leasing land, as established by the Sunnah and the agreement of the leading jurists. By contrast, the prohibition on including trees in the lease is disputed, and there is no scriptural text prohibiting it.

Furthermore, whenever the land alone is leased while the trees are retained, the tenant cannot be trusted with the fruit, leading to conflicting control and an unsatisfactory partnership. This is comparable to the case in which ripeness becomes apparent in one variety. This position yields a ruling similar to that of al-Layth ibn Sa'd: if ripeness becomes apparent in one kind of fruit, and selling the different kinds separately would cause harm, all the kinds may be sold together, because dividing the transaction would entail hardship.

Moreover, if the owner subsequently wishes to sell the fruit, he will find no one willing to buy it while the land and dwellings are held by someone else, except at a substantial discount. Further, if he leases the land and stipulates that the tenant must irrigate the trees—when irrigation is itself part of what the lease covers—then part of what the tenant is paying for becomes his payment. If he does not stipulate irrigation, then, when the tenant waters them—if the lessor contracts with him to irrigate them for a share of the fruit—the lease becomes valid only in conjunction with that fruit-sharing irrigation agreement. If he makes no such agreement with him, the tenant must lose the use of what he has leased. Thus, the alternatives are that the rent consists of part of the leased benefit, that the lease is valid only in conjunction with a fruit-sharing irrigation agreement, or that the tenant is deprived of the benefit of his lease.

Then, if the lessor receives all or part of the fruit, selling it while the land and dwellings are held by someone else reduces its value in many circumstances. The matter therefore comes down to this: when dividing a transaction would cause harm, the two things may be combined in an exchange, even if neither could permissibly be contracted for separately, because the ruling on combining them differs from