the fact that an animal may be fungible, a countable item may be fungible, and an item sold by length or measure may be fungible, and so on. Yet they restrict it to items measured by volume or weight.

Their statement, “which has undergone no permissible manufacture,” means that if it has undergone permissible manufacture, it ceases to be fungible. Thus, if wheat is cooked and becomes food, it ceases to be fungible, even though its original form was sold by volume. Likewise, vessels are not considered fungible, even though their original material is sold by weight.

As for their stipulation, “permissible,” this excludes prohibited manufacture, for prohibited manufacture is treated as though it did not exist.

As for their statement, “for which a forward sale is valid,” this further narrows the definition. It excludes something that is sold by volume or weight but varies and cannot be precisely defined by its characteristics; such an item is not fungible.

The correct view is that a fungible item is one for which there is an identical equivalent, or one that closely resembles it. Evidence for this is that the Prophet, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, said to the wife who broke the vessel and spoiled the food: “A vessel for a vessel, and food for food.” (1) He did not require her to pay its value.

Moreover, manufacturing has now advanced. It is well known, for example, that glass cups are manufactured, yet they are unquestionably fungible. One cup is more closely equivalent to another cup than one sāʿ of wheat is to another sāʿ of wheat. This is well known. Likewise, jewelry, pens, and watches are all fungible, although according to the jurists’ definition they are not considered fungible.