the need calls for it, and if they are more, it is not valid, because the uncertainty (gharar) increases. Our argument is that what varies in its parts and its value, it is not permissible to purchase a part of it, neither specifically nor as an undivided share, like the four [slaves]; and what is not valid without the condition of an option, is not valid with its condition, like the four. There is no need for this, for the choice is possible before the contract. Furthermore, what they stated is invalidated by the [case of the] four.

Section: The ruling for a garment is the same as the ruling for land, except that if he says, 'I sold you from this garment, from this place to this place,' it is valid. If it is of a kind that cutting does not decrease its value, they may cut it. If it is of a kind that cutting decreases its value, and the seller stipulates that he cuts it for him, or both the seller and the buyer agree to its cutting, it is permissible. If they dispute that, they become partners in it, just as they would be partners in land. Al-Qadi said: It is not valid, because he cannot deliver it except with harm, so it is like if he sold him a specific half of an animal. Our argument is that delivery is possible, and the occurrence of harm does not prevent delivery if the seller agrees to it, just as if he sold him half an animal as an undivided share; it differs from half a specific animal, as it is impossible for him to deliver that separately except by destroying it and removing it from its state of being wealth (maliyya).

Section: If he says, 'I sold you this land, or this garment, on the condition that it is ten cubits,' and it turns out to be eleven, there are two narrations. The first: the sale is void, because it is impossible to force the seller to deliver the excess, as he only sold ten, nor to force the buyer to take only a portion, as he purchased the whole, and he is also harmed by the partnership. The second: the sale is valid and the excess belongs to the seller, because that is a defect for the buyer, so it does not prevent the validity of the sale, just like a flaw. Then, the seller is given the choice between delivering the sold item with the excess or delivering the ten. If he agrees to deliver the whole, the buyer has no choice, because he has added goodness for him. If he refuses to deliver it with the excess, the buyer has the choice between...