it is possible to take possession of it in a manner that obstructs the owner from it, such as by residing in the house and preventing its owner from entering it; thus, it is analogous to taking a beast or chattel. As for obstructing one from his chattel, he has not taken possession of his property, and its counterpart here would be to confine the owner without taking possession of his house. As for what is destroyed of the land by his action or the cause of his action, such as demolishing its walls, flooding it, scraping away its soil, throwing stones into it, or any depreciation that occurs due to his planting or building, he is liable for it without disagreement in the school or among scholars, because this is destruction, and real estate is guaranteed through destruction without disagreement. Usurpation does not occur without possession; thus, if one enters another's land or house, he is not liable for it by virtue of his entry, whether he entered with or without permission, and whether the owner was present in it or not. Some of the companions of al-Shafi'i said: If he entered it without his permission and the owner was not in it, he is liable for it, whether he intended that or thought it was his own house, or a house he was permitted to enter; because the intruder's possession is established thereby, making him a usurper, for usurpation is the establishment of wrongful possession, and his possession has been established, evidenced by the fact that if they disputed over the house and neither had proof, it is adjudged to the one who is in it, not the one who is outside it. Our proof is that he is not in possession of it, so he is not liable for it, just as if he had entered it with permission, or entered his desert land, and because he is only liable through usurpation for what he would be liable for in a loan for use (ariyah), and a loan for use is not established by this [entry], nor is liability required therein, so likewise usurpation is not established by it when it is without permission.

The second section: If one plants in the land of another without his permission, or builds on it, and the landowner requests the removal of his plants or building, the usurper is obligated to do so. We know of no disagreement regarding this, due to what was narrated by Sa'id ibn Zayd ibn 'Amr ibn Nufayl, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "There is no right for a wrongful root." Narrated by Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi (4), who said: A Hasan (good) hadith. Abu Dawud and Abu 'Ubayd narrated in the hadith that he said: The one who narrated this hadith to me informed me that a man planted on the land of a man from the Ansar, from the tribe of Banu Bayadah, and they disputed before the Prophet (peace be upon him), so he ruled in favor of the man regarding his land, and he ruled...