it is not part of the pledge. This is based on their view that the growth [of the pledge] is not part of it. This is not correct here, because palm fronds are part of the specific assets upon which the pledge contract was concluded, so they are part of it, just like the roots and the debris of a house. If the pledge is a vineyard, he may prune it, because this is for its benefit and there is no harm in it. The vine shoots are part of the pledge. If the trees are crowded and there is a benefit in cutting some of them for the sake of what remains, he may do so. If he wishes to remove all of them, he does not have the right to do so. It has been said that it is more appropriate to do so, because they may not take root, and thus the pledge would be lost. If the pledger refuses to perform all of this, he shall not be compelled to do so, because he is not obligated to perform actions that increase the pledge.

Section: For any increase that is required of the pledger, if he refuses, the ruler shall compel him to perform it. If he does not do so, the ruler shall hire [someone] on his behalf from his wealth; if he has no wealth, he shall hire [someone] from the pledge [assets]. If the pledgee provides for it voluntarily, he shall not be entitled to be reimbursed for anything. If he spends [on it] with the permission of the pledger, or with the permission of the ruler in the event that the pledger's permission is unobtainable, with the intention of being reimbursed, he shall be reimbursed. If the permission of both is unobtainable, he should call witnesses that he spent [on it] in order to be reimbursed for the expense. He is entitled to be reimbursed for it. If he spends [on it] without the permission of the ruler when it was possible to obtain it, or without calling witnesses that he intended to be reimbursed when it was impossible to obtain permission, then is he entitled to be reimbursed for it? There are two reports [on this]. If he spends [on it] with the permission of the pledger so that the pledge becomes a pledge for both the expense and the original debt, it is not valid, and it does not become a pledge for the expense, for the reason we have already mentioned. If the pledger says, "You spent as a volunteer," and the pledgee says, "Rather, I spent with the intention of being reimbursed," the statement is that of the pledgee, because the matter pertains to his intention, which he alone knows, and others have no knowledge of it, and he must take an oath because what the pledger claimed is possible. Any cost that is not required of the pledger, such as the cost of medical treatment, pollination, and the like, the pledgee shall not be reimbursed for it if he spent it as a volunteer or with the intention of being reimbursed.