because he has known what he purchased through the most effective method, which is visual inspection. The same applies if he says: 'I sell you half of this pile, or a third of it, or a known part of it.' It is permissible, because whatever is permissible to sell in its entirety, it is permissible to sell a part of it, like animals. Also, because its entirety is known through visual inspection, so too is its part. Ibn Aqil said: This is not valid unless the pile is of uniform parts; if it is mixed, such as the pile of a village grocer, it is not valid. It is also possible that it is valid, because he is purchasing an undivided portion of it, thus he is entitled to its good and bad [parts] in proportion. There is no difference between currencies and commodities regarding the validity of selling them by estimation. Malik said: It is not permissible for currencies, because they have risks and it is not difficult to weigh or count them, so they resemble slaves and garments. Our position is that it is known by visual inspection, so it resembles commodities, silver ingots (2), and jewelry. This (3) refutes what he said. As for slaves, it is permissible to sell them if one has seen them without counting them; similarly for garments if he has unfolded them and seen all their parts. The second ruling: If he purchases the pile by estimation, it is not permissible for him to sell it until he moves it. Ahmad explicitly stated this in a narration by al-Athram; there is another narration from him that it is permissible for him to sell it before moving it, which al-Qadi chose, and it is the school of Malik, because it is a determined object of sale that does not require the right of verification, so it resembles a present garment. Our evidence is the statement of Ibn Umar: We used to purchase food from the caravaners by estimation, and the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade us from selling it until we moved it from its place (4). And the generality of his saying, peace be upon him: "Whoever purchases food, let him not sell it until he has taken possession of it" (5), along with the reports we have mentioned. Al-Athram narrated with his chain of transmission from Ubayd ibn Hunayn, who said: Oil came from the Levant, and I purchased some camel-loads of it. Once I had finished purchasing them, a man approached me and offered me a profit on them. I stretched out my hand to conclude the transaction with him when a man grabbed me (6) from behind. I looked, and it was Zayd ibn Thabit, who said: 'Do not sell it until you move it to your quarters, for the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, commanded us to do so' (7). Once this is established, taking possession of it is by moving it, as it came in (8) the report. Furthermore, if taking possession was not defined in the Sharia, it would be necessary to return it to custom, as we said regarding reclamation and acquisition, and the custom for taking possession of a pile (9) is moving it.

Section: It is not lawful for the seller of the pile to deceive regarding it, by placing it on a platform, a mound, or a stone that diminishes it, or by placing the bad [quality] in its interior or the wet [parts], and the like; because of what Abu Hurayrah narrated, that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, passed by a pile of food, so he inserted his hand (10) into it, and his fingers felt moisture. He said: "O owner of the food, what is this?" He said: The sky (rain) afflicted it, O Messenger of Allah. He said: "Why did you not put it on top of the food so that people could see it?" Then he said: "Whoever deceives us is not of us" (11). Al-Tirmidhi said: This is a hasan sahih hadith. If such is found, and the purchaser was not aware of it, he has the option between dissolution and taking the difference in value between the two; because it is a defect. If a hole is revealed underneath it, or its interior is found to be better than its exterior, the purchaser has no option, because it is an increase for him. If the seller knew of that, he has no option, because he entered into it with insight. If he did not know, he has the right of dissolution, just as if he sold it for twenty dirhams and weighed it with a weight, then found the weight to be excessive; he would have the right of recourse. The same applies if he sold it by a measure, then found it to be excessive. It is possible that he has no option, because the apparent case is that he sold what he knew, so dissolution is not established for him by mere possibility.

737 - Issue; He said: (And whoever knows the quantity of a thing, he shall not sell it as a pile.)

Ahmad explicitly stated this in several places, and it was deemed disliked by Ata, Ibn Sirin, and Mujahid,