Another example: pens are value-assessed goods, and watches are likewise value-assessed goods, because they contain permissible workmanship. Thus, according to the school, he must return their value. But how is that value determined?

The answer is that we ask: What was this item worth at the time of the loan? Its value is then established as a liability upon the borrower. This is the stronger view.

For example, someone lends me a camel, and a camel is a value-assessed good. We ask: How much was it worth at the time of the loan? He says: It was worth five thousand. Thus, five thousand becomes established as a liability upon the borrower, because the value of a non-fungible good is what becomes established. Hence he said, “and the value in the case of other goods.”

If someone were to say: Why do you not assess the value at the time of repayment?

We say: Because it entered the borrower’s ownership from the moment he took possession of it, so its value is assessed at that time.

It has also been said that the relevant time is the time of the loan, except in the case of jewels and similar items whose value changes rapidly. However, the correct view is that the relevant value is its value at the time of the loan, because that was the time when I acquired ownership of what was lent to me.

Thus, what becomes established as a liability upon the borrower is an equivalent in the case of fungible goods, and the value in the case of value-assessed goods.

But do we accept that a fungible good is everything sold by measure or weight for which a salam contract is valid and which contains no permissible workmanship?

The correct answer is no. Rather, a fungible good is that which has an approximately equivalent counterpart; it need not be identical. Thus, we know that if a person lends a camel, then wishes