of the right and a transfer of it, so it is transferred in its exact state. The equivalence of the two is considered in three matters: The first is the genus. So, one upon whom there is gold refers [the creditor] to gold, and one upon whom there is silver refers to silver. If one upon whom there is gold refers to silver, or one upon whom there is silver refers to gold, it is not valid. The second is the quality. If one upon whom there is sound currency refers to broken/debased currency, or one upon whom there is Egyptian currency refers to Amiri currency, it is not valid. The third is immediacy and deferment. The agreement of the term of both deferred debts is considered. If one of them is immediate and the other is deferred, or one is deferred for a month and the other for two months, the Hawala is not valid. If both rights are immediate, and he stipulates upon the recipient that he shall take possession of his right or part of it after a month, the Hawala is not valid; because an immediate debt cannot be deferred, and because he stipulated that which, if it were established in the essence of the matter, the Hawala would not be valid; likewise is the case if he stipulates it. If these matters coincide and the Hawala is valid, and they both agree that the transferee pays [the recipient] better than his [original] right, or the recipient agrees to a lesser quality, or the one who owes the deferred debt agrees to accelerate it, or the one to whom the immediate debt is owed agrees to delay it, it is permissible; because that is permissible in a loan (qard), so it is more appropriate in a Hawala. If the transferor or the recipient dies, the term remains as it is. If the transferee dies, there are two narrations regarding the immediacy of the debt, the mention of which has already passed.

The second condition is that it must be for a stable (mustaqirr) debt. It is not considered that he refers [the creditor] to a non-stable debt. However, in the case of a Salam contract, the Hawala is not valid by it nor upon it, because a Salam debt is not stable due to it being subject to rescission as a result of the Salam item being cut off. The Hawala is not valid using it because it is only valid where it is permissible to take a substitute for it, and it is not permissible to take a substitute for a Salam debt; according to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Whoever enters into a Salam contract for something, let him not exchange it for something else." Furthermore, the Hawala is not valid upon a Mukatab (a slave in a manumission contract) for the debt of the kitaba contract, because it is not stable; for he has the right to refrain from paying it, and it lapses upon his insolvency. The Hawala is valid upon him, however, for a debt other than the kitaba debt, because his status is the status of free people in terms of debts.