eleven for ten.” The calculation is then made accordingly. The itemized expenditure that leaves a tangible result is included in the cost, and profit is calculated on it. Expenditure that leaves no tangible result, but relates specifically to the goods and concerns work that the trader does not undertake himself, is included in the cost, but no profit is calculated on it. If it concerns work that the trader undertakes himself, or does not relate specifically to the goods, it is not included in the cost at all, nor is profit calculated on it—unless the seller stipulates, after itemizing and explaining all these expenses, that the buyer pay him a profit on them all. That is permissible.
Section
If, however, he says, “These goods cost me such-and-such, and I sell them at eleven for ten,” or something similar, without explaining these expenses, the contract is invalid. The buyer does not know how much of the capital cost qualifies for profit, or how much has been added in expenses that are included in the cost but do not qualify for profit, or in expenses that are neither included in the cost nor qualify for profit. This constitutes clear uncertainty about the price. Yet the Book of Ibn al-Mawwāz states that the calculation in this case follows the distinctions we have mentioned: what is included in the cost and what is not, and what qualifies for profit and what does not. This is also the apparent meaning of Sahnūn’s statement in his legal cases recorded there. This is far-fetched; the correct view is what we stated above.
Section
As for the second form of sale at a disclosed cost and profit, namely selling at a specified profit on the total price: if he also specifies the purchase price and what he spent on the goods, whether on work that leaves a tangible result or on work that does not, and whether those expenses are included in the cost or not, the sale is valid. Expenses that are not included in the cost at all, such as his personal expenses, the rent of his house, and similar items, are deducted from what the buyer owes—unless the two parties stipulate that these be included, in which case that is permissible. The same applies if he says, “These goods cost me such-and-such,” by analogy with what is stated in the Book of Muhammad and the apparent meaning of Sahnūn’s statement in his legal cases. Analogical reasoning, however, requires that the contract be deemed invalid in this case, as we have explained.
Section
For work that leaves a tangible result, such as dyeing, beating cloth, and twisting, he must also explain the expenses, saying, “I purchased the goods for such-and-such and dyed them for such-and-such.” This applies to both forms of sale, whether he sells at a specified profit on