Its example is a man who owes another one hundred dirhams, payable after one year. During that year, the creditor comes to the debtor and says, “Give me fifty of it, and I will release you from the remainder.” The author says, “This is not valid,” because it resembles usury: he has taken fifty in exchange for one hundred.

The correct view is that it is permissible. If a person takes part of a deferred debt and waives the rest, this is valid, because the sunnah establishes it in the account of the expulsion of Banū al-Naḍīr from Medina, when the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Reduce and take payment early” (1)—that is, waive part of the debt and take what is deferred in advance. Moreover, it benefits both parties: the creditor benefits by receiving payment sooner, while the debtor benefits from the waiver. It is well known that the Sacred Law does not prohibit a transaction that benefits both parties and involves neither uncertainty nor ambiguity. Furthermore, the element of usury here is very remote, for when the debtor incurred the debt, it never crossed his mind that he would repay a lesser amount early. Thus, the prohibited element of usury is very remote indeed. This was the view chosen by our Shaykh, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Saʿdī, may Allah have mercy on him.

However, if either party compels the other to enter into this arrangement, it is not valid. That is, if the debtor says to the creditor, “Here is half of your due; I will pay it to you now, and waive the remainder for me,” and he replies, “No, I want my due in full when it falls due,” then he cannot be compelled.

If he gives him his due in full immediately, in settlement of a deferred debt, can the creditor be compelled to accept it or not?