due to the rise in the price of the garment or its decrease. Likewise, if garments become cheaper and their value becomes three, the usurper is not liable for anything except five, along with returning the garment. If the entire garment is destroyed while its value was ten, and then garments increase in price so that the value of the garment becomes twenty, he is not liable for anything more than ten; because ten was established as a liability, so it does not increase with the rise in the price of garments, nor does it decrease with their fall in price.

Section: If he usurps a garment or a zuli (a type of textile), and some of its parts are lost, such as the nap of a towel or the pile of a garment, he is liable for the indemnity of its reduction. If it stays in his possession for a duration that typically carries a fee, he is liable for its rental, regardless of whether he used it or left it. If both are combined, such as if it remained in his possession for a period and some of its parts were lost, he is liable for both together: the rental fee and the indemnity for the reduction, whether the loss of the parts occurred through use or otherwise. Some of the companions of al-Shafi'i said: If it diminished without use, such as a garment that is reduced by spreading it out, and it diminished by him spreading it out and remained in his possession for a duration, he is liable for the rental fee and the reduction. If the reduction was due to usage, such as a garment he wore until he wore it out, there are two views: one is that he is liable for both together. The second is that the greater of the two—the rental fee or the indemnity for the reduction—is due, because what is lost from the parts is in exchange for the rental fee, and therefore the lessee is not liable for those parts, and a similar ruling can be derived for us. Our view is that each of the two is independently liable, so if they are combined, both become due, as if it remained in his possession for a duration and then was destroyed. The rental fee is due in exchange for the benefits that pass, not in exchange for the parts, which is why the rental fee is due even if the parts are not lost. If the usurped item has no rental value, such as an unstitched garment, there is no rental fee on the usurper, but he is liable for the indemnity of its reduction and nothing else.

Section: If the usurped item diminishes while with the usurper, and he then sells it and it is destroyed while with the purchaser, the owner may hold whichever of them he wishes liable. If he holds the usurper liable, he holds him liable for its value at the highest point it reached from the time of usurpation until the time of destruction; because it was under his guarantee from the time he usurped it until the day it was destroyed. If he holds the purchaser liable,