The basis for the disagreement rests upon the disagreement regarding its sale, which we have already mentioned. The third: He said, "To carry it for me a qafiz for a dirham, and whatever is in excess, then by that calculation." It is permissible, just as if he had said: "Every qafiz for a dirham." The same applies to every expression that indicates the intent to carry all of it, such as his saying: "To carry from it a qafiz for a dirham, and the rest of it or the remainder of it by that calculation," or he said: "And whatever is in excess by that calculation," intending by it all of the remainder, if they both understood that from the wording due to its indication to them of that, or due to a contextual indicator that was directed toward it. The fourth: He said, "To carry from it a qafiz for a dirham, and whatever is in excess, then by that calculation," intending by it whatever you carry of its remainder. It is not valid. The Qadi mentioned this, and it is the school of al-Shafi'i; because the object of the contract is some of it, and it is unknown. It is possible that it is valid; because it is in the meaning of "every bucket for a date." The fifth: He said, "To transport for me from it every qafiz for a dirham." It is exactly like the fourth. The sixth: He said, "To carry from it a qafiz for a dirham, on the condition that you carry the remainder by that calculation." It is not valid; because it is in the meaning of "two sales in one sale." It is possible that it is valid; because its meaning is "to carry for me every qafiz of it for a dirham." The seventh: He said, "To carry for me this heap, every qafiz for a dirham, and to transport for me another heap in the house by that calculation." If they both know the heap that is in the house by observation, it is valid in both; because they are like a single heap. If one of them is ignorant of it, it is valid for the first and void for the second; because they are two contracts, one of them upon a known [item] and the second upon an unknown [item], so it is valid in the known and void in the unknown, just as if he said: "I sold you this slave of mine for ten, and my slave who is in the house for ten." The eighth: He said, "To carry for me this heap and that which is in the house for ten." If they both know the one that is in the house, it is valid in both. If they are both ignorant of it, it is void in both; because it is one contract, for one compensation, upon a known and an unknown [item], unlike the one before it. If they both know the one in the house, but it is usurped, or it is impossible to validate the contract regarding it due to an impediment specific to it, the contract regarding it is void. And regarding its validity in the other, there are two views, based upon the splitting of the deal, unless if their amounts in qafiz were known, or the amount of one of them was known from the other, then the preferred [view] is its validity; because the share of the wage in it is known. And if it is not so, then the preferred [view] is its invalidity; due to the uncertainty (jahala) of the compensation in it. The ninth: He said, "To carry for me this heap, and it is ten qafiz, for a dirham, and if it exceeds that, the excess is by that calculation." It is valid for the ten; because they are known, and it is not valid in the excess; because it is uncertain, and it is not permissible to contract upon that which is uncertain. The tenth: He said, "To carry for me this heap, every qafiz for a dirham, and if food comes for me and you carry it, then by that calculation." It is also valid for the heap, and invalid in the excess; for what we have mentioned.

907 - Issue: He said: "And whoever hires [a mount] to Mecca, and the camel driver does not see the riders, the litters (mahamil), the coverings, and the saddles, the lease is not permissible."

The people of knowledge have reached a consensus on the permissibility of leasing camels to Mecca and other places. Allah the Almighty has said: {And the horses, the mules, and the donkeys to ride them}. He did not differentiate between the owned and the leased. It was narrated from Ibn 'Abbas regarding the saying of Allah the Almighty: {There is no blame upon you for seeking bounty from your Lord}: that you perform Hajj and lease [mounts]. Similar is narrated from Ibn 'Umar. This is because people have a need to travel, and Allah the Almighty has obligated Hajj upon them, and He informed that they come on foot and upon every lean mount coming from every deep pass. Not everyone has a beast they own, nor are they able to tend to it, maintain it, or tie upon it, so necessity called for renting them, so it was permitted to avert the need. Once this is established, then a condition for the validity of the contract is that the contracting parties know what they have contracted upon; because it is a contract of exchange.