in order to use it, or he may intend to obtain the car’s value, purchasing it in order to sell it and have greater means through the proceeds. This purpose is like the first: in the first case, he intended to benefit from the item itself, whereas in this case he intended to benefit from its value. There is no difference between them.

The second view is that it is prohibited. This is also a report from Imam Ahmad, the position preferred by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, and what has been narrated from Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, may Allah have mercy on him.

The reasoning is that the one who bought the car actually intended to obtain cash. It is therefore as though he had taken eighty in cash in exchange for one hundred to be paid later; thus, it is a legal stratagem. Imam Ahmad explicitly stated that tawarruq is among the forms of inah transactions.

However, according to the view that it is lawful, it must be prompted by need, in light of his words, “Whoever is in need.” Thus, if it is prompted by the desire for increase and accumulation, then it is prohibited and impermissible. Their words, “Whoever is in need,” do not merely describe the usual case; rather, they stipulate a condition. For if there is no need, there is no basis for permitting it, since it is a near legal stratagem for usury.

Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his book I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in: “Our shaykh, may Allah have mercy on him, repeatedly reconsidered this issue, perhaps he might deem it lawful; but he refused and would say: ‘It is prohibited, and legal stratagems only make prohibited matters more repugnant.’”

But I hold that it is lawful subject to the following conditions:

The first condition is that a loan or salam sale be unavailable—that is, that it be unavailable.