Is it permissible to take what is unrestricted without qualification, and what is the response to one who objects to that on the grounds that it is necessary to interpret the unrestricted in light of the restricted?

Assigning the absolute to the restricted is a fundamental principle in deriving Islamic legal rulings, and it has several scenarios: 1. If the absolute and the restricted are united in ruling and cause, then the absolute must be assigned to the restricted, such as assigning the absolute blood to the gushing blood mentioned in Surah Al-An'am. 2. If the ruling and the cause differ, then the absolute is not assigned to the restricted. 3. If the ruling differs but the cause is united, the majority opinion is not to assign the absolute to the restricted. 4. If the ruling is united but the cause differs, then scholars have differed on this issue, but the majority opinion is to assign the absolute to the restricted.

Accordingly, the absolute is assigned to the restricted when the ruling and cause are in agreement, and it is not assigned when they differ, or when one agrees and the other differs.