Matn Abu Shuja #33

Mr Rahim Al hamdu Lillahi Rabbil Alameen wa salatu salam ala kind of Cydia Have you been able to be you know, Muhammad, you know, Allah Allah, Mango bad. So today these are the three concepts we're going to study, run, hijra, and

I'm going to first of all finish.

Repeat quickly what we did last time, just the last part of it in case, you forgot what we had done. We talked about arriba for quite a while

to two lessons, I kind of covered as much as I could. And I answered as many questions as I possibly could in terms of Jonnie why It's haram. And what form of is haram? Basically, to simplify it even more, it's impermissibility.

Paying for borrowing is to impermissibility for pay paying for borrowing. When I borrow money I borrow I give back what I borrowed are based on a deal. Yeah, which is like a lucky Thank you.

I'm gonna do that we have regarding regarding a certain period of time, time will not equal money in this loan that we have. That is what it comes down to. And there are everything that could cause that to happen. The Prophet sallallaahu Selim gave it to make haram. So it's not like there's more than one under concept of it, it's one concept that are different ways for us to, to prevent it from from happening. And that's why it was haram, in certain types of food is haram in almost anything that is it has the same value, give or take,

in general sense.

And that was basically what was removed after that to talk about ordering goods, which is Salam. And we talked about different conditions that apply for ordering goods. The text itself has a lot of different

conditions regarding ordering goods, I kind of told you that I told you last time that some of those conditions are very specific to the time meaning that the the Sahaba or the Imams who wrote these texts lived in a certain time, there was a context of their place and time. So they came up with conditions that suited their texts in the context of where they were when they were so many of these conditions may not apply today may not even make sense today. But what do we need to know

is that whatever you're ordering has to be properly described in detail, every aspect of it should be described especially the aspects that will change the value of what you're going to buy right and then we have to know exactly how much you're going to your money is going to be given a front and for how long we're going to wait until we get the good that we're going to get and where we're going to get it these are the conditions just to summarize the conditions of ordering goods so you to describe the good properly it has to be described in every detail that would change its value and if it's not the way it's described is going to be returned that may mean taking back the way that you

give up front for ordering that good has to be an amount that is agreed upon the good has to arrive at a certain time in a certain place and that should be all written within the contract contract that's just to kind of summarize ordering goods today we're gonna start with something called Do I have Yes?

Are you sick?

Are you satisfied? Look whatever you guys agree to is up to you and it says if you want to you know sell an eraser for a million dollars in some some guy who's willing to buy it that's their that's their problem and how much they want to pay for something.

So you're like like maybe six months late for that question. So

go back to the third man, he listened before this one and I talked about that in detail so you can listen to the whole explanation. And you can go to YouTube and listen to the maybe third one before this. I went to a lot of detail and then I talked about it for like at least an hour so you can go listen to that and then you understand it and shoulder behind it. Okay, so today we're going to talk about Ron

English, the best way to translate it is collateral.

The best word for it is collateral, or ponying something and this is a an extremely important concept to understand. If we're going to understand it in detail to understand whatever you have to understand the concept of collateral

or ponding assets.

So whether we're planning an asset, or we're talking about collateral is extremely important for the for the idea of it, but to become clear why It's haram, it's not a problem for us to have collateral when we're giving a loan. So if I'm loaning lending your money and you want you want $100,000 for it, and you're gonna pay it back within the next maybe 10 years or five years or whatever, in an amount. It's okay. It's okay for me to ask for collateral me for me to hold on to something and acid just to make sure that my my rights is,

is being preserved. I'm not going to lose, I'm not going to end up losing money the money that I gave that's fine. Whatever is just money increasing as time moves by but the collateral is you give me for example a car that is similar to the amount of money that I gave you. Now I hold on to that car until you pay me back your my loan, right? Whether we can use it or not. There's a difference of opinion

is something that could be agreed upon amongst the amongst the the two people who are doing the transaction if I'm going to benefit from it then I need to there has to be some calculation of of me paying you back or that loan decreasing based on my usage of whatever it is that you gave me whether it's a piece of land or it's a home or it's a car or something like that, but you can give me something called Run collateral you can find an asset and I can hold on to that until you pay me back. So it's not that's not haram in the DNA if you don't pay me back, but you don't pay me back when we agreed to for you to pay me back then I hold on to the essence right and that's an Islamic

biryani but concept the prophets I sent him Yeah, and he commanded people to do it. It's in the Quran. Anyone could combine SFR with MTG Ducati been very Hernan macabre if you're on he let's say you want to do a transaction and you guys are traveling and there's no one to write down the agreement, then that can be done upon an asset or use a collateral. I want to take a loan from you but no one's here to write down the the contract and we're here hold on to this. And you give it back to me once I once I pay you back. Right and it's an accepted concept whether you're on it he doesn't have that specifically just if you're traveling if there's not someone to write, but it's a

generally speaking, I spoke speaking, it's an acceptable concept. Okay. So just read what the the Imam talked about regarding collateral. If there's any questions we can answer, it's a pretty simple concept. It's important understand, if we're gonna stand why it was haram. Because when you're thinking about loans, you're saying, Well, this is no Where's where's the security? Because that was a big question that I got last time in time before where's that, you know, they're taking risk when they're when they're lending you, they're not really taking a risk, you can take collateral, right? The collateral is something it's totally acceptable and the dean Yaniv, which is a way if the issue

is security of my loan, like I give you the money and I want to make sure that I get my money back I'm not gonna lose anything well, then you can take collateral you can put an asset that's that's not a problem. But usually that's not the thing. That's not the Riba has turned into a way of generating money for the minds of most people in the rural river interest is a way of making money. It's a big way, it's the main way it is the core way of monetary systems making money, especially for those who are lending it so so it's not the issue. But if issue security then Islam offer the the the alternative offer this solution, you can do something called throw him the whole mm Bucha

jar rahamallah were called Luma Jazza. By room, Jazeera Honolulu, do you need either fabric either staccato to have him and everything that you can sell, you can pawn everything that you can sell, you can give us collateral. If it is a when it comes to do and do Amis when it comes to debts when it comes to loans, it has to occur to them when the loan has been well established as a personal debt, meaning now is being pleased with them. Now it's turned into a personal debt. If we signed the contract of the of the loan, I've taken the money and now you're waiting to be paid within a certain period or a certain date, he doesn't matter whether he was a pain installments,

does that difference than paying installments or paying at one point in the future, it really doesn't matter. And Islamically you can pay in installments, you can just pay it any full at the end. Just instead of giving the money to the person whom you owe, give it to someone who you don't owe to hold it for you, and then you give it to them at the end. So it doesn't make a difference. When you put on a collateral when you put an asset but there's a collateral, you only get it back after you've paid back your loan in full, you have to pay back your loan in full. Actually Islam, there's some there's some difficulty in the loan when I'm paying it back in installments, because it

can't pay back in installments, there has to be a proper calculation in terms of of the collateral, what part of it how much of is going to stay with the person that

that is holding on to it again, hold on to the whole thing. If you if you end up not paying the loan in full, if I pay half the loan, then you only should only get half the collateral that that I gave you, so that the calculation has to be clear. So you have to you have to pawn something that is dividable. If you pawn a cow, how do you get half a cow? Like that doesn't work? Right. So yeah, there has to be some ways to divide whatever acid that you're putting. Yeah, so again, the dyes to be agreed upon with it, whether it whether after slaughtering the cow, the amount is still because in a live cow does not have the same value as the meat of a slaughtered cow. In many parts of the

world, Allah and a life coach is way more valuable you only slaughter cows if the cow is extremely sick. It's dying is very old doesn't give any milk to the slaughter and to use the meat. But generally speaking, I live

a life code that will give milk is much more valuable for the owner. So everything that you can sell you can pawn if you can't sell it mean if it's haram to sell or has no value, then you cannot pawn it. And that's of course it's common sense but that's what the Shafia you have as a first statement within within the concept of of collateral when you're writing a roofie Malam Yakubu

what I have man who will be more elaborated ID and the person who was offering the collateral can go back Okay, good can call this off as long as he hasn't given the collateral to the person who took the loan from so if I'm

You're taking a loan from you, and I took the loan and I want to give you collateral. That's why you asked for collateral in return. And I haven't, I'm gonna give it to you. And then I want to go back on my word, I don't want to give you the I can do that as long as you don't have it in your hand. And you once I give it to you, as the client is with you, I can't take it back again. Once you have the collateral, if you're lending money, the moment you have it, I can't take it back. Unless I give you my like I say, I don't want this anymore. So let's say pong with it with you a piece of land, and now the land is with you. You're you're on it. Yeah, you're, it's actually you have the contract

for it. And then in the middle of it, I don't want to do this. I want to take the loan and just pay you back for legally with no with no money. If you already have the contract. I can't take it back. I can only take it back after a pay you pay you the back of the loan. Does that make sense? So as long as like $200,000 from you, right? It's a loan, we're gonna write Do I need a contract on it? But you asked for collateral? And I said, Yes. So I hear here's my here's $100 $100,000. Phone, I give it to you. After I give it to you. I can't. I can't say I don't want to do this anymore. I don't want to I don't want to do anything with you. I just want the contract to be what what? Yeah,

exactly. So I if I give you the collateral causes with you until I pay you back. But I can I can go back the collateral concept. Before I give you the actual assets, you can go talk about it again. But once you have it, we can't change it. And we can't go back me we have to you have to stick to this because we're also it becomes a useless concept to begin with. Yeah. Is that even with like, even when the other person agrees, like let's say, Well, I don't want to do this on like changes. And the other person says, Okay, fine. Even if he says he shouldn't go back for the shock value, that's not for everyone with it. You shouldn't you're not allowed to go back once the once the

maroon once the collateral, the pond acid is in the hands of the one who lent the money he holds on to it until until until he's paid back full by the person in front of us to keep the book or to preserve can be formed asset, does it have to equal the value of? Yeah, so hold on for a minute. Yeah. So let me let me finish talking about

collateral and then at the end, if anything is missing, and shallow answer, but because because they talked about this quite a bit with a couple of them

about what happened. Because where did I put these three because at the end of at the end of these, most of these questions will be covered in Sharla. And then at the end of the show not covered just the only will answer them at the top of them. Babble hatin let me show you Oh, my running hat. Yeah. Kalia Jamia who hit a couple about that. But if the person who lent the money is taking the supplements or taking certain amounts of the loan back, he does not return the collateral until he until he takes the full amount, he has to take the full amount that he can get back then the collateral he can give. Okay, you gave me some, here's some, so you don't get back and forth until

unless we're gonna do something called soda, which comes in a second, if at a certain point, like you look at you, I owe you money. I don't want I can't pay you back. Is there any way we can we could do something different. Is there any way we can come to an agreement where I don't pay you back the money, and then that's called sort of reconciliation, that there's a different way to do that. But generally speaking, if we're still sticking to the contract of the loan, you don't give back the pond asset or the collateral until until they pay that amount in full. Okay, so that's all I have. Now, I'm gonna move on to high yield. And the question you asked will be answered and surely

it within that within the text in a few minutes. So hi, John,

which is since suspension from transactions, and how jealous when you're suspended from being able to have a transaction, you're allowed to use your money anymore. So suspension?

I don't know a better word for it. But if you can think of one tell me.

No, that's not that's not what this is. It's not an ability to pay. It's you're not allowed to use your own money anymore. Meaning you're going to seize your assets and your money. So like the government would do that in certain in certain situations. It's called module where now you're not allowed to touch your money your wealth anymore for a while. For diplomatic society. Yeah, so there's reasons but how you do it, I set it in. And suspension from transaction occurs upon six new types of people. Number one, a sub e.

So first, the youth, someone who has his family, his family passed away.

I think under age is a better word.

would be or what is what are minor? A minor? Yeah. So yeah, minor under depends on the country you're living in. And yeah, so in, back in Arabia, when this was written, it was under Yanni, if you're under 11.

Right. So if you're 12, you are capable of doing your own money because you're old enough at that point to other parts of the world. So if you're under the age of 18, or Brazil, you even older, like you're under 25. Yeah, this is for your lending. No, this is this is just talking about suspension of transactions. Who can we suspend from trying

selections if, if a child

someone passes away, two parents pass away, and they leave a 15 year old boy. And they leave a lot of money assets and 90 year bonds and they have money, they have wealth, can this child is 15 year old use that wealth openly? Can they do whatever they want? No, they're suspended from transaction someone else has to come in. Someone has to be either either a fat, an older family member, or someone appointed by government to hold on to that wealth, until he's old enough until he reaches a certain age where he's capable of, you know, taking care of his own. His own his own wealth. That makes sense. So Islamically that's in the Quran.

And you're supposed to, if he's 18 was an orphan, you're supposed to actually test and trial it put put this individual on trial to see if if they've come to that age, whether they're capable of dealing with their own money, because if they're not giving it to them, it could you know, you could end up you could waste it all if someone could come in you and you find a way to fool them take their money now they're gonna spend the rest of their life poor. So so the or a minor? What am I? No, no.

So the legally insane

so let's say again, exactly the same example. Two parents pass away, and they leave a son or a daughter, who are, you know, 25 or 35 or 40. But they're not legally saying they're insane. And so what do we do the kid can they use the money however, they want know, someone has to be in charge of taking care of the assets for this individual to make sure that they have enough to eat and live right. So in mid June was Sophie and zero NEMA li a stuffy himmelberg theory Molly, and write the word Sufi and Arabic.

Because this is a very interesting concept, it exists. I don't know if it exists elsewhere. I did look it up. I know that it exists in older theologies. I'm not sure if it exists in modern context. A Sufi has someone who

he's not insane. But he is identified i as someone who lacks maturity and lacks proper ethics. And it's just not a respectable part of community. So someone who's identified as that amongst people that he's Sufi, and is super hurt, and you find in the formula, now when I talk to sue for her more eloquent melotti, jalla, hula on piano was the coulomb fee how exhume Bakula home COVID amount over don't you give yourself to So for her to defeat, however, give them enough to close them, feed them and be very careful, don't pull them out of and be very kind of the way you speak to them. Right? So there's so far there are people who are not. And the way I look at it is there because when we

define sanity, or we've defined the we will look at the IQ scale of people, there's different levels of like users, and for you to be legally insane, you have to be under a certain number to be less than 90, I think 60 or 70. But there's this 90 range between and you may be sick or 65 and, and 95 where the person doesn't possess the ability, the mental ability to actually take care of their own wealth and their own assets. And that doesn't exist here in I think in Canada clearly. Yes.

Maybe Is that is that a legal term?

Yeah, so they translated as Spanish? No, Ramallah who is spendthrift? So the last. So if you look at the text in Arabic, and Syfy, who eligible family and family means the spendthrift one, but the word Sufi is the actual word that is meant by this whole thing. But the translators Allah here didn't want to use the word because there's really no translation for Sofia. Very good one. So we kind of just jumped over that was, yeah, exactly. But But foolish. The word foolish is a is a is a social term Sufi in Islam is also a legal term. It's also a religious term, I'm trying to say that there is a fee is not just the social or linguistic term, trying to say someone's foolish. It's also a

religious and legal term that some people identify as two for her. For example, back in the day, there's a long time ago, if you walked around with nothing on your head, like no, no, you're not covering your head, you are considered Sufi, and if you stood in court to give testimony was refused. You have to hide something on your head, it was considered an act of suffer. So all of us are a bunch of suffer at this point. And he said, because we're not 19 So forgive me, because you have nothing on their heads back in the day that's how it was considered. Now, these are our social norms, meaning certain things will dictate what is tougher and what is not. If you look at the

Quran, they called it out to save the flood right now raka FISA, they thought and we think we seem to be sort of suffer that foolishness meaning we we were taking away your Yanni your authority and your ability to speak publicly and to be someone who was listened to me we're evoking your right or your privilege of being someone who was a public speaker or public public figure. So the concept of sofa is, is is down rig is down and down regulation but it's bringing down statuses instead of insanity lack of common sense of most people commonly

think is acceptable, so it's not.

Yeah, so that's not a legal term. It's not talking about just any level of intelligence, it's also behavior. If someone for example, for Sofia, a gambler would be would qualify Islamically ISFP. If someone is known to be a gambler, you don't give him the wealth, even if it's legally his. If he's an alcoholic, you don't give it to him if he's someone who, who has a record of doing striving, it just doing extravagant,

taking extravagant steps with money and wasting a lot of money on projects that don't work and time and time again, someone with a psychiatric Jani

diagnosis of bipolar, for example, or certain types of schizophrenia, where they go on Jani manic

sprees, and they start spending money. So this is what Sophie would equalize to in terms of an illegal term. But I think it's interesting that Islam actually has it as a religious illegal concept of someone like that. You don't give them money. Why? Because at the end, we're looking out for the person. This is a person who said, Miss my right, it's my right, yes, we understand. But once you give this, take this money, and you waste it, then who's responsible for taking care of you, the state is gonna have to take care of you. Okay, if the state's gonna have to take care of you, then then let the state take care of you. Now, as I make sure that this may, that is yours stays yours,

so you can enjoy it. So you can actually use it for your own sake. So it's not saying that you can't use your money, is it you're not going to be given full authority on the usage of your wealth in every direction? Yes. Minor. This past a certain point. It's the receiver full Yeah.

Is there like, yes. So as if he was a gambler, and he does Toba. And it's clear that he's not doing this anymore. He was alcoholic is not like that anymore. He's someone who had some issues and they they dealt with it and they went to rehab or any form of social transformation and people were able but see the social aspect of of regulating people and saying in the opinions of others in the in the behavior of people is important Islam. If people identify someone as something, then that can that can change it by how they actually get treated later on. But I think it's an important idea. I'm not saying that we I have a clear down a perfect way to define it right now in from a legal perspective,

but I think it should exist again, well, Allahu Allah, many illegal terms. Okay. So it's

Yeah, but that's again, that's more of a Yeah, it's more of a curse word than anything but but from a from a legal perspective, yeah, there's something like that in there. Like we there has to be some proper Jonnie, but we have to look the word Islam Islamic the Sufi is an acceptable word, we'd have to find something that works for us. Okay.

Agenda like that.

We don't know that. So that's why Sufi is kind of the middle ground. It's not he's not insane. But he's not also fully functional in society is not responsible, meaning he's lacks maturity lacks responsibility. He's somewhere in the middle. He may be someone who will go agenda Amelie, maybe not. Maybe he's made choices. And these choices he can like someone who's addicted to drugs, like, you know, they may go they may not I don't know what what led them to that depends on what led them to that.

No, no, that's not what we're saying. Yeah. Okay, we'll move Liz, Olivia soccabet, who do you own someone insolvent. So when insolvent or someone has no money back, someone will file for bankruptcy

and move lists. So someone who's who's filed for bankruptcy, and he's filled with debt, like has a lot of debt, he has no money on him. So he's not allowed to use whatever wealth he has in his hands or whatever assets he has. If you file a bankruptcy, whatever he owns, goes to the state now they're gonna deal with it. So I think it's the same thing here. I think the same thing again, if you file for bankruptcy, they're gonna come they're gonna do an audit to see exactly what you own what you have. And then you don't have full authority or full ability to use that wealth that you have anymore, which makes sense when you look as he has an insolvent mean, someone who's recovered from

bankruptcy and has debt. So if you have no money, it's not like, well, you have no assets anyway. So who cares? But if you have debt to me, you have no money, you have debt, but then you can just do whatever you want. Because now we fear that you may cause people because the assets that you have aren't yours anymore, really, if I owe you $100,000, and I don't have any money, I don't have a job either. But I have a piece of land. Technically, that piece of land is not really mine. Technically, it's yours, because because I owe you and I have no way to pay you back and I have to pay you back. So this asset technically is kind of kind of the other person's so you shouldn't be able to use it

however you want to use it. This should this shouldn't be taken care of by the states or that the other person gets gets there. Right and they're not down.

There right isn't lost in what you owe them isn't lost. Okay. Well, Maria, Elma, who for IE, FEMA as data flows.

So this is interesting,

the terminally ill,

terminally ill in any amount of money that is more than a third of what they own.

If more than a third of their assets, they can't use it. So someone who's terminally ill meaning that was told that you're going to die in the next six months or a year or whatever. Now he can only use a third of his wealth at that moment, legally Islamically you can use a third of

yourself only more than that you can't. Because now it's not just about you. If it's you for terminally ill someone who was the very very old in their 90s or 100 it the centurion, or someone who was given a diagnosis of a very, very severe disease and it's obvious or seems so far that they're going to deteriorate, they're going to die. If they make decisions, financial decisions, as they're passing away and more than a third of their money, it's rejected revoked just out okay, within a third, they can do whatever they want. It's totally theirs. But over a third is not in this will come in we'll explain that in a second. Why, but I think you can, you can tell why someone was

passing away, he's leaving behind what

he's leaving behind. Finally, we're gonna inherit him. It's not the money because your money is not yours. And my money is just it's Allah subhanaw taala has any wealth that others have rights within it, whether it's poor, or whether it's the people that we leave, you know, really die, Allah subhanaw taala. And he gave me that money to take care of your family. So now as you're passing away, like, well, you know, I'm not going to be here anymore. So you know, I don't care what happens. I don't have to be here to listen to you. So I'm gonna give all this away, and you can just take care of yourselves. Because sometimes that happens if there's some resentment, or there's some

knee problems, or someone's very scared from Jonnie asapbio Mafia, he may want to just give away all his wealth, he takes care of himself on the day of judgment but now he leaves his family and he for Quran and the prophets I said that I'm told for harvest specifically like to their faces not to do that don't do that don't give me any actually returned money that was given away for a hobby we're trying to give more than like no give that for your family they deserve it leave your your inherit those who inherit you with money is better than and wealth better than leaving them with nothing. And they go around asking people for wealthy I leave them with something don't give away everything

you have. Okay, what's missing? Well, Abdul, Allah de la mujer de lo vintage era and a slave who does not have the permission to actually do business. Because this is regarding anything relating to Afghan rulings are specific to those who were in slavery at the time. This doesn't count anymore for us we've gotten I'm not gonna put it up. Okay, what the photograph was sabe when image you know, when he was to feed him, right eurosai. So,

Sabine, so this one here and a Sufi, an image, no, these three, their transactions are invalid.

The transactions are immediately invalid, anything any transaction they made is completely invalid unless it is done based on those who are in charge of their of their assets and in charge of their of their accounts. But then they whatever, whatever they say themselves doesn't count. So so if you said I bought this phone from this minor, well, I know you didn't buy it, it doesn't count.

I imagine it from your with your son, your son's carrying around ganja toy. Another kid said, I bought this with this good friend. No, you didn't. This is an invalid transaction just by the fact that the person who initiated it, or said yes, it was a minor. So here's your money. Here's the everyone go back to. So it's completely invalid. The same thing happens for insane. And first of all, it's an important concept to think about as well. Because

what happens if he signs a paper where he's giving, it doesn't count does that's a useless piece of paper. And that doesn't mean anything at all. You just throw it out and just do anything, okay? With the software will mostly see your selfie, the Muttahida doing a higher Annamalai. And as far as the insolvent if he's talking about personal debt, it's fine. He can he can do whatever he wants in terms of personal debt. It's valid, but when it comes to his assets, it's invalid. So I'll explain that in a minute. So for assets, anything he does is invalid.

And personal debt

is valid, just fine. So he can't use what he has at all. He can't sell anything he can get. But he can accumulate debt on himself if he wants he can he can he can take a loan and promise to send it to a backlog because that's but he cannot use his assets anything else he does. He's a he's a grown grown person with Danny who has seen it was not, but he cannot use his assets because those assets like I said, because he's he's under a lot of debt has no money. These assets technically aren't his anymore. So it has to be figured out of how much is gonna go to the person who he owes money, and then he'll get whatever's left if there's anything left, but it's not his anymore. Okay. With a

sorrowful Murray, females, Adela floofy, Mo cufon. Isla ijazah, Tijuana 13 embody here, and for the terminally ill to use more than a third

more than a third is is it depends upon the acceptance of those who are inheriting the money. So if a man has three children, and a wife, and he wants to give away half his money, he's only allowed to give away a third from to give the other six of his money away. He has to get the

consent of his wife and his children.

And if his mother and father are alive, then they have to give their consent as well. Because if a man dies, that he is he is what's left is going to go a part of it to his father and to his mother to his wife and to his children.

Basically just to make sure that those people are on here, okay? And this becomes really, really ugly when he doesn't have kids.

And I've seen it get really, really bad in certain certain cases really bad where

the man who is passing away and he's gonna leave his money leave his mind to his brothers. He has no kids. So his mom's gonna get some, his dad's gonna get some, and then his brothers and siblings get the rest of it. And Islamically he's not allowed to give more than third without their consent. And they'll never consent to that, like it's impossible. I've never seen it happen in my life. And I've never I don't think will ever will. And it causes a lot of problems because they're not descendants of the of the person who's gonna

pass away. So people ethically aren't as as open to this man as the kid is you're okay with it. Like, from a conscious perspective, you're like, yeah, that's, that's that sounds good. Like the kids are more deserving of the money that their father is gonna leave away, leave leave behind. But what about the siblings, like you don't feel the same way about it, but the slime if he did not, he's not allowed to do it. And I've seen a lot of problems happen there, but it's still Islamically that is the ruling. And it's not just for the shear failure. By the way, this is one of these things are pretty much across the board, the differences are in details that the text handler doesn't even

get into. So the differences between them at the hip are within details of this text doesn't even go into most of what we're reading right now when we read the insha Allah after this, we read a mitten in a different method whether any hang but your hand, if you are Maliki, you'll find that these parts are pretty much the same, like almost the same wording almost the same concepts because they're the things that they're universal and understanding because because a lot of it is

very practical people got to got to see examples of it at the time that were very clear, okay, with a wonderful Aberdeen, your cool new feet and mighty he YouTuber will be here by the SP and a slave is allowed to accumulate personal debt that will become valid upon him after he buys him out of slavery after he buys himself out of slavery actually becomes a free person, wherever he accumulated upon himself, whatever words he gave whatever loans he took, he'll pay after that, but before that, it has to be with the permission of the the master. Okay.

The final concept

is reconciliation.

So

these are all Islamic.

These are all Quranic concepts of what is in the Quran, larger is in the Quran as well. And so, all these concepts are there, and they exist in the most half without too much detail, but the actual basis of it is a Quranic one, which makes it very strong and very important for us to learn and understand. So we constantly reconciliation, we also we also

assume you

already feel unwell when either you

went around you but right. So it is it is it is permissible and proper for us to have reconciliation

when there is approval, or when there is consent or when there is

admission or someone's admitting to the money. So let's say I owe you a certain amount of money, or I owe you a piece of land, for example. Now we're disagreeing on how this is going to work, how are we going to pay you back the loan is taking too long, there was no no pond asset to begin with, or things are just we're coming to a disagreement about how this is going to work. So we want to, we want to reconciliate you want to find a way to fix this problem so that we can move on. So reconciliation, the first condition for it is o'clock. I mean, I have to I have to admit to the to what is owed before we can actually do anything about it.

I say I owe you $100,000. And I'm supposed to pay you back and I didn't pay you back and you need the money and you're willing to take something for that are you willing to give up a certain amount of that mine take whatever is left, you're willing to do something because you need you want to move on, you don't want to keep keep this going, we can reconciliate and find a way to change the contract that was initially written as long as I admit that I owe you 100,000 If I don't if this doesn't work, so a third party can't come in and do this. With me not admitting to owing you the $100,000 has to be a car, there has to be some level of admission. And in terms of admitting intent

in terms of doing reconciliation, what else should go to the courts. So if I'm not admitting to what I owe you or the person doesn't admit to what the other person is asking for and he's he's saying I I claim that this piece of land is mine and he's wants to give it back to me we agreed that after three years or four years I would be given the contract you didn't and we're not he's asking for more time and we're disagreeing on this. We can reconsider it as long as the person says yes, I promised him after three years we're gonna give it to him where else we should take this to the courts right because then you don't actually becomes worse when someone a third party comes in I've

seen this happen as well when a third party comes in and tries to fix the problem without the first party admitting to what the second party is claiming all it takes is for the this information to be accurate. Okay, you took he's happy he's happy. And then this person goes out Well, I never owed him that to begin with and it was a big then things get go back to fighting all over again. So the ice we have to admit before, let's say we have a piece of land. And this is when this happens a lot. If you come from Middle Eastern country, you know exactly what I'm talking about. The father passes away. And now we're going to take

He fluffed a big piece of land or we're going to divide the line between us. So this is where the line is, right? Here's the line. And then we put it there. And there we go, when we come back a few years later, and the line is moved a bit or shifted, or it's just, we're not clear. And like, here's the line, he's like, No, here's the line. No, here's the line. No, there's a line in there, we're fighting about about it, right? So you can reconciliation as long as someone admits to something someone's gonna admit, if we don't admit to anything, if you don't admit that it was moved this way a bit, or move that way a bit, then here, you can see it and you find, okay, we're gonna put it

here, the other party and say, Well, you know, I was there to begin with, and then we go fighting again, and the other guy pushes it. So it never is never as it never ends, the problem is just never never end. So there has to be some party have to, to admit that something had happened. And then we can be conciliate based on it. And that's something important, might have gone a long way when it comes to wealth when it comes to money.

And anything that is going to lead to the loss or accumulation of wealth, for example, sauce. Here's a really good example. If someone Jonnie harm someone in Islam in certain situation, we'll come to that and show later on the text discusses, there's the concept of you taking back you do doing to the person, whatever they did, did to you, right, an eye for an eye and ear for an ear, nose, my nose. What was it Susan told is a part of the Quran as well. So certain examples like that. So let's say that you something like that happened. You fought with someone and then you you physically harmed them, they have the right to physically harm you back in the same way you Islamically in

certain exact certain conditions. So you don't want that to happen. So you can see it with the with the person. Okay, okay, well, instead of you doing that to me, how about I pay you a certain amount of money I give, and this happens a lot

when you sue someone and that what it is, is personal debt you so if you sue for personal damage, and personal harm and other things that today are even Jonnie, now you can you can basically make a fortune just suing people, I bought it, you can go on YouTube, there's a whole section of filming people who do that for a living, people throwing themselves in front of cars, and it's turning into, some of them have it down to a science where they're really good at it. And they know exactly how to put themselves in a place where they're gonna get killed, or harmed to the point where they can't, they're not mobile, and just enough to take this guy for whatever he's worth she it didn't take a

lot of money. So it exists as a concept today, and it existed back then and on issues on film world meaning on wealth or assets when that and that will lead later on to the loss or accumulation of assets, which is like a sauce. Well, there's two ways of doing a solid solid or a reconciliation, Ibarra only which is absolution when wah wah, which is compensation. So we'll start with the first one which is a liberal. There's two ways to do it once it's cut when it's called abre.

Which is absolution

other ones called Wow.

Which is compensation.

For

your sorrow warm and happy to be here, what are your views, which are the people who either shop

meaning for the person who was owed by someone else to accept a a portion of what he is owed, instead of all of what he is owed me? Okay, you owe me 100,000, you have to give me 60. And I'm satisfied with the 40 I don't want 40,000 is called up solution. And I'm done. I'm saying that I'm forgiving you with $40,000. When I used to I shot, it can't be done as a condition. Because it turns into it about that point. Or you can turn it back into numbers. So it can't be It can't be a condition when I'm lending money, that's going to happen at any point, it can be based on a condition and it can be based on existing condition. For example, let's say I will

forgive you with the premium portion of my loan when when the beginning of the month comes when the beginning of the month comes like in a month No, no, that doesn't work. Either do it now or wait until the beginning of the month and then do it so it can't be done based on a condition for a time or for anything or any I'll forgive you of my part of a portion of my of your debt. Maybe if I make this amount of amount of money this month, or if I if I'm capable of going down but I know it can be based on a condition if you're gonna do it, do it whenever you're ready to do it. And it has to be done

on the spot and it can't be a condition for the loan when you take the loan to begin with. It can't be conditioned for that to begin with. Okay.

That's absolution and what our though which is compensation? What do we do who aren't happy lovey? Where are you at I lay here

so you owe me $100,000 But and you're not and for some reason you can't seem to put it together and like alright, I don't want 100,000 they'll give me something else give me something Forgive me that piece of land that you have wherever in whatever county give me that i Okay give me that and if the person says yes, now this turns into transaction, this becomes beta. This becomes any selling and buying. I bought that piece of land for you for $100,000. Right so so now you got it.

equilibria all the rulings regarding selling and buying apply to that transaction at that point. So this so compensation becomes a transaction actually, it turns into an act of selling and buying, and we have to treat it as such.

Does it have to be perfect in terms of how much we're selling or buying means? Does it have to actually be worth it?

Meaning you owe me $100,000, you're not giving it to me. And then you have a piece of land that's worth more than that. Can we do this if it's worth more than that?

So yes, you can do it because it has transaction. That's why I told you, it is similar to any transaction, it's worth more, but you're gonna sell it to me for $100,000. Fine, that's, it's your choice. And that's my choice as well in terms of buying it. So it can be anything, because these are small, extra conciliation, we're just trying to, we're trying to find a way to fix this or to move on and get out of the Get out of the debt. Okay.

So those are three points that we're up to here.

We are usually the incentive just to finish the chapter and then move on to the next one. They're pretty simple. From now on. The concepts are much more simple, they're less once you add a river to behind everything becomes much more easier to talk about. Yeah, it looks like to be today's much smoother and reading. Well, usually insanity, and usually are ocean and the ocean is a balcony. So this is talking about a specific ruling back in the day apparently was a big deal. So is it permissible for a person to have a balcony, feet tall enough is that is that face is an open road road that is not a dead end dead end dolly or there is not a any

piece of land that is owned by someone else asked to be on an open road and behave today. malroux be here so that the person who's walking back and forth on that road there is not harmed by the balcony so as to be high enough so the person doesn't doesn't hit his head. And it has to be It can't be far enough into the road where Pete you're you know, the person is actually invading the space of people walking back on a a common road that is not owned by by an individual. What I used for Darwin was Cherokee in the evening show aka you can put a balcony towards a piece of road that is owned by different people meaning that it's it's a common land that is owned by a number of different

individuals. Unless you take the permission of all the individuals all these are common sense issues just back in the day, apparently it was a big deal. Well, actually, it still is if you go live in the right place in the world, this becomes a problem.

If you're living in a small area, where they just this is the only road where you put your balcony where you put your door could affect how wide the road is how comfortable people are walking back and forth on it. And people get a lot of problems can happen. Because some people like big doors and big balconies and like Danny make something extravagant different than all the houses around them. And it could actually cause problems for cars to go back and back in and out, we'll use a duck Diem will Bobby fit determine which duck if your door faces a common road owned by more than one individual, then you can push it in towards your house as much as you'd like it's permissible, what

I do with that fear or you can push it towards the road ELAB isn't a shortcut, unless you take the permission of everyone who's owning the road, you want to push it towards the road, making the road a bit less any less white or thinner, then you have to do that with the permission of those owners. So here this would if you want to drive parallel, it's pretty simple. These are the these are the regulations that governments and countries and legal systems will put forward in terms of how you your usage of common area or common space. When you use common space or something that is not owned by individuals, you have to go through the regulations of the country that you're in this is Islamic

law as well. So it's, it's not only is it illegal, something that something legal, it's also religious, we have to, you know, if we're gonna use common space, it has to be with the acceptance or the permission of those who are supervising or owning that comment space. Okay, now we're going to talk about something called assignment of debt.

So assignment of debt in Arabic is called Alhamdulillah.

Decided over here.

So we use the word Hawala today for something a bit different. We use it for someone who is

sending money from one part of the world to another one. They call it how I call it however, but what it actually is it's in Arabic foresight, it's assignment of debt. And sometimes people misunderstand this and I once listen to someone talk Subhanallah

about this from from a book similar to this one. And the brother only D Yeah. And he didn't. I don't know Have you forgotten or he didn't really study that. I don't know what it was. But he he read the word Halladay he thought he was talking about this guy and he was good. He just butchered he just butchered it and the poor guy could not get out of the hole he had dug himself into. Because assignment of debt has nothing to do with sending money from one country to the other at all. Its users however, it has nothing to do with what it meant assignments or debt is a whole different whole different concept file.

You learned I learned something that day. Yeah, exactly. There's even worse, talking about candy and now you're you can never get out.

Good. So I

sold your car. You saying that I didn't sell you a car? And

we take it to court? Yeah, lots of charging more like soon for more cell damage. After you got your person, your original amount you the car's worth 10,000. I'm suing you 10,000 Plus real personal damage. Yeah, so personal damages is is acceptable, you can sue for personal damage any as long as it actually is personal damage, I find that the laws of this country to be very, very loose on it in terms of defining that like,

for every month, yeah, so it's not it's not gonna be interest. So it can't be interested has to be an actual, there has to be some actual damage that happened to you for for him not paying that car, but something that actually, maybe you needed that money, you didn't get it and that caused you any certain damage? And yeah, he's liable to pay that but the concept of just paying interest for it, no, that's not permissible. Islamically that makes sense. Just the interest itself. No, but if there's any form of damage that was caused by him not paying by then you're Islamically you're you have the right and the obligation even dies for it. Like if you have to get a lawyer and it got

exactly he can pay for all of that. Right? All of that you can do just just the concept of just accumulating interest on it. No, that's cuz that's, that's a that's a western concept of

interest. Yeah, exactly, then just do that. Yeah. But you're gonna you're, you're you have the right to sue him for whatever any,

whatever it costs you to actually get this whole thing done. And whatever damage that happened to you, because of the fact that you need to wait for a long time for him to pay you back. Does that make sense? Okay, does that

work there is to lend to people. Yes, it is very much encouraged to lend to people

was one of the biggest things as

problems. But Islamically we're encouraged to lend and we're encouraged to invest. We're encouraged to do two things to lend and to invest

as alternatives for for Riba, right. So an idea like when we talk about collateral, take collateral, and take collateral, your you have the right to take collateral if you don't feel that this person is worthy of and they do it when you think about it, does a bank give you a loan, if you don't have collateral?

They don't give you a loan if you can't prove you have some asset somewhere. So they don't really treat it as collateral, but at the time, but they just need to know Yeah, but you have something right. So so if you don't pay money, we can we can do stripped out from you. Like if you have nothing, I'm gonna give you a loan. Right? So it's dynamically. Yeah, exactly. So I'm ugly. And the idea is okay, no, I offer that collateral until you pay back the loan and that's making sure the person has something in case you don't pay it or you pass away or something happens and he can't get his get his rate back. But you have collateral is it as an Islamic way of encouraging loaning

lending money without without there being any labor involved in the process? And it was, I think, is something worthy of discussion and thought and you'll love it. Yeah.

Sure, I'll just I'll finish this last concept here that we can so I liked the way that he did it in the book. Brother Who this year who did the translation of this I thought it was an easier next easy way to do it. So a OHS be money, alright.

And b

Oh, see money. You see guys.

So a OSB and BOC right. So how are these very simple? Is this guy just removing himself?

saying okay, I'm gonna

now you owe him right?

Because he's the only guy in the middle who is who owes money and is owed money that he owes and is owed. So he's basically bragging okay?

You owe him and you don't know me and I don't know you from now on. So it'd be no longer Oh see money and he's no longer owed by a OC immediately. Does that make sense? So let me Okay, forget it. Forget maybe maybe this was more confusing than that.

Okay, yeah, there's more there's more to it. So if I owe the manual and the manual Oh HydroMet then you know, you can say okay, I owe henchmen from now on it may now it's I just don't like that assign like that. But the process of that is acceptable as long as the terms and conditions are met in terms of doing that so it's not just not anyone can do that. But that's how it's done. So

just for the terminology of the text itself is but be here's called it a more he'll

be as Elmo he'll he is the one who is moving the debt from one source to the other source.

And then you have L L model and mohale I lay here.

So, as Mohyla lay here

and see isn't

it

For my right with that are they miss mister up

yes I'm right

yep

it's a different a different word altogether that trend is over for me

Okay, so let's let's read the text and talk about the conditions and if you have any questions which are right here to add Hala allottee to Russia and therefore the conditions for this this assignment of debt to be to be acceptable

Yes.

So there are four conditions for this to be acceptable the first condition

is the l mohill. Meaning the acceptance of this guy acceptance of B

or the consent of the consent to be about him or her you

number two what Cabul Elmo

SAY THE CONSENT OF b Just so that the different there's different words that are used. So consent A B and the acceptance

of C

so C has to accept this fine old manual manual or is he mad and he's gonna see okay, I know you're hashing my attention I supposed to be okay with that to you has to be okay with me owing him and what I owe him No, because I'm a different person with a different thing that I owe so you have to be okay with the person and with what was being owed here.

Hold on for a second just be give me a minute one minute what COVID would have been stuck in one physical machine

has even established and established that

it has to be established me It can't be something that is not established yet or still on agreed or disagreed upon so my dad manual is established but his document is not clear no dedicate has to be something robust he has to be a conduit all sign so that we don't get into the legal problems and then will I you guys know it has to be to establish desktop. We're gonna assign one to the other we're gonna we're gonna remove one. What DeFalco Murphy the metal Healy. Well, Mohali Ali he.

So

Default means the similarity.

Default is a better word than similarity. What's better than similarity?

What did you translate the word? Default? I don't like there was similarity? What's the default?

Yeah, but we're talking about things. So agreement is a kind of a weak, weak word. All right, I'll explain. And then it makes sense of what it means after I talked with DeFalco. Mafia didn't matter anymore, really, when we're highly highly him in terms of what be owes. And what he owes, would be owes what he owes, they have to be similar for logins and in their kind, when no one and their type will hollowly with a G in terms of when they're supposed to pay until when can they wait to before before payment, whatever, but it will be here, the matomo here, and with this action, B no longer owes anyone anything. But the final condition is what you asked me mean, what what a owes to B has

to be similar to a B O C has to be the same value. It has to be the same. Now the Shafilea they go deeper, they say it's not the same value, they asked me the same type and the same kind of thing like it can't be. So if I owe you a car, then you I owe him a car, he has to owe him a car too. And then C is going to be able to push me to be okay with the car that he's gonna get from me. So I say the same thing. Now most of them don't put those conditions. Some of them say that it doesn't matter. As long as they don't even put that down. As long as C acceptance, his problem from that moment on. That is as long as anything and to me that gives this benefit or use because of the same

thing. Who cares? If the exact same thing doesn't make make a difference? Yes.

Or not? Same thing?

Yeah, so that's what I'm trying to say no, the only the chivay give this very, very detailed descriptor that has to be difficult. If you didn't mention him or he'll when will highlight Leave me the the thing that is the acid that is owed by A and B highly have to be similar or the same in terms of the kind and type and value but for others, it's as long as C is okay with it. So I owe him a 2005 Jani Mazda and he owes him a 2010 Mazda but as long as he's okay with the 2005 like whatever, just give that right? Yes.

Yes, so he can but this and so the Scheifele ESA that is called full.

So if they say that you do have to do for the first and then you can do assignment of debt. So they don't allow this transaction without their bank reconciliation, meaning this guy is saying to him, I said

And absolution sort of has to happen or a compensation sort of has to happen where He's forgiving a certain amount. And he forgave that certain amount. So okay then this the debt that I was owed by this guy should work now, because it's the same amount so he's you can be assigned to me now instead of him paying you, but the rest of them, they don't see that to be necessary as long as he hears the description he's okay with it, then he's okay with it. That's his choice at that point. But the FAA they like it to be a bit more strict in terms of assigning debt from one person to the other. Yeah.

So he is the only person here who doesn't matter. His opinion. So my knee in this example, if I only a manual manual attachment, I don't I don't matter.

says no, we can't do that to be a beacon. How's that dealt with? What do you mean?

Yeah.

Yeah, so let's say so you need the consent of being accepted. So when it doesn't accept this method, he doesn't accept it doesn't happen. The assignment doesn't go through. Yeah, but he doesn't matter here. He just owes something who he owes it to doesn't matter. Like it's, it's, it's the same contract, I owe money, where they owe it to him and you owe attachment, who cares, it's three doesn't make a difference. I'm just gonna instead of going, you know, I owe you what happens with this, whatever Obeah the material more he'll be who's more hail Deborah will be the material now he doesn't know anything. Now he's out of debt. He does not. He's not owed anything by me. He doesn't

owe anything to you. Right. So that's the whole point of this happening. So the final condition here is, oops, I shouldn't be okay.

I think we're okay.

These are. So the similarity.

Between all the assets.

Yeah, the Shafee are the ones who take this on much more seriously than others, you'll find like this opinion, the other one that have as well. It's just not as emphasized as it is in the Sci Fi method, these, when it comes to these parts of transactions in the middle hub, they're very widespread, you'll find in one month hub, two to three to four, sometimes opinion, sometimes opinions that don't even have a prominent one within the method. So for example, if somebody owed mdnr, like in the shop, you wouldn't say you can't you can't pay, for example, like using silverpoint. Would they be that strict? No, because Jesus went nowhere. Yeah, exactly. So yeah. So

as long as it's money, we're good. But if it's the money to an asset, there has to be reconciliation first between the two, between between between basically B and C. B. Yeah, yes. If it was a boat that would have the stable, yeah. Yeah. Unless Unless B and C reconciliation, go go to the creek installation process and then the assignment if that happens, then that's okay. But to do it just immediately, like I owe you a boat, he owes me 100,000. How about he just owes you $100,000? No, it's okay. You have to be conciliator. First there has to be some, we have to calculate whether this boat is more or less or more. And then we have to say I forgive you with the rest of that debt or

there has to be compensation in the middle, there has to be something like that. And then we go ahead and we make that make the assignment. This is how well okay,

good. So before we move on to guaranteeing payment, I'll take some questions. So this is good if we do this every time which I will finish this before I die in shallow fishing this this this Sharla.

So the collateral

if someone is let's say someone's asking for $100,000 Yeah, and the other person is requesting collateral of an apartment building which is worth more yeah able to sign that as Yes, but the thing is, once this is done, he doesn't get the whole apartment building he only gets what is worth 100,000 from it

if they were able to

no no so Ryan you don't need absolution or or compensation when it comes to collateral. Collateral is if I can't pay you then I have something that is worth what I need. So if I have no problem with his weight variability is way more valuable I take from it or this is sold and I get my 100,000 from this so I don't get more than what I owe I'm not getting more than that I'll get more but this is where you have more strict rulings regarding that but that's why I didn't get into it but but generally speaking the gym holder okay with that happening so you can find something you can put a collateral that is more worthy than what it is that you're taking. But at the end the guy who got it

who lent you the money is not going to get more than what they actually are owed. When the collateral on the contract is signed and the collateral stated at that moment. Does the lender own the collateral only things go Yeah, so he doesn't own it. It's just in his head. Is he allowed did we I feel like we missed something when we were reading

we were reading the collateral I felt like we're like it says anything like if okay we did

I miss we read it but I didn't explain it what I have my new motor here in Lubbock Tandy, I'm going by there came up because so

If you put in my hand, a piece of land as a collateral, I don't, I'm not liable for that piece of land, unless I transgress against it. Unless I go, when I burned something in its, then I have to pay something for whatever I burned back, I have to put something back into it. But if something goes wrong to that collateral, like, let's say, your hurricane happens, and it comes in, and it destroys a part of that land, I'm not liable for any of that. If you have, if you pawn a car, if the collateral is a car, as long as the car is sitting in the garage, I'm not liable unless it's on my property, and it's destroyed on my property that I'm liable. But if it's put in a.

So unless, unless the the one who lent the money who received the collateral transgressed against the collateral itself and harms it, then he's not liable to what happens based on just the progression of time? Like something's getting older by time, it's not his problem. It's a piece of land so house doesn't have to take care of the house, I didn't do maintenance. Now, can the person who lent who receive the collateral use use the collateral that he that he received like it was a piece of land? Can he? Can he use it and farm it? If it's a if it's an animal? Can he write it? Or you know, there's a cow? Can you milk it? If it's a car? Can you drive it, so can you use it, so

without an agreement between between them, that states that amount of that loan will decrease, as long as as far as you'd use it, it'll turn it up, all over again. Right, so I owe you 100,000. And you're gonna use my asset for a certain period of time, right? Which is becomes problematic. But

if there's a way we can agree to the point where you are going to use this, and as you use it, the amount of my loan decreases based on the usage of this, this collateral, some of them are okay with it, in certain conditions. If it's a normal, if it's like an animal, like to something that will just keep it alive, I keep it. So feeding it and then using the milk. So that's not considered a Zuma because you knew you're paying for defeated, so you're taking the milk and instead, so in certain conditions, it's okay. But I'm giving more big examples like cars and property and stuff like that. So there has to be an agreement you're going to use the collateral that you have there

has to be decreased from the loan that you gave any longer. It's like a property and it's like this, my house is lit here. Can you do that? Or no, that becomes a bit more complicated. If the collateral is not in the hand of the lender.

The majority of the scholars aren't okay with, with with the concept, meaning you lend it, it has to be the collateral has to be given to the person he has to own. It has to be with him. It's gonna be in his Yes.

Yeah, so I'm gonna take my house as collateral, but I'm gonna stay in it that Islamically that's the problem. That's not It's not okay. Yeah, but the guy lending the money, the lending, was putting it on collateral. I got lending the money doesn't own the house, right. So yeah, leave the house. Yeah. So it stays empty, or the person who was receiving the collateral can live in it with a contract between them, that will decrease that from the loan, tore it will be in favor of a Yanni it'll be for a fit for a fee. So I'll live in the house, and I'll maintain it. So I'll be responsible. In that case, it's okay. So you give me the collateral, I can live in it, if I'll maintain it, and I'll

pay for everything in it. And I'll take care of it and keep it because sometimes houses that are left without any residence, and it can, can can lose value can have a lot of problems with them. So I guess it has to be an agreement between the one who's lending the money or who's receiving the loan, and in terms of how the collateral is going to be used. So it doesn't turn into them. And no one loses their, the value of the asset. So if you're up, I'm giving you the you're giving you're putting that you're putting the house, I'm a so if I'm gonna live in the house, I have to maintain the house, I have to pay for whatever fees like electricity and hydro, whatever I need for that

house. Yeah, that's to be neutral agreements. So that word Yeah, it's worth it for a car.

Crash, and then you're liable. Yeah. Yeah. If you're using it, and there's an agreement of usage, and then you harm it, then you're liable for? No, so it decreases like because maybe, maybe the the damage to the car is not worth the whole debt. So you just

if it wasn't Yeah, and then sometimes if it's more than you owe more than you end up owning. So, so, it has to be it has to be properly

calculated like these things have to be calculated based on worth and value Yes. Okay. So, then two more questions, what happens when there is a contract with collateral and then the person who landed abundant sorry the person who received the money passes.

So, it goes to his 90. So when he passes away, he owns assets right before these assets are distributed amongst the inheritance that is taken out immediately. So it Dane with him Vim, any personal debt that is established upon the deceased is removed before we give away I need the amount of money they were distributed to the inheritance with

Because, yeah, what do you just take the collateral? If it's if it is equal, if the amount is Yeah, then yes, he just takes the collateral. But yeah, so Oh,

okay, now understand the question. Sorry. So yeah, if the cloud was in his hand, and the collateral now is his, unless the those the either of those inherent him have any the money is there and they want to pay him, so they get back the collateral maybe, cuz sometimes there's sentimental values for collateral, like I gave you this, this property, it means a lot to us, and we have the money to pay you, we want to pay you, like he left us this, we're gonna sell these assets, we're gonna give you the money that he owed us, you can give us back the collateral in that case, he has to give back the collateral once the money is there. But if the money doesn't exist, like the object inherits there's

nothing left than the collateral is his if it's more than the value of what the of the loan, then it's sold. Or there's, it's figured out in a way where you and he gets what he's Oh, he doesn't get more than what he is owed.

Yeah, forgetting that. Like, is there big steps? is, of course 100% 100%. Oh, yeah.

So loaning people, instead of giving them sort of card, you get a job. And then forgiving that debt, you get even more. Because you maintain with that action, the integrity and dignity of the person in front of you. Right? When I give you money, here's a sadaqa, right, you take that money, you benefit from it, but it's a sadaqa, you always remember yourself that you took a sadaqa, right? A gift is kind of hard to take in huge amounts of money, especially if the person doesn't really have it. But if I lend you money, so now you feel that your integrity and your dignity is still maintained, you're going to pay back, and then later on, he forgives you with that debt. It's an act of

forgiveness, it's less, it doesn't hurt the dignity and integrity of the person as much. So Islamically you get way more a year sometimes in those situations and actually giving sadaqa like actually giving sadaqa you'll get more you'll by lending and forgiving loans later. Because you're not only helping someone, you're also maintaining their integrity, which is something that we sometimes don't sometimes don't pay attention to as we were dealing with money. Yeah. Does that answer your question? Okay, yeah.

If the lender leaves you the house.

So he's paying rent and something that was given collateral to him? No, that's not going to work? Because that's collateral. That's his Jonnie at this point. It's not for either them to actually use. So the person who put as collateral it does not his right now, it's not his property at that moment. You have to Yeah, so.

Yeah, exactly. So it's not

actually in case you want to return then.

Yeah, no, that doesn't doesn't work. Danny, if I if I find the house to the person who lent me money, I can't charge them rent for living there. That's not that's not gonna, that's not gonna work.

But he can live there and take care of the

house in return for using it like that can work but for him to pay me why I owe him Why would anybody pay me when we just pay himself the property not

an asset. He's not trying to own the asset. He's just holding on to it until you pay him back. There's no transaction I'm not buying something from you. You're just holding on to this you're going to pay him back in Sharla. But in case you don't, this exists, it's not touched. It's not going to be used I can be sold and I'm going to do anything with it. So that he can get his money back if you don't end up having money. So that doesn't work like that because it makes no sense. I owe you and you're paying me well why just pay yourself and that way? I don't know. Yeah. The concept of collateral. I know from back home when somebody lends money usually what they say is I'll

put my house on collateral Yeah, so like if I need sure you give me money you're gonna say I'm not able to pay back $200,000 Yeah, my house is your house right? Yeah. So you say that I can't live in my house it's problematic Islamically because that can that can throw you out on the street

so Islamically that we're not supposed to do it like that. Just don't put collateral just take a loan with a contract don't put collateral

Actually Actually there's no

yeah

so

actually, we didn't continue but we continued it's actually the man who just said you can actually physically say yeah, I'll take care of it physically if especially if it's a physical any right back in the day when it was Yanni when when slavery was a thing so these things could work so we didn't come there yet but that is something today of course that doesn't apply at all but so if you're gonna give collateral is something that shouldn't be used by you or by the the one who lent the money if he's going to use it the one who lent the money then it has to be with an agreement where the loan decreases based on usage or he's going to maintain what he's using but for you to keep on

using it just don't don't get collateral because because you want to be thrown on the street there'll be different way to fix this loan instead of you ending up with no house. Yes.

It's a hadith the prophet as I said, actually use the word third doesn't Okay.