Jew. [Uthman said:] 'You have ruined my well, so buy the rest of it.' So he bought it for eight thousand. In this is evidence for the validity of its sale, its dedication as an endowment (tasbil), the validity of selling what is drawn from it, the permissibility of dividing its water by turns (muhayalah), the fact that its owner is more entitled to its water, and the permissibility of dividing that in which there is a right even if it is not owned property. As for running water, that which originates in non-owned land, like large rivers and others, it cannot be owned under any circumstances. Even if it enters a man's land, he does not own it by that fact, just like a bird that enters his land, and everyone has the right to take it. He does not own it unless he creates a reservoir for it on his land, such as a pond or a basin, or digs a canal in which he takes water from the large river, in which case he becomes more entitled to that water than anyone else, like the surrounding area of a well (naq'). Even if what settles in the pond does not flow out of it, it is more correct that he owns it by that fact, as we will mention regarding rainwater. What originates or is developed, such as underground channels (quni), is like the surrounding area of a well, and there is the disagreement that exists regarding it. As for cisterns constructed for rainwater to be collected in, and similar ponds and the like, the most correct view is that he owns their water, and its sale is valid if it is known, because it is permissible water that he acquired by something prepared for it, so he owned it, like game that falls into his net, or fish in a pond prepared for them. It is not permissible to take anything from it except with the permission of its owner.

722 - Issue: He said: "And if one buys fruit without the tree, and its suitability [for harvest] has not yet appeared, leaving it until it is picked is not permissible. But if he buys it with the stipulation of cutting it immediately, it is permissible."

The sale of fruit before its suitability appears does not lack three categories: The first is that he buys it on the condition of leaving it [on the tree], so the sale is invalid by consensus, because the Prophet—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—forbade the sale of fruits until their suitability appears. He forbade both the seller and the purchaser. This is agreed upon (1). The prohibition necessitates the invalidity of what is forbidden.