-
What Is Default Ruling In Matters Where There'S No Evidence Of Haram/Halal
hello there my question is,
for example if the a city in which crime rates are high. a statistics show that 50% of people who buy guns, use it for purposes of robbery and other right violation. and 50% of them don’t and use it for halal purposes of hunting and self defense.
now if there’s a seller who’s selling gun, if he knows that a customer will use this for robbery then it’s prohibited to sell him and if it’s a customer that he knows will surely use it for halal purposes then it’s halal to sell him. but if a new customer comes about which he has no clue or evidence that will he using it for robbery or halal purpose. what will be the default ruling on this seller? does he have to be in state of surety that the customer will use it only for halal purpose,only then it will be halal to sell?
Or is it that it’s halal to sell it, As long as it’s not likely that the other person will use it for robbery. which means that in case of someone he doesn’t know that whether he will use it for halal or Haram, then it’s still halal to sell him the gun….?
-
11 Replies
-
What Is Default Ruling In Matters Where There'S No Evidence Of Haram/Halal
updated 2 months, 1 week ago
2 Members
·
11
Replies
-
There is no responsibility of one’s actions on another. Since the business is halal its wrong use doesn’t make it haram.
-
@Irfan76 sir if matter is suggestive that the person will use it to rob someone, then only it will be Haram?
because I am stuck in a linguistic fallacy type confusion. when we say while selling a gun, if the person will use it for halal purpose then it’s halal to sell him, but if he will use it to rob someone then it’s Haram to sell him.
then which side is to be put on default? because both sides there’s no evidence for suggestion there’s only possibilities in both sides. we say if there are evidence to suggest that he’ll use it to rob someone then we should not sell him. but if there’s no evidence and it’s just a doubt about whether he will Rob or not because there’s no evidence to suggest this, then we are told that we should not put any weights on doubt.
but for this seller he has no conclusive suggestive evidence that this man will use it for Halal purpose as well only. here on this side a person can also say that it’s just a doubtful thought that he will use it only for halal purpose. we don’t have evidence for this too. then if we say the same thing that don’t give weights to doubt. then where will we land?
which side to put on default and which side to be considered doubt?
A- “He’ll use it to rob someone”
B- “He’ll use it for non rights-violation purposes”
in both these statements we only have thoughts without evidence. so will both be classified as doubts? then comes the confusion that if A is considered doubt then we should continue with B as truth. But if B is doubt then A is to be considered truth. Now which thing is to be put on default and which to be considered doubt? please help me understand this sir
-
-
This is a wrong placement of the principle of determining a thing to be halal or haram as mutashabeh. Mutashabeh in itself is confusing. The case You cite is about the use of a thing which can be used both as wrong or right purpose. It is the use or action, not that thing which is halal or haram. So one has not responsibility of others’ action.
-
@Irfan76 sir but we would be having sin if we know or think that most likely this person will use this gun to do robbery. so in this case we will say it will be Haram to sell him gun. what made it Haram to sell is not the act itself but our knowledge that this thing will most likely or certainly be used by him to do some oppression to others. and we come to this conclusion that he will use it to oppress others for example by evidences like he is a gang member with their associated tattoos, before buying the gun I heard him talking in call “I’m just preparing for our next good loot”. so this suggest his buying is most likely for this purpose.
but if we have no knowledge and we stand in middle, don’t know if he will use it or not. no strong evidence to suggest he will do one thing. here we instead of evidence we only have speculations that maybe he will do it maybe he won’t. so here we are required to not go into speculation. and take a step back and only look at the apparent action (which is halal).
so the action was basically halal. it would have been Haram if the condition that this man will use it to oppress others, is proved by certainity or most likelohood. but since it was not proved by either means with any evidence we are suppose to not give it any weight to it, which will eventually mean that this thing is halal based on its original basic status of being halal.
am I right sir?
-
The halal things stay halal. The responsibility of fair use is on the user. That is why God has ordained the rule that no one will shoulder the burden of another.
-
@Irfan76 and sir if I know that he will or highly likely he will do robbery with this gun, then will I be sinful to sell him gun?
-
-
Of course not. Every one is responsible for his or her own action.
-
@Irfan76 sir wouldn’t the ayah of tawaun alal ithm apply here? because here the person selling the gun knows the other will use it for doing actions with are ‘udhwan’?
if he was doing Shirk or some any other sin which was related to Allah and the man. then we could say that the ayah of tawaun alal ithm does not apply here. because it’s neither ithm, neither udhwan’.
but in example of selling gun to donating who I know will use it for oppressing others. this ayah still won’t make it impermissible to sell him?
-
-
That is the direct support to udwan. Normal business stays halal and the man is not sinful. Of one want to avoid it, one canz but God did not obliged him.
-
@Irfan76 sir what would be direct support to udhwan?
-
-
That you encourage him, support him, and provide him a weapon as his accomplice.
The law also considers the difference. If the killer buys a weapon from a shop the seller is not incriminated but an accomplice it.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
