لو حلف لا يأكل من هذه الحنطة
Suppose someone swears not to eat this wheat.
In the application attributed to Abu Hanifa, the literal sense of eating the wheat remains viable. The oath is therefore tied to consuming the wheat itself; eating bread made from it does not, on this analysis, violate the expression.
The position attributed to Abu Yusuf and Muhammad gives effect to the established figurative breadth and can include both the wheat and bread made from it.
The disagreement concerns the priority of a living literal sense against a recognized figurative generalization, not merely a disagreement about how to translate the noun.