decreasing it, unless there is a reason for the change—for example, if land values have fallen, it should be reduced; or if they have risen, the kharaj should be increased as circumstances require. But if there is no reason, then what the first imam set for this land and for its People of the Covenant must be followed. It appears to me that matters of this kind, when they were not established by the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him and his family—are time-bound rulings; that is, rulings which the caliphs considered most appropriate at that time.

Issue: Does the kharaj attach to the liability of the deceased owner, such that it remains a debt owed by him and his soul is held thereby after his death, or is it due from the one to whom the land passes?

The answer is the latter, except for any kharaj that accrued during the first owner’s lifetime, for that remains attached to his liability. Thus, if five years passed during which he did not pay the kharaj, and then he died, he remains liable for those five years, while what accrues thereafter is due from the heirs to whom the land passed.

On this basis, a person who bought a house subject to a subrah levy may be reassured: if he paid the subrah that fell due during his lifetime and then died, do we say that this subrah remains attached to the deceased’s liability?

The answer is no, because his liability was discharged during his lifetime.

Likewise, if land subject to a subrah levy is sold, may the person who originally imposed the levy seek payment from the seller, or from the purchaser in whose possession the land is?

The answer is the latter, because it is customary for the subrah levy to be demanded from the person in possession of the property, not from the seller.

The one who first imposed the levy might say: “I assessed it upon you, so give me my levy?”