different moments; and because he possessed no fixed rule for distinguishing between them beyond the first impression that presented itself in each case, he answered them in mutually divergent ways. Hence, when a later scholar attempts to marshal those responses into a single, consistent principle, he finds the task difficult—as you can verify for yourself in their books. These, then, are the main questions in this chapter.

Section: Selling the moist form of a ribā-liable commodity for its dried form

The jurists also disagreed about selling a moist ribā commodity for the same commodity once dried when the two amounts are equal and delivery is immediate. The source of the controversy is the report that Mālik transmits from Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqāṣ, who said:

“I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) asked about purchasing dried dates with fresh dates. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Do fresh dates lose weight when they dry?’ They replied, ‘Yes.’ He therefore forbade the transaction.”

Most scholars acted upon this ḥadīth and declared it impermissible to sell dried dates for fresh dates; this is the position of Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and others. Abū Ḥanīfah, however, allowed it, while his two companions—Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan and Abū Yūsuf—disagreed. Al-Ṭaḥāwī upheld Abū Ḥanīfah’s opinion.

The dispute turns on the apparent conflict between this report and the ḥadīth of ʿUbādah and related narrations, and on the differing assessments of that ḥadīth’s authenticity. The ḥadīth of ʿUbādah conditions permissibility solely on equivalence and equality—requirements that, by their wording, apply at the moment of contract, not in the eventual outcome. Those who privilege the outward sense of the ribā narrations reject the report about fresh and dried dates; those who treat it as an independent proof maintain that it provides an additional, explanatory ruling.

Scholars also debate the soundness of the report itself, and the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhārī and Muslim) did not include it in their Ṣaḥīḥs. Al-Ṭaḥāwī notes that ʿAbd Allāh was contradicted in the chain: Yaḥyā ibn Kathīr narrates from him that “the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade selling fresh dates for dried dates on credit.” He further observes that the transmitter who carries the report from Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqāṣ is unknown, yet the overwhelming majority of jurists have nonetheless acted upon it.

Relying on the rationale implicit in this ḥadīth, Mālik states in the Muwaṭṭaʾ that every exchange of a moist item for its dry counterpart is unlawful—meaning that establishing equality is impossible—such as dough for flour or fresh meat for dried meat. For Mālik this forms one of the two types of muzābanah that are forbidden, while the ʿarīyah concession is an exception; al-Shāfiʿī holds the same. In Abū Ḥanīfah’s view, however, the muzābanah that is prohibited is selling dates already harvested on the ground for dates still on the palms, because the respective quantities are unknown—that is, equality cannot be verified.

Al-Shāfiʿī extended the same reasoning to two moist items as well: he therefore disallowed selling moist for moist, or dough for dough, even when the quantities are equal, arguing that disparity will become evident once they dry. Most of those who rely on the ḥadīth about fresh and dried dates disagreed with him on this point.