Examining the Paradox of the Islamic Legal Maxims that " There Is No Payment for Conditions in Transactions" and " Some Portion of Price Is for Conditions"

According to the Islamic legal maxim that the sales price is not allotted for conditions, the Islamic jurisprudents believe that conditions do not allocate a portion of transaction price for themselves, but the only specialty for conditions is to motivate customers’ desire and interest to stipulated shopping. Whereas the Islamic jurisprudents in other situation claim that there is a portion of the price for conditions (shart). Apparently there is disagreement between these two Islamic Legal Maxims. Therefore, in different issues of the Islamic jurisprudential sources, the Islamic jurisprudents have different attitudes and argue the position of the conflict contains which of these two Islamic legal maxims. After observing this paradox, The Islamic jurisprudents try to conjoin these two Islamic legal maxims in various methods. But it seems that convention considers a portion of the price for conditions in cases which conditions (included provision of adjective, performance of an act and result) have the form of the arousal of interest but in cases which provisions is origin (base) it means that transaction itself to fulfill the provision, the price is not fractionated by convention in these cases.