His statement, “by operation of law,” means compulsorily, without his choosing it—just as an heir acquires ownership of his deceased relative’s wealth without choosing to do so. This is the authoritative position of the school.

There is another view: it does not enter his ownership unless he wishes it to. According to this view, it remains a trust in his possession; if it is lost or destroyed without any transgression or negligence on his part, he bears no liability.

According to the authoritative position of the school, if this found property is lost or destroyed after the year—or before the year—does the ruling differ?

Yes, the ruling differs. If it is lost or destroyed before the year due to his transgression, he is liable for it; but if this occurs without transgression, he bears no liability. For if he has transgressed, he is like any other transgressor and must compensate for it. But if he has not transgressed, he is a trustee, because the lost property is presently in his possession as belonging to its owner; thus, his possession is that of a trustee. If the property is lost or destroyed while in his possession without transgression, he bears no liability.

But if it is lost or destroyed after the year, he is liable for it whether he transgressed or not, because it has now entered his ownership and has become his responsibility. Whatever is in your ownership is your responsibility. Thus, once it enters his ownership and becomes his responsibility, he must compensate for it in all cases if its owner is found.

It has also been said that he is not liable for it if he has neither transgressed nor been negligent, in which case the ruling is the same in both situations. This is the stronger view, because the property entered his ownership compulsorily, without his choice. In reality, if he does not want it, it is as though it remains the property of its owner. So how can he say, “I do not want it to enter my ownership, and I disclaim it before Allah,” while we say, “It is in your ownership and you are responsible for it”?! There is a difficulty in this.