by description; because it is not possible to define it thereby. Once this is established, whenever he finds it according to the description, he does not have the right to annulment. This is the view of Muhammad ibn Sirin, Ayyub, Malik, al-'Anbari, Ishaq, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir. Al-Thawri, Abu Hanifa, and his companions said: He has the option in any case, because it is called a sale of the option of inspection, and because inspection is part of the completion of the contract, so it resembles the undescribed. For the companions of al-Shafi'i, there are two positions, like the two madhhabs. We argue that he has delivered to him the object of the contract with its characteristics, so he does not have the option, like in the case of a salam-contracted object. Furthermore, it is a described sold object, so the contractor does not have the option in all cases, like a salam. As for their statement that it is called a sale of the option of inspection, we do not recognize its validity, and if it is proven, it is possible that it is named as such by those who see the option as established, and it is not used as an argument against others. As for if he finds it contrary to the description, he has the option, and it is called the option of discrepancy in description; because he found the described object contrary to the description, so it is not binding upon him, like a salam. If they disagree, and the seller says: "The description has not changed," and the buyer says: "It has changed," the statement is the buyer's statement; because the basis is the release of his liability from the price, so it is not binding upon him unless he acknowledges it, or it is proven by evidence or what takes its place.

Section: Sale by description is of two types: One of them is the sale of a specific individual object, such as if he says: "I have sold you my Turkish slave," and mentions the rest of his characteristics. This contract is rescinded by returning it to the seller, and by its destruction before he takes possession of it; because the object of the contract is specific, so the contract ends with the loss of its subject matter, and it is permissible to separate before taking possession of its price and taking possession of it, like the sale of a present object. The second is the sale of a described, non-specific object, such as if he says: "I have sold you a Turkish slave," and then exhausts the characteristics of salam. This is in the sense of a salam; so whenever he delivers to him a slave contrary to what he described, and he returns it, or according to what he described, and he exchanges it, the contract does not become corrupt; because the contract was not concluded on other than this, so the contract is not rescinded by his returning it,