Do the conditions mentioned in the Islamic Murabaha contract, such as the client's commitment to purchase after the bank takes possession of the commodity, bearing the difference in price and losses in case of default, and the requirement to transfer salary to the bank, affect the validity of the contract, and is it permissible to buy in this way with or without an upfront percentage payment, and is there even the slightest doubt in it?

The conditions mentioned for a Murabaha sale are valid, with the caveat that the binding nature of the promise means the customer bears the consequences of their breach by compensating for the damage. What is prohibited is for the promise to be binding in a way that it cannot be revoked. The Islamic Fiqh Academy has ruled that a Murabaha sale to a ‫purchaser-initiator is permissible if it is conducted on a commodity after it has entered into the ownership of the instructed party and lawful possession has occurred. The promise is religiously binding unless there is an excuse, and judicially binding if it is contingent on a cause and the promised party incurred expenses. The effect of the binding nature is either the fulfillment of the promise or compensation for the damage. Mutual promising between two parties is permissible provided that an option (khiyar) exists for both or one of them; otherwise, it is not permissible due to its resemblance to selling before possessing the commodity. Furthermore, the condition of salary transfer and providing a portion of the price presents no issue.