for he derived them from Saīd ibn al-Musayyib, of whom it was said that he was the most learned of all people in matters of sale, just as it was said that Atā was the most learned of all people in the rites of pilgrimage, Ibrāhīm the most learned among them in prayer, and al-Hasan the one who most comprehensively combined all of these fields. Thus, as anyone who examines Ahmad’s legal responses will see, Ahmad agreed with each of the Successors in most of the field for which that Successor was considered preeminent. Accordingly, Ahmad agreed with Mālik in most matters. Both prohibited usury and treated it with the utmost severity, given what was explained above concerning the strictness of its prohibition and the enormity of its harm. They prohibited every device designed to circumvent it, even barring a means that led to it although it was not itself a stratagem. Although Mālik carried the blocking of means to [points on which Ahmad’s position did not differ from his], or to points that Ahmad did not himself affirm, Ahmad nonetheless agreed with him—with no contrary position reported from him—on prohibiting all such stratagems.

Legal stratagems fall into two general categories: either an unintended item is added to one of the two countervalues, or the contract is coupled with another contract that is not intended in itself.

The first is the “mudd of Ajwa dates” issue. Its governing principle is that a commodity governed by the rules of usury is sold for another of its own kind, while something of a different kind is added to both sides or to one of them. For example, the parties may intend to exchange silver for a greater amount of silver, or something similar, so another countervalue is added to the smaller amount of silver, such that one thousand dinars together with a handkerchief are sold for two thousand dinars.

Whenever the intended purpose is to exchange a commodity governed by the rules of usury for an unequal quantity of its own kind, the “mudd of Ajwa dates” transaction is prohibited without disagreement according to Mālik, Ahmad, and others. Only those Kufans who permitted legal stratagems would allow such a transaction, although the early Kufans prohibited it.

As for when both components are genuinely intended, as in exchanging one mudd of Ajwa dates and one dirham for one mudd of Ajwa dates