Benefits of the Hadith: (Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah (may Allah be pleased with them both) said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade selling the surplus of water.

The Shaykh : Jabir’s second hadith contains benefits:
First, the prohibition of selling the surplus of water, which is what exceeds a person’s need from water that has not entered his ownership, because what has entered his ownership is his, and he may dispose of it as he wishes.
Now, and in it is also evidence that if he sells it, what is the sale?
The student: Not correct.

The Shaykh : It is not valid, and the price is returned to the buyer, it is returned to the buyer, because the prohibition was specifically about this, and the prohibition in it is for invalidity, because validating it is contrary to the ruling of Allah and His Messenger ... from it legally, what? Its invalidation and not giving it consideration, so if we validate it, we have contradicted the objective of the Shari'ah.
And in it is evidence for the permissibility of preventing, or the prohibition of selling, what a person needs from water. Why? Because the restriction to "surplus" is based on the common case, and the scholars of usul al-fiqh said that it was brought with a restriction considering the common case, so it does not have a concept (mafhum), and they gave many examples for this, among them is the saying of Allah the Exalted: So His saying is based on? The common case, otherwise she may not be in his care, and likewise because this is the common case, and coercion is not permissible, whether they want to seek chastity or not. Now, if someone says, if a person takes possession of it and owns it, is it permissible to sell it?
The student: No.

The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : If we look at the apparent meaning of the hadith, we say it is not permissible because it is general. And if we analogize it to firewood, about which he (peace and blessings be upon him) said , then it indicates that water, if a person takes possession of it, is his, just as in firewood, people are partners, so if he takes possession of it, he owns it.
Now, can it be derived from the hadith the prohibition of preventing one who benefits from the surplus of water from benefiting from it?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : The answer is yes. If a person wants to benefit from the surplus of water in your land, whether it is a well or a drainage pool, you do not have the right to prevent him, because the Lawgiver did not prohibit selling except so that all people may benefit from this water.
Now, if someone says, what do you say if his entry to take the water causes harm to the owner of the land? We say to him that in this case, he should prevent him, because harm is not removed by harm. That is, if we assume that the one who wants the water is harmed and needs water, then his harm is not removed by the harm of the other. If someone says, if he has taken possession of it and a person is in dire necessity for it, is it permissible to sell it to him? For example, he has water in a skin, and there is a man in dire need of drinking, is it permissible for the owner of the skin to sell him the water?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : The answer is no, because he must save him from perishing, he must save him from perishing, and if saving him is obligatory, then no compensation is taken for the obligatory, no compensation is taken for the obligatory. However, if he comes to you to bargain with you and he is in need, not in dire necessity, then you may sell to him for what you want.
And among the benefits of the hadith is the prohibition of selling the service of a camel for breeding, for this hadith, due to his saying: And it follows from this that if he sells that, then the sale is not valid, it is invalid, because it is from what the prohibition was specifically about, and what the prohibition is specifically about is not valid.
And among the benefits of the hadith is the wisdom of the Shari'ah in that trivial matters that are usually given freely and generally are not seen to have a price or a fee, due to his saying: If the owner of the camel refuses to give it freely except for a fee or by sale, we say in the answer that he may take it for a fee, and the one who commits the sin is the owner of the camel, because this person is trying to reach something he needs, so the sin is on the owner of the camel.