Monopoly is absolutely prevented, and it is forbidden in Shar’a due to the decisive prohibition of it that came explicitly in the Hadith. Sa’id ibn Al-Musayyab narrated from Mu’ammar ibn Abdullah Al-‘Adawi in Bukhari that the Prophet ﷺ said: “No one monopolises except the wrongdoer.” Al-Athram narrated from Abu Umamah, who said: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ forbade that a foodstuff be monopolised.” And Muslim narrated through his chain of narrators from Sa’id ibn Al-Musayyab that Mu’ammar said: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: ‘Whoever monopolises is a wrongdoer.’” The prohibition in the Hadith indicates the refrain and the dispraising of the monopoliser by describing him as a wrongdoer, and 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 (hoard) 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. Shuning uchun monopoliyaning sharti faqat tovarni sotib olish emas; balki uni to'plash va narxi ko'tarilishini kutib, uni qimmat sotish, ya'ni monopoliya deb hisoblanadi. Bu hukm monopolist uni sotib olish yo'li bilan to'plagan bo'lsinmi, yoki o'zining keng yerlaridan olingan hosildan bo'lsinmi – chunki u bunday turdagi hosilni ekadigan yagona shaxs bo'lgani uchun yoki bunday tur kamdan-kam ekilgani sababli – yoki u o'z zavodlaridan, yagona ishlab chiqaruvchi sifatida to'plagan bo'lsinmi, yoki kapitalistik monopoliyalarda bo'lgani kabi bu turdagi sanoatda tanqislik bo'lgani uchun bo'lsinmi – ular boshqa zavodlarni yo'q qilib, ma'lum bir narsani ishlab chiqarishni monopoliyaga oladi va shu bilan bozorni monopoliyalashtiradi. Bu shakllarning barchasi monopoliya deb ataladi, chunki ular "ihtikar" so'zining lug'aviy ma'nosiga aynan mos keladi, ya'ni tovarni sotishdan ushlab turish va narxi ko'tarilishini kutib, uni qimmatga sotishni anglatadi.

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.

Monopoliya barcha narsalarda harom (Haram) hisoblanadi: inson oziq-ovqati yoki hayvonlar oziq-ovqati bo‘lishidan, oziq-ovqat bo‘lishi yoki bo‘lmasligidan, hamda xalqning zaruriy ehtiyojlari yoki hashamat buyumlari bo‘lishidan qat’i nazar. Buning sababi shundaki, "monopolizatsiya qilmoq" (Ihtakara) so‘zining lug‘aviy ma’nosi narsani mutlaq ma’noda (cheklovsiz) to‘plashdir. "Monopolizatsiya qilmoq" so‘zi oziq-ovqat yoki xalqning ehtiyojlarini to‘plash ma’nosida emas, balki umuman narsani to‘plash ma’nosida kelgan; shu sababli u lug‘aviy ma’nosidan boshqa narsaga cheklanmasligi kerak. Yana bir sabab shuki, monopoliya masalasida kelgan hadislarning ochiq ma’nosi uning barcha narsalarda man etilganini ko‘rsatadi. Buning aniq bo‘lishiga sabab, hadislar shartsiz mutlaq, tafsilotsiz umumiy holda kelgan; demak, ular ham mutlaq va umumiy holda qolishi kerak.

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.

Что касается хадисов, в которых запрет монополии ограничен только продуктами питания, например хадис: «Посланник Аллаха ﷺ запретил монополизировать продукты питания», и других преданий. В этом вопросе упоминание продуктов питания в хадисе не делает монополию ограниченной только продуктами питания. Также неверно утверждать, что в одних преданиях запрет пришел в общем виде (мутлак), а в других — с ограничением (муқаййад) продуктами питания. Общий смысл (мутлак) следует разъяснять в соответствии с ограниченным (муқаййад). Это неверно, потому что слово «продукты питания» (таъам), упомянутое в некоторых преданиях, не годится для ограничения общих (мутлак) преданий; это скорее конкретное указание на одну из отдельных вещей, которые охватывает общее значение. Ведь исключение всего, кроме продуктов питания, из божественного установления о запрете монополии основано на использовании значения прозвища (мафхум аль-лакаб), а такой способ рассуждения недействителен; следовательно, значение прозвища не годится ни для ограничения, ни для уточнения. Таким образом, упоминание продуктов питания в некоторых преданиях о монополии — это лишь указание на один из видов монополии в качестве примера, а не ограничение монополии продуктами питания и не описание, имеющее значение, которое нужно учитывать. Это скорее застывшее (жамид) название конкретной вещи, то есть прозвище, а не определение, поэтому его значение не принимается во внимание. Годится для ограничения или уточнения предписания то, что имеет значение (мафхум), которое можно использовать, а в данном случае это не применимо. Это указывает на то, что преданья, запрещающие монополию, в том числе те, где упомянуты продукты питания, являются общими (мутлак) и всеобъемлющими (аам), поэтому они охватывают запрет монополии на всё без исключения.

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.

Monopolist haqiqatda bozorni monopoliya qiladi va uni yagona egalik orqali ushlab turgani sababli odamlarga o‘zi xohlagan narxni majburlaydi. Chunki bu mol boshqa birovdan topilmaydi, shuning uchun odamlar uni unga yuqori narxda sotib olishga majbur bo‘ladi. Demak, monopolist aslida musulmonlar uchun narxni oshirishni xohlaydi, bu esa haromdir. Ma’aqil ibn Yasordan rivoyat qilinishicha, u aytgan: Allohning Elchisi ﷺ dedilar: “Kim musulmonlarning biror narxiga aralashib, ularga narxni oshirish maqsadida bo‘lsa, qiyomat kuni Allohning zimmasida uni katta olovga solish bo‘ladi.”

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.”