Kitab al-Buyu: Fruit Sales, Ripeness, Cutting and Reserved Quantities

1. When fruit itself is sold

The previous lesson separated ownership of a tree from ownership of fruit already on it. Now the fruit itself is sold while the tree remains with its owner.

The governing questions are:
1. Can existing unripe fruit be sold in its present state?
2. When must the buyer remove it?
3. What if the contract requires it to remain until ripening?
4. Can a seller retain a specified weight from the unsorted fruit on the trees?

Keep fruit already in existence distinct from fruit expected to grow in the future.

2. Original: before and after ripeness

وَمَنْ بَاعَ ثَمَرَةً لَمْ يَبْدُ صَلَاحُهَا أَوْ قَدْ بَدَا جَازَ الْبَيْعُ
Translation: Whoever sells fruit whose suitability has not yet appeared, or whose suitability has appeared, the sale is valid.

Lam yabdu salahuhu describes existing fruit before the signs of soundness or ripening appear.
Qad bada describes existing fruit after those signs appear.

Quduri recognizes the sale in either state, then immediately specifies the buyer's duty to remove it. This wording must not be stretched into authorization to sell fruit that does not yet exist.

3. What budding suitability means

Budu al-salah does not always mean the fruit has reached its very last stage of sweetness or maturity. Hanafi discussion also considers whether the crop has passed its serious risk of damage.

Its signs vary by species: dates may change color while other fruit may show a different indication of soundness.

The issue is distinct from whether the fruit already exists. A crop that has not yet grown is not treated as an identified existing fruit.

4. Existing produce vs future yield

Compare three situations:
1. Small mangoes are visibly growing on a tree: the question concerns an existing subject of sale and the contractual conditions.
2. Mango season is approaching but no mango exists yet: that is not the example addressed by this Quduri clause.
3. Ripe mangoes are already present: the fruit exists and shows the signs of suitability.

Other rules govern transactions involving future nonexisting crops. This lesson examines identified fruit already in being.

5. Unripe fruit as valuable property

Classical commentaries link the permissibility of existing unripe fruit to recognized saleable value (mal mutaqawwam)—a lawful benefit in its present or anticipated state.

A green fruit may already have lawful use, such as processing. Some Hanafi authorities also discuss its future usefulness, although jurists disagreed on cases of fruit with no present utility.

It is therefore incorrect to infer that anything wholly nonexistent or devoid of recognizable value may be sold.

6. Two ripeness scenarios

Suppose mangoes already exist on two trees:
1. The first carries hard, unripe mangoes.
2. The second carries mangoes showing signs of maturity.

Quduri's starting rule recognizes the sale of the existing fruit in either case.

Yet a valid sale is not the entire analysis: we must still examine severance, the seller's continuing ownership of the tree, and the effect of a condition that the fruit remain attached.

7. Original: buyer must cut promptly

وَوَجَبَ عَلَى الْمُشْتَرِي قَطْعُهَا فِي الْحَالِ
Translation: And the buyer is obliged to cut and remove it immediately.

Al-mushtari means the buyer, and qatʿuha means separating the fruit from the tree.

The buyer acquired the fruit, not the seller's tree or land. Ownership of the fruit by itself does not give the buyer an indefinite right to keep occupying the seller's tree.

Classical Hanafi explanation connects immediate cutting with freeing the seller's property.

8. Buyer and seller after the sale

After a completed sale, the seller still owns the tree, while the identified fruit belongs to the buyer.

Buyer's right: to take possession of that fruit and remove it lawfully.
Seller's right: not to have someone else's property occupy his tree for an indefinite period without entitlement.

The removal rule protects the boundary between two separate ownership interests; it is not simply a penalty for purchasing unripe produce.

9. Does cutting also apply after ripeness?

Quduri places the duty of immediate removal immediately after mentioning fruit both before and after signs of suitability. At the level of his main text, removal is not confined to green fruit.

Example: someone buys existing ripe dates but not the palms. Under the unqualified wording, the buyer must release the seller's trees.

Later jurists discuss custom and special cases involving fully developed fruit. Those qualifications should be distinguished from Quduri's straightforward general text.

10. Express cutting vs unrestricted sale

Distinguish:
1. Existing fruit is sold with an agreement to remove it immediately.
2. Existing fruit is sold outright with no condition that it be left attached.

Both fit Quduri's rule that cutting follows the sale, although in the second case that duty arises from the rule rather than an express contractual condition.

An agreement that the fruit must remain on the seller's tree until later is a different stipulation, addressed in the next sentence.

11. Original: retaining fruit by condition

فَإِنْ شَرَطَ تَرْكَهَا عَلَى النَّخْلِ فَسَدَ الْبَيْعُ
Translation: If he stipulates that the fruit is to remain on the palms, the sale becomes defective (fasid).

Shart tarkiha means making it an enforceable term of the sale that the buyer's fruit will remain attached to the seller's palms.

That imports a benefit from the seller's separate property into the sale. In the classical Hanafi account, it is a defective condition not required by an outright fruit sale.

Fasada al-bayʿ is a legal judgment of a defective contract, not merely an expression of dislike.

12. Why retention as a term causes defect

A seller agrees: “I sell you these mangoes currently growing on my tree, but your fruit must remain on that tree for the next 40 days as a term of the sale.”

The buyer bought only the fruit, not the tree. Yet the same contract now grants mandatory future occupation of another person's property.

Under Quduri's rule, that stipulated retention renders the sale defective. The issue is not the number 40; it is a benefit imposed on the separate tree through a condition extraneous to the sale.

13. Post-sale permission differs from a contract condition

Two situations must remain distinct:
1. The sale itself stipulates that the fruit must stay on the tree until maturity.
2. After an otherwise valid unconditional sale, the tree owner separately permits temporary retention.

The first is a stipulation of retention and is condemned by Quduri. The second has its own discussion in Hanafi commentaries; it should not be equated automatically with a defective term of sale.

The duration, additional growth and possible withdrawal of permission require case-specific legal analysis, not an unconditional shortcut.

14. Prophetic prohibition and the juristic explanation

Prophetic reports prohibit selling fruit before the signs of suitability. Yet Quduri permits selling existing fruit in certain pre-ripeness circumstances.

Hanafi jurists distinguish a present, identifiable crop whose removal follows sale from a transaction whose contractual arrangement leaves it on the seller's tree to ripen and exposes the parties to future risks.

This is a difference in interpreting the scope of the reports, not a dismissal of Prophetic evidence.

15. Where the schools differ

A useful teaching framework is:
1. Fruit has not yet appeared: outside the quoted rule on existing fruit.
2. Existing fruit is unripe but presently useful and stipulated to be cut: broad acceptance is reported.
3. Existing unripe fruit is sold without a condition: a well-known disagreement separates Hanafi and majority positions.
4. The contract requires the fruit to remain attached: Quduri rules the sale defective.

This is a teaching overview, not an exhaustive treatment of every jurist's qualification.

16. When newly grown fruit mixes with the sold crop

Suppose the buyer purchased fruit already on a tree, but before delivery additional fruit developed and became indistinguishably mixed with what was sold.

The new growth was not necessarily part of the original sale: it did not exist at contract formation. Hanafi commentaries discuss how inseparable mixing obstructs delivery and may affect the sale in particular circumstances.

This is a commentarial extension, not a new sentence being attributed verbatim to Quduri.

17. Original: reserving a measured weight

وَلَا يَجُوزُ أَنْ يَبِيعَ ثَمَرَةً وَيَسْتَثْنِيَ مِنْهَا أَرْطَالًا مَعْلُومَةً
Translation: It is not permitted to sell fruit while reserving a specified number of ratls from it.

Yastathni means excluding something from the subject of sale.
Artalan maʿlumah means a known number of ratls, a historical unit of weight.

This ruling concerns fruit still attached and not separately weighed or apportioned. The unseparated remainder becomes insufficiently determined, creating problematic uncertainty in what the buyer receives.

18. A known reservation can leave an unknown remainder

A seller says: “You may buy all the mangoes on this tree except 10 ratls that I will retain.”

The 10-ratl reservation is numerically specified, but the unharvested and unseparated remainder has not been identified in the way needed for the sale.

Classical commentary explains the prohibition through uncertainty in the subject remaining for the buyer. Knowing the number withheld does not by itself make the remainder sufficiently determined.

19. Retaining an identified tree is different

Compare:
1. “I sell the orchard's fruit but keep 10 ratls.” This reserves weight from an undivided attached crop.
2. “I sell the existing fruit on the orchard's trees except the fruit on the clearly marked tree at the eastern edge.” A specified tree is excluded from the transaction from the outset.

Fath al-Qadir distinguishes the visible, identified exclusion from the uncertain weight reservation. This is about identification of what is excluded, not a blanket authorization of all exceptions.

20. Harvested and weighed fruit is a separate case

If the fruit has already been harvested, weighed and physically separated, the saleable remainder may be clear and identifiable. This is distinct from reserving a weight from fruit still unseparated on a tree.

For example, 100 kg are harvested, 10 kg retained in a separate container and the remaining identified 90 kg sold. The subject of sale can be fully determined.

Quduri's phrase should not be generalized into a prohibition on every sale involving a separately weighed retained quantity.

21. The reservation issue has juristic discussion

Quduri's main text prohibits reserving specified ratls from unseparated fruit. Commentators nevertheless discuss the supporting reasoning, variant transmissions and alternative juristic analyses.

Fath al-Qadir records discussion of a report through al-Hasan, al-Tahawi's position and possible derivation from zahir al-riwayah.

For learning the Quduri text, retain its clear stated rule; for scholarly accuracy, do not hide that commentarial discussion exists.

22. Four fruit-sale decisions

Case 1: Existing green fruit sold without a retention stipulation — valid under Quduri's general rule; cutting follows.
Case 2: Existing ripe fruit sold without its tree — the main text still states a duty to remove.
Case 3: Existing fruit sold with a contractual obligation to remain until ripening — a defective sale.
Case 4: All the unseparated fruit sold except 10 ratls to be retained — prohibited in Quduri's stated rule.

The decisive concern changes between existence, added contract conditions and identification of the sold property.

23. A numerical uncertainty example

Suppose unharvested fruit is estimated at 80–110 kg. The seller reserves 15 kg and sells “the rest.”

The notional remainder might be 65–95 kg. The problem is not arithmetic alone; it is determining the unseparated subject of sale and deliverability.

If all fruit is first harvested and found to weigh exactly 90 kg, then 15 kg is put aside and the identified 75 kg sold, the transaction is factually different.

24. How contract wording changes the ruling

These three formulations are not identical:
1. “I sell you this existing fruit.” An unrestricted sale; Quduri's cutting rule follows if other requirements are satisfied.
2. “I sell it on condition that you leave it on my tree until ripe.” A retention stipulation.
3. “I sell it except 12 ratls of the attached fruit reserved for myself.” An unseparated measured reservation.

Contract terms and identification of property change the legal analysis, not merely the parties' unstated intentions.

25. Where the quoted sequence ends

The two consecutive principal rulings of Quduri were studied here in four quoted segments:
1. Selling existing fruit before or after suitability appears.
2. The buyer's duty of prompt cutting.
3. Defect caused by a condition to leave fruit on the tree.
4. Prohibition of reserving specified ratls from unseparated attached fruit.

The next original clause concerns sale of wheat in its ear and broad beans in their pods. That belongs to the next level, preserving the source order.

26. Integrated summary

Keep three inquiries separate:
Existence — Is the fruit being sold already there and identified?
Conditions — Does the sale require it to stay attached until later?
Determination — Is the sold remainder clear when a portion is reserved?

Quduri allows the sale of existing fruit in either stage of suitability and states an immediate cutting obligation. A contractual retention condition makes the sale defective. Reserving specified weight from unsorted fruit still on the tree is prohibited in his text.

Do not confuse these with future nonexistent crops, subsequent permission or already separated weighed produce.