Fulfilling Promises Swearing Allah March 1st 2012

Alhamdulillah

so a lot of Americans you know, whether it was

nominally, Rahim, Allah Tada, yeah, Paulo fever will affect each other. On the book of good manners. He said, I will have a blast doing just one chapter on fulfillment of promises, and agreements.

And a lot of dialogue will also be landed in Alaska, Canada Sula. Last Panama says I'm fulfilled every covenant, verily the covenant won't be questionable. So whatever promise that you give whatever covenant that you give something to people, you have to fulfill that law for the law either.

and fulfill the covenant of a law. When you when you have when you have give that covenant up. And this is an altar call this beyond the law, which means usually when people give promises, and give out when they about other people, and they make things binding, what do they usually use? The name of the last panel, right? So this word By Allah, I swear by Allah, Allah, I'll do that. So eventually, when we use the name of Allah subhanho, wa Taala. Now you're using this covenant and you strengthen that covenant by the name of Allah Subhana, WA,

ala, you're using this covenant

with our Wakata Allah, yeah.

Our formula, or you believe fulfill your obligations. These contracts in particular, particularly contracts. This is basically about transaction. So if you ever made a deal, it's concerned binding, if all the requirements are fulfilled, there is no objections or defects in the contract. So what they will do when you when you look at all these conditions, then that that contract needs to be executed, it's considered valid. And it needs to be to be binding on both parties, you have no right to withdraw from a contract, simply because you just don't like it. And

unless there is there is an option, there is an option in that context, if there is an option to contract, and the option holder has the right to revoke it based on the agreement. For example, when you're gonna buy something from a retail store, they give you a receipt with that, right? When you started that receipt, as now you have approval of it, it becomes binding them. Let's say after maybe three or four days, you didn't like that part. Are you allowed to send it back?

send it back. If there's a contract, if the contract says and the back, you know, we have 99 days return policy, and you return it back within that period of time, you're still fulfilling the contract, because it's still part of that contract. But let's say it's it does that is

like one of the one of the times Actually, I've seen something like some people, they even they use some material for almost four months.

And then they come back, you know, to return that. I said Jeffrey

Walla, they're gonna accept that anyway, they're gonna give a store credit. This is not about them, giving you a store credit, is it ethical,

that you buy that stuff or not, the contract even to the contract itself, does not allow you to do that.

So we're just accepting this as customer service. But significant issue as well, unless, of course, there's a defect in that, or something wrong with it. And now after a few months, we discover that, then you return back by the option of defect in this case, you have the option to return. And one of the worst actually tests I've ever heard. It's from some international students, someone told us that story before. And of course, that story isn't the person who told me that story. So they knew some people, some international students, they, maybe generation of national, international students, they all shared, the same TV was paid for maybe five, six years.

I said, how's that?

Because those guys, the first one bought this maybe six, seven years ago. And every time before the 90 days actually expand there is policy return policy is expired, they go on their return, and they buy another one from another store.

And then they return that. And they buy because you know, three, three months in a first semester, right?

So by the time they return it back, and so on, so as soon as so they returned that per semester,

and he was just bragging about it that there outsmart Walmart.

And even though even though it's eventually within the contract limit, because 90 days so they can put in the contract limit. But then the principle itself, the idea itself, is completely unlimited. And it's really absolutely ridiculous. So the life exists. I don't know what to tell you about that dumped me this month.

I think this is absolutely wrong. So eventually

Allah has commanded us to fulfill the agreement and the contract. Wakata Tada. Yeah, you're Latina Armand, mata coluna, merata cabramatta in the body and

how it's a brilliant choice for the man.

Under this chapter, what he says in this last part that says all you believe, why do you say that which you do not do most hateful, it is with a law that you say that which you do not do. So basically, in the contract is the same thing, you promised people that will do something for them, and you never do that. And you can make a contract with them on a covenant. And individually, you never do that with the intention that you don't want to do.

It's not like some, let's say, have circumstances, you got sick, car broke down, got extremely busy, these kind of things, and so forth might happen. They might happen. But for those people who intentionally give these false promises, just to send people away from them.

So of course, our mind says, Okay, I'm coming with intention just to hold, you know, put you on hold, and then never actually call back until you call back, and so forth. So eventually, this kind of added to the lost power data.

For those who actually put that as part of their attitude, and it was incidental or accidental, that's a different thing. So we see that remember, not anymore log data. After speaking about the etiquette of keeping secrets, and fulfilling your obligations, and so forth, he comes here to fulfill in these covenants and these contracts.

Perhaps maybe tomorrow today, so one of his most

alarming Hadith, which is not that the sign of the hypocrisy is one of another.

So we'll see.

What does exactly mean, we shall not allow any question?

Yes.

For seven years,

if you're the store manager, would you accept a customer to do that?

I understand. But if he does that for seven years,

well, I'm not saying he keeps doing that every semester for for the duration of seven years.

He comes to you, he buys something, he keeps the box in the garage and use it for 90 days. And then on the on the 89 day, he comes to you to return that with the box. And then right maybe next day, he would come again, buy another thing, the same thing, the same product, another TV for them. And I keep doing that over and over and over and over again.

I don't think there's actually any anyone who has a small business, maybe big businesses don't mind because the money eventually is gonna accept that and they don't count. So they get river out of it anyway. So that was anyway, besides some companies, they do actually restocking fees. So by the time you get the they get the monetary percentage stays in their account. And I thought like it goes again to options afterwards. So they almost would have eventually. So these businesses are basically worthless, but the idea is actually for us as a Muslim.

It's an ethical issue of platinum. So that is the thing that actually any commander when you do, don't forget about the ethical aspects of dealing with this society does not believe in business ethics, that sense.

You tell me what you believe is bad.

Good.

Yeah. But some companies like Walmart in the past, they said no question asked. Now sometimes they ask the question.

Yeah, so is there anything wrong with

that?

is a thing that islamically visit when you make a contract? One of the main conditions of a contract is the

Unless, of course, it's a contract that allows this party that's supposed to be permanent. So when you go to buy a house, you don't intend to buy a house for five days, and then bring it and give it back again to the original owner occasion, whenever you don't have that attention. Same day, when you buy a device from this from this company, you don't have in your mind that I'll keep it to now for 90 days, and then I'll turn it back again, then I'll get back another one. So it keeps going in different products. He did the exact same $50, you paid for seven, seven years. Now that is that that's the point. That's the ethical aspect. From a technical perspective, it seems that the option,

including the contract, allows the contract to actually to go that way. But the ethical aspects of someone exploiting that that system of fire, which has been the option, that is the point that we ought to deal with it? Is that abuse of the system that makes it look bad?

Yes.

So

true, but actually hold on a second, the store actually is always a winner in this case, why? First of all, they have restocking fees, in many cases. Number two, they send it back to the manufacturer, and they get their money back.

Regardless, it was open items, they said the customer that I like a big company like Walmart, for example, it's based on actually handling the customers for these manufacturers. So when I'm when I might want, the Walmart doesn't look, a customer doesn't like it, the Walmart said this to the manufacturer said listen, the customer didn't like that. So they're gonna give them maybe a discount to other products afterwards. So they're all good in that case, also, the money that has been in their account for 30 days or 90 days, has already accrued river for them, you know, and benefit that when you when you pay that back again, again, when and even if they if not, they will auction it

actually. So they get their money back in different ways, they still can get their money back. But again, the point is, if they can ask for the intention of doing it, without any making any any intention to make it permanent, or lower than just

buying something.

As long as there is fire, well, there is actually an option and the resources and the tools they need to follow. So that the two basically contracting parties, they have the option of file, which is basically the old recipe,

they give you a grace period to make it binding, which has been example, three days, five days, 90 days, eventually you have the past 90 days, it becomes binding.

And then in this case, there is no return, you cannot return that product without any legitimate reason.

That's the return. If you return it within the 90 days, the

store or the actually agrees with you that I'm gonna give you 90 days to return that one.

And they might even tell you no question asked. So if you return within the 90 days, you're not violating anything. But again, my question is using the same $50 over and over again to buy the exact same product. It's not like someone, you know, you buy TV for $200. And then you return back the 10 or 20,000 at the end of the 90 days. And then you get the 200 you buy groceries for them. That's different. That's absolutely different. But someone is the same $200 to buy the TV for seven years.

That's really bizarre.

And other stuff.

This is something we have discussed

the different discussion, but it's the whole principle islamically basically the whole principle of sale and trade. What is it to circulate the money around, right? Imagine I keep holding the same $50 for seven years back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. How do you circulate these $50 anywhere else? They're not

imagine every person buys the money like this, that fashion Alice Potter says one of the biggest problems in an economic system is to keep monopoly as the last mother says Kate

Like Pura doula main idea, there isn't a lot, man, it's a car make some other rules when you divide, break down the capital among the hands of other people like inheritance, for example, every time they carry them grows big, elaborate it down to inheritance, someone dies, so that it goes down to small portions people, they start picking up from there, or they might lose a lot of people. So the money keeps circulating the losses pay like una to letter by an attorney, I mean, it does not become like a monopoly that circulates on the rich among you. One of the biggest parts of this system is that it is the 1%. What is the one percentage amount, the 1% is the richest among the people in the

society holding that economy and economical fate of the 90% of the society. So because they're circulating the wealth among themselves based on the system that they've got to invest the banking system and insurance system, all the stuff keeps it in the hands of the rich to get richer, and the poor to get it. That's the problem. So if on a micro level, if each one of us stopped, were acting in the same fashion, I hold on to $200. And every time that that by the end of the contract, I return that back and I get another one, return it back in there. So what I'm doing exactly, I'm not really circular $200 is not circulating, you're holding it like this, and you get this exchange in

products. And if everybody's gonna do that, that's gonna affect the entire economy. Long term.

The counter argument to this the counter argument to this

that the counter argument for the counter arguments here is that the seller has already agreed to that rest period. And the contract is usually usually supposed to be based on

mutual consent, and the mutual concept they agreed to the 290 days, don't get those 90 days you will make up your mind to keep it or to return it after a while or unless they make conditions for the return. If the return because of a defect,

for example, whatever we have compatibility whatsoever actually, then in this case, you can't read it just

doesn't matter.

I agree on the principle but if again, if the seller has given you that recipe to the temple in 90 days, a person will just return those options or the option. They are not afford that. But the person will hit if you keep doing that with the same product over and over again to avoid buying and selling something else.