And because there is a risk (gharar) in that we cannot guarantee the dissolution (faskh) [of the contract] if one of them fails, and so he would not know what he should receive in return. This is a risk similar to that which has an effect in Salam. With such reasoning, we justified the [requirement for] knowing the description and quantity of the price. We have already mentioned elsewhere another view that this is not a condition, and a similar ruling may be inferred here; for it is in the same meaning. Furthermore, since it is permitted to pay a Salam for a single object to be delivered at two different times without specifying the price of each part, the same applies here. Ibn Abi Musa said: It is not permitted to pay five dinars and fifty dirhams for a korr (a specific volume) of wheat until one specifies the share of the price for each of them. The stronger opinion is the validity of this; because if a part of the Salam object becomes unavailable, he may reclaim the proportional share of the price for both; if half becomes unavailable, he reclaims half of both, and if one-fifth becomes unavailable, he reclaims one dinar and ten dirhams.

781 - Issue: He said: (And if he pays a Salam for a single object to be taken in scattered, known parts at different times, it is permitted.)

Al-Athram said: I asked Abu Abd Allah: A man gives money to another for food, and he takes from him each day a portion of that commodity? He said: "Is it in the form of a Salam?" I said: "Yes." He said: "There is no harm in it." He then said: "Like the case of the butcher, where he gives him a dinar on the condition that he takes from him every day a ratl (pound) of meat that he has described." Malik held this view as well. Al-Shafi'i said: If one pays a Salam for a single type of item to be delivered at two different times, there are two opinions: One of them is that it is not valid, because what corresponds to the later deadline is worth less than the other, and that is unknown, so it is not permitted. Our evidence is that any sale permitted at a single deadline is permitted at two or more deadlines, like sales of tangible objects. Thus, if he takes possession of part of it and taking possession of the remainder becomes impossible, and he dissolves the contract, he recovers the proportional share of the price, and no surplus is attributed to the remainder over the part already received; for it is a single sold object with uniform parts, so the price is apportioned equally among its parts, just as if the deadline were the same."