the fact that human welfare cannot be sustained on that basis. Moreover, I know of no explicit report from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, establishing that when sold goods perish before the buyer can take possession, the seller bears the loss and the contract is dissolved, except this hadith concerning calamities.
Even if there were no prophetic teaching on this matter, sound reasoning would support this ruling. This is what the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, indicated when he said:
“On what grounds would any of you take his brother’s wealth without right?”
The buyer of fruit can harvest it only when it is fully grown and ripe, not at the time of the contract, just as a lessee can obtain the benefit of a lease only gradually. Thus, fruit perishing before it can be harvested is like leased property perishing before its benefit can be obtained. In a lease, the lessor bears the loss by scholarly agreement; the same therefore applies to a sale. Abū Hanīfah distinguishes between the two on the grounds that the lessee has not acquired ownership of the benefit, while the buyer has not acquired the right to leave the fruit on the trees. Al-Shāfiʿī does not accept this distinction, whose basis we shall discuss.
Thus, since the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had prohibited selling fruit until it showed signs of ripening—in one version narrated by Muslim, Ibn ʿUmar said: The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:
“Do not sell fruit to one another until it shows signs of ripening and the danger of blight has passed.”
In another version narrated by Muslim from him:
“He forbade selling dates until they began to colour, and ears of grain until they turned white and were safe from blight. He prohibited both the seller and the buyer.”
And in the Sunan of Abū Dāwūd, Abū Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him, said:
“The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade selling dates until they were safe from every hazard.”—