The ruling on oil in which a mouse has fallen?

The questioner : A man has an oil press. He pressed the oil, and when he was filling the jars, he looked and saw a large mouse, may Allah reward you, that had been fried in the oil itself from the press. The matter became confused for him: was it from the jars or from inside the press? Is the jar impure, or does he sell the oil as it is? Or what is clarified for him in this matter?

The Shaykh : The answer, in my opinion, is clear and apparent, and the matter is easy, if Allah wills. But I want to understand: you distinguished between one thing and another, and it did not become clear to me. Repeat the scenario for me.

The questioner : A man has a press. After he pressed the oil and filled the jars, it became clear to him that there was a mouse that had been filled with oil.

The Shaykh : And where was this mouse found?

The questioner : Underneath, inside the press, but not inside it from the interior, on the iron innards...The Shaykh : No, I mean, yes...

Another questioner : The press itself has large cavities at the bottom, so that if you put your hand in the press, it will not press unless it comes from the door, for example, from the inside...

The Shaykh : The important thing, Professor, is that this mouse was in the trough where the press is.

The questioner : Yes, that is correct.

The Shaykh : And does that mean that when the oil is pressed and poured into this trough, there is contact between it and the mouse?

The questioner : Yes, that is correct.

The Shaykh : Correct.

The questioner : Yes, that is correct.

The Shaykh : Yes, it no longer matters to us now where the mouse is. The important thing is that there was contact between the oil present in the press and this mouse, right? And from this trough, it was emptied into the jars, or tanks, or something similar. What is the question now?

The questioner : Is this oil impure?

The Shaykh : The answer: The ruling on this oil, and anyAnother questioner : ruling on water in which impurity has fallen, meaning if one of its three characteristics changes—color, taste, or smell—then at that time this oil is impure. It is not permissible to sell it, even for oiling wood or something similar, because it is impure, and its sale and purchase are forbidden, and so on. And if none of its three characteristics has changed, it is pure and clear. He may sell it, and he may eat it, and he may cook with it whatever he wishes. This is the answer.

The questioner : We read in the book "Al-Zuhd" by Ahmad ibn Hanbal this story about one of the Tabi'un or one of the Companions. After he pressed his oil, he found a mouse that had been filled with oil, so he poured out all the jars. This is found in this chapter.

The Shaykh : This is cold asceticism.

The questioner : Cold asceticism.

The Shaykh : Yes, why? Because he wasted lawful wealth.

The questioner : O Allah, my Lord!

The Shaykh : Yes, indeed... You are saying the story is not like this?

Another questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Well, in any case, he gave the answer based on the story he told us. Tell us your story so we can see.

Another questioner : He found a mouse on the floor of the press, meaning submerged in oil. So he said, "Where did the mouse come from, and how did the oil reach this mouse? It must have been, for example, in the jars. It must have, for example, fallen in and then been taken out." So he was in doubt that he had found it on the floor of the press, on the ground of the press, and he was in doubt that it had been present there and then taken out.

The Shaykh : Allow me, my brother, a moment. I am now asking you: is the story in the first narration more serious and difficult, or with the other narration?

The questioner : With the first narration, of course.

The Shaykh : So what?
Al-Halabi : The issue of solid and liquid is not mentioned in the books of jurists. They mentioned, meaning, the consensus that the liquid...

The Shaykh : This is, of course, an important contemporary jurisprudential discussion, because the authentic hadith reported in "Sahih al-Bukhari" is in the wording: The hadith came in another narration, unique to a man known among the scholars of hadith as trustworthy, except in a specific situation we are not now in the position to mention. It came with detail and in the wording: This detail and this distinction between the fat being solid, where the place of the mouse is cut out and thrown away, and then it is eaten, and the fat being liquid, where it is all thrown away and nothing is benefited from it—this detail is not valid from the hadith perspective. Rather, the hadith, as you heard, is absolute: And this absolute text, whose narration it is, is the one that should be the only one considered valid in knowledge. Why? Because the distinction noted something: if it is solid, the mouse, when it falls, cannot dive and then float up; it will take a certain volume. So it is very reasonable that this mouse and what is around it be thrown away, and then the fat be eaten. Some people did not realize another thing: if the fat is like oil in the height of summer, or like water, the mouse falls, reaches the bottom, then drowns and dies. So its state is like this: it reached the bottom, then floated to the surface and died by drowning. In this state, it has one of two conditions, and there is no third: either it decomposes and its smell emerges, or it retains its integrity. That is, the owner of the fat noticed its fall immediately, recently, and not a long time has passed for this mouse such that it decomposes and its corruption spreads to the entirety of this fat. At that time, there is no difference between the fat being solid and the fat being liquid, as long as the mouse still maintains its body, has not decomposed, and its limbs have not corrupted. So throw it away and what is around it, and the problem is solved. Eat your fat, and it is done, and praise be to Allah. Let us go, we will catch the prayer in the mosque...