that the owner of the goods can see to himself—such as the broker’s commission, folding the cloth, or tying it into bundles.
Abū Ḥanīfah maintained that every expense incurred on the commodity is simply added to its purchase price.
Abū Thawr held that a murābaḥah sale is permissible only on the very price for which the seller bought the goods, unless he itemises each additional cost; and should he fail to do so, the contract must, in Abū Thawr’s view, be annulled, for it is a form of lying. The seller is telling the buyer, “The price of my goods is such-and-such,” when it is not; this amounts to deception.
Concerning the sort of capital price that may lawfully be disclosed, Mālik and al-Layth ruled that if a person purchased merchandise with dinars when the exchange rate was known, then sold it for dirhams after the rate had risen, he may not, on the day of sale, quote the dinars with which he purchased it; that would be tantamount to lying and treachery. The same applies when the purchase was for dirhams and the sale is for dinars and the rate has changed in the meantime.
Mālik’s companions disagreed about someone who bought goods by bartering other goods: may he resell them by murābaḥah or not? If we say it is allowed, is it on the basis of the barter items’ monetary value or on the items themselves?
Ibn al-Qāsim said that he may sell on the basis of the very goods he paid in barter and not on their assessed value.
Ashhab replied that anyone who bought with barter goods may not sell by murābaḥah at all, because he would then be demanding from the buyer goods of the same kind and description, which the buyer will usually not possess; this would be akin to selling what one does not own.
Mālik and Abū Ḥanīfah also differed about a man who bought merchandise with dinars but actually delivered, in place of the dinars, either other goods or dirhams: may he resell it by murābaḥah without stating what he in fact paid, or not?
Mālik ruled that it is impermissible unless he discloses exactly what he tendered.
Abū Ḥanīfah allowed him to sell it by murābaḥah on the basis of the dinars for which the goods were purchased, disregarding the merchandise or dirhams that he handed over.
Mālik further said that if a man bought goods on credit and then sold them by murābaḥah, the sale is invalid unless he informs the buyer of the deferment.
Al-Shāfiʿī held that if the sale is concluded nonetheless, the buyer is entitled to the same period of deferment.
Abū Thawr regarded the undisclosed deferment as a defect giving the buyer the right to rescind. There are many other subsidiary questions on this issue within the school, but they lie beyond the scope of our present discussion.