or on the condition that I hire you, or on the condition that you hire me for such-and-such, or on the condition that you marry me to your daughter, or on the condition that I marry you to my daughter, and the like. All of this is invalid. Ibn Mas'ud said: "Two deals in one deal is usury (riba)." This is the position of Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i, and the majority of scholars. Malik permitted it, saying: "I do not pay attention to the corrupt wording if it is known and lawful; it is as if he sold the item for the dirhams that he mentioned he would take in exchange for the dinars." Our argument is the report, and that the prohibition implies corruption (fasad). Furthermore, the contract is not obligatory based on the condition, because it does not establish itself in the liability (dhimma); thus it lapses, and the contract becomes corrupt because the seller was not content with it except on that condition, and when the condition is missed, the consent to it is also missed. Moreover, he stipulated a contract within a contract, so it is not valid, like the nikah al-shighar (mutually conditional marriage). His statement: "I do not pay attention to the wording," is invalid, because the sale is the wording itself; if it is corrupt, how can it be valid? It is possible to derive that the sale remains valid while the condition is corrupt, based on the principle of when one stipulates something that contradicts the requirements of the contract, as previously mentioned. And Allah knows best.

Section: Another meaning has been narrated in the interpretation of "two sales in one sale," which is for him to say: "I sell you this slave for ten [dirhams] cash, or for fifteen on credit," or "for ten broken (debased) ones, or nine sound ones." This is how Malik, al-Thawri, and Ishaq interpreted it. This is also void, and it is the view of the majority; because he did not fix a single sale for him, resembling the case where one says: "I sell you this or that." Also, because the price is unknown, it is not valid, like selling by an unknown number. And because one of the two considerations (iwadayn) is neither specified nor known, it is not valid, just as if he said: "I sold you one of my slaves." It has been narrated from Tawus, al-Hakam, and Hammad that they said: "There is no harm in him saying: 'I will sell it to you for cash for such-and-such, and for credit for such-and-such,' and then he settles on one of them." This is interpreted as having occurred between them after what took place in the contract, as if the buyer said: "I will take it on credit for such-and-such," and he replied: