some of the right except to have him pay the rest; thus, it is as if he exchanged some of his right for another.

The third section is the gift (hiba). It is when he has an asset in his possession, and he says: "I have gifted you half of it, so give me the remainder of it." This is valid, and the conditions of a gift must be observed for it. If he presents it in the form of a condition, it is not valid. This is the school of al-Shafi'i, because if he makes the payment a condition for the gift, he has made the gift a consideration (iwad) for the payment of it, so it is as if he exchanged some of his right for another. If he releases him from part of the debt or gifts him part of the asset using the language of reconciliation (sulh), such as saying: "Reconcile with me for half of your debt that is upon me," or "for half of this house of yours," and he says: "I have reconciled with you for that," it is not valid. This was mentioned by al-Qadi and Ibn Aqil, and it is the view of some of the companions of al-Shafi'i. Most of them said: Reconciliation is permissible, because if it were not valid by its specific terminology, it would cease to be a reconciliation and would have no connection to it, thus not being called a reconciliation. However, if it is done with the language of reconciliation, it is called a reconciliation due to the presence of the term, even if the meaning is absent, like a gift made conditional upon a return (thawab). The term "reconciliation" only implies exchange if there is a consideration present; otherwise, it does not. The meaning of reconciliation is merely agreement and consent, and this may occur without a consideration. Just as ownership, if it is with a consideration, is called a sale, and if it is devoid of consideration, it is called a gift. Our position is that the term "reconciliation" implies exchange, because if he says: "Reconcile with me for the gift of such-and-such," or "for the gift of such-and-such, or for half of this asset," and similar phrases, he has attached it by way of correspondence, making it like saying: "Sell me this for a thousand." If he attaches it with the particle "ala" (upon), it follows the path of a condition, like the words of the Almighty: "So shall we pay you a tribute on condition that you set up a barrier between us and them?" (Surah Al-Kahf 94). Both are invalid, as evidenced by what happens if he explicitly uses the language of...