conditions. Allah’s decree is more binding, and Allah’s condition is firmer. The right of clientage belongs only to the one who emancipates.” (1) Thus, the Messenger ﷺ invalidated this condition because it contradicted what the contract entailed. For the consequence of emancipation is that the right of clientage belongs to the emancipator, not to anyone else. Hence the scholars said: Every condition that contradicts what a contract entails is invalid.

If someone were to ask: “Is the contract itself valid?”

We say: Yes, because the contract’s requirements have been fulfilled and the impediments are absent; the defect lies only in the condition.

His statement, “or [he stipulates] that if the item sold becomes marketable, otherwise he may return it”: nafaqa here means that it increases in demand and acquires a market, such that it is purchased; otherwise, he may return it to the seller. This too is an invalid condition, because it contradicts what the contract entails: the item sold belongs to the buyer whether it becomes marketable or not.

His statement, “or that he may not sell it”: the one stipulating this is the seller. The seller stipulates to the buyer that he must not sell it. The author therefore says that this condition is invalid.

This includes two scenarios:

The first is that he stipulates that the buyer must not sell it at all.

The second is that he stipulates that the buyer must not sell it specifically to a certain person.

According to the madhhab, both are invalid conditions, because they contradict what the contract entails. The consequence of the contract is that the owner may sell his property to whomever he wishes, or, if he wishes, refrain from selling it. Thus, if he is restricted and told, “On condition that you do not sell it,” they regard this condition as invalid because it contradicts what the contract entails.