accepting it; for his interest is achieved along with the additional benefit of acceleration. Thus, it proceeds in the same manner as an increase in an attribute or the acceleration of a deferred debt. The third state is that he brings it after the time of obligation has passed, in which case its ruling is the same as if he had brought the sold item after they had separated.

Section: The situation is that he either brings the subject matter of the Salam contract (muslam fihi) according to its description, or inferior to it, or superior to it. If he brings it according to its description, [the buyer] is obligated to accept it, for it is his due. If he brings it inferior to its description, he is not obligated to accept it, because that involves a forfeiture of his right. If they both consent to that and it is of the same genus, it is permissible; if it is of a different genus, it is not permissible, for reasons previously mentioned. If they agree that he gives him less than his due and adds something extra, it is not permissible; because he has isolated the attribute of quality for sale, and that is not permissible. Since selling the subject matter of the Salam contract before taking possession of it is not permissible, then selling its attribute is even more so. The third [state] is that he brings it of better quality than what was described. This is to be examined: if he brings it to him from the same type, he is obligated to accept it, because he has brought what the contract encompassed, plus an incidental addition that benefits rather than harms him, as no interest is lost. If he brings it from another type, he is not obligated to accept it; because the contract encompassed what they described according to the specification they stipulated, and some of the attributes have been lost, for the type is an attribute, and it has been lost, so it is similar to if any other attribute had been lost. Al-Qadi said: He is obligated to accept it; because they are one genus, the one added to the other in Zakat, so it is like an increase in attribute while the type remains the same. The first [view] is better, because one of them may serve a purpose that the other does not, so if he causes him to lose that, he causes him to lose the interest associated with it, and he is not obligated to accept it, just as if he caused him to lose the attribute of quality. This is the school of al-Shafi'i. If they both agree to take one type as a substitute for the other type, it is permissible, because they are one genus, and it is not permissible to sell one for the other with an excess, and one is added to the other in Zakat, so it is permissible to take one in place of the other, like the single type.