possessing money, they take it from him or impose a tax upon him. I do not want that.” We say: this entails harm, for selling it for cash harms the principal.

In summary: if he says, “Sell it for such-and-such a price on deferred payment,” but the agent sells it for immediate payment, the sale is valid and the principal is required to accept the price—unless this entails harm. In that case, the sale is invalid, and the principal is not required to accept the price. We have given two examples of such harm.

The second issue is: “Buy it for such-and-such a price with immediate payment,” but he buys it on deferred payment. For example, he says: “So-and-so, here are forty dirhams—the dirham being a silver currency—buy me a watch for forty dirhams,” specifying the watch. The agent then goes and buys a watch for forty dirhams, payable after one year, returns the forty dirhams to the principal, and says, “Praise be to Allah, you have acquired a watch for forty dirhams on deferred payment; make use of your dirhams now, and when the year comes, pay what is due.” This is valid, provided that it entails no harm.

It is better for people to receive payment sooner. Even if someone owes you a deferred debt, and you say: “So-and-so, you owe me ten thousand, payable in one year, but eight thousand in cash will suffice; so give me eight thousand”—this is permissible, even though he has taken eight in exchange for ten. Everyone prefers earlier payment, unless it entails harm.

Such harm would be where this principal says: “If the money comes into my possession, I am a man with a careless hand that cannot hold on to dirhams. I might hold a feast for my friends today with forty riyals and squander it.” This harms him, and it is a valid purpose. Many people, when they have dirhams in hand, waste them.