One view was: This is impermissible, because the owner alone benefits from the sale before the profit-sharing investment partnership begins. It is therefore like stipulating that the worker sell another item of merchandise.

Another view was: It is permissible, because this sale serves the purpose of the profit-sharing investment partnership and thus resembles a sale made after the contract is concluded. In both cases, the property is held by the worker in trust, and the owner receives no exclusive benefit beyond the purpose of the partnership. The matter calls for further consideration.

He also said—may Allah sanctify his soul:

Section

As for sharecropping, whether the seed is supplied by the worker or the landowner, or one person provides the land, another the seed, and a third the labour, two positions are reported from Ahmad concerning these arrangements. The correct view is that all of them are valid. Indeed, an arrangement in which the worker supplies the seed has an even stronger claim to validity than one in which the owner supplies it.

“The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) entered into an agreement with the people of Khaybar that they would cultivate it at their own expense in return for half its yield of fruit and crops.”

This was narrated by al-Bukhārī and others. The account of the people of Khaybar is the basis for the permissibility of orchard-tending partnerships and sharecropping. They supplied the seed from their own resources; the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) did not