ad-Dawdî, Kitâb al-Amwâl (traité de droit fiscal), Tunisie, v. 1000 n-è


In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the MercifuL

And may Alldh send down blessings on our chief

Muhammad and on his family and Companions

Abu Ja 4 far Ahmad ibn Nasr al-Da’udi al-Malikl Says: (may God have mercy
on him),

All praise belongs to AHah, the One, Almighty, All-Powerful, the
Forgiving, the King, the Omnipotent, the Creator of day and night, who
made the creation out of nothing, nor after a similar thing that contained
(it), nor with the help of any auxiliary or assistant who could assist Him.
So every thing took its course according to the model preconceived by Him.
He is the Just in His decree and the Judge in His Commandment. He has
chosen Islam as a way of life (din) for His servants and has revealed a
manifest Book wherein He has explained the lawful, and the unlawtul (ways),
laws and commandments and has warned against committing sins and made
it (the Book) a guide and proof for all mankind. Falsehood cannot come at
it (the Book) from before or behind. (It is) a revelation from (Allah) the
Wise and the Praiseworthy , One who gave certain instructions to His servants
some of which do not admit of abrogation or alteration, nor can His com-
mandment be changed till the Day when they are resurrected.

Islam is one of these (instructions) which means to confess beiief in
Allah, in His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day. All
that concerning which a report (knowledge) has come from Ailah, the
Exalted, and is not to be abrogated, nor can His commandment prohibiting
injustice be altered.

Allah, the Exalted, says: “Lo: Allah enjoineth justice and kindness”
(16:90). And He says: “It is not for a believer to kill a beiiever unless (it
be) by mistake,” (4:92) up to His expression; “Whoso slayeth a believer of
set purpose his reward is Hell” (4:93). And He says: “For that cause we
decreed for the children or Israel, that whosoever killeth a human being for
other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he hath



killed all mankind, and whoso S aveth the life of one, it shall be as if he hath
saved the life of all mankind” (5:32).

So Allaii has held its punishment as well as its reward as great. He
«avs- “And slay not the life which Allah hath torbidden save w,th , nght
17 33) And He says: ” And kill not one another. Lo: A.lah ,s very ; M«a u.
unto you” (4:29), And He says: “Neither backbite one another (49.12).
He savs- “Lo as for those who traduce virtuous believ,ng women (who are)
“areleS cu^ed are they in the Wor.d and the Hereafter (24:23), up to the
end of the verse. And He says: *And eat not up your property among
yourselves in vanity” (2:188).

Allah has commanded (us) to follow His Book, and has made it a
guardian on all His revealed books and has abrogated with it whatever He
desired out of the previous books.

Allah has commanded (us) to obey His Messenger and has torbidden
to disobey his Commandments. He therefore says: “And th,s ,s a blessed
Scrtture^which We have revea.ed. So fo..ow it” (6:156)^ And he s
“Follow that which is sent unto you from your Lord (7.3). He says. u,
V e who believe: obey Allah and His Messenger and turn not away from him
wh^n ye hear (Him speak)” (8:20). He says: “We sent no messenger save
that he shoutd be obeyed by Allah’s leave” (4:64). He says: “whoso obeyeth
he Messenger obeyeth Allah” (4:80). He says: “And let those, ^*>£™
Z evade orders, beware, lest grief or painful pumshment befall hem
(24:63). He says: “And whatsoever he torbiddeth, abstam from it (5V./),
upto the end of the verse.

He says “And We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance that
thou mayest explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them
and that haply «hey may retlect” (16:44). He says: “Nor doth ta ^ speak of
■ his own) desire. It is naught save an inspirat.on that ,s mspired (53.3-4).
So the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and keep h,m ,n peace,
has explained whatever was revealed from AUah.

He elaborated what was general, and delivered the message with
which he, may Allah bless him and keep him in peace, was sent w,th gave
good advice to his tollowers, enlightened them, gave them good t,dmgs
cautioned them and warned them. Allah then selected for h,m whatever
wa” availab.e to him and He took him up to Him while , he was protusely
prai^d, lamented, blessed and rightly-guided. May AUah bless h,m and
grant peace to him, his family, his wives and h,s offspnng.

The Messenger of AUah bless him and keep him in peace, said, on



the sacred day in the sacred month, in the sacred city , on the day of Sacrifice

L ri„ ^r^ ^’ h ° nOUr 8nd P^* are ^labreSyou
hke the ,nv,olab,l,ty of th.s day of yours, i„ this month of yours, and i„ ihis

noth JT’ ^Hr 0t Tu diSbeHeVerS ^ mC Smitin « the ne <* °<™
S25 – ” 7 1 the meSsage? °’ A,,an: You bear witness.” He
added So do not adhere to anything against me; I do not declare any thin*
lawful except that wh,ch has been made lawful by Allah and I do not declare
anythmg forbuiden except that which has been ptohibited by Allah,” that

LndS’^ ^ n0t S3V anythin8 bUt that With which he has **<* com- manded. So btood,, and honour, except with any right, are de- dared invi ol a ble ,n accordance with the Qur>a„, Sunnah and the consensus
(of the commun,ty) (Bukhari, al-Jami’ al-Sahlh, Kitab aJ-MaghazI)



Chapter I





Allah, the Exalted, says: “Lo: Allah commandeth you that ye restore
deposits to their owners” (4:58). The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon
him) says: “Many a person who meddles in the property of Allah without
any right, shail have the hell fire.”* Allah also says: tl And know that whatever
ye take as spoils of war, Lo: a fifth thereof is for Allah, and for the Messenger
and for the Kinsman (who hath need), and orphans and the needy, and the
wayfarer” (8:41). He also says: “And that which Allah gave as spoil unto
His Messenger from them, ye urged not any horse or riding-camel for the
sake thereof but Allah giveth His Messengers lordship over whom he will”

It was, therefore, usual with a land from which the disbelieving owners
had migrated without fighting, that Allah made it exclusive for His prophet.
But the Prophet never appropriated it for himself to the exclusion of his
Ummah and never deprived them of it. He used to take out of it the annual
provision for his family and spend the rest thereof on mounts and weapons
as military equipment for the cause of Allah.

Allah has also said: “That which Allah giveth as spoil unto His Mes-
senger from the People of the townships, it is for Allah and His Messenger
and for the near of kin, and the orphans and the needy and the waytarer”
(49:7) upto His expression, “they are the loyal” (49:8). So, whatever Allah
has conferred on His Messenger, as mentioned in this verse, the same as
that which has been mentioned in the chapter of ai-*Anfdl, while He has
added in this verse, “For the poor fugitives who have been driven out from

* Bukhari, al-Sahih, Kitab Fard al-Khumus.


their homes and their belongings” (49:8) and they are the same as “the
needy” mentioned in the verse of al-Khums.

Some people interpret (saying) that Allah’s expression, “Those who
entered the city and the faith before them” (49:9) upto His expression:
“And place not in our hearts any rancour toward those who believe, Our
Lord, Thou art full of pity, Mercifur (49: 10), is conjoined with his expression
Tor the poor fugitives”. But the explicit meaning of the verses indicates
something contrary to this interpretation, since the sentence ends with His
expression al-Muflihun “successrur (49:9) and begins again with ‘Those
who entered the city and the faitrT (49:9) and completes the statement with
His expression: “They love those who flee unto them” (49:9) with which
the sentence ends. Then, again begins with His expression: li And those who
came (into the faith) after them (49:9)” and completes the statement with
His expression: “They say, our Lord: forgive us and our brethren who were
before us in the faith” (49:10).

Ibn Idris says that the Arabian villages conquerred by the Prophet
without fighting were divided into five shares, out of which four shares went
to the Prophet. This is a view which according to our knowledge was never
held by anybody before him. He further says: “AIl that is realized from the
people of ‘protection’ (ahl al-Dhimmah) and the people of enemy-territory
(Dar al-Harb), when they have travelied to us, and the personal effects
(aslab) will be divided into five shares, out of which four shares will be given
to the fighting personnel.” But this is an arbitrary decision without any
authority and is not therefore lawful for anybody.

The ‘Ulama’ have agreed that the whole lot of what has been taken
by the army as spoils of war and carried to their camp except personal effects
and food, the one-fifth thereof, shall be divided according to what Allah,
the Exalted, has mentioned in the verse on al-Khumus, and the four-fifth
shail be distributed among the free individuals of the army with the exception
of those who are minor and unable to fight, and women; they shali have no
share. However, if the Imam considers to give them something as small gift
out of al-Khumus y he can do so. But this concerns only the things other
than personal effects (asb&b), and garments, weapons and the mounts which
are taken from the polytheists.

There has been a disagreement concerning personai effects; some say
these belong to the slayers. Others say that these will be divided into five
shares along with the booty and the four-fifths thereof will go to the army.
Ibn Idris says: the personal effects (asb&b) wiU be divided into five shares
out of which the slayers will be given four-fifths. He also says: the share of
the “near reiations” (Dhawil Qurba) wiil be divided among Banu Hashim


and Banu’1 Muttalib according to their number irrespective of their minors
and adults and males and females, who will get equal shares.

The share wiil be divided among those who take part in fighting and
will be inherited by their heirs and they will be given one-fifth of Khumus
according to the Qur’an, and every group along with others of the same
group will be given Khums.

This view does not make any real sense and any division according
to it will not be valid, Moreover this entails him (Ibn Idris) that he should
assign the shares of orphanage to the orphans. He further argues saying that
the Prophet gave excess out of the Khums of Khaybar for the sake of family
and children of the recipients, although there has been much discussion on
his mentioning of the family. Ibn Idris justifies himself by saying that the
Prophet means by “those who were from them” (man kdna minhum), “the
people themselves” (min al~qawm anfusihim). But the Prophetic traditions
with which he has argued contain (the reports) that the Prophet gave to
Safiyyah fifty wasaq, to Banu Ja 4 far, who were three, fifty wasaq; and to
Fatimah, one hundred. He also mentions that Fatimah demanded the service
of a slave; and that the Prophet gave to ‘Abbas one hundred and fifty, while
the children of 4 Abbas in those days were more in number than those of ‘ Ali.

Thus all these facts prove something contrary to his view. He has,
moreover, narrated stories the like of which he does not accept from others.
Again, he has attributed these stories to those people whom he does not
name. He prefers silence concerning those who bear evidence against him.
£ven if the story is established in accordance with what he has narrated, it
sureiy indicates the opposite of what he has held.

It has been established that the Prophet gave to majority of those,
whose hearts needed reconciliation, one hundred camels. Safwan said: “I
stood before the Prophet while to me he was most disagreeable but he
continued to give me till he became to me the most beloved of the people,”
and he (Safwan) adds that if any Lord was indispensable, the Lord of the
Ouraysh was better than that of the Thaqlf. He (Safwan) says: “What was
given to him in that battle reached three hundred camels.”

lsma’11 says that it is lawful to deprive some of them of the booty
and to divide the Khums among the rest of the people.

Ibn Idris says that there has been disagreement concerning the shai z
of the Prophet. Some say it will be assigned to those who have been mer-
tioned with him. Ibn Idris says that this is so, because, when a group of
people of sadaqdt are not available, the sadaqdi are assigned to the rest of



the people. He (Ibn Idris) hirther says that this is a good opinion. But if
there is an excess, al-fay’ will be divided among those who are other than
those who get sadaqat. Some others say that it will be spent on horses, mules
and weapons. He (Ibn Idrls) prefers that it should be employed for purposes
most useful for Islam such as sealing the border-towns, preparing horses,
mulcs and weapons. He has hereby illustrated (the problem) with an example
which was not so in his opinion.

It has been mentioned on the authority of Nu’man that the share of
the orphans, the needy and the wayfarer would be assigned to them, and
the share of the Prophet /fol. 3-b/ together with the share of the near
relations will be spent on mounts and weapons on account of a hadlth
narrated by Qays ibn Muslim on the authority of al-Hasan ibn Muhammad
ibn AIT which says that they disagreed (on their problem), some urged to
assign the share of the Prophet to the Caliph after the Prophet and the share
of the relations to the near relations of the Caliph. But, later on, they agreed
to spend it on war preparations and horses. This was the case during the
Caliphate of Abu Bakr and k Umar.

But this is not established. What is established indirectly is the fact
that Banu Hashim were entitled to one-fifth of al-Khums, while the Caliphs
had held that they would get out of it to the extent of their needs. In fact,
1 All and * Ahbas disputed only concerning what was left by the Prophet from
the spoils of war that had fallen into his hands without using a horse and a

As for the share of the near relations (DhawTl Qurbd), there is
neither a verse concerning it, nor a Sunnah to be argued with in favour of
turning the share away from them, and the report, like the one preceded,
cannot be advanced as an argument against what has been established by
the Kitab (the Ouran), the Sunnah, and what has been confirmed by the
tact that the Caliphs gave them and offered them that which sufficed them,
but the Near Relations refused to accept anything save one-fifth of al-Khums.

AIT asked a man, who had tound a treasure (kanz)< to deduce its
Khums and take away its four-fifths. He then asked him to distribute the
Khums among the needy. This proves the soundness of the view of Malik.
It has been mentioned that thjs was a remnant of the wealth of Khosroes
and Caesars.

It has been argued by what has been reported that in the battle of
Mutah, an auxiliary soldier hid himself behind a rock to ambush an infidel
and all of a sudden, his horse got hamstrung and fell down. The auxiliary
soldicr. thereupon, killed him and took hold of his horse and personal


effects When the battle was won by the Muslims, Khalid sent for him and
took hold of the personal effects. ‘Awf ibn Malik, thereupon said to him
“Don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah left the decision of givnig
away the personal eftects with the slayer?” He said “Yes, but I consider it
too much.” He said,: 4 You must return it.” But Khalid refused. Then k Awf
mentioned the incident to the Messenger of Allah who asked Khalid, saying
u O Khalid, What made you do this?” Khalid said, 4 i considered it too much/ 1

The Messenger of AUah asked Khalid to return whatever he had
taken from him. ‘Awf thereupon, said “Beware, O Khalid, did I not tell
you the same?” On this, the Messenger of AUah enquired, ” What was that?”
Khalid then told him the story. The Messenger of AUah became angry and
said; “O Khalid, Don’t return it to him. Are you going to leave behind my
chiefs so that for you will be the best of their commandments, and against
them is the turbidity thereof?”

IsmaTl says that this indicates that the Imam cannot give away the
personal effects. He can only give them on exercising his personal discretion
(Ijtihdd). And this also shows that it is a part of the Khums t because the
four-fifths are to be divided in place of booty, and onty the Khums is to be
carried to the Prophet. Now, when four-fifths went to those who acquired
the booty, there was no place left for personal effects save to be included
in al-Khums. It may be assigned to Allah as He says: “And know that
whatever you take as spoils of war its one-fifth is surely for AUah and for
the Messenger” (VIII:41) Now, anything concerning which “lillah” (for
AUah) and “lil-Rasul” (for the Messenger) are used, is not to be considered
by itself, it is only to be executed through Ijtihad.

Isma v Tl adds that this has been indicated [fo. 4-a] also by the saying
of the Prophet: “Whoever kills a person (enemy) and has an evidence for
it, has the right to his personal effects.” It is, therefore, concluded from
this, that when one does not produce an evidence, the personal effects would
be distributed among the Muslims. However, when everyone has his own
case (i.e. a supporting case), the decision will be delayed till the slayer is

Ahmad says that as for his saying: “the four-fifths shall go to those
who have (fought) and acquired booty,” it expresses a general meaning. It
gives a particular sense as has been explained by the Prophet. Now, as for
his expression: “Had the case been definite for every one, the evidence
would not be demanded,” the evidence is only made binding, because some-
times the victim is killed by his own weapon, and sometimes, he is killed
by some-one who dies after his death, while others make claims of having
killed him.



In that battle, there had accompanied the Prophet even those who
had not embraced Islam, and those who had not accompanied the Prophet
m any battle from among those -who embraced Islam, on the day of the
conquest of Makkah. Do you not see him giving it to Abu Oatadah by the
recommendation of one who was with him inspite of his claim? This supports
our view, since, when one who possesses acknowledges the ciaim of the
slayer, the thing becomes as if it is in his own possession and thus the person
becomes the defendant. What is more explicit is that the Prophet did not
ask to estimate its value in counting as a part of the Khums.

It is also possible that the Prophet had asked him not to return what
he had ordered him to give, because he declared the refusal of Khalid as
an executed decision, which was not to be rebutted, just to make ‘ Awf know
that Khalid interpreted that rare practice which had preceded from the
Prophet in this context, and that his exercise of Ijtihad was appropriate for
a person who can apply it in case when there is no nass (explicit text) for
it. This also shows that the personal effects were (declared) for the slayers
before the battle of Hunayn, as the battle of Mu’tah took place before the
battle of Hunayn, and His saying, “The four-fifths are to be distributed
among their claimants and the personal effects are a part of the Khums”.
It is also possible that since it was not known earlier that the personal effects
would be divided into five shares, Khalid returned them. Now, they would
be either returned to the slayer or would be amalgamated with the Khums
also. The hadith of Abu Gatadah indicates that the Prophet had asked the
person who had heid the personal effects in his possession to hand them
over to Abu Oatadah without estimating their value to be counted in the

Isma’11 ibn Ishaq says: Sulayman ibn Harb narrates on the authority
of Hammad ibn Zayd, on the authority of Ayyub, on the authority of Muham-
mad, on the authority of Anas, that al-Bara’ fought a duel with a Persian
noble and killed him, and sent his two bracelets and the belt (to Madinah).
Thereupon, one day ‘Umar said, “Abu Talhah has committed a sin. We
formerly used to treat the personal effects as nafai. Now, the personal effects
of ai-Bara’ constituted a treasure and I consider that I must divide it into
five shares.” It was said to Muhammad, “Did he (‘Umar) divide it into five
shares?” He said, i do not know.” IsmaTI says that this saying of l Umar
proves that he used to act according to his personal discretion {Ijtihad), and
this is quite clear.

Ahmad says: on the contrary, ‘Umar’s saying indicates something
different, because he did not consult Abu Talhah on any matter concerning
whith the decision had been taken earlier. He(‘Umar), however, stated [fo.
4-b[ that they used to treat the personal effects as nafal He, therefore,



apologised to Abu Talhah when he intended to act contrary to the precedent,
because he considered these personal effects enormous. Had it been a case
in which he had the right to make decision he would have executed it on
the basis of the previous case and would not have been in need of making
any apology. This uiso proves that the decision of personal effects was known

Isma’il says: Muhammad ibn 4 Abd al-Malik, reported on the authority
of Abu Salih on the authority of al-Layth ibn Sa’d, on the authority of * Aqfl,
on the authority of Ibn Shihab from Salim, from his father (who relates)
that the Messenger of Allah used to give nafal to everyone whom he sent
on petty expeditions (sardyd) over and above the share of the general army.
He added that the Khums in that was compulsory. He further says that the
action of the Prophet shows that it was not done in general.

Ahmad has criticised the sanad of the hadith, and has said, “Even if
it was established, it would bear no evidence, for Ibn ‘Umar did not attend
all the expeditions so as to attest all cases, He therefore attested what he
observed. His evidence would have been a proof had he said that the Prophet
did not offer the personal effects as nafal. His saying, in all these cases
there is Khums\ indicates that it (personal effects) is other than the Khums. ”
It also proves that nafal is to be given at the time of advance and at the
time of retreat, as had been narrated. But the personal effects (asldb) were
not mentioned there.

He says: ‘Abd al-Wahld ibn ‘Ubadah relates on the authority of
Hammad ibn Salmah, from Ishaq ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Abu Talhah from
Anas that on the day (battle) of Hunayn, the tribe of Hawazin came along
with children, women, camels and goats which they arranged in arrays to
show that they excelled in number and fought fearlessly. Whereupon the
Muslims turned away retreating. The Messenger of Allah, then, said, “O,
servants of Allah, I am Allah’s servant and His Messenger.” He then added,
“O, the people of Ansar, I am Allah’s servant and His Messenger.” So
Allah routed the polytheists, and the Prophet did not strike anybody with
his sword or spear. The Prophet then said 4i Whoever slays a disbeliever,
shail get his personal effects.” Abu Talhah, then, killed twenty men and
obtained their personal effects. Isma 4 Il adds: \This shows that had it been
a known fact, the Prophet wouid not have argued therein with such a state-

Ahmad says: “His argument is baseless, because this battle was at-
tcnded by those who were neither old converts to Islam, nor had they fought
carlicr; so, he (the Prophet) wanted to let them know what had remained
unknown to thcm.” He also said in this hadlth: “Abu Oatadah said, ‘O,


Messenger of Allah, verily, I struck a man on the chord of his shoulder
while his mail-coat lay on him, but I was in too much hurry to take it off
so see with whom it lies?’ I took it, said a person, and so requested the
Prophet to make him contented without it. But the Messenger of Allah kept
silent. He was never asked tor anything but gave him the same. At this Abii
Bakr said, ‘No, by Allah, Allah grants it as/ay’ to one of the lions of Allah
and will he (the Prophet) give it to you?’ The Messenger of Allah then
laughed and said: ‘Abu Bakr has spoken the truth.’ ”

Ahmad says: This is no argument in this case, because had it belonged
to the Prophet, he (the Prophet) would have given it to the seeker, while
Abu Bakr did not say: [fo. 5-aJ “He (Allah) grants it as a fay’ to His
Messenger”, rather, he had said “He granted it as a/ay’ to the slayer”, and
the Prophet did not reject it.

Isma’Il says: ‘All relates on the authority of Fuzari on the authority
of Abu Malik al-Ashja 4 !, from Nalm ibn Abu Hind, from Ibn Samurah,
from his father, that the Prophet said: “Whoever slays a man will get his
personal effects.” He (Isma’11) says, ” NAFAU

lbn ‘Urnar says: “We went out on an expedition towards Najd in
which our shares were eleven or tweleve camels, and they (the fighters)
received one camel each as nafal” This indicates that they were given nafal
trom the Khums. It is also established that k AU said, “I had two aged
she-camels of which I received one as my share in the battle of Badr and
the other was given to me out of the Khums on the day of Badr.” The
Prophet said on the day of Hunayn, “Whoever kills a person and has a
witness to it will get his (the slain man’s) personal effects.” Whereupon Abu
Oatadah reported to the Prophet that he had killed a person. Then a man
said that in reality he had spoken the truth. He told the Messenger of Allah
that the personal effects of the man were with him. So he prayed to the



Prophet to please make him contented without it. Abu Bakr thereupon said,
“By Allah, it is not possible. The Messenger of AHah will not do injustice
to a lion out of the iions of Allah who fights for Allah and his Messenger,
whiie you will be given his personal effects.” The Messenger of Allah said,
i4 He has said the truth, so you give it to him.” And he did.

Malik says: u Had it been so that the personal effects belonged to the
slayers, this would not have remained unknown to Abu Gatadah, who was
one of the prominent Companions of the Prophet so that he had to mention
the case to the Messenger of Allah. Again, had it been a regular case, he
would have surely known it. The Messenger of Allah sureiy did it in some
of his battles, but it has not reached me that the Prophet did it in all of his

Ahmad says that the two sones of ‘Ati-a’ disputed over the personal
effects of Abu Jahl on the day of Badr, Each of them claiming that he had
killed him. The Prophet, then, asked them to show him their own swords.
When the Prophet looked at their swords, he said, “Both of you (killed
him) , \ and gave them his personal effects as nafal, It has been reported
through a chain of narrators of which there is some doubt that Ibn Mas’ud
received the swords of Abu Jahl as nafal, because he had beheaded Abu Jahl.

On the day of Badr the Muslims were divided into three groups; one
group had surrounded the Messenger of Allah so that he might not be
overtaker unawares. Another group was fighting against the enemies and
the third group was busy in collecting the booty. When the rlghting was
over, each group from them claimed that they had better claim to the booty
than others, Those who had surrounded the Messenger of Allah argued
saying that they had better claims because they had guarded the Prophet.
The other claimed that they were better entitled to the booty because they
had driven away the enemy. Thus, the personal effects became the bone of
contention among those who had taken hold of them and those who had
killed (their owners). Allah thereupon revealed: “They ask thee (O Muham-
mad) of the spoils of war, say: the spoil of war belong to AHah and the
Messenger. So keep your duty to Allah, and adjust the matter of your
difference,” upto His words: “If you are believers” (8:1), meaning thereby
that the decision concerning it lay with Allah and His Messenger and this
was in fact a test of their obedience to Allah. They, thereupon, expressed
their agreement and submission.

Allah then, revealed: “And know that whatever ye take as spoils of
war, Lo: a fifth thereof is for Allah, and for the Messenger,” upto the end
of the verse (8:41). So the Prophet assigned four-fifth of the booties after
the personal effects for the army, giving every man one share and every



horseman two shares. In this battle, there were three horses with them, one
horse belonged to Zubayr, the other horse to Abu Murthad al-Ghanawi and
the third to Miqdad ibn l Amr, known as Ibn al-Aswad.

The k \J\ama have agreed that two shares are to be given to the horse,
except Abu Hanifah who does not like to prefer the horse to its rider, and
(according to him) only one share will be given to the horse. They have
disagreed concerning a man who keeps more than one horse. Some hold
that only one share will be given for one horse. Some others are of the
opinion that two horses shall have shares and nothing will be given to more
then that. All these views have been reported from the Prophet.

They have disagreed with regard to the hackneys. Malik and many
other scholars hold that when the ruler (al-wdli) allows their use, hackneys
will be treated like horses. Some think /fo. 7-a\ that a hackney is entitied
to one share and a horse to two shares. Some others say that no share will
hc prescribed for the hackneys. The first view is more correct as the word
khayl (horse) is applied to it.

Chapter II


Scholars have disagreed on the question whether the Imdm should
give anything as additional share (al-nafaf). The Syrians and others report
that those who were sent on expeditions used to receive one-fourth as nafal
during their advance and one-third on their return, out of the principal
booties. And this is the view of the majority of the inhabitants of al- l Iraq.
Malik, however, dislikes it saying: one should not nght for the sake of the
world, and he (Malik) interprets this according to the hadith: “All actions
sureiy depend upon intentions and one only deserves that for which one
intends. So, whoever migrates for the sake of Aliah and His Messenger, his
migration will be, therefore, towards Ali&h and His Messenger, and whoever
migrates for the sake of the world which he attains or for a woman whom
he marries, his migration is towards that for which he has intended.” For
this reason Maiik does not like that the Imdm should promise that whoever
slays anyone wiil get this and that and whoever fights in a certain place will
get this and that. He (Malik) says that if he (Imdm) does say such things or
mentions any nafal before fighting, it is to be executed according to what
he says, because it is a commandment concerning which they have disagreed;
hence it is like a decision that has been enforced.

Those who permit it, argue with what has been substantiated from
the Prophet that he said to ‘Amr ibn al-‘Asi, “Shall I send you in any army,
may Aliah keep you hale and hearty and give you booty and I desire for
you good amount of wealth.” He (‘Arr,) replied, ‘My migration is not for
the sake of wealth, I migrate only for tiie sake of Allah and His Messenger.’
The Prophet rejoiced and exclaimed: ‘How exceilent this wealth is for the
excellent man.’ ”

They say that the Prophet would not have given him that which was
not lawful for him. Moreover, when the action is done for the sake of Allah,


here »s no harm in seeking wealth as well as that which he earns out of the
;race ot Allah. The Prophet Noah (Nuh) said: “Seek pardon of your Lord,
o! He is ever Forgiving. He will let loose the sky for you in plenteous rain”
(71: 10- II), and Hud (the Prophet) said: “Ask forgiveness of your Lord,
thcn turn unto Him repentant: He will cause the sky to rain abundance on
you and will add unto you strength to your strength” (9: 52).


Chapter III





Scholars have differed about the modality of the division of one-fifth
of the booty (al-Khums). Malik and many other ‘Ulama” are of the opinion
that it is to be divided according to one’s personal discretion (Ijtihad) and
not in accordance with the number of the group of people mentioned in the
Qur’anic verse, A similar view has been narrated from the Four Caliphs
except 4 AIT who in this regard fol!owed the poiicy of his companions, bccause
the two had interpreted this verse (in their own way). He, therefore, treated
it like a decision that comes into force. His (*Airs) view and the opinion of
Banu Hashim was that the Khums was to be divided among the five groups.

They had interpreted that Allah*s expression lillah was the opening
of the speech, and for the messenger is a share, and every group of people
would have a share. It is also confirmed that * AH said: “I asked the Messenger
of Allah to give me one-fifth of the fifth [fo. 7-b] so that nobody could
dispute with me in that,” and the Prophet did accordingly . And this continued
till the end of the Caliphate of ‘Umar. ‘AH added: “I then said to ‘Umar:
‘This is needed by the general people while we do not need it, so, please
distribute it among them.’ ” *A1I continued, “When I came out, al-‘Abbas,
who was a farsighted person, said to me. *You have taken out from our
hands something which will never come back to us/ ” ‘All said: “I was not
invited to it afterwards.”

Ahmad says this was something which he considered at a time when
he divided the landed property, but had it been a usual matter, Banu Hashim
would have argued with it as evidence and the Caliphs could not have accused
them of falsehood concerning what they had related. When *A1I became


caliph , Banu Hashim wanted him to spend it according to their interpretation.
But ‘AIT agrued: “People have already interpreted and we have also inter-
preted, but we in our interpretation are no better than that of theirs and f
do not like that k AII should be blamed for opposing the two ( Abu Bakr and
‘Umar).” When he arrived in Kufah, he said, “I have not come here just
to undo a contract made by “Umar.” The Jews submitted to him a letter
which he had written recommending their cases to ‘Urnar for not banishing
them, and they said, “Notwithstanding your letter and recommendation,
‘Umar banished us/’ Thereupon, *A1I said, “Woe to you, 4 Umar was rightly-
guided in the matter; however, I am not going to alter any decision taken
by ‘Umar.”

A group of people holds that al-Khums is to be divided into six shares;
the share of Allah is to be spent for some good cause, and one share for
the Messenger of Aliah, and one share for each one of the groups mentioned
in the verse. Another group says that a handful of the Khums will be taken
and put into the Ka 4 bah for its maintenance, and this is the share for Allah,
and the rest will be divided into five shares; one for the Messenger of Allah
and one share for each of the groups. Yet, another group holds that it is to
be divided into five shares; and we have already mentioned them. But a
different group holds that it is to be divided into four and Allah and His
Messenger alone have the right to give their decisions in the matter because
both this world and the world Hereafter belong to Allah while He is not in
need of the two. These are the six views. Isma’TI says that Khums belongs
to the entire Muslim community and Allah has mentioned the categories of
people in the Ouranic verse only to put emphasis on the affairs (of the
Muslim community). So these are the seven opinions.


Some say that (the Near Relations) are the whole tribe of Ouraysh.
And this is wrong. Some hold that they are Banu Hashim and BanuM
Muttalib. Ibn IdrTs has argued for this view with a hadlth which is not
contirmed by way of transmission,: that the Prophet gave Banu Hashim and
Banul Muttalib out of the fifth of the one-fifth of booty. ‘Uthman and Jubyr
ibn Mutim, thereupon, went to him and said, “O Messenger of Allah! you
gave to Banul Muttalib although we and they stand before you on the same
tooting.” Thereupon the Messenger of Allah said: “Banu 1 ! Muttalib and
Bunii Hashim are one”, and he interweaved his fingers. This he said because
of the fact that they were persecuted for the sake of Allah and His Messenger.
The unbelievers of the Ouraysh entered into a pact (of social boycott) against
thcm including Banu Hashim that they would not mix with them, nor coop-


erate with them. [fo. 8-aJ The matter became grave against them and a few
years later, when their suffering reached its climax, pedple from a group of
Ouraysh made an effort to break this pact. What is established by way of
transmission (hadith) is that the Prophet gave Banu Hashim and Banul
Muttalib out of one-fifth, and that there was no mention of one-fifth of fifth.
They had one share in the Khums which the Prophet gave them out of it
and treated them (Banu’l Muttalib) and Banu Hashim equally, and out of
the same he gave to those whose hearts needed reconciliation (Mu^alli/ah
Qutubuhum), on the day of Hunayn. He gave to al-Aqra’ ibn Habis and
‘Uyaynah ibn Hisn one hundred camels each. He gave to Abu Sufyan,
al-Harith ibn Hisham, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Yarbu’ of Makhzum clan, Suhayl
ibn ‘Arnr, Huwaytib ibn ‘Abd aI-‘Uzza, ‘Alqamah ibn ‘Allathah, Abu Sufyan
ibn al-Harith, Malik ibn ‘Awf , al-‘Ali ibn al-Harithah and ‘Abbas ibn Mirdas,
fifty camels each. ‘Abbas ibn Mirdas, thereupon, said:

These were the spoils of war which I got by my repeated charge riding
the clot through the sandy ground. And I urged the people to keep
awake from their sleep, When the people slept, I did not sleep. Do
you make my spoiis of war and that of ‘Ubayd, like the spoils of war
of ‘Uyaynah and AI-Aqra’? Neither Hisn nor Habis ever excelled
Mirdas in a gathering of the people. And I am not inferior to either
of the two, and he whom you demean today will never be exalted.
And I have never been in the war at the time of defence. I have
never been therefore given anything, nor have I been prevented from
any thing, except a few small she-camels which were given to me
according to the number of their four feet.

By this he meant that he was not given what he deserved.

Dhawu’1 Khuwaysirah said to the Prophet, “Do Justice”. He added,
“This is a division by which the pleasure of Allah was not intended.” There-
upon, the Prophet said to him, “Woe to you: who will do justice if I do not
do justice? surely you will be disappointed and will be in great loss.” This
has been reported in a lengthy Hadith.

Then, some Ansar also talked a great deal and the Prophet gathered
them in a pavilion and said: “Did I not find you going astray and Allah
guided you aright through me? Did I not find you split up into groups and
Allah united you through me? You were weak and humiliated and Allah
made you strong through me.” He, then, continued: “If you so desire, you
can say , *Did you not come to us a fugitive and we gave you shelter, frightened
and we gave you security, and forsaken and we helped you?’ They said,
‘Yes, gracious bestowal suits Allah and His Messenger/ ”


The Prophet thereupon, said, “DorTt you feel happy that people will
go back tp their abodes with goats and camels, while you will return to your
abodes with me?” They replied, ki We do feel happy.” The Prophet declared:
“Ansdr are my companions and my family. Had there been no migration,
l would have surely been a man of the Ansdr. If people walked into any
other valley or mountain, I would surely walk into the valley and the moun-
tain of the Ansar”

It was said to him, “You have given [fo. 8-bj ‘Uyaynah and al-Aqra k
while you have left Ju’ayl ibn Suraqah 31-0^^130.” He replied; “Beware of
Him in whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, indeed Ju 4 ayl is the best of
the entire men of the world like ‘Uyaynah and al-Aqra\ but I make alliance
with them so that they become sincere Muslims, and I have entrusted Ju^ayl
to his Islam.”

When the Prophefs Companions showed their back on the day of
Hunayn, he called out, “O People of Ansar.” They said: lt We respond to
you, O Messenger of Allah, are we not with you? 1 ‘ Thcn he turned to his
left and said; “O People oiAnsar” and they responded in the same words,
while the Prophet was riding a mule which continued in keeping its speed
in advancing and Abu Sufyan ibn al-Harith was holding its reins. The Prophet
continued saying, i am the Prophet, and am not a false one, I am son of
4 Abd al-Muttalib.” ‘Abbas, who possessed a loud voice, was with him. The
(Prophet) asked him to summon (the people) calling them as the people of
the gum-acacia-tree. ‘Abbas thereupon called out loudly, and the people
turned to the Prophet just like a she-camel which hastens to her younglings.
The Prophet, thereafter, took up a handful of pebbles which he threw at
the enemy saying, “Their faces may be deformed”, and the polytheists were


The majority of the ‘ulama” holds that it will belong to those who
have been mentioned along with him in the Qur’anic verse. Another group
of scholars think that it will belong to his successor who wil! use it in the
right cause. In this connection a Prophetic tradition has been narrated to
the effect that when Allah assigns anything to any Prophet as means of
subsistance tu’ma, it belongs to his successor after him.

They have also differed as to whom belongs the share of the Near
Relations after the death of the Prophet. It has been established by the
(policy of the) Four Caliphs, and it is held also by majority of the ‘Ulamd’,
that the Four Caliphs divided it among the Near Relations of the Prophet.



A group ot scholars says that it shall go to the Near Relations of the Caliph.
The scholars, in general, hold the former view, because the Prophet gave
it to them in place of Zakah since they were deprived from accepting Zakah
to which they were not entitled as it was taken to be the dirt of the people
And Allah, the Exalted, has assigned the Khums and booty to the Prophet
as these were the best kind of earnings while he did not say the same
concerning Zakdh. The relations other than the Banu Hashim were not
declared prohibited from Zakdh. Abu Sufyan and Mu*awiyyah belonged to
the group of Muallijah Quluhuhum (those whose hearts need reconciliation)
who will be mentioned in the chapter on Zakdh.

Chapter IV



Some of the scholars hold that Allah made some spoils of war for
His Prophet exclusive as He so willed. So, of all that was made exclusive
for him was that for which neither horses nor camels were ever used.
Whenever the Prophet attended the division, he had the choice spoils of
war (al-Safdyd) y one share along with the people in the four-fifths and another
in one-fifth.

The choice booty is taken first, before the others take their shares.
But if the Prophet was not present at the time of distribution, he had his
share of one-fifth and one share Hke the people in the four-fifths. [fo. 9-aJ
The Messenger of Allah says: “I have nothing out of that which Allah has
given you as fay\ except the Khums, and the Khums is again returned to
you”, that is to say, the Khums which Allah has given to them, not that
which is conferred on him.

When the Messenger of Allah passed away, his wives intended to
sent a representation to Abu Bakr concerning their inheritance from the
Prophet. 4 A*ishah, thereupon, said to them; “Has the Prophet not said, ‘We
the Prophets do not leave any inheritance? Whatever we leave behind is a
sadaqah/ ‘* In a different report related by Abu Hurayrah, the Prophet
said: “My heirs will not share a single dindr> ,whatever I leave behind after
meeting the maintenance expenses of my wives, and the wages of my worker
( l dmUt) wiil be treated as sadaqah”

There has been disagreement concerning his expression wa ma’unatu
dmilL Some say that it is the Wages of one who digs his grave. Some others
hold that it is for the labourers (‘ummd!) working in his enclosures. Ibn


Uyaynah mentions that his wives would inherit him since they devoted
themselves entirely to him. But this is not correct, since the first view is
cstablished and well-known and rts chain of narrators is strong. Thus, Malik
has reported it from Ibn Shihab, from ^Urwah, from k A’ishah and from
Abul Zinad, from a!-A’raj from Abu Hurayrah, and also from Ibn Shihab,
from Malik ibn Aws fromd ‘Urnar, 4 A1T, Abbas, Talhah, Zubayr *Abd
al-Rahman and Sa k d, and simiiarly ‘Uyaynah and a number of prominent
‘Ulama have reported it.

* It has been reported that l Umar offered choice to the Mothers of the
Believers, the wives of the Prophet, saying if they so chose, he could provide
them with maintenance by giving eighty wasaq from dates and twenty wasaq
from barley, and if they so chose, he couid give them that which would yield
so much crop by assigning to them the iands which would yield them equal
to that. and they would have therein their proprietary rights. But I do not
consider it to be correct in respect of transmission (of this report).

Chapter V


Malik relates on the authority of Zayd ibn Aslam from his father that
‘Umar said: “Had there been none to come from the later generations, I
would have surely distributed every village that I have conquerred just as
the Messenger of Allah had distributed Khaybar.”

According to the reports which come from several sources, ‘Umar
retained the Sawdd of iraq, Egypt and the lands of Syria which he had
brought under his sway in order to pay allowances to the fighters, and
maintenance of their dependants and the progeny. Bilal and other Compan-
ions of the Prophet wanted him (‘Umar) to divide among them all that was
conquerred , but ‘Umar disapproved of the idea that had come from them.

There has been disagreement concerning the action of ‘Umar in this
connection. Some say that ‘Umar wanted to obtain the consent of the army.
So, whoever agreed to give up his share without any price in order to retain
it for the Muslims, he accepted it, and whoever refused, he (‘Umar) gave
him the price of his share. It has been narrated that a woman of iraq whose
father was in the army said; “I shali not agree unless you fill my sleeve with
dindrs [fo. 9-b] and give me a red herd.” So he (‘Umar) gave her eighty
dindrs and a herd and then she agreed.

‘Umar sent ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf, who surveyed the land, and it
reached fo two hundred thousand (200,000) jarib. ‘Umar taxed forty-eight
dirhams on each jarib of wheat, twenty-four on each jarib of barley and
twelve on each jarib of dates. It is said that he fixed twenty-four on the jarib
of wheat, twelve on the jarib of barley and six on the jarib of dates.

He sent ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud to iraq to lead their prayers and be
in charge of Bayt al-Mal (Public Treasury) and to make judicial decisions



among them He sent ‘Ammar ibn Yasir to command the army, and ‘Uthman
to survey the land, and fixed for them a goat daily, half of the goat with its
ower parts for ‘Ammar and a f Q urth part for either of his two companions
I think he preferred ‘ Ammar only for his large family or for the great volume
of his work. He says; “Evcry village out of which one goat is taken every
day is sure to hasten to its destruction.” ‘Umar appointed Hudhayfah ibn
;iI-Yaman along with ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf for the survey of the land,

Now whoever holds that ‘Umar retained the land only after winning
the consent of the people, considered his action like the action of the Prophet
as the Prophet divided Khaybar, because his (‘UmarY) purchase of the land
and renunciation of those who gave up their shares willingly was as good as
the dwision of Khaybar. It is said that ‘Urnar had retained it without any
pnce having been handed over to him by the army.

It has been reported that ‘Umar had interpreted his action by the
Our’anic verse: Wl-Fuqara-Vl Muhdjirina upto Rabband innaka Ra’uf al-
Rahim. It is said that ‘Umar summoned the Muhdjirun and the Ansar and
consulted them concerning the conquerred lands and said to them; “You
all ponder over it tonight, and come to me next morning.” He himself
thought over night and it became clear to him that these verses were
revealed in this context.

When they visited him the next morning, he said: “Last night I
carefully recited the verses of al-Hashr;”- and he then read out: ‘That which
Allah has conferred as spoils unto His Messenger from the people of the
township” (59: 7) upto the verse “and (it is) for the poor fugitives” (59: 8).
When he came upto the verse. “They are the sincere ones” (59: 8), he said
these are not for these people alone. Next, he recited: “And those who
entered the city and the faith before them”, upto the verse such are they
who are successfull (59: 9), he said these are not for these people alone.
Next he recited. ^And those who come after them (into the faith)” (59- 10)
upto the verse: -Full of pity, very Mcrciful” (59: 10). He then said, afterwards
not a single Muslim remains excluded from this.

I have already mentioned in the beginning of the book the arguments
of those who had disagreed with him from among the Companions of the

Abu ‘Ubayd says that the verse of al-Anfal and the verses of aUHashr
are decisive (Muhkamdt) nothing of which is abrogated. The Imam may act
according to either of the two decisions by using his personal discretion
(ljtihdd)\ if he (the Imdm) so chooses, he can act according to the poiicy of
the Prophet in Khaybar, [fo. 10-aJ and if he (the Imdm) so desires he can


act as ‘Umar did.

Ismaii ibn Ishaq says that this view does not make any sense. How
can the Imdm be given choice in matters of legal decisions? Ismail, on the
contrary, opines that the verse. mentioned in al-Hashr abrogate those of
aUAnjal The charge brought by Ismail against Abu ‘Ubayd does not stand,
because it cannot be denied that Allah has entrusted the Prophet and the
Imdms after him with their exercise of personal discretion in a case when
they can execute according to their opinion, since our view and the view of
Ismail agree on this that Khums and Zakdh are to be divided only in
accordance with the personal discretion of the Imdm. Hence, any group of
the beneficiaries will be preferred and the number is also included in it,
while he holds that the Imdm may not give as nafal y there being no difference
between this (view of Ismail) and what has been used to differentiate bet-
ween the two (the view of Ismail and the view of Abu ‘Ubayd).

But the argument goes against Abu ‘Ubayd from other point of view.
For the verse in al-Anfdl has already been explained and needs no interpre-
tation. It has been explained by the Prophet by his action in Khaybar. Those
who claim that these (the verses of al-Anfdl) mean other than the landed-
property, do not have any support from the verse which is literally above
any interpretation, nor from the action of the Prophet while the verses in
al-Hashr y on the contrary, bear an interpretation other than the one offered:
and they are better (understood) without any interpretation, as I have dis-
cussed earlier in the beginning of this book, and for the disagreement re-
corded from ‘Umar as to,how he retained the land. If it is, however, estab-
lished, as has been reported, that he won the consent of the people he only
accepted the verse of the al-Anfal\ and what is in al-Hashr remained in
accordance with the interpretation as mentioned earlier.

Now, what is of this category cannot be considered as abrogator of
what has been deciared by the Qur’an, and acted upon by the Messenger
of Allah. In this sense is to be understood the expression of ‘Umar, “Had
there been nobody to come, I would have not conquerred any village but I
would have divided it, as the Messenger of Allah divided Khaybar,” and
his expression: “O Allah, my soul is satisfied with abandoning it.” Had it
not been so, he would not have consulted the people concerning abandoning
the division or would not have given them anything in this context. Nothing
of the Qur’an is abrogated, nor is any verse specined except commandment
that does not admit of any interpretation.

Chapter VI


The scholars in ge-neral are of the view that ‘Umar retained the land
as the (common) possession of the entire Muslim community out of which
their fighting people were given their allowances, their border-towns were
sealed, and subsistence was given to those who looked after thern from
among their officials, judges, the disbursing officers, all other officials and
those who [fo. 10-b/ needed them. Then, whatever there remained in excess
was distributed among the needy till they became rich, and, then, whatever
there remained was divided among the rest of the Muslim community.

If the Imdm decides to divide it immediately, he can do so, and if he
considers to retain it for the iuture needs and circumstances of the Muslims,
he can do so in accordance with his own discretion, good intention, and his
conviction in consultation with the people of wisdom and experience from
among those who are available to him.

There has been disagreement concerning the modality of division.
The Prophet (peace be upon him) used to distribute on the basis of revelation.
Abu Bakr used to make equal distribution among the people saying, “Those
who preceded in accepting Islam by their activities, were sure to get their
reward from Allah, but this property was only a means of living in which
people were equal. ,, ‘All did so. ‘Urnar and ‘Uthman used to give on the
principle of priority. ‘Umar used to give grant to the early converts. He
used to say that one must blame only the kneeling place of one’s riding
beast alone. ‘Umar, therefore, fixed for the wives of the Prophet (peace be
upon him) twelve thousand dirhams each except Safiyyah and JuwayrTyah.
It has been mentioned that he gave them six thousand each, as both of them
had suffered captivity.

He fixed for the early Muhajirun five thousand each and he himself



was like one of them. He fixed for Hasan, Husayn and Usamah ibn Zayd
the like of it, while he fixed for his own son 4 Abd Allah three thousand and
five hundred. Thereupon, l Abd Allah said to him, “Do you give me less
then Usamah’.” 1 k Umar replied “Usamah was Ucarcr to thc Prophct thun
you, and his father was dearer to him than your father.” He gave to the
Ansar four thousand each, and the freed Muhdjirun three thousand each,
and the freed Ansdr two thousand each. He gave to the Muhajirun, of the
conquest of Makkah, four hundred each. He used to provide the bedouins
alongwith the women and children and those who were unable to join the
army with generous sustenance. He fixed for a newly born baby one hundred


In the early phase of his administration he had not prescribed any
amount for them. But, it so happened that one night he passed by a woman
whose child was crying and a man was asking her to suckle the baby. She
said: ” ‘Umar does not prescribe anything for the newly born baby till the
baby is weaned.” l Umar, thereupon, said, “By Allah, I was about to kill
the baby.” He prescribed allowances for the newly born baby from that day.
He used to begin with the needy.

A group of the people of Kufah say that when the Imam retains the
lands, the lands become the possession of their cultivators on whom he will
impose Kharaj forever whether they accept Islam or not. They argue that
‘Umar fixed a specified amount on a jarlb of dates every year. They say
that [fo. 11-aJ if it was not legal to do so, it would not be iawful to buy the
dates before their appearance.

Some of those who hold the first view say that the entire land was
originally without trees, and differences arose only for those piots which
were thought good for cultivation. Now, whoever hires what is conducive
to the cultivation of wheat, the tax will be fixed for it according to the
measurement of wheat, and if he hires what is conducive to the plantation
of trees, it will be taxed according to the measurement of that, not on the
presumption that there were trees in the land on that day.

Some of them hold that the cultivators of these lands were taken as
captives and they were captured by force, therefdre, they became the slaves
of the Muslims who imposed a tax on them. The Jiiyah which was imposed
on them was in fact Khardj, the payment of which was made binding upon
them. The first view, “that the land would be treated without trees” is
correct, because most of the ‘ulama’ hold that the slaves are not to pay
Jiiyah.And, had the Khardj been paid by the slaves it would have been
imposed upon women, and children who could run, but ‘Umar had imposed
it only on the adult free-men, and I do not know any authority ever holding



the view as held by the people of Kufah. Umar and Ali had already prohi-

biied kuying of any thing frum theac Idiids.

There has been disagreement concerning the Iand of Egypt. Some
say it was conquered by force, while others hold that it was conquered by
treaty, as has been related by al-Layth on the authority of ‘Ubayd Allah
ibn Abu Ja’far and Yazld ibn Abu Hablb. And it was for this reason that
he and others tended to consider the tilling thereon lawful. Some others
hold that it was conquerred by treaty which was later on broken by thern.
‘Amr ibn al- Asl then fought against them and occupied it by force.

There has been disagreement concerning the title by which al-Layth
entered (and occupied) the land. Some say he occupied the land after pur-
chasing it, while others hold that he held the land by hiring it, and, yet
othcrs say that he held it by allotment (iVyftT-grant). What is well-known is
the fact that he entered (occupied) Egypt by hiring it. His saying that it was
taken by treaty, and his insistence on the fact that it was not taken bv force
indicated his view that what was taken by force was to be divided into five
shares, as was done by the Prophet at Khaybar, and that it was not lawful
to retam what was taken by force Had it not been his view, he would not
have said, “We know our town, it was conquerred only by treaty.” Moreover
he said; I was informed of this by two Jews of the town Yazld and ‘Ubayd
Allah”, meaning that the treaty was concluded on the condition that the
lands would belong to the Muslims as the Prophet did with some parts of
the Hijaz, not on the condition that it would be retained by the (original)
possessors, because thai (second condition) wouid not permit anybody to
cntcr thcrein (and occupy the land).

Chapter VII




Ahmad says: I have mentioned the difference of opinion concerning
the lands retained in their (tillers) hands. Now, as for the purchase of the
abodes and other places, which were held in possession of some individuals
and that of the wealth they had earned, if the occupants were captured and
their lives were spared for the cultivation of the land, as fc Umar has been
reported to have done, the majority of the ‘ulama hold that they themselves,
their women and children are free and that retaining thern alive would be
treated as grace as exhorted by Allah in the verse; “And afterwards eithcr
grace or ransonT (47: 4).

As regards that which they have earned out of the land not left in
their hands, that with which they seek help therein and all that they have
produced, will be their possession revolving around thcm by demarcation,
purchase and sale, inheritance or offering in gift, or by any other means by
which they owned it. All the lands retaincd in their hands together with its
tools will be treated as mortmain talling in their hands.

Those who consider them slaves, consider all that is in their hands,
what they have earned and what remained in their hands as belonging to
the entire Muslim community. They also consider their women and children
as slaves as long as they are not born of free women; and they treat them
like the slaves in respect of all their conditions. But, a few are those whp
hold this view. The people of Kufah consider that, what had remained in
their hands and what they had earned, were their own property (milk); and
that they themselves, their women and children were free (ahrdr).

Chapter VIII




The Prophet, and the Caliphs after him, used to grant lands to the
people from the territory from which their inhabitants were driven out with-
out fighting, from one-fifth of the booty, from unpopulated plots and from
uninhabited lands. The Prophet used to write deeds (of grants) for anyone
who approached him for the land before it was conquerred. For Example,
he wrote a deed of allotment of two villages for Salman before they were

These villages were conquerred by treaty during the time of ‘Umar
who sanctioned for him the Khardj of those villages, He used to allot to the
people only those deserted fields which had not been trampled by the hoofs
of camels for pasturing. He would allot neither openly ilowing water, nor
salt, nor those places from which people gathered their fuel, nor those places
where their cattle used to graze, lest this might harm them. He as well as
other Caliphs after him, gave grants of mines which in course of time became
the possession of those to whom those were granted.

‘Umar founded the towns of Basrah, Kufah and towns in Egypt. He
granted the land of these places to those who wanted to build structures for
themselves which became their possession. He alloted the land of these
places to many Companions of the Prophet. Zubayr got an allotment of
fourteen houses in these towns. Basrah was founded in the year fourteen
(h). All of a sudden they discovered a white piece of stone at the time of
laying its foundation and they cried out, “Basrah: Basrah:” (limestone:
limestone:) Hence, it was called Basrah. Kufah was built in the year seven-
teen (h). [fo. 12-a] When people got conjested therein, they said, 4t In this
town, we are in Kufan (the thicket of rccds)”. Hence, it was called so.


Egypt was conquerred in the year twenty (h). Its biggest town was
Alexandria. There was a place at the spot of the present-day al-Fustat near
which Zubayr had set up his camp at the time when ‘Umar had reinforced
4 Amr ibn al-Ass with him alongwith twelve thousand soldiers. He had, at
first, sent ‘ Amr with three thousand and five hundred soldiers, but afterwards
he pitied him and reinforced him with Zubayr and others who were with
him. Now, since the city was tounded on the spot of the camp (al-Fus(dt),
it was called so.

It has been reported that the Prophet said: “Whoever revives a ‘dead’
land it belongs to him, and an unjust occupier has no right.” Some ‘Ulama’
hold that there are four (unjust) occupiers; two are explicit and two are
implicit. The explicit ones relate to plantations and buildings, and the impiicit
ones relate to fountains and wells. Malik says that this concerns deserts and
the places which are far away from the human habitation. It appears that
Malik thereby alludes to the Prophetic tradition: “What was not trampled
by the hoofs of camels.” Ibn al-Qasim holds similar views.

There has been disagreement concerning the dead or wastelands which
are in the vicinity of the inhabited areas. Some scholars think that these are
to be included in the rights of inhabited areas. Others hold that these should
be distributed among the people of villages who deserve them most. Malik
has also said that nobody has the right to revive a piece of (dead) without
the permission of the Imdm. This is also one of the two views of Ibn al-Qasim.
Ashhab holds that the land belongs to one who revives it without the permis-
sion of the Imdm. But, if he gives permission, the land wili belong to him.

They have disagreed concerning the limitation of distance. Malik says
what has been mentioned. Abu Hanlfah says: “It will be determined by the
device that a man shouts at the one end of the habitation and his voice is
not audible to one who is at the other end.” Some say, “What is in the
midst of the villages will be treated as the right of the villagers in respect
of the shares of the inhabitants in accordance with their rights in these
villages.” It has been proved that the Prophet said, “There is no reserved
land (Himd) except for Allah and His Messenger. So, he used to reserve
the deserts belonging to none as the property of Allah. The Caliphs after
him retained this practice.

‘Umar said, “By Allah, had it not been the fact that camels belonged
to the property of AUah upon which I make the people ride on the way of
Allah, I would not have reserved even a span of their land, because they
fought for it in the days of ignorance and accepted Islam on it. ‘Umar used
to provide riding beasts for forty thousand. He mounted two persons of
‘Iraq and one person of Syria upon a camel. He had put a man Hanl by


name in charge of pastures and said to him to lower his side for the believers
(i.e. to be lenient), and to inciude the owners of small herds of camels and
sheep in Otese and to keep away from the cattle [fo. 12-bj of Ibn *Affcn
and Ibn 4 Awf. For, in case, their cattle perish they would turn to dates and
crops, but if the cattle of the owners of small herds of camels and sheep
perish they would come to me witlrevidence saying, *0 Amir al-Mu’minin!
O Amir al-Mu’minfn! f So; Water and herbage are more convenient for me
than gold and silver. Am I therefore going to abandon them; may you have
no ^ather?”


Chapter IX


It has been reported that the Prophet said: “The benefit from the
well is not to be withheld.” There is disagreement concerning this benefit
(nafa) as to what it means. Some say that it means surplus water, while
others hold that it means the place wherein the sweepings are thrown. Yet
others say that it is the outiet of its Aowing water. It is, again, said “the
surplus water is not to be withheld, so as to prevent herbage”, meaning
thereby that if those who have settled over a well of the cattle, prevent
others from its surplus water, they in fact prevent others from herbage
because water is indispensable for the eattle.

When the Prophet granted al-Dahna to the Companion of Qtlah, she
said: “Surely al-Dahna is the stable as well as the resting place for the cattle
of Banu Tamim; and the women of Banu Tamim live behind it.^The Prophet,
then, took it back. Similarly, when he alloted some plots to a man, it was
said to him, t4 You have alloted the flowing water which is indispensable for
the people”; he then took the plots back.

People are, therefore, partners in five things: in water, as they con-
sume it and derive benefit out of it by taking bath and all that is necessary
for them and ior the drinking of their animals; in herbage, which is not in
the possession of any individual; in salt, which nobody can preserve exlusively
in his mines; and flames of fire, as nobody can prevent others from enkindling
with his tlame.

As for fishing in water, they have disagreed concerning what has been
reared in water. Some say that one has no right to prevent others from
fishing therein. Others say that one has the right to prevent others from
fishing therein.


As for the ownerless lands and the thing lying in their river beds and
rivers, none has the right to preserve anything out of it, and prevent others
from it. If anybody needs water which is in the possession of somebody else,
he should fulfil his need. If one refuses, the needy person can take that by
force or by any means he can apply even if he has to fight against the owner
for it. If the needy person dies out of thirst, his blood-money will be realised
from the preventor with severe punishment. Some say that it will be realised
from his property, and others say that it will be taken from the relations of
his father’s side. The discussion of all other circumstances which compel
people to do such things, //o. 13-aJ will be dealt with in its right place, if
Allah so wishes.

The Prophet granted to Bilal ibn al-Harith the-minesof al-Qabaliyyah
in the suburb of Far 4 which he inhabited along with its surrounding places.
When Abu Bakr became Caliph, he said to him, “Surely the Prophet assigned
to you so much land which you could not revive, so, allow me to assign out
of it -to somebody else.” Bilal then allowed him; whereupon he left for him
what he could revive and assigned the rest to others.

There is disagreement concerning thd enclosure of the wells. Malik
says that it has no fixed limit but such an area should be left to their owners
sq that it would not harm them. It has been reported on the authority of
Ibn al-Musayyib, who said: “The enclosure of the new well is twenty-five
cubits on all sides and that of an old well is fifty cubits. Ibn Shihab says that
the enclosure of the well is three hundred cubits and the enclosure of the
spring five hundred cubits, and the enclosure of river is one thousand cubits,
that is to say, on all sides for those who would revive any piece of land in
these wastelands.

There is disagreement concerning the extension of courtyards, the
owners of which want to increase any portion thereof . Some say that he can
do so as long as it is not harmful to the people. Those who hold this argue
that Abu Bakr built a mosque in the courtyard of his house at Makkah
before migration, and he used to perform his prayers there. Some others
hold that it is not permissible for anybody to make extension on the
thoroughfares of the Muslims and on the places from which they derive any


Chapter X




It has been reported that the Prophet said: “When the fami!y of so
and so reaches thirty men, they take over Allah’s property as (their personal)
estates and reduce Allah’s religion to corruption, and make Allah^s servants
as their slaves.” He also said, “Iraq would withold her dirham and qafiz t
Egypt her dindr and ardab, Syria her dindr and mudd and you would turn
into the same position from which you had started.” Meaning that this would
happen towards the last days, He also said: “Many a person who meddles
in the property of Allah without any right, will incur Hell-fire.” It has also
been reported that the Prophet said: “Whoever has incurred or taken Khardj,
has indeed incurred or taken humiliation and whoever has incurred or taken
humiliation does not belong to us.”

It has also been reported that the Prophet said: “Whoever is satisfied
with Tisq from which Allah has freed him, will have to bear disgrace and
humiliation of the people of the two books; which means taking away the
land from a dhimmi with its tax of Khardj. Many t Ulamd\ including Malik,
disapprove of hiring the Khardj land on rent because of the hadith which
refers to this subject. Malik has explained ciearly the idea for which he
disliked hiring of Khardj land. He said: “They would want to make the land
of the Muslims cheap. [fo. 13-b] Some other people allow it and interpret
that the meaning of this hadith is that whoever takes away this land from a
dhimmi and transfers to himself its Jizyah t he takes it from the authority
(Sultdn) while the authority is competent to lease it, there is no harm in
taking the land on hire from it or to give the usufruct when he is a deserving
person, for a debt that is due to him, or on account of poyerty, or due to


the big size of the family, or on account of service indispensable for the
cause of Islam or for looking after the affairs of the Muslims.

This is held by Ibn Slrin, al-Layth, Ashhab, Muhammad ibn 4 Abd
al-Hakam and many earlier and later scholars. It has been disapproved by
some due to the fear that because of this many would buy Khardj lands and
thus it would be considered lawful by one who did not deserve it. It is not
in the sense that the landis prohibited for one who hires it. For, had it been
so, this could not have been retained. The famous view of Malik is to retain
all the lands which are conquerred as it was the practice of ‘Umar. But,
when the Imdm divides it in five shares and distributes it, his order will be
executed and the land will belong to one who has occupied it, and it will
be his possession.

Ibn Wahab was asked about getting (purchasing) the land of Egypt.
He disliked to do so. It was thereupon said to him that Ashhab was cultivating
the land in Egypt, he said, “Who would do like Ashhab?” Ashhab used to
multiply the amount of sadaqah and offered in alms the multiplied amounts
of rent (Kird’).

Sahnun says: “Famine broke out in Egypt. I saw him giving dindrs
in alms from morning to evening, and offering in alms whatever food he
had with him.” Al-Layth used to earn four thousand dindrs from his crops,
but at the end of the year he had nothing out of it in his hand. He gave to
Mansur ibn ‘Ammar one thousand dindrs and said to him: “Protect with
this the wisdom which Allah has conferred on you.” Nafi’ came to Egypt
and al-Layth gave him some money. Al-Layth owed Muhammad ibn ‘Abd
al-Hakam a huge amount (as rent). Then, the governor went out on pilgrim-
age and al-Layth kept his company like his attendant. When the people
dispersed, he asked al-Layth to go away, but he remained with him continu-
ously. He again said to him, “Go away , O Abu ‘Abd Allah”, but he prolonged
his stay. Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam then stood up and said: “Do you
need anything?” He replied; “I have incurred such an amount as rent of
the land.” He asked him, “What do you want then?” He replied; “You
please put it away from me.” He said: “The amount is large, O Abu *Abd
Allah.” He said, “This is not at all a large amount from a person like you
for a person like me.” He said, ‘i have waived it.”

If the army commanders appropriate the booty for themselves and
deprive the soldiers of it, our earlier authorities do not consider it lawful to
buy anything out of it. Whoever, then, comes across such a thing he shall
have to give in alms four-fifths of it for his accepting from it. Some of them
have reported to the effect that he should give in alms the entire price [fo.
14-aJ by way of caution. Those who oppose us including some of our later



scholars hold that he has got the right to sell it. The injustice exists in the
prices only. It is, therefore, permissible to buy from him. It is argued by
others that by selling, he is agreeing on usurpation, and not on the fact that
he can do with the price whatever he likes.

Abu Mus*ab considers lawful to buy something out of the expedition
in which booty was obtained while Khums was kept concealed from the
authority with the intent that the buyer would give away Khums as charity.
I think that he considers this only when the authority does not spend properly
what comes to him from AIlarTs property, so it is lawful for one who is
capable of spending it in its proper way to do so.




Chapter I


Kab ibn Malik says: “When the Prophet started for Tabuk, I was
one of those who remained behind. We thought that the case of those who
remained behind would remain unknown, because we were many in number
and there was no register for us. It became impossible for me to gather
some equipments for fighting. Every morning I came out to have it, but it
became difficult for me to have it; so I said to myself: i will get it tomorrow/
This went on till the Prophet left. Then I said to myself: ‘Surely I will meet
him tomorrow/ And, afterwards, I inclined to the shades (of trees). It,
however, grieved me to see that no one remained behind except one who
had some excuse or one who was deep in hypocrisy.

^When the Prophet returned and it was announced that he would be
entering the city the next morning, I began to recollect what excuse I should
make by which I would possibly escape his displeasure. When the Prophct
arrived he came to the mosque and perforrned two rak’ahs of prayer as he
was aecustomed to do this on his arrival.” And then Ka 4 b mentioned the
rest of the Hadith.

When the people grew in number during the time of ‘Umar, he
ordered the preparation of a register (al-Diwan) for receiving the allowances
as well asfor sendingexpeditions. Thereupon, they registered Banu Hashim,
the Banu Taym and then Banu ‘AdT, and submitted the register before him.
At this, ‘Umar said: “You want to the Messenger of Allah md piace ijm&r wbere AlJlah has piaced him.”
They did so. Then k Abbas carne :q him *nd e* preesed his gratitude for this.

‘Umar then ordered to begin wiih the Ansdr oa the basis of their
relationship with Sa 4 d ibn Mu^adh. The allies (mawdli) of every group were
recorded with them and then the names of the rest of the people were



enlisted. He said to Ibn Arqam, who was in charge of the Bayt al-Mal, when
the latter submitted the Register to him: “Go away and write all the names.
Perhaps, you have left somebody whom you did not register.” [fo. 14-bJ
Meaning thereby to include everybody. He added, “Everyone without any
exception has right in this wealth even if he or she were a shepherd or
shepherdess at Adan.”

The reason of his selecting ‘Abd Allah ibn Arqam is said to be that
one day 4 Umar found him present while a letter had come to the Prophet.
The Prophet enquired as to who would reply on his behalf? Ibn al-Arqam
said, i shall reply on your behalf, Sir.” Ibn al-Arqam expressed what was
in the heart of the Prophet. ‘Umar kept this in his heart. When he became
caliph, he wanted to make use of his honesty and judgment. He often
consulted him in dealing with the affairs. ‘Umar sent him to iraq to enquire
into the complaint when the inhabitants of iraq had complained against
Sa’d, but Allah, however, acquitted Sa’d of the charge they had brought
against him.

‘Umar appointed some elderly people as tribal representatives
(‘t/ro/3), assigning one representative to every group who looked into their
affairs at the time of sending expeditions and at the time of receiving allo-
wances. They used to submit to him their needs. The Prophet used to appoint
representatives for detachments of troops at the time of his going out for

When Banu Hawazin came to him repenting after he had waited for
them for more than ten nights, they said, “You are like our father and we
are like your children,” or they said, “You are like our child and we are
like (your) father, you are the most compassionate to relations and the most
righteous in behaviour.” The Prophet replied saying, “I have with me those
qualities which you see, the best discourse to me is the truest one. I have
already waited for you for more than ten nights, so you choose either of
the two: either the captives or the cattle (wealth).” They said, “We do not
consider anything equivalent to our noble descent.”

The Prophet called his Companions and said, “Your brothers have
come to me repenting, and I have already given them the choice of either
of the two; either the captives or the cattle. They say, they do not consider
anything equivalent to their noble descent. So, he whose soul is pleased
with the spirit of granting favour it is well and good, otherwise, he will get
out of the first booty which Allah will confer on us. n They said: “We agree”.
The Prophet said, 4 i do not know who has consented and who has not, you
all go away, and let your representatives report to me.” The representatives
reported to him that they gave their consent and that they yielded.



Thus the Prophet settled this for them in that way. According to
some other reports, Aqra’ ibn Habls and ‘Uyaynah ibn Hisn said, “We are
not satisfied ” The followers of one of them said like this while the followers
of the other said in one voice that they were satisfied. They were, thereiore,
given something in exchange of what had fallen in their shares. So, one of
them got one scabby camel. It also reported that *Abbas ibn Mirdas said
what they said.

Ahmad says that this is not correct, because although the spoils of
war of Hawazin were in plenty, the Prophet gave to those whose hearts
needed reconciliation out of Khums and they were more than [fo. 15-aJ
forty men. He gave one of them one hundred camels. When Banu Qaynuqa 4
and Banu’1 Nadir were expelled, the Messenger of Allah divided their prop-
erties among the Muhajirun excluding Ansar except three from Ansar for
whom he assigned shares. They were: Sahl ibn Hanayf, al-Harith ibn Sum-
mah, Abu Dujanah Sammak ibn Kharashah on account of starvation they
suffered from.

Some say that Prophet divided some parts of the landed property
and retained some, but I do not consider it correct. For, had it been so, it
would have been mentioned in the genuine hadith.

The Prophet had already laid down the condition to the Ansar when
he took the oath of allegiance from them at 4 Aqabah at Makkah that they
would support those Muhajirun who came to them. The Ansar, said: “O
Messenger of Allah, we shall share with them in roots (date-palms).” The
Prophet said, The Muhajirun have no knowledge of the work of date-palms,
so you give them sufficient provision and share with them the expenses,”
and they did accordingly.

When Allah conierred on them the wealth of Banu Qaynuqa 4 and
Banu’1 Nadlr, the Prophet said, to the Ansar: t4 If you so desire, you may
remain on your condition and I shall divide this wealth among you along
with your brothers: but if you so desire, I shall return to you your wealth
and let me divide the booty among them by excluding you.” They then
accepted it (the latter). The Prophet was more generous in giving wealth
than the swiftly blowing wind’, and he was most generous in the month of
Ramadan when Gabriel used to come to him.

When the booty of Bahrayn was brought before the Prophet and it
was indeed the largest amount of wealth ever brought before him in his

life eighty thousand Dirhams, The Ansar then heard about it, so they

gathered around him in the morning-prayer, coming to him from the remote
corners of al-Madlnah. Looking at them the Prophet smiled and said, ‘i



think you have heard of the arrwal of Abu Ubaydah and of the fact that
he has brought something?” They said: “Yes” He said: ‘Then rejoice and
be full of that which pleases you, By Allah, it is not poverty which I fear
for your sake. But I fear the world which wili be opened for you as it was
opened to the people before you, and you would vie with one another for
it as they vied with one another, and the world will destroy you as it destroyed
them/’ y

4 Abbas came to the Prophet and said: “I have redeemed myself, Fadl
and Aqll and I do require that which Allah has promised as He said’ Say
unto those captives who are in your hands: if Allah knoweth any good in
your hearts, he will give you better than that which hath been taken from
you 1 (8: 70).” The Prophet, thereupon ordered him to take (something),
and ‘Abbas put things in his mantle and then wanted to raise it to his shoulder
but he failed. He then sought help from the Messenger of Allah to raise it
to him, but the Messenger of Allah refused to do so. He then asked him to
order somebody to raise it for him. The Messenger of Allah replied again
in the negative. Then he dropped something out of it and intended to !ift
it up, but he failed again. Then he asked the Messenger of Allah again to
raise it to him, but he refused. Then he said, “Ask someone to raise it.”
He said, “No”. Then he again dropped something out of it and Iifted it with
much difficulty and went away. The eyes of the Messenger of Allah followed
him in surprise at his covetousness till the time he disappeared from his sight.

After this, the Prophet said to Jabir, ‘Tf there comes to us the wealth
of Bahrayn, I shall give you so much and so much/’ /fo. 15-bJ he encompassed
his two hands. And the wealth of Bahrayn came after the demise of the
Prophet. Jabir then mentioned this to Abu Bakr, but Abu Bakr kept silent.
He again mentioned it but AbQ Bakr kept quiet. The he said; “Either you
will give me or you will be niggardly with me.” Abu Bakr then replied,
“Which disease is more sickening than niggardliness? Had you not spoken
to me once I would have given it to you, and he gave him a handful. Then
he asked him to count, and on counting he found five-hundred dirhams. He
afterwards asked him to count one thousand over and above this.

‘Umar saw a golden set of clothes placed for sale near the gate of
the mosque, whereupon, he said, “O Messenger of Allah, if you could buy
this for wearing for the delegations when they come to you and for the
Friday prayer.” The Messenger of Allah said: “Only those who have no
share (in the Hereafter) will wear it.” Afterwards some sets of clothes of
the same stock reached him, one of which he gave to *Umar. 4 Umar thereby
said: 4i O Messenger of Allah, you clothe me with this set of clothes while
you had remarked concerning the set of golden clothes what you remarked.”
The Messenger of Allah replied: “I have not given it to you to wear it.”


^Umar thereupon sent it to his poiytheist brother who was at Makkah. He
gave it to him so that he could wear it.

Haklm ibn Hizam says: “I begged something of the Messenger of
Allah who gave me, then I again asked him and he gave me. I, again,
repeated my prayer, and he gave me and said, O Haklm, how intense is
your begging. Verily this wealth is sweet and fresh, so, whoever receives
this with generous soul, he will find it full of blessings, and he who receives
this for the sake of ennobling his (lower) soul will be as if he ate but di<* not feel contented, and surely the best thing for you is not to accept anything from anybody. 1 ” Thereupon, he enquired, “And even not from you?” the Messenger of Allah replied: “And even not from me.” He said, “By Allah, i shall not accept any thing from anybody after this.” And he did not atterwards accept anything from anyone. ‘Urnar used to present to him his allowance, whereupon, Haklm used to say , k i gave up this in the time of one who was better than you,” meaning the Prophet. ‘Urnar then used to say; t4 I ask you to bear witness, O Muslims, the Prophet had only said this to Haklm when he saw him ennobling his soul by begging.” The Prophet gave a gift to ‘Umar, whereupon, he said to the Prophet, “O Messenger of Allah! did you not say that it was best thing for anyone of you not to acCept anything from anybody.” The Prophet replied, *it was only in the case of asking for something. As for that which comes without asking, it is only a kind of sustenance which Allah has given you.” iJmar then said, “By Allah, I shall never ask anybody for anything nor I shall retuse anything which is given to me.’ 1 Abu Musa says: “I came to the Messenger of Allah in a group of AshaTites to ask him for a riding-beast, but we found him busy. The Prophet said: ‘By Allah, I shall not give you a riding-beast/ We therefore turned away: and all of a sudden there came to him thirteen young she-camels. The Prophet then sent for us and gave us some young she-camels with which we moved ahead. Then we talked among ourseives saying: 4 We are afraid, the Messenger of Allah ffo. 16-a] surely forgot his oath; did he not swear that he would not give us riding beasts? And he gave us the riding beasts/ We then mentioned this to the Prophet. He said; ‘Surely, I shail make you mount the riding-beasts; by Allah, I surely make you mount the riding-beasts. By Allah, whenever I do take any oath, and I find afterwards something else better, I offer the atonement for my oath and do the best.’ ” Sa*d says: “I was present with the Prophet on the occasion of payment, He gave a man and left out a man who was dearer to me. I then spoke to 84 KITAB AL-AMWAL him secretly, saying O Messenger of Allah, I surely find him a believer (mumin); ” or he said, a Muslim. He says: “Then I sat down, but what I knew of him overtook me and I repeated the same to him.” The Prophet then said: “Surely I give a man a gift while somebody else is dearer to me than him fearing lest Allah would throw the latter headlong into the Hell- Fire.” He added, “yerily I give some people and entrust some others to their faith and ‘Amr ibn Harith is one of them.” They overwhelmed him by asking for something, so much so that he was rorced to lean against an acacia tree which stuck to his mantle, whereupon he said: tk Return to me my mantle, by Allah, I have taken nothing out of that which Allah has conferred on you, nor even this (and he pointed to a hair of his camel) except al-Khums, which is again returned to you. By Allah, had Allan conferred on you the bounties like the acacia trees of Tihamah, surely, I would have apportioned them all among you and then you would not find me niggardly or cowardly, nor a liar.” A bedouin pulled his mantle. He was wrapped up in this heavily bordered Najranian mantle. This was done so violently that it left a mark on his neck. The bedouin said: “O Muhammad, order for me out of the wealth of Allah which is before you.” The Prophet then looked at him, laughed and issued orders to give it to him. Nobody remained behind from receiving the allowances from him (the Prophet) except Haklm, because of the Prophet’s exchange of words with him. Some say that Abu Dharr also refused to receive any allowances on account of his aversion to accumulation of wealth. The people continued on this upto the death of ‘Umar when some of them did not accept any allowance by way of seeking purity and fearing Allah lest they might receive more than their dues. During the time of ‘Umar they were safe from this because of his strict personal discretion, so, the people were in between receiving and giving up the allowance. The recipient did not hold anything in this unseemly, nor did he fear any sin on account of the purity of the collected tax. However, when the caliphate shifted from the Companions of the Prophet to others, some undesirable levies began pouring in the treasuries. So others remained behind in receiving allowances, as for example, they were Ibn al-Musayyib, Bishr ibn Said, Ta’us and others. Some other people considered receiving allowances lawful as it con- tained mostly the permissible things, and compared with the permissible things the undesirable ones were very meagre in it. This continued till their KITAB AL-AMWAL 85 desire of receiving the things by the proper way became scanty. What their hands contained consisted of the things collected unlawfully. The ‘Ulama’, in general, avoided this and forbade others to receive it except something which was known definitely as good and the recipient of it [fo. 16-bJ deserved the gift for the reason I mentioned above, then he could receive this. Whoever is employed in a useless work or any help is sought from him for an unjust cause or for something which is not useful for the Muslims, it will not be lawful for him to live on it though the amount paid to him be lawful and good. C3C3C3 Chapter II ON ANFAL, FAY>, GHANlMAH AND ). But they
did not turn up, or the news of their death became known, but it was not
known how they were inherited, whether they embraced Islam, or remained
disbelievers, so, what remained unknown like this, was to be treated like
the faf which Allah had conferred on the Muslims.


“But if the Imam decides to retain it so that what it yiclds is to be
spent for the welfare of the Muslims, he can do so. If he decides to sell it
and spend its price in the welfare of the Muslims, he can do so. But if there
is no Imdm to look into the affairs of the Muslims, the just persons of the
piace will look into the affairs of the Muslims as it would have been done
by a just Imdm. ”

It was said to him: “Some of the people of these fortresses have run
away; they were subdued by the Muslims by killing and choking, and so
they ran to Damascus and other places.” He said: “If it was done to them
by way of oppression while they had not disregarded the treaty, they would
be asked to settle in the lands from which they were ejected provided they
were available or their heirs were avaiiable and were recognised. But, if
they remained unknown, it would be treated as fay* conferred by Allah on
the Muslims.”

It was said to him: “What do you think about the sale of the lands
and houses in the island of Sicily after they were conquered and left for all
the Muslims?” He said, “If it is proved that the land was retained for the
Muslims as it has been reported about the decision of ‘Umar concerning the
Sawdd of Iraq and Egypt, their saie would not be allowed and the land
would be restored to its former state. If this is not proved and the land
remained in the occupation of those who possessed it by means of oppression
in the same way as it is said that the powerful people occupied by force
many places without dividing them into five shares while the rest of the
army received nothing, the occupant shouid withdraw from it and hand it
over to those who would look into it for the welfare of the Muslims.”

It was again said to him that the houses and dwellings thereof were
divided unequally and the ruler preferred his own groups and gave them a
good deal thereof without any right and without their sacrifice for the cause
of Islam thus depriving the entire army. He observed that this case was like
the one that has preceded.

A group of people from Spain came out to wage Jihdd on a fleet of
boats and reached Sicily where they found that the enemy had already
surrounded the Muslims in a fortress. The Spaniards landed to confront
them, defeated the enemy and killed them. The Muslims then came forth
and the fortress was conquered. The Spaniards behaved arrogantly towards
those [fo. 18-bJ who were in the island. Whereupon they pounced upon the
Spaniards and killed them, while the Spaniards had their landed properties
along with them which were not recognised in those days.

He says: “If what belongs to the Spaniards is in good quantity but


their places as well as their occupants are not known, nor anybody from
those at whose disposal the landed properties are could ascertain how these
became their exclusive properties out of the hoidings of the Spaniards, the
occupant should withdraw from his possession.

“But, in case their belongings are scanty, and the affair is not known,

nor can anybody know its place and the title of his exclusive possession,
then whoever holds something in possession at present should withdraw
from these out of piety v/ithout any decree upon him to the effect. But if
he gives up his possession from a portion thejeof to the extent of what
belonged to the Spaniards this is surely a praiseworthy act.”

Some people question as to the case of a man who inhabits in this
kind of land, dwells therein on rent, or by purchase or by a grant offered
by the ruler or having a share which the ruler divided among his troops. He
says: if most of the town or its major parts are those areas from which the
Spaniards were ejected and the places exactly are not known, nor do the
Spaniards of the day know them, the land will be treated as a property
whose owners are not known, and will be considered a/ay’ which Allah has
conferred on the Muslims. But if the place from which they were ejectedis
scanty, the opinion concerning it has already been discussed earlier.”

It was then enquired whether in these places the fruits from the old
trees or from the trees planted by the Muslims could be taken with or without
the permission of the occupants in case when one only eats and carries with
him nothing? He says, ‘if the land is developed today and what has been
abandoned by its owners are in plenty, I have already stated to you that it
would be treated as a/ay’ which Allah has conferred on the Muslims. There
is no harm if anybody needs it and eats with good intention.

“But if rnost of the land belonged to those who had remained behind
none will be allowed to consume anything thereof and the occupant will be
asked to leave it by way of piety. However if his sou! does not approve of
this action, he can fix the portion to the extent of their right and withdraw
from his occupation to that extent. If they do not*do accordingly, any trans-
action with them should b$ avoided. One who enters into any transaction
with them with regard to that which is in their hands, the transaction will
not be binding, he will surely fall into haram, the unlawful.”

It was said to him that there were people whom the ruler forcibly
settled in a place not possessed by any Muslim while the place was desolate
having no trees therein. They then spread therein and inhabited and planted
(trees) in it, whether it was lawful for them to derive benefit out of it if they
so desired? He said that it was perrnissible for them; they could freely use



these as their possession over which nobody had any claim.

It was said to him that if one plants anything on a thoroughfare, or
he digs wells there, or constructs mosques and declares them mortmains
and then it was seized by the ruler of the time who restored it to Bayt [fo,
19-aJ al-Mal or offered it to a tenant, would the place be aliowed to be
inhabited or the fruit grown therein be taken? He said “If the plantation or
construction was made therein by way of an encroachment without any
doubt he would surely have the price of demolishing and uprooting of the
plantation. But, if the ruler uses it for some better purpose and includes it
in the welfare of the Muslims, it is permissible to purchase, hire and occupy
it by all permissible means.

“As for one who plants trees and raises constructions he is to pay
the rent of the portion he dwells in and of the portion he uses. The account
will be settled therein in accordance with the price of the crops uprooted.”

It was enquired of him about a fortress which was at the distance of
three miles from the sea and lying waste at the time of its conquest. The
Muslims then inhabited it and it became prosperous. A group of people
then proceeded to it and used it as pastures for their cattle without obtaining
allotment (iqtd ( ) from the ruler and settled there for a long time. Another
group of people from the town, then, came to them and started using the
land as pastures. Now the inhabitants of the place defended the place against
them and treated the area as their landed properties and made boundaries
all around for them and lived there. This caused a fight among them for the

Consequently, those who had settled therein in the beginning killed
a number of the peopie who had driven them out of it. The latter, thereupon,
complained to the ruler who sent to them an army. As a result most of the
inhabitants of the fortress, who had defended it, were killed and the rest
ran away. The fortress, thus, remained in the possession of those who had
driven people out of it and in these they got neither permission nor allotment
from the ruler. They stayed there for a long time while the rulers continued
in succession without challenging them till some of the rulers forced them
to cut the wood for the boats to be used for Jihdd but they refused to cut
the wood and said: “Our duty is only to wage Jihdd and we are not wood-cut-
ters.” The ruler, thereupon, sent armies in succession and besieged them
till they suffered destitution, and the siege prolonged. The besieged, there-
upon, sought refuge with the Christians and a number of them ran away to
them but were not helped by the Christians and met their end.

The fortress was vacated by all of them. The ruler then gave orders



for inhabiting the fortress to which people were brought from all sides and
were forced to settle therein. The fortress was allotted to them. Thus the
ruler made them dwell in its houses and many successors of the original
inhabitants also dwelt there along with some other people who had come
from Ifriqiyyah. Some of them were rich and some were not rich. Then
there rose the progeny of the Agrigento who had been ousted from the
fortress along with some early settlers who had survived and said to the
ruler that the land was theirs and that he should remove the usurpers from
there. The ruler enquired as to how the city belonged to them. Some elderly
people said that they had purchased the land from a man known as aI-Tiflf.
The ruler of the period asked to sell to anyone willing to buy. Others [fo.
19-bj said that the land belonged to them as they had bought it from Ibrahlni
ibn Ahmad. And that they had fought along with him at Taormina and had
received six thousand as fay’ with which they had purchased it from him.
The ruler then said: “By Allah, is there any deed or document in your
possession? 1 ‘ they replied, “Long time has passed over it, we have nothing
of the kind in our hand.” He then, said, ‘This land belongs to the whole
community of the Muslims, I am not giving you this because of your claim. ”

The ruler asked some of the old people of Sicily, who were present
at this court, about Agrigento, a man told him that the registers were entirely
in the possession of his father who was in charge of the Khums as well as
Khardj of the land. He was also a trustee over it. He used to read about
this fortress recorded in the Dlwdn. He paid every year for all its stony lands
and herbages therein. He paid the tax and was in charge of the Bayt ai-Mdl
of the Muslims except that the Register was burnt down in the days of KhalH
ibn al-Ward.

The sons of ‘Abd al-Samad said: “We were present with Ibrahim ibn
Ahmad and had said to him, ‘Sell to us this fortress for six thousand dindrs/
He favoured us but he neither completed the deal, nor we gave him the
price, and it remained so upto this day.” The ruler thereupon, said to them:
“Live along with the people as they lived and nobody from among you
should say that this belonged to his father or else I shall cut his tongue. It
appears to me that nothing belongs to you.”

They, thereafter, settled there on condition that the land belonged
to the Muslims in common till an army of the Muslims was sent to the
Roman cities, and a group of the army from among the people of that
fortress and other places fled away (from the battle-field). By way of punish-
ment, the ruler forced those who had fled away to settle in Taormina,
Remitta, Waliyaj and the deserted fortresses in the vicinity of the enemy!
They then settled therein as long as Allah wished. Then some of the elderly
people of Agrigento approached the ruler and said: “We are the people of



one and the same race so put us in one and the same piace. If a calamity
overtakes us we shall face it together.” He, therefore, put them all m Syracuse
and forced all their ancient companions to settle at Susah. They again rose
after some time and said to the ruler: “We have landed properties in that
fortress.” The ruler said to them that the decision had been taken concermng
them that they couid only live with the Muslims. Now, whoever got his
house pulled down or trees uprooted, he could take the price upon procla-
mation. They, thus, sold their houses and all that brought price for them.
Nevertheless, they always used to say, “Our landed properties are not per-
missible for anyone.”

Ahmad said: “The beginning of your question was different from the
end of it. You said in the beginning of your question that a group of people
had turned it into pastures [fo. 20-a] after it was desoiate till it so happened
that they were driven out of it by another group of people who again were
driven out by the ruler after he had killed most of them, without omitting
any possibility of doubt in your question, nor mentioning the source of your
information. Then, you mentioned their views and their disagreement; some
of them saying that they had purchased from a particular ruler, and others
claiming that they had purchased it from another ruler, while some other
people gave evidence to the contrary of this.

“The reply to your question is this: if the knowledge of these cases
was continuous and was transmitted likewise, the action would be taken in
accordance with what has been transmitted continuously (that is to say) if
their narration of planting trees and that of resistance of their planters was
continuous as you mentioned. Now if the owners of the trees had planted
them for residing and making boundaries therein, without any desire of
going away from these and also they had inhabited the entire fortress or
most of it, they had better claim to the fortress than those who drove them
out of it.

“If they themselves, their places and how they inherited them were
known, these places wouid belong to them. But if they ail or some of them
were not known whereas some were known, the property, the owners of
which are not known, would be treated as a fay’ as conferred by Allah on
the Muslims.

“But if they planted trees in some places while some other places
remained vacant, then in the parts inhabited by those who resisted the former
group who wanted to eject them as well as the places which remained desoj-
ated they had better claim to these. If the areas particularly were known or
how they were tnherited was known, the case would be settled accordingiy.
If the owners of the places were not known, nor was it known how they



jnherited, then it would be a/«v> which Allah had conferred on the Muslims
But, in case the transmission 01 reports was not continuous, and if the
statement of those who stated that they used to pay the usual Kharaj to the
Baytal-Mal was established, this would be settled accordingly and the tax
would be spent for the welfare of the Muslims.

if the ruler made the people inhabit therein after due consideration,
this would continue. But if this was not established, nor was the real case
known and the stories varied and nothing was transmitted continuously
except the statement cf the ejection of the people who drove away from
these the owners of trees, that the ruler had expelled them from these places,
then the place would belong to them. If they confirmed one another therein!
the matter would be settled in accordance with what they mutually confirmed.’

“But if they disagreed and made claims for their own rights against
each other, they would be asked to prove their claims. Now whoever proved
for himse!f something with evidence, he would take hold of it, but if there
was nothing except a claim, then the object claimed would be divided among
lfo. 20-bj the claimants on the basis of their oath. Thus, everyone of them
would take oath to the effect that what he claimed belonged to him, and
then the thing would be divided among them.

“As for the claim of one who says that the registers were at the
disposal of his father as well as for the claim of Banu ‘Abd al-Samad, these
would make nothing binding, because in most of the cases the rulers had
transgressed; sometimes they became angry with some people and seized
their entire landed property and entered these into their registers.

“Those who asked Ibrahlm ibn Ahmad to sell the fortress to them
might have summoned to purchase those Iands from the ruler which were
taken away from them by way of injustice. But it was not possible for them
to claim what was taken away by tbe rulers on account of their position and
power and nothing could be relied upon in this case except the continuous
transmission, and that two reliable witnesses should give evidence to the
effect that they continued listening to the just people who decreed on evi-
dence in the case and that they had acted accordingly.

“So what is established by a continuous transmission would be acted
upon as I shall mention to you. But if the matter is proved to be dubious,
I shali see that your question does not vary from the fact that the ruler
ejected some people from the fortress. I have already explained how the
action should be taken in case when they were known or not known, and
m case when they are not known what to do with what belongs to everyone
of them exactly and how they would inherit their property except that all


kitab al-amwal

of their heirs were known.

«If they had made a peace-treaty on something they would not be
intertered with. But if they retused to make peace, it would be postponed
till they come to terms concerning it. If the matter was as you mentioned
and it was proved that it was a free land belonging to none it would be
lawful for one, to whom the ruler assigned anything out of it, to derwe
benefit from it and own it in the way he got it. If the ruler granted itself to
him, he would have it, but if the ruler allowed him to dnve beneht only lt
would be so.

“If the matter was difficult, they could be treated as I have mentioned
to you that the fortress would belong to those whom the ruler had ejected
from it If they claimed that their rights were well-known, they would not
be interfered with and nobody else would be allowed to derive benefit from
any part thereof except one who would be allowed to do so by one of the
owners who had claimed it for himself without any contest or dispute or
permitted him to continue cultivating it, or to take the fruit for a particular
period or he makes it exclusively (cut off) for himslelf. Again, it would not
be lawful to buy the fortress from them, nor to take it one rent as long as
they were prevented from it. It is, however, permissible to accept from them
anything they offered without price.

“In case it is not known what belonged to them originally and how
they inherited it, it would be treated as foy’ conterred by Allah on the
Muslims. This would be a lawful possession for those who were favoured
by the ruler by way of consideration in a proper way. But if the ruler did
not act therein properly and entrusted it to those who did not deserve the
same, then, the case would be considered by his successor, or even by just
Muslims known for their justice and power in case his successors had not
done their duty properly. Contrarywise, nobody will be allowed to eat any-
thing out of it except the needy or those who can accept the property of the

It is said about the person who had in his possession some landed
property [fo. 21-a] from Agrigentum, the original inhabitants who had inha-
bited it and in which they had planted trees and then abandoned these lands
till the trees perished and the land became desolate and “dead”. Then, some
other people came there and inhabited it and as a result, new trees were
planted in place of the old ones and thus they grew into huge wealth. But
before they were revived a second time, these were full of plants and the
bulls had eaten up all of it. When these lands were inhabited the second
time and ten years elapsed the trees became mature and became five hundred
mba’i (i.e. four cubits high) while before their development they were only


KITAB al-amwal

three rubd’i.

He says: »If it » proved that Agrigentum belongs to the people whom
the ruler ejected from it, and that their migration from the place was due
to oppression which was meted out to them and that they did not give up
what was in their possession, the second group, then, alighted thereinon
interpretmg the difference of opinion concerning the origin of the place the
former will be asked to hand over to the latter a price in between the price
of the place as a desolate one and that of its price evaluated on the day
when it was decreed for you. If he refuses to do so the reclaimer will be
asked to hand over to the former its price in accordance with its value on
the day he started reclaiming it. If he refuses, both of them will be treated
as partners. The one, in respect of the price of the deserted land and the
other m respect of its price in between the prices evaluated before and after
its development.

“This is so when the land was reclaimed by plantation only but if
the trees replaced the former ones, he will get the wages of his labour
therein. If it is not proved that the land belonged to those whom the ruler
cjected from it, rather if it is proved to the effect that it was a case in which
lands were to be treated as a/«/ which Allah has conferred on the Muslims
the action therein between the planter and those who look into the affairs
of the Muslims will be as I have described the action between him and the
occupant who abandoned it. But if the Girgentian abandoned it without
coming under any oppression and compulsion rather merely out of losing
lnterest in it and with the intent that he would not come back to it though
hts ownership had already been established as I described and afterwards
this man reclaimed it. the land would belong to one who reclaimed it.”

He says: if it is established by the evidence that a Girgentian who
rcclaimed it first was not the heir of the Girgentian who owned it and it
belonged, m fact. to a different inhabitant of Agrigentum and it is also
estabhshed that Agrigentum actually belongs to those whom the ruler had
ejected from it and its owners were known, the matter between them and
those who inherited it the second time will be dealt as I have described it
lo you, and that the other person has no claim over it.”

He was asked about those land-owners who died leaving no heir and
whom the ruler had ejected, then a man from Ifriqiyyah came there and got
U allotted (as an iqta>) to himself and inhabited it with or without the
permission of the ruler. He said that if he had inhabited it with the permission
ot the ruler, it would belong to him and if he inhabited it while it was
desolate without the permission of the ruler who, if allowed him to continue
his hold over it, [fo. 21-bj it would belong to him, otherwise, he would get


the price of what he would spend on its reclamation or revival. ,,

Then it was said to him: “What do you think, if the poor are allowed
to dwell in the fortress, drink its water, and cultivate its field? Moreover,
how it would be lawful for the rich if the ruler forced them not to dwell
there and how to buy food-stuff from the fortress, and bring down ships
therein, and to load them with their food stuff?”

He said: “If it is proved that the fortress belonged to those who were
ejected from it as you have described and they are known, its dwelling would
not be allowed for anybody else and the owners should be asked to go back
to the fortress. But if they were unknown, nor was it known how they
inherited it and what was their property, or it was proved that the fortress
belonged to the Muslims, then it is lawful for the rich as well as for the poor
to dwell therein. Whenever the ruler assigned as grant (iqtd ( ) any portion
thereof by way of consideration it would belong to him. And whoever was
favoured by the ruler with any part of it, it would belong to him. The
purchase of any dwelling-piace therein from a person who lived therein
lawhilly and transaction with him will be permissible. But whoever lived
therein illegally, the purchase of the crops raised from the place and the
fruits plucked from the trees planted therein is disapproved. If the majority
of the owners of the fortress are not known while some owners are known,
the lands in which the owners are not known will be treated as I mentioned
to you, as that which Allah conferred on the Muslims as/ay’.

“The Imam will issue orders concerning it according to his djscretion.
He may assign it as an iqta’ or sell it or offer its use to a deserving person.
But in case when the owner of the land, his inheritance, and their benefit
and their properties are not known it is permissible to take Zakdh from it
for the poor, because, either it belongs to the occupant, or to the owner of
the land and either of them shall have to pay sadaqah (i.e. *ushr) of the
crops brought to the floor.

“As for the boats which supply provisions from the fortress, if these
or most of these are indispensable for its inmates, it is well and good. But
if these or most of these are disapproved, then the supply of the provisions
from it is also disapproyed. 11

It was asked whether it is necessary to vacate a frontier-town like
this on account of its being doubtful or forbidden while it was the face and
controlling part of the city? Some of its inmates do not have anything except
that which can only satisfy their hunger or cover their secret parts and if
they vacate these parts Sicily will remain desolate. He says/if what was
necessary for the fortress proved to be belonging to those who were ejected


from it and they were known, they should be invited to return to it and
their properties should be restored to them.

“If there were enough men among them for inhabiting it and for
mending its condition they would be considered sufficient, otherewise, there
would be added to them those who would inhabit it, and the latter would
be given the properties the owner of which were not known. The fortress
would be looked after according to what is best for the interests of the
Muslims. But if the owners are not known, I have already described that
this will be treated as a fay which has been conferred by Allah on the

t4 The Imam can act therein in accordance with what is [fo. 22-a] most
usefui for the Muslims. But, if it is known that some of the owners of the
place are known while some others are not known, then in cases the owners
are known it is sufficient for them to choose between the Iawful and the

“As to the food-stuff which the owners of boats and others carry, I
have already described to you concerning its origin, as to what is permissible
and what is not. Now, what is disapproved of it is also reprehensible to buy
anything raised from it and what is contrary to this will be Iawful for its
buyer and for those who will purchase it from him to sell, and with Allah
lies the right guidance/’


Chapter IV




Allah, the Exalted, says in the verses of inheritance: i4 After any
legacy he may have bequeathed or debt (hath been paid)” (4: 11). There is
no disagreement among the people that whoever usurps wealth or takes
hold of it without any right, incurs a debt against him. Allah has first dealt
with the debt before mentioning inheritance. The Ummah (Muslim commun-
ity) is unanimous in holding that debt precedes bequest. So, when this is
the case it is not befitting for an heir to take his share while there are others
who have greater right than him, no matter whether the deserving one is
known or not. In case he is not known, he will be traced out. If his trace is
not expected, the property will be treated as a/av’ which Allah has conferred
on the Muslims. The bequests of a person described above are not lawful.

Whoever purchases an unlawful commodity in exchange of lawful
money while the price is cash (Ayn)< Ibn al-Qasim says that there is no
harm in purchasing the commodity from him whether the seller knows the
impurity of the price or not. Ibn ‘Abdus says: “If the seller knows the
impurity of the price, the purchase from him is allowed, but if he does not
know the same, the purchase from him is not allowed.”

This is a conjecture which has been given without a careful thought,
and by this he preferred only the course of piety. This sounds remote from
him because he has a better excuse if he does not know than the case when
he knows. Sahnun does not approve of purchase when the seller knows the
impurity of the price. Ibn Idris, al-Marwazi, and Ibn al-Mundhir say that if


he purchases in exchange of cash (‘Ayn) the bargain will not be concluded,
and will be cancelled. If the commodity has passed through the hands of
many persons, every transaction concluded in exchange of the same wiil be

If one purchases and claims the commodity by the contract without
making any condition of handing over the money and then he hands over
the same money, the contract will be valid and it will be permissible to buy
the commodity from the purchaser of the same. But if the same article is
purchased in exchange for an unlawful object, the purchase of the commodity
is not Iawful, because the owners of the commodity who purchased with it
have the right of confirming the sale and taking hold of the article or cancel-
ling the deal [fo. 22-b] and taking back their money, in the opinion of our
authorities as well as in the opinion of others. Any commodity in which the
sale is not concluded, the commodity remains in the possession of the seller.
So, what is of this nature cannot be purchased.

Whoever sells any unlawful object in exchange for Iawful object,
whatever he obtains in an unlawful transaction is unlawful; and the unlawful
object will be considered so in the hands of its recipient if he knows it.

In the case of a powerfui despot who purchases from one who is
under his sway, the former takes initiative in demanding the sale, the latter
can apply the right of either confirming the sale or rebutting it and taking
hold of that with which he was deceived as soon as he is safe because the
former is like the usurper. But if the selier himself takes the initiative and
requests the former to buy from him, while there was no compulsion or fear
in their affairs, nor did he purchase in exchange of an unlawful object, his
sale is lawful.

Whoever has debt against one whose responsibility is outstripped by
claims of injustice and oppressions while the claimants are innumerable and
what he has in his possession is not enough to pay up his debt, nor is it
equivaient to the same, and even the iimit of his dues is not known, it is
not permissible for anyone to demand payment of claim upon him because
his wealth is liable to be divided into lots so it is not permissible for him to
take hold of anything which is not known whether it is his due or not.

There is no harm for one who had entered into any transaction with
him or enjoyed genuine claim against him to have it transferred by the
bankrupt or have its security borne by someone else with or without his
order, and the recipient is allowed to take it, since he has not taken any
thing from him to harm his creditors. It is only permissible to buy lawful
article from him because he had already given something to him in exchange


for what he received from him. Hence he has not done any harm to his
creditors. The demand of payment from him is prohibited because it will
harm them. He was not like the attorney (qaim al-wajh) in what he gives
decree, in his gifts and in his doing good deeds because he can defend,
overcome by force, and is hardly overpowered by others to impose any
decision upon him. But when the claims upon him are known it will be most
undersirable to demand any payment from him.

When the wealth of some governors (‘Ummdl) of ‘Umar increased,
people talked much about it so much so that their poet said:

We perform pilgrimage (hajj) when they perform it, and we take part
in fighting when they take part. Wherefrom they, then, have abun-
dance of wealth while I have no abundance of wealth? When the
Indian trader comes with musk-vesicle, it flows through their parting
places of the hair. So take care of the wealth of Allah wherever you
find it, they will soon be satisfied if you give them a share out of yours.

‘Umar, thereupon, took half of the wealth of those governers who
had it in abundance. He sent Muhammad ibn Maslamah to ‘Amr ibn al-‘As
[fo. 23-a] in Egypt for taking one half of what he had. ‘Amr prepared for
him rich food on the first night he came to him. Muhammad then said: “This
cannot be a food for the guest.” He swore not to take it. He took half of
what he ( 4 Amr) had till he took hold of one of his pairs of shoes, which he
set aside. ‘Amr thereupon said, “There should not come a time in which
the son of Al-‘As served as governor under the son of al-Khattab, I had
surely found his father clad with the woollen, striped cloth, while my
forefathers wrapped with brocade.” Ibn Maslamah said to him: “Leave this,
your as well as his tather are all in the Hell-Fire but he is better than you,”
‘Amr, then asked him (Muhammad) to conceal the talk from ‘Umar, and
he thereby, did not mention it to ‘Umar.

‘Umar, said to Abu Hurayrah after he had taken one-half of what
Abu Hurayrah possessed: “Will you not accept any employment?” He re-
plied, “No, because I fear that my back will be beaten and my honour will
be abused.” ‘Umar said to him, “Verily, Yusuf ibn Ya’qub (may Allah be
pleased with him), who was better than you, accepted employment.”

Abu Musa came to him (‘Umar) along with the delegates of ‘Iraq.
One of them reported to 4 Umar that Abu Musa had seiected forty girls of
the tribe of Usawirah and had two sd% two storeys of building and two
bowls daily. Al-Ahnaf ibn Qays was among the delegate. ‘Umar asked him
about the forty girls of the Usawirah tribe. He replied, “I feared lest the
soldiers might be deceived concerning them and I knew their ransom, so, I


paid their ransom and divided it into five shares and distributed these among
them.” He then enquirfed of the people, if such was the case, they said;
“Yes”. He then asked the reporter, if the case was so? He said, “Perhaps”.
He, then enquired about the two storeys of building. He replied, “I use one
for the wealth of the Muslims, and the other for my family.” He then
enquired of the people if such was the case. They replied in affirmative. He
then enquired of the reporter about it who said, “Perhaps and may be”. He
then enquired about the two bowls of ‘ Aqilah meaning the slave-girl of Abu
Mus§. Abu Musa kept quiet. ‘Urnar then wanted the people to express their
views. They said, “He is the one who is known to you and you know him
better. Moreover, he enjoyed along with you Companionship of the
Prophet.” Umar said: The leavened bread of iraq is forbidden for
*Aqilah.” And he conducted her to al-Madlnah, while he sent Abu Musa
back to his assignment.

‘Umar appointed Hudhayfah as Governor of al-Mada*in and wrote
in his letter of investiture, “You (people) listen to him, obey him and hand
over to him whatever he demands from you.” But usually he used to write
in his letters of investiture: l4 You listen to such and such a person and obey
him as iong as he administered justice among you.” People appeared to
have refused to accept his appointment and consulted privately among them-
selves. They then put questions to him. They then decided to ask him, and
on their enquiry he said, “(I want) food to eat and the fodder for my
donkey.” They added: “Do you want anything else?” He said, “No’\ When
he returned, and it was said to ‘Urnar that he would enter the following
morning, 4 Umar waited for him from a hidden place and Hudhayfah appeared
riding on a donkey, sitting on a packsaddle while he had let loose both of
his legs on one side. ‘Umar hastened to him and held him tight and said,
“You are my brother and I am your brother.”

When 4 Umar arrived in Syria, the Commanders of the troops came
to meet him. Whenever anyone of them approached him, he wouid say,
“Send him off \ He was mounting a camel and his freed slave [fo. 23-bJ
Aslam was on another camel travelling with him. So every officiaI was sent
off. The Syrians who had come out, asked: “Where is the Amir al-
MumininT Asiam repeatedly said, *in front of you”. They therefore pro-
ceeded towards his back, while ‘Umar continued his journey till Abu
Ubaydah appeared on a camei, with its rein made of wool. When he ap-
proached ‘Umar, he made the camel kneel down and got down. ‘Urnar also
got down and saluted him, then they walked together, Aslam was still saying
to everyone who enquired about the Caliph, “Go ahead”. Thereupon 4 Umar
said to him, “You have said much”, Aslarn thereupon said: “This is Amir
al-Mumininr They then looked at him bewildered and *Umar said; “Verily
the eyes of these peopie are acccustomed to (see) the dress of those who


have no share (in the Hereafter), hence their eyes belittle us.”

When ‘Umar entered the locality, he asked Abu ‘Ubaydah to take
him to his residence. Abu ‘Ubaydah enquired as to what he wanted to do
with his residence. ‘Umar said: “Let us go’\ When he entered, he found
no furniture in the house. Abu ‘Ubaydah placed for ‘Umar a pillow made
of skin and full of fibres of palm trees. ‘Umar then wanted some food, and
Abu ‘Ubaydah brought for him a container made of palm-bough which
contained broken pices of barley bread. ‘Umar thereupon said: “O Abu
‘Ubaydah, the world has changed all the people save you, ‘Umar and the
family of ‘Umar are obedient to Abu ‘Ubaydah.” ‘Umar sanctioned for him
two hundred dindrs which Abu ‘Ubaydah gave away in alms. ‘Umar also
ordered for Mu*adh two hundred dinars which Mu’adh also gave away in

‘Umar noticed the signs of starvation among the people of a village,
so he asked them to write down the names of the needy. And they wrote
down the name of their Governor at the top of those whom they enrolled
as needy.

He looked into the case of Shurahbll ibn Hasanah in whom he did
not find the ability of chiettainship, so he dtscharged him from his office.
Shurahbll thereupon said to him privately, “O Amir al-Muminin, verily,
your dismissing me is disgraceful (for me), so please explain my case to the
people.” ‘Umar, therefore, addressed the people and said: “1 did not dismiss
Shurahbll out of displeasure, nor on account of embezzlement of money. I
found a more suitable person for his post and, therefore, had to discharge
him from his office. Had I known anything else I would not have excused

The people of a village complained to him about their Governor
(‘dmil) saying that he did not come out to the people till the day was advanced;
he had a day in the weak in which he did not come out; and a day in the
month on which he did not come out and at night he did not come out
though any accident might have happened. ‘Umar then said to the Governor:
“Why don*t you come out till the day is advanced?” He said, “I have my
family and children so I do not come out till I see that they have taken their
meal, I thus come out without any anxiety.*’ He said: **Even once a week
you do not come out.” He said, “I stay just to straighten the circumstances
of my family.” He then enquired about the day in the month, He said: “I
was among the polytheists, when they killed Khubayb, they struck him and
he shouted loudly. When that time comes I fall in swoon and I think surely
Allah will not forgive me.”


‘Umar said, “Then what about the night?” He said, “Please excuse
me.” ‘Umar said: “You will have to tell.” He said: “Please excuse me, Allah
will excuse you.” He (‘Umar) said, “I beseech you, you must tell.” He said,
“I keep the night for Allah and the day for them, so, I do not like to mix
up one work with the other.”

It is necessary to deal generously with [fo. 24-a] the official and his
associates in respect of their livelihood and it was said: “Keep them with
sufficient resources so that they are not forced to embezzle money.” And
he used to treat them like this and he also said, “This is scarce for one who
acts with justice and simiJar is the case with everyone who is entrusted with
the affairs of the Muslims.”

When the wealth multiplied, he used to import good robes and with
them clothed the Companions of the Prophet. Then there came to him some
robes out of it and he clothed his companions with it. Out of these he gave
two robes to Hasan and Husayn but these robes were short for them, He
thereupon wrote to his Governor to send him two robes immediately to suit
their measurement, as the case had rendered his life unpleasant.

Once some robes were brought before him and he put on one of
them. Ibn ‘Awf said to him, “How excellent is this!” Then a number of
robes were brought before him at the end of the year, and he put on one
robe and forgot the remark of Ibn ‘Awf. Ibn ‘Awf again remarked, “How
excellent is this!” And ‘Umar, this time, kept this in his mind. Afterwards
some other robes were brought before him and he chose the most inferior
one and wore it.

Ibn ‘Awf again said to him, “How excellent is this!” ‘Umar enquired,
“Do you like this, O Abu Muhammad?” He said: “Yes’\ So ‘Umar gave
him that particular robe. Afterwards ‘Umar brought out other garments and
then Ibn * Awf realised that it was inferior one. He, therefore said to ‘Umar,
“Was it a deceit, O, Amir al-Mu^minln?” ‘Umar said, “You said what you
liked year before last year, you repeated the same last year and then, I did
not escape you this year.”

He clothed Usayd ibn^al-HasIr with a robe which he sold in exchange
for five slaves whom he set free and said, “He who prefers these two robes
to the emancipation of those slaves is surely weak in judgement.”

One day ‘Umar took an account of himself and said: “I think that
the apparent contentment of the people that appears to me is only due to
fear from me. Perhaps the case with them is countrary to this. M He then
thought of one whom he would ask of this and suddenly there occurred to



his mind the name of Muhammad ibn Maslamah. He, therefore, went to
him. Muhammad ibn Maslamah said: “0 Amir al-Mu^minin, why did you
not send for me I wouid have surely come to you?” He said, “Suddenly it
came to my mind that people express themselves agreeable to me only
because of fear from me. I beseech you in the name of Allah, tell me what
do the people think of me?” He said: “By Allah, you are just as we like,
and you like. Had it been otherwise, we would have straightened you just
as the shafts of spear are straightened in its instrument.” ‘Umar added, ” All
praise is due to Allah Who has created among the followers of Muhammad
those who would straighten their ruler when he displayed any crookedness
just as the shaft is straightened in its instrument.”

Once ‘Umar came out on an errand and suddenly a widow followed
him saying that Muhammad ibn Maslamah came to them as a tax-collector
but gave her nothing, and not knowing that he was *Umar himself, she said
to him, “Let us go to him”. ‘Umar asked Yarfa’ to call Maslamah. She
rejoined: “May Allah put you aright, if you would come along with me to
him, my need would be fulfilied more quickly/’ ‘Umar said; “If he does not
come to us, we shall go to him.” When Yarfa’ reached Muhammad ibn
Maslamah, he enquired as to what did he want. Yarfa’ said, “I do not know
except that I saw a woman along with him.” Muhammad ibn Maslamah
said, “By Allah, she is one of them.”

He then came to ‘Umar. ‘Umar said, t( We were impatient like the
itch of the head and were afraid of being snatched away by the people, but
when Allah made us victorious, I sent you as a tax-collector; and you did
not give this woman anything. [fo. 24-b] Muhammad ibn Maslamah replied,
4 Tlease, do not make haste, O Amir al-Mu’minin, either she did not come
to me, or I omitted her by mistake.” He (‘Umar) said, Give her, and if you
go out afterwards, receive her with kindness.” Then, the woman shrank and
felt ashamed.

‘Umar once, wrote to Mu’adh and Abu ‘Ubaydah, abjuring them by
Allah, to tell him whether he was a king or a caliph. They replied, ‘if you
take a single dirham without any right or spend it for an unjust cause you
are a king and not a caliph.”

State allowances increased during the time of ‘Uthman so much so
that a slave-girl was bought according to her weight, a horse for twenty
thousand dirhams, and a palm tree for one thousand dirhams.

The Prophet appointed a tax-collector. When he came back he said,
u This is for you and this (object) has been offered to me as a present.” The
Prophet, thereupon, addressed the people and said, “What is it? I send one


of you (as a tax-collector), when he comes back, he says, This has been
given to me as a present/ Why does he not sit down in the house 01 his
mother and see whether any present is offered to him or not?” He added,
“None ot you would come carrying anything on his neck but he would bring
it carrying on his neck on the Day of Resurrection, be it a grumbling camel
or a bellowing cow or a bleating goat.”

The Prophet, inspite of what Allah gave him exclusively out oiAnfal
Ghanlmah and fay\ used to accept food and clothes up to the level of
essential subsistence. The best of robes in which he was ever seen was what
Anas said that he saw him in a red” robe, nothing better than that he ever
saw on him. The Prophet put on a black cloak having design in it. Perchance
he looked at its design in the prayer and said, “It was about to tempt me,
you return it to Abu Jahm and bring for me one having no design knowri
as Anbijaniyyah.

The hadlth of Qaylah contains: “I saw him seated squatting and
wrapped in a bed-sheet-Iike shabby cloak, [a bed-sheet which was a bit worn
out]/’ Al-Mughirah saw the Prophet in a journey while he had a Syrian
gown on him, the sleeves of which were too narrow for his hands. He passed
away , may my father and mother be ransomed for him, in a patched garment.

He used to put on shoes of tanned leather without having any hair
on it. He used them for making ablution. There was no sieve in al-Madinah
during his life, and he did never eat at the table. Whenever food was brought
to him he used to put it on the floor. He had luxuriant hair which he let
loose as long as Allah willed, then he parted it, and shaved them off on the
occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage. The Prophet gave half of his hair to
Abu Talhah and divided the other half among his Companions.

The cap of Khalid fell in the course of a battle field in the enemy
territory. He then rushed to the midst of the enemy and picked it up. On
enquiry he explained that there were some hair of the Messenger of Allah
in the cap. The Prophet consummated his marriage with ‘A’ishah who was
wearing a shirt worth four dirhams. The inhabitants of Madinah used to
borrow it for their brides to be blessed with it.

The Prophet used to take a year’s provisiori for his family. Once he
came out to the mosque and found Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. He enquired as
10 what had brought them out. They replied that hunger had brought them
out. tfo. 25-a.J He said, “The same thing brought me out. Let us go to
Abu’1-Haytham ibn al-TayhaiT. AbO’1-Haytham ordered (his people) to
bnng for them barley which was prepared and he asked for sweet water for
them and then slaughtered a goat for them. The Prophet said, i4 Avoid



(slaughtering) the milch-animal.” He then said; “You will certainly be asked
about the pleasure of this day.”

Jabir noticed signs of hunger in the face of the Prophet on the occasion
of digging the Ditch. He, thereupon, went to his family and said; “I noticed
hunger on the face of the Messenger of Allah.” He, then, ordered for a Sd*
of barley which was prepared, and he slaughtered a domestic animal. Then
he came to the Prophet and informed him of this. The Prophet, thereafter,
said to his Companions, “Verily Jabir has prepared a meal (meaning a feast),
so let us go.” The Prophet walked along with his people who were one
thousand in number. The Messenger of Allah entered Jabir’s house and
then uttered in the food whatever Allah wished him to utter, and lo: the
whole lot of the people ate out of it and afterwaf ds there remained so much
food that it sufficed his family and his relations.

Anas says: Umm Sulaym folded a few breads of barely in her scarf
and gave back some of them to me and asked me to take them to the
Messenger of Allah, whom I found in the mosque in the crowd of the People.
I then stood up before them. The Messenger of Allah asked me, ‘Did Abu
Talhah send you?’ I said, “Yes”. He rejoined, “With food?” I said “Yes”.
He, then, asked his Companions to get ready.

They all, then, departed while I walked in front of them and reached
Abu Talhah and informed him. Abu Talhah then said: “O Umm Sulaym,
the Messenger of Allah arrives along with his people, while we have no food
to suffice them all.” She said, “Allah and His Messenger are aware of it.”
Abu Talhah then received the Prophet who came in and said. “O Umm
Sulaym, bring to me what is with you.” She brought the bread.

Then, by the order of the Messenger of Aliah, she crumbled it,
squeezed the butter skin with her hand and seasoned it with condiment.
The Messenger of Allah then uttered a prayer over the food with what Allah
desired him to do so. Then he asked Abu Talhah to allow ten-of them to
come in. Abu Talhah sent them accordingly and they all ate to their satisfac-
tion and went out. The Prophet again asked him to allow ten of them to
come in, Abu Talhah sent them in and they all ate to their satisfaction and
went out. Thus, tlie whole party to the last of them. They were seventy or
eighty in number.

The Prophet did not arrange any wedding feast with bread and meat
for anyone of his wives except Zaynab. He mostly arranged his wedding
feast with meal of dates mixed with butter,

Once honey was presented to one of his wives. When he entered


upon her she entertained him with it, while there remained its smell with
the Prophet. At this, his other wives became jealous. Aishah and Hafsah
both made an agreement and advised his wives to enquire about the smell
which they felt from him saying that perhaps he had eaten Manna. Now
Sawdah says, ‘i almost enquired him of this when he was still at the door
on account of fear from ‘Alshah/’ The Prophet said, “No, but I drank [fo.
25-b} honey with such and such wife.” The Prophet said to Hafsah, “By
Allah, I shall not take it,” and he asked her to keep it a secret. But she
informed ‘A’ishah of this and both of them divulged it. Thereupon Allah
revealed, “O Prophet: why bannest thou that which Allah hath made Iawful
for thee,” upto His saying “wa abkdra” (and Maids) (66: 1-5). The Prophet
then took oath of refraining from his wives for a month and discontinued
his going to them and confined himself to his parlour which was a small room .

l Umar says, “We used to prevail upon our wives at Makkah, but we
found in the tribes of Ansar that their wives prevailed upon them. Our wives
at Madinah, therefore, learned this from their wives. One day my wife
answered me back. So, I said to her, l How does it concern you\ She replied;
k How amazing, O son of Khattab, you do not like me to return you answer
for answer but your daughter scoffs daily at the Messenger of Allah.” I
enquired, Did she scoff at (the Prophet)?’ ” He then said, “I put on my
clothes and went to Hafsah and enquired, ‘Does anyone of you scoff at the
Messenger of Aliah? 1 She said: ‘ Yes\ I thereupon said, l Do not risk yourself;
verily ‘ A’ishah is more beautiful and dearer to the Messenger of Allah than
you. Do^tyou^earthatMesGeagero^ Allahwillbe angry, and consequently
Allah will be angry because of his anger and will direct the Messenger of
Ailah to divorce you?^ ” ^Umar added that he had a friend from among the
Ansar with whom he had arranged to visit the Prophet on alternate days.
On his turn he used to visit the Prophet and tell the Ansari friend all that
he had learned from the Messenger of Allah, and in his turn, he used to
visit him ( 4 Umar) and tell him whatever he had learned about the rumour
that the king of Ghassan was making war preparations against them.

“One day”, says ( Umar, “my Ansari friend knocked at the door
violently . 1 came out and ask^d him whether the king of Ghassan had arrived.
He replied, rather it was more serious than that, the Messenger of AllSh
had divorced his wives. 1 said to myself 4 did I not say the same thing to
Hafsah?’ I then went to Hafsah and said, 4 Did I not tell you? Did the
Messenger of Allah divorce you all? T She replied, i do not know, and he
is in that parlour/ 1 then went to the mosque and found the people weeping
near the pulpit.

I, too, sat down and wept because of their weeping, but my soul,
however, did not remain in peace, so, I went to the parlour and found a


black slave at its entrance. I asked him to take permission for ‘Umar. Where-
upon, he entered, then, came out, and said, “I mentioned your name, but
the Prophet kept quiet.” I, theretore, retumed to the people but my soul
did not let me be at peace; so, I came back to the parlour again, and asked
the slave to seek permission for ‘Umar. The slave entered, and came out,
and said, “I mentioned your name but he kept quiet.” I again went back
to the people, but again, my soul did not let me be at peace, so, I returned
and asked the slave to seek permission for ‘Umar. He entered, came out,
and said, “I mentioned your name but he remained silent.” When I turned
my back, I was called by him and he said, [fo. 26~a] ‘He has permitted
you.” I therefore entered and saluted him and the Prophet returned to me
his salutation. I found him on the sand-made bedstead which had left marks
on his skin. So I stood and said, O Messenger of Allah, we the people of
the tribe of Quraysh used to prevail upon our wives. When we came to this
tribe of the Ansar, we found in them that their women prevalied upon them.
Our women learned the same from their women.’ ”

Then, ‘Umar mentioned to the Prophet his discourse with his wife
and what she had toid him and what he had said to Hafsah. The Messenger
of Allah thereupon smiled, ‘Umar says: “Then I said, ‘O Messenger of
Allah, have you divorced your wives?’ He replied; ‘No\ I then praised
Allah, took my seat and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, you are in thiscondition
while the Khosroes and Caesars move about in brocade./ He said, ‘O ‘Umar,
had I prayed to Allah to turn the mountains of Tihamah into gold and silver.
He would have surely done so. What should I care for this world?’ ”

Abu Hurayrah says, “One day, I was extremely hungry, so I met
Abu Bakr. I asked him to recite a verse of the Qur’an which I recited so
that he might give me something to eat. But he recited the verse for me
and went away. Then, I met ‘Umar and I behaved likewise. He also acted
like Abu Bakr. Then I met the Prophet who asked me to follow him. And
I followed him. He then brought out a cup of milk and asked me to call the
people of the Suffah whom I called. I said to myself, ‘How would it suffice
them?’ I, however, called them and they all drank out of it and went away.
The Prophet then said, ‘O Abu Hurayrah, will you drink?’ I said: ‘I shall
drink. 1 He said, ‘Drink then.’ I drank and I stretched out my both hands
with it to him. He then asked me to drink. I drank and stretched out my
hands again to hand it over to him. The Prophet agains asked me to drink.
But I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, I do not find any space for it.’
And he drank it.”

Hafsah brought to the Prophet something which was presented to
her by her sister. The Prophet drank out of it. On another occasion some
milk mixed with water was brought to him, while a bedouin was on his right



side and Abu Bakr was on his Ieft, He then drank from it and offered it to
the bedouin and said; “Begin with the right side, the right side, and the

‘ A*ishah brought to Prophet some food and some home-made condi-
ments, whereupon, the Prophet said, “Did I not see the cooking-pot boiling
with meat?” She said; 4 it has been given to Barirah as sadaqah y but you
do not eat sadaqah.” He said, “This is sadaqah for her/but for us it is a

When the Prophet was at Sahba, a place at the lower part of Khaybar,
he asked to bring provisions which was nothing except gruel of barley. Then
he asked to make soup out of it and they all ate, then rinsed their mouths
and performed M aghrib-pr ayers.

4 A1I says: “I had two full-grown she-camels. I got one of them as my
share of the battle of Badr, while the other I received from the Khums. So,
I gathered ropes and woodeh packs and sought help from some people to
bring dry herbage with which I wanted to prepare the wedding feast of
Fatimah and a man came to us and said that Hamzah got intoxicated and
cut the humps of both the camels and opened their bellies. Then I came to
the Messenger of Allah and said; i did not see a scene like today and I
mcntioned the incident to him/ He thereby took his cloak and accompanied
me to Hamzah. We found him along with [fo. 26-bJ a drinking party while
he was intoxicated. Hamzah then raised his head and said; ‘You all are only
thc slaves of my father.’ The Messenger of AUah then turned back and left
the place.

Some prisoners of war were brought to the Prophet. Fatimah then
came to him to ask for a slave. The Prophet said to her, “Shall I not offer
you something better than this, you recite Subhdn Alldh (Sublime is Allah)
thirty-three times, Alldh Akbar (Great is Aliah) thirty-three times, and
al-hamdu lilldh (all praise belongs to Allah) thirty-four times.? Or he said,
you utter aUhamdu lilldh thirty-four time Allahu Akbar thirty-four times
and that will be better than a slave, a slave and a slave.”

The Prophet was shrouded in three pieces of white clothes of one
thread which were folded one upon another. They were made of average
(ordinary) sort of cotton clothes.

Atter his proclamation as Caliph, Abu Bakr went to the market,
carrying some clothes. Some people met him and asked him as to where he
intended to go and to whom he had entrusted the affairs of the people. Hc
said, indced my people know that my profession is not to be made to


shorten the maintenance of my ^301^.” People, theretore, prevailed upon
him to return and fixed for him one goat. When death approached him, he
ordered to take the account of what he had spent out of the Bayt al-Mal
and it amounted to seven thousand dirhams. He thereupon, asked them to
deposit into the Bayt al-Mal a)l that he had left behind except the dwelling-
houses. It was accordingly deposited into the Bayi al-Mai ‘Aishah says,
The Muslims have, thus, earned profit through him whUe they did not earn
profit through anybody else.” He was moderate m his dress, m taking food
and drinking and all that concerned him

4 Umar used to be moderate in his dress, tood, drinking, and he used
to patch his clothes. He patched even with three pieces in between his two
shoulders matting one upon another. He walked barefoot and siept during
the day in courtyards of the walls. He had every day two wooden bowls,
over which his visitors used to assemble. It was then suggested to him that
he should have richer food than this, He rephed, “1 am afraid, I would then
hasten to exhaust all my excellent foods. Allah, the Exalted says, ‘Ye squan-
dered your good things in the life of the world/ (46: 20} I fear I might
adopt the way other than that of my two eompanions and thus I would be
treated in a different manner.”

One day, Abu Musa attended his meal which comained the bread of
barley, vinegar and olive oil. Abu Musa ate out of it a lirtle, whereupon,
‘Umar reminded him saying, “I found you among ihe people of Suffah whiie
today you remained behind in eattng <t; I ear it while l feit of it to be what
is in it, certainly, one of these rwo condirnems had sufficed me.”

One day ‘Amr ibn al-‘As came to hiro. while the peopl.e weire at the
bowl of ‘Umar who was standing on their heads, oo account oigreat number
of people. ‘Umar, thereupon, took a handful of broken bread mixed with
meat (tharid) and gave it to Amr which he took in his right hand and threw
it into his Ieft hand and began to eat out of it sitting in a corner. When * Amr
came out, some people asked him, “What did you do with yourself?” He
said, By Allah, certainly he knew that I had sufficient food bul he intended
to test me only. [fo. 27 -aj Had J retused I would bave certainly received
punishment from him.”

One day ‘Umar^s son caUed on his sister Hafsah who offered him
broken bread with meat. She said to him, “Would chat you had put some
olive oil in it to make it more patatable.” He said, 4t I fear lest Amir al-
Muminin might entet and I would get punishment from him.” She said,
“This is not the time or his coming in. so saying, she put some olive oil over
it, and ‘Umar entered while he was eating. Umar exclaimed, “What! Two
condiments at a time.” He then put on his clothes and started beating him


till he became tired.

Umar used to take a stroll at night to irwestigate into the affairs of
the people. In the year of the famine, one night, he went out and heard
some children weeping because of hunger. He then came back and took a
load of f!our and some fat which a strong man can carry. He put them on
his shoulder. Some of those who met him offered their services to carry his
load which he refused, saying that only he who had harmed them should
carry for them. He then sought permission from the inmates of the house
who permitted him to enter. When he entered, he enquired whether they
had any cooking-pot. They replied in the affirmative. So, he took the cooking-
pot, placed it properly and poured water in it. He then put some fat and
salt and began to blow into the fire while smoke was gushing forth through
his beard. Then he put some flour into it. When it was cooked, he poured
it in a large wooden bowl. He then left them eating and himseif waited
outside to overhear their conversation. The ate, and then played till they
tell asleep.

Some of those who envied him saw him one night in the darkness of
night. He said: tk I thought ill of him and followed him in a way that he
would not see me till he reached a house in ruins wherein he entered. At
this, my ill-feeling increased, and he stayed there for a while and then came
out. I, thereupon, entered in the ruins and enquired of the inmates and
there appeared a person in the house whom I enquired as to who he was.
She replied, “I am a poor and blind old woman.” Then, I asked about the
man who had gone away. She said, kt I do not know except that he comes
to me every night or on alternate nights and removes the harmful things
from me, and leaves near me sufficient food.” The man then said to himself,
“Where was I led by my evil thought?”

Once k Umar met a woman carrying a water-skin full of water. He
asked her, “Have you not anyone who can do this for you?” She replied,
“Had there been anyone, I would not have carried it.” He then took it from
her and said, lt Why did you not, then, go to ‘Umar”? She replied, l i am
told that he is rough and rude.” He said, “Perhaps, he treats only the unjust
and transgressor with ioughness and rudeness/’ She answered, i do not
know.” When she reached near her place, she said, This is my place.” He
gave her the water-skin and said, “No, you must come to ^Umar.” The
woman then came to his locality seeking guidance from the people and was
surprised to see that the bearer of her water-skin himself was the man who
issued orders and prohibitions. Realising this, she turned her back and went
away, l Umar then called Yarta 1 to call the woman back. He called her and
Umar gave her a servant.


A man ate with him in the year of the famine and began to wipe off
the grease of the dish, whereupon, 4 Umar said to him, “It seems that you
are // butter, nor have I seen any food prepared with it since such and such period.”
‘Umar, thereupon, said, “By Allah I shall not take clarified butter till the
people have the means of sustence as they had beforehand.” He, therefore,
used to take olive oil without altering it, so, his complexion changed into
brown colour while he was fair. So, whoever saw him only that year described
him of brown complexion.

‘Umar wrote to ‘Amr ibn al-‘As in the year of the famine: “To *As
ibn ‘As, now after (praise of Allah) surely, you do not worry if you along
with your companions are satiated, without taking into consideration the
fact that if I myself and my companions remain hungry. So help, help.” In
reply, ‘Amr wrote to him: “At your service: at your service, and at your
service, sir. The caravan is sure to reach you, its front part will be near you
while its rear part will remain with me and, Allah willing, I shall soon
transport for you through the sea that much which will make those who are
near you free from want.” On this, some of his companions said to him,
“If you open to him the passage of the sea, he will not leave for you anything
in Egypt.” So, he wrote to ‘Umar: “Verily, I have looked into the matter
of the sea, but nothing seemed to be right.” Umar also wrote to him:
“Either you will.finish that or I shall send somebody else who will do the
job while you will be in your house.”

‘Umar used to send a camel loaded with flour to the family of the
Prophet and said to them, “You slaughter the camel, eat its meat and make
condiment with its fat, eat the flour and wrap yourselves with the bag.” He
also entrusted to them some people who would attend to their slaughtering.
He also said, i4 Verily, the bedouins like to keep the camels alive.” He said,
“I have determined to assign like this to every member of the family of the
Prophet. Verily a man does not die on account of half satiation.” (This
continued) till there reached him the wealth of Egypt.

Once ‘Umar went out on a journey. While journeying, ‘All , Talhah
and a group of the Companions of the Prophet lost their way. When the
evening approached, they found some people in a tent whom they asked to
send to them somebody to talk. They replied; “This is not possible, we are
all naked. We have only a single garment, whoever goes out wears it.” They
then stood perplexed, and at that time there appeared to them the owner
of the tent who drove his emaciated camels including a fat she-camel. On
their asking for refreshment he replied, “We have nothing with us except
what you see. As for this she-camel, it belongs to ‘Umar against whom
nobody can dare. 11 They smiled and got hold of the she-camel, slaughtered



it, and ate out of it, and asked them to eat its meat, make condiment with
its fat and make shoes with its hides. In the morning, they set on their
journey, and asked them to meet them at a particular well. When they
returned to ‘Umar and informed him of all about it, he said, “Why did you
not ask them to do so and so?’ 1 They replied, ” We have already done so. ”

The man, however, came to ‘Umar who gave him one hundred goats
and asked him to look after them, to Iive on their milk, wool, and, then to
see him again at a particular well at the end of the year. When the man met
him the next year he reported to ‘Umar that the goats had reached upto
two hundred in number and that they had [fo. 28-aj Iived on them. ‘Umar
again asked him to look after them and to live on their milk, wool, and to
call on him at the end of the year at a particular well.

The man again met ‘Umar and reported to him that the goats had
multiplied to four hundred in number and that they had lived on them.
^Umar again asked the man to look after thern and live on their milk, wool,
and asked him to meet him at a particular well. He met him at the appointed
place and reported that they had grown eight hundred in number and that
they remained occupied with them while they got hold of a small herd of
goats other than these, so, he urged Umar to take hold of them. 4 Umar
said, “These goats belonged to you from the very beginning but you are
stupid. 1 ‘

‘Umar did nor cut off the hands of those who cornmitted theft during
the year of the famine as the people were needy. This is the opinion held
by Mallk and Awzai concerning those who committed theft on account of
hunger. The famine however continued for six years.

‘Uthman was moderate in his food and dress, modest and chaste
except that he feH in what the generation urged him to death because of
the diffusiveness of the subjects and his old age. He therefore spent wealth
among the Musiims, and the affair became of such consequence to him that
he sacrihced himself to defend his religion. His death opened the door of
civil war and gave rise ito schism.

4 Aii was moderate in his dress and food. He had inclination towards
coarse cloKh; and he used io cut both of his sleeves at the upper end of the
sides of his fingers, He mzd xo walk on foot through mud or rain and
disposed of ait that v^as in hh Bayt al-Mal every Saturday. Whenever he
looked at tne comews ot iht Bap ai-MaL he said * This is my collection
which compnses iht best oi it, while every other coiiector has his hands
moving towards his mouth. O Red (gold), and O White (silver), you deceive
everyone save me.” When he died nothing was found in his possession


except three hundred dirhams which he had arranged for buying a slave.

Once food was brought to Ibn al- l Awf, who said, 4t Hamzah died, he
was better than me, he was shrouded in a woollen garment which was drawn
on his face while his feet were uncovered, so Idhkhir grass was placed on
them. Mus k ab ibn ‘Umayr died; he too was better than me, they treated
him in the same way.”

Once Talhah abused his servant, he then gave fifteen thousand
dirhams in alms. He was called the hero of the Ouraysh on account of ,his
generosity and courage. Al-Zubayr died while he was in debt of one hundred
thousand dirhams which was paid out of his landed properties. Sad and
Sa^Id were foremost ascetics and their prayers were always granted by Allah.

All the four Rightly-Guided Caliphs died and everyone of them had
worthy sons who deserved caliphate, had it ever been entrustcd to them.
But none of them did so out of the fear of Allah and due to compassion for

Mu*awiyyah spent wealth generously and was forbearing. He granted
to Hasan four hundred thousand dirhams, to Husayn three hundred
thousand, to Ibn al-Abbas two hundred thousand, and to Ibn al-Zabayr
onc hundred thousand. Often he delivered sermons in patched-clothes. When
lfo. 28-b} dcath approached him, he ordered to deposit half of his wealth
in the Bayt al-Mdl, and in this act he followed the practice of ‘Umar. When
thc pcoplc othcr than thĕ Companions of the Prophet took over the administ-
ration, thc attairs changed a little, till ‘Umar ibn 4 Abd al-‘Aziz became
caliph. Hc admistered justice, righted wrongs and restored to the owners
what the chiefs of Banu Umayyah and others had assigned as (iqfd”). They
discusscd this among themselves.

Hisham ibn k Abd al-Malik entered upoon ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-*AzIz.
Hishiim says: ” ‘Umar was a venerable person, I found him sitting on a mat
wcaring a white robe.” He says, k i kept quiet. When my silence prolonged,
hc said, to mc, O Hisham, tell me what do you want? 1 ” He said, ‘i then
said, You havc changed the practice of your own people and altered their
dccisions and cnabled the critics to criticise them.’ He said to me, ‘Are you
impartial?’ I said, ‘Yes’. He said, l By Allah\ I said, *By Allah’. He again
said, By Allah\ 1 said, By Allah\ He repeated, 4 By Allah\ I said, By
Allah*. Hc thcn said to me, ‘What do you think of the case when a man
cntrusts his minor children to a man whom he had appointed trustee over
thcm and administrator of their affairs. The man then usurps their wealth
and offers the same as a bequest to his own sons settled them on it, writes
tor them thc deed of ownership therein and makes others witnesses to it.


Then others grow up and demand their property from them. While you
happened to be the judge, how would you then decide the case?’ ” Hisham
said, “I shall restore it to its owners. 1 ‘ He said, tl He had already made a
deed duly witnessed in favour of his children and a long time had passed
over it.” Hisham said, “Even if the case be iike this?” ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd
al-‘Az!z then said, “By Allah, what is the difference between your case and
between this?” Not even like and he made signs to a little bit of the earth .

Among those who were very much bitter against him on this was
Maslamah ibn ‘Abd al-Malik. Once 4 Umar said on the pulpit, “I see that
schism shall not come to an end till it is transferred into slayery.” Maslamah
remarked, “Lo! I was not safe from slavery till I saw his gra^e.”

Maslamah said to ‘Umar on his death-bed, “Surely you have Ieft your
children destitute, and they need what the other people need. Would you
then entrust them to me and to my equals from among your family? I shall,
on your behalf, suffice them in matters of their provision.” ‘Umar asked
(his people) to make him sit. He, then, said to Maslamah, “As for what
you have mentioned that I left them destitute, surely, I did rrot deprive them
of any right that was their due, nor did I give them anything which was not
their due. Their case is just like either of the two men; a man who fears
Allah, and in that case surely Allah will make their affair easy; or they are
not so, in that case, I do not like to help them. As for your proposal that
I should entrust them to you or to your equals among your people, verily
I leave them in the custody of ‘one who has sent the Kitab and who is the
guardian of the good doors.’ ” Then he asked them to call his sons.

They, twelve in number, came. His eyes became full of tears and he
exclaimed: “There have come a group of people whom I have left behind
as destitutes. O my sons, go away, Allah is the guardian over you. Verily
you would not come across anybody from among the Muslims or the dhimmis
but he would find for you your right.”

A woman from iraq came to ‘Umar ibn 4 Abd al-‘Aziz so that he
would fix some allowance for her. When she saw his house she said to
herself: “We have come to seek riches trom the house of poverty ffo. 29-aj.
She then entered and k Umar was then plastehng a wall in the house. She
sat down beside Fatimah. k Umar looked at Fatimah now and then. The
woman thereupon said to her, tv Verily this labourer looks at you.” She said,
“He is the Amlr al-Muminin. ‘ The woman thereupon attired herself with
proper clothes and became ashamed. When ‘Umar finished his work, he
enquired about her need. She said, i have seven daughters.” He said, “I
have fixed maintenance for one of them.”


She praised Allah. He said, “We have granted maintenance for the
second “, and she praised Allah again and thus he continued granting mainte-
nance for her daughters one by one and she continued praising Allah up to
the sixth daughter. She said, 4t O Amlr al-M’uminm t may Allah give you
good reward.” He said, tk Had you continued praising Allah, I would have
surely fixed maintenance for the seventh one also. She will now be with her
sistcrs.” He wrote a letter for her. No sooner had she reached iraq than
the news of his death reached the place. She, then, handed over the letter
to the Governor who executed his order concerning her.

Before he became caliph, ‘Umar ibn l Abd al- 4 Azrz used to wear
beautiful clothes. When he was proclaimed as caliph he became ascetic and
shunned the world. Before he assumed caliphate, once a robe was purchased
for him for six hundred dirhams, but he did not like it. During his caliphate
a robe was bought for him for six dirhams and he accepted it.

Ibn al-Musayyib was imprisoned and special care was taken about
his diet but he rehised to take the special diet and said, ki Find out those
pieces of bread which I used to take.” The Amlr al-Muminln sent for him
five thousand dirhams which he refused to accept while he was found quar-
relling with his slave over haif a dirham which he considered to be dearer
to him than the former.

Al-Walld sent some money to Bishr ibn Said but he refused to accept
it. Then al-Walld said to 4 Umar ibn 4 Abd al-‘Aziz who had mentioned the
name of Bishr before him: 44 You have guided me to a Kharijite. By Allah,
I shall certainly put him to death.” Umar thep said to him, “Perhaps he
does not need the money, now I shall guide you to a man like him.” And
then he guided him to a different man who accepted the offer.

Malik says: 4 i often passed unaware of any danger except when
Ziyad, the freed slave of Ibn 4 Abbas, put his hand on my back between my
two shoulders. Then I turned to him and he would say; *You sjiould be
cautious, if the case is just as they say, you will be held io chains, but if it
was otherwise you are safe,* ” meaning Rabl 4 ah and Zayd ibn Aslam. When
ai-Mansur banished Rabi 4 ah to iraq, he ordered for him five thousand
dirhams but RabPah refused to accept them. Mansur had also ordered for
him a slave-girl which also he refused to accept. Malik says that in character
he was most ascetic of the people.

Ta^us entered upon Muhammad ibn Yusuf while the former was
shivering with cold, so Ibn Yusuf ordered to put a Persian mantle (Taylasdn)
on him. But Ta”us began to move his shoulders so violently that it fell down.
When he came out [fo. 29~bJ. Itwas said to him, would that you had accepted

1 20 K | T A B AL-AMWAL

it and givervit to somebody in alms. He said, “I am afraid, that afterwards
somebody would come forward saying that Ta’us accepted, so he would
accept but would not give in alms.”

Ibn al-Oasim says, *i saw camel-dung burnt in the house of Malik/ 1
He also says, “Malik said, i had a piece of clothes which I wore and
periormed pilgrimage severai times. without washing it/ ” It is mentioned
that he exhorted AbO Jaiar al-Mansur, and asked him to investigate into
the condition of his subjects. Mansur thereupon said to him, “O Abu l Abd
Alliih, is it not true that when your daughter cries out of hunger, you ask
for thc two stones of the hand-mill to be moved, so that the neighbours
would not hear her cry?” Malik replied, “By Allah, nobody other than Allah
knows it.” Mansur rejoined, “How is it, I know this and I do not know the
condition of my subjects?”

A person from Kufah narrated^i carried some food-stuff to Makkah
where Sufyan al-ThawrT had been staying. His sister had sent through me
a provision-bag of dates for him, I found him reclining in the mosque, so I
saluted him but he returned my salutation in a low vice. I therefore, said
to myself, Perhaps he is angry with me for carrying the food.’ Hence l left
him till the people dispersed from him.

‘Then I said to him, ‘Yerily your sister has sent to you a provision-bag
of dates/ He asked, ‘Where is that? 1 I said; in the litter/ He said, l Let us
go\ So I went with him and brought it out for him. He then uttered the
name of Allah and started eating. Afterwards he enquired of me if I had
water, and I then offered him water. He uttered the name of Allah and
drank it.

‘Then he asked me about the condition of some particular persons.
I, then said, i saluted you when I saw you, but you did not make query at
that time. 1 He said, i had no food for the last three days. Then, when you
mentioned to me my sister I came to know that it was out of this,’ meaning
spindle and he demonstrated it with his fingers.”

Once he was employed by some camel-drivers on their way to Mak-
kah. Sufyan prepared bread for th^m but he burnt their bread, so they beat
him. When he arrwed in Makkah one of the camel-drivers came to the
mosque and found the people crowded around him. He exclaimed, 4 This
is the person whom we had employed.” A certain man said to him “Well,
this is Sufyan.” He, thereupon, informed his companions of it. They came
and as soon as they found him aione, implored him to forgive them. He
said, tl There is no harm, Whoever burns the food of the people is generally



beaten.” They then asked him to allow them to keep his company, where
upon, he said, “Provided it is on the former condition, otherwise, not.”






Chapter I



Allah, the Exalted, says: i4 Now, when ye meet in battle those who
disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks, until, when ye have routed them,
then making fast of bonds; and afterwards either grace or ransom till the
war lays down its burdens” (47: 4). And He says: ‘It is not for any Prophet
to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land.” (8: 67)

Therefore, it is not desirable for any commander of an army or that
of troops to take anyone from among the fighting people as a captive except
after making large slaughter. As for one whose return to the battlefield is
expected but his mustering power is not feared, if the lmdm thinks to offer
him as ransom lfo. 30-aj for the Muslim prisoners, he can do so.

There has been disagreement about accepting their ransom in the
form of wealth. Most of our authorities disapproved of this, saying that this
was done only at Badr because of the fact that the Prophet was sure of the
fact that he would soon come out victorious over them. The Prophet had
consulted his Companions concerning them, whereupon, Abu Bakr and a
group of his Companions suggested to him to set them free on ransom
saying: “They were your relations. 1 ‘ He added: “Allah might deliver them
on your account.” But ^Umar and 1 A1I had suggested to put them to death.
Umar said, “Hand over fc AqIl to ^AII to put him to death, and hand over
that particular cousin of him, I shall put him to death.” 4 AII said, “They
have forced us to follow the common usage of the Arabs, so please enkindle
fire for them and burn them with it.”

But the Prophet inclined to the view of Abu Bakr and released them
on ransom except 4 Uqbah ibn Mu’!t, whom he killed. When he was brought
out for execution he said, “Shall i be put to death in the midet of these
people?” ”Yes”, said the Prophet. He enquired, “What for?” The Prophet



replied, “Because of your disbelief in and rebellion against Allah and his
Messenger.” He said, “Who will look after my children?” “Hell” was the
reply. The Prophet ordered the dead bodies to be thrown into the ditch.

■k o X l! 1 ^ St °° d ° Ver them and addres sed them, saying: »O f ‘Uabah
ita Rab, Compamons) said, «O, Messenger of Allah, Do you speak to the dead-
The Prophet rephed, » You are not better bearers than they . ”

The Prophet executed al-Nadar ibn al-Harith on the way, and said
“Had Mut’im ibn *Adf been alive and prayed to me concerning these corpses
I would have surely released them.” Mut’im ibn ‘Adl was one of those who
had tried to destroy the document written by the disbelievers of the Ouraysh
against Banu Hashim and Banu Muttalib stipulating that they would not
have any social contact with the latter till they surrendered the Prophet to

The saying of Allah: “Had it not been for an ordinance of Allah
which had gone before, an awful doom had<;ome upon you on account of what Ye took” (8: 68) is only as Allahicnows best (was revealed) concerning the booties to which the soldiers at the battle of Badr had hastened and their dispute among therhselves before the modality of distribution of booties was explained to them, and it does not surely concern them as to what and why they took, as it is held by some people. This is, because, Allah has already promised them (of giving) one of the two kinds. Moreover, the Prophet would not have given them anything which was not permitted for them. It is permissible to release two or three prisoners of war in exchange for two Muslim prisoners. Imprisonment is no security of life for the prisoners who do not accept faith. Nobody other than the Imam can consider their case when they deserve captivity. Whoever, then, thinks it proper to kiil him, he will kill him, and whoever wants to spare his life in order to offer him as a ransom or to enslave him, he can do so, when none shares him. Abu Musa besieged the inhabitants of a certain fort and made a treaty with them on condition that Abii Musa would set free one hundred from among them and would do concerning the rest whatever he desired. Their chief, therefore, started releasing whomever he wanted and Abu Musa used to say to those around him/”Verily I hope the enemy of Allah would deceive himself, and he counted one hundred without counting himself.” Abu Musa, therefore, ordered to smite his neck, whereupon, the chief said, I am with them.” Abu Musa replied, “You made the condition of only one hundred.” KITABAL-AMWAL 127 He, therefore, smote his neck. This is held by a group of the Ulama but Sahnun holds that one is not liable to execution in case of doubt. Abu Musa sent Hurmuzan as a captive to ‘Umar in the care of Anas ibn Malik. l Umar asked Hurmuzan to speak. He ejaculated and enquired, whether he would speak like a living one or a dead one? ‘Umar replied, ‘You speak, there will be no harm (to you).” He said, “O, Arabs, as long as Allah maintained neutrality (among you and us) we enslaved you and ruled over you, but as soon as Allah sided with you, we lost our sway upon you.” At this ‘Umar grew angry and intended to execute him saying, “He is the murderer of my leader al-Bar.a’ ibn Malik.” Anas, thereupon, said to him/ k You can not do that.” Umar enquired, “Why, has he given you something, or have you received something from him?” Anas replied, “Cer- tainly not, you have already allowed him to speak without fear.” ln the meantime 4 Umar had forgotten what he had said and thereby asked him to bring someone to attest to what he had said or he would start punishing him. Anas, then, found aI-Zubayr remembering what ‘Umar had uttcred. Umar therefore set Hurmuzan free. It is narrated that the Prophet executed seventy captives of war after making a large slaughter. A prisoner of the Khazar tribe was brought before ‘Umar ibn l Abd al-Aziz. Umar said, “Certainly, I am going to execute you.” The prisoner said, “This would not decrease the number of the people of the Khazar tribe.” l Umar ordered his execution; and he never executed any other pris- oner during his caliphate. When Banu Qurayzah yielded to the judgement of Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, and they were allies of his tribe, and as such, they expected that he would spare their lives. Sa l d had received an arrow in the median vain of his arm on the day of the Ditch (al-Khandaq) and had said, “O Allah, do not let me die till my eyes are pleased to see the doom of Banu Qarayzah”, and the bleeding had stopped. They had induced the combined forces of the dishelievers (aI-Ahzdb) againstthe Muslims. He, therefore, gave his judge- ment of killing their fighting men and enslaving their children. The Prophet said to him, “You have given the judgement according to the judgement of Allah,” or he said, “According to the ‘Judgement of the King’ “. Hence, all those who used razors (i.e, were adults) were put to death. ‘Atiyah al-Ourayzi says, ‘i was among them, they looked at me, and I had not grown hair, my life was spared.” Zubayr ibn Bata had a favour upon ‘Uthman, who said to the Prophet, 128 KITAB AL-AMWAL ‘Verily Zubayr has a favour upon me. I, thereibre, want to make a requital tor it.” The Prophet said, “I set him frec.” ‘Uthman informed Zubayr of this. Zubayr said, “How can one Iive without his family and children?” ‘Uthman reported this to the Prophet who said, 4 i set his family and children free. ,, ^Uthman informed Zubayr of this favour, whereupon he said, “How can onc Iive without his property?” And ‘Uthman reported the same to the Prophet , who said, ll We have given up his weaith for him. ” This was informed to Zubayr who, however, enquired of his some particular acquaintances about whom it was said that they were all killed. [fo. 31-a] Zubayr then said, “There is now no charm left for me in life. You have done to the best of your capacity. 11 He was, then, executed. At Badr, those disbelievers of the Quraysh who had no wealth to offer in ransom were set free on condition that they would teach the Ansar the art of writing. The Ansar said to the Prophet that they would forgive the ransom of Abbas, their nephew. But the Prophet replied, “No, by Allah, not even a single dirham. ” Then ‘ Abbas said to the Prophet, “Did I not accept Islam?” But this did not do any good to him, as he had not migrated. Whatever was on hjm was taken away from him. He was of tall stature. So, they sought for him a shirt to cover him. At last, l Abd Allah ibn Ubayy ibn Salul gave him his shirt, and the Prophet in return gave ‘Abd Allah his inner shirt when he died. He was shrouded in it. ‘Abbas was tied up with lamb’s skin which made him groan at night, this kept the Prophet awake. Ahmad was asked about selling and purchasing the inhabitants of Bargouatah and booties taken frorn them, and whether Jizyah could be imposed on them if they agreed to pay it after their defeat. He was also asked about some people who were mentioned as disbelievers and settled in the districts of Ashlr. They belonged to the tribe Sanhajah. They consi- dered themseWes belonging to the Arab stock. He was enquired whether they would be treated like the Arabs; that nothing but Islam would be accepted from them or they would be put to death and what decision would be taken concerning them all. Ahmad replied that, if the people from Bargouatah were taken as capitives then it was permissible to sell and enslaves them after they were divided into five shares and were distributed (among the people), andJizyah would not be accepted from them if they offered it, since the text with refrence \oJizyah only relates to the People of the Scripture and the Magians. Similar is the case with the Sanhajah tribe who hailed from the tribes known as Suwalah and those who fell in the same category in the districts KITABALAMWAL 1 29 of Katamah and l Agiyah. Now, whocvcr bccomcs himscli a rcncgadc will bc put to dcath and his wcalth will go to thc Muslims. But, whocvcr inhcrits disbclief trom his forefathers, is H> bc trcatcd likc Bargouatah. Thcy will
only bc cnslavcd whcn thcy acccpt Islam and will bc ioreed to aceept Islam.
As for one who conecals his disbeliet is liablc to nothing save execution.


Chapter II





When the Muslims gain upper hand and have no fear from the enemy,
it is not permissible for them to make truce with the enemy on the condition
of wealth and without it, since Allah says, “So, do not falter and cry out
for peace when Ye (will be) the uppermost.” (47: 35) But when the Muslims
are too weak to fight the enemy and it becomes impossible for them to have
help from the Musiims of their neighbourhood, they can make truce with
them on or without the condition of wealth.

But when the armistice continues between us, and they hand over to
us some persons as hostages from among them against the wealth which
they promise to pay but afterwards they break the truce, turn into enemy
and stop the payment of the amount on which the truce was concluded,
there is disagreement concerning their hostages. //o. 31-b} Some say that
they will be treated like the wealth in which transaction is allowed till they
pay the entire amount of the truce imposed on their companions.

However, some others say that if they want to remain as Dhimmis,
nothing of the sort wili be taken from them. The first view is preferable!
But, if during the period of truce they want to sell their children to us, most
of our authorities do not allow the purchase from them, because according
to the truce the children have similar rights like their fathers. Some people
hold that it is allowed.

When they ask for protection (Dhimmah) of Altah and His Messenger,
this would not be given to them, because of the Prophetic tradition that
prohibits this. They will, however, be given the protection of those with



whom they have made the truce. In case of apprehension of breach of truce
from those who have concluded the truce but reside near us and they are
settled between us and the enemy territory (Ddr al-Harb)< Malik and a
section of Ulama hold that vigilance will be kept on them, they will be
excmptcd trom thc obligation to fight and thc pcoplc should bc on guard

against thcm. Thcy wili not bc treated hastily till their treachery becomes
manitest and thc trcaty will be maintained as long as they remain faithful
and thcy will be defended as long as they pay.

A scction of thc pcopic hold that the treaty will be thrown back to
thcm tairly as “Allah docs not likcthc trcacherous” (8: 58). The spy, be
he a Muslim or a disbciicvcr, wili bc put to death and his life will in no case
bc sparcd as it is tcarcd hc might turn to his old habit and he might be
followcd by othcrs. In casc hc is a Muslim, his act wiil be regarded as apostasy .


Chapter III





The Prophetic tradition consecutively related to and supported the
view that Makkah was conquered by the force of arms; and that the Prophet
entered the city having a helmet on his head, lowering his head in submission
to Allah, Glory be to Him. He was reciting the verse: “The Kingdom belongs
to Allah, the Almighty one”. The Prophet had ordered Khalid ibn al-Walld
to proceed to the lower part of Makkah and not to begin fighting unless
they start it. It was, then, reported to him, “Look, Khalid has reached upto
Safa”. Whereupon, the Prophet said, “Perhaps they have started fighting
with him.”

It has been narrated that when the Ourayshites showed endurance
for fighting, the Prophet ordered the Ansar to be called for him. They all
gathered around him. He then asked them if there were any aliens amidst
them. They said, not except their nephew (sister’s son). The Prophet said,
“The nephew of the people belongs to them. Don’t you see the Ourayshites
who have gathered their rabbles around them? You uproot them by striking
the sword vehemently till you meet me at Safa.”

When the slaughter of the Ourayshites reached its climax, Abu Sufyan
appeared on the roof of the Ka*bah and called out, “O Messenger of Allah,
the Ourayshite leaders are being annihilated. There will be no Ouraysh after
this day,” Or he said, 4 ‘They have been annihilated, whoever enters his own
house is safe.” The Prophet said: 4i Yes’\ Abu Sufyan further added, “Who-
ever throws away the weapon is safe, whoever enters t”»t is Tabuk. was
hc last battle ,n the Prophet personally participated and in which
thcrc was no tighting.

He entered into an agreement with the people oillah on theircoming
out and came back (to Madinah). The last expedition is the expedition in
which he appointed Usaiuah as the commander who came out before his
(Prophets) demise but went to its destination after his demise during the
Caliphate of Abu Bakr. The Musiims had desired Abu Bakr to detain the
expedition, but he refused and said, “Let there not be the first knot which
I would execute by undoing the last knot which was done by the Prophet
Even if the dogs run around the litters of the Mothers of the Beiievers (the
wives of the Prophet) I would not withhold it.” When Usamah intended to
move ahead, he urged Abu Bakr to give him instructions. Abu Bakr said,
“The mstruction will be the same as the Messenger of Allah gave you.”


Usamah then wanted to know as to what orders he would give him. Abu
Bakr said, ‘The order is the same as the Messenger of Allah gave you.”
Usamah thereupon marched ahead.

Abu Bakr directed Khalid ibn al-Walld to meet the renegades, and
thus the hopes of those who had aspired to march towards al-Madlnah on
account of the death of the Prophet came to an end. They said that they
were the people who were not shocked by the death of their master. Thus
victory welcomed the Muslims; Allah caused the death of Musaylimah, the
Har, while Tulayhah fled away and afterwards accepted Islam.

The Companions of the Prophet used to go out to participate in the
battles and liked to settle down at frontier-towns. Here, for example, is Ibn
Umm Maktum who was a blind man and was seen in the land of the enemy
holding his banner.

When Abu Bakr became Caliph, Bilal consulted him seeking his
permission to go to Syria but Abu Bakr refused to let him go. Bilal, then
said, 4 if you have freed me to serve you, I shall render you such a service
which will never be performed by anybody, but if you had freed me for the
sake of Allah, let me go away.” Abu Bakr thereafter allowed him to go
out, and Bilal went to Syria where he lived upto his death. Mu 4 adh also
settled in Syria.

Once, Suhayl ibn l Amr, Abu Sufyan, and Harith ibn Hisham came
to the door of ‘Umar and found Suhayb, Bilal and Salman sitting (waiting
for permission). YarfV informed ‘Umar of their position but ‘Umar asked
him to let Bilal, Suhayb and Salman enter upon him. Abu Sufyan got angry
and said, “We are being deprived while these people enter.” Suhayl pacified
him saying, “Here they have preceded us a little only to the door of ‘Umar.
This is nothing. Don’t you realize that they have gone far ahead. Let us
then go to these frontier-towns where we may achieve some of what we
want.” They, thereafter, set out for Syria.

Suhayl gave his daughter into marriage to Harith ibn Hisham who
had eighteen children from her. After this, ( Umar used to send instructions
to them /fo. 37-h.j They lived there upto his death. A number of the Com-
panions of the Prophet like Hudhayfah, AbO’1-Darda’ settled in frontier-

Bahz ibn Hakim ibn Mu^awiyah ibn Hldah reported on the authority
of his father, on the authority of his grandfather, who said, 4 i said, X>
Messenger of Allah: grant me something. 1 ” The Prophet made for him
sign toward Syria.



One day, while he was in a battle-field, Salman saw a man forcing a
dhimml to carry for him the fodder of his animal but the latter refused,
whereupon, the Musiim treated him harshly. Salman asked him not to do
this, whereupon, the man asked him to carry the burden himself. He took
it from the dhimmi while the man did not know him. Then some people
said to him: “This man is Salman, do not let him carry.” The man then
apologised to Salman, who said, “Well, there is no harm to you, I have
acquired by this act three virtues, I helped you in the way of Allah by
carrying it, prevented an act of injustice and tested my soul whether any
sign of pride has remained therein.”

Mu^awiyyah sent out his son Yazld, who was very young, to command
an army. This was disliked by Abu Ayyub who stayed behind but afterwards
repented. Next year he set out and said, “I shali fight for my share of the
next world and everybody receives the benefit of what he performs.” He,
then, fell ill near Constantinople. YazTd visited him in his illness and enquired
about his need. Abu Ayyub said, “When I die, please make my grave deep
and conceal its place.”

When he died, Yazld took his body far away at night and buried him.
Afterwards they passed over it with their horses in order to conceal its place.
But lo! the people saw their action. When dawn appeared, the people said,
“Certainly something grave happened to you last night.” He replied, “Yes,
a great Companion of our Prophet fell ill and died. We buried him in your
land, If you do any mischief therein, no bell will be rung for you in the land
of Islam, as long as we have authority over it.” Afterwards, whenever they
faced drought they visited his grave and then rain was supplied to them.

A man said to Malik that he had killed a man, and that he was afraid
of his guardians who might kill him any moment and sought his advice.
Malik advised him to go to the frontier-towns and to remain there till his


Chapter X


Allah, the Exalted, says in many verses: “And establish prayer and
pay Zakdh. ” (2:43) And mentions therein the obligatory character of Zakah.
He also says: “And they ask thee what they ought to spend? Say, that which
is superfluous.” (2: 219) It is said that ‘afw is that which their souls grant
spontaneously, that is to say their souls bestow bountirully. Some say that
‘afw is anything which remains in excess (fadl) after meeting one’s basic
needs of food (qut). A cultivator is, therefore, expected to keep the provision
of one year and offer the excess (fadl) in alms. If he is an artisan, he will
keep the provision of his day and will offer the excess in alms. This was the
practice before the organization of the system of Zakah.

Allah, may He be glorified, says, “The alms are only for the poor
and the needy and those who collect them and those whose hearts are to
be reconciled and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of
Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower,
Wise” (9: 60). Allah, the Glorified, has not thus left its divine duty to any
other category.

There has been disagreement about (the meaning o0 Fuqara and
Masdkin as to who .they are. It has been said, that a Faqir is one who
possesses means of subsistence and a Miskln is one who posseses nothing.
Some say that Faqir is one who has nothing, and a Miskin is one who has
something. Some say that a Faqir is one who has no wealth nor has he any
physical disability, while a Miskin is one who has physical disabihty. Some
others say that a F’aqir is one who does not beg, while a Miskin is one who
begs. Yet, some others say that al-Fuqara are those emigrants (Muhdjirun)
who are needy, lfo. 38-aj while the Masdkin are those needy who are not
emigrants. Some hold that Faqir is a Muslim and Miskin is a Dhimmi. This
has been related from the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas and has been held by
some people of Kufah.

154 – –


As to al^Amiluna ‘Alayhd, they are those who are employed to collect
Zakdh and are given out of it by way of wages irrespective of their being
nch or poor except Banu Hashim, who are not to be employed for collecting
Zakdh. This has been proved on the authority of the Prophet.

As to the al-Muallifati qulubuhum; they are the chiefs of Banu Mudar
and their ieaders. Their attachment to Isiam was required in order to induce
those who were under them to accept Islam. They were, for example, Abu
S »fyan ibn Harb, his son Mu l awiyah, Haklm ibn Hizam, Suhayl ibn ‘Umar,
Safwan ibn Umayyah, ikrimah ibn Abu Jahl, Abul Sanabil ibn Ba’kak
Aqra’ ibn Habis, Uyaynah ibn Hisn, ‘Abbas ibn Mirdas including other

There has been disagreement about the time when the act of seeking
attachment to Islam will be started; some say that it should be done before
accepting Islam to allure them to accept Islam. Some others hold that it
should be tried after their accepting Islam in order to endear belief to them.
They were treated so during the Iife of the Messenger of Allah, as well as
the early phase of the caliphate of Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr, afterwards said to
Abu Sufyan: The monetary help has now been stopped. Allah has now
rendered Islam strong, and has discontinued this from them. ,,

It is said that they enjoyed throughout the Iife of the Messenger of
Allah, that of Abu Bakr and the early phase of the caliphate of ‘Umar who
in his time, said to Abu Sufyan: “Allah has now placed Islam in no need
of your help and that of the people iike you, you are only a Muslim like
others, and then stopped the early practice.”

There has been disagreement concerning the share as to whom it
should be assigned. Some say that it will be redistributed among the seven
groups of people mentioned along with them in the Qur’anic verse. Some
others say that half of the share will be assigned to the buiiding of the
mosques and the other half will be assigned to ali the seven groups mentioned

They have also disagreed whether the like of it will recur if the
Muslims face such a situation in which they need the similar practice. Many
Vlama\ including Malik and his fo!lowers, hoki that this share has been
stopped and hence it should be assigned to those who have been mentioned
in the verse. ^Umar ibn ‘Abd aI- l Aziz and Ibn Shihab hold that if a similar
situation arises, the Imam can seek attachment to Islam from those whose
attachment to Islam is required as the situation demanded in the past.

There has been disagreement concerning the meaning of wafi’l-Riqdb.



It is said that the slaves who are under contract to redeem themselves
(al-Mukatibun) will be offered out of it to the extent of obtaining their
freedom, but the slaves will not be purchased with it for freedom. Some
others say, on the contrary, the slave under contract of buying freedom will
not be given anything out of it since wala (the right of succession to the
freed man) is confirmed for those who have declared them Mukatab.

Some others say that the share will be spent particularly for all these
groups. All these views have been recorded on the authority of Malik. It
has also been said that out of this share the ransom wili be paid for the
Muslim prisoners in order to obtain their freedom.

As for w’al-Gharimina, it means those who borrow for good purposes
and not for the sake of an unlawful purpose, nor do they find anything for
the payment of their debts, Some say that it means whoever is crushed by
debt and has not incurred it for the sake of an unlawful purpose, will be
given out of it, even if he possesses something to pay up his loan. They have
obviously considered the apparent meaning of the verse and what has been
reported on the authority of the Prophet: that Sadaqah is not lawful [fo.
38-bj for any rich man except for five persons; for a debtor, for a collector
of it, for a man who purchases it with his money, for a man who has a needy
neighbour to whom the Sadaqah is offered and the needy neighbour offers
it to the rich man as a gift, or for one who fights in the way of Allah.

As regards the words Fi SabiWl-lah, they mean provision of riding-
animal out of Sadaqah to those who have no riding-animal and provision to
those who have no provision, and to seal the frontier-towns out of it. Horses,
weapons, and riding-animals are to be purchased out of Sadaqah for making
preparation in the way of Allah. Some say it is permitted for the warrior
(ghazi), whether rich or poor, to receive out of it in accordance with the
apparent meaning of the Qur’anic verse and the Prophctic tradition.

Ibn al-Sabil is a wayfarer whose means of traveliing are cut off in
course of his jourriey, though he possesses wealth in his own town.

They have disagreed concerning the division of the Sadaqah (alms)
Some hold that it will be divided into either eight shares in accordance witii
the number of the groups, or seven shares. It is also said that out of these
groups, the needy groups will be given preference, and then it will be trans-
ferred to those from among them to whom the need is transferred. It has
been narrated on the authority of the Prophet with good chain of narrators
that the Prophet said, “Sadaqah is neither lawtul for the rich nor ior an
artisan. ,, Dhul Mirrah means one who is niggardly skillhil in profession, or
^n artisan who earns his livelihood and maintenance of his living bv his skill



As for one who is deprived of earning and is unable to earn, as whenever
he attempts to do anything he fails to earn his livelihood, deserves Sadagah.

There has been disagreement concerning the limit to earning when
it is not desirable for the earner to accept Sadaqah. Yahya ibn Sallam narrates
on the authority of some people of KQfah that he who possesses fifty dirham%
should not accept it. I do not think that it has ever been substantiated by
those who possess authority. What has been proved from the authority is
that he who possesses not so much coins as to incur Zakah f nor has goods
equivalent to it in price, can receive Zakdh because of the saying of the
Prophet: ‘The Sadaqah will be taken from their rich and will be distributed
among the poor.” Thus, the Prophet has made a limit between the two
groups. This was also the opinion of al-Mughlrah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Ma-
dani aI-Makhzumi.

There has been disagreement about the amount which may be given
out of it (Zakdh) to the poor. Some say that a poor person may be given
to the extent of incurring Zakdh. Some say that if this much can be given
to him at a time, there is no harm in giving him more than the amount
necessitating Zakdh.

He who possesses a house or a servant can be given Zakdh provided
he would not have anything in excess after meeting his necessities if he sells
the two, or purchases out of their price a house just to suffice him and a
scrvant just to satisfy his need and then something surptus remains in his
possession. Some of them hold that cven he would be given out of Zakdh
il he owns a house, a servant and a horse.


Chapter XI




lfo. 19-aj It has been proved that the Prophet said: “No Sadagah is
to be realised from less than five awqiyyah of silver and less than five camels
in number, and no Sadaqah is to be paid for what is less than five wasaq.

It has been reiated that the Prophet levied Zakah on twenty dindrs
of gold This is held by ‘Ulama in general. Al-Hasan says that no Zakah is
to be levied on gold till it reaches forty dinars. It has been related on the
authority of Ibn Shihab that he said: “Whoever possesses gold worth two
hundred dirhams, has to pay Zakah lor it.”

Malik, his followers, and many ‘Ulama’ say that Zakah is to be levied
only on crops, ready-money and cattle. Al-Nu’man says that Zakdh is to be
levied on all wealth except straw (tibn) and wood (hatab). It hasbeen proved
that the Prophet said: “No Zakah is to be levied on a Muslim for his slave
or for his horse.”

The Syrians are of the view that Zakah is to be levied on honey.
They relate in this connection a Hadith traced back to the Prophet that he
used to realise one water skin out of ten watersakins (full of honey), then
he reserved it ror them. If the Hadith is established, our authorities hold
that they oiiered it voluntarily. Some say that they offered this only because
he reserved an exclusive place for them in their territory. The Messenger
of Allah has said: “There is no Himd (reserved land) except for the sake of
Allah and for His Messenger.” Hence, it became the price of that which
was reserved for them. Malik and his followers hold that there is no Zakah
on vegetables. on walnuts, on almonds, pistachio, pine-pitch, fig and all
other kinds of fruits except date, grapes, seeds and olive. But Ibn Idns holds
that no Zakah is to be levied on olive. Ibn Habib holds that Zakah is to be



levied on vegetables.

They have agreed that Zakah is not to be Ievied on sheep and eoats
(a^anam) ttl. their number reaches fort y . Out of forty, one goaHs o be
pa.d, there bemg only one goat upto one hundred and twenty Two Itl
are only ,o be paid out of one hundred and twenty-one to two ZndTed
goats. Jhey have d!sagreed when the number exceeds two hundred b v one
goat Most of them ho.d, and this is the view of Malik, that three goats
71 h C P h ^ Wh, ‘7° me others hold that o”‘y two goats will be paid up.o
h :ndX e ats f ° r,y ^” “*’ °” e g ° at ‘ S <° be «”* ‘” ^ «

They have agreed that one goat is to be levied on every five camels
till they reach twenty-five, there being nothing extra for what lies inbetween
the two prescribed numbers. One bint-makhad (i.e. a female camel of one
year) is to be levied on twenty-five camels. Now, bint makhad is the she-camei
m the womb of whose mother her youngling moves before the birth. If bint
makhad is not available, then one ibn labun (a male camel of two years) is
to be paid tupto thirty-five T ffo. 39-b] and then one bint labun (a female
camel of two years) from thirty-six upto forty-five camels. One hiqqah
(female camel of three years) from forty-six to sixty; one jidha’ah (female
camel of four years) from sixty-one to seventy-five; two bint labun from
seventy-six to ninety ; two hiqqah from ninety-one to one hundred and twenty .

When the number reaches upto one hundred and twenty-one, the
S&im (the tax-co!lector) may take either three bint labun or two hiqqah.
But some say that only three bint labun are to be paid for one hundred and
twenty-one, but others say that only two hiqqah are to be levied on them.

Many ‘Ulama hold, and this is also the view of Malik, that he will
not go back to the prescribed Zakah of sheep except when the number
decreases so much so that it becomes less than twenty-five. It has been
related on the authority of ‘ AII that when the number exceeds one hundred
and twenty by five then one goat is to be paid for five; similarly one goat
is to be levied on every five sheep above the number from ten to twenty.
A group of people followed him on this point.

They have agreed that one tabt (female calf of one year) is to be
paid for thirty baqar (i.e. all bovine animals viz. cows, bulis, oxen and
buffaloes etc), and one musinnah (female calf of two years) for forty.
Musinnah is a female calf havfng all her milkteeth fallen. They have disagreed
concerning those that are belowthirty. Most of the l Ulamd\ including Malik,
hold that noihing is to be paid for less than thirty as has been reported on
the authority o; Mu^adh. Some say that one goat is to be levied on every


five baqar. But the Ulama in general hold that only one musinnah is to be
paid for fifty. It has been related on the authority of al-Nakh’1 that one
musinnah is to be paid for fifty baqar.

They have disagreed concerning al-Khulata (co-partners) who possess
so much cattle, when they are kept separate, everyone from among
the owners is not liable to pay Zakdh. Malik, his followers and a group of
the l Ulamd\ are of the opinion that when the whole lot is taxable nothing
is to be levied on him whose share is not taxable with Zakdh. RabPah,
al-Layth and a group of the ‘Ulama hold that when the whole lot is taxable
Zakdh is to be realised. Malik says: “If the tax-collector does according to
this, the partner would make claims for restitution each upon the otherdue
to difference of opinion and it will be regarded as a case in which rulings

They have disagreed concerning the nature oial-Khulatd: the majority
of the Ulama explains that this occurs when everyone of them brings his
own sheep in which the shepherd, watering-pail and resting place are com-
mon. Taus and l Ata” hold that al-Khulatd are no other than share-holders,
but this is against the tradition, since the two co-partners make claims for
restitutioning the surplus, each upon the other equally, whereas the share-
holders have no scope for doing so. Some say that when the shepherd is
common, they are Khalit, since in this case stallion is common, so both will
be regarded as co-partners irrespective of realising taxes. Some say that if
they are combined in both ways, they are Khalit. They are, however, re-
garded as al-Khulata /fo. 40-aJ when the owners of cattle permit this sort
of union. When they herd together before the end of the year, they are
co-partners except if the year happens to be very near, and similar is the
case when they are separated.

They have disagreed concerning the meaning of the Hadith: “Those
who are separate will not be combined and those who are combined will
not be separated out of the fear of sadaqah.” Malik says that it is, for
example, in the case when two or three persons have forty sheep each, now,
when the tax-collector appears to them they gather these together so that
they are to pay only one goat, for example; or a person who has one hundred
goats, and another has one hundred and one goats, now, when the tax-col-
lector appears to them they separate their herds and thus either of the two
will be liable to pay one goat each.

Ibn Idris says: ‘The meaning of the Hadith The combined are not
to be separated 1 , means that either of the two co-partners possesses forty
goats, the tax-collector ts not then allowed to divide them and take one goat
from each of them. He who differs from us in the interpretation of the word,


does not differ from us in holding the view. 1 ‘ What he says is the view of
Malik except that the interpretation of Malik appears to be more suited to
the extemal meaning of the words, because, his expression: Khashyat al~
Sadaqah (for fear of Sadaqah) is to be understood in respect of one who
pays it and not in respect of one who collects it.

The ( Ulama\ in general, hold that what is obtained as accruing from
apparent properties is not subject to Zakdh unti! a year passes over it. Ibn
‘Abbas says that Zakdh should be paid immediately and then after every
year. The same meaning has been expressed by Mu l awiyyah in taking Zakah
out of the allowances given to the people.

They have disagreed concerning the Zakdh of ornaments, ‘A’ishah
and many Companions of the Prophet hold that ornaments are not liable
to Zakdh. This is the view of Malik and his followers. Some Companions
of the Prophet and a section of the ‘Ulamd’ hold that the ornaments are
liable to Zakdh; some others hold that if it is lent, its lending will be treated
as Zakah.

They have disagreed about the Zakdh of the wealth of the minors.
‘Umar and a number of the people of the early period hold that Zakdh is
to be levied on these and this is the view of Malik and his followers. Some
people of ‘Iraq hold that no Zakdh is to be levied on them. Al-Thawri says:
“The guardian will maintain an account of that which falls due to him every
year and when he hands over wealth to him, he should inform him of his
due.” Those who hold that Zakdh is not to be levied upon them argue that
it is so, because prayer, fasting, pilgrimage and punishments are not incum-
bent upon them except when they reach the age of puberty. As to those
who hold this (i.e. Zakdh is to be levied upon them) argue that Zakdh is
levied on wealth and not on persons.

They have disagreed concerning the Zakah of the wealth of slaves.
So those who think ffo. 40-b] that a slave owns (wealth) hold that no Zakdh
is to be levied upon him and those who do not consider him to be an owner,
say that he himself is the property of his master and the master is to pay
the Zakdh for him. The first view is the view of Malik and his followers.
They argue on the basis of the Qur’anic verse in which Allah, the Exalted,
says: “And whoso is not able to afford to marry free believing women, let
them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess. Allah
knoweth best (concerning) your faith. Ye (proceed) one from another. So
wed them by permission of their folk, and give unto them their portions.”
(4: 25)

He thereby ordered to gave their dowry, and also with what al-Layth



related on the authority of Bukayr on the authority of Nafi* on the authority
of Ibn ‘Umar that the Prophet said: “Whoever sells a slave who owns prop-
erty, his property belongs to the seller except in the case when the purchaser
makes a condition.” So he (the Prophet) allowed the purchase of a slave
together with his property and he did not exclude any known or unknown
thing or property on cash or on credit, nor that which cannot be sold, as he
declared the property part and parce) of the sla v e. The disagreement of
those who oppose us in this case when it is not permissible to exclude the
property of the slave when it is unspecified and something which is not to
be sold is no proof, since, when something has been substantiated on the,
authority of the Messenger of Allah, disagreement of those who opposed it
is no proof. Since disagreement does not affect the genuine proofs.

When they did not find anything objectionable in the chain (of nar-
rators) of the Hadith of al-Layth they charged that ‘Ubayd Allah ibn \bu
Ja l far exceeded the limits in it, but this is an expression without any proof.
Again, one who intends something against Sunnah has no right to advance
arguments without proof that what refutes it.

The ‘Ulama in general hold that no Zakdh is to be levied on at-
mukdtab (the slave under contract to earn his freedom), and this is the view
of one who considers him as slave so long as something of the term of
Kitabah remains due to him, Ibn ‘Abbas used to hold that when the scribe
wrote the terms of Kitdbah, the slave becomes free and the terms of Kitdbah
are a debt, on him, so according to his view, he is liable to pay Zakdh, Some
say that if he pays one-fourth of the term, he becomes free. Some say that
if he pays his entire price, and some say that he is free to the extent of what
he has paid. Some say that, when he pays in instalments (he is free). ‘AIT
used to hold that he who sets free partly will inherit him and will inherit to
the extent of freedom in him. This necessitates that Zakdh will be levied in
the like manner, Ibn ‘Abbas did not favour to split the freedom into parts
and whenever someone freed a slave he asked to free the rest of the slave .

They have disagreed concerning the case when a woman gives her
Zakdh to her husband. It has been proved that the Prophet permitted Zayn-
bab al-Thaqafiyyah, the wife of Ibrt Masud, to give her Zakdh to him and
to her son from him. Abu ‘Ubayd says: “Verily it is the case of Ibn Mas^ud
together with his son from other than Zaynab. [fo. 41-a.J He (Abu 4 Ubayd)
says: “Because they have agreed that a woman cannot give something from
her Zakdh to her own son.”

The opinion of (Abu ‘Ubayd) that it is an Ijmd 1 (consensus) is surely
not so, because Malik and his followers hold that whoever is not responsible
for the maintenance of a person, can give his Zakdh to that person and



because of their view that it is not incumbent upon the mother to bear the
maintenance of her children whether they are minor or adult. Of course,
there has been disagreement concerning the view of Malik whether it is
preferable (Mustahab) for one to give Zakdh to the near reiations or not.
Once he disliked it because it removes from him the duty showing favour
(Silah) to them and once again he (Malik) allowed it. In either of his views
it is not found that in case he gives them, it will not suffice him. He liked
that one should not be in-charge of distributing his own Sadaqah because
by it he earns praise and escapes thereby from blame. He preferred also to
give Zakah secretly like the voluntry alms, while some people may follow
each other and vie with each other in good deeds.

There has been disagreement about the person who pays his Zakdh
in advance before it falls due to him. Malik thinks that it will not suffice
him like the one who performs prayers before its time, except in case when
it (paying of Zakdh) happens only a few days earlier since that would be
regarded as its exact time. Some of the Ulamd’ have permitted it saying
that some performances cannot be compared with one another.

They have argued with the Hadith in which it has been reported that
it was said to the Prophet that ‘Abbas. Khalid ibn a!-WalId and ibn Jamil
refused to pay Zakdh. The Prophet said, “As for ‘Abbas, he will get it as
well as the like of it, and as for Khalid, you are certainly doing injustice to
him, he has dedicated his coats of mail and his men for the cause of Allah,
and as for Ibn Jamll, he did not refuse except for the reason that Allah,
and His Messenger made him rich, out of Allahs bounty. ,, So they have
interpreted that ‘Abbas and Khalid paid their Zakdh in advance.

In this connection they have again offered the argument that the
Prophet ordered the women to come out for the *Id prayers so that they
may attain to the good action and be present at the feast of the believers.
They then came out so much so that the newly grown up girls and the veiled
women came out; or he said, the newly grown up veiled girls. When he
performed the prayer, he came upon them accompanied by Bilal. He then
delivered sermons before them and asked them to offer Sadaqah t whereupon ,
they started throwing the ornaments in the clothes of Bilal. The prophet
then did not ask them, whether one year had passed or not as the possessions
of the people may very.

Those who hold that Zakdh is to be levied on the ornaments argue
with this, and those who allow the actions of women without the permission
of their husbands also argue with this, because the Prophet did not ask them
whether they were unmarried or married. Here is also given argument in
favour of the view of Malik who held that Zakdh is to be levied on the

KllAti AL-AMWAL 163

wealth of the children, because the Prophet did not ask them whether they
were adult or minor or whether they were offering alms voluntarily or com-

They have disagreed about the person who buys his own Sadaqah
and gives ffo. 41 -bj articles (al-urud) in exchange for cash. Malik dislikes
all these and taking articles in exchange for cash is most abhorrent to him
except in case when he is forced to do so and he does not think that to pay
articles will suffice him. Some people allowed this and they argued with the
example of purchasing Sadaqah, because it has been proved by the Prophet
who said concerning one upon whom Zakdh became incumbent and he
brought an animal younger than the required age of the animal of the Zakdh.
It and two goats more will be accepted from him if these two are convenient
for him, or twenty dirhams and if he brings an animal older than the required
animal of Zakdh, it will be accepted from him and he will be given two
goats.” In this case, there is a sort of purchase and this is contrary to the
voluntary charity the purchase of which the Prophet forbade. ‘Umar, and
he (the Prophet) said: “One who takes back his charity is like a dog who
swallows its yomit.”

They have argued in favour of giving articles in payment of Sadaqah
with what has been reported on the authority of Mu’adh that the Prophet
said to him, when he sent him to al-Yaman, to collect Sadaqah: “Bring to
me the garments called Khamis or labis, because it is more convenient to
you and more useful for the emigrants (Muhdjirun) residing at al-Madlnah”

They have disagreed concerning coming out of the collector of Zakdh
in a year of drought. It is said that this will be delayed till the next year, so
he will realise the Sadaqah for two years. Some say that this cannot be
delayed; and both these views have been held by Malik.

They have also disagreed about the person who possesses forty young
lambs (sakhlah), none being big. Mahk says that the owner should bring a
big she-goat or such a big he-goat which may be allowed for payment of
Sadaqah. Some say that one will be taken out of them. Some say that the
price of one will be taken because it is not permissible to take younger than
the Jidh’a. Some say that nothing falls due in it.

They have differed whether the tax-collector will divide the whole
lot of the goats into three parts. Malik says that he cannot do so, and
whatever the owner brings and whatever he pays as his due, the collector
should accept it. Ibn Shihab says that the whole lot will be divided into three
parts and the owner will choose two-thirds out of it and the tax-collector
will choose the other one-third aiming the required age necessary for him.


They have disagreed concerning one to whom a goat falls due, then
he slaughters it and distributes its flesh. Ibn al-Qasim says that this wiill not
suffice him and Ashhab says that this will suffice him.

There has been disagreement concerning the view of Malik regarding
the two co-partners, one of them has five camels while the other nine. He
said that one goat is to be paid by each and they will not reimburse among
them. Arterwards he said, rather they should reimburse among themselves
concerning the two goats according to the number of his camels. He says
that this is the meaning of the Hadith and this is held by his followers.

They have disagreed concerning the case of one who says that the
tax-collector had been absent from him for a number of years. Some say
that he will have to pay the Zakdh of that which he finds with him for the
years that had passed [fo. 42-a] except in the case when this reduces the
number after the collection of Zakdh for some years, then Zakdh will not
fall due in it and this Zakdh will be waived from him. Some say that he will
be asked about the number of the camels he had with him every year so he
will have to pay Zakdh accordingly.

They have disagreed concerning a man whose cattle was taken away
forcibly from him and then it was restored to him after a number of years.
Some say that he will pay Zakdh for one year oniy and some say that he
will have to pay Zakdh for all these years which have passed. ‘Umar ibn
‘Abd al-‘Aziz wrote concerning the wealth (cattle) which was taken without
any right, that it should be returned to its owner and its Zakdh should be
taken for all the years which had passed. Then he sent another letter im-
mediately after the first asking to take Zakdh for one year only. Others say
that a year will be counted for him in advance.


They have disagreed concerning the person who exchanged sheep
with sheep or cow with cow or camel with camel and he tpok animals in
which Zakdh falls due. Some says that Zakdh wili be taken out of what he
took in the first year , and some say that he will wait with it for one year more.

They have disagreed concerning the case when one exchanged goat
with camel or cow and camel with cow but whatever he took was not liable
to Zakdh. Some say that Zakdh falls due in it at the first year, and some
say that a year will be counted for him in advance.

They have disagreed concerning the oxen used for water-wheel and
the working camelsand the domesticated and minor younglings of sheep.
Malik and his followers say that Zakdh will be levied on all these when they
constitute nisdb (taxable limit). Some say that no Zakdh is to be levied on


any cattle except on the pasturing animals.

They have disagreed about the sheep of a trader who constantly
exchanges his sheep; when he completes the years his weaith (cattle) is found
invested in the articles of trade. Malik and his followers hold that no Zakdh
is to be levied on them till they are sold. Some of the people of Kufah say
that these will be evaluated at the end of ea 42-b] of cattle while the
like of it is due to him. Ibn Slrin says, and this is also the view of Malik and
his followers, that no obligatory Zakah will be waived from him on account
of this. Some say it will be waived.

They have disagreed concerning a person whose slave came to him
on the day of Id al-Fitr while he is to pay the Sadaqah of a slave like him;
some say that Sadaqah will not be waived from him on account of this; some
say it will be waived from him.

They have also differed about the payment of Sadaqat al-Fitr on
behalf of one’s wife. Malik and his followers say that it is incumbent on him
and similarly he is to pay on behalf of her servant. Some say that he is to
pay Sadaqah on behalf of her more than one servant if she is a lady of


distinction. Some say that he is not to pay Sadaqah on her behalf nor on
the behalf of her servant.

They have disagreed concerning a serving-slave. Some say that Ir.s
Sadaqah is to be paid by his master and some say that it is incumbent upon
the one who enjoys his service.

They have differed about the case when the. Khawdrij conquered a
city and collected Zakdh trom the inhabitants Some say that it will be
sufficient for them and some say that it wiJl not suffice them.

They have disagreed about the person who gave his Zakdh to a rich
man without knowing him. Some say that he is to pay the Zakdh again while
others say that nothing falls due tohim.

They have disagreed about a grown up and healthy son to whom his
father gives something from his Zakdh. Those who hold that maintenance
is not binding upon the father because of his puberty say that it will suffice
him and those who hold that maintenance is incumbent upon the father as
the Prophet said to Hind when she said to him saying that Abu Sufyan was
a niggardly fellow, should she take scrnething from his wealth secretly?
Whereupnn the Prophet said: l * You can take that which is sufficient for you
and for your children with justice ” and he did not exempt adult from minor.

They have disagreed concerning the allies of Banu Hashim in matters
of receiving the voluntary alms.

They have disagreed concerning the meaning of Allah’s saying: “And
pay the due thereof upon the harvest day.” (6: 142) Some say that it means
the prescribed Zakdh. Some say that the beggar should be given at harvest
time and also at the time of gathering the crops and also a handful (Qabs)
at the time of gathering on the threshing-floor. Qabs means plucking some-
thing with forefingers and Zakdh will be #ven when wheat is threshed out.

They have differed about the meaning of God*s Saying: “And they
refuse small kindness” (107: 7). Some say that it means Zakdh. Some say
that it is lending of rope, watering-pail and pick-axe.

They have disagreed as to how much of wheat is paid for the Sadaqat
al~Fitr. Malik and his followers say that one Sd l from every human being
(will be taken), according to the statement of Abu Sa’Id al-Khudri: “We
used to pay one Sd l from food” Ibn Idris says that Sadaqat al-Fitr is half
of one Sd’ and on this concern a Hadith has been narrated which requires
consideration in its chain of narrators.


They have dittered about the payment of Sadaqat al-Fitr on behali
of slaves. Some say thai the master is to pay on their behalf, and some say
that he is not to pa>\ There has been disagreement concerning a slave who
is half-free. Some say that Sadaqat al-Fitr will be paid on his behalf by one
who owned him partly. Some say that it is to be paid in proportion to his
freedom and m proportion to his being a slave. According to the view ot
Ibn “Abbas, some of the parts of a human being cannot be partly free and
partly [fo. 43-aJ slave. The Sadaqat al-Fitr according to his view is, therefore,
to be levied on the man.

They have disagreed concerning the embryo, whether the Sadaqat
al-Fitr is to be paid on its behalt. The ‘Ulama in general hold that this is
not incumbent, and Ibn Hanbal says that Sadaqat al-Fitr is to be paid on its

They have disagreed about the payment of Sadaqat al-Fitr on behalf
of one who was born on the day of Id al-Fitr. Some of them consider it as
preferable (Mustahab) without any obligation, while Ibn Hanbal makes its
payment obligatory (Wdjib). They have also differed about the payment of
the Sadaqat al-Fitr in the form of a cost-price (thaman). Most of them hold
that it does not suffice, so they disagreed while some of them permitted this.

They have disagreed concerning the measurement of the mudd as
recorded from the Prophet. The people of the two Sacred Cities have agreed
that it is one ratl and the third of it. The ratl consists of one hundred and
twenty-eight dirhams. To this Abu Yusuf had agreed when he argued with
Malik on this matter in the presence of the Caliph, the Commander of the
Faithful, and this is also held by Abu ‘Ubayd. The people of iraq say that
mudd consists of two ratls.

And in wealth there are dues other than Zakdh as well. Among them
is the emancipation of their prisoners. It has been made compulsory for the
Muslims to redeem them. It has been narrated on the authority of the
Prophet that he said: “You emancipate the prisoner (at-^Ani) and aWAni
means prisoner. Asbagh says tTiat this is incumbent upon the Muslims (even
if it costs all their wealth). AncAher case is that of a person who does not
tind anything which could strainghten his affairs, So it then becomes incum-
bent upon one who comes to know this from him, to give him that which
may straighten his affairs and he (the needy person) can take it by force
and even he can take away by hiding himself, if he is unable to overpower
him, except by this way. Another case is to give to a beggar if he comes
across a prepared thing by chance. It becomes then incumbent upon him to
give to the beggar out of it. But if he does not find anything available but
knows that the beggar does not possess anything which can strainghten his


affairs, it becomes incumbent upon him to give him that which is helpful
for him. If he does not know his condition, he should speak to him justly.

It is the duty of one who reaps the crops or plucks the fruits to
entertain those who are present with some of it. It has been mentioned that
this is the meaning of God^s saying: “And pay the due thereof {Haqqahu)
upon the harvest day,” and this Haqq (due) is other than Zakah.

Some say that it is incumbent upon him to leave that which has been
missed by the reapers. Some people live on it. It has been narrated that the
Prophet forbade reaping the harvest at night, because it will deprive the
needy of the kind treatment. This is the interpretation of the verse of the
Oufanic chapter Nun wal-Qalam, by those who h6ld this view. Some say
that he forbade this out of the fear of snakes and reptiles of the land.



Chapter I









It has been said to Ahmad ibn Nasr that the rulers levy a number of
taxes in the name of Khardj; often they levy a tax according to the price of
land and trees and sometimes impose it according to water and canals and
some other times according to the number of trees as strictly agreed upon
by the chiefs of these places. This practice has continued from generation
to generation and nobody knows the actual position whether the land and
the cities were under Khardj or tax was realized from them unjustly. This
happened in the land of al-Maghrib.

He says: “Sahnun reports that he had investigated into the affair of
the land of Ifriqiyyah but could not establish whether the land was conquered
by force or by a peace treaty, or whether the inhabitants embraced Islam
on the condition of retaining the land. What is agreed upon by the inhabitants
of the cities isthat they have inherited (these lands) and it is known through
ages and accepted by all and sundry that they.possessed these lands as usually
lands are owned and that they did therein all sorts of acts as the owners of
lands usually do with their lands viz. sale, offering as charjty, gift, mortmain,
mortgage, loan, dowry and all other transactions. No ascetic needs there to
refrain from this except in some other places called as al-Akhmds and known
so essentially and some other places which were usurped from their owners
and turned into exclusive estates (sdfiyah) and a long time has since passed

1 79

over it, its owners are not known and also some other places the inhabitants
of which emigrated on account of oppressions meted out to them, and a
long period has since passed over lt, the owners are not known and other
places as well where this happened on account of wars that broke out among
the inhabitants and their neighbours.

4 in some places out of these categories, some other people settled
down therein, nevertheless the circumstances of the place were known; it
was known to the entire population who knew that iand that the inhabitants
of these lands were ejected from these, and that these other people alighted
at the land by way of transgression. Some of them hold that in the past, a
group of people had alighted at the land by way of oppression. Anyone
belonging to all these descriptions who recognises his companions whose
number may be counted although they do not know as to how these lands
belonged to them, will be reconciled therein as the like. But if they refuse
and are serious while nobody from among them claims to know of anything
he demands, the ruting will be deferred therein till they are reconciled. But
if they are at law therein, they will be treated according to legal procedure.
But if some of them claim of knowing while the others show ignorance
saying that they have no knowledge, the land will belong to one (fo. 44~aj
who claims it, some say that the claims will be confirmed with oath, while
others hold that they need no oath, if there was none to dispute over it.

“II somc people say that they have rights (over the land) but they
do not know them due to their long absence from the lands as well as due
to long absencc of thcir predecessors whom they have inherited and that
the land is not also in their possession but others claim the knowledge of
what they claim as their right; the lands will belong to those who claim the
knowledge accompanied with an oath to the effect that the lands belonged
to them and that thcy were not aware of othenT right therein.

“But if the owners are known but their number is not known and it
is not known as to who from among them are present and who are absent
and also who had something therein out of those and who had nothing and
again they did not know if their possession was scanty or in plenty, nor did
they recognise thesc exactly, nor how did the inheritance circulates among
them, due to passage of long span of time, such lands will be treated like
the property left behind by a man whose heirs are neither known for, nor
knowledge about them is expected. These will be spent for the welfare of
the Muslims and should not be abandoned in desolation.

“There has been disagreement as to the fact whether these lands will
be treated like Sadaqat or like the/ay*. But what is sound by consideration
ts the fact that it should be treated like fay\ since they have all agreed on



the view that one whose heir by lineage is not known, he is to be inherited
by the right of relationship (wala’), so it has been treated like the fay’ as
the Sadaqat are neither meant for the definite individuals nor for the wealthy
people. Further, it is also known that every mortal being surely has an heir
and if the heir is not 4tnown, some heir must be there to meet him in
accordance with the knowledge of Allah.

“But if it is heid that often a reunited lineage is cancelled on the
ground of illegal bed (illegitimacy), it wili be said that this view of yours is
not sound for a number of reasons; the objects are to be understood according
to their apparent meanings and consideration will be taken therein as I have

“The other reason is that every human being save Adam, Eve and
Jesus Christ must have a father and for this reason Allah, the Exalted, has
addressed us saying: “O children of Adam”. Again the ‘Ulama’ have agreed
on the view that an illegitimate child inherits his mother and there is no
difference between father and mother. Those who hold that the fornicator
will not inherit the child who is born of his fornication, oppose because the
fornicator does not know the fact as to whether the child is born of him or
of somebody else. So, when he does not have any legal bed and his affairs
remain dubious, he cannot be accepted as heir on account of their denying

“It has been related on the authority of ‘Umar that where legal bed
was not availabie he used to join the children born during the days of
ignorance to those who wanted them affiliated to them during the days of
Islam. This view is also held by Malik and his followers. They argue with
the story of the son of the slave-girl of Zam’ah who had a legal bed, but
when bed and fornication join together, the iegal bed will be given preference.
Al-Nakhai, al-Nu 4 man and Ishaq hold that he who wants an illegitimate
child affiliated to him, the child becomes affiliated to him when he has no
legal bed.

*ishaq also argues with the fact that they have agreed on appointing
the mother as heir. And the other argument to the effect that this will be
treated like fay’ [fo. 44-b] is the fact that they, all agree with the view that
one whose heir by lineage is not known, he is to be inherited by the right
of relationship (wala’) so it has been treated like the fay\ Because as for
Sadaqat, the Prophet, peace be upon him, told a man who asked him about
a goat which he found in the desert that it belonged either to the man n
to his brother or to the wolf. Further, he found a date lying, whereupon he
said, had he known that it was not out of Sadaqah, he would have surely
eaten it up.”


Ahmad was asked as to whether he advises one to exempt himself
from the payment of this tax caljed Kharaj, imposed by the ruler, if he can
do so. He replies in the affirmative. and hoids that he is allowed to do this
much only. Again, he was asked about the fact that if the ruler had imposed
it on the people of a town, realized it from them at the rate of a fixed amount
and the people paid them against their properties, whether one is ailowed
to exempt himself from its payment if he can do so. But when he does so,
thc authority will realize the total amount imposed on them from the entire
people. He replies that he can do so.

This is further corroborated by the opinion of Malik concerning a
tax-collector who realizes one goat trom the goats of one of the partners
though the total lot of the goats is not taxable: ‘That it has been taken
wrongtully, accruing to one for whom it is collected and not to be used upon
onc irom whom it is collected who in turn is not entitled to make a claim
for anything upon his co-partners and in this case, \ shall not accept that
which has bcen recorded on the authority of Sahmun, because there should
not be any model in doing wrong nor is it incumbent upon anybody to insert
himselt into injusticc lest injustice might be doubled for others. Al!ah, the
Hxalted. says: The way (of blame) is only against those who oppress man-
kind’ (42: 42).”

It is said to him that there are a people who have to pay this tax
according to the number oi their trees which are irrigated by the water of
the canals, and in water their ownership is known; some of them have little
and some have much watt*- as Allah blessed them it. Sometimes they make
transaction of water and not that ol tree as a result; some of them have
plenty ot trees but little water or trees without water or plenty of water but
lew trees while no tax is levied on water. So the chiefs of the local people
all agreed on sharing the entire water of the locality according to the number
of trees, so water became little for those who had plenty of it and plentiful
lor those who had little oi it and water was also givcn to those who had no
water on account ot the cjuota ot his trees.

So, some people abstained from using water that fell in their share
while most of them used that and those who abstained from using water
had to pay the tax levied to the extent of their share in that. The affair
continued for long so much so that neither the nature of their ownership
was determined, nor was it known who from among them did own something
therein and who did not. Aiterwards all or some of them wanted to adopt
the best way.

Ahmad says: “If they are^counted, there being no absentee — orphan
or light-witted individual, they should come to an agreement among them-


seWes on that water as they liked; and if the officer in charge finds in that
case any way to act equitably, he should defer the rulling till they come to
an agreement. But if the owners are not present [fo. 45-aJ the owners being
absentees and orphans, and the number of absentees fro’m among them is
not determined nor are their whereabouts known, the water thereof will be
treated like the property the owners of which are not known, as I have
mentioned earlier.

if the Imam so desires, he may bequeath it as an endowment so
that the use of water may be offered for sale on dialy, monthly and annual
basis and also exercise his own discretion to use it for the welfare of the
Muslims, he can do so. But if he thinks of selling itself, dividing it in rpany
parts among the owners of those trees and of using them for the welfare of
the Muslims,he can do so. But if there is no just authority to employ it for
the very purpose, the just Muslims shall administer it on behalf of the Imam,
whoever from among them undertakes the task, his action will be considered
su^Acient.’ 1

The inhabitants of a certain territory said to him that under some
convenants (with some other people) they received water by which they
watered their land. On the authority of their forefathers, their forefathers
had informed them of the fact that water originally did not belong to them
and that water in fact belonged to some people whom they did not know.
He replies that this case, too, is like the one as he has mentioned about the
decision of the Imam or that of the just Muslims if the just Imam is not
available to sell it on tirhe basis and one who undertakes the administration
can do so and will employ the price for the benefit of the Muslims, and if
he thinks it proper to seil itself, he can do so. But if there is none to undertake
any of these, whoever receives water out of it should give the price in alms
and use it for the benefit of the Muslims.

He was asked about a people whom the ruler had ejected from their
localities and seized their landed properties. They had proprietary right over
the canals in which they had other partners who had not given up their
proprietary rights over the canals. The canals were common among them
and they shared these together according to some definite parts without
having any fixed day which they cannot turn away. Now, whether it is
allowed to take his own share for one who is not prevented from taking his
share without having any claim of the deprived people upon him. HeTeplies
that he cannot take that but if he takes only to the extent of his share he
should share it along with the deprived people in proportion to their shares
in the canal , and in case of their absence he should consider therein for them.

It was said to him that if the canal was shared by the owners, each


having a definite day of the week; Friday for one group, Saturday foranothet
and Sunday for still another, Atterwards, some owners gave up their ow^
propnetary nght thus enabling some others who had not given up their rights
to take a day other than his and give up his own day, now whether it would
be lawful to take it. He said, “No, except that he is able to take his own
day exactly, and it would not be lawful for him to take anyother day.”

He was asked about the people of a certain town, in which the ruler
levied heavy taxes on them for their landed properties while there were
some other people who had no landed property. As this continued for long
with the owners of the landed properties and fell Heavy on them, a group
from among them made agreement with the rulers to allot all the lands lying
outside their town among them all on condition that the unlawful taxes
would be levied /fo. 45-bj on the (newly) allotted lands and thus everyone,
whether he had owned any land or not was included therein. They then
turned their scattered holdings into common property.

They remained on it for a period till knowledge of all about the origin
of the lands and also about the ownership was forgotten. Later on, they
were ejected from their town and the town as well as the adjoining places
which were left in their possessions became desolate so much so that a iong
time passed by, every one forgot his own right and it was not known as to
who had something and who had not. As their number increased and all
spread over the lands it was not possible to note the present from those who
remained absent. He says, ‘This case, too, will be like the one I have
described earlier with regard to the places in which the inhabitants are not
known and the place will be treated like the article lost and picked up; the
Imam or the just Muslims will decide the case therein according to what
would be deemed best for the Muslims/ 1

It was asked about one who had obtained produce of the land or
gained benefit out of some of these places. He replies that he will have to
pay the price of the rent of what he benefitted; if the land is worthy of rent
or the rent of the fruits if he benefits by the fruits provided the measure of
the fruits is unknown, or he will pay the price in case the measure is not
known and fruits belong to somebody who is not known. If its owner is not
known and knowledge about him is not expected, it should be given in alms
or be spent for the welfare of the Muslims.

It is said to him that the inhabitants of this town were at war with
their neighbours and fighting broke out among them, then the elders of the
town made peace with the people who fought them on having half of the
valley by which they irrigate their land while the entire valley belonged to
a large number of people most of whom were neither consulted nor their



consent was taken. Will this agreement be considered lawful? He says, “No,
except in case when the recipient desires to take the shares of those (only)
who entered into the agreement provided they did not enter into the agree-
ment under injustice or oppression nor did they exceed the hmits into their
main affairs while everybody from among them demanded that much only
to which he was entitled to.”

He was asked about certain people whom the ruler drove away from
the entire land and then a iong time passed by till it was not known how
the holdings were owned originally or how the aggrieved parties shared the
land among themse!ves. He replied that it would also be treated like the
properties which he had mentioned, that the owners thereof are not known
and their trace is not expected.

It is said to him that there Iived a people who had a river and it was
the custom among them that the powerful people used water and with held
the water as long as they needed it, and as soon as they were notin need
of water, another powerful people would come and take water after the
former had taken so the weak people could not reach it as long as the strong
people needed water and they were not aware of the original holding of
every one of them. Later on, they wanted to do the best and some of the
people expected to obtain their due. What is to be done in this case? He
replies that if those who preceded them had informed them of the fact that
the land belonged to all of them ffo. 46-aJ except that their powerful people
prevailed over their weak till they siezed it as you have mentioned and they
do not know as to what tHeir holdings are they should make peace on the
terms they so desire. But if they refuse, water should flow from the highest
to the next highest; the highest one should keep back (water) in his land
upto two ankle^bones and then relase it for the next till water reaches the
last one.

He was asked about a people who were ejected from their places and
were forced to live in a town alongwith their offspring in spite of the oppos-
ition from the inhabitants of the place. The ruler took an undertaking from
them that nobody from among them would go away from it and whoever
leaves the place from among them fears the punishment from the authority.
Now what is about one who wants to do the suitable? He says: t( If he finds
anyone from among the inhabitants of that city to get the land legalised
from him, he should do so, and whatever is made lawful for him viz, dwelling,
harvest or crops, will be treated as such.

“But if he does not find that and the inhabitants are known, he should
live in the place according to the minimum requirement for himself and for
his family and pay the rent to the inhabitants provided he knows them, or

1 7R


to the poor if he does not expect to know them. Mostly, he should dwell in
the mosques and other places, where nobody prevents others from living,
like the present thoroughfares and the lands belonging to none.

“However, if he has something else because of which he is in no need
of these things, he shouid not come near other’s property except with the
consent of the owner. As to that which is made lawful by the owner upto
a definite period or upto the life of the owner or upto that of the donee,
will be regarded as lawful. And what they donate him from the root and
the donee was able to receive it before the death of the donor, the thing
belongs to hirn, but if he was able to receive only after the death of the
donpr, according to Ibn al-Qasim the endowment will be null and void. But
Ashhab and most of dur authorities hold that the occupation of the donee
will be deemed as that of a usurper.

‘Those who alighted at othefs places are allowed to use the
thoroughfares of that town, mosques and the public places as they like.
They, like the original inhabitants, can gather wood from the places from
where the common people gather wood, and bring under cultivation those
lands only which lay uncultivated by the people of the locality. Similar is
the case in respect of their use of the drinking water of the local people. So
whatever property which remains common among the people he can take
from it like others but whenever he finds any other alternative while tht
abode was not made lawful for him he should not settle at that piace.”

He was asked about a people whose lands were grabbed (by some
other people) and were afterwards able to obtain their due while the usurper
tilled the land for a period and they found standing crops therein. He says
as to that which they found in the season of harvest, they have the right to
take it without offering anything to the usurper except that it belongs to the
usurper when he reaps the crops and throws on the ground [fo. 46-bJ the
price. The usurper will have to pay to (the owner) the price of it being
reaped after deducting the wages of the reaper of the harvest and in case
when he had crops before hand, account will be settled with him according
to that price. But if they are not/able to obtain the due and the season of
the harvest lapses, there has been disagreement concerning the view in it
and the Ulama have also disagreed in this; some saying that the usurper
has to pay the rent while the crops will belong to him and some others hold
that crops will belong to the owner of the land.

Preference will be given to this view on account of a Prophetic tradition
traced back to the Prophet: “One who plants or sows wrongfully has no
right (in the land)”, and also for the consensus of the ‘Ulamd’ that whoever
has begotten the child to an abducted siave-girl, her master wili be better



entitled to her child, so, what the usurper had obtained out of his cultivation
in this land will fall under this category.

It was enquired of him: whether the poor can receive the tithe of this
land if the usurper pays it. He says: “Yes, the poor can receive this, because
the grain either belongs to the cultivator or to the owner of the land and in
either case he is liable to pay Zakah therein, and Zakah is the right of the
poor as well as of the beneficiaries of Zakah y so they can receive it in
whatever way they get it.”

It is said: “Is it allowed to purchase food from the usurper?” He says:
‘i have already informed you of my view that the crops belong to the owner
of the land. How can it be allowed to purchase from someone a thing in
which others have better claim except in the case when he settles his affair
with the owner of the land on lawful terms, and in such a case it is lawful
to purchase from him. Those among our companions who think that the
crops belong to the usurper and he is to pay the rent of the land, disapprove
of purchasing from the usurper till he pays the dues to the owner of the
land or till he makes it lawful for him from the owner.” He further says,
“Whatsoever the usurper adds (on the land)iike plantation of trees, and
what he does wronghilly, fall under the category of what has been raised
out of cultivating the land according to their difference of opinions.

“But when the land is restored to the owner, he is to pay to the
usurper the price of the tree thrown on the ground after deducting the wages
of the reaper and the account will be settled out of his past dues for him
and similar is the case of the constructions in the usurped land. Now if the
usurper sold anything usurped exactly and purchased in its exchange cattle
which brought forth younglings or purchased a slave-girl which gave birth
to children, what he purchased in exchange of the price will be lawful for
him, in case dues were realised from him or he himself paid up the dues,
provided he sold the usurped thing for ready commodity and the bargain of
what he purchased was done verbally and afterwards handed over the ready
mony. But if he sells the usurped thing in exchange of artieles and then sells
the article in exchange of another article, the person usurped of will be given
choice, either he can accept his article if he finds it and cancel both the
transactions providedboth the articles are intact, or he can accept the articie
in exchange of which his article was sold while other transactions will be
null and void, or he can allow both the transactions and accept the other

But if he does not rind his article he will be given choice, he can
accept the price of his article of the day it was usurped according to our
authorities [fo. 47-a] while others hold that he will get the entire price as it



would be evaluated from the day it was taken from him forcibly upto the
day he missed it; or if he so wills, he can accept the article which has been
received in exchange, and cancel the third deal, and if he so wills, he can
accept the third deal, and all the transactions will be recognised because,
some of the ‘Ulama allow him only to accept his article if he finds it or the
price, if it is lost.

“But they do not allow him to recognise the transaction of his article
in any bargain. But if he sells the usurped article or dlnar, ready money,
and afterwards purchases an article on cohdition of the same ready money,
then the article was claimed, according to our authorities, the option will
be given to the claimant, he can receive his article while the buyer will turn
to the usurper for the price, and if he so wills he can allow the sale of his
article and accept the equivalent price of the article sold. But if the price is
ready mony, according to them as well as to others, the claimant cannot
accept what he purchased for its price.

“And our opponents hold that he has no right to allow the sale of
lts substitute on condition that he will accept the price, and one who purch-
ased the substitute for its price, cannot own what he purchased. And they
consider all the transactions as null and void, because according to them,
to have the claim of ready money is as good as to have the claim of the
goods at a time when the condition is stipulated to accept the ready money
itselt while the bargain was not executed by the word and afterwards he
handed over that ready money.”

He was asked about a man who torcibly carried away oxen and slaves
and then tilled the land with the help of those slaves and oxen at his lawfully
owned land with lavvful means, whcther it will be permissible to purchase
the crops he raised?

He says: it is undesirable to purchase it from him as long as his
attair is not sound with regard to slaves and oxen but its gradation of unde-
sirability will not be like that of one who forcibly took away some grains
which he sowed, because, I do not know of anyone holding the view that
the corns belong to the owner of the’oxen and the slaves and the force of
undesirability (therein) is not like the one who grabbed a land, then tilled it .

“So purchasing from its grain is more undesirable than (to purchase)
the raised and usurped grain due to the strong difference of opinions on it
and on account of paucity of those who hold that whoever sows usurped
seeds, the raised seeds belong to the person usurped from, notwithstanding
the fact, that in all these cases it is undesirable to purchase anything from
thc usurper till his affair is settled with the one from whom he usurped.


“As for the person, who usurps wool, linen, cotton or soft hair and
then makes clothes out of these, according to all our authorities and the
people of Kufah, he is liable to pay the equal in quality of what he has
usurped, if he knows the measure (weight). Further, our authorities hold
that it will not be lawtul to purchase what is made out of it till he pays dues
to the owner. Some of the ‘Ulama’ hold that the person usurped from, can
accept what is made of it if he so wills or its price entirely as it amounted
on the day of usurpation, [fo. 47-b] and similar will be the case of the person
who wrongfully takes away gold or silver and then changes or melts it, or
copper or iron and then makes.pots or swords or knives and other objects
out of it. When they are changed fromd their original forms according to
their difference of (substances), so whoever holds that the owners are to
accept them does not allow its sale.

“As for one who does not like them to accept, disapprove of its sale
and does not cancel it if the price is abated except that our authorities find
the gradation of undesirability very severe in that and take it as a defect for
which the buyer can return the article.

“According to our authorities, if any person carries away forcibly an
eatable animal, slaughters it, and afterwards the owner seizes it as uncooked
meat, the owner will be given option between accepting the meat or receiving
the price of the animal, while others hold that he will get the meat as well
as what falls Short in the price. But if the meat is cooked, then according
to our authorities and the people of Kufah, the claimant wiU receive only
the price of the usurped animal.

“Some ‘Ulama* hold that he will receive his animal exactly. I do not
know any disagreement in the case of the animal slaughtered by the thief
and found by its owner or the latter’s acceptance of the price that the
slaughter in it is lawful slaughter except according to the views of Ta’us and
*Ata* who hold that it is not a lawriil slaughter.

“As for that which has been made defective by any usurper, transgres-
sor or a thief out of fruits, milk or wool or a hired land, a house or a dwelling
place, will be regarded as indemnity against them. However there has been
disagreement on this issue with regard to the views of Imam Malik and those
of his followers; and this is the most correct view of all the views held on
it so far.

“When, in the custody of the usurper, the female animals and other
cattle give birth to younglings and afterwards, the mothers die leaving behind
the younglings or the younglings die and mothers live, according to many
of our authorities, the owners will be given option between receiving the



remainder without receiving anything for the dead animals or receiving the
price of the usurped animal to be evaluated on the day of usurpation. Some
others hold that he will get the remainder as well as the price of the dead
animals and this is the most sound in consideration. As for the younglings
and their mothers eaten or being offered as gifts or being benefitted, they
all agree that the owner will receive whatever he finds (on the spot) as well
as the price of what has been destroyed on account of the usurper.”

He says: “Whoever has been robbed of dtnars of dirhams or food or
anything which he is not able to recognise when it is kept hidden from him,
and afterwards the thing is mixed with simiiar things before it goes out of
the hands of the usurper. The owner will receive the equal measure or weight
whether the usurper is bankrupt or one who is liable to pay back the dues
which he owes on account of his oppression, because by accepting this the
person is not dbing any harm to the other party.

“There has been disagreement among our authorities concerning the
transaction with a person who mingles his wealth (cattle) with unlawful thing
while the major portion is lawful. Ibn al-Qasim allows the deal without any
binding [fo. 48-a] except in the case when he knows it as unlawful and in
that case he should keep away from it. And similar is the case with regard
to taking his food and receiving his gift as long as claims upon him do not
overwhelm his lawful and unlawful possession, because very few people can
avoid such deals. Ibn Wahhab disapproves of this, saying that it should
neither be sold nor should his gifts be accepted.

“Our authorities unanimously agree that when the unlawful object
dominates over the object he holds in his possession, the possessor is not
allowed to make any deal unless he purchases the lawful commodity, and
then there is no harm in purchasing from him. But if the man offers it as
gift and is aware of the fact that all that is left in his possession is enough
to cover the claims against him, then there is no harm in accepting it from
him provided he knows that it origin is lawful because by his acceptance no
harm is done to anybody.”

It was said to him that Abu’l ‘Atiyyah relates on the authority of
Fadl ibn Salmah from Ibn Abu Isa’ ibn Siddlq and Ibn Habib to the effect
that whoever purchases a iawful commodity in exchange of unlawful prop-
erty, there is no harm in accepting the gifts from him if he is overburdened
with the responsibility for transferring (changing) the ownership.

He says: “Abu’l ‘Afiyyah is an obscure man whose report cannot be
considered and had it been established, from who you have mentioned, they
would neither be followed nor did any argument stand in accordance with


their view. This is also cor.trary to the view of the people of Traq that they
allow the endowment of the borrower though nothing remains at his disposal
to pay up his credit.

“It has been established that a man declared that his siave would be
free after his death. The Prophet then sold the slave and gave to the man
his price. It has been said that debt was due to the man, so the Prophet
asked him to pay up the loan. Had he sold the slave without any debt due
to him, his sale would have been more emphatic on account of debt, because
possessions of the people are inviolable except for their dues. As for their
saying that “the ownership has bneen (transferred or) changed” is difficult
to understand from the word, because, when the properties are usurped
without a (valid) reason, the properties belong to the real owners, wherever
the properties are because, there is no disagreement among the ( Ulama
that whoever has proved an article to be his own, he is entitled to accept it
wherever he gets the object, without any consideration of its present shape
and possession.

” A person asked the Prophet for something which was not permissible
for him. At this, the Prophet became angry and said: ‘He begs of me some-
thing which is not good for me and nor is for him. If I do not give, it will
displease me; if I give it to him I will thus give him a thing which is not
good for me as well as for him.’ So, the Prophet has informed of the fact
that it is not good to receive anything giving of which is not good on the
part of the giver and this retutes what they have argued. The questioner
adds that they argue with the fact that ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd ai-‘Aziz used to give
from the official treasuries that came at his disposal and that the pious people
used to receive it from him. This is really a careless point from one who
argues with it, because ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz repaired the wrongs and as
such all that remained at the official treasury became good and lawful, since
no unjust object reamined in it and the receipt of the similar object is lawtul
when it is spent in its right way.”

He adds: “Abu’,1 ‘Afiyyah mentions [fo. 48-b] from a man whom he
mentioned by name that two gold coins (dindrs) were brought before Sahnun
from a certain place. He disliked them. So he sent for someone from whom
he got these exchanged.” He says: “This is not an authentic report about
Sahnun who is most immune from it. I have already informed you that the
report of a person like Abu’l ‘Afiyyah would not be worth considering,
However, if it is proved authentic, Sahnun hand disliked its coin on account
of its inferior quality , so he got them exchanged lawfully with superior quality
of gold but not for the reasons that the coins were not lawful/’

It has been related from him, that a certain Abu Da’ud, one of


Sahnun’s reliable rriends, gave evidence before him. So he charged Hamdis
al-Qattan with the task of investigating into the names of the witnesses which
included the name of Abu Da’ud. Hamdls then wrote in the report that he
was not a reliable man and this frightened Sahnun as soon as he looked into
it. It is then enquired of Hamdis as to who had remarked about Abii Da’iid
in that way. “I”, he replied. It is again asked; where from?

He replied: “(Once) I accompanied Abu Da’ud while he had with
him a slave; then a policeman appeared and purchased some clothes from
the slave. The report was communicated to Abu Da’ud once Hamdls passed
by him, he asked Hamdls whether the Qddi had charged him with any probe.
‘Yes\ replied Hamdls. ‘Was my name entered therein?’ He asked. *Yes\
he replied. *What did you enter in that?* Abu Da’ud asked. That you are
not reliable one,’ Hamdls replied. ‘How do you know that?’ Abu Da’ud
again enquired. ‘Because I was with you on such and such day along with
your slave and then a policeman appeared and purchased some clothes from
the slave.’ Hamdls replied. At this, Abu Da’ud announced: ‘O man, the
slave will not belong to me, he is free and I disown what he holds in his
possession.’ At this Hamdls became glad and he then came back to Sahnun
and narrated to him what Abu Da*iid had said.” This in turn pleased Sahntin.
He praised Allah on this occasion as he was aware of reliability of Abu Da’ud.

He adds: “As for the property of one which has been usurped by the
bankrupt, one who compelled him to sell it on his behalf, or some one took
the initiative and sold it on beha!f of the bankrupt one or on behalf of one
whose presents are not legally accepted on account of exces of claims of
injustices on him, so he engaged for it a surety and the surety is one whose
transaction is considered lawful, or he purchased a lawful commodity and
transferred it to the bankrupt, this is lawful, because he did not throw any
spot on the debtor of the bankrupt, he did only turn one responsibility into
another or undertook a responsibility for another.”

He was enquired of the view as it has been reportedly held by Abii
I-Zahra and al-Hasan about a man who dies leaving behind wealth some
of which contains these (irregularities), that his heirs are entitled to receive
the wealth. He replies: “I dp not consider this view to have been firmly
established by them and had this been proven from them, the explicit meaning
of the Our’an would have repudiated it, because Allah, the Glorirled, says:
4 After any legacy that may have been bequeathed or debt’ (4:11). There
being no disagreement as to the fact that whenever property of others falis
at the disposal of one not in a proper way; either through usurpation, trans-
gression, usury or any other unlawful means, it will be like the debt due to
him as the saying of Allah, the Glorified, goes: * And eat not up your property
among yourseWes in vanity’ (2: 188). And he says on usuary: [fo. 49-a] ‘And


if ye repent, then ye have your principals (without interest), wrong not, and
Ye shall not be wronged’ (3: 179). So whatever is considered as debt due
to the occupant, his heir will not have better claim to it than the debtors,
because, debt is more binding than inheritance, by the Qur’an, the Prophetic
practice, and the consensus of the community. So, the suggestion for trans-
ferring the ownership from the deserving one was put forward without any
deliberation at all and hence should not be accepted.

“There is no disagreement regarding the fact that had this dead man
been summoned during his iifetime, his wrongs would have been repaired
to or denied by him, so, neither his death nor excess of demands upon him
will remit that from his wealth. But if these claimants are not known due
to their abundance, in comparison to those who made the objects which
were held in their possession out of that as lawful for his heirs. As for one
who belongs to this category and does not expect to count his claimants,
whatever he leaves behind, will be treated like the property lost and picked
up in which the trace of the owner is not expected and wherein the gleaner
declares himself immune from it and like the treatment of the property of
a dead person whose heirs are not known.”

He was asked about one to whom innumerable claims are due and
afterwards he inherited lawtul wealth (cattle), whether it is lawtul to accept
some of these as gift or whether one is allowed to purchase that wealth
(cattle) from him, or if it is permissible for him to eat it. He replies: “As
for his purchase from him, it is permitted, because had he purchased a lawful
commodity in exchange for unlawtul commodity it was permitted to purchase
from him, and this is evidently a sound view. As for his offering it as gift
or eating out of it, it is not lawful, because then he will stand on the way
of obtaining justice from him.”

It is again said: whether it is lawful to accept this property if he
married in its exchange or paid up with it his loan. He replied, “No”.

It is said: does he not hold the power of transaction in his properties
while he knew this property exactly as lawful? He replies: “The person
holding the same position is one whose acts are lawrul as long as his property
is not bequeathed and witheld for him as well as one who does not prevent
others from realising their dues from him and one who allows others to
obtain the justice from him, and also one who by the official power annuls
the just decree by way of injustice and power of putting an obstacle while
he was in such a state or condition that he was within the jurisdiction of
enforcing the decree on him. The authority (sultan) of AHah is above the
authority of His servants.”


He was asked about the person who desired to repent and (renounce)
the unlawfui properties which he held in possession. He replies: “If he had
earned the properties through usury he should return the earned property
to one on whom he practised usury, and if the debtor is not present he
should be traced out. And in case he is not expected to be found alive, the
property should be spent in alms on his behalf . He should do like-wise in
the case of those on whom he committed injustice.”

He was asked as to how to deal with the property the real affair of
which is confounded with him and he is unable to know how much wealth
in his possession is lawful and how much is uniawM, and whether it suffices
him to take a portion out of his property for spending it in alms (there being
no other way for this man except to select that). He says: “Spending a fixed
portion of his possession in alms by a man whose state of affairs is like this
is not reasonable [fo, 49-b] but the man should select such a portion of his
possession the return of which was necessary for him so that the remainder
will be undoubtedly pure for him. He then can restore out of that which he
renounced to those who are known and were subjected to injustice or usury
and the people who remained should be traced out for the return of the rest
of the property, But if the existence of the remaining people is not expected
the property should be spent in alms on their behalf.”

He was asked about giving in alms by one who is overtaken by the
claims of the acts of injustices out of the properties the owners of which are
not known to him because the thing exactly will not be recognised when it
is kept hidden from him. And he knows that the man giving in alms will
never do justice on account of his huge claims upon him and large number
of claimants, while he can neither meet these all nor enable others to realise
their dues from him. He replies: “As to that which the man gives in alms
on behalf of the owner by way of repentance and withdrawal, the recipient
thereof is allowed to receive it but as to that in which the man gives in aims
on his own behalf , he cannot give it in aims on his own behalf and will not
receive any reward in it. And the safest act for the recipient is not to receive
it. But if its recipient believes that the property belongs to the destitutes so
he accepts it as a debt transferred to him it would be a possible course. But
if one for whom charity is not lawful accepts it for running the affairs of the
Muslims while it is allowed for him for that purpose to receive something
from the Bayt al-Mal of the Muslims, it is right. Because had he given up
what is in his possession, he would have asked to spend it on that account;
so the act done by him would not be more troublesome than the circumstances
called for by him.”

It is enquired as to the nature of repentance by one who is over-
whelmed by the acts of mjustice. The man knows also that he will never be


able to pay up their dues incumbent upon him, The enquiry is made also
as to whether his evidence in the law court will be accepted. He replies:
“The nature of repentance on his part will be to withdraw from everything
he had held in his possession and to hand it over either to the destitute or
to one who looks after the welfare of the Muslims so much so that nothing
rmains in his possession except less than the dress that suffices him in his
prayer; that is to say, that much which covers his body from his navel upto
his knees and the food of that day, because this is the amount which he is
allowed to take from other’s properties when he is constrained to it though
the possessor does not like it. According to our view, the insolvent is here
different, because the properties of the people do not come to the insolvent
by way of transgression, the people themseWes carry the property to him;
so, according to our view that which covers him as well as that which consti-
tutes the shape of his dress will be left out for him.

“But Abu ‘Ubayd holds that nothing of the dress will be left out for
the insolvent except so little as to suffice him in prayer; that is to say, that
much which covers him up from his navel down to his knee and then whatever
remains in his possession he should dispose it of and must not retain anything
out of it except that which I have mentioned till he as well as one who knows
his condition come to know that the man has paid up his dues.

“\Vhoever acquires undersirable wealth secretly, should remove them
away and disposssess himself also secretly. But as to that which he acquired
openly and people at large know that, the guilt will not vanish from him in
this case except with evidence [fo, 50-a] of his payment of dues. But as to
the property which he got legalized from the real owner and received from
him through his free will without subjecting him to fear while it was not
acquired by bribe at giving a decree, and imposing a right against any claim-
ant, nor any soothsayer’s fee, nor the dowry of a prostitute, nor the earning
of a singer, nor that of a hired wailing woman. As for one earned through
transgression and usury, the permission of the oppressed one will acquit him
of his sin.”

He was asked about a man who accompanied a story-teller and used
to earn on it some dirhams wrongfully and afterwards one of them desired
repentance. He suggests to the one who desired repentance that if “he were
in charge of the receipt or had benefitted out of it, he should give back the
amount to one who had paid him together with fine, but if he was neither
in charge of it nor had benefitted out of 4t the due falls on the other man
But if the owners are not available and are not known. or their trace is not
expected, it should be given in alms/’

He was asked about something given away as a gift by a man of this


type, whether it is lawful to purchase the thing from him while the thing
was given to them as a gift only for the dues upon him. He says that it is
prohibited and not lawful for anyone by purchase or gift. He asked if the
donor permits the object for the donee out of that which he gave him and,
afterwards, the donee repents, whether it will be lawful? He replies: “It
would not be Iawful, he must offer it in charity and should not retum it to
its donor. Now if the object is lost at the hand of the donee he shall have
to offer the like of it in charity provided the object has the equivalent,
otherwise its price. But if nothing remains in his possession it will be treated
like a debt due to him which he will offer in charity except the donations
which perished before his arrival and there he will not have to pay anything

He was asked about one who was entrusted with some deposit which
he employed in trade and earned profit out of it. He replies: “According
to the view of Malik, Ibn al-Oasim and most of our authorities, what he has
done in respect of taking loan from it is despairing and the profit will belong
to him. Ashhab recommended him to offer the profit in charity while Ibn
‘Umar and Nafi\ his freed slave, hold that the profit belongs to the depositor;
and according to Ibn Idris, and al-Marwazi, if the man had purchased with
the same goods, the sale will be cancelled and the deal will not be confirmed
with it, but if he had purchased it verbally without any fixed commodity,
and then he completed the sale and afterwards handed over the goods, the
profit will belong to him.”

He was asked about someone who held in his possession some disag-
reeable goods whether the possessor can periorm pilgrimage and take part
in the holy war with it. He forbade him to do that.

He was asked about a person who was subjected to injustice, then a
man averted the acts of injustice from him, afterwards the oppressed man
offered something as a gift to his benefector, whether it will be lawful for
him. He replies: “H it was offered for his averting injustice from him, its
receipt will not be lawful for him/ 1

He was asked abouf the judge who distributes wealth among a people
on condition that he will receive some remuneration. He replies: “If he
happens to be the same judge who decides the cases among them, it would
not be lawful for him, but if the judge is somebody else and receives the
remuneration only for his engagement with accounts, it will be lawful. ,,

He was also asked about a person who held in his possession some
properties which he considers [fo. 50-b] to have sequels containing goods


of different nature, and, therefore, desires to offer the property in charity
while he had dependants or no dependant at all. He replies: “If he had laid
hands on the properties on the prohibition of which there exists explicit text
from the Book of Allah, established Prophetic Practice or Consensus of the
Community he should dispossess that and if it had owners, the property
should be restored to them, otherwise he should offer it in charity. But if
there is neither an explicit text nor Consensus of the Community concenung
it and the property which he held in possession be enormous, or he desires
to give up some of it, he should do that.

“But if he maintains a large family having dependants, he should
keep it back for them so that it does not incite him to commit crimes and
lest he might be unable to endure and fall into a more dangerous situation.
But if he is a righteous bechelor and is immune from the direction of his
motive he can do so, and it is best for him to retain some of it.

Sufyan al-Thawri who was a jurist, may Allah have mercy on him,
says: “An earning which contains something is better than begging from
some people and wherever the soul of man urges him to a sure good he
should not lose time in doing it lest his soul might pull him off from it. But
if the soul urges him to a thing in which peril is apprehended though at the
moment some good is visible in it, he should retrain from it as far as he
can, except in the case when he comes to know with certainty that it will
notchange on account of diferent situations and demands on him to do his
part righteously , wherever is found way of success Oiie should hasten to do it.

“Whoever entrusts any deposit and it becomes known that the depo-
sited object reached the depo^itor by way of excess or that the depositor
happens to be a non-bailiff , he should return the object to the owner if he
knows them or offer it in charity if he does not know them when he returns
the object to the depositor.

“Once one of the companions of Sahnun was seated by the Qadl
Isma’Il at Baghdad, a man brought a valuable pearl that came out from the
treasury of the king. The people then started turning it in their hands. Some
one asked the companion of Sahnun if he had noticed it. He replied in the
negative. Ismail then urged him to extemporize on the point. He said: ‘If
it had reached my hands it would come under my surety.’ This pleased
Isma’11 and he liked it.”

It has been reported that a man found a bead at the hands of a
plunderer. He considered it suitable for the neck of his wife, and purchased
it from the plunderer for seven dinan. He paid up the price to the plunderer
and put the bead in an evelope. Afterwards it appeared to him that the bead

1 90


did not suit his wife, so he demanded rescission of the sale from him who
in turn rescinded the sale and gave him back ali the dinan, and the plunderer
received the bead. The jurists of al-Oayruwan who were present gave the
jundical verdict that “the price which was incumbent upon him should be
offered by him in charity and in exchange of the commodity, he shall have
to offer all the dinars in charity as well” and in that they did not use deceit.
This happened when Ibrahim ibn Ahmad conquered Tunis.

Ahmed says: ‘This answer (verdict) was given without due consider-
ation. The man shall not have to pay anything for the bead [fo. 51-a] nor
for the dindrs. Had it been so, one who purchased some goods in the market
of the Muslims by lawfui way and later on it appeared to him that it was an
usurped article which perished not due to him or he purchased a slave-girl
with whom he had sexual intercourse, he would have been charged with the
payment of the price of the article perished and punishment for his having
sexual intercourse.

“As for one whose property has been mingled with unlawful property ,
should receive his property per weight. The Prophet, peace be upon h\m y
says: 4 Whoever takes over any tract of land (unlawtully) Allah will put
around his neck the seven Earths on the Day of Resurrection.’ ” He adds:
“The acts of injustice are darknesses on the Day of Resurrection.” He
further adds: “Whoever has committed acts of injustice should expiate them
before the Day when there would be no dinar and dirham.”

As to that which has been reported that he said: “If anyone of you
is unable to be like Abu Damdam whenever he (Abu Damdam) comes out
of his abode, he says, ‘O Allah, I have offered my honour in charity among
the people.’ The ‘Utama’ have disagreed on the question of legitimization
(Tahallul); Ibn al-Musayyib does not permit anyone in respect of honour
and property while Sulayman ibn Yasar used to permit (others) in respect
of honour and property. Malik approves of giving permission to others in
respect of wealth but not in respect of honour.

“The Prophetic traditioi> has been established that when the people
would cross the Path of Heaven on the Day of Resurrection, they would be
detained till some of them obtain their dues from some others.

“Some ‘Ulama’ say that all the evil acts will move in between the
servant (of Allah) and Allah, the GIorified, either the wronged person will
take away the good acts of the oppressor or he will ascribe to the oppressor
his evil acts, or he will forgivĕ him or Allah will be pleased with the wronged
man and forgive the Muslim wrongdoer and afterwards the affair of the
servant will return to Allah, the Exalted.



“Some of the ‘Ulamd hold that whoever is dealt unjustly and his
property is taken away, will get the reward of what has been witheld from
him upto his death and then the reward will go to his heir and thus to more
deserving one, because the property rem*ins after the death of the survivor
and this is sound on deliberation. According to this view, if the usurper of
property dies before the man to whom the wrongs were done without leaving
anything behind or that he left behind some properties in which the heirs
were not aware of his wrong acts, the claims of the wronged will not be
transferred to his heirs, because nothing remained for the wrongdoer which
the heirs of the wronged could demand.

t4 But when the claim is due upon the man to whom the wrongs were
done ior the property, his claims will not be inherited except aiter the
payment of his dues, because the claim to his property is prior to his debt
which in turn is prior to the heir and Ailah has calculated this, taught it and
taught as to whom it belongs.”

Chapter II


Allah the Exalted says: “The unthinking man accounteth them weal-
thy because of their restraint. Thou shall know them by their mark. They
do not beg of men with importunity” (2; 273). The Prophet, may peace be
upon him, says: “Whoever from among you begs while he owns one ounce
of silver ffo. 51-bj or its equivalent, surely, he begs with importunity.” He
adds: “Surely, it is better for anyone of you to take his rope, pick up rlrewood
and carry the wood on his back than to approach a man whom Allah has
gi ven out of his bounties and beg of him whether the latter gives him or not . ”

He hirther says: “The upper hand is better than the lower hand, and
begin with those whose maintenance is due to you.” He also says: “The
best of alms is that which is offered over and above the level of sufficiency
that keeps him in no need, and begin with those whose maintenance you
owe.” He also says: “The destitute is not the one who rambles and whom
one or two morsels or two dates send back; the real destitute is he who does
not have enough sufficiency to satisfy his wants, nor does he come out to
beg publicly. 1 ‘

Haklm ibn Hizam says: “I asked the Messenger of Allah, may Allah
bless him and grant him peace, for some thing; whereupon, he gave me, I
again begged of him and he gave me. I asked him again and he again gave
me, and then said to me, ‘O Haklm, how unsparing is your begging; verily,
this wealth is sweet and fresh; whatever one receives out of this with generos-
ity of the soul, he is blessed with it and whatever one receives out of this
one receives with the greed of the soul, he is like one who eats but does
not feel satiated and surely, it is good for you not to take anything from
anybody.’ ” I said: “And even not from you, O Messenger of Allah,” “No,
not even from me,” the Prophet replied. I rejoined, “By Allah, I shall not
take anything from anybody”. And he then gave up begging. Whenever,
later on ‘Umar offered him his allowances, Haklm said that he had given

1 93


that up during the time of one who was greater than him, meaning the
Prophet, may peace be upon him. At this, ‘Umar replied: i ask you to
bear witness, O congregation of the Muslims [The Prophet, may peace be
upon him, has said this to Hakim when he noticed in the latter greediness
leading to begging].”

The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace,
has said: “Verily, Allah recommends for you three things and disapproves
of three things for you; that you serve Him, and do not associate anything
with Him, hold fast the rope of Allah unitedly, and give sincere advice to
one whom Allah entrusts with your affairs. For you He disapproves of
wastage of wealth and importunate begging.” It is reported that he said, as
it has been related in another Prophetic tradition: “Allah forbids you to do
three things; burial of female children alive, disobedience to mothers, and
withholding and begging.” As for importunate begging, it is said the Prophet
meant begging by a person from the people as to whatever is in their hands.
Some say that this means that a person must not ask about the problems
which do not concern him.

Ic has been reported that the Prophet, may peace be upon him, said:
“On the Day of Resurrection begging will appear on the face of any one of
them like the marks of scratching, wrinkling or lacerating.” The prohibited
begging is the begging by one who acts as a beggar while he is not a beggar
or who exhibits his wants more than his actual want. And an undesirable
begging is one in which a person begs while he owns one ounce of silver.
However, it is not forbidden for him, because the Prophet, may peace be
upon him, gave alms to Hakim several times thcugh he had possessed more
than one ounce. Neverthtess, he was from among those who deserved charity
as he was one of those whose hearts needed reconciliation. Had it been
forbidden for him, the Prophet would not have given charity to him although
he disliked it for Hakim. Moreover, ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan //o. 52-a] and
Jubayr ibn Mutim prayed to the Prophet to grant them out of the one-fifth
along with Banu ‘Abd Shams and Banu Nawfal when the Prophet gave out
of it to Banu Hashim and Banu’l Muttalib.

There is no harm if a person who possesses less than forty dirhams
begs in an agreeable way. Whoever is constrained to beg, it then becomes
incumbent upon him to beg and the donor will not be considered superior
to the donee because, Moses and al-Khidr asked the inhabitants of a village
to give them food. Again, begging is lawful if one begs in an agreeable way
due to reasons other than poverty; due to an incident, that happened to
him, a want that overtook him, a burden that he bore, a blood money that
fell due to him, or a compensation he owed. In these cases the donor will
not be superior to the donee. The Prophet, may peace be upon him, once



went out to Banu Qaynuqa\ the Jews, to seek their help for payment of
blood money that fell due to his two Companions. He entered and food was
brought to him. At this, the Prophet said: “Did I not notice the cooking
pot boiling with meat?” It was replied that it was charity offered to Barirah
and he did not eat charity. “For her it is charity but for us it is a gift*\ the
Prophet retorted.

The Prophet offered something to ‘Umar who enquired if he had not
said that it was better not to take anything from anybody. The Prophet
replied that it was in the context of begging. As for that which comes without
begging, it is only a sustenance offered to him by Allah. Thereupon, ‘Umar
declared: “By Allah, I shall neither beg of anybody for anything nor shall
I refuse to accept anything that comes to me without begging.” The Prophet,
may peace be upon him, said to his Companions: “You intercede, you will
be rewarded. Allah decrees whatever He wills through the tongue of His

Once Abu Musa came to the Prophet along with a group of the
AshTarites with a request to provide them with beasts of burden and found
him busy. Prophet then swore by Allah three times that he would not provide
them with the beasts of burden. No sooner had they departed than thirteen
young she-camels were brought before him. He, then, called them back and
offered them out of these animals. When they went their way, they discussed
among themselves saying, perhaps the Prophet had forgotten his oath that
he would not provide them with the beasts of burden but afterwards he
provided them with. They later on came back to the Prophet and said: “O
Messenger of Allah, you swore that you would not provide us with any beast
of burden but iater on you did provide us with [them].” The Prophet replied:
“By Allah, I did not provide you with the beast of burden nor was I to
provide you with the beast of burden, it is Allah who provided you with the
beast of burden, by Allah, whenever I take an oath, and then find something
else better, I offer the atonement for my oath and do what is better.”

When the Prophet was distributing the booties out of one-fifth among
the Banu/1-Muttalib as well as Banu Hashim, ‘Uthman and Jubayr ibn Mutim
came to him, may peace be upon him, and said: “O Messenger of Aliah,
we acknowledge the superiority of Banu Hashim on account of their relation
to you, but you gave Banu’1-Muttalib and neglected us, although they and
we in relation to you stand on the same footing.” The Prophet replied:
“Surely, Banu Hashim and Banu’1-Muttalib are one.” And he knitted to-
gether his fingers.

This is an instance of permissible begging and they both intended
therein to be blessed with. The Prophetic tradition has already been men-



tioned in its proper placc. Moreover, when the Prophet gave Aqra’ and
‘Uyaynah one hundred camels each and fifty to ‘Abbas [fo. 52-bJ ibn Mirdas,
the latter composed those peoms which had been mentioned earlier and the
Prophet then increased his share. This is also an instance of agreeable begging
because. by this he wanted to be blessed with and hence became importunate
and the Prophet. therefore, increased his share. Had it not been lawful, the
Prophct would not have made it allowable to him.


Chapter III


Ahmad ibn Nasr says that there are some explicit texts on the descrip-
tion of sufficiency (kafaf), poverty (faqr), and wealth (ghind’) which provide
explanation and satisfaction for the ‘Ulama. Surely superiority goes to suf-
ficiency while poverty and wealth are the two divine trials and tests by which
the best servants of Allah are tried so that the endurance of those who
endure, thankfulness of the thankful, rebellious nature of the insolent, and
greediness of the greedy are tested. However, ambiguity will remain only
for the ignorant and the negligent, and those who do not contemplate among
the strong ones. Allah, the Exalted, says: bt And if they had referred it to
the Messenger and such of them as are in authority, those among them who
are able to think out the matter would have known it” (4: 83). He also says:
“And none will grasp their meaning save the wise^ (29: 43). He also says:
“Will they then not meditate on the Our^an, or are there locks on thc
heartsT (47: 24)

Some people, therefore, compiled works giving preference to wealth
over poverty, while others composed books giving preference to poverty
over wealth. Thus they became unmindful of the required encouragement
and recommendation and in it they committed exaggeration. Some of them
blamed others and criticised among them. I hope for one whose argument
is sound, intention is sincerely for Allah, and discourse is directed for the
sake of Him while he has enough knowledge befitting his discourse and
bringing out the conclusion, that Allah will cover him with his forgiveness,
ieward him for his intention and turn away from his fault because, the human
beings are not infallible. Sometimes they inevitably commit errors and be-
come neglecthil. Allah, the Great and High, helps whomsoever and in what-
soever circumstances He wills to assist by rendering the circumstances favour-
able for him. I hope also that this community by His grace will never agree
on misguidance.



Allah, the High, and Exalted, says; “Lo! we have placed all that is
on the earth as an ornament thereof that we may try them: which of them
is best in conduct” (18: 7). And He says: “And we shall try you with evil
and with good for ordeal. And unto us ye will be returned” (21: 35). And
He says: “And when we make life pleasant unto man, he turneth away and
is averse and when ill toucheth him he is in despair” (18: 83). ‘Then he
aboundeth in prayer” (41: 51). And He says “Lo! man was created impatient,
fretful when evil befalleth him, and, when good befalleth him grudging”
(70: 19-21).

And He says: “As for man, whenever his Lord trieth him, by honour-
ing him, and is gracious into him he saith: ( My Lord honoureth me.’ But
whenever He trieth him by straitening his means of life, he saith: ‘My Lord
despiseth me,’ ” (89: 15-16) upto His saying: “And you love wealth with
abounding love” (89: 20). That is to say, you are neither hpnoured by wealth
nor despised by poverty . He adds: ” And if Allah were to enlarge the provision
for His slaves, they would surely rebel in the earth but He sendeth down
[fo. 53-aj by measures as He willeth. Lo! He the Mormed, Seer of His
bondmen” (42: 27). And He says: “And were it that mankind would have
become one community, We might well have appointed, for those who
disbelieve in the Beneficent, roofs of silver for their houses and stairs (of
silver) whereby to mount,” (43: 33) upto His saying: “for those who keep
from evil” (43: 35). And He says: “Nay, but verily man is rebellious, that
he thinketh himself independent” (96: 6-7). And he says: “Lo! man is an
ingrate unto his Lord and Lo! he is witness unto that. And is in the love of
wealth, he is violent” (100: 6-8).

Some say, ai-Kanud means al-Kafur i.e. denial of faith, while some
others hold that it means al-Jahud i.e. aburation of faith. Some others
comment on His saying: “Verily he is violent in the love of his wealth,”
that is to say, he is violent lover of wealth; and others hold that he becomes
emaciated due to love of wealth. The Prophet, peace be upon him, says:
“Whoever wants to remain chaste, Allah keeps him chaste, and whoever
wants to be self-sufficient, Allah keeps him self-sufficient. And nobody has,
ever endowed with anything better and more capacious than preseverance. ”

He further says: “Sufficiency is not achieved through abundance of
goods: it is achieved only by the wealth of the soul.” He says: “It does not
make him cheerful to have gold to the size of the mountain of Uhud while
after three days, he is reduced to a state in which he possesses nothing
except that which he has as the balance of payment for debt.”

Abu Dhar says: “I have heard the Prophet saying, By the Lord of
Ka’bah, they surely possess little.’ *Who are they, O Messenger of Allah? 1


I asked. They are those who possess enormously except one who uttered
in the property such, such, such and such,’ and he pointed out by both of
his hands, to the right, left, front and the back. And he says: ‘This property
is Iike sweet and verdant herbage except the ripest of the herbage eaten up
(by the cattle), so much so that when both of its Aanks were filled, its size
was reduced and it faced the sun. Afterwards it threw thin dung, made water
and then pastured/ Some said O Messenger of Allah, does good come from
evil?” He replied: “The good does come only from good, the good does
come only from good, the good comes only from good and whatever plants
the autumn causes to grow does kill , or nearly kills , by swelling of bellies. ‘ ”

The Ansar heard of the wealth that was brought to the Prophet from
Bahrayn so they gathered around him in the morning prayer. When the
Prophet performed the prayer, he looked at the multitude and said smilingly:
“I think, you have heard of the arrival of Abu ‘Ubaydah and of the fact
that he has brought something.” They said “Yes”. He said: “Then cheer
up and be filled with what cheers you up. By God, it is not the wealth which
I fear for you but I fear the world for you which will be opened for you
after me as it was opened for the people before you. So you would quarrel
among you for it as they did quarrel for it and it would destroy you as it
did destroy them.” And the Prophet, peace be upon him. used to pray as
follows: “O Allah, I seek refuge with you from the trial of grave as well as
from that of wealth (ghind*)”

Whatever we have recited and quoted so far proves that over and
above the level of sufficiency (kafdf), there is a trial from which nobody is
safe except one whom Allah keeps safe. It has been reported in a Prophetic
tradition that what is little and sufficient is better than what exceeds in
number and is earned by appropriating (other’s right).

When the wealth of Khusroes was brought before 4 Umar, he along
with the other illustrious Companions of the Prophet spent the night with
the wealth in the mosque. In the moming, when the light of the Sun fell on
it, the crowns presented wonderful scene. At this, ‘Umar began to weep,
whereupon, Ibn ‘Awf reminded ‘Umar that it was not the time for weeping,
rather it was to moment for thaivksgiving. ‘Umar replied that he thought
that whenever AlUh favours any people with this, they invariably shed their
blood and break with their blood-kindred.

And he added: “O Allah, we are not able but to clear the way with
what is in my power, O Allah, give me power to exhaust it in the right
cause.” He added: 4t O Allah, verily, you have denied it to your Prophet as
a token of honour to him but favoured me with it just to put me to trial: O
Aliah, guard me against its allurement.” Or the words to that effect. The

1 99


Prophet, peace be upon him, says: “The poor will enter Paradise but the
wealthy pcople will be detained to account (for theti deeds)”

Once a man wrapped in Sllings passed by the Prophet, the Prophet
then enquired of his Companions as to what they thought about the man.
They replied: the man was fit to be rejected in a marriage proposal if he
proposed for marriage and he would not be given entrance if he seeks
admittance. Afterwards, another man wrapped in a beautihil cloak passed
by the Prophet who again asked them about their opinion of him. They
replied that the man was worthy of being accepted in a marriage proposal
if he proposed and would be given admittance if he sought it. At this, the
Prophet remarked: “Verily, this man is better than the earth filled with the
other like one.”

And all these prove the preeminence of the state of sufficiency (kafaf)
and not that of poverty (faqr) y and the case is not as it appeared to them.
Poverty and wealth are both trials. The Prophet used to invoke divine pro-
tection against both trials. In addition, the divine expression supports this:
“And let not thy hand be chained to thy neck nor open it, with a complete
opening, lest thou sit down rebuked, denuded” (17: 29). And He says: “And
those who, when they spend, are neither prodigal nor grudging; and there
is ever a firm station between the two” (25: 67). And He says: “Give not
unto the foolish (what) is in your (keeping of their) wealth, which Allah
hath given you to maintain; but feed and clothe them from it; and speak
kindly unto them” (4: 5). And He says with regard to the guardian of the
orphan, “Whoso (of the guardians) is rich, let him abstain generously (from
taking of the property of orphans); and whoso is poor let him take thereof
in reason (for his guardianship)” (4: 6).

So, some say, he should live on his own property reasonably, so that
he does not require the property of the orphan. Some others hold that he
should live on some property of the orphan reasonably in return for his
looking after it; while others hold that he should borrow from Jhe wealth
of the orphan reasonably, and others say that he along with the orphan
should lay his hand (on the property). He says: “And let those fear (in their
behaviour toward orphans) who if they left behind them weak offspring
would be afraid for them. So, let them mind their duty to Allah, and speak
justly” (4: 9). That is to say, whoever attends a testator, he should advisc
him not to hinder his heirs (trom the property) as he himself would have
Uked, hand the heirs been his own.

What we have so far said has turther been corroborated by the story
of Ka’b ibn Malik when Allah had accepted his repentance. He addressed
the Messenger of Allah, saying: “Surely my repentance entails that I shouid



be stripped of my wealth, and sacrifice it for Allah and His Messenger and
tbat I shouJd not say except truth.” The Prophet then said to him: “You
should keep back for you some of your property and that would be good
for you.”

Sa*d had sought permission from the Prophet to bequeath two-thirds
of his wealth, whereupon, the Prophet forbade him. Sa*d then asked pennis-
sion for one-third, whereupon, the Prophet replied that one-third was also
a big amount. He added: “It is better for you to Ieave behind you heirs
self-sufficient than to leave them destitute begging alms from the people.
So this kind of wealth (ghina’) is not excessive. Had every surplus been
better, [fo. 54-a] the Prophet would have forbidden him to bequeath any-
thing. The hands of people fell short of giving in alnjs and spending in the
way of Allah though that would have led to a different situation.

Fatimah, the daughter of Qays, told the Messenger of Allah that
Mu’awiyah and Abu Jahm both asked her in marriage. The Messenger of
Allah remarked: “As for Mu’awiyah, he is a poor man and does not possess
any property.” The Messenger of Allah would not have censured a condition
which was good. The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Amr ibn al-‘As: “Shall l
send you in an army, may All&h keep you safe and sound, grant you booty,
and shall I make you interested in some wealth?” He (‘Amr) replied: “My
migration is not for the sake of wealth rather I migrate for the sake of Allah
and for His Messenger.” The Prophet said: “Bravo! a good wealth is for a
good man.” He, therefore, could not encourage anyone to do anything
which reduced his share with Allah. So, it is not lawtul to say that either of
the two conditions is superior to the other because both of them are trials .

One who holds this view says: the loss of two hands of a human being
is better with Allah than the loss of a leg; and again, the loss of hearing is
better than the loss of an eye. So there is no point of superiority, rather
here is the point of trials by which Allah subjects His servants to test so that
those, who persevere and thank Allah, are distinguished from others.

As far as we know, nd Prophetic tradition has come down to the
effect that the Prophet, peace bfc upon him, used to invoke poverty (faqr)
for himself nor did he ever invoke poverty for anybody whom he wished
well; rather he used to pray for self-sufficiency (kafaf) and invoked divine
protection against the trials of poverty and wealth. Moreover, the Prophet
did not invoke wealth (ghindj for anyone except with a condition which
he would mention in his prayer.

There is, however, a Prophetic tradition in which it is reported that
the Prophet used to say: “O Allah, keep me alive as a destitute (miskin)


and put me to death as a destitute and resurrect me in the group of the
destitutes.” If this tradition is established to be correct through its transmis-
sion, it woiild mean a stage which does not exceed the limits of self-
sufficiency (kafaf) or that the Prophet desired to become humble before
Allah, the Exalted. The soundness of this interpretation has been corrobo-
rated by the fact that the Prophet left behind (after his death) the properties
of Banu ‘1-Nadir, his share in Khaybar and Fadak. So, it is not logical to
think of the Prophet that he would pray to Allah so that notlung remains
in his possession, and he was able to remove the things from his possession
through spending in alms.

In another tradition, it has been reported that the Prophet said: “O
Allah, decrease the wealth and children of those who believe in me and
hold as true what I have brought.” This tradition is not authentic through
the way of transmission as well as in consideration. Had his prayer been
only for the wealth, it was possible that he would have prayed for their
sufficiency (kafaf), but as to his prayer with regard to the children, how can
he pray for decrease in the number of Muslims, since the ruination of a
generation results in reduction of the Muslims and their destruction. But
what raises the size of the family has been traced back to the Prophet, peace
be upon him , [fo. 54-b] the traditions which do not contradict (this point) .

How can he censure the poverty of Mu’awiyah when at the same
time he asks Ka*b ibn Malik and Sa’d to keep back the wealth as mentioned
with the remark that it was good and then he opposed that? It has been
established that the Prophet prayed for Anas ibn Malik and said: “O AUah,
multiply him in wealth and progeny and bless him in what You have given
him.” Anas Says: “My daughter has counted that I presented before Hajjaj
at Basrah about one hundred and twenty living beings coming from my
progeny on account of the prayer of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah
bless him and send down His peace on him.” He lived for a number of years
after this and other children were born to him. Even after him, the prosperity
of his family continued. So, the Prophet not only prayed for the abundance
of his wealth but conjoined it with his expression: “And bless him in what
you have given him.”

Now if the question is put, of the two men which one is better, the
one put to test with poverty or the one tried with wealth, provided the
condition of either of them is otherwise sound. It is said, the question about
this does not stand, because this man can have besides this trial, other acts
in which he is better than the other man, whereas the other man may have
acts by which he excells his equal in the similar situation. Again, this man
whose condition is sound in poverty, often may not remain so in wealth,
while the condition of the other man may remain sound in both poverty as


well as in wealth. So the conditions of both may be different in other similar

It may be argued that the condition of either of them remains sound
in both the circumstances, while besides this, they have equal acts; the rx>or
man does the acts incumbent on him in his poverty, like fortitude, restraint,
and contentment, the rich man does the acts incumbent on him, like spending
in alms, generosity, gratitude, and humility. So, of the two which one is
better? The knowledge about it rests with Allah, notwithstanding the fact,
that a group of people prefer poverty (faqr) on account of the Prophetic
tradition which we have mentioned: that the poor will enter the Paradise
whiie the owners of fortunes will be detained to give accounts.

Others reject this interpretation. They say that only those who boast
and vie in accumulating wealth will be detained; but as for one who pays
up the dues of Allah in his property and does not vie with others by his
wealth in boasting and accumulating wealth, and spends out of it as for as
he realises to be his duty and lays aside the remainder for fulfiiling his needs.
In this circumstance, the others will not be considered superior to him in
anything. This is hirther corroborated by that which has been proved correct
from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and send him peace, who says:
‘There must not be any envy except with two persons; a man whom Allah
gives wealth and then empowers him to exhaust it in (the way of) truth, and
a man whom Allah favours with wisdom with the help of which the man
decides the cases and teaches it (to some others).”

In another Prophetic tradition, it has been reported in some other
words: ” A man whom Allah gives wealth and then empowers him to exhaust
it in (the way of) truth and a man whom Allah favours with the Qur’an by
which he abides day and night.” So, the Messenger of Allah has explained
that there is no more dignified position than these two positions. [fo. 55 -a}
He is the only one who can explain on behalf of Allah and give juridical
verdict of what He wills. Had one who had this position been superceded
in the world Hereafter, the Messenger of Aliah, peace be upon him, would
not have encouraged him to stick to his act nor would he had described it
with this description nor would he urge Ka’b ibn Malik to turn to the position
which would lead him to Paradise and no more.

What we have so far mentioned is enough including the Prophet’s
saying: “The horse wiil be a reward for a man, a shield for another and a
burden upon another, so the man for whom it is a reward is one who has
saddled it for the Path of Allah,” upto the Prophetic tradition that has been
previously mentioned. The man for whom it is a shield is one who saddled
it for becoming free from want and for acquiring self-restraint without forget-



ting Allah’s due on its neck and back, the man upon whom lt is a burden
is one who saddled it out of hypocrisy, boastfulness and opposition to the
Muslims, and this man belongs to the group of people who would be detained
for giving accounts if Allah so wills, and the hrst two belong to the states
ot self-sufficiency (kafdf) in two cases.

Ibn Shihab says: ” An ascetic is one in whom neither the lawtul things
exhaust his gratitude (for Allah) nor do the prohibited things exhaust his
patience.” It has been confirmed from the Prophet who says: “You look at
the one who is inferior to you and do not look at the one who is superior
to you.”

It has been reported that Hudhayfah said: “O Allah, no one can be
raised in dignity except by dint of actions and no action is possible except
with the help of property and no propercy is acquired except out of your
bounty, so keep me free from want with your abounding mercy. O Allah,
I cannot do with a meagre amount nor is it enough for me/ 1

It has been established that when Allah asked Prophet Ayyub [Job]
to take bath so that he was cured of his desease, lo! a swarm of golden
locusts passed by him. At this he started collecting these in his clothes while
he was naked. Allah then sent down revelation to him (saying): “Can you
not do without these?” lt Who does not need your mercy, O my Nourisher? 1,
He said, or used a similar expression.

Moreover, verily, Allah, the Exalted, says: “Nor unto those whom,
when they come to thee (asking) that thou shouldst mount them, thou didst
tell: i cannot find whereon to mount you. 1 They turned back with eyes
Aowing with tears for sorrow that they could not find the means to spend”
(9:92). Now in the circumstances in which they were, if priority goes to one
whom others do not match, they would not have grieved when they did not
get beast of burden inferior to that. Had they overlooked that and thought
that the other would be superior, Allah certainly would have explained that.

Nevertheless, the dangers of wealth are many while those who are
saved from them are very few, because scarcely people escape its danger
except one who is infalliable (ma’sum) and for this reason, the position of
the infalliable one in it is great as the devil allures him either in receiving
(wealth) without his right, in spending (wealth) inappropriately, depriving
a person of his right, showing oppression and transgression (in acquiring)
wealth, or iittle thankfulness for it or in aspiring to it and other similar
situations which canot be described. So great is the gratitude and patience
of one whom Allah granted safety from it.


All praise bclongs to Allah for His favour He conferred upon us
through His Book before ffo. 55-b] and behind of which falsehood does not
come— a revelation from One Wise and Praised and also through the Practice
(Sunnah) of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him
peace and keep it alive among us after His Prophet, so, nobody other than
one who is doomed will destroy them. May Allah send down blessings on
Muhammad, His Prophet, peace be upon him and his family.


The transcript of it was finished on Saturday the 23rd Safar in the
year 677. May Allah give benefit with it. Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Maghlli undertook its transcription in the beginning and
completed it himself.



Ahmad abu Rafar Araudi.

Tractatus Juridicus de praedis, ac de divisione iliarum juxta legem
Alcorani et Unanimem Doctorum Consensum facienda/Ubi nimiam regum
aviditatem, ac licentiam in praedis, Civiumque fortunis usurpandis acriter
impugnal, Sugillatis.

Agit etiam de tributo aequo rebus imponendo, Ubi excipit omnia
commestibilia quaeque ad victus rationem necessaria; asseritque ven-
ationem, piscatumque non posse licite prohiberi nec reservari; plura de
decimis; de lucre licito, ac illicito, de bello licito queq requisitis contra
Christianos, ubi plura de militum licentia, Ibidem decet Chrianos posse
retinere sua bona, quae jure possidebant in regnis in ditionem Mauritanorum
redactis et solum teneri, Singulos viros, exceptis pueris Mulieribusque
Tribitum, Singulis annis solvere, quod testaticum Vocamus, posse etiam sine
ullo impedimento suam profiteri religionem, eam lebere exercere, qd An-
dulusorum Christianorum Mauritanis subjectorum Tune temporis nune tem-
poris Confirmat.

equiv. 677


Ahmad Abu Ja*far Da’udi,

Juridical Treatise on booty and how the division of booty has to be
made according to the law of the Qur’an and the unanimous consensus of
Doctors (of law).

He criticises in strong language, the excessive greediness of the kings
and their indulgence in booty , while misusing to their own benefit the fortunes
of the civilian population. In the book he also deals with equitable imposition
of taxes and makes exceptions for all eatables and things which are necessary
for a reasonable livelihood. He asserts that hunting and fishing cannot in a
legitimate way be prohibited, nor (its products) be conserved.

He (teaches) more about tithing, about legitimate and illigitimate
earnings, about legitimate warfare and the things which can be charged
against Christians. In this section he says more about what soldiers are
allowed to do and what not. In the same place, he teaches that Christians
can keep their (earthly) goods under their own control, the goods they
possessed legally in those territories which were brought under the sway of
the Muslims and that only the individual men (with the exception of young
boys and women) will be held responsible to pay tribute every single year.
We call this head-money. He teaches that the Christians can profess their
religion and practise it without hindrance, which (right) he conrirms for the
Christians under the Muslim rule for the past and present.

It was written in 677.