the rest is delayed by a long delay, the sale is permissible for that which has matured, and it is not permissible for the remainder. Abu al-Khattab said: It is permissible to sell what is in the orchard of that [same] genus. This is the second opinion of the companions of al-Shafi'i, because the single genus is combined with one another to complete the nisaab (threshold) for Zakat, so it follows it in the permissibility of sale, like the single variety. The first [opinion] is more appropriate, because the two varieties may have a wide disparity in their maturation, so one does not follow the other in the appearance of suitability, just like two different genera. It differs from Zakat, for the intention there is wealth from that genus of property due to the proximity of its benefit and each variety taking the place of the other in its intended purpose. The reasoning here is the proximity of the maturation of one to the other and the prevention of the harm resulting from shared ownership and the division of hands; this does not occur in two different varieties, so it is, in this regard, like two different genera.

Section: As for the same variety from two different orchards, one does not follow the other in the permissibility of sale until suitability appears in one of them, regardless of whether they are adjacent or distant. This is the Madhhab of al-Shafi'i. It is narrated from Ahmad another report: that the appearance of suitability in a tree in a separate plot of land (qarah) is considered suitability for it and for what is near it. Malik also held this view, because they are close in suitability, so they resemble a single plot. And because the intention is safety from blight, which has been achieved. The first Madhhab [holds] that he only deemed that which had not shown suitability as equivalent to that which had, and as a follower of it, to prevent the harm of shared ownership and the division of hands; otherwise, the principle is the assessment of each thing by itself. What is in another plot does not contain this harm, so it must not follow the other, just as if they were far apart. What they have mentioned is invalidated by that which is not adjacent to it from that same variety. If the suitability of some of the single variety appeared, and one singled out for sale that which had not shown suitability from the remainder of the variety in that orchard, it is not permissible, because it enters under the generality of the prohibition. Its analogy is estimated upon the specific case [exempted] from the generality.