a human being, the surety is not discharged, because in that case he can seek recourse from the person who destroyed it, saying, “Provide a replacement for what you destroyed.” But if the specified property perishes through an act of Allah, then he is discharged and bears no liability.

His statement, “Or if he surrenders himself, the surety is discharged”: the subject of “surrenders” is the principal. If he surrenders himself and comes at the appointed time, the surety is discharged. This is clear when he surrenders himself upon the debt’s falling due.

For example, if the debt falls due on the first day of Ramadan, and the man comes on the first day of Ramadan and surrenders himself to the person entitled to the right, the surety is discharged, whether or not he is able to recover his due from him, because the surety only undertook to produce his person, and he has appeared.

But if he surrenders himself before the debt falls due, is the surety discharged? There is some detail to this. If he surrenders himself before the debt falls due and there is no oppressive power preventing the claimant from recovering his right, there is no problem. Otherwise, it is not valid, because if he surrenders himself before the debt falls due, this may be a stratagem for the surety to be discharged, after which he may flee. But if there is no oppressive force preventing recovery of the right, there is no problem if he says, “I now surrender myself and give you your due now.”

If the principal is released from the obligation, the surety is discharged, as we mentioned concerning a guarantee: if the person whose obligation is guaranteed is released, the guarantor is discharged. This is because the rule is that when the principal is discharged, the subsidiary party is discharged. But if the surety is released, the principal is not discharged, because the principal is not discharged by the discharge of the subsidiary party.