Earlier, in a letter to me, you said that it is not permissible to let out property to a bank or to a bottle store or to a church.

Answer

From the attachment you sent, we observe that you had earlier sought a fatwa from another Mufti on the issue of renting out property for haraam purposes, and on 12 May 2011 you had received the response to your query. Now when you had already received a reply for your query from a Mufti on whom you have confidence, then it was improper for you to have referred the same question to us. What was the reason for asking us the same question when you already had received an answer?

Furthermore, the answer was more in line with your desires. It was an easy way for you. Our fatwa poses difficulties for you. We fail to see the logic for this attitude which you have adopted. A question pertaining to the Deen should be asked with sincerity and with the intention to practise accordingly. The Deen is not an object with which to trifle. If your motive was to obtain a fatwa for practical purposes, then the Mufti's fatwa served your purpose and satisfied your whims. He said that it was permissible. What then constrained you to write to us?

It is necessary for a layman to refer all his Deeni issues to one Aalim on whom he has confidence. It is not permissible to go on a fishing expedition in search of fatwas, then make a selection from the several responses to suit his whim and fancy. If you have confidence in the integrity and righteousness of the Mufti, then you should adhere to his fatwas, and not write to other Muftis. In so doing you are trifling with the Deen.

Our other naseehat which is of great benefit, and which is a Qur'aanic and Sunnah principle which should be adopted is the principle of Ihtiyaat (Caution). If there is a conflict in the fatwas of two Muftis, then act in terms of Ihtiyaat. In other words, opt for the view in which there is safety and the assurance that you will not be indulging in haraam. Thus, if one Mufti says that an act is permissible and another Mufti says it is haraam, then for practical purposes act according to the Fatwa which says that the act is haraam, even if the Mufti you follow says that it is halaal. Never do the opposite, i.e. if the Mufti you follow says that the act is haraam, and another Mufti says it is halaal, then never follow the permissibility view of the other Mufti. If you adopt this principle, you will always be on safe ground, and in this manner your Taqwa will increase.

We shall not comment on the academic arguments of the Mufti's fatwa because we are averse to discuss such issues with laymen who lack in the knowledge of higher Deeni Ilm. It will suffice to say that the permissibility fatwa regarding leasing, is seriously flawed, and opens the avenue of haraam for the public. The respected Mufti Sahib has erred in his lengthy fatwa. He has misconstrued the view of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah), and he has given it an erroneous practical application. In brief, his fatwa is in c o rre c t. It is haraam for a Muslim to let out his property for any haraam activity. The

Qur'aan Majeed explicitly prohibits aiding sin and transgression.

A property may be hired out to a non

-Muslim for a lawful purpose, e.g. for residence, for conducting a lawful business. If the non-

Muslim puts idols in the house for his private worship or sells some haraam products in the shop, the owner of the premises is not liable for such sins. The rental he acquires will be halaal. But, if he lets his property to a person who will utilize the premises for only haraam activities, e.g. a church, a winery, selling liquor or for a riba bank, then it will not be permissible to lease out property for this purpose.

The view of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) does not abrogate the Qur'aanic aayat which prohibits aiding and abetting sin and transgression. Furthermore, Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) never intended his view to clash with the Qur'aan and Sunnah. His view has a technical application. His view will be utilized only for consequences, not for initial indulgence. We shall not delve into elaboration of this issue. The Fatwa for practical expression is that it is haraam to let out property for haraam purposes. There is complete consensus of all the Fuqaha of all the Mathhabs, including Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh), on this dimension of prohibition.

Just reflect on the Taqwa of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh). On an extremely hot day he refused to stand in the shade of a wall which belonged to his debtor because in his view it was akin to riba since it was an act of deriving benefit from a debtor, and this is prohibited in the Hadith. How is it possible for a Faqeeh and an Imaam of the Math-hab whose Taqwa is of such a lofty state to rule that it is permissible to aid in sin and transgression - that it is permissible to hire your premises to Hindus and Christiansfor the purpose of conducting a church/temple where kufr and shirk will be perpetrated?

How is it conceivable that a Faqeeh of Imaam Abu Hanifah's calibre would ever permit hiring premises for a bottle store, for a riba institution or ing any aspect of Islam is kufr. He is a murtad for mocking a Muslim and the Islamic dress to soothe the desires of the kuffaar.