulated it?
The questioner : If he stipulated it, according to the school of thought, it is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid because he combined two conditions. All right, a man stipulated in the sale of a slave that if he frees him, the patronage belongs to him. What is the ruling on the sale and the condition? Samih?
The questioner : No, this condition is valid and the sale is valid.
The Shaykh : The sale is valid without the condition. Do you have evidence?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the evidence?
The questioner : ... The story of Barira... So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered her to buy her and free her, even if she stipulated the patronage for her. And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said, and he said
What is the matter with a group of people
ما بال أقوامThe Shaykh : The story of Barira, where her family stipulated that the patronage would belong to them and sold her on this condition, so the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) invalidated the condition without the contract. He stipulated to the buyer that he should not sell her. Yes?
The questioner : He stipulated to the buyer that he should not sell her. It is not valid.
The Shaykh : The sale is not valid?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And the condition?
The questioner : And the condition.
The Shaykh : And the condition. Yes, there are many opponents.
The questioner : The sale is valid and the condition is not valid.
The Shaykh : Do not yield to the number of people. Is the sale and condition valid, or is the sale valid without the condition?
The questioner : The sale is valid and the condition is invalid.
The Shaykh : All right, why?
The questioner : Because it restricts the buyer.
The Shaykh : All right, did he agree to this? Did he agree to that?
The questioner : It contradicts the meaning of the sale, because the sale... the buyer is its owner, and this contradicts it.
The Shaykh : Meaning it contradicts its implication?
The questioner : The implication...
The Shaykh : The implication of the contract. All right, is there another opinion? Shahr, Abdul Aziz? Is there another opinion?
The questioner : The condition is valid if the seller has a valid purpose.
The Shaykh : For example?
The questioner : For example, it could be that the slave is dear to the seller, so he stipulated that he should not sell him.
The Shaykh : He stipulated to the buyer that he should not sell him, fearing that he would sell him to a person?
The questioner : To a person who does not appreciate him.
The Shaykh : Who would harm him or something similar. And this is the correct opinion. He said, "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased?"
The questioner : There are two opinions, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : There are two opinions, as he said?
The questioner : If it is
The Shaykh : Is the sale valid or not valid?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : According to the school of thought, it is not valid. Why?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, it is not unknown; Zayd is a shop owner, but I said "if Zayd is pleased" because I know he is a man who knows goods and knows their prices.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : How? "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased." Suppose he said, "I sold it to you if my father is pleased." Let us leave Zayd; "if my father is pleased."
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The question and the answer: you say it is not valid... Why? Know, O students, that you are required, if you say the sale is not valid, to present evidence for the invalidity, because Allah said
But Allah has permitted trade
وأحل الله البيعThe questioner : A suspended sale.
The Shaykh : A sale suspended on what? Unknown or known? Unknown? All right, but it will be known soon.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Do you have evidence that such a condition is unknown and invalidates the sale?
The questioner : Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade the sale of gharar.
The Shaykh : And this? And this is from gharar. All right, would this be from gharar if the time is specified and I said "if Zayd is pleased within two days"?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : It would not be.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And on this basis?
The questioner : The sale and the condition are valid.
The Shaykh : If?
The questioner : If the time is specified.
The Shaykh : If the time is specified, like the option, as if he said, "I have the option for two days, for example." All right, this opinion is the correct one, and the school of thought says it is not valid absolutely. If he said, "I sold it to you on the condition that you pay me the price within three days, otherwise there is no sale." You, Musa?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : "I sold it to you on the condition that you pay me the price" means you give me the price within three days, otherwise there is no sale between us.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is it valid? How is it valid and how does it become valid?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : All right, but he says, "otherwise there is no sale between us."
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : What is the difference between this and "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased"?
The questioner : This is suspended.
The Shaykh : And if?
The questioner : This is the rescission of the contract.
The Shaykh : Where is the suspension? But it means this is possible. This is suspended: "If you do not pay me within three days, otherwise there is no sale."
The questioner : If the time is specified.
The Shaykh : All right, "if Zayd is pleased within three days"?
The questioner : "If Zayd is pleased within three days"?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : It is valid. Good.
The questioner : The difference between them: in the first case, the sale is suspended on rescission, the sale...
The Shaykh : What is the first case?
The questioner : The first case is like deferred price.
The Shaykh : What?
The questioner : That you pay me the price within three days.
The Shaykh : And if not?
The questioner : Otherwise there is no sale between us.
The Shaykh : This is a sale of what?
The questioner : Suspended on rescission.
The Shaykh : A sale suspended on rescission? We did not understand this? How does it become a sale suspended on rescission when it did not become a sale?
The questioner : ... Oh Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Sharafi?
The questioner : The last one, Shaykh, is the suspension of rescission.
The Shaykh : Shaykh, if I say the last one, we do not know which is the last and which is the first.
The questioner : Yes, Shaykh, "I sold it to you on the condition that you pay me the price within three days, otherwise there is no sale between us."
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : This is the suspension of rescission.
The Shaykh : Suspension of rescission, and "I sold it to you if Zayd is pleased"?
The questioner : This is a suspension.
The Shaykh : A contract.
The questioner : A suspension.
The Shaykh : Of the contract?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Suspension of the contract. This is the difference. So the suspension of the contract is not valid, and the suspension of rescission is valid. This is the difference, and you know that there is disagreement regarding the suspension of the contract.
He pledged something to him and said to him, "If you bring me the price when the time comes, otherwise the pledge is yours?"
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : It is not valid?
The questioner : According to the school of thought, it is not valid.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : The hadith is
A pledge does not become lost to its owner
لا يغلق الرهن من صاحبهThe Shaykh : All right, and is there coercion here, since he said that of his own choice?
The questioner : According to the correct opinion, it is not a condition.
The Shaykh : And on this basis, is it valid?
The questioner : It is valid...
The Shaykh : It is valid. He says, "I pledged something to him and said, 'If you bring me your right at such a time, otherwise the pledge is yours.'" All right, is there a difference between when the pledge is large, more than the value, or small? Say, Abdul Rahman? Is there a difference?
The questioner : If the pledge is many times the value of the item... by a coercive order, then the sale is not valid.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : Because this, Shaykh, is a sale of gharar.
The Shaykh : What is in it? Much loss.
The questioner : Ghabn (unfairness).
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : There is ghabn.
The Shaykh : Much ghabn, but is he willing? The owner of the pledge who pledged this thing? This is the one by whom we can explain
A pledge does not become lost to its owner
لا يغلق الرهن من صاحبهThe questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : He said, seeking blessing in the will, it is valid.
The Shaykh : Is it valid or not valid?
The questioner : He said, seeking blessing in the will, it is valid according to the school of thought and other than the school of thought.
The Shaykh : All right, you seem to want to detail: if he said it seeking blessing in mentioning the will, the sale is valid. Yes? And if?
The questioner : And otherwise, according to the school of thought, it is not valid, and the correct opinion is that it is valid.
The Shaykh : And otherwise, according to the school of thought, it is not valid.
The questioner : And the correct opinion is that it is valid.
The Shaykh : And the correct opinion is that it is valid. It is as if you have a rule: whatever is stricter is the school of thought?
The questioner : No, but the school of thought says that suspending anything other than the sale, suspending contracts, is not valid except in two cases.
The Shaykh : Except in?
The questioner : Two cases.
The Shaykh : Which two?
The questioner : The will and the earnest money.
The Shaykh : All right, this is the will.
The questioner : If Allah wills.
The Shaykh : Yes, "I sold this to you for one hundred thousand riyals, if Allah wills." He said, "I accepted."
The questioner : It is valid, according to the school of thought and others.
The Shaykh : All right, it is valid according to the school of thought and others, because the suspension with "if Allah wills" is either seeking blessing or giving a reason. Then we know that if the contract is concluded according to the Shari'ah, Allah has willed it, because a person does not do an action except by the will of Allah. And on this basis, if he says, "I sold this thing to you, if Allah wills," the contract...
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Who said it is not valid? The contract is valid. All right, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) excepted the earnest money or the 'arabun?
The questioner : The 'arabun...
The Shaykh : Did you hear the 'arabun? He gives him a part of the price and says, "If the sale is completed, it is the first part of the price, and if it is not completed, it is yours." This is valid, even though it is suspended, and it is similar to the suspension of the pledge mentioned earlier. All right, why is it permissible even though it is suspended?
The questioner : Shaykh, for two reasons... the buyer, and the second is that it is a compensation, which is a reduction in the price of the item in the case of return.
The Shaykh : All right, and the evidence is also the action of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). This is evidence, and what I mentioned is a reason. All right, then we read: if he sold it and stipulated exemption.
The questioner : We read it.
The Shaykh : We read it. All right, if he sold it and stipulated exemption from every defect without specifying it, is he exempt or not? The brother? The one at the door?
The questioner : If the condition of disavowal is stipulated?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : If it is like a car, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : What do we say if it is like a car? Let us say if it is like a camel, then.
The questioner : ... If the buyer does not know about this defect and the seller does not know about this defect, it is permissible for the customer. But if he knows about its condition, it is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Yes, and according to what the author said, does the disavowal hold?
The questioner : No, the disavowal does not hold.
The Shaykh : The disavowal does not hold? Do you understand the scenario? He said, "I sold you this item on the condition of disavowal from every defect," and he said, "I accepted." Does the disavowal hold or not? Yes? You?
The questioner : The disavowal holds if he says to him after the sale, after the contract, if it is ...
The Shaykh : This is one case: if he disavows him after the contract, he is disavowed.
The questioner : And if he accepted the contract ... .
The Shaykh : All right, the details ... Abd al-Rahman?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Do you agree with this? If he disavows him after the contract, then he is disavowed, otherwise not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, the buyer disavows him. What do you say? Correct. All right, if the defect is specified, he said, "I sold you this on the condition that it has such-and-such a defect" and named it? Sa'd? Does the disavowal hold and is he disavowed?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Because it is known. All right, is there another opinion on this issue? Ubayd? What is the other opinion?
The questioner : The Shaykh al-Islam.
The Shaykh : And he?
The questioner : If ... his sale is valid, whether it was before the contract or during the contract.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : And if the seller is not aware, then he is ... whether before the contract ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, repeat? What does the Shaykh al-Islam say?
The questioner : If the seller is ignorant ... .
The Shaykh : Ignorant of the defect?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Then the condition?
The questioner : Is not valid, whether before it, after it, or during the contract ... .
The Shaykh : Reverse it and you will get it right. I say, reverse it and you will get it right: if the seller is aware of the defect, then he is not disavowed.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Good, if Allah wills. In any case, we accept your retraction: if he is aware, then he is not disavowed, because that is deceiving the buyer, so he is dealt with the opposite of his intention. And if he is ignorant, then the disavowal is valid, whether he disavowed him before the contract, with the contract, or after the contract. This is the opinion that was narrated from the Companions, and it is the correct one. This is the stronger position, because people have great need for it. Often a person buys a car and it stays with him for a day or two, then he sells it without knowing what internal defect it has.
Then the author said, and this is the beginning of tonight's lesson.