The first is that he receives the customary profit share in a comparable investment partnership, in all cases without distinction. This is the position of Ibn al-Mājishūn, which he also narrated from Mālik, and likewise the position of Ashhab.
The second is that he receives the customary remuneration for comparable work, likewise in all cases without distinction. This is the position of ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Abī Salama, and the view adopted by al-Shāfiʿī and Abū Hanīfa.
The third is that he receives the customary profit share in a comparable investment partnership, provided that it does not exceed the share of the profit stipulated for him; he is awarded no more than that. Thus, if the owner of the capital stipulated the condition in the partnership, the working partner receives whichever is less: the customary profit share or the share stipulated for him. Conversely, if the working partner stipulated the condition upon the owner of the capital, his customary profit share must not fall below the share stipulated for him; he receives whichever is greater. This position accords with what Ibn al-Mawwāz related from Mālik—may Allah have mercy on him—concerning an investment partnership in which the capital is guaranteed: the working partner receives whichever is less, the customary profit share or the share of the profit stipulated for him.
The fourth is that he receives the customary profit share in a comparable investment partnership whenever either partner stipulates for himself a benefit that is integral to the invested funds, neither external to them nor separate from them, and not exclusively for the party stipulating it. He receives the customary remuneration for comparable work whenever either partner stipulates for himself a benefit external to the invested funds and exclusively his own, and whenever their agreement involves contractual uncertainty or something unlawful that takes it outside the established rules of a valid investment partnership. This is the position of Ibn al-Qāsim, which he also narrated from Mālik, and the position of Mutarrif, Ibn Nāfiʿ, Ibn ʿAbd al-Hakam, and Asbagh. It was also the position preferred by Ibn Habīb.
In our studies with Shaykh Abū Jaʿfar ibn Rizq—may Allah have mercy on him—the accepted interpretation was that Ibn al-Qāsim’s position in the Mudawwana entails awarding the working partner the customary remuneration for comparable work in every invalid investment partnership, except in seven cases: an investment partnership whose capital consists of merchandise; one in which the capital is guaranteed; one concluded for a fixed term; one whose terms are left unspecified; one in which the owner says to the working partner, “Work with the funds on condition that you have a share in them”; one in which the two partners disagree, each makes an implausible claim, and both swear to their respective claims; and one in which the owner entrusts him with the funds on condition that he buy only on credit, but he buys for cash, or on condition that he buy only a particular commodity which is unavailable, but he buys something other than what he was instructed to buy. On this interpretation, this constitutes a fifth position on the question. The correct view is