striking it, or its stamp is different from the Sultan's stamp, then the contract is valid, and the buyer is given the choice between keeping it or annulling the contract and returning it, but he has no right to a replacement because the contract occurred on its specific substance; if he were to take another, he would be taking what he did not buy. But if we say that currency does not become specific by specification in the contract, then he has the right to take a replacement, and the contract does not become void; because what he took is not what was contracted upon, so it resembles a salam (forward sale) when he takes possession of it and finds a defect in it. If the defect is in part of it, he has the right to return the whole or keep it. And is he allowed to return the defective part and keep the sound part? There are two views, based on the division of the transaction (tafriq al-safqa). The ruling regarding when the two compensations are of the same category is like the ruling for when they are of two categories, as we have mentioned. However, it is derived from the view of those who forbid the sale of two types for one type of that same category, that if he finds part of the compensation to be defective, the contract becomes void for the whole, because that which corresponds to the defective part is less than that which corresponds to the sound part, so it becomes like the issue of the mudd of Ajwah (dates). The view of al-Shafi'i is the same as what we have mentioned in this chapter, exactly.

Section: If he desires to take the arsh (indemnity) for the defect, and the two compensations in the sarf (exchange) are of the same category, it is not permissible because of the occurrence of an increase in one of the two compensations and the loss of the parity required in the same category. The Qadi derived a view permitting the taking of the arsh in the session, because the increase occurred after the contract; but this view has no basis, for the arsh of the defect is from the compensation; it is used for compensation in murabaha (cost-plus sale), the shafi' (pre-emptor) takes it, and it is returned if one returns the sold item through annulment (faskh) or rescission (iqala). If it were not from the compensation, then by what means would the buyer be entitled to it? It is not a gift, given that an increase in the session is from the compensation, and if it were not an arsh, then the arsh is more entitled to be considered so. If the sarf is of a different category, he may take the arsh in the session because parity is not required, and the delay in taking possession of one part of the compensation relative to the other while they are both in the session does not cause harm, so it is permitted, as in all other sales. If it is after they have separated, it is not permitted because it leads to separation occurring before taking possession of one of the two compensations, unless they make the arsh from a different category of price, as if he took the arsh for the defect of the silver as a qafiz of wheat; in that case, it is permissible.