Does a voided contract regarding a pledged item that undergoes transformation regain validity without a new contract?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Pledges (Collateral)
Primary text
The view suggesting the contract remains valid due to the return of the underlying condition (becoming vinegar) is deemed closer to correctness, because if the contract were completely voided, it could not regain validity without initiating a new contract. This contrasts with the case of a non-Muslim wife whose husband converts to Islam during the waiting period (Iddah), where the marriage bond returns based on the first contract because the impediment (difference in religion) is removed. In that case, the marriage was only suspended, not voided.
Supporting text
Those who argue for renewal based on the return of the property's essential nature (vinegar) equate it to the case where a wife of a non-Muslim man reverts to Islam, leading to the cessation of the contract due to religious difference; if the husband converts during the Iddah, the marriage bond is restored by the original contract. However, this analogy is rejected because in the case of conversion during Iddah, the dissolution of the marriage was merely suspended, not voided. If it had been voided by the expiration of the Iddah, a new contract would be required for restoration. In the case of the juice turning to wine, the ruling is a definitive voiding (jzm), unlike the suspended nature of the marriage contract.