I asked Abu Minhal about money exchange from hand to hand. He said, "I and a partner of mine bought something partly in cash and partly on credit." Al-Bara' bin `Azib passed by us and we asked about it. He replied, "I and my partner Zaid bin Al-Arqam did the same and then went to the Prophet and asked him about it. He said, 'Take what was from hand to hand and leave what was on credit.' "

The Prophet said, "The neighbor has more right to be taken care of by his neighbor (than anyone else)." Some men said, "If one wants to buy a house for 20,000 Dirhams then there is no harm to play a trick to deprive somebody of preemption by buying it (just on paper) with 20,000 Dirhams but paying to the seller only 9,999 Dirhams in cash and then agree with the seller to pay only one Dinar in cash for the rest of the price (i.e. 10,001 Dirhams). If the preemptor offers 20,000 Dirhams for the house, he can buy it otherwise he has no right to buy it (by this trick he got out of preemption). If the house proves to belong to somebody else other than the seller, the buyer should take back from the seller what he has paid, i.e., 9,999 Dirhams and one Dinar, because if the house proves to belong to somebody else, so the whole bargain (deal) is unlawful. If the buyer finds a defect in the house and it does not belong to somebody other than the seller, the buyer may return it and receive 20,000 Dirhams (instead of 9999 Dirham plus one Dinar) which he actually paid.' Abu `Abdullah said, "So that man allows (some people) the playing of tricks amongst the Muslims (although) the Prophet said, 'In dealing with Muslims one should not sell them sick (animals) or bad things or stolen things."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi from Abdullah ibn Umar that Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "If a slave who has wealth is sold, that wealth belongs to the seller unless the buyer stipulates its inclusion."

Malik said, "The generally agreed upon way of doing things among us is that if the buyer stipulates the inclusion of the slave's property whether it be cash, debts, or goods of known or unknown value, then they belong to the buyer, even if the slave possesses more than that for which he was purchased, whether he was bought for cash, as payment for a debt, or in exchange for goods. This is possible because a master is not asked to pay zakat on his slave's property. If a slave has a slave-girl, it is halal for him to have intercourse with her by his right of possession. If a slave is freed or put under contract (kitaba) to purchase his freedom, then his property goes with him. If he becomes bankrupt, his creditors take his property and his master is not liable for any of his debts."

Yahya related to me that Malik asked Ibn Shihab about selling animals, two for one with delayed terms. He said, "There is no harm in it."

Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us is that there is no harm in bartering a camel for a camel like it and adding some dirhams to the exchange, from hand to hand. There is no harm in bartering a camel for a camel like it with some dirhams on top of the exchange, the camels to be exchanged from hand to hand, and the dirhams to be paid within a period." He said, "There is no good however in bartering a camel for a camel like it with some dirhams on top of it, with the dirhams paid in cash and the camel to be delivered later. If both the camel and the dirhams are deferred there is no good in that either."

Malik said, "There is no harm in buying a riding camel with two or more pack-camels, if they are from inferior stock. There is no harm in bartering two of them for one with delayed terms, if they are different and their difference is clear. If they resemble each other whether their species are different or not, two are not to be taken for one with delayed terms."

Malik said, "The explanation of what is disapproved of in that, is that a camel should not be bought with two camels when there is no distinction between them in speed or hardiness. If this is according to what I have described to you, then one does not buy two of them for one with delayed terms. There is no harm in selling those of them you buy before you complete the deal to somebody other than the one from whom you bought them if you get the price in cash."

Malik said, "It is permitted for someone to advance something on animals for a fixed term and describe the amount and pay its price in cash. Whatever the buyer and seller have described is obliged for them. That is still permitted behaviour between people and what the people of knowledge in our land do."

Al-Miswar bin Makhrama came and put his hand on my shoulder and I accompanied him to Sa'd. Abu Rafi' said to Al-Miswar, "Won't you order this (i.e. Sa'd) to buy my house which is in my yard?" Sa'd said, "I will not offer more than four hundred in installments over a fixed period." Abu Rafi said, "I was offered five hundred cash but I refused. Had I not heard the Prophet saying, 'A neighbor is more entitled to receive the care of his neighbor,' I would not have sold it to you." The narrator said, to Sufyan: Ma'mar did not say so. Sufyan said, "But he did say so to me." Some people said, "If someone wants to sell a house and deprived somebody of the right of preemption, he has the right to play a trick to render the preemption invalid. And that is by giving the house to the buyer as a present and marking its boundaries and giving it to him. The buyer then gives the seller one-thousand Dirham as compensation in which case the preemptor loses his right of preemption."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that al-Qasim ibn Muhammad was asked about a man who bought goods for 10 dinars cash or fifteen dinars on credit. He disapproved of that and forbade it.

Malik said that if a man bought goods from a man for either 10 dinars or 15 dinars on credit, that one of the two prices was obliged on the buyer. It was not to be done because if he postponed paying the ten, it would be 15 on credit, and if he paid the ten, he would buy with it what was worth fifteen dinars on credit.

Malik said that it was disapproved of for a man to buy goods from someone for either a dinar cash or for a described sheep on credit and that one of the two prices was obliged on him. It was not to be done because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade two sales in one sale. This was part of two sales in the one sale.

Malik spoke about a man saying to another, "'I will either buy these fifteen sa of ajwa dates from you, or these ten sa of sayhani dates or I will buy these fifteen sa of inferior wheat or these ten sa of Syrian wheat for a dinar, and one of them is obliged to me.' Malik said that it was disapproved of and was not halal. That was because he obliged him ten sa of sayhani, and left them and took fifteen sa of ajwa, or he was obliged fifteen sa of inferior wheat and left them and took ten sa of Syrian wheat. This was also disapproved of, and was not halal. It resembled what was prohibited in the way of two sales in one sale. It was also included under the prohibition against buying two for one of the same sort of food."

Malik said, "No one should buy a specified animal when it is concealed from him or in another place, even if he has already seen it, very recently or not so recently, and was pleased enough with it to pay its price in cash."

Malik said, "That is disapproved of because the seller makes use of the price and it is not known whether or not those goods are found to be as the buyer saw them or not. For that reason, it is disapproved of. There is no harm in it if it is described and guaranteed."

"The Messenger of Allah (saws) prohibited two sales in one."

There are narrations on this topic from 'Abdullah bin 'Amr, Ibn 'Umar, and Ibn Mas'ud.

[Abu Eisa said:] The Hadith of Abu Hurairah is a Hasan Sahih Hadith.

This is acted upon according to the people of knowledge. Some of the people of knowledge have explained it by saying that two sales in one is when one says: "I will sell you this garment for ten in cash, and twenty on credit." He does not distinguish between either of the two sales. But when he distinguishes it as being one of them, then there is no harm when one of them is agreed upon.

Ash-Shafi'i said: "Included in the meaning of what the Prophet (saws) prohibited of regarding two sales in one, is if one said: 'I will sell you the house of mine for that (price), upon the condition that you sell me you alve for this (price). When I get the slave, then you get the house.' In this way the sales are distinguished without the prices being known, and neither of them knows what will happen at the conclusion of it (the agreement)."

86 Malik related to me from Musa ibn Maysara that he heard a man ask Said ibn al-Musayyab, "I am a man who sells for a debt." Said said, "Do not sell except for what you take to your camel."

Malik spoke about a person who bought goods from a man provided that he provide him with those goods by a specific date, either in time for a market in which he hoped for their saleability, or to fulfil a need at the time he stipulated. Then the seller failed him about the date, and the buyer wanted to return those goods to the seller. Malik said, "The buyer cannot do that, and the sale is binding on him. If the seller does bring the goods before the completion of the term, the buyer cannot be forced to take them."

Malik spoke about a person who bought food and measured it. Then some one came to him to buy it and he told him that he had measured it for himself and taken it in full. The new buyer wanted to trust him and accept his measure. Malik said, "Whatever is sold in this way for cash has no harm in it but whatever is sold in this way on delayed terms is disapproved of until the new buyer measures it out for himself. The sale with delayed terms is disapproved of because it leads to usury and it is feared that it will be circulated in this way without weight or measure. If the terms are delayed it is disapproved of and there is no disagreement about that with us."

Malik said, "One should not buy a debt owed by a man whether present or absent, without the confirmation of the one who owes the debt, nor should one buy a debt owed to a man by a dead person even if one knows what the deceased man has left. That is because to buy that is an uncertain transaction and one does not know whether the transaction will be completed or not completed."

He said, "The explanation of what is disapproved of in buying a debt owed by someone absent or dead, is that it is not known what unknown debtor may be connected to the dead person. If the dead person is liable for another debt, the price which the buyer gave on strength of the debt may become worthless."

Malik said, "There is another fault in that as well. He is buying something which is not guaranteed for him, and so if the deal is not completed, what he paid becomes worthless. This is an uncertain transaction and it is not good."

Malik said, "One distinguishes between a man who is only selling what he actually has and a man who is being paid in advance for something which is not yet in his possession. The man advancing the money brings his gold which he intends to buy with. The seller says, 'This is 10 dinars. What do you want me to buy for you with it?' It is as if he sold 10 dinars cash for 15 dinars to be paid later. Because of this, it is disapproved of. It is something leading to usury and fraud."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade 'selling and lending.'

Malik said, "The explanation of what that meant is that one man says to another, 'I will take your goods for such-and-such if you lend me such-and-such.' If they agree to a transaction in this manner, it is not permitted. If the one who stipulates the loan abandons his stipulation, then the sale is permitted."

Malik said, "There is no harm in exchanging linen from Shata, for garments from Itribi, or Qass, or Ziqa. Or the cloth of Herat or Merv for Yemeni cloaks and shawls and such like as one for two or three, from hand to hand or with delayed terms. If the goods are of the same kind, and deferment enters into the transaction, there is no good in it."

Malik said, "It is not good unless they are different, and the difference between them is clear. When they resemble each other, even if the names are different, do not take two for one with delayed terms, for instance two garments of Herat for one from Merv or Quhy with delayed terms, ortwo garments of Furqub for one from Shata. All these sorts are of the same description, so do not buy two for one, on delayed terms."

Malik said, "There is no harm in selling what you buy of things of this nature, before you complete the deal, to some one other than the person from whom you purchased them if the price was paid in cash."

Malik related to me that Zayd ibn Aslam said, "Usury in the Jahiliyya was that a man would give a loan to a man for a set term. When the term was due, he would say, 'Will you pay it off or increase me?' If the man paid, he took it. If not, he increased him in his debt and lengthened the term for him ."

Malik said, "The disapproved of way of doing things about which there is no dispute among us, is that a man should give a loan to a man for a term, and then the demander reduce it and the one from whom it is demanded pay it in advance. To us that is like someone who delays repaying his debt after it is due to his creditor and his creditor increases his debt." Malik said, "This is nothing else but usury. No doubt about it."

Malik spoke about a man who loaned one hundred dinars to a man for two terms. When it was due, the person who owed the debt said to him, "Sell me some goods, whose price is one hundred dinars in cash for one hundred and fifty on credit." Malik said, "This transaction is not good, and the people of knowledge still forbid it."

Malik said, "This is disapproved of because the creditor himself gives the debtor the price of what the man sells him, and he defers repayment of the hundred of the first transaction for the debtor for the term which is mentioned to him in the second transaction, and the debtor increases him with fifty dinars for his deferring him. That is disapproved of and it is not good. It also resembles the hadith of Zayd ibn Aslam about the transactions of the people of the Jahiliyya. When their debts were due, they said to the person with the debt, 'Either you pay in full or you increase it.' If they paid, they took it, and if not they increased debtors in their debts, and extended the term for them."

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said that Abu'd-Darda wrote to Salman al-Farsi, "Come immediately to the holy land." Salman wrote back to him, "Land does not make anyone holy. Man's deeds make him holy. I have heard that you were put up as a doctor to treat and cure people. If you are innocent, then may you have delight! If you are a quack, then beware lest you kill a man and enter the Fire!" When Abu'd-Darda judged between two men, and they turned from him to go, he would look at them and say, "Come back to me, and tell me your story again. A quack! By Allah!"

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "If someone makes use of a slave, without permission of its master, in anything important to him, whose like has a fee, he is liable for what befalls the slave if anything befalls him. If the slave is safe and his master asks for his wage for what he has done, that is the master's right. This is what is done in our community."

Yahya said that he heard Malik say about a slave who is part free and part enslaved, "His property is suspended in his hand and he cannot begin anything with it. He eats from it and clothes himself in an approved fashion. If he dies, his property belongs to the one to whom he is in slavery."

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "The way of doing things in our community is that a parent can take his child to account for what he spends on him from the day the child has property, cash or goods, if the parent wants that."

Malik said, The best of what I have heard about a mukatab whose master frees him at death, is that the mukatab is valued according to what he would fetch if he were sold. If that value is less than what remains against him of his kitaba, his freedom is taken from the third that the deceased can bequeath. One does not look at the number of dirhams which remain against him in his kitaba. That is because had he been killed, his killer would not be in debt for other than his value on the day he killed him. Had he been injured, the one who injured him would not be liable for other than the blood-money of the injury on the day of his injury. One does not look at how much he has paid of dinars and dirhams of the contract he has written because he is a slave as long as any of his kitaba remains. If what remains in his kitaba is less than his value, only whatever of his kitaba remains owing from him is taken into account in the third of the property of the deceased. That is because the deceased left him what remains of his kitaba and so it becomes a bequest which the deceased made."

Malik said, "The illustration of that is that if the price of the mukatab is one thousand dirhams, and only one hundred dirhams remain of his kitaba, his master leaves him the one hundred dirhams which complete it for him. It is taken into account in the third of his master and by it he becomes free."

Malik said that if a man wrote his slave a kitaba at his death, the value of the slave was estimated. If there was enough to cover the price of the slave in one third of his property, that was permitted for him.

Malik said, "The illustration of that is that the price of the slave is one thousand dinars. His master writes him a kitaba for two hundred dinars at his death. The third of the property of his master is one thousand dinars, so that is permitted for him. It is only a bequest which he makes from one third of his property. If the master has left bequests to people, and there is no surplus in the third after the value of the mukatab, one begins with the mukatab because the kitaba is setting free, and setting free has priority over bequests. When those bequests are paid from the kitaba of the mukatab, they follow it. The heirs of the testator have a choice. If they want to give the people with bequests all their bequests and the kitaba of the mukatab is theirs, they have that. If they refuse and hand over the mukatab and what he owes to the people with bequests they can do that, because the third commences with the mukatab and because all the bequests which he makes are as one."

If the heirs then say, "What our fellow bequeathed was more than one third of his property and he has taken what was not his," Malik said, "His heirs choose. It is said to them, 'Your companion has made the bequests you know about and if you would like to give them to those who are to receive them according to the deceased's bequests, then do so. If not, hand over to the people with bequests one third of the total property of the deceased.' "

Malik continued, "If the heirs surrender the mukatab to the people with bequests, the people with bequests have what he owes of his kitaba. If the mukatab pays what he owes of his kitaba, they take that in their bequests according to their shares. If the mukatab cannot pay, he is a slave of the people with bequests and does not return to the heirs because they gave him up when they made their choice, and because when he was surrendered to the people with bequests, they were liable. If he died, they would not have anything against the heirs. If the mukatab dies before he pays his kitaba and he leaves property which is more than what he owes, his property goes to the people with bequests. If the mukatab pays what he owes, he is free and his wala' returns to the paternal relations of the one who wrote the kitaba for him."

Malik spoke about a mukatab who owed his master ten thousand dirhams in his kitaba, and when he died he remitted one thousand dirhams from it. He said, "The mukatab is valued and his value is taken into consideration. If his value is one thousand dirhams and the reduction is a tenth of the kitaba, that portion of the slave's price is one hundred dirhams. It is a tenth of the price. A tenth of the kitaba is therefore reduced for him. That is converted to a tenth of the price in cash. That is as if he had had all of what he owed reduced for him. Had he done that, only the value of the slave - one thousand dirhams - would have been taken into account in the third of the property of the deceased. If that which he had remitted is half of the kitaba, half the price is taken into account in the third of the property of the deceased. If it is more or less than that, it is according to this reckoning."

Malik said, "When a man reduces the kitaba of his mukatab by one thousand dirhams at his death from a kitaba of ten thousand dirhams, and he does not stipulate whether it is from the beginning or the end of his kitaba, each instalment is reduced for him by one tenth."

Malik said, "If a man remits one thousand dirhams from his mukatab at his death from the beginning or end of his kitaba, and the original basis of the kitaba is three thousand dirhams, the mukatab's cash value is estimated. Then that value is divided. That thousand which is from the beginning of the kitaba is converted into its portion of the price according to its proximity to the term and its precedence and then the thousand which follows the first thousand is according to its precedence also until it comes to its end, and every thousand is paid according to its place in advancing and deferring the term because what is deferred of that is less in respect of its price. Then it is placed in the third of the deceased according to whatever of the price befalls that thousand according to the difference in preference of that, whether it is more or less, then it is according to this reckoning."

Malik spoke about a man who willed a man a fourth of a mukatab or freed a fourth, and then the man died and the mukatab died and left a lot of property, more than he owed. He said, "The heirs of the first master and the one who was willed a fourth of the mukatab are given what they are still owed by the mukatab. Then they divide what is left over, and the one willed a fourth has a third of what is left after the kitaba is paid. The heirs of his master gets two-thirds. That is because the mukatab is a slave as long as any of his kitaba remains to be paid. He is inherited from by the possession of his person."

Malik said about a mukatab whose master freed him at death, "If the third of the deceased will not cover him, he is freed from it according to what the third will cover and his kitaba is decreased according to that. If the mukatab owed five thousand dirhams and his value is two thousand dirhams cash, and the third of the deceased is one thousand dirhams, half of him is freed and half of the kitaba has been reduced for him." Malik said about a man who said in his will, "My slave so-and-so is free and write a kitaba for so-and- so", that the setting free had priority over the kitaba.

Yahya said that Malik spoke about an investor who made a qirad loan to a man, who used it and made a profit. Then the man bought with all the profit a slave-girl and he had intercourse with her and she became pregnant by him, and so the capital decreased. Malik said, "If he has money, the price of the slave-girl is taken from his property, and the capital is restored by it. If there is something left over after the money is paid, it is divided between them according to the first qirad. If he cannot pay it, the slave-girl is sold so that the capital is restored from her price."

Malik spoke about an investor who made a qirad loan to a man, and the agent spent more than the amount of the qirad loan when buying goods with it and paid the increase from his own money. Malik said, "The investor has a choice if the goods are sold for a profit or loss or if they are not sold. If he wishes to take the goods, he takes them and pays the agent back what he put in for them. If the agent refuses, the investor is a partner for his share of the price in increase and decrease according to what the agent paid extra for them from himself."

Malik spoke about an agent who took qirad money from a man and then gave it to another man to use as a qirad without the consent of the investor. He said, "The agent is responsible for the property. If it is decreased, he is responsible for the loss. If there is profit, the investor has his stipulation of the profit, and then the agent has his stipulation of what remains of the money."

Malik spoke about an agent who exceeded and borrowed some of what he had of qirad in money and he bought goods for himself with it. Malik said, "If he has a profit, the profit is divided according to the condition between them in the qirad. If he has a loss, he is responsible for the loss."

Malik said about an investor who paid qirad money to a man, and the agent borrowed some of the cash and bought goods for himself with it, "The investor of the capital has a choice. If he wishes, he shares with him in the goods according to the qirad, and if he wishes, he frees himself of them, and takes all of the principal back from the agent. That is what is done with some one who oversteps."

Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us about whatever is weighed but is not gold or silver, i.e. copper, brass, lead, black lead, iron, herbs, figs, cotton, and any such things that are weighed, is that there is no harm in bartering all those sorts of things two for one, hand to hand. There is no harm in taking a ritl of iron for two ritls of iron, and a ritl of brass for two ritls of brass."

Malik said, "There is no good in two for one of one sort with delayed terms. There is no harm in taking two of one sort for one of another on delayed terms, if the two sorts are clearly different. If both sorts resemble each other but their names are different, like lead and black lead, brass and yellow brass, I disapprove of taking two of one sort for one of the other on delayed terms."

Malik said, "When buying something of this nature, there is no harm in selling It beforetaking possession of it to some one other than the person from whom it was purchased, if the price is taken immediately and if it was bought originally by measure or weight. If it was bought without measuring, it should be sold to someone other than the person from whom it was bought, for cash or with delayed terms. That is because goods have to be guaranteed when they are bought without measuring, and they cannot be guaranteed when bought by weight until they are weighed and the deal is completed. This is the best of what I have heard about all these things. It is what people continue to do among us."

Malik said, "The way of doing things among us with what is measured or weighed of things which are not eaten or drunk, like safflower, date-stones, fodder leaves, indigo dye and the like of that is that there is no harm in bartering all those sort of things two for one, hand to hand. Do not take two for one from the same variety with delayed terms. If the types are clearly different, there is no harm in taking two of one for one of the other with delayed terms. There is no harm in selling whatever is purchased of all these sorts, before taking delivery of them if the price is taken from someone other than the person from whom they were purchased."

Malik said, "Anything of any variety that profits people, like gravel and gypsum, one quantity of them for two of its like with delayed terms is usury. One quantity of both of them for its equal plus any increase with delayed terms, is usury."

Malik said there was no harm if a man who sold some drapery and excluded some garments by their markings, stipulated that he chose the marked ones from that. If he did not stipulate that he would choose from them when he made the exclusion, I think that he is partner in the number of drapery goods which were purchased from him. That is because two garments can be alike in marking and be greatly different in price.

Malik said, "The way of doing things among us is that there is no harm in partnership, transferring responsibility to an agent, and revocation when dealing with food and other things, whether or not possession was taken, when the transaction is with cash, and there is no profit, loss, or deferment of price in it. If profit or loss or deferment of price from one of the two enters any of these transactions, it becomes sale which is made halal by what makes sale halal, and made haram by what makes sale haram, and it is not partnership, transferring responsibility to an agent, or revocation."

Malik spoke about some one who bought drapery goods or slaves, and the sale was concluded, then a man asked him to be his partner and he agreed and the new partner paid the whole price to the seller and then something happened to the goods which removed them from their possession. Malik said, "The new partner takes the price from the original partner and the original partner demands from the seller the whole price unless the original partner stipulated on the new partner during the sale and before the transaction with the seller was completed that the seller was responsible to him. If the transaction has ended and the seller has gone, the pre-condition of the original partner is void, and he has the responsibility."

Malik spoke about a man who asked another man to buy certain goods to share between them, and he wanted the other man to pay for him and he would sell the goods for the other man. Malik said, "That is not good. When he says, 'Pay for me and I will sell it for you,' it becomes a loan which he makes to him in order that he sell it for him and if those goods are destroyed, or pass, the man who paid the price will demand from his partner what he put in for him. This is part of the advance which brings in profit."

Malik said, "If a man buys goods, and they are settled for him, and then a man says to him, 'Share half of these goods with me, and I will sell them all for you,' that is halal, there is no harm in it. The explanation of that is that this is a new sale and he sells him half of the goods provided that he sells the whole lot."

Malik said, "If someone advances for goods to be delivered after a time, and those goods are neither something to be eaten nor drunk, he can sell them to whomever he likes for cash or goods, before he takes delivery of them, to some one other than the person from whom he purchased them. He must not sell them to the person from whom he bought them except in exchange for goods which he takes possession of immediately and does not defer."

Malik said, "If the delivery date for the goods has not arrived, there is no harm in selling them to the original owner for goods which are clearly different and which he takes immediate possession of and does not defer."

Malik spoke about the case of a man who advanced dinars or dirhams for four specified pieces of cloth to be delivered before a specified time and when the term fell due, he demanded delivery from the seller and the seller did not have them. He found that the seller had cloth but inferior quality, and the seller said that he would give him eight of those cloths. Malik said, "There is no harm in that if he takes the cloths which he offers him before they separate. It is not good if delayed terms enter into the transaction. It is also not good if that is before the end of the term, unless he sells him cloth which is notthetypeof cloth for which he made an advance.

Yahya said that Malik said, "The person who puts up the principal must not stipulate that he has something of the profit alone without the agent sharing in it, nor must the agent stipulate that he has something of the profit alone without the investor sharing. In qirad, there is no sale, no rent, no work, no advance, and no convenience which one party specifies to himself without the other party sharing unless one party allows it to the other unconditionally as a favour and that is alright to both. Neither of the parties should make a condition over the other which increases him in gold or silver or food over the other party."

He said, "If any of that enters the qirad, it becomes hire, and hire is only good with known and fixed terms. The agent should not stipulate when he takes the principal that he repay or commission anyone with the goods, nor that he take any of them for himself. When there is a profit, and it is time to separate the capital, then they divide the profit according to the terms of the contract. If the principal does not increase or there is a loss, the agent does not have to make up for what he spent on himself or for the loss. That falls to the investor from the principal. Qirad is permitted upon whatever terms the investor and the agent make a mutual agreement, of half the profit, or a third or a fourth or whatever."

Malik said, "It is not permitted for the agent to stipulate that he use the qirad money for a certain number of years and that it not be taken from him during that time."

He said, "It is not good for the investor to stipulate that the qirad money should not be returned for a certain number of years which are specified, because the qirad is not for a term. The investor loans it to an agent to use for him. If it seems proper to either of them to abandon the project and the money is coin, and nothing has been bought with it, it can be abandoned, and the investor takes his money back. If it seems proper to the investor to take the qirad loan back after goods have been purchased with it, he cannot do so until the buyer has sold the goods and they have become money. If it seems proper to the agent to return the loan, and it has been turned to goods he cannot do so until he has sold them. He returns the loan in cash as he took it."

Malik said, "It is not good for the investor to stipulate that the agent pay any zakat due from his portion of the profit in particular, because the investor by stipulating that, stipulates fixed increase for himself from the profit because the portion of zakat he would be liable for by his portion of the profit, is removed from him.

"It is not permitted for the investor to stipulate to the agent to only buy from so-and-so, referring to a specific man. That is not permitted because by doing so he would become his hireling for a wage."

Malik spoke about an investor in qirad who stipulated a guarantee for an amount of money from the agent, "The investor is not permitted to stipulate conditions about his principal other than the conditions on which qirad is based or according to the precedent of the sunna of the Muslims. If the principal is increased by the condition of guarantee, the investor has increased his share of the profit because of the position of the guarantee. But the profit is only to be divided according to what it would have been had the loan been given without the guarantee. If the principal is destroyed, I do not think that the agent has a guarantee held against him because the stipulation of guarantees in qirad is null and void."

Malik spoke about an investor who gave qirad money to a man and the man stipulated that he would only buy palms or animals with it because he sought to eat the dates or the offspring of the animals and he kept them for some time to use for himself. He said, "That is not permitted. It is not the sunna of the Muslims in qirad unless he buys it and then sells it as other goods are sold."

Malik said, "There is no harm in the agent stipulating on the investor a slave to help him provided that the slave stands to gain along with him out of the investment, and when the slave only helps him with the investment, not with anything else."

Malik said, "The best of what is said about a man who buys the mukatab of a man is that if the man wrote the slave's kitaba for dinars or dirhams, he does not sell him unless it is for merchandise which is paid immediately and not deferred, because if it is deferred, it would be a debt for a debt. A debt for a debt is forbidden."

He said, "If the master gives a mukatab his kitaba for certain merchandise of camels, cattle, sheep, or slaves, it is more correct that the buyer buy him for gold, silver, or different goods than the ones his master wrote the kitaba for, and that must be paid immediately, not deferred."

Malik said, "The best of what I have heard about a mukatab when he is sold is that he is more entitled to buy his kitaba than the one who buys him if he can pay his master the price for which he was sold in cash. That is because his buying himself is his freedom, and freedom has priority over what bequests accompany it. If one of those who have written the kitaba for the mukatab sells his portion of him, so that a half, a third, a fourth, or whatever share of the mukatab is sold, the mukatab does not have the right of pre-emption in what is sold of him. That is because it is like the severance of a partner, and a partner can only make a settlement for a partner of the one who is mukatab with the permission of his partners because what is sold of him does not give him complete rights as a free man and his property is barred from him, and by buying part of himself, it is feared that he will become incapable of completing payment because of what he had to spend. That is not like the mukatab buying himself completely unless whoever has some of the kitaba remaining due to him gives him permission. If they give him permission, he is more entitled to what is sold of him."

Malik said, "Selling one of the instalments of a mukatab is not halal. That is because it Is an uncertain transaction. If the mukatab cannot pay it, what he owes is nullified. If he dies or goes bankrupt and he owes debts to people, then the person who bought his instalment does not take any of his portion with the creditors. The person who buys one of the instalments of the mukatab is in the position of the master of the mukatab. The master of the mukatab does not have a share with the creditors of the mukatab for what he is owed of the kitaba of his slave. It is also like that with the kharaj, (a set amount deducted daily from the slave against his earnings), which accumulates for a master from the earnings of his slave. The creditors of his slave do not allow him a share for what has accumulated for him from those deductions."

Malik said, "There is no harm in a mukatab paying off his kitaba with coin or merchandise other than the merchandise for which he wrote his kitaba if it is identical with it, on time (for the instalment) or delayed. "

Malik said that if a mukatab died and left an umm walad and small children by her or by someone else and they could not work and it was feared that they would be unable to fulfil their kitaba, the umm walad of the father was sold if her price would pay all the kitaba for them, whether or not she was their mother. They were paid for and set free because their father did not forbid her sale if he feared that he would be unable to complete his kitaba. If her price would not pay for them and neither she nor they could work, they all reverted to being slaves of the master.

Malik said, "What is done among us in the case of a person who buys the kitaba of a mukatab, and then the mukatab dies before he has paid his kitaba, is that the person who bought the kitaba inherits from him. If, rather than dying, the mukatab cannot pay, the buyer has his person. If the mukatab pays his kitaba to the person who bought him and he is freed, his wala' goes to the person who wrote the kitaba and the person who bought his kitaba does not have any of it."

Malik related to me that he heard the like of that from Sulayman ibn Yasar.

Malik spoke about a man who bought out one of the partners in a shared property, by paying the man with an animal, a slave, a slave-girl, or the equivalent of that in goods. Then another partner decided to exercise his right of pre-emption after that, and he found that the slave or slave-girl had died, and no one knew what her value had been. The buyer claimed, "The value of the slave or slave-girl was 100 dinars." The partner with the right of pre-emption claimed, "The value was 50 dinars."

Malik said, "The buyer takes an oath that the value of what he payed was 100 dinars. Then if the one with the right of pre-emption wishes, he can compensate him, or else he can leave it, unless he can bring a clear proof that the slave or slave-girl's value is less than what the buyer said. If someone gives away his portion of a shared house or land and the recipient repays him for it by cash or goods, the partners can take it by pre-emption if they wish and pay off the recipient the value of what he gave in dinars or dirhams. If someone makes a gift of his portion of a shared house or land, and does not take any remuneration and does not seek to, and a partner wants to take it for its value, he cannot do so as long as the original partner has not been given recompense for it. If there is any recompense, the one with the right of pre-emption can have it for the price of the recompense."

Malik spoke about a man who bought into a piece of shared land for a price on credit, and one of the partners wanted to possess it by right of pre-emption . Malik said, "If it seems likely that the partner can meet the terms, he has right of pre-emption for the same credit terms. If it is feared that he will not be able to meet the terms, but he can bring a wealthy and reliable guarantor of equal standing to the one who bought into the land, he can also take possession."

Malik said, "A person's absence does not sever his right of pre-emption. Even if he is a way for a long time, there is no time limit after which the right of preemption is cut off."

Malik said that if a man left land to a number of his children, then one of them who had a child died and the child of the deceased sold his right in that land, the brother of the seller was more entitled to pre-empt him than his paternal uncles, the partners of his father.

Malik said, "This is what is done in our community."

Malik said, "Pre- emption is shared between partners according to their existing shares. Each of them takes according to his portion. If it is small, he has little. If it is great, it is according to that. That is if they are tenacious and contend with each other about it."

Malik said, "As for a man who buys out the share of one of his partners, and one of the other partners says, 'I will take a portion according to my share,' and the first partner says, 'If you wish to take all the preemption, I will give it up to you. If you wish to leave it, then leave it.' If the first partner gives him the choice and hands it over to him, the second partner can only take all the pre-emption or give it back. If he takes it, he is entitled to it. If not, he has nothing."

Malik spoke about a man who bought land, and developed it by planting trees or digging a well etc., and then someone came, and seeing that he had a right in the land, wanted to take possession of it by pre-emption. Malik said "He has no right of preemption unless he compensates the other for his expenditure. If he gives him the price of what he has developed, he is entitled to pre- emption . If not, he has no right in it."

Malik said that someone who sold off his portion of a shared house or land and then, on learning that some one with a right of pre-emption was to take possession by that right, asked the buyer to revoke the sale, and he did so, did not have the right to do that. The pre-emptor has more right to the property for the price for which he sold it.

In the case of some one who bought along with a section of a shared house or land, an animal and goods (that were not shared), so that when any one demanded his right of pre-emption in the house or land he said, "Take what I have bought altogether, for I bought it altogether," Malik said, "The pre-emptor need only take possession of the house or land. Each thing the man bought is assessed according to its share of the lump sum the man paid. Then the pre-emptor takes possession of his right for a price which is appropriate on that basis. He does not take any animals or goods unless he wants to do that."

Malik said, "If someone sells a section of shared land, and one of those who have the right of preemption surrenders it to the buyer and another refuses to do other than take his pre-emption, the one who refuses to surrender has to take all the preemption, and he cannot take according to his right and leave what remains.

In the case where one of a number of partners in one house sold his share when all his partners were away except for one man, the one present was given the choice of either taking the pre-emption or leaving it, and he said, 'I will take my portion and leave the portions of my partners until they are present. If they take it, that is that. If they leave it, I will take all the pre-emption,' Malik said, 'He can only take it all or leave it. If his partners come, they can take from him or leave it as they wish. If this is offered to him and he does not accept, I think that he has no pre-emption.' "