al-Qāsim, if he claims that both have perished and his statement is the only evidence. If, however, their loss is established by testimony, the loss of both would fall upon the seller: one was received in trust, so liability for it rests with the seller; (the other) was received subject to an option, so liability for it also rests with the seller, since its loss has been established by testimony. This is Ibn al-Qāsim’s position on this question. There is considerable disagreement concerning it, and it requires details and explanation that are beyond the scope of this discussion.

Section

Purchasing one garment from among several, with a right of selection and a binding commitment to purchase, is permissible only when they belong to the same category. If they belong to two different categories, this constitutes two sales in one sale. “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade two sales in one sale.” This means that the sale contract encompasses two objects of exchange, but the sale, though binding on both parties or one of them, can be completed only with respect to one of those objects. We have said “one of the two objects of exchange,” rather than “one of the two prices” or “one of the two items being priced,” to encompass both cases. There is no difference between the contract encompassing two alternative prices or two alternative items in the manner described, since the price is sold in exchange for the item just as the item is sold in exchange for the price.

Section

If a sale is contracted for one item at two alternative prices, for two alternative items at one price, or for two alternative items at two prices, there are two possibilities: (the first) that exchanging one alternative for the other is permissible; (the second) that it is not. Where exchanging one for the other is impermissible, such a sale is agreed to be impermissible when grounds for suspicion are evident. If, however, both alternatives are free of such suspicion, it is permissible. An example is where the two objects of exchange, other than food, differ in quantity, whether payment is immediate, their payment terms are the same, or their terms differ—as when the deferred amount, or the amount due at the later date, is smaller. There is no purpose anyone would seek to achieve by that. Examples include selling someone an item for one dinar payable immediately or two dinars payable immediately, or selling it for two dinars payable immediately or two dinars payable at a later date. Thus, although it is not