a. Uncertainty with Respect to the Delivery Date
Uncertaintywithrespecttothedeliverydateprimarilyaffectstransactionslike thesalamcontractandcreditsales,whichhavedelayedeitherthedeliveryofthegoodof
thecontractorthepaymentofthecontract.Aswithmanyofthecausesofgharar
consideredascontractterms,itseemscommonsensicalthatacreditorwillwanttoknow
147Forsystematicdiscussionsofthedistinctionbetweenthesetwotypesofsales,see Bājī,Muntaqā,vol.6,p.284,Ibn Ḥazm,Muḥallā,vol,8,pp.336-337,¶1411;IbnRushd,
whenhewillbepaidortakedeliveryofhisgood.148Nevertheless,tostatethatthe
deliverydateisundefined(majhūl)ordefined(ma‘lūm)impliesanumberofanterior systemsofknowledgeabouthowtospecifythedeliverydate,whichcalendarsystemto employ,andhowthelengthoftimeaffectsgharar.Inotherwords,anumberofsystems
of knowledgedefinethisformofuncertainty.Notwithstandingthefactthattheseissues ofthedeliverydateareinterrelated,Iwillexamineeachoneseparately.
i. Date Selection
Althoughjuristsprohibituncertaintywithrespecttothedeliverydate,theydiffer
regardingthedefinitionsofuncertaintyandcertaintyinthiscontext.Allofthem examineeventsuponwhichthedeliverydatemaybecontingent.Forexample,Bājī permitsthestipulationofdeliveryonthedistributionofthe‘aṭā’,orpaydayofsoldiers, sincethedateisknownanddeliveryisdueonthatdateregardlessofwhetherthe governmentpaysthesoldiersornot.Healsopermitsstipulatingthedeliveryuponthe returnofapilgrimfromḥajjortheharvestofaspecificcrop.Asfortheharvest,Ibn Rushdstatesthatthishasaminimalamountofghararsincethedateoftheharvestofa
specifictypeofcropvariessolittlefromyeartoyear.149 Inotherwords,thehistorical occurrencesofpastharvestsenableonetoforecastitsprobablefutureoccurrenceswith enoughcertainty.
148 AlthoughSarakhsī doesnotappeartoexplicitlyequatethisformofjahlwithgharar, herequiresthecounterpartiesofsalamtospecifyadeliverydate.See,Sarakhsī,Mabsūṭ,vol. 12:4,pp.124-125.
On the other hand, Shīrāzī and Ibn Ḥazm grant no role to probability in these cases. According to Shīrāzī, the date is uncertain if the counterparties stipulate it with referenceto thepayday ofsoldiersor returnof aparticularpilgrim.150Ibn Ḥazmargues that,“The harvest may be afew days earlier than expected ifthere was a lot ofrain or later if was dry. As for the ‘aṭā’, that may be cancelled altogether.”151 Furthermore, Shīrāzī andIbn Ḥazminterpret contractsliterally soas torequire theactual paymentof the soldiers before the delivery of the good of the contract. If the payment date comes butthegovernmentdefaultsonpayingthesoldiers, Shīrāzī andIbn Ḥazmarguethatthe seller does not have to deliver the good since the stipulation makes the delivery contingentontheactualpaymentofthesoldiers.Althoughitisunsurprisingthata Ẓāhirī jurist wouldreject inductivereasoning inissues oflaw, it is somewhatsurprising thata Shāfi‘ī jurist, supposedly the great champions of analogy and probabilistic reasoning thatnecessarilyentailsnotionsofcontingency,wouldtakethesameposition.
Asfordeliveryonafixeddate,Bājī permitsthecounterpartiestopicka particulardayinthemonth,otherwiseiftheyspecifyonlythemonththedeliveryis assumedtobedueonthefirstdayofthemonth.152IbnQudāmastatesthatonemay eitherspecifyaparticulardayofthemonth,somepartofthemonthsuchasthe beginning,middle,orend,orcommonIslamicholidays.153Finally,Ibn Ḥazmand
150Shīrāzī,Muhadhdhab,vol.3,pp.45-46.
151Ibn Ḥazm,Muḥallā,vol,8,pp.444-445,¶.1464. 152Bājī,Muntaqā,vol.6,p.306.
Shīrāzī arguethatthecounterpartiesmustspecifytheexacthourofaparticularday.154
Shīrāzī arguesthatifoneweretostipulatethedeliveryonsomeday,month,oryear therewouldbenoreasontoassumethespecificmomentthatdeliveryisduesinceeach momentcouldbetheintendedmomentofdelivery.155Thisambiguitycreatesalevelof
uncertaintythatIbn ḤazmandShīrāzī deemunacceptable.
ii. Calendar Systems
OnlyIbnQudāma,Ibn Ḥazm,andShīrāzī examinetheroleofthecalendar systememployedindelineatingthecertaintyanduncertaintyofthedeliverydate.Both IbnQudāmaandIbn ḤazmagreethatMuslimsshouldemploytheIslamiclunar
calendar.Asfortheuseofnon-Islamiccalendars,IbnQudāmadividestheseintotwo types.Thefirstemploysasolarcalendarornon-Islamicholidays,whichoccuronthe samedayseachyear. Ḥanbalī juristslikeal-Khiraqī andIbnAbī Mūsā forbidtheuseof thesecalendarstostipulateadeliverydatesincetheyarenotlunarmonthsand “itislike onewhoentersintoasalamcontractfordeliveryonPalmSundayorPassover,whichis
illicitbecausemanyMuslimsdonotknowwhentheseoccur.”Infact,PalmSundayand Passoverarenotcelebratedonthesamedayofthesolaryear.Ontheotherhand,Shīrāzī permitstheuseofthesecalendarsandholidayssince,heclaims,theyarewell-known amongMuslims.156
154Ibn Ḥazm,Muḥallā,vol,8,p.445,¶.1464. 155Shīrāzī,Muhadhdhab,vol.3,pp.171,173. 156IbnQudāma,Mughnī,vol.4,pp220-221,¶.3184.
Asforthesecondcategory,non-Islamicholidaysthatdonotoccuronafixedday, butarecontingentonaneventlikeamoonsightingsuchaswithPassoverorPalm
Sunday,IbnQudāmastatesthat,
Muslimsdonotknowwhentheyoccuranditisimpermissibleto follownon-Muslimswhoseclaimsarerejectedsincetheymake theholidaysearlierorlateronthebasisoftheirownreckoning, whichMuslimcannotknow.157
Hethenclaimsthatbothcontractingpartiesmustunderstandthedateandsystemusedto assignthedeliverydate.158AlthoughhedoesnotexplainwhyaMuslimcouldnotknow thesestates,Ibn Ḥazmopenlystatesthathedistrustsnon-MuslimstoinformMuslims accuratelyabouttheoccurrenceoftheseholidays.159Althoughperhapsdistastefulby contemporarystandards,theviewsofIbn ḤazmandIbnQudāmareflectanteriorviews abouttherelationsbetweenMuslimsandnon-Muslims,whichstructurehowthesejurists definecertaintyanduncertaintyinregardtothespecificationofthedeliverydate.
iii. Length of the Period
OnlyBājī andShīrāzī examineuncertaintyintermsofthedeliverydateinregard tothelengthoftimeuntilthegoodisdelivered.Theydiscussthisissueintheirtreatments ofthesalamcontractinwhichonepartypaysatthetimeofenteringintothecontractand
takesdeliveryatalaterdate.AccordingtoBājī,Ibnal-Qāsimfoundadeliverytwenty
157IbnQudāma,Mughnī,vol.4,p221,¶.3184.Li-annaal-muslimīnlā ya‘rifūnahuwa-
lā yujāztaqlīdahlal-dhimmafīhili-annaqawlahumghayrmaqbūḍ wa-li-annahum yuqaddimūnahuwa-yu’akhkhirūnahu‘alā ḥisāblahumlā ya‘rifuhual-muslmūn.
158IbnQudāma,Mughnī,vol.4,p221,¶.3184.
yearslaterreprehensible(makrūh),butheinvalidatedonlytransactionsthathaddelivery datesforeightyorninetyyearslater.Suchadistantdeliverydatepresentsuncertaintyin regardstowhetherthecounterpartieswillbealive.160Ontheotherhand,Shīrāzī permitsa
salamcontractinwhichdeliveryoccursonthesamedayofconcludingthecontractsince
ithaslessghararthanlongerdatedcontracts.161
Inadditiontodiscussionsaboutthelengthofdelayinthedeliverydate,Sarakhsī andShīrāzī alsodiscusshowthelengthoftimetotheexpirationofanoption(khiyār)
affectsthelevelofgharar.Shīrāzī prohibitsthebuyerfromhavinganoptiontocancela
salemorethanthreedaysafterthecompletionofthecontractduetoexcessivegharar.He
baseshisopiniononaḥadīth,whichheinterpretstobearontheissueofgharar,that permitsanoptionforatmostthreedays.Hereasonsafortiorithatifthreedaysis
permissiblethanfewerdaysshouldbeevenmoresoduetolessgharar.162
Althoughtheeponymofthe Ḥanafī schoolandhisstudentsknewthisḥadīth,they tookdifferentstancesonthemaximumlengthofsuchanoption.Abū Ḥanīfapermitsa maximumlengthofthreedayswhereashisstudentspermitanoptionforanylengthof timeaslongastheperiodoftheoption’slifeisstipulatedinthecontract.Onthebasisof
qiyās,somejuristsprohibitanysuchoptiononthegroundsthatispossessesgharar. Sarakhsī,however,rejectsthisstringentviewduetotheaforementionedḥadīththat
160Bājī,Muntaqā,vol.6,p.401.
161Shīrāzī,Muhadhdhab,vol.3,pp.162-163.Interestingly,Sarakhsī rejectstheclaimthat asalamcontractthatisdueimmediatelyhaslessgharar,sincehearguesthatthesellerhasless timetoprocurethegood.Sarakhsī,Mabsūṭ,vol.12:4,p.126.
162Shīrāzī,Muhadhdhab,vol.3,pp.13-14.Adiscussionoftherulesregulatingoptionsin thedifferentschoolsoflawisoutsideofthescopeofthisstudy.
permitsanoptionofthreedays.Nevertheless,hestatesthatthisḥadīthdoesnotjustifya longerperiodsince,“thepermissibilityofthecontractwithalittlebitofgharardoes
indicatethepermissibilitywithrespecttoalotofgharar.”163
iv. Summary of the Discussions of Uncertaintywith Respect the Delivery Date
Inthissection,Iexaminedtheepistemicsystemsthatjuristsemploytodefinethe uncertaintyassociatedwiththedeliverydate.Althoughthesejuristsagreethatuncertainty withrespecttothedeliverydatecaninvalidatecertaintransactions,theydisagreeabout thestandardsusedtodefinethisuncertainty.Bājī andIbnRushdhaveaminimalist standardofwhatconstitutescertainty;whereasIbn ḤazmandShīrāzī generallyhavea stricterone.However,thetwosetsofjuristsemploydifferentformsofreasoningand legalmechanismsinordertojustifytheirpositions.Inthecaseofdesignatingtheharvest asthedeliverydate,IbnRushdandBājī usetheprobabilityoftheoccurrenceofeventsto definecertainty.164Inaddition,IbnRushdandBājī allowthedateofthepaydaytobe usedtospecifythedeliverydate.Ibn ḤazmandShīrāzī ontheotherhand,interpretthis stipulationliterallyasrequiringthepaymentofthesoldiersinordertorequirethe deliveryofthegood.Ultimatelythedefinitionofuncertaintyanditscontrary,certainty, arerelatedtoanteriordiscursivesystemsofdating,modesofreasoning,and
163Sarakhsī,Mabsūṭ,vol.13:5,pp.17,41.
164 Ibn Ḥazm’srejectionofprobabilityhereisinkeepingwithwhatZysowrefersasthe materialistpositionofthe Ẓāhirīswhorejectedprobabilisticknowledge(ẓann).Nevertheless,he notesthatthedefinitionofprobabilisticknowledgechangedoverthecenturiesforthem.See, Zysow,Economy,pp.3-4.
hermeneutics.Thus,thedefinitionofthisformofuncertaintydependsonanumberof formsofknowledgetodelineateitscontours.
Inaddition,thediscussionsofIbnQudāmaandIbn Ḥazmacknowledge explicitlytheroleofconventioninthedefinitionofthecontoursofuncertaintyand certainty.Itisthecounterparties’mutualknowledgethatleadstocertaintyand
consequentlytothedefinitionofuncertainty.Designatingadeliverydateisadiscursive actthatrequiresasharedpracticeamongparticipants.
b.Uncertaintywith Respect to the Description of the Good
Allofourjuristsagreethatuncertaintywithrespecttothequalityandquantity causesgharar.165Thequantityandqualityofagoodareessentialforvaluingandmore broadlyrepresentingagoodintheeyesofjurists. AccordingtoIbn Ḥazm,alegally bindingcontractrequiresthemutualconsent(al-tarāḍī)ofbothcounterparties,but consentcannotoccurwheneitheroneorbothcounterpartiesareuncertain.166 Below,I examinetheformsofknowledgethatjuristsemploytodefinethisformofuncertainty. Liketheepistemicsystemsemployedtodefinethedeliverydate,thesesystemsare anteriortobeingemployedtodiscussionsofghararsuchthatknowledgeenablesthe
definitionofthisformuncertainty.
165Infact,thereareseveraltransactionswherejuristsallowanexchangealthoughoneof thecountervaluesisuncertaintobothcounterparties.Wewillexaminetheexceptionstothis requirementinmoredetailinthefollowingchapter.
i. Uncertainty of the Quality
Mostjuristsemploythewordṣifa,orqualitativegrade(henceforthsimply quality),todiscusstheinformationaboutagoodthatcounterpartiesrequire.167Theterm
“quality”impliesahighresolutionofdescriptiveknowledgeaboutagood.Infact,
Shīrāzī’sandSarakhsī’suseoftheterms‘ayn,orspecificandtangibleproperty,andjins,
orgenus,respectivelysuggesttheneedforthisanteriordescriptiveinformation.168These requirementsandvaryingtechnicalvocabularyraisethefollowinginterconnected
questions:1)whyisthisformofuncertaintysoimportant,2)howdoesoneacquire certaintywithrespecttothequalityofagood,and3)howdoesonedescribeagoodwith sufficientprecision?
Theanswertothefirstquestionisratherstraightforward.Anaccuratedescription ofthequalityofthegoodallowsonetovalueit.Accordingtojurists,thedescriptionof thequalitymustbeaccurateenoughtoallowthecounterpartiestodifferentiatebetween thepricesofsimilargoods.169Thevalueofanddescriptionofagoodarethusnot
absoluteorintrinsiccharacteristicsofit,butrathertheyarerelational.Forexample,Bājī notesthataslightincreaseinthefatcontentofmeatcandoubleitsprice.170
167Bājī,Muntaqā,vol.6,pp.36,144,185,216,399,401,405-406,543;Ibn Ḥazm,
Muḥallā,vol.8,p.389,¶.1421;p.407,¶.1434;p.458¶.1471;IbnQudāma,Mughnī,vol.4,p. 157,¶.3061;IbnRushd,Bidāya,v.3,pp.1198,1206,1215.
168Shīrāzī,Muhadhdhab,vol.3,pp.34;Sarakhsī,Mabsūṭ,vol.12:4,p.163.
169Bājī,Muntaqā,vol.6,pp296-297;IbnQudāma,Mughnī,vol.4,p.207,¶.3158; Sarakhsī,Mabsūṭ,vol.12:4,p.136;Shīrāzī,Muhadhdhab,vol.3,p.170.
Asfortheacquisitionofcertaintywithrespecttothequalityofagood,one methodisthevisualinspectionofitwhenthecounterpartiesnegotiatethecontract. However,thismethodisproblematicsincefraudmaysubvertthevalueofaninspection. Furthermore,theMālikīsarguethatamorecomplexgoodlikeahouserequiresa
substantialamountoftimetoanalyze.Theacquisitionofcertaintythroughsightisthus notcertainorinstantaneousinthecontextofcommerciallaw,contrarytotheclaimsof worksofuṣūlal-fiqhandkalām,inwhichsensorydataleadstonecessaryandimmediate certainty.171
Averbaldescriptionofthegoodisanothermethodtoobtaincertaintywith respecttothequalityofagood.172Intheintroductiontothischapter,Inotedthatin worksofuṣūlal-fiqhandkalām,authorsgenerallyclaimthatlanguagemapsperfectly ontothoughtandexistence.173Therelationbetweenlanguage,thought,andreferentis, however,morecomplexincommerciallawaswewillseebelowinmoredetail. AlthoughBājī claimsthatavisualinspectionisabettermethodtoobtaincertaintywith respecttothegood,theotherjuristssuggesttheequivalencebetweenthoughtand
171Forexamplesofthisclaim,seeBājī,Iḥkām,pp.170-171;Ibn‘Aqīl,Wāḍiḥ,pp.8-9; IbnQudāma,Rawḍat,pp.13-14;Shīrāzī,Sharḥ,vol.1,pp.148-149.Infact,authorsofthese genresoftenrecognizethatthesensescanbedeceived.Forexample,althoughashadowappears tobemotionless,acarefulstudyofitoverasufficientlylongperiodoftimerevealsthatitis constantlymoving.SeeAbū ḤāmidMuḥammadb.Muḥammadal-Ghazālī,Al-Munqidhminal- dalāl(Beirut:CommssionInternationalepourlaTraductiondesChefs-d’Oeuvre,1959),pp.12-
13.‘Aḍudal-Dīn‘Abdal-Raḥmānb.Aḥmadal-Ījī,Kitābal-Mawāqif,ed.‘Abdal-Rahmān ‘Umayra,3vols.(Beirut:Dāral-Jīl,1997),vol.1,pp.83-91.
172Bājī,Muntaqā,vol.6,pp.285,301,364;Ibn Ḥazm,Muḥallā,vol,8,p.343,¶.1413;