loss of the worker’s right. We must bear in mind that, in a musāqāh agreement, the fruit is the subject matter of the contract. For example, the owner may give the worker the palm trees at a time such as the present, when the fruit has already been harvested and there is no fruit on the trees. Then, after two months have passed, the owner sees that this worker is not fulfilling what is required with regard to the palm trees, so he terminates the musāqāh agreement between himself and the worker. In this case, we say: there is no problem with that; but since the worker has laboured on your property with your permission, he is entitled to compensation. According to the author’s view, he is to be awarded the customary wage. Thus, it may be asked: How much would a man be paid to work in this orchard for two months? They say: he would be paid, for example, ten thousand per month. So we say: he is entitled to twenty thousand.
If someone were to say that he should instead be given a proportionate amount of the customary share, that would also be a plausible view, because the worker did not work on the basis that he was an employee; rather, he worked as a partner. It may be said, for example: had the worker completed his work, he would have received an agreed share. Now, for instance, two months out of eight have passed, so he is entitled to one quarter of the share agreed upon with the owner. This may be more than the wage, or it may be less. In any case, if it were said that he should be given a proportionate amount of the share stipulated for him, that would be a plausible view.
His statement, “But if he rescinds it”: the pronoun here refers to the worker.
His statement, “then he is entitled to nothing,” is because he himself has forfeited his labour. This applies before the fruit appears; that is, if the worker terminates the musāqāh agreement, he is entitled to nothing.
If someone were to say: this may cause harm to the owner—for example, it may be customary for workers to be in high demand at the time of harvest—