the value of the wheat.

He followed Ibn Abbās’s position on this. Mālik’s school permits accepting merchandise in place of food or merchandise owed. Those holding the first view cited the report in the Sunan that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“Whoever pays in advance for something must not divert it to something else.”

They said that this entails that one may not sell a debt arising from a salam contract, either to the debtor himself or to anyone else. The second view, however, is more sound. It is the view of Ibn Abbās, and no Companion is known to have disagreed with him. This is because a debt arising from salam is an established debt, so accepting a substitute for it is permissible, just as with the repayment of a loan or the price owed for a sale. Moreover, it is one of the two things exchanged in a sale, so accepting a substitute for it is permissible, just as it is for the other.

As for the hadith, its chain of transmission is questionable. Even if it is authentic, what it means is that one must not turn a debt arising from salam into an advance payment for something else. Hence his words:

“He must not divert it to something else.”

That is, he must not convert it into another advance-purchase transaction. This is impermissible because it entails making a profit on something for which one has not assumed liability. Likewise, when accepting a substitute for a sale price or the repayment of a loan, one must do so at its current value. Thus, it is reported in the Sunan from Ibn Umar that they asked the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace:

“We sell camels at al-Naqī for gold and receive silver, and we sell them for silver and receive gold.”

He replied:

“There is no harm, provided it is at the exchange rate on that day and you part with nothing remaining outstanding between you.”

Accepting a substitute at the current rate is therefore permissible, so that one does not profit from something for which one has not assumed liability.

If it is objected, “A debt arising from salam falls under that ruling, since selling what has not been received is prohibited,” the reply is: “The prohibition concerns specific items, not debts.”