النص المفهرس

5. It is treated as a commodity among traders in their
transactions.1
Some latter day scholars say that instead of its sale and purchase, it
will be better to collect a remuneration for giving up the right. They
based this on the issue of nuzul 'an al-waza'if. Observe the following:
وفى الأشباه: لا يجوز الاعتياض عن الحقوق المجردة كحق الشفعة، وعلى بذا لا
يجوز الاعتياض عن الوظائف بالأوقاف، وفيها في آخر بحث تعارض العرف
مع اللغة: المذبب عدم اعتبار العرف الخاص، لكن أفتى كثير باعتباره،
وعليه فيفتى بجواز النزول عن الوظائف بمال. (الدر المختار: ٥١٨/٤، ٥١٩،
سعيد. وكذا فى الاشباه: ٢٨٦/١)
وفى "الفقه الحنفي في ثوبه الجديد": فالسوال الآن: بل يجوز بيع الاسم التجاري
أو العلامة التجارية؟
وظابر أن الاسم والعلامة ليس عيناً مادياً، وإنما بو عبارة عن حق استعمال
بذا الاسم أو العلامة، وبذا الحق ثبت لصاحبه إصالة بحكم الأسبقية
والتسجيل الحكومي، وبو حق ثابت فى الحال، وليس متوقعاً فى المستقبل، وہو
حق يقبل الانتقال إلى آخر، ولكنه ليس حقاً ثابتاً في عين قائمة، فعلى ضوء
القواعد التي استخلصنابا من كلام الفقهاء ينبغي أن يجوز الاعتياض عنه عن
طريق التنازل دون البيع - وبهذا أفتى شيخ مشايخنا العلامة أشرف على
التهانوى وقاسم على مسألة النزول عن الوظائف بمال، وحكى فيه عبارة ابن
عابدين التي نقلها في مسألة النزول عن الوظائف. (الفقر الحنفى فى ثوبه
الجديد: ٣٧/٤، بيع الاسم التجارى والعلامة التجارية، دمشق)
Imdād al-Fatāwā:
The name of a factory is similar to haqq-e-waza'if - it is intrinsically
established and not for the repulsing of harm. Both are - in practice -
1 Fiqhī Maqālāt, vol. 1, p. 192.
339

supplementary matters, and both are means for acquiring wealth in
the future. Based on this, it seems that there is room to permit the
giving of a payment or reimbursement. Although it is against piety for
the person to accept the payment, it will be permitted in the case of
necessity.1
Reference to this is made in a text of al-Hidāyah:
وإذا أقعد الخياط أو الصباغ في حانوته من يطرح عليه العمل بالنصف فهو
جائز لأن بذه شركة الوجوه فى الحقيقة فهذا (الخياط أو الصباغ) بوجابته يقبل
(أى العمل من الناس) وبذا (أى من يطرح عليه العمل ) بحذاقته يعمل
فينتظم بذلك المصلحة فلا تضره الجهالة فيما يحصل. (الهداية: ٣١٧/٣، كتاب
الاجارة)
In other words, just as status, popularity and eagerness are means in
whose return it is permissible to take a payment - i.e. mal or wealth -
in the same way, a business name or business logo is also a means of
popularity and eagerness. It will therefore be permissible to accept
payment in exchange for it.
To sum up, if a trademark or goodwill is formally registered with the
government, its sale and purchase will be permissible; and it will also
be permissible to accept a reimbursement for it.
Further reading: Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, pp. 158-190; Jadīd Fiqhī
Mabāhith, vol. 3; Fiqhī Maqālāt, vol. 1, pp. 159-228; Huqūq Aur Oen Ka
Kharīd Wa Faraukhat of Maulānā 'Umar 'Abidīn Qasimī; Nizām al-Fatawā,
vol. 2, p. 314; Fatāwā Haqqānīyyah, vol. 6, p. 67.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The Shari'ah status of haqq-e-suknā
Question
The author of al-Hidayah says that the sale of haqq al-murūr is
permissible. The sale of haqq as-suknā is classified as impermissible as
stated in the marginalia of al-Hidāyah. The sale of haqq as-suknā is quite
common nowadays. Is it permissible?
1 Imdād al-Fatāwā, vol. 3, p. 119.
340

Answer
Pagrī is also a type of sale and purchase of rights and benefits. Its
practice has now spread from the cities to the villages. It is especially
common in large and central cities. In some places it is referred to as
salāmī. In the Arabic language is referred to as jalsah, and more
commonly, khulūw.
When a house or shop is given on rent, then in addition to the monthly
rental, the tenant has to make a once-off payment. After paying this
amount, the tenant enjoys the right to live in that house for the rest of
his life.
One challenge for the tenant was that there were times when he had
to suddenly empty the house/shop and return it. For example, a
tenant opens a shop and his business becomes well-established. If the
landlord were to ask him to vacate the shop, it would be a severe test
for him and probably impossible to make up for the financial loss.
Qādī Mujāhidul Islām Sāhib Qāsimī rahimahullāh writes:
If the silent approval of societal norms was put into words, it would
mean that when a landlord collects pagrī from a tenant at the time of
renting a property to him, then while he has maintained his
ownership right, he has sold the right of occupation. This right of the
tenant cannot be seized by the landlord. It will also be transferred to
the tenant's heirs. The tenant may sell this right if he wants.1
'Allāmah Ibn Nujaym rahimahullah is inclined to permitting this
practice. He says that Sultan Ghaurī constructed the shops of Jamlun
in Ghaurīyyah. He then gave occupation of them to the traders with
the right of khulūw. A certain amount was laid down for each
businessman. The Sultan collected this amount from them and
recorded it in the endowment register.
والحاصل أن المذب عدم اعتبار العرف الخاص، ولكن أفتى كثير من
المشايخ باعتباره، فأقول على اعتباره: ينبغي أن يفتى بأن ما يقع في بعض
أسواق القابرة من خلو الحوانيت لازم، ويصير الخلو فى الحانوت حقاً له، فلا
يملك صاحب الحانوت إخراجه منها، ولا إجارتها لغيره، ولو كانت وقفاً وقد
وقع في حوانيت الجملون بالغورية أن السلطان الغوري لما بنابا أسكنها للتجار
1 Majallah Fiqh Islāmī, vol. 1, p. 83, Islamic Fiqh Academy, India.
341

بالخلو، وجعل لكل حانوت قدراً أخذه منهم، وكتب ذلك بمكتوب الوقف.
(الأشباه والنظائر: ٢٨٦/١-٢٩١، تحت القاعدة: العادة محكمة، ادارة القرآن. وكذا
فى فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢١/٤، مطلب فى خلو الحوانيت، سعيد)
وفي رد المحتار: قال البدر القرافي من المالكية: إنه لم يقع في كلام الفقهاء
التعرض لهذه المسألة، وإنما فيها فتيا للعلامة ناصر الدين اللقانى المالكى بنابا
على العرف وخرجها عليه وبو من أبل الترجيح فيعتبر تخريجه، وإن نوزع فيه
وقد انتشرت فتياه فى المشارق والمغارب وتلقابا علماء عصره بالقبول. وفى
الخيرية (للشيخ الرملى الحنفى ما يفيد أن الخلاف في بذه المسألة معتبر يعني
خلاف الذي أفتى به من المالكية وبو الشيخ ناصر الدين اللقانى ومن تابعه)
قال: ليقع اليقين بارتفاع الخلاف بالحكم حيث استوفى شرائط من مالكي
يراه أو غيره صح ولزم وارتفع الخلاف خصوصاً فيما للناس إليه ضرورة
لاسيما فى المدن المشهورة كمصر ومدينة الملك (إستانبول) فإنهم يتعاطونه
ولهم فيه نفع كلي ويضر بهم نقضه وإعدامه .. ألا ترى ما فعله الغوري كما
مر ... وممن أفتى بلزوم الخلو الذي يكون بمقابلة درابم يدفعها للمتولي أو
المالك العلامة عبد الرحمن آفندى العمادی صاحب بدية ابن العماد، وقال
فلا يملك صاحب الحانوت إخراجه ولا إجارتها لغيره ما لم يدفع له المبلغ
المرقوم، فيفتى بجواز ذلك للضرورة قياساً على بيع الوفاء الذي تعارفه
المتاخرون احتيالاً على الربا. (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢١/٤، ١٢٢، ١٢٣، ملخصاً، سعيد)
A few doubts and answers to them
1. Some jurists say that it is impermissible. Their reasoning is that it is
not wealth; and it is impermissible to take a recompense for non-
wealth, i.e. rights. Furthermore, it is not possible to acquire benefit
from it. This is why it is impermissible.
The fact of the matter is that societal norms and common practices
play a major influence in deciding whether something can be classified
as wealth or not. It is solely through societal norms that a thing
342

acquires value and becomes something of use. Countless examples of
this can be found in the books of jurisprudence. In our times, rights
have taken on the status of a valuable asset. It is common practice to
receive remuneration in exchange for a right. Therefore, while
classifying it as wealth, it will be permissible to accept a remuneration
in exchange for it or to engage in its sale and purchase.
إن البيع مبادلة المال بالمال، وليست الحقوق المجردة مالاً متقوماً حتى يصح
بيعها، وإنما بو نزول عن ذلك الحق الثابت له للغير بمال معلوم، أفتى بعض
المتاخرين من العلماء بجوازه، فمنهم من استند في جوازه إلى أنه قد تعورف
ذلك في بعض البلدان، والعرف الخاص قد اعتبره كثير من العلماء، ومنهم من
استند فى ذلك إلى إلحاق بنظائره المنصوص على جواز أخذ البدل فيها كحق
القصاص وحق النكاح وحق الرق فإنه قد جاز أخذ البدل فيها مع أنهما حقوق
فألحق بها النزول عن الوظائف. (شرح المجلة: ١٢٠/٢، تتمة)
وفى العرف والعادة فى رأي الفقهاء: والذي يشهد له إطلاق أدلة الشرع أن
المنافع قسم من المال، ثم ذكر بعد أسطر:
والحاصل أن كل ما لا ينتفع به فليس بمال، أما ما يجري فيه البذل والمنع
وينتفع به ولو بحسب المآل فإنه يصح بيع متى قومه الشرع وأباح الانتفاع به،
ولهذا جوزوا بيع النحل ودود القز والعلق مع أنها من الهوام للانتفاع بها ...
ومن بذا يتبين أن مقايس المالية تعارف الناس أن بذا الشيء مرغوب فيه
ومنتفع به أو عدم تعارفهم، ذلك ولا ريب أن بذا أمر يتجدد على مر العصور
واختلاف الأمكنة، فكثير من الأشياء لم تكن له فى القديم فائدة فكان
محقراً بين الناس ... ثم تمولم الناس وقابلوه بالأثمان، وكثيراً ما نرى الشيء في
مكان تافهاً لا ينتفع به ولا قيمة له وفي مكان آخر من العزة والنفاسة بمقدار،
ثم أن العرف العام والخاص في تعريف المالية سواء ولهذا قال البخاري في
كشف الأسرار: وتثبت المالية بتمول الناس كافة أو بتمويله البعض، وبذا لأن
343

العرف المثبت للمالية من العرف الذي يرجع إليه في تطبيق الأحكام الكلية.
(العرف والعادة، للاستاذ احمد ابو سنة، ص: ١٨٠، ١٨١)
2. When a pre-emptor relinquishes his right of pre-emption (shuf ah),
he cannot collect a return for it. The same rule ought to apply to pagrī.
It is incorrect to compare the issue of pagrī to the right of pre-emption.
This is because there are two types of rights. Some are given to a
person to save him from harm and loss. The right of pre-emption falls
under this category. The Shari'ah ruling for rights of this nature is that
it is not permissible to collect a remuneration when relinquishing
them. Other rights are given to a person as a way of benevolence and
kinship. Remuneration for them can be collected. For example, khula'
in exchange for the right of marriage. The remuneration for pagrī falls
under this category. (Further details in this regard will be given in the
next question and answer - insha Allah).
3. Some scholars say that khulūw/pagrī is essentially bribery, and this is
obviously unlawful.
If we think about it carefully, classifying it as bribery is questionable.
Bribery refers to a payment which is not in exchange of a right.
Whereas here, the amount for pagrī is collected in exchange for
khulūw. Thus, it does not entail the collection of an amount without
due right.
After a detailed discussion, 'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullāh writes:
وبذا كلام وجيه لا يخفى على نبيه وبه اندفع ما ذكره بعض محشى الاشباه من
أن المال الذي يأخذه النازل عن الوظيفة رشوة، وبي حرام بالنص، والعرف لا
يعارض النص وجه الدفع ما علمت من أنم صلح عن حق كما في نظائره
والرشوة لا تكون بحق. (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢٠/٤، سعيد)
In this regard, there is a parallel practice of Hadrat Husayn radiyallahu
'anhu. He relinquished his lawful right to the caliphate in favour of
Hadrat Mu'āwiyah radiyallahu 'anhu in exchange for an allocated
stipend.
‘Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullāh writes:
344

واستدل بعضهم للجواز بنزول سيدنا الحسن بن سيدنا علي رضي الله تعالى
عنهما عن الخلافة لمعاوية رضي الله تعالى عنه على عوض، وبو ظابر أيضاً
وبذا أولى من عدم الجواز. (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢٠/٤، سعيد)
In the light of the above quotations, it is not correct to refer to this
practice as bribery.
Further reading: Fatāwā Shāmī, vol. 4 p. 519-520; Huqūq Aur Oen Kī
Kharīd Wa Faraukhat, pp. 194-203.
4. Some scholars ask: Since the landlord has collected a once-off
payment and it is in exchange for the right of occupation of the
property and the right to benefit from it, for what is the monthly
rental collected?
The owner of the shop can take back his shop at any time he wants on
the basis of being its owner. However, by collecting a once-off
payment, the right to take back the shop is relinquished either
perpetually or temporarily. Since the land and shop belong to him, he
collects a rent for enabling the tenant to derive benefit from his
[landlord's] property. There is nothing objectionable in this regard.
Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il:
If a house or shop is given on rent, and the owner of the property
collects the customary pagrī in addition to the monthly rental, it will
be understood that the landlord - on the basis of being the owner of
the property - has collected a remuneration to relinquish his right to
take his property away from the tenant. This amount will be
permissible for him on the basis that it is in exchange for that right.
Later on, if the landlord wants to take the property back from the
tenant, the latter will have the right to ask for a mutually-agreed-upon
amount from the landlord. In such a case, the tenant can relinquish his
right by collecting an agreed-upon amount from the next tenant.1
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The sale of a right to choice
Question
Is the sale and purchase of a right to choice permissible? What is the
difference between a haqq mutagarrar and ghayr mutagarrar?
1 Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, p. 153.
345

Answer
The sale and purchase of a right to choice is impermissible.
قال فى الهداية: إن الخيار ليس إلا مشيئة وإرادة لا يتصور انتقاله. (الهداية:
٣٢/٣)
قوله لا يجوز الاعتياض عن الحقوق المجردة عن الملك قال فى البدائع الحقوق
المجردة لا يحتمل التمليك ولا يجوز الصلح عنها ... قوله كحق الشفعة ... ولو
صالح المخيرة بمال لتختاره بطل ولا شيء لها. (رد المحتار: ٥١٨/٤، سعيد)
The jurists explain the difference between a haqq mutagarrar and ghayr
mutagarrar as follows: A recompense can be taken for a haqq mutagarrar
but not for a haqq ghayr mutagarrar. If a woman has acquired the right
to implement a divorce on herself, and she takes a recompense for it,
she will remain a wife as she had been. This is known as a haqq ghayr
mutagarrar - that after taking a recompense, the previous condition
does not change. Recompense can be taken for the right of retribution
(haqq qisās) because retribution is a haqq mutagarrar. Before taking the
recompense, the life of the killer was lawful. After accepting the
recompense, his life becomes sacrosanct.
Another meaning of haqq mutagarrar is haqq al-malik fī milkihi (the right
of the owner as regards what he owns). The right of choice is not
applicable over one's belongings. The following is stated in al-Hidāyah:
لأن حق الشفعة ليس بحق متقرر فى المحل بل بو مجرد حق التملك فلا يصح
الاعتياض عنه. (الهداية: ٤٠٦/٤، باب ما تبطل به الشفعة)
A'zamī Sahib writes in the marginalia of al-Hidāyah:
ليس بحق متقرر كحق الاصطياد فى الصيد والحق المتقرر كالملك فى المملوك.
(حاشية الهداية: ٤٠٦/٤، رقم الحاشية، ٦)
'Allāmah Akmal ad-Dīn Bābartī rahimahullāh, the author of al-'Ināyah
writes:
والفاصل بين الحق المتقرر وغيره أن ما يتغير بالصلح عما قبله فهو متقرر
وغيره غير متقرر واعتبر ذلك فى الشفعة والقصاص، فإن نفس القاتل كانت
346

مباحة في حق من له القصاص، وبالصلح حصل له العصمة في دم فكان حقاً
متقرراً وأما فى الشفعة فإن المشتري يملك الدار قبل الصلح وبعده على وجه
واحد فلم يكن حقاً متقرراً. (شرح العناية بهامش فتح القدير: ٤١٦/٩، ما
يبطل به الشفعة، دار الفكر)
شرح المجلة للاتاسى:
عدم جواز الاعتياض عن الحقوق المجردة ليس على إطلاقه، بل فيه التفصيل:
وبوأن ذلك الحق المجرد إن كان الشرع جعله لصاحبه لأجل رفع الضرر عن،
كحق الشفعة، وحق القسم للزوجة، وحق الخيار للمخيرة، فالاعتياض عنه
بمال لا يجوز، لأن حق الشفعة للشفيع، وحق القسم للزوجة، وكذا حق الخيار
فى النكاح للمخيرة، إنما ثبت لدفع الضرر عن الشفيع والمرأة، وما ثبت لذلك
لا يصح الصلح عنه، لأن صاحب الحق لما رضي علم أنه لا يتضرر بذلك، فلا
يستحق شيئاً وإن كان ذلك الحق قد ثبت لصاحبه أصالةً لا على وجه رفع
الضرر كالوظيفة في وقف من إمامة وخطابة وأذان وفراشة وبوابة، فإن
صاحبها قد ثبت له بذا الحق بتقرير القاضي على وجه الأصالة، لا لأجل رفع
ضرر عن صاحبه، فينبغي أن يصح الاعتياض عن تلك الوظيفة بمال يأخذه
الفارغ، وبو صاحب الوظيفة، من المفروغ له، لأنه صلح عن حق إلحاقاً له
بالاعتياض عن القصاص بمال، وبالاعتياض عن النكاح بمال، وما أشبه
ذلك. (شرح المجلة للاتاسى: ١٢٠،١١٩/٢)
Further reading:
Radd al-Muhtār, vol. 4, pp. 518-520; Hāshiyah at-Tahtāwī, vol. 3, p. 9; 'Itr
Hidāyah, p. 332; Fiqhī Maqālāt, vol. 1, p. 163; Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, p.
176; Jadīd Fighī Mabahith, vol. 3, p. 147.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
347

Royalties for copyrighted material
Question
Is it permissible to receive royalties for copyrighted material?
Generally, there are three ways in which this is done:
1. A publisher or printer initiates a project and obtains the services of
scholars for it. A remuneration is agreed upon for the task of writing,
compiling, arranging, researching or other academic tasks. This
system is by and large common among international publishing
houses and printers.
2. An author gives the right to publish to a publisher. They make an
agreement that for each new edition of the book, the publisher will
pay a certain amount to the author. This is known as a royalty.
3. An author sells an eternal right to publish, and receives a large sum
of money in return. In this way, all the rights of printing and
publishing are held by the publisher.
In all the above cases, the publisher is legally and morally bound not to
make any alterations, changes, additions and subtractions to the
original book.
Which of the above is permissible according to the Shari'ah?
Answer
It is permissible to receive royalties for copyrighted material. From the
above three cases, there is no doubt whatsoever about the
permissibility of the first one. The ruling for it is the same as for
accepting the post of imamat [in a masjid] or teaching. The book which
is produced will belong to the printer or publisher because it paid for
the work to be done.
As regards the second two, scholars of the past voiced differing
opinions. In the beginning, most of them said that it was
impermissible. In our times, the majority of the 'ulama' are inclined
towards permissibility. Generally, copyrighting or exerting one's
rights over written material is accepted as a right of the author for the
following reasons:
1. Current societal norms treat copyrights as commodities. Their sale
and purchase are highly common. The practices of people play a major
role in classifying something as wealth or a commodity. Details in this
regard were given previously.
348

2. The jurists have permitted the acceptance of payment for teaching
the Qur'an, Hadith, fiqh, etc. The reasoning which they give for
permissibility is found here as well. For example, if teachers were not
paid, the system of teaching and educating will be affected. In the
same way, if an author is not given this right despite so many efforts
and difficulties in producing a written work, he will become de-
motivated. An author spends considerable time and mental energies
when producing a written work. Furthermore, the task of preserving
Din, propagating it and researching it can be affected. This reasoning
cannot be disregarded.
3. This is a haqq asbaqiyyat (right of precedence) which is accepted by
the Shari' ah. Observe the following narration of Sunan Abī Dawud:
من سبق إلى ما لم يسبق إليه مسلم فهو له. (رواه البيهقى فى سننه الكبرى:
١٤٢/٦، كتاب احياء الموات. وابو داود: ٤٣٧/٢، باب فى اقطاع الارضين)
4. To classify something as a commodity, it is necessary for it to be
protect-able. The rights of an author are protected through legal
registration.
5. Another prerequisite to classify something as a commodity is that it
must be possible to derive benefit from it. Immense benefit can be
derived from this right.
6. In addition to the need for many efforts in securing legal rights,
large amounts of money have to be spent. It can therefore be made
into a means of income.
Further reading: Huquq Aur Oen Kī Kharīd Wa Faraukhat, pp. 208-215;
Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, pp. 178-184; Fiqhī Maqālāt, vol. 1, pp. 223-227;
'Itr Hidāyah, pp. 343-344; Jadīd Fiqhī Mabahith, vol. 3.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Royalties for each new edition
Question
An author gave his book to a printer to print. He laid down the
condition that after the book is printed, he will receive 250 copies. The
remainder belongs to the printer. He may sell them at whatever price
he wants. Is this agreement permissible?
Answer
If the author gave perpetual rights of printing to the printer, then the
250 copies will be the value of the manuscript. The printer has
349

acquired perpetual rights for printing. But if he gave the right for one
time, the 250 copies are the price of a single right to print. The right to
print is one of the rights for which a person can ask for a
remuneration. Details in this regard were given previously.
If the author did not mention the number of times - whether once or
perpetually - societal norms will be taken into consideration. As far as
I know, the right is given for a single edition of printing. This is why
the author has the right to have his book printed somewhere else. If he
has the book re-printed at the same printer, he can make a new
agreement and take a certain number of copies as per the new
agreement.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The sale of a trading licence and pension
Question
Is it permissible to sell a trading licence, pension, etc .?
Answer
1. A trader or company obtains a licence from the government to
facilitate its business. Through this licence, the business is protected
against governmental obstacles in the import and export of goods.
However, a licence is not a tangible item. Rather, it is a right which
enables a business to sell goods in another city or market, to transport
them, or to purchase them from other countries or cities. A
considerable amount of effort and monetary cost is borne for
acquiring this licence. Based on the following reasons, the sale and
purchase of a licence is permissible.
a) Its sale and purchase must be legally permissible. If it is not legally
permissible, it will not be permissible according to the Shariah. For
example, the licence is in favour of a specific person or company, and
the law does not permit it to be transferred to another company, then
the sale of this licence will not be permissible.
b) The practice of its sale is common in the market. The traders - in
their environment - treat a trading licence as they do any other
commodity. It will therefore fall under the ruling of a commodity.
c) Benefit can be derived from it. The Shari'ah does not prohibit
deriving benefit from it.
d) The right is an intrinsic right in favour of the one who has it. It is
not for the sake of repulsing a harm. Also, it must be present.
350

e) It must be storable. A trading licence is protected legally through a
written certificate or registration.
Further reading: Fiqhī Maqālāt, vol. 1, p. 222; Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 4, p.
188; Huqūq Aur Oen Ke Kharīd Wa Faraukhat, p. 193; Īdāh al-Anwār, vol. 1,
p. 43, Na'ei Masa'il Aur 'Ulama'-e-Hind Ke Fayslei, p. 105.
The sale of a pension
A pension can be sold in two ways:
1. A person sells it to the government. In reality, this is not a sale but
bringing forward a deferred contribution. If the government agrees to
it, it will be permissible according to the Shari'ah.
2. It is not permissible to sell it to anyone other than the government.
Firstly because the government itself does not approve of it. Secondly,
it has certain disadvantages. For example, it is not permissible to sell
the currency of one country for the currency of the same country on
credit.
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
A pension is a type of gift. An employee is not its owner until he takes
possession of it. This is why it cannot be sold. However, selling it to the
government is not a sale in reality. It is a sale only in name. What it
really means is that the large amount [gift] which the government had
promised to give in instalments is now given at once, but for a lower
amount. This transaction is permissible with the government.1
Imdād al-Fatāwā:
The government re-purchases it ... this is a sale only in name. In reality,
it is a complete donation from the government. This is why it is
permissible through the approval of the government.2
Further reading: Ap Ke Masā'il Aur Oen Kā Hull, vol. 6, p. 53; Islām Aur
Jadīd Ma'āshī Masā'il, vol. 4, p. 168; Fatāwā Haqqānīyyah, vol. 6, p. 39.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 6, p. 521.
2 Imdād al-Fatāwā, vol. 4, p. 580.
351

The difference between haqq mutagarrar and ghayr mutagarrar
Question
What details do the jurists have with respect to rights. What is the
difference between haqq mutagarrar and ghayr mutagarrar? Which
are the rights for which a remuneration can be accepted and which
cannot be accepted? For example, what is the ruling with regard to
pagrī?
Answer
The 'ulama' have many discussions and differences on this issue.
Nonetheless, it has become common practice to accept a remuneration
for rights.
The jurists have divided rights into two categories: (1) huquq
mutaqarrarah and (2) huqūq mujarradah.
1. Haqq mutagarrar: This refers to a right which changes after an
agreement is reached, and its ruling changes.
2. Haqq mujarrad: This refers to a right which does not change
after an agreement is reached. It remains as it was. No type of
change whatsoever takes place.
An example of haqq mutagarrar: Qisās (retribution). Before an
agreement is reached, the killer's life was lawful. After an agreement is
reached, his life becomes sacrosanct. It is permissible to accept a
remuneration or to effect a reconciliation in rights of this nature.
The right of pagrī also seems to fall under this category. Before
accepting a remuneration, the owner had the right of occupation over
a property. After accepting a payment and reaching an agreement, the
buyer now enjoys these rights. As though the buyer has acquired
perpetual benefit.
An example of haqq mujarrad: The right of pre-emption (shufah) or
where a husband first gives his wife the right to implement a divorce,
and later on says to her: "Choose me in return for one thousand." Both
these are huquq mujarradah, and no monetary benefit is attached.
The right of shuf ah is a haqq mujarrad because before the agreement,
the land belonged to the buyer; and after the agreement, it still
belongs to him. Also, where the wife was given the right to divorce -
she was his wife before the agreement, and remains his wife after the
agreement. In this case, the previous condition or situation has not
changed. This is why it is a haqq mujarrad, and it is not permissible to
collect a payment for it.
352

الهداية:
وإن صالح من شفعته على عوض بطلت شفعته ورد العوض، لأن حق الشفعة
ليس بحق متقرر فى المحل، بل بو مجرد حق التملك، فلا يصح الاعتياض
عن، ... بخلاف القصاص لأنه حق متقرر. (الهداية: ٤٠٦/٤)
شرح العناية:
والفاصل بين المتقرر وغيره أن ما يتغير بالصلح عما كان قبله فهو متقرر،
وغيره غير متقرر، واعتبر ذلك فى الشفعة والقصاص، فإن نفس القاتل كانت
مباحة في حق من لم القصاص، وبالصلح حصل له العصمة في دمه، فكان حقاً
متقرراً، وأما فى الشفعة فإن المشتري يملك الدار قبل الصلح وبعده على وجه
واحد، فلم يكن حقاً متقرراً. (شرح العناية بهامش تكملة فتح القدير:
٤١٦/٩، ما يبطل به الشفعة، ط: دار الفكر)
Other examples can be given under the above principles. Where it is
permissible for a person to accept a remuneration for a right or to
reach an agreement for it, and it is a haqq mutagarrar. For example,
the jurists say that a remuneration can be accepted for nuzul 'an al-
waza'if. In other words, an employee can vacate his post and appoint
someone else in his place; and he takes a payment for doing this. This
is also a haqq mutagarrar because before the agreement, a particular
person was at that post, and after the agreement, another person took
over that post.
وعليه فيفتى بجواز النزول عن الوظائف بمال. وفى الشامية: قال العلامة
العيني في فتاواه: ليس للنزول شيء يعتمد عليه، ولكن العلماء والحكام
مشوا ذلك للضرورة، واشترطوا إمضاء الناظر، لئلا يقع فيه نزاع، ملخصاً من
حاشية الأشباه للسيد أبي السعود. (الدر المختار مع فتاوى الشامى: ٥١٩/٤،
سعيد)
353

وللاستزادة انظر: (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢٤/٤، سعيد. والاشباه والنظائر مع الحموى:
٢٩١/١. ومنحة الخالق على البحر الرائق: ٢٣٤/٥، ٢٣٥، كوئته)
Some jurists consider it permissible to collect a payment for the right
to irrigate a land - known as haqq ash-shurb. This is because
previously the person did not have the right to take the water because
it is a specific water. He now acquired the right to irrigate his land.
بخلاف الشرب حيث يجوز بيعه تبعاً باتفاق الروايات، ومفرداً في رواية وبو
اختيار مشايخ بلغ، لأن حظ من الماء. (الهداية: ٥٦/٣)
‘Allāmah Sarakhsī rahimahullāh writes in his al-Mabsūt:
وكان شيخنا الإمام يحكي عن أستاذه أنه كان يفتي بجواز بيع الشرب بدون
الأرض، ويقول: فيه عرف ظابر في ديارنا بنسف، فإنهم يبيعون الماء، فللعرف
الظابر كان يفتي بجوازه. (المبسوط: ١٣٥/١٤، دار الفكر)
'Allāmah Sarakhsī rahimahullah states that no consideration is given
to societal norms in this case because they are against explicit texts
[Qur'an and Hadith]. However, later on, he himself explains the issue
in more detail in Kitab al-Muzara'ah where he quotes the view of latter
day scholars on the permissibility of bay' ash-shurb on the basis of
societal norms. He does not condemn this view. He writes:
وبعض المتأخرين من مشايخنا أفتى أن يبيع الشرب وإن لم يكن له أرض
للعادة الظابرة فيه في بعض البلدان، وبذه عادة معروفة بنسف، قالوا : إنما
جوز الاستصناع للتعامل، وإن كان القياس يأباه، فكذلك بيع الشرب بدون
الأرضي الله عنه. (المبسوط للامام السرخسى: ١٧١/٢٣)
وفى الفتاوى السراجية: بيع الشرب تبعاً للأرض جائز، ومقصوداً كذلك في
رواية وبه أخذ مشايخ بلخ. (الفتاوى السراجية: ٣٧٢، كتاب البيوع، ما يجوز
بیع وما لا يجوز)
Furthermore, he says that it is permissible to collect payment for haqq
al-murūr (the right of passage) because it is also like a haqq
354

mutagarrar in the sense that previously the person did not have the
right to travel on a particular road, and now he got the right.
The following is stated in al-Hidāyah:
أما حق المرور يتعلق بعين تبقى، وبو الأرض فأشبه الأعيان.
The permission to sell haqq al-murūr is related by Ibn Sama'ah:
قال فى العناية: وبيع حق المرور، وبو حق التطرق دون رقبة الأرض جائز في
رواية ابن سماعة. (العناية فى شرح الهداية بهامش فتح القدير: ٤٢٩/٦، دار
الفكر. وكذا فى الفتاوى الهندية: ١٣١/٣-و ٢٩٤/٦. وتبيين الحقائق: ٥٢/٤،
ملتان)
الدر المختار:
وصح بيع حق المرور تبعاً للأرض بلا خلاف، ومقصوداً وحده في رواية، وہه
أخذ عامة المشايخ. وفى الشامية: قوله وبه أخذ عامة المشايخ، قال السائحاني:
وبو الصحيح، وعليه الفتوى، مضمرات، انتهى. (الدر المختار مع فتاوى
الشامى: ٨٠/٥،سعید)
Similarly, in khula', a woman makes a payment to obtain a release
from her marriage. This payment is not in exchange for a specific item
or thing. It is paid to obtain her release.
In marriage, the dowry is paid to acquire the right of marriage.
In Sharh al-Majallah, it is stated that it is permissible to accept a
remuneration - to keep the peace - for haqq 'uluw and other huquq
mujarradah.
قال الأتاسي في شرح المجلة: وعلى ما ذكره من جواز الاعتياض عن الحقوق
المجردة بمال، ينبغي أن يجوز الاعتياض عن حق التعلى، وعن حق الشرب،
وعن حق المسيل بمال، لأن بذه الحقوق لم تثبت لأصحابها لأجل دفع الضرر
عنهم، بل تثبت لهم ابتداءً بحق شرعي، فصاحب العلو إذا انهدم علوه، قالوا:
إن له حق إعادته كما كان جبراً عن صاحب السفل، فإذا نزل عنه لغيره بمال
355

معلوم ينبغي أن يجوز ذلك على وجه الفراغ والصلح، لا على وجه البيع، كما
جاز النزول عن الوظائف ونحوبا لا سيما إذا كان صاحب حق العلو فقيراً قد
عجز عن إعادة علوه، فلو لم يجز ذلك له على الوجه الذي ذكرناه، يتضرر
فليتأمل، وليحرر، والله سبحانه أعلم. (شرح المجلة للاتاسى: ١٢١/٢)
To summarize the above: Accepting a payment for haqq-e-mutagarrar
is mentioned in al-Hidayah and the commentary to it. As for a haqq
mujarrad, e.g. haqq ta'allī, if there is a practice of accepting a payment
for it, then it is permissible as per Sharh al-Majallah.
Fatāwā Haqqānīyyah:
Although a copyright is related to huquq mujarradah, one has to bear
in mind that there are two types of huquq mujarradah:
1.
Rights which have monetary gains attached to them, e.g. haqq
wazīfah.
2. Rights which do not have monetary gains attached to them,
e.g. haqq shuf ah.
The Shari'ah permits the acceptance of money/wealth in exchange for
forfeiting one's right which has a monetary gain attached to it. Since
monetary benefit is attached to a copyright, its sale and purchase is
permissible. It is referred to as haqq asbaqīyyat in juridical
terminology.1
The same is mentioned in Nizām al-Fatawā, vol. 2, p. 316.
We say: Monetary benefit is also attached to a house and shop. It is
therefore permissible to accept a payment in exchange for their rights.
فإنهم قالوا: يجوز أخذ العوض على وجه الإسقاط للحق. (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢٠/٤،
سعيد)
In the above-mentioned case, the owner forfeited his right of
occupation and accepted a remuneration in exchange for it. It ought to
be permissible.
1 Fatāwā Haqqānīyyah, vol. 6, p. 111.
356

وحاصله: أن ثبوت حق الشفعة للشفيع وحق القسم للزوجة، وكذا حق الخيار
فى النكاح للمخيرة، إنما بو لدفع الضرر عن الشفيع والمرأة، وما ثبت لذلك لا
يصح الصلح عنه، لأن صاحب الحق لما رضي علم أنه لا يتضرر بذلك، فلا
يستحق شيئاً، أما حق الموصى له بالخدمة فلیس کذلک، بل ثبت له على وجه
البر والصلة فيكون ثابتاً لم أصالة، فيصح الصلح عنه إذا نزل عنه لغيره،
ومثله ما مر عن الأشباه من حق القصاص والنكاح والرق حيث صح
الاعتياض عنه، لأن ثابت لصاحبه أصالة لا على وجه دفع الضرر عن
صاحبه ... الخ. (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢٠/٤، سعيد)
الهداية:
ومن ادعى على الآخر مالاً فافتدى يمين أو صالح منها على عشرة درایم فهو
جائز. (الهداية: ٢٠٩/٣)
A person made a claim against another. The litigant made peace with
the claimant and paid him some money. This is permissible. Here too,
a remuneration was accepted in return for a haqq yamin. And this is
permissible.
Further reading: Huqūq Mujarradah Kī Kharīd Wa Faraukhat by Muftī
Muhammad Taqī 'Uthmānī Sāhib; al-Madkhal al-Fiqhī al-'Ām, vol. 3 by
Shaykh Mustafa az-Zarqā; Sharh al-Majallah; al-Mausū'ah al-Fiqhīyyah al-
Kuwaytīyyah; Jadīd Fiqhī Mabāhith, vol. 3; al-Fiqh al-Islāmī Wa Adillatuhu,
vol. 4.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
A permanent lease
Question
A piece of land has been leased perpetually. Will this right be
transferred to the heirs? In our province - Gujarat, India - tracts of
land are leased from the government. A formal permanent lease
agreement is signed. In this agreement, the government agrees to give
a piece of land to a tenant on permanent rent. The revenue records
contain the details of the person as a tenant. The government remains
the owner of the land, and is accepted as such. The tenant is given the
357

right to exercise full control over the land. For example, he could rent
it to someone else, construct a building on the land and give it out on
rent, etc. However, the tenant cannot sell the land to anyone. In other
words, a sale agreement of the land cannot be registered in any office.
The government never takes the land back, nor does it stop the tenant
from doing whatever he wants with it for as long as he is under that
agreement. An annual rental is specified by the government, and this
has to be paid by the tenant.
My question is: Does this land belong to the government or is the
tenant considered to be its owner? When the tenant passes away, will
all his heirs have a claim over it or only that person whom the
government chooses?
Answer
A permanent lease enables a tenant to enjoy this right perpetually.
Therefore, when he passes away, this right will be transferred to his
heirs. However, since there is no ownership of the property, it will not
be permissible to sell it. Ownership will remain in the hands of the
original owner. The heirs too will only have the right to use it, give it
out on rent or loan it out. This latter right will not be transferred to
them as a transfer of ownership. Furthermore, this right will be
transferred to all the Shar'ī heirs. 'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah rights
with reference to pagrī:
نعم يفتى به فيما دعت إليه الحاجة وجرت به فى المدة المديدة العادة وتعارفه
الأعيان بلا نكير كالخلو المتعارف فى الحوانيت ... قلت: ورأيت في فتاوى
الكازرونى عن العلامة اللقاني أنه لو مات صاحب الخلو يوفى منه ديونه
ويورث عنه وينتقل لبيت المال عند فقد الوارث. (فتاوى الشامى: ٥٢١/٤،
مطلب فى خلو الحوانيت، سعيد)
In the Shari'ah there are certain rights which are inherited and
distributed among all the heirs as per the shares which the Shari'ah
has allocated to them. For example, the right of qisās (retribution) and
diyat (blood money) is transferred to all the heirs. 'Allamah Sarakhsī
rahimahullāh writes:
358