It is not permissible to sell gold or silver with inequality due to craftsmanship [117] -For example, one may exchange used gold for new gold, or used silver for new silver while paying the difference in craftsmanship; this does not exempt the transaction from being considered Ribawi usurious, as the craftsmanship has no effect in this regard. .
The four schools of Islamic jurisprudence: Hanafi [118] -"Al-Mabsut"  by Al-Sarakhsī (14/4);  "Al-‘Inayah" by Al-Babarti(7/136); "Al-Binayah" by Al-Aynī (8/396). , Maliki [119] - "Sharh Al-Zurqani 'ala Mukhtasar Khalil"( 5/82); " Manh Al-Jalil by Al-Aliyyah"( 4/503, 504). , Shafi'i [120] -"Fath Al-Aziz" by Al-Rafi'i (8/164); "Mughni Al-Muhtaj"  by Al-Shirbini (2/25).       see: "Hashiyat Al-Bujairimi 'ala Al-Khatib"(3/21- 22). , and
Hanbali [121] - ""Kashaf al-Qina' "" by Al-Buhuti( 3/252). agreed on this issue , and Consensus on this has been narrated [122] -Al-Qadi Iyad said: "His statement: 'Do not sell gold for gold, nor silver for silver...' is a general statement applicable to all its types, whether refined, manufactured, or raw, as well as good and bad; there is no disagreement on this." "Ikmal Al-Ma'lam"(5/262).       Ibn Abd al-Barr said: "The scholars unanimously agreed that gold—whether in raw form or coined—is the same, and it is not permissible to engage in any exchange involving disparity in it. The same applies to silver—whether in raw form or coined, whether manufactured or minted; no form of disparity is permissible in any of it. This consensus was upheld by the early scholars Salaf and those who followed them Khalaf, except for a small difference narrated from Mu'awiyah."  "Al-Istidhkar"(6/347).      Imam al-Nawawi said: "The statement of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, 'Do not sell gold for gold, nor silver for silver, except in equal amounts,' was explained by the scholars to encompass all forms of gold and silver: whether good or bad, intact or broken, in the form of jewelry or raw, and whether pure or mixed with something else. All of this is unanimously agreed upon." "Sharh Muslim by al-Nawawi"(11/10). .
The Evidences:
Firstly: From the Sunnah
1. It was narrated on the authority of Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri  رضي الله عنهthat the Messenger of Allah  صلى الله عليه وسلمsaid: "Do not sell gold for gold except like for like, and do not give more or less in one of them. Do not sell silver for silver except like for like, and do not give more or less in one of them, and do not sell an absent item for an immediate item." [123] - Narrated by Al-Bukhari (2177) and Muslim (1584).   
2. It was narrated on the authority of Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "Gold is to be exchanged for gold, weight for weight, like for like; silver is to be exchanged for silver, weight for weight, like for like. Whoever increases or seeks increase in the exchange has committed Riba (usury)." [124] - Narrated by Muslim (1588).  
3. It was narrated on the authority of Abu Bakrah  رضي الله عنهthat the Messenger of Allah  صلى الله عليه وسلمsaid: "Do not sell gold for gold unless it is equal in weight, and do not sell silver for silver unless it is equal in weight. But sell gold for silver, and silver for gold as you please (wish) with any difference in value." [125] - Narrated by Al-Bukhari(2175), and the wording is his, and by Muslim (1590).
Reasoning:
These Hadiths generally prohibit usury (Riba), without distinguishing between manufactured or non-manufactured items [126] -  Refer to: "Kashshaf al-Qina'" by Al-Buhuti (3/252). .
Secondly : From the Athar (Sayings of the Companions):
It was narrated from Mujahid that he said: "I was with Abdullah ibn Umar when a goldsmith came to him and said, 'O Abu Abdur-Rahman, I craft gold and then sell some of it for more than its weight. Can I keep the extra amount as compensation for my labor?' Abdullah forbade him from doing so. The goldsmith kept repeating the question, and Abdullah continued to forbid him, until they reached the door of the mosque or the animal he intended to ride. Then Abdullah ibn Umar said: 'A dinar for a dinar, and a dirham for a dirham, with no excess between them. This is the command of our Prophet to us, and this is our command to you.'" [127] -It was narrated by Mālik in Al-Muwaṭṭa' (2/633) by Al-Muzanī in As-Sunan Al-Ma'thūrah from Ash-Shāfi'ī (221), and by Al-Bayhaqī in As-Sunan Al-Kubrā (10491).    Al-Tahawi said in "Sharh Ma'ani Al-Athar"(4/66): "The narrations on this matter are "mutawātir" consecutively reported." Its chain of transmission was authenticated by Al-'Ayni in "Nukhbat Al-Afkar" (14/272) and by Shu'ayb Al-Arna'ut in "Takhreej Mushkil Al-Athar 6100".
Reasoning:  The evidence from the text:
Abdullah ibn 'Umar, رضي الله عنه  prohibited the sale of crafted gold for more than its weight in uncrafted gold [128] - Refer to "Al-Muntaqa Sharh Al-Muwatta'" by Al-Baji(4/260). .
Thirdly: The Reason for Prohibition
Because it involves Riba al-fadl (usury of surplus) when both items are of the same kind, and Riba al-nasi’ah (usury of delay) when the items are of different types [129] - Refer to "Sharh Al-Zurqani 'ala Mukhtasar Khalil"(5/82). .

The Third Topic: Selling a Riba-based Item Along with Another Item of a Different type as the Main Purpose of the Sale [130] -This issue is commonly known among the jurists as "a mudd of dates and a dirham." The mudd is a measure equal to a quarter of a sa‘, and the ‘ajwah is a type of date. It was named as such because the jurists used this example for the issue, and it became well-known by it.  Its forms are as follows: a transaction includes an item subject to Riba on both sides, and the type differs on both sides. For instance, a mudd of ‘ajwah dates and a dirham for a mudd of ‘ajwah dates and a dirham, or a mudd of ‘ajwah dates and two dirhams for two mudds, or a mudd and a dirham for two dirhams. Alternatively, both sides may involve a Riba-based item along with a non-Riba-based item, like a dirham and a garment for a dirham and a garment, or in one of them, like a dirham and a garment for a dirham. The types may also differ on both sides, such that one of them contains two =types of Riba-based items and the other side contains the same two types, such as a mudd of sihani dates and a mudd of barni dates for a mudd of sihani dates and a mudd of barni dates, or only one of them, like a mudd of sihani dates and a mudd of barni dates for two mudds of sihani or barni dates.  Refer to: "Al-Mawsu'ah Al-Fiqhiyyah Al-Kuwaitiyyah" (36/285).   .
The scholars differed on the ruling regarding selling a Riba-based item along with another item of a different kind as the main object of the sale. For example, selling a mudd (a measure of grain) and a dirham for another mudd and dirham, or a mudd and dirham for two dirhams, and similar transactions. There are two opinions about this.
The First Opinion:
It is prohibited to sell a Riba-based item along with another item of a different kind as the main purpose of the sale. This is exemplified by selling a mudd and dirham for another mudd and dirham, or a mudd and dirham for two dirhams, and similar transactions. This is the view of the majority of Jurusprudents: the Malikis [131] - "Al-Taj wal-Ikleel" by Al-Mawwaq (4/301); "Manh Al-Jaleel" by ‘Ulaysh (4/493- 494), and refer to: "Uyoon Al-Masa'il" by Al-Qadi Abdul-Wahhab p. 404. , Shafi'is [132] - "Rawdat al-Talibin" by Al-Nawawi (3/387). , Hanbalis [133] -"Al-Insaaf" by Al-Mardawi (5/29); "Kashshaf al-Qina'" by Al-Buhuti(3/260). , and the opinion of Zufar from the Hanafis [134] -"Al-Mabsut" by Al-Sarakhsi (12/161), and refer to "Badai' al-Sana'I" by Al-Kasani(5/191). .
The Evidence:
Firstly, from the Sunnah:
It is narrated from Fadalah ibn 'Ubayd رضي الله عنه: "On the day of Khaybar, I bought a necklace for twelve dinars that contained gold and beads. I separated it and found that it was worth more than twelve dinars. I mentioned this to the Prophetصلى الله عليه وسلم and he said: 'It must not be sold until it is separated. [135] -Narrated by Muslim (1591). '"
Reasoning:
The Prophetصلى الله عليه وسلم  commanded them to separate the gold from the beads to avoid Riba. By analogy, this applies to all Riba-based items sold together with non-Riba-based items [136] -Refer to "Sharh Sahih Muslim" by Al-Nawawi (11/17- 18). .
Secondly:  If the transaction includes two items of different values, the price is divided according to their respective values. This is like buying a portion of land and a sword; the preemptive right holder takes the portion of land at its respective price. In this case, it either leads to knowledge of disparity or ignorance of equivalence, both of which invalidate the contract. For example, if someone sells a dirham and a mudd worth two dirhams for two mudds worth three dirhams, the dirham would correspond to two-thirds of a mudd, leaving one mudd corresponding to one mudd and one-third. This is Riba (Usury). Even if the equivalence is presumed—such as a mudd worth a dirham, a dirham worth a mudd, and a dirham—it is still impermissible because the valuation is based on conjecture and estimation, which does not ensure equivalence. Ignorance of equivalence is like knowing the disparity [137] -Refer to "Al-Mughni" by Ibn Qudamah (4/29); and "Kashshaf al-Qina'" by Al-Buhuti (3/260). .
Thirdly: To block the means to Usury (Riba), so it is not used as a trick to commit clear usury, such as selling a hundred dirhams in a bag for two hundred, where one hundred is considered in exchange for the bag, which may not even be worth a single dirham [138] - Refer to "Kashshaf al-Qina'" by Al-Buhuti (3/260). .
The Second Opinion: It is permissible to sell a Riba-based item along with another item of a different kind, provided that the single item is of greater value than the one accompanied by the other, or that each has a different kind accompanying it. This is exemplified by selling a mudd and a dirham for another mudd and dirham, or a mudd and dirham for two dirhams,and similar transactions.This is the view of the Hanafis [139] -"Al-Mabsut" by Al-Sarakhsi (12/161), and refer to " Badai' al-Sana'I" by Al-Kasani(5/191). , a narration from Ahmad [140] -"Al-Insaf" by Al-Mardawi (5/29), and refer to "Al-Mughni "by Ibn Qudamah(4/28). , chosen by Ibn Taymiyyah [141] -""Al-Insaf ""by Al-Mardawi(5/29); and" Mukhtasar Al-Fatawa Al-Masriyya" by Ibn Taymiyyah p. 324. , and the opinion of some of the early scholars al-Salaf [142] -Ibn Qudamah said: “Hamād ibn Abī Sulaymān and Abū Ḥanīfah stated that it is permissible. This applies only if the singular item is greater than the other item accompanying it, or if each of them has something from a different genus. Al-Ḥasan said that there is no harm in selling a sword adorned with silver for dirhams. This is also the opinion of Al-Shābiʿ and Al-Nakhāʾi.” "Al-Mughni" (4/29). . They argue that if the contract can be interpreted in a way that makes it valid, it should not be interpreted in a way that makes it invalid. For example, suppose someone buys meat from a butcher. In that case, the transaction is valid, even with the possibility that the meat could be from an animal that was not slaughtered properly (maytah). St it is assumed to be a lawful Sacrifice (thabīhah) to validate the contract. Similarly, if someone buys something from a person, the transaction is valid even with the possibility that the seller does not own the item or does not have permission to sell it, again to validate the contract. In this case, the contract can be validated by considering the item of one kind to be in exchange for the item of another kind, or by considering the non-Riba-based item to be in exchange for the excess in the Riba-based item [143] - "Al-Mughni "by Ibn Qudamah (4/29). .