ribā between it and the price. Therefore, let the property be dealt with in one contract and the slave in another, so that the case of mudd ‘ajwah (a measure of ‘ajwah dates) does not arise. The item sold must also be seen and known. In short, all the conditions of sale must be fulfilled.

If someone asks, “What is the evidence?” we say: We have the great hadith of ‘Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, may Allah be pleased with him, upon which all matters of the religion are founded: “Actions are only by intentions, and every person shall have only what he intended.” (1) If he intends both of them, then he must know it and fulfil the remaining conditions of sale.

The author says: “Clothing worn for adornment belongs to the seller, while customary clothing belongs to the buyer.” That is, clothing worn for adornment belongs to the seller because it is beyond the slave’s needs, whereas customary clothing belongs to the buyer.

Do customs differ in this regard? In other words, might clothing considered adornment in one custom be considered customary clothing in another, and vice versa? The answer is yes, without doubt; this is determined by prevailing custom. Thus, if something is regarded as clothing for adornment, it belongs to the seller; but if it is regarded as customary clothing, it belongs to the buyer.

If he has a watch and a pen with him, they belong to the seller, since they are not clothing but are, at the very least, property.