to him in exchange for something not delivered to him, so he returns to the compensation for its lost benefits caused by planting it, [charged] against the owner of the crop. If it is invalid and the seed belongs to the landowner, the crop belongs to him, and he owes the laborer his equivalent wage for that. If the seed is from both of them, the crop is between them, and they settle accounts with each other for what is due to one of them over the other regarding the rental value of the land in which the laborer's share is located, and the laborer's wage in proportion to his work on the share of the landowner.

Section: If he enters into a sharecropping agreement with him on the condition that the landowner receives specific crops and the laborer receives specific crops—such as if one of them stipulates the crop of one section and the other [stipulates] the crop of another, or if one of them stipulates what is on the water channels and irrigation ditches, either exclusively or along with his share—it is invalid by the consensus of the scholars. This is because the report prohibiting it is authentic, neither contradicted nor abrogated, and because it leads to the loss of what was designated for one of them rather than the other, resulting in one of them exclusively taking the produce to the exclusion of his companion.

Section: Corrupt conditions in sharecropping (musaqat) and sharecropping (muzara'a) are divided into two types. The first is that which leads to the uncertainty (jahala) of each one’s share, such as what we have mentioned here, or if one of them stipulates an unknown share, a specific amount of money, or specific measures (aqfiza), or [a condition] that if he irrigates by flooding he receives such-and-such, and if he irrigates with effort he receives such-and-such. This invalidates it because it leads to the uncertainty of the subject matter of the contract, so it resembles a sale with an unknown price and a Mudaraba contract with uncertainty regarding the share of one of the two. If he stipulates that the seed is to be provided by the laborer, the explicit text from Ahmad indicates the invalidity of the contract; for when the condition is invalid, the crop must necessarily belong to the owner of the seed, as it is the growth of his wealth, so the landowner gains nothing from it and deserves the rental wage, and this is the meaning of the invalidity. As for if he stipulates something that does not lead to uncertainty in the profit, such as the owner of the wealth working with him, or the work of...