cut; because the harm befalls it even if it is not cut, and the roots are safe if it is cut, so cutting it is more appropriate. Al-Shafi'i has two opinions, similar to these two views.

Section: If one sells trees containing fruit belonging to the seller, and other fruit emerges, or if one purchases fruit on its trees and other fruit emerges, if the two can be distinguished, then each person has his own fruit. If one cannot be distinguished from the other, they are partners in both, each according to the amount of his fruit. If the amount of each is unknown, they reach a compromise regarding it, and the contract does not become void; because it is not impossible to hand over the sold item, it is merely mixed with something else, just as if one bought food in a place and other food belonging to the seller was poured onto it, or it was poured onto food belonging to the seller, and the amount of each was not known. This differs from the case where one buys fruit before its ripeness is evident and leaves it until its ripeness becomes evident, or buys an 'ariyya (gift of fruit on a tree) and leaves it until it bears fruit, for the contract is void according to one of the two narrations; because the mixing of the sold item with something else occurred through committing a forbidden act, and because it is used as a stratagem to purchase fruit before its ripeness is evident, or to purchase fresh dates with dried dates without measuring, without a need to eat them fresh. Here, he has not committed a forbidden act, nor does he make this a path to performing a prohibited deed. Abu al-Khattab combined both, saying: In all these cases, there are two narrations; one of them is that the contract becomes void, and the other is that it does not become void. The Qadi said: If the fruit belongs to the seller and other fruit emerges, it is said to each of them: "Grant your share to your companion." If one of them does so, we uphold the contract and compel the other to accept, because the dispute is resolved thereby. If they both refuse, we rescind the contract because it is impossible for each of them to obtain his rightful share. If one purchases fruit and other fruit emerges, we do not say to the buyer: "Grant your share," because the fruit represents the entirety of what was sold, so he is not ordered to relinquish all of it; rather, we say that to the seller, and if he grants his share to the buyer, we compel the latter to accept; otherwise, the sale is rescinded between them. This is the school of Al-Shafi'i. Ibn 'Aqil said: Perhaps this is an opinion of some of our colleagues, for I have not found it