General meaning
Pollination is the very first operation carried out on the fruit of the date-palm, and for that reason the Law makes the ruling revolve around it. Hence, when someone sells standing date-palms: if the fruit has already been pollinated—something the owner has worked on and set his heart upon—it remains the property of the seller and stays on its trees until the time of harvest. If the fruit has not yet been pollinated, it is included in the sale of the trees and thus belongs to the purchaser. This holds unless, in the first situation, the buyer stipulates that all or part of the fruit be included in the sale, or, in the second situation, the seller excludes all or part of the fruit from the transaction. In that case the fruit remains on the trees until harvest, for “Muslims are bound by their legitimate conditions,” and this is one of them.

The same rule applies to a slave whose master has placed money in his care: should the master sell the slave, that money belongs to the seller, since the contract does not cover it—unless the purchaser expressly stipulates that the money, or some of it, be included in the deal. Even if the money is of a type that would incur ribā (usury) when combined with the price, the inclusion is valid, because it is merely an adjunct not sought for its own sake, and what is subsidiary carries no separate ruling; it follows the principal.

Points derived from the ḥadith
1- Whoever sells date-palms that have been pollinated, their fruit belongs to the seller. This is the explicit purport of the ḥadith.
2- Whoever sells date-palms that have not been pollinated, their fruit belongs to the purchaser. This is the implicit meaning of the ḥadith.
3- If the seller excepts the unpollinated fruit, or part of it, it is his by virtue of that condition.
4- If the buyer stipulates that the pollinated fruit be included in the contract, it is his by virtue of that condition.
5- The permissibility of conditioning part of the fruit is inferred from the omission of the object in the phrase “unless the purchaser stipulates,” which applies equally to all of it or to a portion of it.
6- When some of the orchard’s fruit has been pollinated and some has not, the correct view is that each part is governed by its respective ruling, for the ruling follows its effective cause where it exists and lapses where it does not—unless the pollination relates to one palm tree, in which case all of that tree’s fruit belongs to the seller, because the rest is subsidiary to the first part.
7- Jurists have attached the same ruling to every form of transfer of ownership: for example, when the date-palms serve as consideration in a conciliation, a dowry, a rental payment, a gift, and the like.
8- Including the fruit in the sale when the purchase occurs before pollination, or when the buyer stipulates its inclusion after pollination, technically counts as selling fruit before signs of ripeness appear; yet it is allowed because the fruit is ancillary to its tree and not sold independently. The legal maxim states, “What cannot be sold on its own may be sold as an adjunct,” and this case exemplifies that, thereby reconciling the relevant texts.