Matn Abu Shuja #34
Date:
Channel: Adnan Rajeh
Series: Adnan Rajeh - Matn Abu Shuja
File Size: 55.64MB
Episode Notes
2018 4 26 LMM at 8pm -Chapter of Trade 4
Related
- Abu Bakr Zoud – How to thank the Prophet ﷺ
- Karim Abuzaid – 100 Benefits From Surat Yusuf Part 7
- Abu Bakr Zoud – Inspirations from the revelation #4
- Karim Abuzaid – The Higher Aim – Narration-Based Tafsir
- Adnan Rajeh – Self-Discipline and Grit
- Adnan Rashid – My Grandfather’s Death Led Me To Islam.
- Adnan Rajeh – Surah Summaries – Surat Al-Takwir (81) and Al-Infitar (82)
AI Generated Summary ©
The speakers emphasize the importance of trust and privacy regulations in the legal system, emphasizing the need for agreements for property ownership and proper privacy agreements for proper damages. They stress the importance of giving customers time to choose their mortgage options and improving the mortgage industry. The speakers also acknowledge the need for more information and advice for customers.AI Generated Transcript ©
Okay, no matter Haman hamdulillah without any alarm whistling whistling better Cassidy Muhammad.
Okay, so now it's been two weeks now, but we're gonna continue Inshallah, from where we left off. We're in
the Kitab everywhere. So we're talking about commerce, finance, trade. That's what that's the chapter that we are in. It is one of the longest chapters in the book. It is one of the most important chapters in the book because it talks about a part of life that is very
crucial and critical for everyone, regardless of whether you're someone who, who's religious or not. These rulings are it will affect everyone. That's why we talked about at the beginning, we talked a lot about climate change, specifically trade what are the rules regarding trade, and we talked about the ABA specifically went into a lot of detail about that. Today, we'll continue from
we're gonna talk about a Bowman so I'll put up a couple of words and the meanings that they that they carry, so that we can continue so the first thing we're talking about a woman
and this is guaranteeing payment
so guaranteeing payment of woman.
The chapter after that we're gonna talk about Alka Furla
is very similar, but has its own subheading, like a fella. Very similar.
Exactly the same.
Okay, sure, we'll talk about sciatica
which is partnership.
In front, it comes the idea of companies.
Right, so shakez idea of partnership from it will come the idea of companies and shall if you have time,
job, we will have time because we have a lot of time, we'll move on and we'll do something
we will do with
our commission.
thing is that these words that were used back then had different meanings than the same word use now. So the same way, which is a bit confusing sometimes when you're studying
when you're studying these things, but I'll explain to Michelle as we go along. So let's start at the beginning. We'll say, Man Who do you know, what if he's either early Madruga when he saw he will help the multilevel to mansha I mean, Obi mini well, Mother Mooney, and who either kind of banana, the yen. Okay. So it is acceptable, and it's permissible
for you to guarantee payment for debts that are established within the established upon a person established upon his, upon his Dima upon his personal rates, or personal assets, either only Makaha if the amount of it is known, meaning you want to take money when you want you want him to, to lend you money,
and you're willing to lend him money, but you want to guarantee that you can get the money back. So I can be a guarantor, I can come and guarantee you that he will pay you back. So what does that mean, in Islam? What does that what implications? Is that acceptable? Yes, it is accepted permissible for me to guarantee if the amount of money that you are lending him there's going to be paid back is known.
You can't say I want to take a loan from Brother, can you guarantee guarantee me are you a guarantor for me? And I say, Yes, I'm going to I don't know what how much is being lent here. That doesn't work, I didn't know exactly what's going.
And then you were the one who was owed the money, you are allowed to come and ask me the guarantor, or the person who took the loan from you for the money, both of both of you can ask either of us for the money, we both have to take care of it. If the guaranteeing process is, as explained, meaning we know the amount. So if I guarantee you for it to him in terms of being alone, you can come and ask me for the money.
Or you can ask it
so guaranteeing is a very, it's a it's a bit of a
dangerous process that has to be thought out properly.
When the date is met, yeah, so let's say the day is met, and we're let's say we're paying back in installments. And the day comes for that installment and you don't pay him he can ask you or you can ask me me can come and you can claim the money from me as well because I guaranteed you and I would have to pay somebody that was a bomb you know, Elijah Mooney, and who either kind of banana welcome will be easily here. And if I ended up paying you as the guarantor, if I ended up you asked me for the money, because I guarantee you I pay the money, then he owes me the money. Does that make sense inside the triangle because we're gonna He's gonna owe me the money as long as that I guaranteed him
and I paid you with His permission
or with
is, with his knowledge being guaranteed
him with his knowledge, you can't come and take a loan from you, then I guarantee him for you. And he didn't ask for it. He's like, I don't want your guarantee. I don't want you to do it. Don't do it, but I do it anyway. And then when you ask for the money, I pay you, he doesn't know me. Because it wasn't with your permission. It wasn't with your consent. It has to be with your consent that I guarantee someone and then if you if I ended up paying the person who lent the money, then you owe me right and that's how guaranteeing works. Okay, it's pretty simple. Like the concept is very simple is not very difficult. It's just important understand that these are the conditions that
Islam carry Islam carries regarding or highs regarding guaranteeing payments, what I also help man with the module, wala Mujib debacle maybe.
So it's not acceptable or proper or permissible for you to guarantee something that is ambiguous or unknown in in, in, in amount or in value? Yeah, whatever it is that you're guaranteeing, you have to know the value of it, you have to know the amount that you're guaranteeing. And you can guarantee something that is not
obligate obligatory for the other person to pay on time, meaning meaning, if you agreed that you would pay him a year, I can't guarantee that you're going to pay him in six months, because that's not what you guys agreed upon. You agreed upon a year. So I'm guaranteeing something that the time for it is not does not come yet. That's not that doesn't make any sense. Because that's putting you in a bad situation. You agreed on a year, why am I guaranteeing six months ahead that's actually abusing your abusing you can maybe the only thing that you can guarantee that doesn't carry those conditions or goes beyond those conditions is the legitimacy of an item that's being sold.
So let's say you want to buy this phone from me, he can guarantee that the phone is as described.
That makes sense. So you can guarantee that the phone is as described when I'm going to sell it to you. And if it's not, then you can ask either of us for the money or for your for a refund or to take the phone and get the refund. So that's acceptable so that the sale the sale is legitimate, you can guarantee that the sale is legitimate. Okay, so that's the first part on demand guaranteeing payment. The second one is going to be called a fella who is very similar with a fella to Bill Bethanien Jack is and you can guarantee you can guarantee someone else's physical presence in the moment. So Bowman is guaranteeing and Obama is the guarantor don't think about it is that the
guarantor is present at the soil Cafe Allah is guaranteeing worker Farah tomb, build better Niger is you can guarantee someone's physical presence for a for a court hearing, for example, either cannot fully be here, how can lead me to the person that you're guaranteeing their presence, if they owe something to someone else, if they owe their presence for some reason to someone else, then you can guarantee their physical presence?
Exactly. So you can guaranteed or when you bail someone out, you're guaranteeing that they're going to be present at their next court hearing. So that's acceptable. So Kafala has the same meaning of bond. It's just, it's just a synonymous. Synonym, sorry, is synonymous to demand. It's usually used when we're talking guaranteeing physical presence of a certain individual, okay? It doesn't fulfill its responsibilities. And it goes back to on you, anyone you guarantee, if it's not fulfilled, it comes back to you, now you have to pay for that, or you have to take care of it. So if I guarantee your physical appearance to court, and you don't, then I'm gonna have to carry a certain amount of
that.
The consequences for that like this consequence that will become upon me because you didn't end up showing up so it becomes a bit more difficult when when there's a physical presence. Somebody guarantee someone like why would
a lot of different reasons
just people who are related to you, people Yeah, and it's a there's tons of reasons if you a friend of mine, you need to you need to you need immediate money and you need someone to get it because he won't give it to you unless he gets a guarantee you need me to do I'll do for you. Like when it comes to getting a passport here in this country, you need a guarantor. Right, and if you ever made a class, we're going to be able to guarantee and sign that this is the guy who it is so so these things are, you know, they're very, they're very common in legal situations. It's not it's not unheard of. Okay, so the second thing we're talking about is sciatica.
Sciatica team comes to shove in there are five, five conditions to starting a partnership. Now, as I told you before, within this chapter, specifically, not everything in this chapter is precise, and in 100%, because it was written in a very long time ago. So the conditions of the scholars put with conditions based on what they observed in terms of how partnerships were being built and how companies were being established. So some of these things are based on logic, not just specifically on on Islamic texts.
dividends so it's not all Quran and Sunnah some of these just common sense and logic they may apply today and they may not apply today, they may be applicable in a situation they may be not applicable at all, but it's okay, the ones that are applicable, we will point out the ones that are less applicable I'll point out as well inshallah. So the first condition for for a sciatica for partnership, and yeah, hakuna Allah Now, Lin della Heaney, then annual Mina has to be based on a certain amount of money. I mean, there has to be a capital that is put in, that we that we are partners in. And that is not by and that is, unfortunately, not the, the prominent position for the
Shafia. Yeah, is what the email was put into a text, but it's not but the prominent position for the Sheffy or for any other of them, that we have, meaning it doesn't have to be on a certain amount of money, it can be on an estate, or on an asset that does not doesn't have a face value or the value of it is not clear, as long as we agree that the it is divided 50% or 6040, or whatever you want to divide it. So it doesn't have to be on money, but that's the first condition that he put here.
Now, where do we get the
evidence for the permissibility of partnerships? Is that what the Prophet of Islam likes of them said, and how do you would trust in Allah cool ALLAH SubhanA says Anna 32, Cherie Kane, and the third of any any partnership, there's two people are the partners on the third one of their partnership, Madam Johan Umar Sahiba, as long as no one betrays is the other as long as they don't betray the other, Allah subhanaw is with them in this partnership, because Allah subhanaw taala is, is encouraging people to take partnerships, and if one of them betrays the other than that partnership is destroyed, and ALLAH SubhanA leaves him fadeout Hana who cannot be stolen benei him
if one of them betrays the other than I leave this partnership alone. So partnership is something that is encouraging this time because it strengthens bonds, it allows more needed the fluidity of cash and of wealth amongst people and strengthens economies. So as long as there's no betrayal, once you're betrayed by your partner, you should leave that partnership, you shouldn't go back again, with different conditions, if there's betrayal, you should get out of that partnership.
That's the first condition on Monday, but it's a condition that doesn't apply even for the Sheffy. Yeah, it's like it's an old condition. No one get filled GNC, when Noah, that the the two partners are bringing in money, and are bringing assets that was exactly the same in terms of their species and their type. And that, again, is not something that the Scheifele even agreed to interpret and the prominent position, or other mazahub. This is an old opinion that exists. It doesn't have to be like I can bring in the labor, you can bring in the money, and we can start a partnership with that. So it's not something that is agreed upon. When you're then Aquila, Hayden, Minh, Houma, the Sahibi,
he fit the sunroof. So the third condition is that each partner allows the other partner to act on behalf of the partnership. So in order for TV partnership, we both have to have the ability to
perform transactions to buy and sell to do something with our partnership. Equally, or at least based on the the cut down on what the partnership looks like. What else it turns into employment after that's no longer a partnership. When you're cool. Now, remember, well Hassan Al Academy Maleme
and for
losing or making money, for profit, or for loss to be based on the percentage of how much we have in the partnership. So if I have 60% of the assets, and you have 40%, and we are going to business, if we make money, then I make 60%, I get 60% of the profit and you get 40%, the problem we lose, I lose 60%, you lose 40%, based on what you've invested into the into this into this partnership. And that's important when you think about it, a lot of partnerships today don't follow those simple rules. So you'll be asked to maybe become a partner within your LLC, your 10%, you're putting 10% in but you're carrying 50% of the losses, or maybe only 5% of the profit. And those are the different
ways that people have a lot of money, take less risk. When you when you study finance, they'll find the trend to be
horribly clear. Those who have money will try their best to reduce the risk on themselves to the point where they don't carry any risk within the partnership with anything that they do. And he was less money will carry much more risk. And for for an economy to be healthy. It can't work like that. If you have more money, you should be able to carry more risk in any transaction, any financial endeavor that you're going to get into. And if you have less money, you shouldn't be carrying as much risk. I'm not saying that. If you have money, you should carry all the risk. I'm just saying it should be proportionate to how much money you actually have to your wealth. If you're wealthy, you
have the ability to carry more risk anyway because you're wealthy and someone who doesn't have any role doesn't have the ability to carry that much risk. And this is why these conditions exist for partnerships in the in the month of November that are similar in terms of these ideas will equally we're heading in Houma first who
were Mata Mata huduma Babolat. And both partners have
ability to end the partnership at any time, they can't be stuck into the in this against their will, because the partnership or, or else if they're stuck into this and this against their will or for then is to wonder partnership, unless they find that they're gonna stay into it for a certain period of time. Right. But when when one of them passes away, then the partnership ends, unless there's a pre signed contract that this partnership based on the assets will continue with the inheritances of whoever inherits the money, if it's agreed upon, that will go on to a certain period of time, okay. And that is ending the partner part of partnership. And this in this kind of talks to the concept of
building companies in Islam. First of all, that is an encourage thing, we're encouraged to think in partnerships and in companies meaning to work to start businesses not on our own, but with other individuals. Why? Because it lessens the risk that you carry. When you go into a business with more than one person, then you don't carry 100% of the risk of winning, or making or losing money, you carry less because you have more than more people putting in their wealth, you know, to put all your wealth into it. So it's an incredible thing in Islam to do. But there has to be certain conditions that make sure that everyone is getting treated fairly. And no one's been getting the shorter
side.
Yeah, yeah, well,
yeah, that's usually based on the fact that we have less trust in each other. But from an Islamic perspective, partnerships and companies are encouraged in Islam for us to do as the Hadith narrated explains, and this is why we have a couple of conditions that the scholars put towards having these partnerships. Okay, we're gonna move on to the concept after that, and we're Karla.
We're Kulu magia as in Sani Assad roofie he BFC FC jazz Allah Who and your killer fee Are we at our kill everything that you are have, you have the ability
to use any asset that you have the ability to use on your own on your own with your own will then you are allowed to offer someone the Commission on your behalf to use it, or if you did a commission on someone else's behalf to use what they own. So this is just to say that if wherever you own any assets that you own anything, you're allowed to use that from a governmental and legal perspective, you're allowed to buy, sell trade or use in any way that you want. You're allowed to offer someone commission to use it on your behalf. And you're also allowed to take someone else's assets and use them as commission if they allow you to so when you work get out get out get so commission on one's
behalf. And what was the word that you use for confetti that you want to use you someone give me word for a photo?
Okay, someone offered a different the concept of commission on one's behalf is if you if you're going to leave the country, for example, and you want someone to have the power of attorney on your on your assets, then that's called Tolkein. Or what Carla right for you give someone the power of attorney from a legal perspective on assets. It's similar. It's a similar concept where you will allow people to use your assets or to run your company on your beehive, meaning that your signature now is equivalent to their signature. Right. So you're allowed to take commission on one's behalf.
Now, are there conditions to do that? Yes, there are certain conditions for that to be acceptable. What about Kerala to so commission on one's behalf after doing isn't is a contract that is permissible, it's allowed, it's okay for us to do? Well. He called him in Houma, Pasco Hama Dasha and it's and it's permissible for either either parties, whether the one who was commissioning, or the ones offering it, meaning the person who was commissioned meaning is no longer
using his assets or the person who is commissioning on his behalf. Both of them, both parties have the ability to end to end this transaction. Anytime that they want. They're allowed to end this committee, this commission, and anytime that they want, what infesting will be melki, I had the HEMA and if either of them died in this commission will end if one of them died if I if I'm if I didn't commission on your behalf. So I'm my signature equivalent to yours and your assets, then you pass away I lose my workout is no longer with me. And if I die, of course, that's obvious, because I can't do it anymore. So it doesn't it's not inherited. That's the point that's being made. So if I
was on your behalf, I was a commission on your behalf that you pass away it doesn't stay with me. It goes away your inherited those who inherited from you are allowed to give it back to me if they want to, but it doesn't stay with me. And that's something that goes against
how the law works here, by the way.
So if you give someone the power of attorney on your assets, if you pass away that stays with them.
So they say they still have the power of attorney on your assets, your your your descendants don't that's how it works.
I'm saying here, I'm the law here. Yeah. Back into law here. So if you're offered power of attorney and it goes on after you pass away is still with that person and it causes a lot of legal problems. It's a very, it becomes a very messy, messy issue. Usually these are lawyers, they're not usually their lawyers are not just in regular individuals, but it could it could go on Yeah.
assignment. If you had that anxiety in person here, will the attorney ship continue? Because you specified an overseer? Right? Yeah, just specified in the world as a different thing. So now now it's becoming within the will it's not, it's not something that was redefined outside of the will, the will itself can, it's a renewal, basically the will, once you die, it's gone. Well, we're Qilu.
profit.
Profit
This is not talking about making money. This is just the say you have a company, you're going to leave the country and go, we're going to do this for you. So someone who you give a COLA to
getting
commission on one's behalf is different commission on one's behalf is different than commission in terms of what you meant you make commission on one's behalf is for you to be able to use their assets in their name when they're not there. Yeah, so I don't think it was making money. Well, the key to the one who's taking that the person who has power of attorney with Okay, the person who's taking commission on one's behalf, I mean, on female, who are female CFO is required to be trustworthy, regarding what masters or what wealthy brings in what he spends. So if I'm running a company for you, I am required to be transparent, trustworthy in terms of how much money I bring
into the company, to make sure that's all written and how much money I spend from this company, it all has to be led based on trust, or trust, where I have the model elaborate every year, but I am not the person that will keep the person who's taking commission on another person's behalf is not required, he's not liable for and for everything that happens within this, the assets that he's responsible for, unless there's negligence
visible unless we can prove negligence. So if you leave your company with me, you say I'm you're lucky, I'm gonna take care of this company for you and commission on your behalf. And I ended up this company ends up losing a lot of money. Right? So let's say you can prove that I was negligent, I don't carry a liability here. It was on you is your mistake giving me that commission on your behalf to begin with. So it's a matter of negligence, that he's even that's very hard to prove. That's very hard to prove in these types of situations. But just asked to be spoken up. Yes. point you mentioned about. You can pick it up at any point, let's say somebody gives you power of attorney
for a company and he travels. And while he's traveling says hey, can you sign this paper from NSA? No, I want to bring it right now. Yeah, that was your fault, you chosen a non trustworthy person. That's why the concept of Wakanda and from it comes to a could of course, and other Islamic concepts, that you don't entrust this with someone who you do not know 100%, that will not betray you, because they can betray you easily. It gets very, very hard to prove negligence. And they can easily
take away steal a lot of money from you and steal a lot of your assets. And there's not much you can do do about it. So it's important that that's kind of noted when I got Zhu, Zhu and Joby were cheriya, inlab, ithala, 30, shadow and three conditions for the person who was working on someone else's behalf who's taking commission on someone else's behalf, there's condition for him to use these assets in terms of buying and selling this specific for buying and selling for the first one. And the IB IB feminism if he can't sell any of the assets that his he's working with, with less than their face value like he can, because that means he's he's betraying the trust of VI, I'm taking
over your company, I'm giving the Commission on your behalf on a company of phones, and I sell these phones for half their price. I can't do that it's not acceptable for me to do that. Because I have to sell with the price as the face value of what I'm what I'm doing, where else I'm actually betraying the trust of the person who put me in my position, when you're calling me not valid, of course is a specific
condition to back then it has to be with the money of the country that they're living in. And that's a good reason no longer applies anymore with the currencies that exist in the world maybe would apply to having fiat currency, not cryptocurrency because of the fact that cryptocurrency is not trustworthy. But that's why they use this because if you bought it if you bought or sold things using a currency from a different country, easily that currency could be
deemed worthless at any point. So that's why they use this condition. However, it's not it's not a very strict one. There's leeway to talk about what I assume. And yeah, the I'm in FC. Where are you Corolla, Mo Akili. He is easily him. And he can sell by with and or accept. It can accept selling something except buying something unless you have the permission of his market, meaning we're going to sell assets, full assets, like let's say you gave me the company, you put the company, I'm the Commission on your behalf of this company, and then I want to sell the company, I can't do that or buy another one unless I have the commission of the person who put me in that position. So there are
certain conditions Islamically that will apply to work that don't apply in a lot of today's courts. So if you give someone Power of Attorney from, from a financial perspective, as well, from a legal perspective, so they can do anything they want with your assets. You don't have to go back to you at any point at all. It's like we know they're gonna make big
Good choices, then they have to go back to you if you need to for permission or for consent on doing stuff like that. And I think that the reason for that is just to make it safer, just to make sure that these things are safer and people don't end up betraying one another and it turns into a very ugly situation. Okay.
That's commission on one's behalf. We move on to the final word on the board, Elektra or admission? Well, mocha Ruby Morbihan. And what we admit to are two types of things is an important chapter important part in the, in the chapter that we're studying,
when you admit to something, you admit to two types of things. First one Huck Biller, he will help will add me
a right that is owed to Allah subhanaw taala and a right that is owed to a human being to another person and a very different in terms of how that works. So an example
let's say I admit to stealing from from you, I admit to stealing something from you. And I also admit that I
that I left Islam this morning, but I stopped being a Muslim. So the first one is a heck of an add me it's a write of you, I stole from you. And the other one is the hack of Allah subhanaw taala is something I don't owe anyone anything I owe this to Allah subhanaw taala for help Allah He Tyler you'll say hello Raju roofie.
Karate he will help me de la Yasuo Raju Rafi and
so the right of ALLAH SubhanA wa Tada it is permissible for you to track to what you admitted to.
Right and the right of a human being you it is not permissible for you to track what you admitted to. So if I admit that I stole from huddling money, I can retract and say no, I didn't. I was lying. That's not you know, you admitted to this. Now you're gonna be held to it. So it's like a confession. When do I confess that I took something from someone I harm someone. It sticks. I can't go back on my confession. But if I say it this morning, I left Islam and then they come to me with their soldiers come to me to tell me I have to do tobei Like no, I didn't I didn't do it.
Then what happens? Nothing because my word is enough. If I for example, when it comes to a lot of the dude
because of the punishments social punishments regarding Zina, for example, if I commit Zina, now unless I'm caught by four individuals, so I'm doing it publicly. I won't be lashed unless I come in admitted.
Unless they come and I admit it. And the private, as I said, will discourage people from ever doing they never admit it. Just don't just make Toba and move on. But some people want to admit it want to be purified, like basically to get the punishment so they can be purified. So if I came in, I admitted of committing Zina. And you're like, Well, you admitted it. So now we have to last year and then I say you know what? I didn't do it, you leave me.
That makes sense. You leave because of Allah subhanaw taala of anyone else. So the rights of human beings, I can't retract. But the right of Allah subhanaw taala can retract, because it's between me and between Allah subhanaw taala he there's punishment waiting anyway, when it comes to the right of a human being you can't retract it once you admit that's it, this stuck on you.
Unless you were coerced, or other examples that would apply
to us regarding this person convincing for that, and then the one who knows about it, like you would have been affected.
And he doesn't have to go through with telling the state, let's say somebody,
and then they tell you about it. And I say I forgive you, there's no need for me to depends on depends on how big the crime is. So some crimes, there's half of the state that the rate of the state, so there's an alarm was called the general public's rights. So, which is a punishment that would apply even if
even if the person forgave you. So if you commit murder, and then the family forgives you, that's fine. But there's still gonna be a punishment put upon you like jail, or you have to be left at the center of the city for sale, because that's the rate the general rate of the public. So it depends on how big the crime is. If it's a small one, like 50 bucks, that doesn't matter. But if it's like 50 million, and then you forgive for some reason, then no, there's still something that could
embezzlement is it there's there's a portion of the punishment that is based on the general public's law or the law in general, it's not just based on your harm. And part of that will be on your harm as well. So that's something that exists in law today and exists in Islamic law as well.
But they still be in Yeah, exactly. Because because there's a bigger picture here that needs to be tinker. But you're right, in general, yeah. Where they're stuck. So how to help carry illaAllah t shirt. There are three conditions for an admission to be proper for acceptable or valid for the validity of any admission there are three conditions number one L Bulu. The one who is admitting has to be balanced. As you arrive at the end of Age. It has to be someone who was legally responsible, religiously responsible today. It's I think it's eight
To 17, right? In Islam, it was blue whenever you hit puberty, because at that time, you would just leave the house and go work and start a family, they would marry you off and go, go do your own thing. Today's life is different. So it's, it's a different level of maturity. So basically, maturity is the word that I use, usually for blue. And I think it's the proper word. As long as we can define a legally or psychologically or socially, without the, which is sanity, the person who was admitting has to be seen. And the admission of a, an insane person is not does not count. So if an insane person admits that they committed murder doesn't really apply, nothing happens. It has to
be someone saying it, or if someone does it at a time when they're not seeing. So if you admit to something when you're drunk, right, it doesn't apply, of course, you should be punished for being drunk or being drunk as haram. But if you do admit something when you're drunk, or when you're half asleep, or you're intoxicated doesn't count. So that's an important point, because sometimes they will, there are certain drugs on toxic youth. And they're called the truth. serums. Right. And they that's what they call them meanings, your your subconscious without speaking at all that you everything you feel, and everything true will come out. Well, it's time because it doesn't count.
admissions are only acceptable when you do them. Anyway, maintaining your sanity, and that's the law today. But they will, they will sometimes try to reference certain drugs that can be given that would maybe bring out
to a point where you're just talking. Yeah, exactly. So your sanity has to be maintained in order for your admissions to be acceptable. And that word, somebody commits a crime during their insanity. That's different. That's a whole different story.
Yeah, so that's a whole different story. When you commit something, when you commit a crime, when you're not totally seen, or you know, you're intoxicated, or you're not aware, different rules apply. And that doesn't be because it's not it's not treated as if we were saying, Oh, you're a complete Oh, is a premeditated is treated differently. Some of it is not a to a certain extent, you're not liable. But
on the other hand, for certain things, you're also you're still liable. So it depends on what you do really sound like you. There's a lot of people they complain, Oh, I did this because I was drunk, whatever. Yeah, so so that's fine. So drunk, being drunk or angry doesn't count, like being drunk or angry is not.
So being drunk or angry, doesn't, doesn't, doesn't cut it.
Admissions, however, you have to be sane. So even if you're drunk, you admit to doesn't doesn't count any harm that you caused during your time being drunk, you're liable for the harm, you may not be
punished in the same level because you weren't doing it intentionally. But you're still liable for the harm that you caused. Okay? The third condition so blue, aka the third condition LFTR that you do it?
By choice, not You're not coerced into doing it, you're not forced to do it. So if someone holds a gun to your head and says, admit that you did this, he admitted doesn't doesn't count. So any form of coercion doesn't count the admission. And most people in the Middle East and when they, when they admit anything, they're admitting under Yani a huge amount of physical and mental pressure. So it doesn't really count. Oh, in kinda be Merlin or Toby Rafi sharpen Robin we're talking about admitting to money and there's a fourth condition that applies well, what we should do we should which is
right and wrong, yeah disturbing knowing knowing what is what is understanding money basically, we should be talking about I should once before we said that, blue widgets maturity, Rocha is understanding his comprehension is appreciation of what wealth is and what money is and knowing that so Lucia is basically the opposite of sofa if you remember we talked about stuffy a few lessons back and what that means. So the opposite of sofa is is should of course this is a very is not agreed upon of for all my dad, by the way, and today, different understandings apply to him. Okay, well, either accord Robbie Medulin rugi, ie by any he
will say holistic financial, or either our Salah who will be well who if he had a hottie hottie will not only Salah. So if you admit to something that is ambiguous or unclear, then we go back to you to ask for clarification, we don't make up our own story. So if you say yeah, I admitted to taking that thing. And I just saw who he meant to the closet and you meant like the pencil. So we have to go back to you in terms of clarifying what is it that you admitted to so you have to admit this and to be clear before it actually stuck, meaning you're gonna be held accountable for returning it or you're liable for the damage that happened to it.
And if you want to make an exception to an admission, you can do it as long as you say it at the same time. And I know that sounds weird, but this is a good way of people copying other people. So I say yeah, I admit I owe you $100,000. And then you walk away and I accept the first 50 they don't owe you. So that's not an exception that except to just say the ones that I wasn't sitting, but I admit to this much but except that much. I don't want to admit to these. Dr. Richard
into this state except the house or the state except the last part of the land. So I'm gonna say an exception and admission at the state at the same time, I can't see it later on under my breath, or I'm gonna do this, this silly stuff that you know people use to try and con other people. So if you want to accept it, we'll put an exception to an admission has to be done in one in one sentence for it to be acceptable. And it's whether you're, whether you're healthy or are sick. It's the same thing. Meaning here, it's not. It doesn't matter whether you're, you're terminally ill. Why was that important? Where was terminal illness? A problem or an exception? Can you remember talking about
this a few weeks back? When it's terminal, a terminal illness a problem? Go ahead. Yeah, for the will.
So I can't, when I'm when I'm dying on my deathbed, I can't give way more than how much of my assets third, I can't give away more than third, right, and I can't divorce my wife, so that she doesn't get her inheritance, I can't do these things. And certain things you can't do when you're dying. So if you admitting to something is acceptable, and you're dying,
you want to do it, do it during your life, like doing when you're fine. If you want to do it fine. But because you're doing it when you're dying, you're just trying to deprive her from inheritance. And that's how long that's not acceptable. And when you're giving away more than a third, you're depriving your sons and daughters and inheritance. That's not acceptable either. I knew that when you're alive. That's up to you.
Yeah, doesn't accept that doesn't work. Yeah, it doesn't work. So that's if you if you're alive, and you're healthy, and you want to give away your your your money, do it do that. But in your will, you can go over third, there'll be revoked. So if you're a real estate agent, we call it says I want to give away 99% of my assets, we only give away third. And the rest goes to your inheritance like we don't even listen to it doesn't count because you're going against the Shediac in terms of what you're allowed to do. So if you want it because you could have easily given all your assets during your life. Why did you do it in your life? Why are you waiting to die to basically just rip off the
people who are your descendants? Yeah. So
when it comes to admissions, it doesn't you could be terminally ill and then admit, yeah, I ripped him off. I took his money, though, that counts. Because that's a different thing. That's not giving a charity here, you're admitting to something that you did. If you took some money from someone you admitted before you die then that you owe that person the money back. So if you admit it when you're sick, it's a second it's acceptable. That's why the email I'm talking about it here in that form. All right.
The point so the point after that will take off or just add another point
talks about Coachella how it's a bit different.
So the point after that is an era
and that is lending
not money.
Not talking about money here. Talking about assets.
What kulula Younkin LNT fire op ma any jazz that era to who either cannot manage Yahoo.
And everything that you can benefit from without destroying its essence without actually ruining it or is no longer or fading away then you can loan or lend to someone as long as the benefits are something that are results from it being there not from it's actually fading away. So
lending a pen
is a problem because unless it's a refillable thin pen, if it's only for the kind of refill it lending, it makes no sense because you could use it and then it's unusable after that. So you give it back to me and it's useless. It's not a pen anymore. Lending a candle makes no sense you don't lend the candle because if they lend it to you use it and actually the candle goes away it physically is not there anymore. But I can lend you a car for example because when you're finished using the cards still a car is still works but when I lend you a candle when you use it it's not a candle anymore or the pen doesn't work unless it's very few the refillable pen that you can put in
ink later on that makes sense so as to be something that can be that you don't ruin the essence of it when you use it. Which makes sense anyway in terms of lending where else just give it as a gift or buy it don't don't count London
so you want to return to what's right what's less than what's left of it.
I've got a new one replaced. Yeah, that's not lending anymore to replace something is not lending lending is here. Just give it back later. The same thing but that's replacing that's a whole different thing with the usual idea to Metallica, 1010 v moda and you're allowed to lend something
indefinitely and with a certain amount of time stuck to it. So I can lend you my phone and say just whenever you want to give it back or I can say you have to give it back tomorrow. So it's it's permissible either way. Well, yeah, my Munna to Natalie muster at BT Emma T ha yo Mattel fe.
And it is something that is guaranteed by the person who's taking it.
When he takes it with its value, yes to pay it back if the day that he ruins it. So
I gave you the phone
I lent you my phone then you are you have to guarantee that you give it back and if you don't, then you're responsible for
reimbursing me with its value on the day that you ruined it not the day that you bought it or took it as important to understanding lending things.
So if I lend you my phone now it may be worth maybe 800 bucks for example it's not but let's say that so then you use it and then you ruin it a year from now a year from now it's no longer worth the 100 bucks is worth 600 That's what you pay me back you don't pay me back eight
okay, you pay back what it was worth the day it was ruined. Why so that I can buy it so like if I want to get buy the same thing
that makes sense. So basically gonna give me you're gonna reimburse me with the amount of money that will allow me to buy the same thing that I gave you and I'm gonna give me $100 that now I can buy a better phone with it. I have to give me back the exact but that's what lending is. You take risk when you lend. Right when you when you when you loan someone gives someone a late you're lending someone something? You're taking some risk here like you're not it's not it's not extra simple. Let's say the person just happens to be broken time. He has no money in his bank debt. No. Can you just ask for an extension?
Is he allowed to ask for that? It's a debt but now it's just debt that's all
nobody's debt now it turns into debt. It's no longer something that you you took that it's not. Now it goes from being you lent someone something to now you owe me like a year in debt to me to give it back? What if I borrow someone's gonna scratch and give up?
Yeah, so you ruin the right? No Presto worthy still? Drive it? Yeah. But you ruined a certain emotion. You're liable for the damage? You're like, you're always
Yeah, so the next sentence, we'll talk about that woman and also by Madeline Lea hiding. There's email we're doing who take an asset from someone against their will. And the same rules now will apply for someone who's lending something somewhere else just to add this in case someone took it against their will there's email who will do then you have to return it?
Well shooting actually, you have to pay him for damage. Right? What do you want to make? What would you like to me three, and you have to pay him the rent for using it that time. If I take it against your will and say take your phone away from you, then I have to give it back. Now when I give it back, I give it back and I pay for damages to the phone, if any damages exists, and I pay you for for the time that I had the phone as rent for it. So let's say I had it for three months, how much would it cost to rent a phone for three months? Calculating that I pay you that as well. That is if I take it against your will. But if I don't take it against you well meaning
Neva interleaver Wamena who made me throw him in Canada who method and if it's ruined, then he has to give something similar just to get the same phone we have the same phone but something similar to it back to you. Oh, in Canada homophily. If there's something if there is an asset that exactly the same that I can give it back. So if I if I steal a horse and the horse dies, I have to give back a horse that is similar to that horse in terms of his age. And if there's no there's no horse similar to it. Oh became at 11 Yeah, cool. Lahoma fair Americana. minio Mila Gasby Isla Yomi. tellef, and in or else I give back the value of what it is that I took from you. And its maximum value on its
minimum value from the day that I took it to the day that I they ruined it. So I took this form from you, like I stole it, and I have to give it back. But before I give it back, it was ruined, destroyed completely. So I give you back the exact same phone, I go back to the or if I can't, I look at the value of the phone during the time that I had it. When was it the most expensive during the time that I had it. Let's say the second month that I had, it was the most expensive, I pay you back that moment of money. That makes sense. That's what you have to do in the case you take something against someone will, but if I lend it to you, and then you you ruin it, then you are
liable for the damage that you cause to it right on the day that you damage it. So whether you ruin it fully or just damage it, you're liable on the day that you damage it to fix it or to or to pay me back the amount of what it was the value of it on that day. Sometimes it's cheaper to actually replace something that actually fix it like for a car. Let's say I lent me your car. And on the day that I used it. I use it for a month and a month. I kind of horrible accident tonight. I really bashed up the car to fix the car is more expensive than actually the whole car. So how much was the car word the day that I bashed it, then I just pay you back that amount of money or buy a new car or
I fix the car and give you back the car if that's possible. But sometimes it's not possible because it's so damaged. It's unfixable. Like at a certain point it wasn't broken. You still have to pay a rental fee. Now that is if I if I take it against your will. Yeah
If I take it against you, I have to pay the rental fee. If I don't know, I don't like that amount, you just it's arbitrary, and you just kind of come up with it. So it's calculated through the norm. If you just see what how much would it cost to rent a phone, you see whatever services are exist out there for that, and you calculate it based on that, and then only up and if you take it against someone's will you take it away with us, but you force them to take it away.
To take back home and to get to someone's
house is not
the first time they say it again, your garlic gives me a back up.
So that's based on whatever you guys agreed upon. So there has to be an agreement here. For Garlic. Yeah. So that's been an agreement in terms of when I guard this, am I liable to it or for it or not? Regarding someone? Yeah. So that's, to me, that's the mean agreement between you and the person, whether you are liable for it for its harm or not, because you're not really benefiting from it, you're just taking an Amana so there has to be a proper agreement in terms of how that works, what we'll come to that Inshallah, Soon, it will be a part of our study in talking about it, then, yeah.
Don't take something as someone's okay. Let me give an example. So this makes sense. You're away, you're away in a different country, right. And I don't have any means to contact you. And I go, when I say, you know, when he has his car here, it's not yours using I go and I pick the lock, I use your car. For like, I'm just using, I'm just lending, taking.
I'll bring it back. And you come back in like I didn't, I didn't let you do this. So what do you have to get it back? You have to pay for damages, and you have to pay for rent for the time that you use it for every time you use it, right? Because you took something without someone's permission or their consent. So it's not just going and taking something from you is using something that you own without your permission is also of course that's acceptable. But what's that? Here? He's not talking about the ethics behind it, just saying what happened with it happens. This is the ruling that applies to it if it happens, okay.
Of course, 100%. With no.
Yes. How do you prove that this isn't typical? Or how does a person for example, like if of course, get involved, differentiate between this being normal? And yours?
So you use something that wasn't yours in terms of meaning you don't? You don't have ownership on? Right. So it's up upon you to produce evidence that you had permission. That makes sense. Like you were you were driving something that wasn't yours? If you could prove that you're doing it? Yeah, you're fine. Don't get the punishment, you just get some other type of penalty. In that case, you just you just liable for damage. If you cause damage. That's all. So yeah, if not, then now you're no you know, you have to pay for damage and you have to pay for rent and you have to give it back and as to be end up. You're a criminal. Okay, so after that it's Jafar Chavez, preemption.
Do you know what preemption is? Neither do I. So don't worry about it.
I'll explain it in a moment. Some words are very difficult. I liked that. I had to look this up today. Because I had no idea what Chef I was, I was going through my mind, what are we talking about today? Like, oh, Chef is here. So I'm going to explain show bindingly English in one word, but I'll explain the concept in in, in in a moment.
It's similar, but here it has nothing to do with it. Like it's so
like,
if I
decide my color, and if I
can claim that he wants to buy
Yeah, so that's what the concept was.
So a shofar, Wajima Bill helper, doing LGR so Bill helper means there has to be joint ownership or there has to be a mixing of of assets. It's not about neighborhoods or neighboring. So if I want my piece of land is here, and it's fully disconnected from your piece of land, right then No, you don't have preemption on buying it. But if we own this piece of land together, it's like one mesh of a piece of land. And I want to sell my piece of land you get, you get first choice, you mean you you're owed that choice, that opportunity to buy that piece of land before everyone else because called preemptions called shofar? Because of the fact that this this will you know, just it fixes a
whole lot of problems in terms of you guys add
a whole lot of punches people legal legal differences or difference of opinions or fighting over over assets. So this is one issue five is java is when we have joint ownership of anything and I want to sell my my, my part of it my end that I that you get first picks you get you get to buy it first. I don't have the ability to have the right to sell it to someone else with
All you have to give offer you the chance to buy it first if you want to female young person dude I'm Ally and custom disregarding things that are dividable not talking about things are undividable that's a whole different story with equally Mariela you will follow me a lot of the Callicott you have it and this regarding things that you cannot move from from lands like like real estate, like houses and, and buildings, you can't move it away. I mean, I can't, like if I have a trailer, I want to sell it, you don't get first choice on the trailer because a trailer can be moved out of the land. Even if it's on your land, like say you own the land, I own the trailer, my trailer is on your
land. That's how we've had it for a long time, when I sell the trailer, you don't get first choice, you'll get preemption here, because it's something can be moved. But if I own a house on the piece of land that you have, right, I own the house, you own the land, and I want to sell the house, then you get preemption on the house, you get to buy it first, if you would like to, then if you don't want to, of course I can sell it to whoever I want.
This is a huge problem in the Middle East. Like this is huge. I remember growing up and watching my extended family members, older ones, literally fight for years, because of problems of this nature. Like I was a kid and I remember watching all my great uncles and aunts and just fighting all the time. Because if one person wants to sell their piece of land, and he went and he sold it to some guy from a different village, and now this guy is coming in, he wants to build his house in the middle of our neighborhood. And man because of like we will literally kill him if he thinks of doing it. So now guys carrying rifles and huge problem. And they would take it back to the courts. And the
courts would say, well, the shofar. The Syrian courts have certain parts of it that follow Islamic law. It's not just Islamic laws, it's really common sense law. If we both own this, if it's joint ownership, you want to sell I should get a heads up in terms of I want to buy you out, like especially in a partnership or a company, you're just gonna go and sell to someone else immediately. But if I don't if I don't jump on the on the opportunity, I don't have the ability, I don't have the will don't have the money, then you can do whatever you want. But if I do then that's that's an own as an old right that I have I if it's joint ownership of any of any sort, obviously the percentage
of like, let's say he had a 5050 partnership. Yeah. He still always has to give the other 50% of the profit gain, of course, regardless if he told them or not. Yeah, of course, that's that's a given. Yeah.
All kinds of
No, so I guess it had to be something that is divided, divisible, there has to be something that you cannot move. If you can move it, then you don't have to do it.
Yeah, so land, and then buildings on top of the land, and maybe agriculture or trees and the land has gotten moved those.
Yeah, same thing. Yeah. But for example, let's say we own 100 cars, you own 50 or 50. You don't get preemption on the cars, because even though they're in the same place, let's say they're put in the same warehouse, but because these cars are movable, I don't have to give you preemption on the cars. But if you own the warehouse, and I wanted to share my percentage of the warehouse, I have to give you a presumption because joint ownership of an asset of a real estate of a building.
But
like different family members
that
do people get the sheet in one
reference
as long as anyone in the house. Yeah, anyone in the house.
The author have this Yeah, this right. I'll tell you a funny story. My an uncle of mine owned with another uncle of mine, a Scottish shooted zaytoun. So it was a number of olive trees in a row 12 olive trees, one uncle owned, I think 10 and other uncle own to all trees. So the uncle going to all of these wants to sell his to all pieces some other guy ate, and he didn't do it properly. So you didn't do a PM, she didn't give my uncle the chance to buy him out. And he sold it some other guy. And then we had this weird guy we don't know, coming just to take care of his to have trees on the land was very, very difficult. It was great. It caused a lot of problems. And we tried to buy him
out. He wouldn't sell his own cheese. You had to go to the court in order for it actually, to work. So these problems are more prominent in other parts of the world. I think here it's less prominent, but you'll find it in other parts of the world. Okay.
This is something that's not visible to people.
That would that would be Yeah, that would be the same. Yeah, yeah. So it would be the same. Yeah. Okay.
The final word here, be feminie Allah the work Allah, Allah, he'll be here. You'd have to yet you don't you can buy you out. You give him the first choice your partner to buy based on the price that is is proper for the time. So again, let's say we own a partnership of land, and I want to sell my purse 50% of it.
So you got preemption on buying because you're my partner, you have to buy it from me based on the actual price, the face value of the land, you can just come up with any number. So let's say my land is worth $100,000. You gotta say, Well, I'm gonna pay you 85 for it, and I get first choice. Yeah, you got first choice if you'll pay me $100,000, which is, which is the value of the land? Meaning that's the land, that's what you're getting for it. I can't ask you, for example, for $200,000 for it. That's not fair. Meaning what is the value of this land in terms of selling it? You got to pay that amount to take the land. You can't pay me less. I can't ask you for way more. I can only ask
you for what is it acceptable for that piece of land to be sell sold for it, which is an important point as well? Because then I can say, Okay, you got preemption on the land? I want to send sell it to you for a million. I want to sell it to him for 5000. It's my choice. No, that's how it is preemption means what are you willing to sell this for? Whatever you put it on sale for? That amount? I got to pay it first. I get to pay it first. I get that they get it first. No one else before me.
Yeah. So what he I'll fully find out
about it, it is something that you have to do immediately shofar preamps, you have to do it right away with it. And if you postpone it, even though you you're capable of paying for it, but a lot of meaning is not it's not acceptable. You can't come later on and say, Well, I wanted it well, you had the money at the time, and you didn't come up and buy it. So now you lose your chance. So if you have the money, then you have to do it immediately. Or else you lose your chance. And in doing it.
All right. What happens if you don't have the money?
Because you didn't put that there. But that's, of course obvious. You don't have the money. So you can ask for for a short period of time to make the money to come up with the money you're allowed a certain period of time they differ on those periods of time was in the middle him. Some allow up to a year. Some some of them allow up to a year, like you can ask and get a year to put this thing together. And then if the other person who's selling is not in serious need, he has to wait for that for that year, some of them say up to a month, two months. So we'll give you time to come up with the money in case in case you really want that case you really want to buy any piece of land that is
part of your joint partnership you don't want anyone else in but you don't have the money right now then you can go and liquidate some assets or find some way to to buy it. All right. Well, we that was our jam Robertson, Allah shixin. AKA who should you be my real monthly. So here's an interesting point. So let's say I marry a woman, and I hurt my heart, or my heart is my percentage of the land, right, or the asset or the joint partnership acid.
So now this is going to go to whom?
To my wife. So my partner can give her Method and Method gave her the dowry that usually women take and take the piece of lead
to, let's say, the dowry that is usually given to women, what is it that we're usually given to him in here?
$10,000
Let's say 10 years, I think is too much. Let's say 10, Miani. I think I gave my wife took what, 200 bucks or something?
My Dell remember, I was like, $200. It was ridiculous. Let's see.
Yeah, exactly. So let's say 10,000, just for the benefit of the argument, is it $10,000. Now I go ahead and I give her her dowry, a piece of land. That is a joint partnership. Now I made a mistake here, that piece of land is way more than mountain method is way more than $10,000. Because now my partner can actually give her $10,000, which is the norm of mountain at the time, if there's an if there's an amount at the time and take the piece of land. There are reasons, reasons for that. First of all, I don't because it's joint partnership, and preemption as a part of how things work, I have to respect that number one, number two, I shouldn't be giving more than the norm of dowry.
It's discouraged that you give them more of the norm of dowry, because you actually if you've started raising the dowry a lot, it makes it hard for people to raise the money, make it hard people to get married. So I made a mistake. If I did, I can give her a piece of land that is not joint partnership. There were there's no preemption on it, and it can be worth whatever I want it to be worth. But I'm gonna give her Mahoto a piece of land that is based on joint partnership and there's preemption here, you can actually find a loophole in Islamic law. Now that is not for all of them. That is for the Sharia Yes, specifically, not specifically. But other than that, I've also seen
something similar, but it is a difference of opinion. But I've always thought that was an interesting and interesting Jonnie ruling that even existed, because he's giving something that he doesn't fully know he owns. It is just a part of joint partnership. He owns the piece of land that he's giving, but as part of a of a joint partnership that requires him to respect the preemption clause of it, which is your fine he didn't so that's his problem. Okay. We can kind of Schufa or GEMMA Eitan is who her either federal amlak and if those who have joint partnership, or more than two, then they take they're allowed to buy or they take the profit based on their percentage of
ownership. So it's just the math has to be has to be lined up properly.
Okay,
I think that's enough. We've done over an hour and 15 minutes now so we'll start with that we'll continue with SHA and accept with okay Rob, is it's hard it's not very hard is it? So there's not many questions so we'll go to I'm trying to go a bit more quickly through this that we finished more in Charlotte before the Ramadan is not gonna look so
good to be Lagos Mohammed in one earlier cyber domain