to harvest it, liability for it rests with the seller, even though the apparent position of his school permits the purchaser to dispose of it by sale or otherwise. Thus, he permits the purchaser to dispose of it while liability remains with the seller.

The Sunnah establishes that liability for the fruit rests with the seller. In Sahīh Muslim, Jābir reports that the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—said:

“If you sell fruit to your brother and a calamity strikes it, it is not lawful for you to take any of its price. On what grounds would any of you take his brother’s wealth without right?”

However, the other report from Ahmad, prohibiting disposal of this fruit, accords with the first approach.

Among the arguments supporting this approach is that the lessor bears liability for the benefits stipulated in a lease before they are received. This means that if they are lost through a calamity beyond human control, such as the death of the animal, and the benefits become unavailable, liability rests with the lessor, because they were lost before it was possible to receive them. Nevertheless, the lessee may dispose of those benefits, even by selling them, according to the apparent position of the school. There is, however, another report from Ahmad that the lessee may not sublet the property for more than the rent he pays if no enhancement has been made to it, lest he profit from something for which he has borne no liability. This is also Abū Hanīfah’s position. Abū Hanīfah holds that ownership of the benefits is not acquired through the contract, but only gradually as they are received.

According to the well-known position reported from Ahmad, he and other scholars permit subletting for more than the original rent. They say:

“This is not profit from something for which one bears no liability, because liability for these benefits rests with