because the option is attached to the inspection, and because it leads to making the contract binding upon an unknown object, which leads to harm. Likewise, if they traded on the condition that no option is established for the buyer, the condition is invalid for that reason. Does the sale become corrupt due to this condition? There are two views, based on the [rules regarding] corrupt conditions in a sale.

Section: For the validity of the contract, inspection is required from both the seller and the buyer. Even if we rule that a sale is valid without inspection, if one sells what he has not seen, he has the option upon inspection; and if the buyer also has not seen it, then each of them has the option. This is the view of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: [He has no option], based on the hadith of Uthman and Talha, and because if we granted him the option, it would be established due to the assumption of an increase, and an increase in the sold object does not establish an option. Similarly, if he sold something on the basis that it is defective, and it turns out not to be defective, no option is established for him. We say: He is ignorant of the characteristics of the object of the contract, so he is like the buyer. As for the report, it is the statement of Jubayr and Talha, and Uthman disagreed with them, and his statement is more appropriate because in a sale, mutual consent between them is considered; therefore, the inspection, which is the locus of consent, is considered for both of them.

Section: When he describes the sold object to the buyer, and mentions for him those characteristics sufficient for the validity of a salam (advance payment) contract, its sale is valid according to the zahir (apparent) doctrine of the madhhab. This is the view of most scholars. From Ahmad, it is reported that it is not valid until he sees it, because the description does not result in the knowledge of the sold object, so the sale based on it is not valid, like that for which a salam contract is not valid. We say: It is a sale based on description, so it is valid like a salam contract. We do not concede that it does not result in [knowledge of the sold object]; indeed, it is obtained through the manifest characteristics by which the price varies outwardly, and this is sufficient, as evidenced by the fact that it is sufficient in a salam contract, and that [full] insight into hidden characteristics is not considered in inspection. As for that for which a salam contract is not valid, its sale is not valid