Chapter: Conditions that are valid in a musāqāh agreement and those that are not

1. The orchard owner may not stipulate that a fixed measure of dates be set aside exclusively for him, with the remainder divided between the two parties according to shares they agree upon.

2. In Imām Mālik’s view, a musāqāh concluded over rain-fed (non-irrigated) orchards is permissible just as it is for irrigated orchards.

3. If the orchard contains draft animals or slaves, the reports from Mālik differ:
   • One narration states that the cost of maintaining those slaves and animals is borne by the owner unless he expressly places it on the worker.
   • A second narration relates that Mālik disliked placing their upkeep on the worker at all.
   • A third narration holds that fodder for the animals and the living expenses of the slaves are in fact the worker’s responsibility, while any animals or slaves that perish, and any water-wheels, implements, or irrigation devices that break, must be replaced and repaired by the owner.

4. The worker may not demand that the owner provide animals that were not already present in the orchard when the contract was concluded.

5. It is lawful to conclude a musāqāh for one year, two years, or several years—harvest to harvest—on the basis of a known share of whatever fruit God brings forth after the zakāt has been taken out.

6. If the agreement is fixed to a calendar date, that date arrives, and there are still dates on the palms that may not yet be cut nor lawfully sold, the arrangement continues under the original musāqāh until the harvest is completed, for that is a right that has accrued to the worker. In essence, a musāqāh is tied to the cutting of the dates and the picking of the fruit, not to a calendar deadline.

7. A musāqāh may not be contracted over bare land (bayāḍ), just as leasing for a share of the produce is impermissible in cases where musāqāh itself is lawful. However, if the property includes both bare land and palms or other fruit trees, and the contract is concluded only over the trees while the bare land is left unmentioned, the agreement is valid. The bare land then remains at the owner’s disposal: he may cultivate it, lease it out, or leave it idle.

8. If, in that situation, the owner stipulates for himself the entire bare land or everything that may grow on it, the condition is invalid; but if he stipulates a specific, clearly defined portion of it, the condition is acceptable.