FJT10 Fiqh of the Judiciary & Testimonies – Acknowledgement

Hatem al-Haj


Channel: Hatem al-Haj


File Size: 36.20MB

Share Page


WARNING!!! AI generated text may display inaccurate or offensive information that doesn’t represent Muslim Central's views. Therefore, no part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.

AI Generated Summary ©

The transcript is difficult to follow and the conversation is difficult to follow. The transcript ends abruptly. The conversation is difficult to follow and the transcript ends abruptly. The transcript is difficult to follow and the transcript ends abruptly.

Transcript ©

00:00:00--> 00:00:17

Hello earlier Sofia minerales and I'm about to proceed. Today inshallah, we will have the last chapter in the book of lambda, which was written by an amount of nakoda Ma, who died in the year 620 after hijra as a unbury primer on feq.

00:00:20--> 00:00:31

The last book was the Kitab shahadat, but it is under the segment of our judiciary and testimonies. So, under the general segment of the judiciary

00:00:33--> 00:00:39

and today's chapter was the chapter on acknowledgment or confession, that is Babel

00:00:42--> 00:00:49

chapter one acknowledgement, slash confession because a cloud means both acknowledgement and confession.

00:00:50--> 00:00:53

Remember to put that American Allah tala sad

00:00:55--> 00:01:07

apparel more colorful Rashid or Sahih matar or the hacking of his OBE if a free person who is received that that means competent in managing money,

00:01:08--> 00:01:23

more can laugh and not terminally ill, voluntarily acknowledges some right has in adapt to others, he or she will be responsible for he or she will be responsible for it.

00:01:24--> 00:01:25


00:01:27--> 00:01:34

basically, is the supreme evidence. We say in Arabic krrc.

00:01:35--> 00:01:44

confession is the supreme evidence. Confession as the supreme evidence does not mean that confession always supersedes

00:01:45--> 00:01:45


00:01:47--> 00:01:51

usual evidences the admissible evidence is in court.

00:01:53--> 00:01:57

confession is the supreme evidence as far as the

00:01:59--> 00:02:01

person that is making the confession.

00:02:02--> 00:02:08

But as far as others confession is called a restricted qualify and

00:02:10--> 00:02:29

evidence it is an intransitive evidence. We call albina pajetta matar there was a PR project on Coursera Hill bayona that is admissible evidence in court are considered transitive evidences and parar.

00:02:31--> 00:02:58

On the other hand, which is confession slash acknowledgement is in transmit intransitive or restricted evidence. So apply applies to only so if you were partners in crime, and you make a crime or the EPA will not apply to your partner, it will apply to you only now to establish the you know, guilt against your partner. We need Breanna

00:02:59--> 00:03:45

also when you acknowledge something and you have a partner, that acknowledgement will apply to you only does not apply to your partner. If you are the heir of someone, and you acknowledge that this person had another heir, that acknowledgement will not apply to the other heirs, it will apply to you only, like if you are an heir to your father. And you acknowledge that your father had another child that no one knew of, but you acknowledge that this is your brother, your father, his child, that acknowledgement will apply to you only it does not apply to anyone else. Yeah, so

00:03:47--> 00:03:53

that is why we call it a paracas era in transitive evidence because that applies only to

00:03:55--> 00:03:59

the person who's making the acknowledgement or that confession.

00:04:00--> 00:04:08

But when as far as that person is concerned, I'm proud to say that Adela confession is the supreme evidence

00:04:10--> 00:04:13

or acknowledgement is the supreme evidence.

00:04:14--> 00:04:24

She said with a parallel mocha love and her if every person who is received in kind of a hoarder rasheeda Rashid means competent in managing money

00:04:25--> 00:04:45

rowsley comes from what prudence Rashid is prudent, but it is not it is in particular about money. Because the person who stuffy foolish in managing money if he confessed to a crime,

00:04:46--> 00:04:59

wherever crime murder like fornication, whatever crime, he will be liable for that but he will not be liable for travel money and monetary transactions.

00:05:00--> 00:05:10

Because he is foolish in monetary transaction, deserving to be interdicted hard, deserving of heart or inter diction.

00:05:11--> 00:05:12


00:05:14--> 00:05:38

And then he said, mocha love mocha love means what? tech leave as when you are liable and responsible, McCann life is both liable. And I'm sorry, liable and authorized liable is like responsible, so liable slash responsible and authorized. If you are mechanical if you're authorized to perform the technical Shariah IEA.

00:05:39--> 00:06:06

And you get rewarded for them, and you are liable, and you are liable for your errors. Of course, if you're not mocha enough, because you are a child, you could still get rewarded for your fasting and your prayers and so on. If you're a discerning child, you'll be steadily rewarded. Even if you are not a discerning child, someone took you to heart for instance, he gets rewarded for that.

00:06:08--> 00:06:08


00:06:10--> 00:06:32

But in terms of liability, you know, that's that's authorization but in terms of liability, you have to be bad enough to be liable, according to the majority. And, you know, we've talked about the Hungary's the discerning child as far as the companies are concerned before.

00:06:33--> 00:06:43

So McArdle if liable and not terminally ill because if you are terminally ill your acknowledgment may not be

00:06:45--> 00:06:54

always accepted. Certain acknowledgments will be accepted. We will talk about this in some detail later. inshallah.

00:06:57--> 00:07:05

So, now you are free, competent, prudent, liable.

00:07:06--> 00:07:46

Not terminally ill. And OSI means what OSI means well, but if you translate Asahi to well, that will not be an adequate translation because and that is always the problem with translation. like would you be we would want to be faithful to the letter of the orig original language, you will have to translate OSI as well. But is that what it means in this context? No. Because what if you are unwell, but you are not terminally ill? Will we accept your acknowledgement of course, it will not be accepted only from the terminally ill.

00:07:48--> 00:07:48


00:07:50--> 00:07:58

So if you acknowledge some some right as an adult to others, you will be responsible for it.

00:08:06--> 00:08:09

Okay, so what if you are

00:08:11--> 00:08:16

a child for instance, this will come or if it does not come?

00:08:17--> 00:08:19

Whether if you are your discerning child,

00:08:21--> 00:08:21


00:08:23--> 00:08:35

you're not free, you're a slave or a discerning child. During those times, there were still slaves. So what if you acknowledge concern acknowledge

00:08:37--> 00:08:39

your participation in a financial transaction

00:08:41--> 00:08:44

that you were authorized to conduct?

00:08:45--> 00:08:59

Would that acknowledgement be accepted? Yes, it should be accepted. It is limited to you know, your acknowledging of your participation, your particular participation in a financial transaction

00:09:01--> 00:09:03

that you were authorized to conduct.

00:09:05--> 00:09:27

When the SEC said women are para bedarra, Hema, some masakatsu kuten Yom Yom kinomoto al Qaeda mofi some makala is us and our car and how much a gelatin nazima udia then we have a higher Latin when was herbivory comatose Colombia plati Lizzy moto valic. If someone acknowledges

00:09:28--> 00:10:00

always a certain number of Durham's that silver currency, but then stay silent for a period of time in which he could have spoken and then says counterfeit or small or deferred, he will immediately be liable for the specified number of gentlemen and hold their hands. If however, he describes them with these qualities in direct connection with his acknowledgement. He will be

00:10:00--> 00:10:07

liable for what he acknowledged as he described it, as he described it.

00:10:11--> 00:10:18

Okay, so what what is he saying here? Like, let's say, Yes, I owe Sharon Oh,

00:10:19--> 00:10:20


00:10:21--> 00:10:25

their homes. I always share no five.

00:10:26--> 00:10:32

You know, counterfeit dollars is different from counterfeit their homes counterfeit, their home still had some value

00:10:34--> 00:10:43

if they were mixed with lead, counterfeit Durham's silver coins, but they were mixed with lead counterfeit dollars of no value whatsoever.

00:10:44--> 00:10:48

But anyway, so I Oh Sherry No, five

00:10:49--> 00:10:51

there hums, okay.

00:10:52--> 00:10:54

And then I stay silent

00:10:56--> 00:11:06

for a period that, oh, you know, that is uncustomary for people to you know, take your browser or something or cough or something.

00:11:08--> 00:11:32

And then I say, but the word deferred, it's a deferred that it's not, you know, immediate one there, the it's not do deferred, or I say, but they were counterfeit. Or I would say they were small their homes during their time, the small Dirham was like about two thirds of the size of the real there,

00:11:34--> 00:11:39

it was getting a little bit more difficult to have gold and silver currency.

00:11:41--> 00:11:53

So they would actually make smaller their homes, counterfeit their homes, and they would make something called flus that were metal that will not their hands whatsoever.

00:11:54--> 00:11:56

Not silver coins whatsoever.

00:11:58--> 00:11:59

So in this case,

00:12:02--> 00:12:36

what what is what is going to happen, I will be responsible for my acknowledgement, any exclusion, any addition after this, after my silence, will not be taken will not be accepted. So I will be responsible for the specific specified number of the items that I spoke of first, and there'll be do, and there'll be original, and they will be the regular size, whatever the you know. Now, if I say I Oh, Sharon, oh,

00:12:37--> 00:13:29

five, there are homes that are counterfeit. That's my acknowledgement, then I will be liable for five there are homes that are counterfeit, what I'm sharing the ones to establish abena evidence that I owe him five, there are homes that are not counterfeit, please go ahead, and then you will get your $5 arms that are not counterfeit, but if it is about my approach or my acknowledgement, then whatever I acknowledge will be taken. But at the same time, it has to be in connection, you know, to the or to the original statement. Any exclusion has to be in connection to the original statement I owe. And it is better. I mean, to avoid any trouble in court to say I owe Shenmue, five

00:13:29--> 00:13:49

counterfeit their homes, that is better than to say I owe share no five there are harms that are counterfeit, because you could have like, like a sort of an episode of Coffee or something and then is stop for a time that the judge will consider to be unreasonable.

00:13:51--> 00:13:52

But anyway, that's what it is.

00:13:54--> 00:14:04

Now, certainly, you know, he also said voluntarily, right. You know, I'm sorry, that we

00:14:05--> 00:14:40

we did not mention this, you know, the previous paragraph in the previous paragraph. He said voluntarily, because any acknowledgement under duress is unaccepted is invalid any acknowledgement under duress. If you torture people to confess, that confession will not be accepted. It is invalid because the Prophet sallallahu wasallam said in a luchador Jolyon metal hopper our nesea mess to credo Holly, this was reported by an imagine

00:14:42--> 00:14:50

Yeah, it would be a hadith. This is just to tell you that not everything is in Bukhari and Muslim. This was really just reported by Ivan imagine

00:14:52--> 00:14:55

the weakest of the six collections is an image

00:14:57--> 00:14:59

Yeah, of course and body a Muslim will come first and

00:15:00--> 00:15:34

in Abu Dhabi, the median salary, in this particular order, some people will remember the above Buddha word, but in the area of 10 particular, Buddha's above it, Timothy, Timothy is above a Buddha Buddha in the area of heart softeners, and advocates lacking adab and manners and stuff like this, but then particularly in the area of focus above, maybe so Bukhari and Muslim, and then up with od Timothy and Si, and then even imagine, it's a different category by itself, they would not actually count it among the

00:15:35--> 00:15:53

six collections earlier, but then it became an established sort of norm among the mahadi scene to consider imagine the six of them. But this particular hobbies that is reported by every manager is supported by by happy also on others.

00:15:54--> 00:16:00

But happy came later, of course, about this particular hobbies is considered half of this area.

00:16:02--> 00:16:07

In the lottery that was very hot on this youngster curry Holly, Allah had

00:16:08--> 00:16:09


00:16:10--> 00:16:17

or how did I translate it? Pardon for the given part in the last part in the my people,

00:16:18--> 00:16:28

for my sake, that I was really, you know, I'm sorry, I did not hear in the commentary that's missing from the translation.

00:16:29--> 00:16:58

And I will fix it in the third edition inshallah, because that is an important addition is, it's important in the law, you know, certainly, it has varying reports, and in some of the reports, it's that Lee is not there. But in this particular report, that I cited here in Arabic, I should have translated it as Allah has pardoned my people, for my sake, for my sake,

00:16:59--> 00:17:08

for their mistakes, their forgetfulness, and for what they do, or they have done under duress.

00:17:10--> 00:17:21

consider this to be half of the Sharia, because it is certainly a very important aspect and very important principle of the Sharia. So, whatever you do out of forgetfulness, out of error,

00:17:23--> 00:17:29

or under duress, you are forgiven, and he may have been a mad saddened that error

00:17:31--> 00:17:35

NRP there should not be any different from error,

00:17:37--> 00:17:56

which was an enormous opposition. Because, you know, by his time people were making fear of each other on matters of our pizza, because they did not allow for that hobbies to apply to also or

00:17:58--> 00:18:36

they would only apply it in an hour or in the law, not in creed. So, he confirmed that it will apply not only to furore, but it will also apply to creed so in a lot of jobs, Leah on Matty utkatasana crmc should be general law as part of the my people for my sake, for their mistake, their forgetfulness, and for what they have done under duress applies everywhere. Now, it would not apply to the principles of our either because they are not subject to error.

00:18:43--> 00:18:50

I have a long discussion about this, you know, the accountability of of non Muslims, and when are they accountable and,

00:18:51--> 00:18:53

but, but in general,

00:18:55--> 00:18:57

the principles of al Qaeda

00:18:58--> 00:19:01

you cannot be Muslim, and

00:19:02--> 00:19:03

deny resurrection.

00:19:04--> 00:19:18

You know, that just wouldn't work. You cannot be Muslim and deny the encompassing eternal knowledge of God. It wouldn't work. And that's how these would not apply, of course,

00:19:19--> 00:19:24

but in the other matters of Arpita that are not established through certainty.

00:19:26--> 00:19:29

Then that's how these would apply as well. So great hobbies.

00:19:30--> 00:19:31


00:19:32--> 00:19:36

We're done also with the with a paragraph on

00:19:38--> 00:19:39


00:19:40--> 00:19:51

If you stay silent and then you make an exclusion or qualification, it will not be accepted. If you say it in connection to the original statement. It will be accepted.

00:19:54--> 00:19:59

If the chairman says or any staff member para be a panda meanness for him apostle

00:20:00--> 00:20:12

On visa hostis now, we're enforcement of a normal visa kutani on Kino mode killer movie. I'll be Colombian as an eBay hostess now AXA meanness V, our military Regency lezzy mahoe

00:20:13--> 00:20:14


00:20:16--> 00:20:48

If he excludes from his acknowledgment less than half of it in connection with his acknowledgement, his exception will be valid. But if he separates the acknowledgement and the exclusion by a period of silence in which he could have spoken, or by irrelevant speech, or if he excludes more than half of what he acknowledges, or something from a different genus, he will be liable for the entire acknowledgement. Okay.

00:20:49--> 00:20:51

I owe sharing them

00:20:52--> 00:20:54

100 their homes?

00:20:56--> 00:20:58

Save one goat?

00:21:00--> 00:21:01

How much do I owe Sharon?

00:21:03--> 00:21:10

100 items, he cannot exclude one goat from 100 dirhams you can exclude you know,

00:21:12--> 00:21:16

something of the same genus? Not something of a different genus.

00:21:17--> 00:21:21

Okay, so I almost showing you 100 Durham's.

00:21:27--> 00:21:28

Except two or

00:21:30--> 00:21:30


00:21:32--> 00:21:34

or less, you know,

00:21:35--> 00:21:43

I always heard that 100 their homes except 60. their homes? not make sense, does not is not okay.

00:21:44--> 00:21:53

No, because you excluded more than half of the 160. So it wouldn't count. It wouldn't work.

00:22:00--> 00:22:09

I say here in the commentary, because it's not linguistically customary or sound to exclude more than one half of what was acknowledged. So

00:22:11--> 00:22:19

I acknowledge that this room belongs to share No, except two thirds of it.

00:22:21--> 00:22:22

The whole room would belong with sharing them.

00:22:24--> 00:22:40

What do you mean except two thirds? You're not gonna like if you really wanted to say that you should have said, I acknowledge that turnell owns 1/3 of this room. But to say I acknowledge that I know that Turner owns Sharon owns

00:22:41--> 00:22:44

this room, except two thirds. That doesn't make sense.

00:22:45--> 00:23:00

So since it doesn't make sense, we will presume that you had second thoughts while you're making the acknowledgement that you're acknowledging that he owns the room. But then you have second thoughts and said except two thirds

00:23:01--> 00:23:07

because I had you really meant it. You wouldn't have said that at all. You will have said something different

00:23:08--> 00:23:10

that he owns 1/3 of the room.

00:23:12--> 00:23:15

Like when you say 100 their arms except one go with her.

00:23:16--> 00:23:50

Okay, so let's test now which was exclusion. There are certain principles here that should be applied. Then the shack said woman Karla, Allahu Allah, Dara and some makalah Dr. Lamb yoke Bell tabula. We're in con la Hui nd some mccarl what Dr. COVID Billa Cola, whoever says for him upon me is X number of Durham's, and then says as a deposit for safekeeping.

00:23:52--> 00:23:54

His second statement will not be accepted.

00:23:56--> 00:24:25

If he says for him, with me, not upon me. The first one is Allah and the second is nd Allah means upon me, the second means with me, for him with me, instead of upon me and then says as a deposit for safekeeping, his second statement will be accepted. These are what semantics? You know, because to say Allah Yeah.

00:24:27--> 00:24:32

And then to say it's deposit for safekeeping does not make sense

00:24:33--> 00:24:37

because at deposit for safekeeping, whatever is lost.

00:24:38--> 00:24:40

Are you liable for it?

00:24:43--> 00:24:45

Okay, so when are you liable?

00:24:47--> 00:24:59

You know, that zero from your end or not being careful or not being prudent, okay, that's when you are liable. Otherwise, all of this is is tuffrey, which is basically negligence.

00:25:00--> 00:25:07

was the other 130 you stole it? I mean, or you, you ruin that, you know,

00:25:08--> 00:25:11

you use that, and you crash the car.

00:25:13--> 00:25:16

For instance, if you leave my car, yeah, so.

00:25:18--> 00:25:40

Okay, so that would not be so it's not suitable to say I layer upon me because the idea is nd with me, he left it with me. So it's not upon me, if I borrowed money from you, then it is upon me because I am responsible to give it back to you when no matter what happened to that money.

00:25:42--> 00:25:42


00:25:43--> 00:26:08

But these are semantics. So imagine if a miracle mama said that whatever is customary should take precedence over semantics. You know, what is customary if, if a lay person makes a statement, don't hold him to that grammar, the rules of grammar

00:26:09--> 00:26:21

hold him to what is customary? Is it expected of a lay person to say that the mean this by this statement is expected of a layperson to mean this by their statement.

00:26:23--> 00:26:31

He was extremely concerned with the viability and the vitality of this area. And if we say to lay people that you are

00:26:33--> 00:26:41

you're going to be held liable for the rules of grammar that would look unfair to most of them.

00:26:42--> 00:26:48

And then in the court system, you know, whatever it is that they acknowledged.

00:26:50--> 00:27:10

It would be certainly I mean, if you invoke grammar and understanding the speech of laypeople, it will do them injustice, because they don't follow the rules of grammar. And they are not linguists to know the subtle differences in semantics. Okay.

00:27:12--> 00:27:13

And then this became,

00:27:15--> 00:27:16

this became sort of

00:27:19--> 00:27:27

a legitimate position in the math hub that has been reported ever since. From chef Taki de la Mola.

00:27:29--> 00:28:04

Zan the chef says women akara bedarra Hema Norman Cora bedarra Hema for Apollo miles mo musasa illa Aeneas of Depo huhtamaki our makara Allahu Allahu Akbar Allahu Allah minha. Whoever acknowledges all in the raw hands, their hands, the least, that he will be liable for his three, unless the one who is owed the money agrees to a lesser amount. Why because in Arabic,

00:28:05--> 00:28:07

there are two different plurals

00:28:10--> 00:28:15

if you're talking about to a pair, you're not using

00:28:16--> 00:28:20

use the customary plural for more than two.

00:28:21--> 00:28:33

You're using what is called masana. That is plural for two in particular. So you say Raja Raja LAN Raja, a man progent

00:28:34--> 00:28:39

two men, Raja Lan, three or more men.

00:28:41--> 00:28:52

So the muslin although of course, sometimes there are exceptions, but in general, this is what it is. So if you say hi oh, ham.

00:28:55--> 00:29:04

That is the plural. You can say they are to their homes. Because to their homes. What have been, I owe him

00:29:06--> 00:29:08

there? How am I okay?

00:29:11--> 00:29:17

No, that's the main it's correct with I'm just laughing because like you're bringing in Arabic grammar in English statements.

00:29:19--> 00:29:25

Then Amanda may that's fine. So I owe him their humaine because it's mfold B.

00:29:26--> 00:29:26


00:29:28--> 00:29:35

So I owe him to their arms that would have been I owe him Am I not the run?

00:29:38--> 00:29:39

Then the shake says

00:29:41--> 00:29:45

woman hopper Robbie say in muddiman kobuleti of Sierra who be my atomico

00:29:46--> 00:29:59

if one acknowledges all in gun, an identified item, his explanation of it will be accepted as long as it is plausible. Yeah, tomorrow as long as

00:30:00--> 00:30:51

It is plausible. So I say here if he admits that he owes someone money, any amount of money will be plausible. If you say I owe him a garment, whatever, you know, you whatever will be called a garment will be a plausible explanation no matter how cheap it is. Why? Because he's established evidence against you. In his own, we're only going by your acknowledgement. So you are the one entitled to interpreting your own acknowledgement. Because we don't have evidence against you. So whatever it is, you acknowledge, but you will be entitled to interpret in your acknowledgement as long as your interpretation is plausible. So no matter how cheap it is, if it is, if we can call this a garment,

00:30:51--> 00:30:59

we'll call this a garment. But you say, I owe him how a garment and basically

00:31:02--> 00:31:08

I give him like a piece of cloth or something that's not garment, you know, so we're not accepted.

00:31:09--> 00:31:10


00:31:11--> 00:31:50

Then the chef talks about acknowledgement by children and he says, first learn while Corrado Vidal McArdle FEBC in inla and Meza when at that moment of sorrow Fifi Katrina or the Nala and we did talk about this already subsection, the acknowledgement by one who is not Micallef liable and authorized is not accepted regarding anything except in the case of a discerning child who is allowed to conduct a particular business transaction, his acknowledgement is valid concerning the particular transaction he is permitted to conduct.

00:31:54--> 00:32:06

Then he talks about acknowledgement by fools Sophie, Sophie, we said is imprudent foolish,

00:32:08--> 00:32:18

particularly when it comes to financial transactions. Okay, so according to Sophie who behaved in our ASR seven out of 10

00:32:20--> 00:32:21

okay is a

00:32:22--> 00:32:23

beam of fraud.

00:32:27--> 00:32:30

When a para be mad in America applaro.

00:32:31--> 00:32:49

If a foolish person confesses to a crime that is punishable by had or subject to sauce, he will be held liable if he acknowledges Oh in money is acknowledgement will not be accepted. Because if you're interdicted,

00:32:51--> 00:33:14

your acknowledgement is not accepted. Also, there's a fee that is interdicted, there's a fee that has been interdicted for the creditors for the interest of the creditors, you owe money to a lot of people, they came and ask the judge, remember in financial transactions, we have a separate chapter on had introduction.

00:33:15--> 00:33:18

That is basically when the judge

00:33:20--> 00:34:00

denies you the power to dispose of your money, you're under no introduction. At this point, many creditors came you failed to pay them back. You're not able to dispose of your money and we sell all of your properties to pay off your creditors. So now the creditors came and asked for interdiction and they prove that you owe them money. So, then we will you know, certainly sometimes the judge can convey convince them, give him a little bit of time

00:34:01--> 00:34:17

to figure out how he can collect the money, but but he will give him some respite for a limited time then introduction will be in well the issue the verdict of introduction would be issued by the judge, then

00:34:19--> 00:34:21

you go and

00:34:23--> 00:34:27

sort of agree with someone or collude with someone

00:34:29--> 00:34:35

and tell him go to the judge and claim that I owe you money.

00:34:36--> 00:34:38

claim that they owe you money. So let us say

00:34:41--> 00:34:50

I owe the grocery store $100 and I owe the furniture store $200 and

00:34:51--> 00:34:57

I owe the landlord $400

00:34:58--> 00:34:59

and I only have

00:35:00--> 00:35:02

Have $500.

00:35:04--> 00:35:08

So we will combine this and it will be 700.

00:35:10--> 00:35:29

And we will distribute the 500 among them, everyone will get a percentage that is commensurate with how much how they are owed. Let's say you go and you tell up, why are you Why don't you go to court and claim that I owe you

00:35:31--> 00:35:32


00:35:34--> 00:35:42

Okay, have will. And I would acknowledge that I owe you this money, and then I can give you $50

00:35:44--> 00:35:46

then what will happen is,

00:35:47--> 00:35:58

that person who is is owed $2,000, everybody here is owed $700 person who's owed to $2,000, we'll get two thirds of the 500

00:35:59--> 00:36:14

and walk away with it, and we will squeeze all the actual creditors into that 200 that are left of the 500. So, we will not accept your acknowledgement, if you are sefie.

00:36:17--> 00:36:21

Basically, because we want to protect the interests of

00:36:23--> 00:36:50

and under any transaction in this case, because we want to protect the interests of their creditors. Now, if you if you are actually owed $2,000 and you establish Sabina, you present a Yuna that you are owed this money, of course, you will be added to the rest of the creditors, but with Urbina, not merely my acknowledgement.

00:36:52--> 00:36:54

And then the shake says

00:36:56--> 00:36:58

we move now to a car married

00:37:02--> 00:37:05

or maybe we come back to a partner married after

00:37:07--> 00:37:15

a short break in sha Allah, what which statement is this disambiguation clarification or because we will keep the questions further until the end?

00:37:20--> 00:37:23

Haven't we said 200 times that any?

00:37:24--> 00:37:33

Yeah, any statement about slavery? We will not translate because there is no slavery. So it is irrelevant knowledge at this point.

00:37:37--> 00:37:44

Won't be translated again translated. Likewise is the ruling concerning the acknowledgement of the slave.

00:37:45--> 00:37:49

Ilana Matala with a mighty you Bobby about the

00:37:50--> 00:38:05

inland economy to Jara via Karima within alone, so the acknowledgement of the slave it Well, basically, he will be liable for it and he will be

00:38:06--> 00:38:07

after emancipation.

00:38:08--> 00:38:18

People can press charges against him on the basis of his acknowledgement, after his emancipation and economy has gone along with the GA except if he is given permission

00:38:21--> 00:38:41

to transact you know, for a particular trends, actions or trade faza hepler houfy podremos in Allah hope, then his acknowledgement concerning the part whenever he is authorized to conduct whatever transactions he is authorized to conduct will be valid.

00:38:42--> 00:38:46

Yes. So I will stop here and then we will return

00:38:47--> 00:38:50

and five minutes