Explanation of the author's statement: "And it has categories. The first is the option of the session, which is established in sale, settlement in the sense of sale, lease, currency exchange, and forward sale, but not in other contracts."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said "And it has categories". There are eight categories, and the categories are limited to eight based on tracking and induction. That is, the scholars tracked the texts regarding the option and found that they do not exceed eight, or they saw that they were limited to eight in this chapter, even though there are matters involving the option that were not mentioned in this chapter, such as the last issue in the chapter before this one, which was not mentioned in the chapter on the option.
He says the first is the option of the session. The session is the place of sitting, and what is meant here is the place of the transaction. So even if the contract is concluded while they are standing, or if the contract is concluded while they are lying down, the option is for them. It is called the option of the session because what is meant by the session is what? The place of the transaction, not specifically sitting.
He said "It is established in sale". It is established in sale for whom? For the seller and the buyer. The evidence for that is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)Sunan Ibn Majah 2182Sahih (Darussalam) and his saying Sahih al-Bukhari 2112. This is one.
The author said "and settlement in its sense". Settlement in its sense means that the option is established in settlement that is in the sense of sale. The pronoun in his saying "in its sense" refers to sale, meaning settlement that is in the sense of sale. That is because settlement is of two types, as will come in its chapter. One of the types is what is in the sense of sale, such as when a person acknowledges to another person a hundred sa' of wheat, then he settles with the one to whom he acknowledged it on these sa' for a hundred dirhams. This settlement is in the sense of sale because it is a clear exchange. So settlement in the sense of sale establishes the option by analogy to what? By analogy to sale. Likewise, it is established in lease and its lease, because lease is the sale of benefits. So if a man leases a house for a year for a hundred, he has sold him the benefits of this house.
It is also established in currency exchange, because currency exchange is a sale, but it is a sale specific to currencies. That is, selling gold for silver is currency exchange, but selling gold for iron is not currency exchange. The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) specified currency exchange with a chapter and rulings because it differs from other types of sales. Therefore, they mentioned it specifically, otherwise it is part of sale.
"Forward sale". Forward sale establishes the option of the session. What is forward sale? Forward sale is when a person pays the seller dirhams with the goods deferred, such as when a man says to a farmer, "I want to buy fruit from you after one or two years for a thousand dirhams, and here are the thousand dirhams." This is called forward sale and is also called advance payment, and both are valid. As for its being called forward sale, it is because the buyer paid the price. And as for its being called advance payment, it is because he advanced it, and advance payment means that which is advanced. From this is our saying "the righteous predecessors," because they were the predecessors.
The author said "but not in other contracts". But not in other contracts, such as pledge, endowment, gift, sharecropping, transfer of debt, freeing a slave, and the like. These do not have an option. That is because these contracts do not escape two states: either they are from the permissible contracts, in which case their permissibility suffices for us to say that they have an option, because a permissible contract can be annulled even after separation. Did you understand? These contracts that do not have an option do not escape two states: either they are from the permissible contracts, and permissible contracts do not need an option because a permissible contract can be annulled by the contracting party whenever he wishes, whether in the session of the contract or after it; or they are from the binding contracts, which, due to the strength of their binding nature, cannot have an option, such as freeing a slave and endowment. Now, let us take examples of these. Sharecropping was said to be a permissible contract, and on this basis there is no option in it, because the sharecropper and the owner of the land, each of them has the right to annul. Do you know sharecropping? Sharecropping is when a person gives his orchard to a person, a farmer or worker, and says, "Take this and work on it, and you will have half of its fruit." The scholars say, according to the well-known view of the school of thought, that it is a permissible contract. So the worker has the right to annul, and the owner of the orchard has the right to annul. Therefore, there is no need for us to say he has the option of the session, because the option is established whether they are in the session of the contract or after it.
Pledge. Pledge is a binding contract from one party and a permissible contract from one party. So the one who has the right, it is permissible for him in his right, and the one upon whom the right is, it is binding for him in his right. An example: I borrowed money from a person, so he asked me for a pledge, so I gave him a document. This pledge is binding from me, and permissible from the owner of the right, because he has the right to annul the pledge and say, "Take your document," and the debt remains in my liability as an unsecured debt. Now.
Freeing a slave. If a person frees his slave and then in the session of freeing he belittles it, what do you say? It is not valid due to the strength of its binding nature. And the like of it is endowment, because endowment is when a person takes it out for Allah, so there is no option in it. And from this is gift: if it is received, there is no option in it because it is not a contract of exchange. Now, so the option of the session is established for both the seller and the buyer.
He says the first is the option of the session. The session is the place of sitting, and what is meant here is the place of the transaction. So even if the contract is concluded while they are standing, or if the contract is concluded while they are lying down, the option is for them. It is called the option of the session because what is meant by the session is what? The place of the transaction, not specifically sitting.
He said "It is established in sale". It is established in sale for whom? For the seller and the buyer. The evidence for that is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)
The two parties to a transaction have the choice (of annulling it) so long as they have not yet parted.
البيّعان بالخيار ما لم يتفرّقاBoth the buyer and the seller have the option of canceling or confirming the bargain, as long as they are still together
إذا تبايع الرجلان فكل واحد منهما بالخيار مالم يتفرّقاThe author said "and settlement in its sense". Settlement in its sense means that the option is established in settlement that is in the sense of sale. The pronoun in his saying "in its sense" refers to sale, meaning settlement that is in the sense of sale. That is because settlement is of two types, as will come in its chapter. One of the types is what is in the sense of sale, such as when a person acknowledges to another person a hundred sa' of wheat, then he settles with the one to whom he acknowledged it on these sa' for a hundred dirhams. This settlement is in the sense of sale because it is a clear exchange. So settlement in the sense of sale establishes the option by analogy to what? By analogy to sale. Likewise, it is established in lease and its lease, because lease is the sale of benefits. So if a man leases a house for a year for a hundred, he has sold him the benefits of this house.
It is also established in currency exchange, because currency exchange is a sale, but it is a sale specific to currencies. That is, selling gold for silver is currency exchange, but selling gold for iron is not currency exchange. The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) specified currency exchange with a chapter and rulings because it differs from other types of sales. Therefore, they mentioned it specifically, otherwise it is part of sale.
"Forward sale". Forward sale establishes the option of the session. What is forward sale? Forward sale is when a person pays the seller dirhams with the goods deferred, such as when a man says to a farmer, "I want to buy fruit from you after one or two years for a thousand dirhams, and here are the thousand dirhams." This is called forward sale and is also called advance payment, and both are valid. As for its being called forward sale, it is because the buyer paid the price. And as for its being called advance payment, it is because he advanced it, and advance payment means that which is advanced. From this is our saying "the righteous predecessors," because they were the predecessors.
The author said "but not in other contracts". But not in other contracts, such as pledge, endowment, gift, sharecropping, transfer of debt, freeing a slave, and the like. These do not have an option. That is because these contracts do not escape two states: either they are from the permissible contracts, in which case their permissibility suffices for us to say that they have an option, because a permissible contract can be annulled even after separation. Did you understand? These contracts that do not have an option do not escape two states: either they are from the permissible contracts, and permissible contracts do not need an option because a permissible contract can be annulled by the contracting party whenever he wishes, whether in the session of the contract or after it; or they are from the binding contracts, which, due to the strength of their binding nature, cannot have an option, such as freeing a slave and endowment. Now, let us take examples of these. Sharecropping was said to be a permissible contract, and on this basis there is no option in it, because the sharecropper and the owner of the land, each of them has the right to annul. Do you know sharecropping? Sharecropping is when a person gives his orchard to a person, a farmer or worker, and says, "Take this and work on it, and you will have half of its fruit." The scholars say, according to the well-known view of the school of thought, that it is a permissible contract. So the worker has the right to annul, and the owner of the orchard has the right to annul. Therefore, there is no need for us to say he has the option of the session, because the option is established whether they are in the session of the contract or after it.
Pledge. Pledge is a binding contract from one party and a permissible contract from one party. So the one who has the right, it is permissible for him in his right, and the one upon whom the right is, it is binding for him in his right. An example: I borrowed money from a person, so he asked me for a pledge, so I gave him a document. This pledge is binding from me, and permissible from the owner of the right, because he has the right to annul the pledge and say, "Take your document," and the debt remains in my liability as an unsecured debt. Now.
Freeing a slave. If a person frees his slave and then in the session of freeing he belittles it, what do you say? It is not valid due to the strength of its binding nature. And the like of it is endowment, because endowment is when a person takes it out for Allah, so there is no option in it. And from this is gift: if it is received, there is no option in it because it is not a contract of exchange. Now, so the option of the session is established for both the seller and the buyer.