until he takes possession of it.” He thus distinguished between what requires possession and what does not. For the latter, the ability to take possession is sufficient, as with property held in safekeeping.

He then said:

“Whoever purchases a heap of grain may not sell it until he moves it.”

Thus, the heap passes to the buyer’s risk once it is made freely available to him and he is able to take possession, yet he may not sell it until he moves it? All of this is explicitly stated by Ahmad. However, the scholars of the school disagree on these matters, and there are differing reports of his position whose discussion belongs elsewhere.

The point here is that, according to the apparent position of Ahmad’s school, the goods may remain at the seller’s risk while the buyer is permitted to resell them. This applies, for example, to fruit sold after it begins to ripen: according to the schools of Mālik and Ahmad, it remains at the seller’s risk. This is also a position conditionally held by al-Shāfiʿī, on the basis of the report narrated by Muslim in his Sahīh from Jābir, that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

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

Nevertheless, according to the sounder of the two reports from Ahmad, the buyer may resell this fruit even though it remains at the seller’s risk. Likewise, a tenant may, without disagreement, sublet what he has rented for the same rent, even though the benefits remain at the seller’s risk.

However, if he sublets it for a higher rent without making any addition to the property, there are two reports:

The first permits this, in agreement with al-Shāfiʿī’s position.

The second does not permit it, in agreement with the position of