The visible fruit that is sold with the land is not taken by preemption along with the [land] itself. Al-Shafi'i stated this. Abu Hanifah and Malik said: It is taken by preemption along with its roots, because it is connected to that which is subject to preemption, so preemption is established for it as a dependency, like buildings and plantations. Our argument is that it does not enter the sale as a dependency, so it is not taken by preemption, like the household goods of a house. The opposite of this is the building and the plantation. The verification of this is that preemption is, in reality, a sale, but the Lawgiver granted the preempter the authority to take it without the buyer's consent. If trees are sold containing fruit that is not yet visible, like a spathe (tal') that has not been pollinated, it enters into the preemption because it follows the [trees] in the sale, thus it resembles a plantation in the land. As for what is sold from the land individually, there is no preemption in it, whether it is something that can be moved, such as livestock, clothing, ships, stones, crops, and fruits, or something that cannot be moved, such as buildings and plantations when sold individually. Al-Shafi'i and the scholars of opinion (ashab al-ra'y) stated this. It was narrated from al-Hasan, al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, al-'Anbari, Qatadah, Rabi'ah, and Ishaq that there is no preemption in movable property. There is conflicting narration from Malik and 'Ata'; they said it once, and another time they said: Preemption applies to everything, even a garment. Ibn Abi Musa said: Another narration has been reported from Abu 'Abd Allah that preemption is mandatory in things that do not divide, such as stones, a sword, livestock, and what holds the same meaning. Abu al-Khattab said: There is another narration from Ahmad that preemption becomes mandatory for buildings and plantations even if sold individually. This is the opinion of Malik, based on the generality of his (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) statement: "Preemption is in whatever has not been divided." Also, because preemption was instituted to avert harm, and the occurrence of harm due to partnership in things that cannot be divided is more severe than in things that can be divided. Furthermore, Ibn Abi Mulaykah narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Preemption is in everything." Our response is that the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Preemption is in whatever has not been divided; if the boundaries have been set and the paths defined, there is no preemption," does not encompass anything except what we have mentioned. He only intended that which cannot be divided from the land, as evidenced by his saying: "if the boundaries have been set and the paths defined."