then its value would become fifty-five thousand, so the rescission is invalid. Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, said: “Because it resembles a buy-back arrangement (ʿīnah), in which the seller profits from the buyer.”

Likewise, if the seller asks the buyer for rescission and says, “I will grant you rescission on condition that you give me such-and-such in addition to the price,” this is not permissible, because it resembles a buy-back arrangement, in that something has been added to the price.

However, the stronger view is that it is permissible for less or more, provided it is in the same currency as the original price, because the concern of usury here is remote. It is not like the case of a buy-back arrangement, in which the concern of usury is immediate. Ibn Rajab, may Allah have mercy on him, said in al-Qawāʿid (Legal Maxims) that there is a narration from Imam Ahmad indicating that this is permissible, as he cited as evidence the earnest-money sale reported from Umar, may Allah be pleased with him (1). He said: “Rescission may be in return for a consideration of the same kind.” Accordingly, there is a narration to which Imam Ahmad alluded indicating that an increase over the price or a reduction from it is permissible. This is the stronger view, and it is the practice of the people. It is in everyone’s interest, because when a seller grants rescission to a buyer, people will talk and say, “Had the item not had a defect, the buyer would not have returned it.” The seller may therefore take compensation in addition to the price in order to make up for this loss.

His statement, “There is no option in it,” means that there is no option in rescission. The word “option” is indefinite in a negative construction, and therefore includes the option due to a defect, the stipulated option, and other such options, because rescission is not a sale; rather, it is a reversal of the contract. Thus, if he grants him rescission