before possession, so it is not permitted, just as if it were by the wording of a sale. Furthermore, both are types of sale, so they are not permitted regarding the Salam object before taking possession of it, just like the other type. As for the report [narrated to allow it], we do not know it, and it [the general prohibition] is an argument for us, because he prohibited selling food before taking possession of it, and partnership and transfer are sales, so they are included in the prohibition. His statement "and he granted a concession regarding partnership and transfer" is interpreted as having granted a concession regarding them in general, not in this specific instance. As for rescission (iqala), it is a dissolution (faskh) and is not a sale. As for transferring it (hawala) through it, it is not permitted, because transfer is only permitted upon a settled debt, and the Salam object is exposed to dissolution, so it is not settled. Moreover, it is a transfer of ownership of the Salam object in a manner other than dissolution, so it is not permitted, like a sale. The meaning of transferring it is that a man has food [due to him] from a Salam contract, and he owes the like of it due to a loan, another Salam contract, or a sale; so he transfers what he owes of food to the one who holds the Salam object for him, and this is not permitted. If the Salam recipient transfers the Muslim [the person who paid the capital] by the food he owes him, it is also not valid, because it is an exchange using the Salam object before taking possession of it, so it is not permitted, like a sale. As for selling the Salam object to its seller, this is when he takes something other than what he had contracted for as a substitute for the Salam object. This is forbidden, whether the Salam object is currently existing or non-existent, and whether the substitute is equal in value to the Salam object, less, or more. Abu Hanifah and al-Shafi'i held this view. Ibn Abi Musa mentioned, on the authority of Ahmad, another report: if someone pays a Salam for wheat, but it is not available at the time of delivery, and the Muslim agrees to accept barley in place of the wheat, it is permitted. No more than that is permitted. This is interpreted based on the report that wheat and barley are of the same genus, [though] the correct view in the school (madhhab) is the opposite. Malik said: It is permitted to take something other than the Salam object in its place, provided it is taken immediately and not delayed, except for food. Ibn al-Mundhir said: It has been established that Ibn Abbas said: If you pay a Salam for something to a term, if you take what you paid for, do so; otherwise, take