that he was in a settled area, he is not to be believed with regard to the animal’s alleged death alone, for such a thing would not escape his neighbours and others. As for what he claims about the slave’s flight, the mount’s escape, or its theft, his word is accepted—whether at home or on a journey—provided he swears an oath; but if his lie is later exposed, he must make good the loss.
If a person borrows a garment on condition that he will wear it once but ends up wearing it more than that, one report from Mālik says he must, for the excess period, pay the amount by which the garment’s value has been reduced during the additional days of use. Another report from him states that he must instead pay the hire of the garment for those extra days. This second view is the sounder one, and it is the position I adopt, because any depreciation in the garment is uncertain and cannot be precisely determined—he might wear it for several days without it losing any value at all.
As for jewellery that is lost while in the borrower’s hands: if it is gold, the lender is compensated for its value—reckoned as a fashioned piece—in silver dirhams; if it is silver, he is compensated for its value—also reckoned as a fashioned piece—in gold dinars, paid on the spot. If it is a gold piece set with gems such that one-third of its value lies in the gold and two-thirds in the stones, the lender is to receive its value—again reckoned as a fashioned piece—in whatever form of gold he chooses, immediately and without deferment, so that the transaction does not become a deferred exchange (nasiʾa) in currency dealings.
There is no harm in his taking, in all these cases, the value owed to him in the form of goods or food. Whenever he substitutes something other than the lost item itself, he must take possession of it straightaway and not defer the exchange, lest the deal become debt for debt.
What I prefer is that no liability be imposed, and that an article composed of gold and gems not be sold for any amount of silver. Liability should be settled only with merchandise (ʿurūḍ) or with a different species of the same class, paid in cash, as in currency exchange.
Whoever lends an article for a fixed term has, according to Mālik and his companions, no right to reclaim it from the borrower before that term expires. And whoever lends—