Fiqh of Transactions #20 – Prize Money and Deposits for Safekeeping
Date:
Channel: Hatem al-Haj
Series: Hatem al-Haj - Fiqh of Transactions
File Size: 45.50MB
Related
- Ismail Kamdar – Protecting Our Hearts From Atheism
- Zakir Naik – Meaning of Religion
- Mansoor Danish – Ep 2 Understanding the Prohibition of Riba in Islamic Finance
- Mufti Menk – Role of the Media in Shaping Opinion
- Fatima Barkatulla – Aisha (RA) – Mother of the Believers #19
- Taimiyyah Zubair – Taleem al-Quran 2010 – Juz 17 – L170A
- Muhammad Alshareef – Patience and gratitude #shorts
AI Generated Summary ©
The speakers discuss the bifurcation of prizes in competition and the importance of promoting activities and prizes for winners. They emphasize the need for scientific and political transparency in competitions and emphasize the importance of transparency and avoiding mutation. The speakers also discuss the default of a proposal and the importance of avoiding harmsome behavior in competition. They provide examples of how trustees and banks use the word "armiveness" to avoid liability and suggest avoiding leaving money in boxes.AI Generated Transcript ©
Bismillah Alhamdulillah wa salatu salam ala rasulillah
I'm about to proceed.
So, today inshallah we will talk about
some pertinent issues here the you know that you may find practical, I know that sometimes we talk about things that are not practical to the majority of you, but this is going to be a little different, because it may be practical to the majority.
The two chapters that we will address here are the chapter of Sabbath, which is prize money
and the chapter of it with era which is deposits for safekeeping.
First the chapter of subak.
Kodama Allah says in his book along the on the
bubble subak, the chapter on prize money,
but the Judo moussaka to be very Jordan, Philadelphia equilibria competitions, which do not involve the prize money are permissible in all fields competitions are permissible in all fields, if they do not involve prize money, What did he mean by this, he meant in all permissible competitions, not competitions and everything, because there are things that are not permissible. So, the first thing that when whenever we talk about prizes in competitions,
draws awards,
loyalty programs, all of the stuff we will talk about today, but whenever we talk about these things, the first thing that we will have the first bifurcation here, first bifurcation, because, you know, you want if you really want to get down, you have to always think in algorithms, you have to always have algorithms in your mind mental algorithms, but, you know, divisions classifications, so, the first bifurcation here is what is this activity in and of itself hallette are not valid,
is valid or not valid, if it is not valid, then you cannot compete in something that is not valid.
For instance,
you know, and I know that this may may be a little bit controversial, you know, boxing is not hand to strike equal in the face. And I know that this will break the hearts of many people, particularly on this side.
But, but it you know, it is not really hard to strike people in the face.
There are certain things that will be controversial. Car Racing, for instance,
would be controversial. Why? Because there is no, there is will always be controversy, once you don't have something clear from the Prophet sallallahu wasallam, you know, clear in the revelation, whether in the book of Allah subhanaw taala, or the Sunnah of the Prophet sallallahu sallam, once you don't have something that's clear, then there will be controversy. And once you've done that, you will have something that is subject to human judgment, human assessment. That's it, subjectivity will create controversy. I would say that car racing is dangerous enough to be at least to this light. Someone else may say, No, no, it has great benefits and they take law precautions and then
they may come up with statistics that a lot of people you know, a lot more people die on the highway than they die on those tracks and all of that stuff and they may think that car racing is just fine.
But you know, like when said when when the prophet SAW Selim forbids hitting or striking the face, and your very sport is about striking the face is that is a conflict that is that's hard to reconcile that it's hard to reconcile. But when it is up to sort of human assessment
is
you remember my poster Muhammad Ali Muhammad Allah died
basically tells you what my my position so it is one of the ironies of life is that you love someone who is just known for like a sport that that you hate, you know, just, you know, the celebrity of Muhammad Ali comes, but he really the celebrity of Muhammad Ali comes does not really come from
the boxing ring only comes from, you know, his,
his humanity like, comes from his legacy, it comes from his positions, his permanence, his commitment to the truth of things, but to the world He is known for, for boxing, you know, he's known for his boxing career.
Anyway, so boxing in, in and of itself is
is not permissible it's not permissible to strike someone in the face. Therefore, when we talk about competition here, that's the first bifurcation, this will be this will come out from this will be excluded and anything that involves something that is prohibited will be excluded from the discussion, obviously, common sense right will exclude everything that is not permissible to begin with as an activity will excluded from the discussion, then
then we will say as the sheikh said, aside from that, aside from impermissible activities, everything else that is how you could it is harder to compete in.
competitions, which do not involve prize money are drawn are permissible in all fields. So, if you don't have to say, Can we have a car like a basketball tournament? Well, certainly you can, there is no problem in basketball per se. And there is no problem in competing, you know, and there is no problem for recognizing the winner. But once you say, Can we have an award for the winner, then then we would have this discussion,
then, then this discussion now would become pertinent. Because we're talking about awards. We're not talking about merely competing. The profits are seldom used to race with eisah or raised with Ayesha, Salah vanilla Aqua I used to race with people on foot is extremely fast is the race with people on foot and in the presence of the prophets of Salaam without any century under condemnation from the Prophet sallallahu wasallam Therefore, all competitions in all permissible things are permissible. If there are no awards, no prizes.
Then the sheikh said what are the do's will be drawn in in laughing hi Lee when a believer Rami Natalia Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam la sebata lfv hoofing alnus Lin, how to have fair
prize money or joy is permissible only in horse racing, camel racing and archery. The Prophet sallallahu wasallam said there should be no prize money subak in competitions except in cannon racing, archery and horse racing, horse racing, camera racing and archery.
Okay.
And this this is an authentic hadith. So what did the Prophet sallallahu Sallam mean by this? There should be no prizes, no awards except in these three
horse racing.
camel racing
and archery
123
shooting have prizes. So can we expand from this or can we not? How are we allowed to expand this? Well?
Okay, well, the hammer the Maliki's Scheffer is at home Belize said that they are limited the ease and the fire the found the common denominator and the common denominator was preparation for
preparation for di
that's the common denominator the Find the found in these three. Once you found that you find the common denominator This is the minority right. This is basically the the cause behind the permissibility in these three alone. Can you expand a little
that Americans surveys of ham bellies, okay we will expand it a little bit some of them at least not all of them but some of the Chinese companies in particular said that we will expand it a little bit to include you know things like elephant tracing you know elephants can be used in morals so
and things of that nature so but the expanded them you know, and
and instead of you know throwing
arrows throwing spears which is what you know, spear what
competitions and throwing spears just like they moved it a little bit, you know, but but still within the same realm.
But they showed a little bit of flexibility it doesn't have to be ours could be Spears, it doesn't have to be camels could be elephants, yeah.
nozzle is for errors. Yeah. Not Not Not simply shots not not the is the arrows,
not shots in general. So, they expanded a little bit. Now.
Then,
based on this
set, you got all of the
but then within the Hanafi is said
and you will find that the Deputy Mayor de la
chose the Hanafi position here. The head of is said that
Islam does not only prevail by the sword,
you know,
the
memorization of the Quran and the Sunnah and all of these things are means to the intellectual struggle means to preparation for the intellectual struggle, therefore you would allow he would allow
these things as well.
memorization of the Quran and the Sunnah. So competitions in the Islamic sciences, so the HANA fees and even Tamia Rahim, Allah expanded this or not, you know, at the heart of his, you know, and then even Tamia chose that position out of the form of heavy chose the Hanafi. position,
expanded this to, to intellectual sort of competitions.
Now, having said that, does that include basketball?
Okay. Well,
would it include chess?
It depends on how flexible you are? I guess. So is it can basketball help with physical fitness? And is it isn't that what is intended here by allowing the sort of horse racing camera racing?
Not really, that's the fitness of the horse.
The rider has the pet as well. But the rider is really inconsequential in horse racing. And even if the rider dies, the competition would go on because another rider above the horse, mainly not the rider.
But anyway, this is. So someone can be a little bit more flexible, and expand this.
It's not like flexible in a bad way. By the way, it's just like, you know, someone can say, well, the prophet SAW said, I'm meant by this sort of preparation for Jihad isn't part of your preparation to be physically fit? And if it is part of that anything that will get you there should also be encouraged. And how do you encourage those activities by allowing prizes and awards for the winners in those competitions?
So they expanded this to include scissors like soccer and basketball and
chess would be helpful. If you go here, it is a intellectual stamina and sort of has to
have this as well.
But that is, but then there there are to be some things that would have to be excluded, right? Because at the end of the day, no matter how flexible you are, there will be a point where something would not make any sense. You know, like certain games, for instance, that the you know, the is not obvious how they contribute to your physical or intellectual fitness don't have to be excluded. And in this case, we wouldn't say the profits are solid, because that have it has to mean something at the end of the day, right? Last about a levy half an hour and a half or an hour on us, there is no prize money except in horse race and camera racing, or archery, that have it has to mean something
at the end of the day. So it means that you should not be at least if you're very flexible, it will mean that you should not be promoting triviality.
You should not be promoting nonsense, waste of time, you know, things that are distractions,
and they do not contribute to your physical or intellectual fitness.
At least remember that at least remember that there are certain things we'll we'll take all the questions afterwards unless it is to clarify something ambiguous, I said
is it to clarify ambiguity,
okay.
Doesn't have to be because the profits are Southern, that not necessarily tell them you know, that you have to be intending.
And they did not always do these things in preparation for jihad, these were existing sports, during the time of the Prophet sallallahu sallam, and people did not always they did them for also
to some extent fun.
So now, because it serves the purpose, it serves a good purpose, which is preparation.
And like I said, before, the you know, meditech met, preparedness met military preparedness
is not a is not a controversial thing. You know, human beings agree on this.
People all
how many countries do we have in the world now they keep on increasing? One not 199 members are 201 something in the United Nations now. So for 200 companies, approximately.
You could actually say companies now
over 200 countries have armies, so that preparedness is not something that you should shy away from really no, all people had armies. And the whole concept is, was it. The whole concept is that the concept of war and Islam. And these are the three things that you need to remember.
More war in Islam has nothing to do with terrorism or terrorism doesn't have anything to do with war and Islam. war on Islam was, is the concept of just war. Because they, you know, whoever your interlocutor will be, they do recognize the concept of just war. So when we talk about war and Islam, we're talking about just war, where the motivation is just impure. And the third one that is to be mentioned as well, is the difference between modern war and war
in antiquity, modern war to be just
you really have to prove it, because it is that it's so much destruction and devastation that you cannot compare modern war to war, when people used to go out of town and open field and, you know, two sort of armies
coming together, fighting for a day or two. And that's a modern war is a completely different story, the different story. So these are the three things that you want to remember that just remember this
It is just war that has been legislated.
The commentary on this is a long commentary.
But if, if I may point you to my article on reflections on terrorism as well, hell,
reflections on terrorism. If you just put my name and reflections on terrorism, the article would come up.
Okay.
Now, but we agreed that there will have to be some balance here. It's not like completely, it's not like we're going to sort of turn this off and just, you know, do our own thing.
Are there any activities that you could think of that would not be where we said all haram activities are out for the week I started by saying that, but are there any activities that are not haraam that would not qualify for permissible prize money or joy or sabba?
Like what eating competition
competition,
hot dog eating hot dog eating competition,
there is something like this
was actually a good one.
games of chance, well, then we will have to talk about permissibility first and then once we clear the permissibility issue, then we may come here
video game competitions that is going to be see whenever we get into human subject subjectivity, whenever it is a matter of judgment and assessment. Yes.
Movie passes.
That, why did I Why were these examples better than the video games thing? Because video games, like I said before, sometimes they're just like senseless and so on. But But a lot of people could say that. In fact, you guys don't know what you're talking about. War nowadays is all about this, you know, sort of, it's always wrong. It's remote control war. So it's about your precision and hitting your target and video games enable you, but if they do, you know anyway, but it's subject to judgment,
then the shake said thing cannot
muster be tiny jazz, well, what is the P min Homer?
Well, let us first finish all the awards, so that we can go. So now. Now, we said it has to figure out permissible or not permissible, we have to figure out
whether they are whether permissible or not permissible.
And if they are permissible, whether they are beneficial or not. beneficial or not beneficial here means physical and intellectual, if you take in consideration the Hanafi position.
And the Hanafi is the data intellectual and to be honest about
So, they said like Islamic sciences per Aronson and we're expanding, obviously contemporary, you know, times we're expanding this not
so beneficial or not beneficial. And, and then
what about the sort of the awards that
companies give?
Like,
a company would give an award for instance, for
Yeah, if you buy a certain product or something and you could get into like a drawer and they can give you an award if you come out
raffles and stuff. What about those things? Well, the first thing that you have to ask yourself about is a purchase required or not required, purchase, required.
Purchase not required
if a purchase is not
acquired and the company will give a word
to people
then what if the purchase is not required that at least some activity is required and if this activity
this activity then will be
this activity in this case will be subject to this discussion, is this activity beneficial or not beneficial, this activity was beneficial, then the award is permissible if this activity was not beneficial than the award is impermissible, but if a purchase is required, if a purchase is required, can those companies give awards? By drawing lots?
Korra or Joe lots, can those companies give hours? Well, first of all, some of the scholars like shaka laka amo, they said that determining the winner by drawing lots is not permissible to begin with. So, all of the discussion now is void there is you know it's not permissible to determine a winner by drawing lots. drawing lots is permissible if you're going to like draw lots for the first for your the first row in the masjid or the asat or something of this nature, but for a price to determine a price is not permissible. The majority of the scholars set drone laws to determine and winner in a competition is permissible, permissible. So according to the majority of the scholars,
it is permissible drone lots.
Okay. So now our purchase is required.
Then
if then we have three different positions, three different positions. One position is the position of
many matches Machado couldn't have ended up in Rahim Allah, He said impermissible if a purchase is required, implemented.
And Sheikh Mustafa zarca Rahim Allah said if a purchase is required,
small prizes are permissible. Not large prizes, small prizes, not anything that is significant to like, you know, but like pens and stuff like this would be permissible.
And shape.
How much automatic Osman schwabe Rahim Allah he actually wrote a book on Hawkman Masada Kata masarap phaedo, in fact, Islam. So it is a paper that he presented to much more affected Islami to the International Islamic Academy that has been later converted into a book or rendered into a book. And he said that the the prizes should be permissible,
whether they are big or small, that doesn't matter. All prizes should be permissible. But they all added a contingency here.
Any one who said it is permissible, the said given given that the prize money is not coming out of the purchase is not. You don't like add, you don't add
the prize money to the purchase price? Is that what you wanted to ask about?
A purchase required? It's not separate. Purchase requirements?
Yeah, no, buy a bottle of water, and then automatically by buying that entered into a competition? Yes. buying an entry into a competition? No, you're you're you're buying the company who will say that they will be drawn lots to determine the winner out of the people who will buy
you know, it's like when you want to buy Coca Cola for instance and they have like prizes, they used to do this in the past right or if the find some Yes. Okay. So, now, if the company they all said if the company is is basically having to the price of the product,
increasing the price of the product to make up for the price that they will give to the winners, then that is not permissible. And why is it not permissible in this case, because you're talking now about the competitors here talking about
But all of us now buying Coca Cola, you know, 100 of us buying, you know, like water bottles, for instance, and 10 out of the 100. Well, when were they getting the money from? From the 100? Isn't that just like gambling? Yes. Okay. So, they said no, it would not be permissible in this case, if the buyers are the ones who are contributing to the prize, that one of them would win or some of them would win, if the company out of the goodness of their heart or to promote their product or something is it is the same the same price that they would charge for this bottle of water anywhere. But they said you know, we will give the first we will give 10 people will give one person or
whatever a prize, then in this case, it would be permissible.
Why, because the prize is coming from had different entity outside of the participants, outside of the participants, which we will come to discuss right now. And maybe we should have deferred this discussion. But anyway, we will come to discuss this concept that the price needs to come from an entity other than the competitors, so that it would not be considered gambling. What about discount cards?
and loyalty programs? What about discount cards and loyalty programs? Well, discount cards,
like Costco ones, and so on.
Okay, is this discount? Is there a fee? fee?
Yes, no. If there is no fee, then no one would say discount cards are a bad thing. Why would they be bad? If there is no fee? No, and there will be no controversy. So the company just decided to give people discount cards, you know, to give you a like a discount.
But if there is a fee, so what is the problem if there is a fee, the problem if there is a fee is that we are, you know, the members participants, the you know, clients, etc. We're all contributing to this pool. And some of us will get a lot more of this pool than others. But this there is a little bit of difference here between this and gambling. Why?
Because this is not based on luck. It is based on your purchasing power. You will go more often to Costco and buy more stuff from Costco it is not growing lots. It is. So there is a little bit of a wrinkle here that is not making it exactly the same year don't apply. But is there an element of
undue risk taken?
There is an element of horror here. Because like when we buy the when we get those discount cards? And will you pay like $400 for the discount cards? I don't know how much discounts I will get. You don't know how much discounts here again. So we're buying, we You and I were giving the discount card for $400. You end up
making $1,000 in discounts, and I ended up making none or $10? Or is there is no clarity, a transaction? Because we said that part of the transparency is important than Islamic transactions, financial transactions, there is some ambiguity some risk taking less clarity.
Can this vodder be tolerated?
That's what that's the idea.
was well
can this dollar be overlooked? Because it is not too much. And then someone could say well, you could make your own assessment. You know, like you you know what you're gonna buy through the year.
Not that great. You know, Costco, you know that.
Some people said that. I don't believe that. But anyway, some people say that there's not a
Could be tolerated but what I do believe is that if these discount cards if the fee and the discount cards is minimal, too insignificant to basically
the being just for administrative fees and things of that nature to keep track, because they establish a discount program to establish a discount program,
they need infrastructure for this is the need to keep track of people and the you know,
and if if, if these have the membership
is basically to cover the expenses
of this, of the administrative work required for those programs to function, then those memberships would be permissible,
those fees would be permissible.
Exactly. The same applies to loyalty program and thinking this way in general, thinking this way in general,
that the participants should not if it comes up from a third, if it comes from an outside entity, then it is permissible likely
if the activity itself is permissible, but the participants should not be the ones contributing the prize towards one of them because that is the essence of gambling.
Hmm.
Well, it's okay if it is this ambiguous and go ahead.
Do you mean like a dual meaning member content that
you think might be on sale, but you need the membership card just to get in? And
I don't necessarily.
Okay, well,
that adds a little complication to it also, Kay.
But someone could say that there are a lot of services at Costco. So, to become a member of that club, I guess,
is is has has a certain value.
But the contract here the subject matter of the contract, Mahalla lock the here is a little bit still ambiguous, because what do you mean by membership? Like what are what is the subject matter of the contract between like I'm buying membership, what is the subject matter of the contract? What is it what is the art of the for what what are the services slash the commodities, because whatever whenever you pay for something you're paying for a service or commodity use a product or property I in or manufacture, high end means property, manufacture means benefits service use a product or service or the usufruct of a property, then,
but venerated, it means both this councilmembers
then that she accepts and cannot
muster bikini jazza who are the Sabbath even Homer the prize money is permissible if it is offered by somebody other than the racers, it goes to the one who wins the race, the prize money is permissible if it is offered by animatic he said that it has to be offered by the authorities that are otherwise not permissible, but the rest of them said anyone as long as it is from a
different entity other than the participants, then it is permissible
right. So any any any competition that is permissible, if I come and say to you do the whoever view wins this I will give them a prize that is okay. But he said what is not permissible because it will be like gambling, if it is coming from the participants. It's coming from the participants and go into one or some of them. He said, we're in Africa, Damien lineageos illa and youth Filipino Manmohan Leyland, UK, a few foreigners who forced him
to buy him out from Yoo hoo, Rama, Rama Rama
Rasulullah sallallahu Sallam and add Coronavirus and VEDA for us aid. Yeah, Nicola, you know and yes, Becca philosophy madwoman as far as and Dana ferrocyanide work at Amina and yes Vika
for work Mr.
Subbu Subbu Hema way in South Africa huduma hora de Silva who have a Suboxone heavy
it's not lawful for both of them to offer prize money unless I'm O'Hanlon, whose horse or camel or archery or ability to you know at archery is equivalent to theirs enters the race with them. The basis of this ruling and we will say that the mohanlal is someone who will not contribute to the price. Here's X and Y they want to raise let us say, on foot or whatever that we will make permissible now based on our expansion. They want to raise on foot and they say hi would contribute $10 Why would say I'll contribute $10 whoever wins will take 20 that is impermissible by agreement. And permissible but not by agreement because I'm claiming that it is permissible
because these are these are not spectators these are not gambling give this as a read competition between participants. He said that this hadith that is reported here is not authentic. And this is very controversial that most people do not authenticate the hobbyist but it has been acted upon and it has been the agreement of the forum as I have that the let me say that he first the basis of this is the routing is the praise the prophets have if if one enters a horse with two others, when he or she is not certain that it can win it is not gambling. But when one enters a horse with two others, but is certain it can win. It is gambling.
If the mohanlal beats them
is uncertain should be akin when there's gambling. If the mohanlal beats them, he or she takes the contributions of the other two contestants who offer the prize money. If one of the other two contestants wins, the winner wins. The winner takes his or her own contribution and also that of the other contributor. Okay, so x and y. x, he says I'll contribute 10 y said I'll contribute 10.
That is not helpful. According to the forum as a common law said it is harder. This is not like gambling. These are contestants, they are not spectators.
There is an activity that they're doing. And they're trying to encourage each other
sort of to, you know, it's this, he said that it is even more fair than to add to them z just for the mere purpose of
avoiding gambling these are the two ad z the formulas that have acted upon the apparent meaning of this Hades. To them, they accepted the meaning of this hadith even though
transmission wise the Hadith may not be authentic. But they accepted the meaning of this hadith and the Hadith said x&y cannot do this unless they add another competitor to them. That is that may win. If they add another competitor and they are certainly wouldn't he will not win, then it's just like a sort of a trick that they're afraid but of the add another competitor that may win, then in this case x will contribute 10 y will contribute 10
if x and z will contribute none to be had. If x wins x takes 20 have y wins, he will not take 20 he will keep his thin and take the 10 that why contribute if y wins y will take 10 plus people stand and take the 10 that he can tribute to him z wins z will take 20 z will take 20 this arrangement will make it halaal according to the HANA fees cfaes and Mel and honeyberries medic he said no
mohyla normal handler does not had the money is not contributed is not contributed by the participants. The participants do not contribute the money towards the price. Maliki said all of that is not held out whether it is between
x&y alone, or the Add z to it. So how do the Maliki reply to the heavies? They said it's not authentic?
How does everything Mayor reply to the Hadith when he said, both?
You know,
he said it's not authentic. But the mannequin said it's not authentic. And then they did not allow x&y to do this, even if a man said it's not authentic, and he allowed X and Y to do it at all, then from x 10 from y, whoever wins the competition will get the award, but certainly to be on the safe side.
And this is, you know, we said before, when do we depart from the agreement of the former head of this is a position of a much the head, if it is has some justification in this area, and there is a need for a need for this position, like the triple divorce the three fold divorce, there is a need supposition from which that they've been temir Amala and it has some justification in this area. But in a in a in a scenario like this, you know, it is a position in which the head it does have some justification of the Sharia he will argue that this habit is not authentic. And he will argue the fairness of this sort of activity. But is there a need there is no need
the you know what he knows no one would really hurt if they don't you know, do this
if they don't have this type of priors, these types of prizes.
Okay, so is it clear now, so that the the prize the award should not be contributed by the participants unless the add someone who is a Mohammed according to the Hanafi jfets embellies, not the Maliki's unless they add someone who's a Mohammed. Mohammed means what to make something how to handle it in family law, the one who would marry a woman who was divorced three times to make her halaal for her first husband.
It's called Mohan Mohan here and financial transactions is the one who enters into the competition without contributing to make the competition harder. You know, like, you know, what, what do they call this like
their word frivolous.
But, but that's the concept here.
Then the sheikh said when I put them into hidden Masako by Anna via Catherine Isabela, refer to the rich,
the rich cartridge case the verb noun from Russia, which is to throw
so he said, it's essential to define the distance of the race, the termination point and for archery the accuracy for hitting the target its character and number of hits the character of the target, what is the target?
What how, you know, what is it that we are, what is the what is considered the accurate
he said a shooting or archery contest is all about hitting the target is not a matter of distance. So, when you know that he was just talking about the details of how to determine the winner, yeah, clarity, everything has to be transparent, everything has to be transparent, so that you avoid this mutation. And all of this is not based on Quran and Sunnah the concepts are based on grandison concepts of what fairness and transparency and avoid this mutation as much as you can, how are these changeable like depending on the sport and depending on the customs and so on and so forth? Yes. So, so, you will have to determine, you know, the parameters that you will go by to determine the winner
and you have to be transparent about them.
Then that is the end of it in this chapter, sub sub is the verbal noun, sub sub up is the name of the price. SAP is the verbal noun SAP, which is the
outdoing
to come to come first is called sub, that's the variable now. Okay, now we do idi deposits for safekeeping. And that chapter is very small. So if you allow me five minutes over the time, I'll be able to finish and solve.
The Shaykh said chapter on the deposits for safekeeping or with Dr. Baba, Dr.
Ma
Another mafia
rl muga Melania tada it was er is a trust with no liability on the part of the trustee unless they transgress with lower liability on the part of trustee unless the transgress we said several times before when every someone has the property of someone else, there are there are two different types of here if you have the property of someone else, it is in your hand, this hand is called the Amana or yet
so, he had Amana
he had potty he had the means and Amanda means to trust Han
trust
he had diarrhea, he had the means an IRA means loan,
something that is being loaned for the usufruct of the benefit of okay. So, and here you will have a list of things that are considered that manner. If you are our key agent, someone's agent, is your hand the hand of trust or a hand of loan
trust, are you a borrower or just the trustee? So it will it will be here. Okay.
If someone left something for you for safekeeping, the positive deposit for safekeeping. Are you trustee or a borrower? Trustee? So, trustees in general, in all in all the trustees, when are they liable? Domine when are the Domine
for negligence, that D out of free time, then out of free time D means transgression. For free, it means negligence, that the means doing something that you were not supposed to do tuffrey meaning failing to do something that you weren't supposed to do.
That's that's the difference between that the antifreeze Daddy, he did something you are not supposed to do for free, you did not do something you weren't supposed to do
negligence. So if someone leaves something with with you for safekeeping, then they are I mean,
most men, most men, they are trusted. And in this case, they would only be liable if they transgressed or neglected.
What about banks when you leave your money in his checking account,
checking account left your money in a checking account
it's a man
Okay, so is the bank liable now we're not liable
not liable
okay.
So here the polka have to come in and do is the same?
Because it looks like this is our Dr. It's actually called the Dr. And Dr. In the bank. It's called the idea that you know deposit money in the bank, but the fuqaha said those banks use this money
which violates the concept of what they are. Therefore, we will make them liable for the bank should be liable for these words.
Because they use that money and they were dr should not be used for the benefit of mood or the trustee. Okay.
Then the SEC said when lamea fee heresy mislead, mislead heads the livi O'Meara vihara z haffi outta Salafi Helen upset. How can I be mad at me as men who
do some
outcast crap makhija how we had our tenant in batala Bihar MA in Kearney bar Amina, okay. Here are all exceptions from the non liability of the trustee. Here we will make him liable. Here we will make them liable. Take these examples. If they did not preserve it in a safe place. Be fiddling it's like because every
has a different, so I can't put the car into like as a sort of
a safety box or whatever. So it has to be left on the street. But if I leave it far away in an abandoned area, that is not Herzliya, if I leave it on, like, sort of a sort of a busy street, in front of my house, then I did not commit negligence, then I did not commit negligence. But if I have like a diamond dream, it has, you know, whatever you are able to get the concept has to be this, that safe place has to be be fitting it's like, or in a head is has been erected in a heads as directed. If the mood there, if the owner of the property told me keep it in that room, keep it here. And I listen to them, I'm not responsible, even if it is not befitting of its life. But that
was the wish of the owner have enough response, okay, or use it, if I use it, I will be liable. Banks,
for their own interests or cool are listed with another so that it became an inseparable part of a home. So
flower, you added it to your flower, now you're liable. You know, you won't have to give me the flower regardless of of whatever happens. If the some of the flowers lost all of the flowers lost, you added it to your into your flower became inseparable, then you're liable. You have to give me my flower back
or took it out to spend it and then return that. If you even take it out to spend it to spend, like I leave something with you high leave, like money with you, how do you take it out, take some out, spend it, and then return it, return it. If you take it out and spend it, spend it and then return it and after you return it to the safe place after you return it to the Safe Place the money is lost, you're liable
because at one point there was an interruption of the MN that interruption to establish the establish the state of Ameen yet the MN whenever someone possesses money,
the default is that if I have your money, I am liable. The default is not that I am me, the default is that I am liable. Now,
you gave me something to keep. So that is a that is a like an exception of the default.
I took it out and spent it
that's interruption of the default.
That is interruption of the exception. Going back to the default, I am liable.
I put it back in. But when I put it back in you another around to reestablish the exception, which is me and I'm not done. I am interested, I'm not liable. You are not around. So no reestablishment of the
exception, I will continue to be bothered.
When is it that I could have I could be I mean, if
I inform you that I took it out, and I'll put it back in and you sanction this and you re establish by agreement, my state of America or my being I mean mataman mister man etc. Trustee
then very sad, who I will you know, these are things that will make you liable
or and did it it's seen. If you just undo the scene, someone leaves something with you in a box and you open the box. someone leaves someone says something in the box and you undo the seal of the box that says your life.
Regardless, you're either going to be alone then or denied receiving it at one point if you're denied and then you admitted you're liable
or resisted returning it upon being demanded despite their ability to do so. Then he or she will become liable for it, then he or she will become liable for it because you by
denying that he received it by refusing to return it at one point you you switched from more attachment to what?
possible, which is the one who takes the you know, seizure by by
unlawful seizure by force. Hello procedure prefers when you see someone's property
can you know by force? So you made yourself awesome. Now, after you made yourself for us, if we go back to the default, you are liable, liable, liable? Okay.
When the sheikh said we're in our data need some data for our
Bellman, we're in Carl America and da da da da da, da da Kabira min. If he or she said you did not leave anything with me, then the claim that damage or loss for its return to the depositor, their claim will not be accepted from them. Why? Because they're being inconsistent.
Because he said, You did not leave anything with me.
And then he said, No, it was lost, then that inconsistency will make them liable. We will not take because in general motorman not only that they're not liable, but in more damage will be believed in the court. Because if you trusted them, that is your own scale of them. You have trusted them. So then you cannot
accuse them of wrongdoing without begginer proof, then that the you know would be on the lender or the owner of the money would have to establish the Vienna that the motorman the trustee, betrayed the trust. The motorman will only need to take an oath. And that said they walk away. Okay. Now, if he said, if he, if they said, I owe you nothing, and then claim this return damage or loss, it will be accepted. What's he trying to say here? That the default is that we will believe them? If what they're saying can be reconciled, they said different statement. I, you know, you you come and said, you know, you owe me like $20,000 and I say, I owe you nothing. And then later, you know, I say I
returned the money to you. Can we reconcile between the two statements? Yes. Because when I said that, oh, and I think I meant I returned the money to you, we can be reconciled. But the first inconsistency was not reconcilable.
You know, when you deny that you received anything, and then say it was last, then that's it. But the point that he's trying to make here is that we will,
we will believe them all the time. And as much as we can, we will believe them all the time. And as much as we can. Finally the shake, talked about a completely different thing. And he said, this is the only sentence in this book about it. He said what I do tomorrow morning, when let me adopt the fee hammer style, hire a loan for us will be guaranteed, even if the borrower did not transgress loan for use will be guaranteed, even if the borrower did not transgress because the Prophet sallallahu Sallam said, had idea to
what day in Well, I was a Muharram what they know not to be an IRA,
an IRA to them there.
Which means what an area, an item that was borrowed, an item that was borrowed, must be returned, there must be returned. So which means what? It means that, regardless of what happened.
And that makes sense, right? Because you borrowed this from me, for your own interest. So you should be liable if you were benefiting from the use of fracture the you know, of this property during this time, you should be liable. If it was lost, you're liable. So if you borrow someone's car, and you do too late, you're liable if the left did with you, because they're traveling, and they wanted you to keep it for them, and it gets without you
transgression or negligence
to to?
You're not liable. There was not yours clear. That is the difference between the idea and the idea, deposit for safekeeping and loan for use or borrowed it couldn't have already had a Stanford Chronicle long section of the paper today.