and found a defect in each of what they purchased. Their argument that it is limited (qasir) is incorrect, and the permissibility of its dissolution does not entail its limitation nor does it prevent the transfer of ownership, just like the sale of a defective item. The prohibition of disposal was only for the sake of the right of another, so it does not prevent the establishment of ownership, such as mortgaged goods and goods sold before possession. Their argument: "Because it exits the ownership of the seller and does not enter into the ownership of the buyer" is invalid; because it leads to the existence of ownership without an owner, which is impossible. It also leads to the establishment of ownership for the seller without the attainment of its compensation for the buyer, or to the transfer of his ownership from the sold item without its establishment in its compensation, and the nature of the contract as a compensatory exchange precludes this. The argument of the Shafi'i scholars that ownership is suspended (mawquf), and that if they both finalize the sale we determine that it has transferred, and otherwise not, is also incorrect. For the transfer of ownership is based upon its cause that transfers it, which is the sale, and this does not differ by its finalization or dissolution. For its finalization is neither a requisite nor a condition for it; if it were so, ownership would not be established before it. Dissolution is not a barrier; for a barrier does not precede the thing being barred, just as a ruling does not precede its cause or its condition. Furthermore, because the sale with the option (khiyar) is a cause after which ownership is established if it is not dissolved, therefore it must be established even if it is dissolved, like the sale of a defective item. This is clear, God willing.

Section: Whatever results from the yields of the sold item and its separate growth during the period of the option belongs to the buyer, whether they finalize the contract or dissolve it. Ahmad said regarding someone who bought a slave, and property was gifted to him before they separated, and then the seller chose the slave: the property belongs to the buyer. Al-Shafi'i said: If they finalize the contract and we say ownership is for the buyer or is suspended, the separate growth is his. If we say ownership is for the seller, then the growth is his. If they dissolve the contract and we say ownership is for the seller or is suspended, then the growth is his, otherwise it is for the buyer. Our evidence is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "The yield is by way of liability (al-kharaju bi-al-daman)."