perishes before the buyer is able to take possession, the loss is borne by the seller. Indeed, al-Shāfiʿī takes the strictest position on this, holding that if any item sold perishes before possession is taken, the loss is borne by the seller. He also extends this rule to transactions other than sales. Abū Hanīfah applies it to all movable property. Mālik and Ahmad, who uphold remitting the price of produce lost to calamities, distinguish between property of which possession could have been taken, such as an item physically present, and property of which possession could not have been taken. This is based on al-Bukhārī’s report through al-Zuhrī, from Sālim, from Ibn ʿUmar, who said:

“The established Sunnah is that any grain sold after it has been gathered is the buyer’s property.”

The disagreement, rather, concerns whether fruit that perishes before becoming fully ripe has perished before the buyer was able to take possession. They say that it has perished after possession was taken, because possession was achieved by giving the buyer unrestricted access to it. By agreement, this constitutes taking possession of real estate and whatever is attached to it. Moreover, the buyer may dispose of it by sale or otherwise, and the permissibility of doing so indicates that possession has been taken, since disposing of an item sold before taking possession of it is not permissible. This, then, is the underlying basis of their position.

They have also invoked the apparent meaning of certain hadiths in support of their position, such as the report narrated by Muslim in his Sahīh from Abū Saʿīd, who said:

“A man in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) suffered a loss involving fruit he had purchased, leaving him heavily in debt. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Give him charity.’ The people gave him charity, but it was not enough to pay off his debt. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) then said to his creditors, ‘Take what