However, the correct view is that the ruling depends on its effective cause. If a person buys an item from someone early in the day and brings the price at the end of the day, people do not regard him as negligent, because this is customary practice.
The correct view, then, is that if he delays payment of the price in a manner that is deemed negligent, he is liable; otherwise, he is not.
The jurists’ reasoning, may Allah have mercy on them, indicates this as well. It is not always feasible for a person to have the dirhams in his pocket. He may be walking down the street, find the item he was appointed to purchase, and buy it; then, at the end of the day, he brings the price to its seller. This is common and well known.
His statement, “If he delays it without excuse and it perishes, he is liable,” means: if he delays it with the seller’s permission and it perishes, is it borne by the seller or by the principal?
The answer is that it is borne by the seller, because as soon as the purchase is made, the price becomes due to the seller. The seller may say to the agent, “You may give me the dirhams today, tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow; there is no problem.” If, during that time, the price is destroyed without any transgression or negligence on the agent’s part, then its liability rests with the seller, because the agent retained it only with the permission of the one entitled to it, namely the seller.
“If he appoints him to conduct an invalid sale, but he conducts a valid one; or appoints him to transact in every matter, great or small; or to purchase whatever he wishes; or to purchase a specified item for whatever price he wishes, without setting a price, the agency is invalid. ........”
His statement, “If he appoints him to conduct an invalid sale, but he conducts a valid one; or appoints him to transact in every matter, great or small; or to purchase whatever he wishes; or to purchase a specified item for whatever price he wishes, without setting a price, the agency is invalid,” includes four issues:
The first issue: if he appoints him to carry out an invalid sale, but he conducts a valid sale—for example, if he appoints him to sell a runaway camel—the appointment is invalid, because the sale