Book of Hawala (Transfer of Debt) and Dhaman (Guarantee).

Hawala is established by the Sunnah and consensus (ijma'). As for the Sunnah, it is what Abu Hurayra narrated: that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Delay by a wealthy person is injustice, and when one of you is referred (uhila) to a solvent person, let him accept the referral." (Agreed upon). In another wording: "Whoever is referred for his due right to a solvent person, let him accept the referral." The scholars have reached a consensus on the permissibility of Hawala in general, and its linguistic derivation is from the shifting (tahwil) of a right from one liability to another. It has been said: It is a sale (bay'), for the transferor (muhil) is buying what is in his own liability with his property that is in the liability of the transferee (muhal 'alayh), and the delay of possession is permitted as a concession because it is founded upon leniency, thus the option of the session (khiyar al-majlis) applies to it for that reason. The correct view is that it is a contract of facilitation unique in itself, not analogous to anything else. If it were a sale, it would not be permitted because it would be a sale of a debt for a debt, and the separation (before taking possession) would not be permitted because it would be the sale of riba-bearing property for its own kind. Furthermore, it would be permissible using the terminology of a sale, and it would be permissible between two different types, like any other sale. Moreover, its terminology implies shifting rather than selling. Based on this, the option (khiyar) does not apply to it, and it becomes binding merely by the contract, and this is more consistent with the statements of Ahmad and his fundamental principles. It must necessarily involve a transferor (muhil), a recipient of the transfer (muhtal), and a transferee (muhal 'alayh). For its validity, the consent of the transferor is required without disagreement, for the right is against him and the channel for its settlement is not fixed upon him. As for the recipient of the transfer and the transferee, their consent is not considered, according to what we shall mention, if Allah the Exalted wills.

820 - Issue; He said: (And whoever is referred for his right to one upon whom there is a like of that right, and he agrees, then the transferor is acquitted forever).

Among the conditions for the validity of Hawala are four conditions: The first of them is the equivalence of the two rights; because it is a shifting of the right and a transfer of it, so it is transferred in its exact state. The equivalence of the two is considered in three matters: The first is the genus (type). So, one upon whom there is gold refers [the creditor] to gold, and one upon whom there is silver refers to silver. If one upon whom there is gold refers to silver, or one upon whom there is silver refers to gold, it is not valid. The second is the quality (sifa). If one upon whom there is sound currency refers to broken/debased currency, or one upon whom there is Egyptian currency refers to Amiri currency, it is not valid. The third is immediacy (hulul) and deferment (ta'jil). The agreement of the term of both deferred debts is considered. If one of them is immediate and the other is deferred, or one is deferred for a month and the other for two months, the Hawala is not valid. If both rights are immediate, and he stipulates upon the recipient that he shall take possession of his right or part of it after a month, the Hawala is not valid; because an immediate debt cannot be deferred, and because he stipulated that which, if it were established in the essence of the matter, the Hawala would not be valid; likewise is the case if he stipulates it.