His statement: “It is not permissible for a donor to take back a binding gift, except a father.” The word “donor” is indefinite in a negative construction, and thus encompasses every donor. That generality is further indicated by the exception in his words, “except a father.” The scholars have said: An exception is the criterion of generality.

His statement, “a binding gift,” excludes a non-binding gift. A binding gift is one of which possession has been taken, whereas a non-binding gift is one of which possession has not been taken. Thus, if he says to someone, “I have given you this particular car,” and the other replies, “I accept,” but then, after making the gift, he retracts it, his retraction is permissible and valid, because the recipient has not taken possession of it. A gift becomes binding only upon possession being taken.

Once the recipient has taken possession and the donor wishes to retract it, this is neither lawful for him nor within his power—even if they are still in the same sitting in which the gift was made. For example, if he gives him his pen while they are sitting together, and, after the recipient has taken possession of it, he says, “I retract it,” he has no right to do so. The gift has been established and has become binding; therefore, it is forbidden to retract a binding gift. This is because, once possession has been taken, the gift becomes the property of the donee. If the donor retracts it, he has taken another person’s property without right, and this is unlawful. This is the rationale of the issue from the standpoint of reasoning.

As for the textual evidence, the Prophet ﷺ said: “We do not set an evil example: the one who takes back his gift is like a dog that vomits and then returns to its vomit” (1). His ﷺ words, “We do not set an evil example,” are highly instructive regarding those who