Is the ruling regarding fresh dates and dried dates in the sale of unripe fruit (‘ariyah) applicable to other fruits, such as figs?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: Shaykh, may Allah reward you. I say: We mentioned the disagreement among the scholars regarding the permissibility of this for the seller, who is the owner of the fruit, and we said that they stated that he cuts it from his tree. Then you mentioned that the issue of figs and grapes may be raised against him!
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: I say: If it were raised to us, how could we answer it?
The Shaykh : How? It is possible! We mentioned the answer to it: that the Shari'ah cannot distinguish between two similar things, and specifying this with dates is because that is the predominant case among them.
The student: All right.
The Shaykh : And it passed us in the principles of jurisprudence, O Khalid: “That which is a predominant restriction has no implication”. Did it not pass us?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh :[An-Nisa 4:23] What is the condition of this.
The student: Yes, but we mentioned it in the first scenario, then it returned in the second scenario, meaning in the analogy of grapes and figs to dates, we said.
The Shaykh : It is easier because the place of need is one. In the issue of analogizing grapes to fresh dates and figs to fresh dates, this is closer, because the place of need is one, which is the buyer. But transferring the need from one place to another is a point of difficulty. So in the first issue, regarding the type of the contracted item, we say there is no difference. But the place of need in the first issue is one. Yes, 'Abd al-Rahman!
The student: Shaykh, may Allah reward you. I say: We mentioned the disagreement among the scholars regarding the permissibility of this for the seller, who is the owner of the fruit, and we said that they stated that he cuts it from his tree. Then you mentioned that the issue of figs and grapes may be raised against him!
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: I say: If it were raised to us, how could we answer it?
The Shaykh : How? It is possible! We mentioned the answer to it: that the Shari'ah cannot distinguish between two similar things, and specifying this with dates is because that is the predominant case among them.
The student: All right.
The Shaykh : And it passed us in the principles of jurisprudence, O Khalid: “That which is a predominant restriction has no implication”. Did it not pass us?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh :
your step-daughters under your guardianship
ربائبكم اللاتي في حجوركمThe student: Yes, but we mentioned it in the first scenario, then it returned in the second scenario, meaning in the analogy of grapes and figs to dates, we said.
The Shaykh : It is easier because the place of need is one. In the issue of analogizing grapes to fresh dates and figs to fresh dates, this is closer, because the place of need is one, which is the buyer. But transferring the need from one place to another is a point of difficulty. So in the first issue, regarding the type of the contracted item, we say there is no difference. But the place of need in the first issue is one. Yes, 'Abd al-Rahman!