Hodarda (ihtikar) an hana shi gaba ɗaya, kuma haramtacce ne a Shari'a saboda hani mai tsanani da ya zo a fili a cikin Hadisi. Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyab ya ruwaito daga Mu'ammar ibn Abdullah Al-'Adawi a cikin Bukhari cewa Annabi ﷺ ya ce: "Babu wanda yake hodar abinci sai mai zalunci." Al-Athram ya ruwaito daga Abu Umamah, ya ce: "Manzon Allah ﷺ ya hana a yi hodar abinci." Muslim kuma ya ruwaito ta hanyar sarkar ruwaitonsa daga Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyab cewa Mu'ammar ya ce: "Manzon Allah ﷺ ya ce: Duk wanda ya yi hodar abinci to mai zalunci ne." Hanin da ke cikin Hadisan yana nuna tsawatarwa da kuma zargin mai hodar ta hanyar kiransa mai zalunci, kuma mai zalunci na nufin mai sabo ga umarnin Allah. Wannan jerin ruwaitoyi yana nuna cewa wannan hani tabbatacce ne. Saboda haka, Hadisan sun nuna cewa hodar haram ce. Mai hodar shi ne wanda yake tara kayayyaki yana jiran farashinsu ya tashi domin ya sayar da su da tsada, har ta kai ga 'yan ƙasa sun kasa sayen su. Ma'anar mai hodar (muhtakir) a matsayin wanda yake tara kayayyaki yana jiran farashinsu ya hau ta samo asali ne daga ma'anar kalmar ihtakara a harshen Larabci, wato tara wani abu da riƙe shi yana jiran ya yi tsada sannan a sayar da shi a farashi mai yawa. Haka kuma tana nufin istabadda, wato riƙe kaya (boye su) domin a sayar da su da tsada. Sharadin cewa hodar sai ta kai iyaka da ta zama abu mai wahala ga 'yan ƙasa su sayi kayan da aka hodar, saboda hakikanin hodar ba ya tasowa sai a irin wannan yanayi. Idan sayen kayan bai zama mai wahala ga mutane ba, to da ba a tara shi ba, ba kuma a riƙe shi ba domin a sayar da shi da tsada. Saboda haka, sharadin ihtikari ba kawai sayen kayan ba ne; a'a, shi ne tara shi da jiran farashinsa ya tashi domin a sayar da shi da tsada, wanda ake ɗauka a matsayin ihtikari. Wannan yana aiki ko mai ihtikari ya tara shi ta hanyar saye, ko daga amfanin gonarsa mai girma saboda shi kaɗai ne ke shuka irin wannan amfanin gona ko irin wannan iri, saboda ba a cika shuka shi ba, ko kuma ya tara shi daga masana'antunsa, a matsayinsa na kaɗai mai ƙera shi, ko kuma saboda ƙarancin wannan nau'in masana'anta, kamar yadda yake a cikin ihtikarin masu jari-hujja, waɗanda suke mallakar ƙera wani abu ta hanyar kawar da sauran masana'antu, ta haka suke mallakar kasuwa. Dukkan waɗannan sifofi ana kiransu ihtikari saboda sun dace daidai da ma'anar kalmar a harshe, wato ihtikari, wadda kuma take nufin riƙe kayan daga sayarwa da jiran farashinsa ya tashi domin a sayar da shi da tsada.

Monopoly is prevented absolutely, and it is forbidden in Shar’a due to the decisive prohibition of it that came explicitly in the Hadith. S’aid ibn Al-Musayyab narrated from Mu’ammar ibn Abdullah Al-‘Adawi in Bukhari that the Prophet (pbuh) said: “No one monopolises except the wrongdoer.” Al-Athram narrated from Abu Umamah, He said: “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) forbade that a foodstuff be monopolised”. And Muslim narrated through his chain of narrators from S’aid ibn Al- Musayyab that Mu’ammar said: “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Whoever monopolised is a wrongdoer.”’ The prohibition in the Hadith indicates the refrain and the dispraising of the monopoliser by describing Him as a wrongdoer, however the wrongdoer means the disobedient. This is a concatenation which indicates that this prohibition is decisive. Thereupon, the Ahadith indicated that monopoly is Haram. The monopoliser is the one who hoards the commodities until the price rises so as to sell them expensively such that it becomes difficult for the citizens to buy them. As for the meaning of the monopoliser (Muhtakir) as being the one who hoards commodities waiting for their price to rise, this is because the word monopolised (Ihtakara) linguistically means to gather something and hold it waiting until it becomes expensive and then sell it for a high price. It also means Istabadda i.e. to hold back (hoarded) the goods so that they are sold expensively. As for the condition of monopoly that it should reach a limit at which it becomes difficult for the citizens to buy the monopolised commodity, this is because the reality of the monopoly is not conceived to happen except in such a situation. If it did not become difficult for the people to buy the commodity then it would not have been gathered nor held back to be sold expensively. Therefore, the condition of the monopoly is not only to purchase the commodity; rather it is gathering it and waiting for its price to rise so as to sell it expensively, which is considered monopoly. This applies whether the monopoliser compiled it through purchase, or from the harvest of his large land because He is the only person to plant such type of harvest or for such type, because of it being rarely planted or He compiled it from his factories, as the sole manufacturer, or because of the shortage in this type of industry as is the case with the capitalist monopolies, who monopolise manufacturing a certain thing by eliminating other factories and thereby monopolise the market. All these forms are called monopoly because they fit exactly to the linguistic meaning of the word monopolised (Ihtakara), which again means holding the commodity from sale and waiting for its price to rise so as to sell it expensively.

Ihtikar (ɗauƙe kaya) a cikin dukkan abubuwa haramun ne, babu bambanci tsakanin abincin mutane ko abincin dabbobi, abin ci ko wanda ba abin ci ba, da kuma abubuwan da mutane suke buƙata ko abubuwan jin daɗi. Wannan saboda ma'anar kalmar "ihtakara" a harshen Larabci ita ce tara abu gabaɗaya, ba tare da ƙayyadewa ba. Kalmar "ihtikar" ba ta zo da ma'anar tara abinci ko abubuwan bukatun mutane kawai ba, sai dai tara abu kawai, don haka bai kamata a takaita ta ga abin da ba ma'anarta ta harshe ba. Haka kuma, saboda ma'anar fili ta hadisai da suka zo game da ihtikar, waɗanda ke nuna haramcin ihtikar a cikin komai. Wannan a bayyane yake, domin hadisan sun zo ne a cikin ma'ana ta gabaɗaya, ba tare da sharaɗi ba, ba tare da ƙayyadewa ba; don haka dole ne su zauna a kan ma'anarsu ta gabaɗaya da ta fili.

Monopoly is prohibited (Haram) in all things without a difference between the human foodstuff or animals foodstuff, a foodstuff or not a foodstuff, and of the people’s necessities or luxuries. This is because the linguistic meaning of the word monopolised (Ihtakara) is to compile a thing in its absolute sense (without specification). The word monopolised did not come in the meaning of compiling the foodstuff or the people’s necessities, rather compiling the thing, so it should not be confined to other than its linguistic meaning. And also because the explicit meaning of the Ahadith that came in the subject of monopoly indicate the prohibition of monopoly in everything. This is clear because the Ahadith came absolute without qualification, general without specification; so they have to stay absolute and general.

Fيما يتعلق بما جاء في بعض أحاديث النهي عن الاحتكار مقصورًا على الأطعمة فقط، كحديث: «نهى رسول الله ﷺ عن احتكار الطعام»، وغيره من الروايات. وفي هذا الصدد، فإن ذكر الطعام في الحديث لا يجعل الاحتكار مقصورًا على الأطعمة فقط. كما أنه ليس صحيحًا أن يقال في هذه المسألة إن النهي جاء مطلقًا في بعض الروايات، وجاء مقيدًا بالأطعمة في روايات أخرى، فيُحمل المطلق على المقيد. وذلك غير صحيح، لأن لفظ الطعام الوارد في بعض الروايات لا يصلح لتقييد الروايات المطلقة، وإنما هو ذكر خاص لأحد الأفراد التي يشملها المطلق. ذلك أن إخراج غير الأطعمة من الحكم الشرعي بتحريم الاحتكار مبني على الأخذ بمفهوم اللقب، وهو أمر غير معتبر؛ وعليه فإن مفهوم اللقب لا يصلح للتقييد ولا للتخصيص. فذكر الطعام في بعض روايات أحاديث الاحتكار ليس إلا تسمية لأحد أنواع الاحتكار على سبيل المثال، لا تقييدًا للاحتكار بالأطعمة، ولا وصفًا له مفهوم يجب الأخذ به؛ بل هو اسم جامد لشيء معين، أي أنه لقب لا وصف، فلا يُعمل بمفهومه. وإنما يصلح للتقييد أو التخصيص ما كان له مفهوم معتبر يُعمل به، وهو ما لا ينطبق في هذه الحالة. وهذا يدل على أن الروايات التي تنهى عن الاحتكار، حتى تلك التي ذكرت الأطعمة، هي مطلقة وعامة، فتشمل تحريم الاحتكار في كل شيء على الإطلاق.

With regard to what came in some of the Ahadith narrations concerning limiting the monopoly to foodstuffs only, like the Hadith: “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) prohibited monopolising the foodstuffs”, and other narrations. In this regard, mentioning of foodstuffs in the Hadith does not make monopoly confined only to foodstuffs. As well, it is not true to say in this matter that prohibition came as unqualified (Mutlaq) in some narrations, and came as qualified (Muqayyad) to foodstuffs in others. So the unqualification (Mutlaq) should be explained according to the qualified (Muqayyad). This is not true because the word foodstuff (Ta’am) mentioned in some narrations is not fit for qualifying the unqualified (Mutlaq) narrations, it is rather a specific mentioning of one of the individual things which the unlimited (Mutlaq) indicates. This is because excluding other than the foodstuffs from the divine rule of prohibiting monopoly is based on using the meaning of the title (Mafhum al-Laqab), a matter which is not applied (i.e is invalid); accordingly, the meaning of the title is not fit for qualification nor for specification. Thus, mentioning the foodstuffs in some narrations of the Ahadith of monopoly is only nominating one of the types of monopoly as an example, not as qualifying monopoly in foodstuffs nor as a description which has a meaning that has to be used; it is rather a rigid (Jamid) name for a specified thing, that is to say it is a title not a description, so its meaning is not used. That which fits to qualify or specify the rule is that which has a meaning (Mafhum) that can be used, a matter which does not apply in this case. This indicates that the narrations which forbid monopoly, even those which mentioned the foodstuffs, are unqualified (Mutlaq) and general (A’am), thus they include the prohibition of the monopoly in everything absolutely.

Gaskiyar al'amarin game da mai boye kaya shi ne cewa yana mallakar kasuwa; yana kuma sanya farashin da yake so a kan mutane ta hanyar rike kayan a matsayin mallakinsa kadai, don haka mutane za su tilastu wajen saye daga gare shi a tsada, domin ba a samunsa sai a wurinsa. Saboda haka mai boye kaya a zahiri yana son ya kara farashi ga Musulmai, al'amarin da yake haramun ne, saboda abin da aka riwaito daga Ma'akal ibn Yasar, cewa ya ce Manzon Allah ﷺ ya ce: "Duk wanda ya shiga cikin farashin Musulmai, don ya kara musu shi, to haƙƙi ne a kan Allah ya sanya shi cikin wuta mai girma a Ranar Alkiyama."

The reality of the monopoliser is that He monopolises the market; and imposes upon people whatever price He likes by holding the commodity as a monopoly, so people will be forced to buy it from Him at a high price, for it is not available other than to him. Thus the monopoliser in fact wants to increase the price for the Muslims, a matter which is Haram, due to what was narrated from Ma’akal ibn Yasar, that He said that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Whosoever was involved in any of the prices of the Muslims, so as to increase it for them it would be due on Allah to place Him in a great fire at the Day of Judgement.”