Section: If he gives him his food, and the worker wishes to save some of it for himself, you must look: if the employer gave him more than the obligatory amount in order for him to eat his fill and have the remainder, or if there is harm to the employer in his leaving any of it—such as the worker becoming too weak to work, or the wet nurse's milk supply decreasing—it is prohibited. This is because, in the first case, he did not grant him ownership of it, but only permitted him to eat his fill; and in the second, there is harm to the employer in losing part of his wealth represented by the worker's labor, so it is prohibited, just as in the case of a camel driver who refuses to feed the camels. If he gave him the obligatory amount without any excess, or if he gave him more and granted him ownership of it, and there is no harm to the employer in him saving some of it, then it is permissible, because it is a right that causes no harm to the employer, making it similar to dirhams.

Section: If he presents food to him, and it is looted or perishes before he eats it, you must look: if it was on a table where he did not specify it for him as his food, it is the employer's liability, because he did not deliver it to him, so its loss is from his own wealth. If he did specify it for him and delivered it to him, it is the worker's liability, because it is a delivery of compensation for the purpose of transfer of ownership, resembling a sale.

Section: If he gives a man a garment and says, "Sell it for such-and-such amount, and whatever you get in excess is yours," it is valid. Ahmad stipulated this in the narration of Ahmad ibn Sa'id, and it was narrated from Ibn Abbas. Ibn Sirin and Ishaq held the same view. Al-Nakha'i, Hammad, Abu Hanifa, al-Thawri, al-Shafi'i, and Ibn al-Mundhir disliked it because it is an unknown wage that may or may not be attained. Our position is what 'Ata' narrated from Ibn Abbas, that he saw no harm in a man giving another a garment or something else and saying, "Sell it for such-and-such, and whatever you get in excess is yours," and no one is known to have opposed him in his era. Also, because it is an asset to be grown through work upon it, it resembles handing over [the capital of a Mudaraba contract]. Once this is established, if he sells it for an excess, it belongs to him, because he made it a wage. If he sells it for the named amount without any excess,