the purchaser, in the sense that if he leaves them unused despite being able to receive them, he bears liability for them. Liability rests with the seller only if they are lost before it becomes possible to receive them.” Accordingly, the apparent position of Ahmad’s school concerning contractual liability distinguishes between what one is able to take possession of and what one is not, rather than between what has actually been received and what has not.

An example is the position stated by al-Khiraqī and others: liability for a specifically identified heap of grain sold in bulk without measurement passes to the purchaser upon conclusion of the contract. Yet they do not permit the purchaser to sell it until he moves it, on account of the hadith of Ibn ‘Umar. Ibn ‘Umar reported both rulings. He said:

“It is part of the Sunnah that whatever is alive and intact when the transaction is concluded belongs to the purchaser.”

He also said, as al-Bukhārī narrated from him:

“We used to purchase food in bulk without measurement, but we were forbidden to sell it where it lay until we had moved it to our quarters.”

Thus, disposal is permitted where liability rests with the seller, as with fruit, while disposal is prohibited where liability rests with the purchaser, as with a heap of food. This establishes that the two do not necessarily go together.

Another argument supporting this position is that the purchaser may not dispose of everything for which he bears liability, as shown by property taken into possession invalidly and property received in an invalid taking of possession.

As for the first case, suppose someone purchases a qafīz (a measure of capacity) from a heap of grain, or a ratl (a unit of weight) from a lump of metal, or something similar whose delivery requires measuring or weighing, but then takes possession of the entire heap or lump. This is an invalid taking of possession and does not permit him to dispose of it unless his property is distinguished