Stipulations in trade [1098] i.e., is the relevant time for stipulations to be set in a trade during the contract, should they be agreed upon before the contract, or is their time after the contract, during the period of the two options: the option of the meeting and the option of the stipulation? are valid and effective regardless of whether they are added during the drawing up of the contract [1099] The validity of stipulations set during the contract and the necessity of fulfilling them was agreed upon by the four jurisprudential schools of thought[1099]: the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis. See Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq by Ibn Nujaym (6/3), Minah al-Jalil by `Ulaysh (5/112), Al-Majmu` by Nawawi (9/374), and Al-Insaf by Mardawi (4/255). or after the conclusion of the contract and before its implementation, [1100] i.e., during the period of the two options: the option of the meeting and the option of the stipulation, and they are not valid after the contract’s implementation. This was the position of the Shafi`is, according to the soundest view, and Hanbalis, and was the preferred opinion of Ibn `Uthaymin. See Al-Majmu` by Nawawi (9/374), Kashshaf al-Qina` by Bahuti (3/202), and Al-Sharh al-Mumti` (8/224). or are agreed upon before the contract, [1101] And the contract was valid before the stipulation according to the view of some Malikis, a statement related from Ahmad, and the preferred opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Mardawi, and Ibn `Uthaymin. and this was a statement related from Ahmad that was given precedence by some of his companions [1102] Al-Insaf by Mardawi (8/114), Kashshaf al-Qina` by Bahuti (5/90), and Matalib ‘Uli al-Nuha by Rahibani (5/119). and the preferred opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah, [1103] Majmu` al-Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah (32/167). See also Al-Insaf by Mardawi (8/114), Kashshaf al-Qina` by Bahuti (5/90), and Matalib ‘Uli al-Nuha by Rahibani (5/119). Ibn al-Qayyim, [1104] See I`lam al-Muqi`in by Ibn al-Qayyim (3/266). Mardawi, [1105] Mardawi said: “Shaykh Taqi al-Din r said: ‘Likewise, if they agreed upon it before the contract, according to the preponderant view of the maddhab.’ He also said: ‘This was the response of Imam Ahmad r in matters of legal stratagems because the obligation to fulfil stipulations, contracts, and covenants encompasses all of that uniformly.’ Zarkashi said: ‘This is the apparent generalization of Khiraqi, Abu al-Khattab, Abu Muhammad, and others.’ Shaykh Taqi al-Din r stated in his verdicts: ‘It is the preponderant view of the maddhab and the documented view of Imam Ahmad r, as well as the view of the early Companions and later researchers.’ I say: ‘It is the soundest position in which there is no doubt.’” Al-Insaf (8/114). and Ibn `Uthaymin. [1106] Ibn `Uthaymin said: “Issue: Are the stipulations of a trade that are considered those that were set within the core of the contract, after the contract, or before the contract? The position of the madhhab is that the stipulations that are considered are those that were set within the core of the contract or within the period of the two options: the option of the meeting and the option of the stipulation. For example, ‘I sell you this car on the condition that I travel with it to Makkah.’ This stipulation is valid as it is was set within the contract. Another example is if I say, ‘I sell you this car’, and then after the contract is concluded with offer and acceptance, I say, ‘I stipulate that I travel with it to Makkah.’ This is valid because it is within the period of the option. If you had said, ‘No’, I could have said, ‘I am now rescinding the trade because I still have the option in my hands. As long as we have not separated, we can add a stipulation.’ Another example: ‘I sell you this car, and I have an option for three days.’ On the second day, I come to you and say, ‘I stipulate that I travel with it to Makkah.’ This is valid because it is within the time frame of the two options. As for what was agreed upon before the contract, the position of the madhhab is that it is not considered. For example, if you and I agreed that I would sell you the car, and I stipulated that I travel with it to Makkah, but at the time of the contract, we did not mention this condition, either due to forgetfulness or reliance on what was previously mentioned. Is this stipulation considered or not? The answer is that according to the madhhab, it is not considered, but the soundest view is that it is considered.” Al-Sharh al-Mumti` (8/224).

Evidence:
(1) From the Sunnah:
Abu Hurayrah narrated, “The Messenger of Allah said, ‘Muslims are bound by their stipulations.’” [1107] Reported by Bukhari in an emphatic form (sighat al-jazm) before hadith no.  (2274) with the wording “Muslims are bound by their stipulations”, by Abu Dawud (3594) in a mawsul narration, and by Hakim (2309) from Abu Hurayrah h. Authenticated by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (5091), and `Abd al-Haqq al-Ishbili authenticated its chain in Al-Ahkam al-Sughra (718). Nawawi said in Al-Majmu` (9/368): “Its chain is either hasan or sahih.” Ibn al-Muqallin graded its chain hasan in Khalasat al-Badr al-Munir (2/69), as did Ibn Kathir in Irshad al-Faqih (2/54). Albani said in Sahih Sunan Abu Dawud (3594): “Hasan sahih.”
(2) From narrations:
Umar ibn al-Khattab said, “Indeed, rights are subject to stipulations, and you are entitled to that which you stipulate.” [1108] Reported by Bukhari in an emphatic form (sighat al-jazm) before hadith no. (5151) and hadith no. (2721), by Ibn Abi Shaybah (16706) in a mawsul narration, and by Sa`id ibn al-Mansur in Al-Sunan (663). Albani graded its chain sahih according to the conditions of the two Shaykhs in Irwa’ al-Ghalil (6/304), as well as authenticating it (1891) with the wording: “Rights are subject to stipulations.”
(3) Because in contracts that took place between the Prophet and others, such as the pledge of allegiance with the Ansar on the night of `Aqabah and the peace treaty with the Quraysh during the year of Hudaybiyyah, the stipulations were agreed upon first and then the agreements were concluded. [1109] Majmu` al-Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah (32/167).
(4) Because the right belongs to the two parties to the transaction. If they agree on stipulations regarding a matter and then conclude a contract in that regard, it is evident that they both accepted the stipulations of the contract to begin with. [1110] Al-Fatawa al-Kubra by Ibn Taymiyyah (6/269). See also Kashshaf al-Qina` by Bahuti (3/202) and Al-Sharh al-Mumti` (8/272).
(5) Because a stipulation, even if it is added after the contract and before its implementation, holds the same status as if it was added during the drawing up of the contract. [1111] Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat by Bahuti (2/37).