Thawr, and one of the two opinions of al-Shafi'i; because if it is permissible in [a case where the fruit is] non-existent despite the high level of uncertainty (gharar) in it, then it is more appropriate that it be permissible when it is present and the uncertainty is minimal. It is only valid if there remains work to be done through which the fruit can be increased, such as pollination, irrigation, and tending to the fruit. If what remains is work that does not increase the fruit, such as harvesting and the like, then it is not permissible, without disagreement. The second [narration] is that it is not permissible. This is the second opinion of al-Shafi'i, because there is no text regarding it, nor is it within the meaning of the text; for the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) dealt with the people of Khaybar for a portion of what is produced of fruit or crops. Furthermore, this leads to the result that [the worker] becomes entitled by the contract to a present compensation, whereby ownership transfers from the owner of the wealth to the worker of the musaqat. Thus, it is invalid, just as if the fruit had begun to ripen. Additionally, it is a contract for labor on property in exchange for a portion of its yield; therefore, it is not permissible after the yield has appeared, just like mudaraba [profit-sharing]. Also, this makes the contract a lease for both a known and an unknown [consideration], which is invalid, just as if he had hired him to do the work for that. Regarding their argument that it involves less uncertainty, we say: the minimal nature of uncertainty is not a requirement for permissibility, nor is the abundance of it, which is present in the subject of the text, a prohibitive factor; therefore, its being minimal has no effect. The Sharia was revealed in a manner that does not entitle the worker to any present compensation, and nothing transfers to him from the property of the wealth owner; rather, the existing yield is generated on their joint property according to what they stipulated. Thus, it is not permissible to violate this arrangement, nor to establish a contract that is not within its meaning by way of analogy, just as if the fruit had begun to ripen, and like mudaraba after the appearance of profit.

Section: As for the statement of al-Khiraqi: "with a known portion allocated to the worker from the fruit," it points to two things: First, that musaqat is only valid for a known, undivided portion of the fruit, such as a half or a third, due to the hadith of Ibn Umar: "He dealt with the people of Khaybar for a portion of what is produced from it." And whether...