But it may be argued that there is a distinction: when someone purchases with another person’s specific property and gives the owner of the dirhams other dirhams, it makes no difference to him whether he is given back his original dirhams or their equivalent.

His statement, “If he purchases for him,” means: for another person.

His statement, “as a liability,” means: not with his specific property. For when the contract is concluded as a liability, it is not concluded over another person’s property. What is prohibited is disposing of another’s property; whereas a liability is broader in scope.

His statement, “without his permission and without naming him in the contract, it is valid for him,” means: for the other person.

His statement, “through ratification; otherwise, it becomes binding upon the purchaser,” means: if it is not ratified.

His statement, “as property,” means: the purchaser’s property.

The case may be illustrated as follows: I know that a certain person wishes to buy a watch, so I go to a watch dealer and purchase a watch for that person as a liability upon myself, although he has not appointed me as his agent or given me permission. Nor do I say to the seller, “I am purchasing it for so-and-so.” Then I say to the man for whom I bought it, “I bought you a watch.” If he ratifies it, ownership belongs to him; but if he does not ratify it, ownership belongs to me.

Another example: I know that a certain person wishes to buy a sheep for milk—that is, to milk it—so I buy a sheep for him from a sheep seller, without saying that it is for so-and-so or naming him in the contract. Then I say to my companion, for whom I bought it, “I bought you a sheep.” If he says, “I accept,” it belongs to the person for whom it was purchased, and the milk produced after the contract belongs to the person for whom it was purchased, because it is the increase of his property.

But if he says, “I do not want it,” then it belongs to the purchaser and becomes binding upon him.