than from its seller, just as if he had sold it for the equivalent of its price. Our argument is what Ghundar narrated from Shu'bah, from Abu Ishaq al-Sabi'i, from his wife al-Aliyah bint Ayfa' ibn Shurahbil, that she said: 'I, the umm walad of Zayd ibn Arqam, and his wife entered upon Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her. The umm walad of Zayd ibn Arqam said: I sold a slave to Zayd ibn Arqam for eight hundred dirhams to be paid at the time of the [state] stipend, then I bought him from him for six hundred dirhams. She said to her: Evil is what you bought, and evil is what you purchased. Tell Zayd ibn Arqam that he has invalidated his jihad with the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, unless he repents.' This was narrated by Imam Ahmad and Sa'id ibn Mansur. The obvious implication is that she would not say such harsh words and proceed with them unless she had heard it explicitly from the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, so it carries the status of her narrating that from him. Furthermore, this is a pretext (dhari'ah) for usury, as he introduces the commodity only to render it permissible to sell a thousand for five hundred to a known term. Likewise, it has been narrated from Ibn Abbas regarding a similar issue that he said: 'I see a hundred for fifty, with a silk cloth between them,' meaning a piece of silk cloth they included in their sale. Pretexts (al-dhara'i) are taken into consideration for the reasons we have previously stated. As for selling it for the same price or more, it is permissible because it does not act as a pretext. This applies if the commodity has not decreased from the state it was in at the time of the sale; however, if it has decreased—such as if the slave has become thin, forgotten a trade, or the garment has become torn or worn—it is permissible for him to buy it for whatever amount he wishes, because the decrease in price is due to the decrease in the commodity, not to facilitate usury. If its price has decreased or increased due to that, or due to some factor that occurred within it, it is not permissible to sell it for less than its original price, just as if it were in its original state. Ahmad has explicitly stated all of this.

Section: If he buys it for a trade good (ard), or if its first sale was for a trade good, and he then buys it for cash, it is permissible. Abu Hanifah also held this view. We know of no disagreement regarding this, because the prohibition only existed due to the suspicion of usury.