Why did the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) order that they be granted the condition of loyalty, then invalidate it? – The hadith of Barirah – Is this not a deception of them, allowing them to stipulate this condition for themselves and then invalidate it?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : This is a question that has been raised, and it is very difficult. It asks: Why did the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) order that they be granted the condition of loyalty, then invalidate it? Is this not a deception of them, allowing them to stipulate this condition for themselves and then invalidate it, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Muwatta Malik 38:18?
Settle down. Regarding this issue, some scholars said that the lam in his statement: means “upon,” and that it is like the saying of Allah the Exalted: , meaning: the curse is upon them. But this answer is wrong, wrong in two ways:
First: This is not like the parallel case they mentioned, because in the saying of Allah the Exalted:, the lam here indicates entitlement, meaning that they are cursed with a curse they deserve, which is more emphatic than saying “the curse is upon them.”
Second: If the lam meant “upon,” they would have rejected it, because they had already rejected it from the beginning, so there would be no benefit from this. But we say that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered her to buy it and for them to stipulate loyalty for them, because it has been established that loyalty belongs to the one who frees a slave. So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) wanted to invalidate this defective condition, even if it had been stipulated. Do you understand, people?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : You did not understand. Well, I say: It has been established that loyalty belongs to the one who frees a slave. So if they came and stipulated that loyalty belongs to them, they deserve punishment for stipulating this for themselves, and then this condition is invalidated. This is one answer.
A second answer: They said that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Stipulate loyalty for them,” so she stipulated loyalty, and then he invalidated it. And if it is invalidated, to whom does the condition belong? To the one with the option. And these people did not choose to annul the contract. These are two answers, or rather three answers. The first answer is not correct, and the second and third are possible.
Take her and stipulate that the wala' is yours
خذيها واشترطي لهم الولاءSettle down. Regarding this issue, some scholars said that the lam in his statement:
And stipulate the loyalty for them
اشترطي لهم الولاءThose are the ones for whom is the curse
أولئك لهم اللعنةFirst: This is not like the parallel case they mentioned, because in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
Those are the ones for whom is the curse
أولئك لهم اللعنةSecond: If the lam meant “upon,” they would have rejected it, because they had already rejected it from the beginning, so there would be no benefit from this. But we say that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered her to buy it and for them to stipulate loyalty for them, because it has been established that loyalty belongs to the one who frees a slave. So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) wanted to invalidate this defective condition, even if it had been stipulated. Do you understand, people?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : You did not understand. Well, I say: It has been established that loyalty belongs to the one who frees a slave. So if they came and stipulated that loyalty belongs to them, they deserve punishment for stipulating this for themselves, and then this condition is invalidated. This is one answer.
A second answer: They said that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Stipulate loyalty for them,” so she stipulated loyalty, and then he invalidated it. And if it is invalidated, to whom does the condition belong? To the one with the option. And these people did not choose to annul the contract. These are two answers, or rather three answers. The first answer is not correct, and the second and third are possible.