as for merchandise, all of it—other than what has already been described—if the usurper inflicts only slight damage on any of it, he must make good the deficiency caused by that damage. Should he harm it in a way that eliminates most of its usefulness or beauty, or consumes it completely, he is liable for its full value on the day he seized it. No attention is paid to any later increase in the item itself or in market prices; once it has perished, what counts is its value on the day of usurpation—neither more nor less—according to Malik and his companions. After he pays that value, the ruined article becomes his, not the owner’s, in exchange for what he has paid.

It makes no difference whether the damage is great or small, whether it occurred by his own hand or otherwise—for example, a slave who loses an eye, or a riding animal that grows emaciated or is injured. In every such case the owner may choose either to take the article back in the condition he finds it or to take its value as of the day it was usurped; he may not take the article and also claim compensation for the depreciation. This is the position most widely transmitted from Malik.

Some of Malik’s associates, however—chiefly Muhammad ibn Maslama—maintained that if the usurper causes major damage, such as a man who slaughters another’s camel, the owner is given a choice: either to take the carcass as meat together with compensation for the loss the slaughter caused, or to hold the usurper liable for its full value while alive. If the damage is only minor, the usurper must return the item and the amount by which he diminished it, and in that case the owner has no option. A number of other scholars have adopted this view as well.

If a third party destroys the commodity while it is in the usurper’s possession, that party must pay its value on the day he destroyed it, and that payment goes to the owner—unless the amount is less than its price on the day it was usurped. In that situation the usurper must make up the difference, should the owner wish; or the owner may instead charge the usurper its full value on the day of usurpation, in which case the usurper may claim that amount from the destroyer.

The usurper is liable only for the value, on the day of usurpation, of whatever perishes in his hands—whether he himself destroyed it or it was lost by an act of God—unless the owner finds it in exactly the same, unchanged condition with the usurper. In that event the owner is entitled to nothing but the article itself, even if