of the hadith tradition. However, this reasoning does not hold under Abū Hanīfa’s legal principles, because he does not permit purchasing fruit on condition that it remain on the trees, although he permits purchasing it before its soundness becomes apparent. The contract requires its immediate removal. Thus, when someone purchases the fruit together with the trees, his entitlement to leave it on them arises only because the trees belong to him. We shall discuss this principle, Allah willing.

Abū ʿUbayd stated that there is a consensus prohibiting the leasing of land containing many trees.

The third view is that land containing trees may be leased, with the trees included in the lease, without qualification. This is the view of Ibn ʿAqīl, and Harb al-Kirmānī inclined towards it. This view amounts virtually to a consensus among the early generations, although it differs from the position generally reported from the imams whose schools are followed. Saʿīd ibn Mansūr narrated—and Harb al-Kirmānī narrated it from him in his Masāʾil (Legal Questions)—saying: ʿAbbād ibn ʿAbbād narrated to us, from Hishām ibn ʿUrwa, from his father:

“Usayd ibn Hudayr died owing six thousand dirhams. ʿUmar summoned his creditors and assigned them his land for a number of years, including its date palms and other trees.”

Furthermore, ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb imposed land tax on the Sawād and elsewhere. He left the land containing date palms and grapevines in the hands of its inhabitants, and levied on every jarīb (a unit of land area) of land, whether planted with trees or treeless, a land tax