In the realm of transactions, two principal perspectives are presented among Islamic jurists. The first view considers puberty as an absolute and fundamental condition for the validity of a minor’s transactions, asserting that the absence of puberty results in their absolute invalidity. Conversely, the second perspective identifies intellectual maturity and the ability to exercise discernment as the primary criteria for transactional validity, regarding puberty merely as a means for establishing such maturity. Advocates of the first perspective, relying on Quranic verses, narrations, and scholarly consensus (ijmā‘), emphasize the absolute necessity of puberty for the validity of transactions and maintain that its absence renders a minor’s transactions null and void. In contrast, proponents of the intellectual maturity theory argue that the cited evidences primarily highlight the importance of a minor’s ability to discern and exercise judgment, considering puberty merely as a means to ascertain this cognitive capacity. Accordingly, they deem the transactions of a rational minor valid, provided they conform to both rational and Sharia-based criteria. This study, adopting a descriptive-analytical approach and relying on library sources, undertakes a detailed examination of these perspectives to elucidate the role of puberty in a minor’s transactions and to ascertain the applicable Sharia ruling in this regard. The findings indicate that the theory of intellectual maturity, by emphasizing the criterion of discernment and managerial capability, aligns more closely with both Islamic legal principles and customary practice, offering a more effective approach to safeguarding the minor’s rights and interests. Adopting this theory could play a crucial role in the jurisprudential reassessment of the concepts of puberty and maturity in transactional validity and serve as a significant step toward achieving social justice.