As for the ʿīna sale, it is nothing but a stratagem for exchanging dirhams for a greater amount of dirhams on deferment, with a lawful commodity inserted between the two transactions. It therefore also falls under the heading of “selling what you do not own,” which the Messenger of Allah ﷺ prohibited. Should the intermediary commodity be food, the deal is further blemished by the sale of food before possession is taken.

An illustration: a man approaches someone and asks him to sell him a certain item on credit, fully aware that the would-be seller does not yet possess it, and says, “Buy it from its owner for ten, and I will purchase it from you for twelve—or fifteen—payable on such-and-such a date.” This is impermissible for the reasons already given.

Mālik’s associates differed over whether a contract of this sort must be revoked. One group ruled that it is to be annulled so long as the goods have not perished, and that if they are lost the matter is settled by paying their value, following the rules for invalid sales; we shall devote a special chapter to this, Allah willing. The majority, however, held that the sale is not to be rescinded.

The distilled position of the school is this: if someone says, “Buy such-and-such an item for ten, and it is mine for twelve on deferred payment,” the contract is canceled provided the goods are still intact. If they have already passed out of existence and he bought them on that basis, the twelve payable at the agreed date becomes binding, for the agent who was instructed is regarded as having guaranteed the commodity. Nonetheless, it is commendable for him to show pious restraint and accept only what is paid immediately in cash.