and this is when he sells it alongside that which has shown suitability; because it entered into the permissibility of sale as a secondary component, to prevent the harm of shared ownership and the division of hands. This [harm] does not exist here. Furthermore, items that are permissible to be sold individually sometimes enter into a sale as secondary components, such as fruit sold with the base [tree], crops with the land, and milk in the udder with the ewe. It is possible [to argue for] the permissibility [of selling it separately]; because the whole is in the same ruling as that which has shown suitability, and because it is permissible to sell it with another, [so it is permissible to sell it] individually, just like that which has shown suitability.

Section: If the fruit requires irrigation, it is incumbent upon the seller to do so, because he is obligated to hand over the fruit in its complete state, and that is achieved by irrigation. If it is said: Why did you say that if he sells the base [tree] while there is fruit on it belonging to the seller, the buyer is not obligated to irrigate it? We say: Because the buyer is not obligated to hand over the fruit, as he did not own it through the seller; rather, the seller's ownership of it remained, unlike our issue. If the seller refuses to irrigate it due to harm that would affect the base, he shall be compelled to do so, because he entered into the contract upon that basis.

Section: It is permissible for the buyer of the fruit to sell it while it is still on its trees. This was narrated from al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam, Zayd ibn Thabit, al-Hasan ibn Abi al-Hasan al-Basri, Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i, and Ibn al-Mundhir. Ibn Abbas, Ikrimah, and Abu Salamah disliked it, because it is a sale of something before taking possession of it, so it is not permissible, just as if it were on the face of the ground and he had not taken possession of it. Our argument is that it is permissible for him to dispose of it, therefore it is permissible for him to sell it, just as if he had cut it. Their statement that "he has not taken possession of it" is invalid, for the possession of every thing is according to its nature, and its possession here is [by way of] leaving it free (al-takhliya), and that has been realized.

725 - Issue; he said: (If it is the fruit of palm trees, the appearance of its suitability is for redness or yellowness to appear in it. If it is the fruit of grapevines, its suitability is for it to become translucent (tatamawwah). The suitability of what is other than palm trees and grapevines is for ripening to appear in it).

In sum, whatever fruit changes its color when it reaches suitability—such as the fruit of palm trees,