"Take it," or "I have become satisfied," and the like. This would then constitute a sufficient contract. If there is nothing found to stand in place of the offer (ijab) or to indicate it, it is not valid, because the previous speech is not fit to be an offer for the reasons we mentioned. It has been narrated from Ahmad, regarding one who says: "If you sew it today, you shall have one dirham, and if you sew it tomorrow, you shall have half a dirham," that it is valid. It is possible that this sale could be attached to that, and thus a position could be derived for its validity. It is also possible to differentiate between them on the basis that the contract in that case can be valid because it is a wage contract (ju'ala) which permits uncertainty, unlike a sale. Furthermore, the labor for which the wage is deserved cannot occur except upon one of the two deals, so the specified wage is determined as the compensation for it, and it does not lead to dispute, which is unlike the case here.
Section: If he sells to him on the condition that he lends him [money] or gives him a loan, or the buyer stipulates that against him, it is prohibited and the sale is void. This is the school of Malik and al-Shafi'i, and I know of no disagreement regarding it, except that Malik said: "If the one who stipulated the loan abandons the loan, the sale becomes valid." Our argument is what was narrated by 'Abd Allah ibn 'Amr, that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) forbade the profit on what is not guaranteed, the sale of what is not possessed, two sales in one sale, two conditions in a sale, and a sale combined with a loan. Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi recorded it, and the latter said: "A hasan sahih (good and authentic) hadith." In one wording: "A sale combined with a loan is not lawful." Also, because he stipulated a contract within a contract, it is corrupt, like two sales in one sale. Furthermore, when he stipulates a loan, he increases the price on account of it, so the increase in price becomes compensation for the loan and a profit for him, which is prohibited usury (riba); thus it is corrupt, just as if he had stated that explicitly. And because it is a corrupt sale, it does not return to being valid, just as if he sold one dirham for two dirhams, and then abandoned one of them.
(7) Recorded by Abu Dawud, in: Chapter on a man selling what he does not possess, from the Book of Sales, Sunan Abi Dawud 2/254; and al-Tirmidhi, in: Chapter on what has been narrated regarding the dislike of selling what you do not possess, from the Chapters on Sales, 'Aridat al-Ahwadhi 5/242. It was also recorded by al-Nasa'i, in: Chapter on selling what is not with the seller, Chapter on a loan and a sale..., and Chapter on two conditions in a sale..., from the Book of Sales, al-Mujtaba 7/254, 259. Ibn Majah, in: Chapter on the prohibition of selling what you do not possess..., from the Book of Trade, Sunan Ibn Majah 2/737, 738. Al-Darimi, in: Chapter on the prohibition of two conditions in a sale, from the Book of Sales, Sunan al-Darimi 2/253. And Imam Ahmad, in: al-Musnad 2/175, 179, 205.
خُذْهُ، أو قد رَضِيتُ. ونحوَ ذلك. فيكون هذا عَقْدًا كافِيًا. وإن لم يُوجَدْ ما يَقُومُ مَقامَ الإِيجابِ، أو يَدُلُّ عليه، لم يَصِحَّ؛ لأنَّ ما مَضَى من القولِ لا يَصْلُحُ أن يكون إيجابًا؛ لما ذَكَرْناه، وقد رُوِىَ عن أحمدَ فى مَن قال: إن خِطْتَه اليَوْمَ فلَكَ دِرْهَمٌ، وإن خِطْتَه غَدًا فلَكَ نِصْفُ دِرْهَمٍ: إنَّه يَصِحُّ. فيَحْتَمِلُ أن يَلحقَ به هذا البَيْعُ، فَيُخَرَّجَ وَجْهًا فى الصِّحَّةِ. ويَحْتَمِلُ أن يُفَرَّق بينهما من حيث إنَّ العَقْدَ ثَمَّ يُمْكِنُ أن يَصِحَّ؛ لِكَوْنِه جُعالَةً يَحْتَمِلُ فيها الجَهالَةَ، بخِلافِ البَيْعِ. ولأنَّ العَمَلَ الذى يَسْتَحِقُّ به الأُجْرَةَ لا يُمْكنُ وُقُوعُه إلَّا على إحْدَى الصَّفْقَتَيْنِ، فتَتَعَيَّنُ الأُجْرَةُ المُسَمَّاةُ عِوَضًا له، فلا يُفْضِى إلى التَّنازُعِ، وهاهُنا بِخِلافِه.
فصل: ولو باعَه بِشَرْطِ أن يُسَلِّفَه أو يُقْرِضَه، أو شَرَطَ المُشْتَرِى ذلك عليه، فهو مُحَرَّمٌ والبَيْعُ باطِلٌ. وهذا مذهبُ مالِكٍ والشَّافِعِيِّ. ولا أعْلَمُ فيه خِلافًا، إلَّا أنَّ مالِكًا قال: إن تَرَكَ مُشْتَرِطُ السَّلَفِ السَّلَفَ، صَحَّ البَيْعُ. ولَنا، ما رَوَى عبدُ اللهِ ابن عَمْرٍو، أنَّ النَّبِيَّ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- نَهَى عن رِبْحِ ما لم يُضْمَنْ، وعن بَيْعِ ما لم يُقْبَضْ، وعن بَيْعَتَيْنِ فى بَيْعَةٍ، وعن شَرْطَيْنِ فى بَيْعٍ، وعن بَيْعٍ وسَلَفٍ. أخْرَجَه أبو داوُدَ والتِّرمِذِيُّ (٧)، وقال: حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ. وفى لَفْظٍ: "لَا يَحِلُّ بَيْعٌ وسَلَفٌ". ولأنَّه اشْتَرَطَ عَقْدًا فى عَقْدٍ، ففَسَدَ، كبَيْعَتَيْنِ فى بَيْعَةٍ. ولأنَّه إذا اشْتَرَطَ القَرْضَ زادَ فى الثَّمَنِ لأجْلِه، فتَصِيرُ الزِّيادَةُ فى الثَّمَنِ عِوَضًا عن القَرْضِ، ورِبْحًا له، وذلك رِبًا مُحَرَّمٌ، ففَسَدَ، كما لو صَرَّحَ به. ولأنَّه بَيْعٌ فاسِدٌ، فلا يَعُودُ صَحِيحًا، كما لو باعَ دِرْهَمًا بِدِرْهَمَيْنِ، ثمَّ تَرَكَ أحَدَهما.
(٧) أخرجه أبو داود، فى: باب فى الرجل يبيع ما ليس عنده، من كتاب البيوع. من أبي داود ٢/ ٢٥٤. والترمذى، فى: باب ما جاء فى كراهية بيع ما ليس عندك، من أبواب البيوع. عارضة الأحوذى ٥/ ٢٤٢.كما أخرجه النسائى، فى: باب بيع ما ليس عند البائع، وباب سلف وبيع. . .، وباب شرطان فى بيع. . .، من كتاب البيوع. المجتبى ٧/ ٢٥٤، ٢٥٩. وابن ماجه، فى: باب النهى عن بيع ما ليس عندك. . .، من كتاب التجارات. سنن ابن ماجه ٢/ ٧٣٧، ٧٣٨. والدارمى، فى: باب فى النهى عن شرطين فى بيع، من كتاب البيوع. سنن الدارمى ٢/ ٢٥٣. والإِمام أحمد، فى: المسند ٢/ ١٧٥، ١٧٩، ٢٠٥.
