Is it permissible to enter into a Salam (forward contract) for a commodity that is prohibited for women to hold in a marital context, using another such commodity as the subject of the contract?
Chapter on Guaranteed Salaf (Advance Payment) for a Specified Term
Al-Mughni
Book of Sales
Primary text
It is not permissible to enter into a Salam contract where one prohibited commodity serves as the subject of the contract (*muslam fih*) and another prohibited commodity serves as the capital (*ra's al-mal*). This is because the prerequisites for a Salam contract require fungibility and deferment. Al-Khiraqi prohibited the exchange of commodities amongst themselves on a deferred basis, which implies that exchanging one for the other in a Salam contract is impermissible. Based on this view, the capital of the Salam cannot be anything other than specie (gold or silver) or currency. This position is attributed to Al-Qadi and appears to be the apparent view of Ahmad.
Supporting text
It is reported that Al-Sharif Abu Ja'far permitted Salam in dirhams and dinars, which is the Madhhab of Malik and Al-Shafi'i, based on the rationale that since currency can be established in the debt as *mahr* (dower), it can also be established as a subject of a Salam contract, similar to other commodities. They argue that since there is no prohibition of usury through excess or postponement between them, exchanging one for the other in Salam is valid, analogous to exchanging one commodity for another commodity. Furthermore, if one agrees to accept the specific commodity stipulated in the contract upon maturity, one must accept it according to one ruling, as the obligation is to deliver the item according to its description. A secondary view suggests acceptance is not obligatory because it leads to the price becoming the subject of the sale.