The shart is an accomplishment quality for its (mashrout) conditioned matter in what that matter requires or in what the rule (hukm) of that conditioned matter requires. The hawl (elapsing of one year) in the money zakaat accomplishes the ownership of the nisaab, so the hawl is a shart in the ownership of the nisaab to oblige the zakaat in it, so it is of what the mashrout requires, and the marriage (ihsaan) accomplishes the quality for the fornicator in stoning the married (muhsan) adulterer, so it is a condition for the adulterer to oblige his stoning, so it is of what the mashrout requires. The wudu’ (ablution) accomplishes the performance of the prayer in what the hukm requires in it, so it is a condition for performing the prayer, and it is of what the hukm requires in that mashrout, and covering the awrah is a condition for performing the prayer, and of what the hukm requires in it, so it is a shart and of what the hukm of the mashrout requires, and like such are all the conditions (shurout). The shart is different to the mashrout (conditioned matter) because it is an accomplishment quality for it, not one of its parts, therefore it is different to the pillar, because the pillar is a part of the thing not separated from it, and it is not right to say: the pillar is different to the thing or similar to it because it is one of its parts, whereas the shart must be different to the thing and an accomplishment for it at the same time. The shart is defined as which’s absence necessitates the absence, and its existence does not necessitate the existence, and this is a clarification for it with regard to its effect.

The shart (condition) with the mashrout (conditioned matter) is like the quality with the described matter, so nothing can be described without the existence of the quality, but the quality may exist without the existence of the described one, and so is the shart, the salaat does not exist without the existence of the purity, but the purity may exist without the existence of the salaat. The shart does not come specifically for the assignment verdict, but it may also be for the circumstantial verdict. So there are shurout (conditions) related to the assignment address, like the purity, covering the awrah, and the purity of the dress, every one of them is a shart for praying. And there are shurout related to the circumstantial address like the hawl (elapsing of one year) with the nisaab of the money zakaat, the ihsaan (marriage) in the issue of the adultery, and the protection (al-hirz) in the stealing (taking the stolen thing from its storage or fortified and walking away with it), they are all shurout for the sabab (cause). And they are all considered as sharout upon which applies the definition of the shart, and they are all shari'ahi sharout for their arrival in the evidence, except that the first type are shurout for the hukm and the second type are shurout for what is set for the hukm of matters it necessitates.

The agreements shurout are included in the shari'ahi shurout, like the shurout of the sale, the partnership, the entailment (waqf), and the like, but they are not like the assignment verdicts and circumstantial verdicts shurout (conditions) with regard to the need of a shari'ahi evidence that shows the shart to make it considered as a shart, but it is conditional for these shurout that they don’t contradict the shari'ah. Which means that, the shurout of the assignment or circumstantial verdicts need a shari'ahi evidence to be considered as shurout, contrary to the agreements shurout, they don’t need to be included in the shari'ahi daleel, but it is permissible for the two parties of the agreement to set the shurout they want, however it is not permissible for them or any of them to set shurout which contradict the shari'ahi text. So the agreement shurout must not contradict the shari'ah and it is not conditional for them to come through a shari'ahi daleel, that is for the saying of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) : “… what is the matter with some men, they set conditions that are not in the book of Allah, what so ever of a condition that is not in the book of Allah; is invalid (baatel), even if it is a hundred shart, the decree of Allah is greater in the right, and the condition of Allah is more binding”, narrated by Al-Bukhari. And the meaning of “not in the book of Allah” is contrary to what is in the book of Allah, means it is not in His ruling nor is it in accordance with His decree; that is because the Messenger of Allah (SAW) has permitted the setting of the shurout (conditions) without restrictions, and clarified that whatever contradicts the hukm of Allah Ta’ala is baatel (invalid), so He did not forbid the setting of the shurout, and since He (SAW) negated (that the meaning is) the consideration of what is from within the book of Allah (of shurout), then the meaning of it is negating the consideration of what contradicts the book of Allah.

The hadeeth in Al- Bukhari is : “ A’ishah may Allah be pleased with her said: Burayrah came to me and said: I have made an agreement with my people (my master to free me) over nine ounces, one ounce a year, so help me please, I said: if your people like it I count it to them and your loyalty will be to me, then I will do. Then Burayrah went the her people with the offer, and they refused it, so she came back while the Messenger of Allah (SAW) was sitting, she said I offered them that, but they refused, they want the loyalty for themselves, so the Messenger of Allah heard that, then A’ishah told Him, and He said: take her and set the loyalty as a shart, as the loyalty belongs to whoever sets the slave free, so A’ishah did. Then the Messenger of Allah (SAW) stood up addressing the people: He thanked Allah and praised Him, then he said “what is the matter with some men...”, the hadeeth. This shows that what is prohibited is the condition that contradicts the book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and does not show that the shart must be in the book of Allah and in the Sunnah. Accordingly the shurout in the agreement must be set so they do not violate the shari'ah, that is by not contradicting any of the shari'ah texts, or any shari'ahi verdicts which has a shari'ahi evidence. For example, the shari'ah has made the loyalty to whoever sets the slave free from his master, so it is not right to sell the slave and setting the shart of keeping his loyalty, so the shart is cancelled and the sale is valid.

Another example, it is not right to say: I sold this to you for one thousand in cash (naqdan) or for two thousands as credit (nasi’ah). So this is one sale consists of two conditions, the aim of it differs in accordance with their differences; so this is an invalid shart, for which the sale becomes invalid because of His (SAW) saying“ :credit and sale is not permissible, nor is it permissible to make two sharts in one sale”, narrated by Abu-Dawood. And as an example, if a man sells a good to another one and sets a condition for him that he does not sell it to anyone; the shart is cancelled and the sale is valid (sahih), because this shart contradicts the requirement (muqtada) of the agreement, which is the ownership of the sold good and having the right of its disposal, so that contradicts the shari'ahi verdict. And thus the conditions that contradict the shari'ah are not considered at all, whether they violate a shari'ahi text or a verdict which the shari'ah brought it. Has it been a shari'ahi assignment verdict or one of the circumstantial verdicts.

And what affirms that the shari'ah has permitted the Muslim to set the shurout he wants in the agreement except what violates the book of Allah or the shari'ahi verdict; is what came in the hadeeth of A’ishah about Burayrah in one narration of Al-Bukhari, that He (SAW) said to A’ishah may Allah be pleased with her“ : bye her then free her and let them set the shart they want”, so this is clear that the saying of the Messenger (SAW):

“... Let them set the condition they want”, is the (ibahah) permissibility for the human to set the conditions they want, and that is supported by the saying of the prophet (SAW)“ :the Muslims are at their conditions”:

narrated by Al-Haakem, means they are adherents to the conditions they set, so He referred the conditions to them. Also the prophet (SAW) acknowledged the setting of conditions that are not mentioned in the book of Allah, in the agreements, Muslim narrated on the authority of Jaber “that he was riding his weak camel, so he wanted to leave it, he said: the prophet (SAW) followed me and made supplication for me and patted on it then it walked actively in a way it never walked like it before, He said: sell it to me for one ounce, I said no, He said: sell it to me, then I sold it to him for one ounce, and I excluded its load for my family”, narrated by Muslim. Excluding its load is a shart he set in the sale. On the authority of Sufaynah Abi Abd- Arrahman said “ Ummu- Salamah set me free and set a condition on me that I serve the prophet (SAW)”, narrated by Ahmad, and in a narration : I was a slave for Ummu- Salamah, she said: I free you under the condition that you serve the Messenger of Allah as long as you live, I said: even if you don’t set this condition on me I will not leave the Messenger of Allah as long as I live, then she set me free”, narrated Abu Dawood. And thus many incidents in which conditions are set, not taken from the shari'ah, but set by every human as he wants. And all what came in this matter is that the shart is restricted by not violating the book of Allah or any verdict of the shari'ah. But it is conditional that the set condition does not permit a haram or forbid a halal; because of the saying of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) ." :

“The Muslims are at their shurout except a shart that forbids a halal or allows a haram”, narrated by Al-Tirmithi.