He—may Allah have mercy on him—was asked: (*)

About an endowment for which compensation is used to purchase something to take its place. An example is an endowment destroyed by someone: compensation is collected from him and used to purchase its replacement. Scholars unanimously agree that anyone who destroys an endowment is liable to compensate for it. Liability also arises from possession. Thus, if someone unlawfully seizes it and it perishes while in his wrongful possession, he must compensate for it, by scholarly agreement. Some scholars have, however, disagreed over whether unlawful seizure entails liability for certain kinds of property, such as real estate, and whether certain kinds, such as movable property, may validly be endowed. Nevertheless, they have not disputed that compensation is due for its destruction at someone’s hands, as with other property.

This differs from the case of a slave woman who has borne her master a child. Although scholars agree that compensation is due for causing her death, they disagree over whether liability also arises from possession of her. Most—including Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Ahmad—hold that it does. Abū Hanīfa, however, holds that it does not.

Liability arising from possession is contractual liability, such as the seller’s responsibility to deliver the item sold, to ensure that it is free of defects, and to ensure that it was rightfully sold. His liability for recourse arising from the sale follows from the contract, even if he has not expressly stipulated it.

One of the established grounds for purchasing a replacement with the proceeds of an endowment is that the endowment has ceased to provide any benefit. In that case, according to the school of Ahmad and others, it is sold and its price used to purchase something to take its place. May it be exchanged for something better while it is still producing income? There are two opinions within his school. Permitting this is the position of Abū Thawr and others.