What is the ruling on a lease stating: 'I lease this to you every month for one dirham'?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Leasing
Primary text
The ruling is that the lease is valid, according to Al-Qadi and the established narration from Ahmad (Ibn Mansur's narration) and the choice of Al-Khiraqi. The lease for the first month is binding immediately upon the contract due to specification (known, succeeding the contract, and having a known rent). Subsequent months become binding only upon physical occupation (*tilbūs*), such as residing in a house if the lease is for a dwelling, because the term is ambiguous at the time of the initial contract. Upon occupation, the contract for that month is specified and ratified by the initial contract. If occupation is not undertaken or the contract is terminated after the first month, the contract for the next month lapses. This is the Madhhab of Abu Thawr and the People of Opinion. This view is supported by the actions where specific payment per unit of use was agreed upon, such as the narration concerning Ali (RA) drawing water for a Jew per date, which is analogous to the current issue.
Supporting text
Abu Bakr Abdul Aziz bin Ja'far and Abu Abdullah bin Hamid hold the contract to be void, as does Al-Thawri and the sounder of the two views of Shafi'i. They argue that every term involving enumeration requires quantification; without it, it remains indeterminate and void, similar to leasing for an undefined period. Malik holds a view similar to the majority, except that the lease is not instantly binding for him, as usufructs are quantified by the rent, making the explicit mention of the total period unnecessary except for establishing finality. Abu Hanifa maintains that if both parties engage in the second month, the possession becomes connected to the invalid contract, which is rejected because possession in tangible invalid contracts does not obligate the contract or the stated price, and possession here only occurred for what was utilized.