Was the price specified and agreed to?

Some hadiths clearly mention a specific agreed price, while others do not mention it or mention different prices.

• Sahih Muslim 715m: Yes – “Sell it to me for an ‘uqiya… So I sold it to him for an ‘uqiya.”
• Sahih Muslim 715o: No clear price mentioned at the time of sale.
• Sahih Muslim 715r: Yes – “I sold it for five ‘uqiyas.”
• Sahih Muslim 716a: Yes – “Bought a camel from me for two ‘uqiyas and a dirham or two.”
• Sahih Muslim 716b: No specific amount is mentioned – only “stipulated price.”
• Sahih Muslim 716c: Yes – “I have taken your camel for four dinars.”

Did Jabir stipulate the right to ride the camel back, or did the Prophet offer it?

Some narrations explicitly show Jabir making the stipulation, while others are silent or unclear.

• Sahih Muslim 715m: Jabir says – “but made the stipulation that I should be allowed to ride back.”
• Sahih Muslim 715o: Jabir – “on the condition that (I would be permitted) to ride it.”
• Sahih Muslim 715r: Jabir – “On the condition that I may use it as a ride.”
• Sahih Muslim 715p: The Prophet says – “you reach Medina on it” – no stipulation from Jabir mentioned.

How much did the Prophet pay? Did he pay any extra?

Some hadiths mention extra payment, others are silent or vague.

• Sahih Muslim 715m: Paid price in cash and gave back the camel – implied extra.
• Sahih Muslim 715r: Paid agreed price and added an extra ‘uqiya.
• Sahih Muslim 715p: Bilal gave “an ‘uqiya of gold and made an addition of a qirat.”
• Sahih Muslim 716a: Paid with “excess payment.”
• Sahih Muslim 715o and 715s: No mention of extra payment.

Reconciliation

Was the price specified and agreed to?

An-Nawawi quotes several narrations: “So I sold it to him for a uqiyyah. In another narration: for five awaq and he added a uqiyyah. In another: for two uqiyyahs and a dirham or two. In another: for four dinars. Al-Bukhari also mentioned differences: 800 dirhams, twenty dinars, and in one narration: I think it was four awaq.”

Then An-Nawawi explains: “The reason for these differences is that they narrated by meaning, and that is allowed, and what is meant is a uqiyyah of gold, as is made clear in the narration of Salim ibn Abi al-Jaʿd from Jabir. That explains those narrations that only say ‘a uqiyyah’ without specifying. As for the narration with five awaq, it means five silver uqiyyahs, which were equal in value to a gold uqiyyah at that time.”

So, he affirms that a price was specified and agreed upon, and he harmonises the differences by showing that some narrations refer to the agreed price (a gold uqiyyah), and others refer to what was actually paid—including added generosity.

Did Jabir stipulate the right to ride the camel back, or did the Prophet offer it?

An-Nawawi explains: “His statement: ‘And I stipulated for myself its load’ – ḥamlanih is with a ḍamma on the ḥāʾ, meaning: to ride it while it carries me.”

He also brings Imam Malik saying: This is allowed if the distance to be ridden is short, and he interpreted the hadith based on this. Al-Shafi‘i, Abu Hanifah, and others said: It is not allowed, whether the distance is short or long, and that the sale does not become valid.”

Then he explains their response to the hadith: “They said: Perhaps the condition was not part of the contract itself, and what causes harm is when the condition is within the contract. Perhaps the condition came earlier, so it had no effect. Then the Prophet simply let him ride it out of generosity.”

How much did the Prophet pay? Did he pay any extra?

After quoting the variant amounts, An Nawawi says: “Reporting a uqiyyah of gold reflects what the sale was contracted on, and reporting silver uqiyyahs reflects what was actually paid.”

Then he clarifies that these additions do not contradict the agreement but show extra generosity: “It is also possible that all this came as additions after the original sale, as Jabir said: ‘He kept increasing it for me.’”

Translation: This contains the hadith of Jabir, which is a well-known narration. It was used as evidence by Ahmad and those who agreed with him for the permissibility of selling a riding animal while the seller stipulates for himself the right to ride it. Malik said this is allowed if the distance to be ridden is short, and he interpreted this hadith in light of that. Al-Shafi‘i, Abu Hanifah, and others said it is not permitted—whether the distance is short or long—and that the sale does not become valid. They used as proof the previous hadith that forbids bayʿ al-thunyā (a sale with a withheld portion) and another hadith forbidding sale with a condition.

They responded to the hadith of Jabir by saying it was a specific incident (qadiyyah ʿayniyyah) open to various possibilities. They said: perhaps the Prophet ﷺ did not intend a real sale, but rather wanted to give him the camel as a gift. Or perhaps the condition was not part of the contract itself, and what causes harm is when the condition is within the contract. Perhaps the condition came earlier, so it had no effect, and then the Prophet ﷺ rode it simply out of generosity.

His statement ﷺ: “Sell it to me for a wuqiyyah”—This is how it appears in the manuscripts: bi-wuqiyyah, which is a correct form already discussed multiple times. It is also said ūqiyyah, which is more widely known. This hadith shows that there is no harm in asking the owner to sell an item even if he has not offered it for sale.

His statement: “And I stipulated for myself its load”—ḥamlānih is with a ḍamma on the ḥāʾ, meaning “to ride it while it carries me.”

His statement ﷺ: “Did I not see you haggling with me?”—The scholars of language said: al-mākasah is bargaining or trying to reduce the price. Its root meaning is deduction. From it comes muks al-ẓālim, which refers to what an oppressor unjustly deducts or takes from people’s wealth.

His statement: “So I sold it to him for a wuqiyyah”—and in one narration: for five awāq and he added to me one wuqiyyah; and in another: for two ūqiyyahs and a dirham or two; and in another: for a wuqiyyah of gold; and in yet another: for four dinars. Al-Bukhari also mentioned that the narrations differed, with one version saying eight hundred dirhams, another twenty dinars, and another: I think it was four awāq. Al-Bukhari said: al-Shaʿbi’s version of a wuqiyyah is the most common.

Qadi ʿIyad said that Abu Jaʿfar al-Dawudi stated: the measure of a wuqiyyah of gold is known, and a wuqiyyah of silver is forty dirhams. He said: the reason for the difference in these narrations is that the companions narrated based on meaning—and that is permissible. The intended meaning is a wuqiyyah of gold, as explained in the narration of Salim ibn Abi al-Jaʿd from Jabir. That narration clarifies the reports that merely say wuqiyyah without specifying. As for the report of five awāq, the intent is five wuqiyyahs of silver, which would be equivalent in value to one wuqiyyah of gold at that time. So, reporting a wuqiyyah of gold reflects what the sale was contracted on, and reporting silver wuqiyyahs reflects what was actually paid. This would not change the legal ruling. It is also possible that all this came as additions after the original sale, as Jabir said: He kept increasing it for me.

As for the narration of four dinars, it is consistent, because it is possible that a wuqiyyah of gold at that time weighed four dinars. As for the narration of two ūqiyyahs, one could have been the sale price and the other an addition, as he said: He added a wuqiyyah to me. As for the wording a dirham or two, it aligns with the wording: He added a qīrāṭ for me. As for the narration of twenty dinars, it may refer to smaller dinars that they had at the time. The narration of four awāq, where the narrator says I think, is based on doubt, so it carries no legal weight. And Allah knows best.

Sharh Sahih Muslim By An Nawawi (11/30-32)