then we say: “Accept it, and intend to reciprocate it,” such as by giving him a watch worth two hundred or three hundred riyals. But if it is worth less than that—for example, if the watch is worth one hundred—then this is not permissible, because that is not reciprocation; one hundred does not reciprocate two hundred.

His words, “or count it against his debt,” mean that he accepts the gift but does not reciprocate it.

An example of this is that he lends him one thousand riyals, then the borrower gives him a gift worth two hundred riyals, which he accepts but records against his debt, saying: “Two hundred riyals have been received from so-and-so.” This is permissible and there is nothing wrong with it, because he now intends to count it against the debt, so it is discharged from the borrower’s liability.

Question: Is hospitality counted against the debt?

Answer: The jurists say that hospitality is counted against the debt. It is said: “How many dates, loaves of bread, and oranges did you eat?” Its value is then counted against the debt. This is the established position of the madhhab.

However, the author of al-Furūʿ mentioned that there is a valid basis for holding that this should not be counted against the debt, because hospitality is customarily regarded as a gift—unless the lender deliberately intends otherwise. For example, if there are hotels and restaurants in the town, and the lender says, “Rather than incur the expense of a hotel, I will stay with the person to whom I have done a favor by lending money,” then, if he deliberately intends this, we may say that it is not permissible, because he has thereby obtained a benefit for himself.

Question: If the borrower has an occasion—such as a wedding feast, a feast upon the arrival of someone who has been absent, a circumcision feast, or something similar—and invites the lender, then the lender may accept his invitation, even according to the madhhab. The reason is that