Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that al-Qasim ibn Muhammad said, ”I heard Abdullah ibn Abbas say, when a man asked him about a man making an advance on some garments and then wanting to sell them back before taking possession of them, ‘That is silver for silver,’ and he disapproved of it.”
Malik said, “Our opinion is – and Allah knows best that was because he wanted to sell them to the person from whom he had bought them for more than the price for which he bought them. Had he sold them to some one other than the person from whom he had purchased them, there would not have been any harm in it.”
Malik said, “The generally agreed on way of doing things among us concerning making an advance for slaves, cattle or goods is that when all of what is to be sold is described and an advance is made for them for a date, and the date falls due, the buyer does not sell any of that to the person from whom he has purchased it for more than the price which he advanced for it before he has taken full possession of what he has advanced for. It is usury if he does. If the buyer gives the seller dinars or dirhams and he profits with them, then, when the goods come to the buyer and he does not take them into his possession but sells them back to their owner for more than what he advanced for them, the outcome is that what he has advanced has returned to him and has been increased for him.”
Malik said, “If someone advances gold or silver for described animals or goods which are to be delivered before a named date, and the date arrives, or it is before or after the date, there is no harm in the buyer selling those goods to the seller, for other goods, to be taken immediately and not delayed, no matter how extensive the amount of those goods is, except in the case of food because it is not halal to sell it before he has full possession of it. The buyer can sell those goods to some one other than the person from whom he purchased them for gold or silver or any goods. He takes possession of it and does not defer it because if he defers it, that is ugly and there enters into the transaction what is disapproved of| delay for delay. Delay for delay is to sell a debt against one man for a debt against another man.”
Malik said, “If someone advances for goods to be delivered after a time, and those goods are neither something to be eaten nor drunk, he can sell them to whomever he likes for cash or goods, before he takes delivery of them, to some one other than the person from whom he purchased them. He must not sell them to the person from whom he bought them except in exchange for goods which he takes possession of immediately and does not defer.”
Malik said, “If the delivery date for the goods has not arrived, there is no harm in selling them to the original owner for goods which are clearly different and which he takes immediate possession of and does not defer.”
Malik spoke about the case of a man who advanced dinars or dirhams for four specified pieces of cloth to be delivered before a specified time and when the term fell due, he demanded delivery from the seller and the seller did not have them. He found that the seller had cloth but inferior quality, and the seller said that he would give him eight of those cloths. Malik said, “There is no harm in that if he takes the cloths which he offers him before they separate. It is not good if delayed terms enter into the transaction. It is also not good if that is before the end of the term, unless he sells him cloth which is not the type of cloth for which he made an advance.