to weight,” they mean only that it is to be assessed by weight; they do not mean that it has become a commodity sold by weight. This is an issue that must be noted carefully, lest one fall into error.

His statement, “and its juice for its juice,” means the juice of a ribā-based commodity for its own juice, such as grape juice for grape juice. This is permissible because the two are equal—but by what standard is that equality determined?

The answer is: by volume, because juice is a liquid, and every liquid is measured by volume.

His statement, “and its fresh dates for its fresh dates,” means fresh dates for fresh dates, on condition that they are equal in moisture. If they differ in moisture, it is not permissible, because the dry one is deficient in comparison to the fresh one.

His statement, “A ribā-based commodity may not be sold for another of its own kind when one or both of them are accompanied by something not of their kind.” The jurists refer to this issue as “a mudd of ajwah dates and a dirham.”

An example is where dates are sold for dates, with dirhams accompanying each of them: that is, one sells a ṣāʿ of dates and a dirham for a ṣāʿ of dates and a dirham. This is not permissible. This is the meaning of his statement, “or both of them are accompanied by something not of their kind,” for here both items being exchanged are accompanied by something not of their kind.

Some scholars said that if each of them is accompanied by something of a different kind, then it is permissible and there is no objection. They say that one may match each kind against that which is not of its kind, thereby avoiding ribā. For example, if I sell you a mudd and a dirham for a mudd and a dirham, there is nothing prohibited in this: if you match the mudd against the mudd, they are equal; and if you match the mudd against the dirham, there is no ribā between them.