that he purchased it for himself or for the Mudaraba; because the disagreement here is regarding his intention, and he is the most knowledgeable of what he intended, and no one else is privy to that, so the statement is his regarding what he intended, just as if a husband and wife disagreed regarding the husband's intention in using an allusive term for divorce. Furthermore, he is a trustee in the purchase, so the statement is his, like an agent (wakil). If he purchased a slave, and the owner of the wealth said: "I had forbidden you from purchasing him," and the agent denied it, the statement is that of the agent; because the basic principle is the absence of the prohibition. We know of no disagreement regarding any of this.

Section: If he says: "You gave me permission to sell on credit and to purchase for ten," and he says: "Rather, I gave you permission to sell for cash and to purchase for five," the statement is that of the agent. Ahmad stipulated this, and Abu Hanifa said it as well. It is possible that the statement is that of the owner of the wealth, which is the opinion of al-Shafi'i; because the basic principle is the absence of permission, and because the statement is that of the owner of the wealth regarding the fundamental existence of permission, so it is the same regarding its qualification. Our argument is that they both agreed upon the existence of permission and differed regarding its qualification, so the statement is that of the agent, just as if he had said: "I have forbidden you from purchasing a slave," and he denied the prohibition.

Section: If he says: "You stipulated for me half of the profit," and he says: "Rather, it was a third," there are two narrations from Ahmad regarding this. One of them is that the statement is that of the owner of the wealth. He stipulated this in the narration of Ibn al-Mansur and Sindhi. Al-Thawri, Ishaq, Abu Thawr, the people of opinion, Ibn al-Mubarak, and Ibn al-Mundhir held this view; because the owner of the wealth denies the extra sixth and its being stipulated for him, and the statement is that of the denier. The second is that if the agent claims the customary wage and an increase that people commonly overlook, the statement is his, and if he claims more, the statement is his regarding what corresponds to the customary wage. Al-Shafi'i said: They take an oath against each other; because they disagreed regarding the consideration of a contract, so they take an oath against each other, like two transacting parties. Our argument is the saying of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him: "But the oath is upon the one who denies." And because it is a disagreement within a Mudaraba, so