to receive ready money in return for a larger sum to be paid later.
The bilateral form occurs between two parties. An example is when a loan is coupled with a sale, a lease, a musāqāt partnership, or a share-cropping agreement. It is authentically reported that the Prophet ﷺ said, “It is not lawful to combine a loan with a sale, nor to stipulate two conditions in one sale, nor to make a profit without bearing liability, nor to sell what you do not possess.” Tirmidhī declared it sound.1
Another case is when someone sells a commodity on deferred payment and then buys it back. In the Sunan of Abū Dāwūd the Prophet ﷺ said, “Whoever performs two sales in one shall receive the lower of the two prices, otherwise it is usury.”2
The trilateral form is when the two principals introduce a third person to disguise the usury: the usurer buys the commodity from the middleman, the lender then sells it to him on credit, after which the middleman returns it to the original owner for fewer dirhams, pocketing the difference.
Some of these arrangements are unanimously forbidden—such as whenever the usurious condition is expressly stipulated; whenever the item is resold before lawful possession or without the required conditions; or whenever a debt owed by an insolvent person is rolled over for an increase, for the insolvent must be granted respite and it is impermissible by consensus to impose any additional amount on him through a transaction or otherwise. Other cases have been disputed by certain scholars, yet the sound reports from the Prophet ﷺ, the Companions, and the Followers establish the prohibition of all of them.
Another reprehensible practice is intercepting merchandise before it reaches the marketplace. The Prophet ﷺ forbade this because it deceives the seller, who is unaware of the current price and thus sells below value. For this reason the Prophet ﷺ granted the seller the option to rescind the sale once he reaches the market. That the option is established when there is deceitful underpricing is beyond doubt; whether it is established even when underpricing is absent is a point of scholarly disagreement, and there are two reports from Aḥmad on the issue,