[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 464 |
| In-book reference | : Introduction, Hadith 464 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 25 |
Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Sulayman ibn Yasar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to send Abdullah ibn Rawaha to Khaybar, to assess the division of the fruit crop between him and the jews of Khaybar.
The jews collected for Abdullah pieces of their women's jewellery and said to him, "This is yours. Go light on us and don't be exact in the division!"
Abdullah ibn Rawaha said, "O tribe of jews! By Allah! You are among the most hateful to me of Allah's creation, but it does not prompt me to deal unjustly with you. What you have offered as a bribe is forbidden. We will not touch it." They said, "This is what supports the heavens and the earth."
Malik said, "If a share-cropper waters the palms and between them there is some uncultivated land, whatever he cultivates in the uncultivated land is his."
Malik said, "If the owner of the land makes a condition that he will cultivate the uncultivated land for himself, that is not good because the sharecropper does the watering for the owner of the land and so he increases the owner of the land in property (without any return for himself)."
Malik said, "If the owner stipulates that the fruit crop is to be shared between them, there is no harm in that if all the maintenance of the property - seeding, watering and case, etc. - are the concern of the sharecropper.
If the share-cropper stipulates that the seeds are the responsibility of the owner of the property - that is not permitted because he has stipulated an outlay against the owner of the property. Share-cropping is conducted on the basis that all the care and expense is outlayed by the share-cropper, and the owner of the property is not obliged anything. This is the accepted method of share-cropping."
Malik spoke about a spring which was shared between two men, and then the water dried up and one of them wanted to work on the spring and the other said, "I don't have the means to work on it." He said, "Tell the one who wants to work on the spring, 'Work and expend. All the water will be yours. You will have its water until your companion brings you half of what you have spent. If he brings you half of what you have spent, he can take his share of the water.' The first one is given all the water, because he has spent on it, and if he does not reach anything by his work, the other has not incurred any expense."
Malik said, "It is not good for a share-cropper not to expend anything but his labour and to be hired for a share of the fruit while all the expense and work is incurred by the owner of the garden, because the share-cropper does not know what the exact wage is going to be for his labour, whether it will be little or great."
Malik said, "No-one who lends a qirad or grants a share-cropping contract, should exempt some of the wealth, or some of the trees from his agent, because, by that, the agent becomes his hired man. He says, 'I will grant you a share-crop provided that you work for me on such- and-such a palm - water it and tend it. I will give you a qirad for such-and-such money provided that you work for me with ten dinars. They are not part of the qirad I have given you.' That must not be done and it is not good. This is what is done in our community."
Malik said, "The sunna about what is permitted to an owner of a garden in share-cropping is that he can stipulate to the share-cropper the maintenance of walls, cleaning the spring, sweeping the irrigation canals, pollinating the palms, pruning branches, harvesting the fruit and such things, provided that the share-cropper has a share of the fruit fixed by mutual agreement. However, the owner cannot stipulate the beginning of new work which the agent will start digging a well, raising the source of a well, instigating new planting, or building a cistern whose cost is great. That is as if the owner of the garden said to a certain man, 'Build me a house here or dig me a well or make a spring flow for me or do some work for me for half the fruit of this garden of mine,' before the fruit of the garden is sound and it is halal to sell it. This is the sale of fruit before its good condition is clear. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade fruit to be sold before its good condition became clear."
Malik said, "If the fruits are good and their good condition is clear and selling them is halal and then the owner asks a man to do one of those jobs for him, specifying the job, for half the fruit of his garden, for example, there is no harm in that. He has hired the man for something recognised and known. The man has seen it and is satisfied with it.
"As for share-cropping, if the garden has no fruit or little or bad fruit, he has only that. The labourer is only hired for a set amount, and hire is only permitted on these terms. Hire is a type of sale. One man buys another man's work from him. It is not good if uncertainty enters into it because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade uncertain transactions."
Malik said, "The sunna in share- cropping with us is that it can be practised with any kind of fruit tree, palm, vine, olive tree, pomegranate, peach, and soon. It is permitted, and there is no harm in it provided that the owner of the property has a share of the fruit:
Malik said, "Share-cropping is also permitted in any crop which emerges from the earth if it is a crop which is picked, and its owner cannot water, work on it and tend it.
"Share- cropping becomes reprehensible in anything in which share-cropping is normally permitted if the fruit is sound and the good condition is clear and it is halal to sell it. He must share-crop in it the next year. If a man waters fruit whose good condition is clear and it is halal to sell it, and he picks it for the owner, for a share of the crop, it is not sharecropping. It is similar to him being paid in dirhams and dinars. Share-cropping is what is between pruning the palms and when the fruit becomes sound and its sale is halal."
Malik said, "If some one makes a share-cropping contract for fruit trees before the condition becomes clear and its sale is halal, it is share-cropping and is permitted . "
Malik said, "Uncultivated land must not be involved in a share-cropping contract. That is because it is halal for the owner to rent it for dinars and dirhams or the equivalent for an accepted price."
Malik said, "As for a man who gives his uncultivated earth for a third or a fourth of what comes out of it, that is an uncertain transaction because crops may be scant one time and plentiful another time. It may perish completely and the owner of the land will have abandoned a set rent which would have been good for him to rent the land for. He takes an uncertain situation, and does not know whether or not it will be satisfactory. This is disapproved. It is like a man having someone travel for him for a set amount, and then saying, 'Shall I give you a tenth of the profit of the journey as your wage?' This is not halal and must not be done."
Malik summed up,"A man must not hire out himself or his land or his ship unless for a set amount."
Malik said, "A distinction is made between sharecropping in palms and in cultivated land because the owner of the palms cannot sell the fruit until its good condition is clear. The owner of the land can rent it when it is uncultivated with nothing on it."
Malik said, "What is done in our community about palms is that they can also be share-cropped for three and four years, and less or more than that."
Malik said, "That is what I have heard. Any fruit trees like that are in the position of palms. Contracts for several years are permissible for the sharecropper as they are permissible in the palms."
Malik said about the owner, "He does not take anything additional from the share-cropper in the way of gold or silver or crops which increases him. That is not good. The share-cropper also must not take from the owner of the garden anything additional which will increase him of gold, silver, crops or anything. Increase beyond what is stipulated in the contract is not good. It is also not good for the lender of a qirad to be in this position. If such an increase does enter share- cropping or quirad, it becomes by it hire. It is not good when hire enters it. Hire must never occur in a situation which has uncertainty in it."
Malik spoke about a man who gave land to another man in a share-cropping contract in which there were palms, vines, or the like of that of fruit trees and there was also uncultivated land in it. He said, "If the uncultivated land is secondary to the fruit trees, either in importance or in size of land, there is no harm in share-cropping. That is if the palms take up two-thirds of the land or more, and the uncultivated land is a third or less. This is because when the land that the fruit trees take up is secondary to the uncultivated land and the cultivated land in which the palms, vines or the like is a third or less, and the uncultivated land is two-thirds or more, it is permitted to rent the land and share-cropping in it is haram."
"One of the practices of people is to give out sharecropping contracts on property with fruit trees when there is uncultivated land in it, and to rent land while there are fruit trees on it, just as a Qur'an or sword which has some embellishment on it of silver is sold for silver, or a necklace or ring which have stones and gold in them are sold for dinars. These sales continue to be permitted. People buy and sell by them. Nothing described or instituted has come on that which if exceeded, makes it haram, and if fallen below makes it halal. What is done in our community about that is what people practise and permit among themselves. That is, if the gold or silver is secondary to what it is incorporated in, it is permitted to sell it. That is, if the value of the blade, the Qur'an, or the stones is two-thirds or more, and the value of the decoration is one-third or less."
| Sunnah.com reference | : Book 33, Hadith 2 |
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 33, Hadith 2 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 33, Hadith 1392 |
| Reference | : Sunan an-Nasa'i 448 |
| In-book reference | : Book 5, Hadith 1 |
| English translation | : Vol. 1, Book 5, Hadith 449 |
[Muslim].
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 171 |
| In-book reference | : Introduction, Hadith 171 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 1022 |
| In-book reference | : Book 42, Hadith 59 |
| English translation | : Book 42, Hadith 1022 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 93 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 250 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Al-Albani) | صحيح (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Sunan Abi Dawud 4695 |
| In-book reference | : Book 42, Hadith 100 |
| English translation | : Book 41, Hadith 4678 |
Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us about whatever is weighed but is not gold or silver, i.e. copper, brass, lead, black lead, iron, herbs, figs, cotton, and any such things that are weighed, is that there is no harm in bartering all those sorts of things two for one, hand to hand. There is no harm in taking a ritl of iron for two ritls of iron, and a ritl of brass for two ritls of brass."
Malik said, "There is no good in two for one of one sort with delayed terms. There is no harm in taking two of one sort for one of another on delayed terms, if the two sorts are clearly different. If both sorts resemble each other but their names are different, like lead and black lead, brass and yellow brass, I disapprove of taking two of one sort for one of the other on delayed terms."
Malik said, "When buying something of this nature, there is no harm in selling It beforetaking possession of it to some one other than the person from whom it was purchased, if the price is taken immediately and if it was bought originally by measure or weight. If it was bought without measuring, it should be sold to someone other than the person from whom it was bought, for cash or with delayed terms. That is because goods have to be guaranteed when they are bought without measuring, and they cannot be guaranteed when bought by weight until they are weighed and the deal is completed. This is the best of what I have heard about all these things. It is what people continue to do among us."
Malik said, "The way of doing things among us with what is measured or weighed of things which are not eaten or drunk, like safflower, date-stones, fodder leaves, indigo dye and the like of that is that there is no harm in bartering all those sort of things two for one, hand to hand. Do not take two for one from the same variety with delayed terms. If the types are clearly different, there is no harm in taking two of one for one of the other with delayed terms. There is no harm in selling whatever is purchased of all these sorts, before taking delivery of them if the price is taken from someone other than the person from whom they were purchased."
Malik said, "Anything of any variety that profits people, like gravel and gypsum, one quantity of them for two of its like with delayed terms is usury. One quantity of both of them for its equal plus any increase with delayed terms, is usury."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 71 |
Malik spoke to me about a man who wrote a kitaba for his slave for gold or silver and stipulated against him in his kitaba a journey, service, sacrifice or similar, which he specified by its name, and then the mukatab was able to pay all his instalments before the end of the term.
He said, "If he pays all his instalments and he is set free and his inviolability as a free man is complete, but he still has this condition to fulfil, the condition is examined, and whatever involves his person in it, like service or a journey etc., is removed from him and his master has nothing in it. Whatever there is of sacrifice, clothing, or anything that he must pay, that is in the position of dinars and dirhams, and is valued and he pays it along with his instalments, and he is not free until he has paid that along with his instalments."
Malik said, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things among us about which there is no dispute, is that a mukatab is in the same position as a slave whom his master will free after a service of ten years. If the master who will free him dies before ten years, what remains of his service goes to his heirs and his wala' goes to the one who contracted to free him and to his male children or paternal relations."
Malik spoke about a man who stipulated against his mukatab that he could not travel, marry, or leave his land without his permission, and that if he did so without his permission it was in his power to cancel the kitaba. He said, "If the mukatab does any of these things it is not in the man's power to cancel the kitaba. Let the master put that before the Sultan. The mukatab, however, should not marry, travel, or leave the land of his master without his permission, whether or not he stipulates that. That is because the man may write a kitaba for his slave for 100 dinars and the slave may have 1000 dinars or more than that. He goes off and marries a woman and pays her bride-price which sweeps away his money and then he cannot pay. He reverts to his master as a slave who has no property. Or else he may travel and his instalments fall due while he is away. He cannot do that and kitaba is not to be based on that. That is in the hand of his master. If he wishes, he gives him permission in that. If he wishes, he refuses it."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 39, Hadith 11 |
| صَحِيح (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 4625 |
| In-book reference | : Book 24, Hadith 18 |
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Muhammad Sirin used to say, "Do not sell grain on the ears until it is white."
Malik said, "If someone buys food for a known price to be delivered at a stated date, and when the date comes, the one who owes the food says, 'I do not have any food, sell me the food which I owe you with delayed terms.' The owner of the food says, 'This is not good, because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade selling food until the deal was completed.' The one who owes the food says to his creditor, 'Sell me any kind of food on delayed terms until I discharge the debt to you.' This is not good because he gives him food and then he returns it to him. The gold which he gave him becomes the price of that which is his right against him and the food which he gave him becomes what clears what is between them. If they do that, it becomes the sale of food before the deal is complete."
Malik spoke about a man who was owed food which he had purchased from a man and this man was owed the like of that food by another man. The one who owed the food said to his creditor, "I will refer you to my debtor who owes me the same amount of food as I owe you, so that you may obtain the food which I owe you ."
Malik said, "If the man who had to deliver the food, had gone out, and bought the food to pay off his creditor, that is not good. That is selling food before taking possession of it. If the food is an advance which falls due at that particular time, there is no harm in paying off his creditor with it because that is nota sale. It is not halal to sell food before receiving it in full since the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade that. However, the people of knowledge agree that there is no harm in partnership, transfer of responsibility and revocation in sales of food and other goods."
Malik said, "That is because the people of knowledge consider it as a favour rendered. They do not consider it as a sale. It is like a man lending light dirhams. He is then paid back in dirhams of full weight, and so gets back more than he lent. That is halal for him and permitted. Had a man bought defective dirhams from him as being the full weight, that would not be halal. Had it been stipulated to him that he lend full weight in dirhams, and then he gave faulty ones, that would not be halal for him."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 54 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1347 |
| Sunnah.com reference | : Book 2, Hadith 181 |
| English translation | : Book 2, Hadith 293 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 2, Hadith 295 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Sunan Ibn Majah 3784 |
| In-book reference | : Book 33, Hadith 128 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 33, Hadith 3784 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Yazid ibn Khusayfa that he had asked Sulayman ibn Yasar whether zakat was due from a man who had wealth in hand but also owed a debt for the same amount, and he replied, "No."
Malik said, "The position that we are agreed upon concerning a debt is that the lender of it does not pay zakat on it until he gets it back. Even if it stays with the borrower for a number of years before the lender collects it, the lender only has to pay zakat on it once. If he collects an amount of the debt which is not zakatable, and has other wealth which is zakatable, then what he has collected of the debt is added to the rest of his wealth and he pays zakat on the total sum."
Malik continued, "If he has no ready money other than that which he has collected from his debt, and that does not reach a zakatable amount, then he does not have to pay any zakat. He must, however, keep a record of the amount that he has collected and if, later, he collects another amount which, when added to what he has already collected, brings zakat into effect, then he has to pay zakat on it."
Malik continued, "Zakat is due on this first amount, together with what he has further collected of the debt owed to him, regardless of whether or not he has used up what he first collected. If what he takes back reaches twenty dinars of gold, or two hundred dirhams of silver he pays zakat on it. He pays zakat on anything else he takes back afte rthat, whether it be a large or small amount, according to the amount."
Malik said, "What shows that zakat is only taken once from a debt which is out of hand for some years before it is recovered is that if goods remain with a man for trading purposes for some years before he sells them, he only has to pay zakat on their prices once. This is because the one who is owed the debt, or owns the goods, should not have to take the zakat on the debt, or the goods, from anything else, since the zakat on anything is only taken from the thing itself, and not from anything else."
Malik said, "Our position regarding some onewho owes a debt, and has goods which are worth enough to pay off the debt, and also has an amount of ready money which is zakatable, is that he pays the zakat on the ready money which he has to hand. If, however, he only has enough goods and ready money to pay off the debt, then he does not have to pay any zakat. But if the ready money that he has reaches a zakatable amount over and above the amount of the debt that he owes, then he must pay zakat on it."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 17, Hadith 19 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 17, Hadith 598 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Thawr ibn Zayd ad-Dili from a son of Abdullah ibn Sufyan ath-Thaqafi from his grandfather Sufyan ibn Abdullah that Umar ibn al-Khattab once sent him to collect zakat. He used to include sakhlas (when assessing zakat), and they said, "Do you include sakhlas even though you do not take them (as payment)?" He returned to Umar ibn al-Khattab and mentioned that to him and Umar said, "Yes, you include a sakhla which the shepherd is carrying, but you do not take it. Neither do you take an akula, or a rubba, or a makhid, or male sheep and goats in their second and third years, and this is a just compromise between the young of sheep and goats and the best of them."
Malik said, "A sakhla is a newborn lamb or kid. A rubba is a mother that is looking after her offspring, a makhid is a pregnant ewe or goat, and an akula is a sheep or goat that is being fattened for meat."
Malik said, about a man who had sheep and goats on which he did not have to pay any zakat, but which increased by birth to a zakatable amount on the day before the zakat collector came to them, "If the number of sheep and goats along with their (newborn) offspring reaches a zakatable amount then the man has to pay zakat on them. That is because the offspring of the sheep are part of the flock itself. It is not the same situation as when some one acquires sheep by buying them, or is given them, or inherits them. Rather, it is like when merchandise whose value does not come to a zakatable amount is sold, and with the profit that accrues it then comes to a zakatable amount. The owner must then pay zakat on both his profit and his original capital, taken together. If his profit had been a chance acquisition or an inheritance he would not have had to pay zakat on it until one year had elapsed over it from the day he had acquired it or inherited it."
Malik said, "The young of sheep and goats are part of the flock, in the same way that profit from wealth is part of that wealth. There is, however, one difference, in that when a man has a zakatable amount of gold and silver, and then acquires an additional amount of wealth, he leaves aside the wealth he has acquired and does not pay zakat on it when he pays the zakat on his original wealth but waits until a year has elapsed over what he has acquired from the day he acquired it. Whereas a man who has a zakatable amount of sheep and goats, or cattle, or camels, and then acquires another camel, cow, sheep or goat, pays zakat on it at the same time that he pays the zakat on the others of its kind, if he already has a zakatable amount of livestock of that particular kind."
Malik said, "This is the best of what I have heard about this. "
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 17, Hadith 26 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 17, Hadith 604 |
86 Malik related to me from Musa ibn Maysara that he heard a man ask Said ibn al-Musayyab, "I am a man who sells for a debt." Said said, "Do not sell except for what you take to your camel."
Malik spoke about a person who bought goods from a man provided that he provide him with those goods by a specific date, either in time for a market in which he hoped for their saleability, or to fulfil a need at the time he stipulated. Then the seller failed him about the date, and the buyer wanted to return those goods to the seller. Malik said, "The buyer cannot do that, and the sale is binding on him. If the seller does bring the goods before the completion of the term, the buyer cannot be forced to take them."
Malik spoke about a person who bought food and measured it. Then some one came to him to buy it and he told him that he had measured it for himself and taken it in full. The new buyer wanted to trust him and accept his measure. Malik said, "Whatever is sold in this way for cash has no harm in it but whatever is sold in this way on delayed terms is disapproved of until the new buyer measures it out for himself. The sale with delayed terms is disapproved of because it leads to usury and it is feared that it will be circulated in this way without weight or measure. If the terms are delayed it is disapproved of and there is no disagreement about that with us."
Malik said, "One should not buy a debt owed by a man whether present or absent, without the confirmation of the one who owes the debt, nor should one buy a debt owed to a man by a dead person even if one knows what the deceased man has left. That is because to buy that is an uncertain transaction and one does not know whether the transaction will be completed or not completed."
He said, "The explanation of what is disapproved of in buying a debt owed by someone absent or dead, is that it is not known what unknown debtor may be connected to the dead person. If the dead person is liable for another debt, the price which the buyer gave on strength of the debt may become worthless."
Malik said, "There is another fault in that as well. He is buying something which is not guaranteed for him, and so if the deal is not completed, what he paid becomes worthless. This is an uncertain transaction and it is not good."
Malik said, "One distinguishes between a man who is only selling what he actually has and a man who is being paid in advance for something which is not yet in his possession. The man advancing the money brings his gold which he intends to buy with. The seller says, 'This is 10 dinars. What do you want me to buy for you with it?' It is as if he sold 10 dinars cash for 15 dinars to be paid later. Because of this, it is disapproved of. It is something leading to usury and fraud."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 86 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1373 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2863 |
| In-book reference | : Book 44, Hadith 5 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 42, Hadith 2863 |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 5647 |
| In-book reference | : Book 28, Hadith 119 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 81 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al- Musayyab that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade muzabana and muhaqala. Muzabana was selling fresh dates for dried dates. Muhaqala was buying unharvested wheat in exchange for threshed wheat and renting land in exchange for wheat.
Ibn Shihab added that he had asked Said ibn al-Musayyab about renting land for gold and silver. He said, "There is no harm in it."
Malik said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade muzabana. The explanation of muzabana is that it is buying something whose number, weight and measure is not known with something whose number, weight or measure is known, for instance, if a man has a stack of food whose measure is not known, either of wheat, dates, or whatever food, or the man has goods of wheat, date kernels, herbs, safflower, cotton, flax, silk, and does not know its measure or weight or number and then a buyer approaches him and proposes that he weigh or measure or count the goods, but, before he does, he specifies a certain weight, or measure, or number and guarantees to pay the price for that amount, agreeing that whatever falls short of that amount is a loss against him and whatever is in excess of that amount is a gain for him. That is not a sale. It is taking risks and it is an uncertain transaction. It falls into the category of gambling because he is not buying something from him for something definite which he pays. Everything which resembles this is also forbidden."
Malik said that another example of that was, for instance, a man proposing to another man, "You have cloth. I will guarantee you from this cloth of yours so many hooded cloaks, the measureof each cloak to be such-and-such, (naming a measurement). Whatever loss there is, is against me and I will fulfill you the specified amount and whatever excess there is, is mine." Or perhaps the man proposed, "I will guarantee you from this cloth of yours so many shirts, the measurement of each shirt to be such-and-such, and whatever loss there is, is against me and I will fulfill the specified amount and whatever excess there is, is mine." Or perhaps a man proposed to a man who had cattle or camel hides, "I will cut up these hides of yours into sandals on a pattern I will show you. Whatever falls short of a hundred pairs, I will make up its loss and whatever is over is mine because I guaranteed you." Another example was that a man say to a man who had ben-nuts, "I will press these nuts of yours. Whatever falls short of such-and-such a weight by the pound, I will make it up, and whatever is more than that is mine."
Malik said that all this and whatever else was like it or resembled it was in the category of muzabana, which was neither good nor permitted. It was also the same case for a man to say to a man, who had fodder leaves, date kernels, cotton, flax, herbs or safflower, "I will buy these leaves from you in exchange for such-and-such a sa, (indicating leaves which are pounded like his leaves) . . or these date kernels for such-and-such a sa of kernels like them, and the like of that in the case of safflower, cotton, flax and herbs."
Malik said, "All this is what we have described of muzabana."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 25 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1318 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar said that there was no harm in a man making an advance to another man for food, with a set description and price until a set date, as long as it was not in crops, or dates which had not begun to ripen.
Malik said, "The way of doing things among us concerning someone who makes an advance for foodstuffs at a known rate until a stated date, and the date arrives and he finds that there is not enough of what he was sold with the seller to fulfill his order, and so he revokes the sale, is that he must only take back the silver, gold, or price which he paid exactly. He does not buy anything else from the man for the same price until he has got back what he paid. That is because if he took something else besides the price which he paid him or exchanged it for goods other than the goods which he bought from him, it would be selling food before getting delivery of it."
Malik said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade selling food before getting delivery of it."
Malik said that it was not good if the buyer regretted his purchase and asked the seller to revoke the sale for him and he would not press him immediately for what he had paid. The people of knowledge forbade that. That was because when the food was made ready for the buyer by the seller, the buyer deferred his due from the seller in order that he might revoke the sale for him. That was the sale of food with delayed terms before taking delivery of the food.
Malik said, "The explanation of that is that when the date of delivery comes and the buyer dislikes the food, the seller takes by it money to be paid later and so it is not revocation. Revocation is that in which neither the buyer nor the seller is increased. When increase occurs by deferment of payment for a time period, or by anything which increases one of them over the other or anything which gives one of them profit, it is not revocation. When either of them do that, revocation becomes a sale. There is an indulgence for revocation, partnership, and transfer, as long as i ncrease, decrease, or deferment does not come into them. If increase, decrease, or deferment comes into it, it becomes a sale. Whatever makes a sale halal makes it halal and whatever makes a sale haram makes it haram."
Malik said, "If someone pays in advance for Syrian wheat, there is no harm if he takes a load after the term falls due."
Malik said, "It is the same with whoever advances for any kind of thing. There is no harm in him taking better than whatever he has made an advance for or worse than it after the agreed delivery date. The explanation of that is that if, for instance, a man advances for a certain weight of wheat. There is no harm if he decides to take some barley or Syrian wheat. If he has made an advance for good dates, there is no harm if he decides to take poor quality dates. If he paid in advance for red raisins, there is no harm if he takes black ones, when it happens after the agreed delivery date, and when the measure of what he takes is like the measure of what he paid for in advance."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 49 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1342 |
| Grade: | Da'if (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2549 |
| In-book reference | : Book 38, Hadith 27 |
| English translation | : Vol. 4, Book 12, Hadith 2549 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2610 |
| In-book reference | : Book 40, Hadith 5 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 38, Hadith 2610 |
| صَحِيحٌ (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 1773 |
| In-book reference | : Book 6, Hadith 2 |
| Grade: | Sahih Isnād (Zubair `Aliza'i) |
| Reference | : Ash-Shama'il Al-Muhammadiyah 23 |
| In-book reference | : Book 2, Hadith 8 |
| Grade: | Da'if (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Sunan Ibn Majah 3861 |
| In-book reference | : Book 34, Hadith 35 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 34, Hadith 3861 |
رواه مسلم (وكذلك مالك والترمذي وأبو داود والنسائي وابن ماجه)
| Reference | : Hadith 8, 40 Hadith Qudsi |
Yahya related to me, that Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us about a man buying cloth in one city, and then taking it to another city to sell as a murabaha, is that he is not reckoned to have the wage of an agent, or any allowance for ironing, folding, straightening, expenses, or the rent of a house. As for the cost of transporting the drapery, it is included in the basic price, and no share of the profit is allocated to it unless the agent tells all of that to the investor. If they agree to share the profits accordingly after knowledge of it, there is no harm in that."
Malik said, "As for bleaching, tailoring, dyeing, and such things, they are treated in the same way as drapery. The profit is reckoned in them as it is reckoned in drapery goods. So if he sells the drapery goods without clarifying the things we named as not getting profit, and if the drapery has already gone, the transport is to be reckoned, but no profit is given. If the drapery goods have not gone the transaction between them is null and void unless they make a new mutual agreement on what is to be permitted between them ."
Malik spoke about an agent who bought goods for gold or silver, and the exchange rate on the day of purchase was ten dirhams to the dinar. He took them to a city to sell murabaha, or sold them where he purchased them according to the exchange rate of the day on which he sold them. If he bought them for dirhams and he sold them for dinars, or he bought them for dinars and he sold them for dirhams, and the goods had not gone then he had a choice. If he wished, he accepted to sell the goods and if he wished, he left them. If the goods had been sold, he had the price for which the salesman bought them, and the salesman was reckoned to have the profit on what they were bought for, over what the investor gained as profit.
Malik said, "If a man sells goods worth one hundred dinars for one hundred and ten, and he hears after that they are worth ninety dinars, and the goods have gone, the seller has a choice. If he likes, he has the price of the goods on the day they were taken from him unless the price is more than the price for which he was obliged to sell them in the first place, and he does not have more than that - and it is one hundred and ten dinars. If he likes, it is counted as profit against ninety unless the price his goods reached was less than the value. He is given the choice between what his goods fetch and the capital plus the profit, which is ninety-nine dinars."
Malik said, "If someone sells goods in murabaha and he says, 'It was valued at one hundred dinars to me.' Then he hears later on, that it was worth one hundred and twenty dinars, the customer is given the choice. If he wishes, he gives the salesman the value of the goods on the day he took them, and if he wishes, he gives the price for which he bought them according to the reckoning of what profit he gives him, as far as it goes, unless that is less than the price for which he bought them, for he should not give the owner of the goods a loss from the price for which he bought them because he was satisfied with that. The owner of the goods came to seek extra, so the buyer has no argument against the salesman in that to make a reduction from the first price for which he bought it according to the list of contents."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 77 |
| مُتَّفق عَلَيْهِ (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 5864 |
| In-book reference | : Book 29, Hadith 122 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 397 |
| In-book reference | : Book 22, Hadith 1 |
| English translation | : Book 22, Hadith 397 |
| Sunnah.com reference | : Book 9, Hadith 20 |
| English translation | : Book 9, Hadith 1218 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 9, Hadith 1188 |
Yahya said that Malik said, "The person who puts up the principal must not stipulate that he has something of the profit alone without the agent sharing in it, nor must the agent stipulate that he has something of the profit alone without the investor sharing. In qirad, there is no sale, no rent, no work, no advance, and no convenience which one party specifies to himself without the other party sharing unless one party allows it to the other unconditionally as a favour and that is alright to both. Neither of the parties should make a condition over the other which increases him in gold or silver or food over the other party."
He said, "If any of that enters the qirad, it becomes hire, and hire is only good with known and fixed terms. The agent should not stipulate when he takes the principal that he repay or commission anyone with the goods, nor that he take any of them for himself. When there is a profit, and it is time to separate the capital, then they divide the profit according to the terms of the contract. If the principal does not increase or there is a loss, the agent does not have to make up for what he spent on himself or for the loss. That falls to the investor from the principal. Qirad is permitted upon whatever terms the investor and the agent make a mutual agreement, of half the profit, or a third or a fourth or whatever."
Malik said, "It is not permitted for the agent to stipulate that he use the qirad money for a certain number of years and that it not be taken from him during that time."
He said, "It is not good for the investor to stipulate that the qirad money should not be returned for a certain number of years which are specified, because the qirad is not for a term. The investor loans it to an agent to use for him. If it seems proper to either of them to abandon the project and the money is coin, and nothing has been bought with it, it can be abandoned, and the investor takes his money back. If it seems proper to the investor to take the qirad loan back after goods have been purchased with it, he cannot do so until the buyer has sold the goods and they have become money. If it seems proper to the agent to return the loan, and it has been turned to goods he cannot do so until he has sold them. He returns the loan in cash as he took it."
Malik said, "It is not good for the investor to stipulate that the agent pay any zakat due from his portion of the profit in particular, because the investor by stipulating that, stipulates fixed increase for himself from the profit because the portion of zakat he would be liable for by his portion of the profit, is removed from him.
"It is not permitted for the investor to stipulate to the agent to only buy from so-and-so, referring to a specific man. That is not permitted because by doing so he would become his hireling for a wage."
Malik spoke about an investor in qirad who stipulated a guarantee for an amount of money from the agent, "The investor is not permitted to stipulate conditions about his principal other than the conditions on which qirad is based or according to the precedent of the sunna of the Muslims. If the principal is increased by the condition of guarantee, the investor has increased his share of the profit because of the position of the guarantee. But the profit is only to be divided according to what it would have been had the loan been given without the guarantee. If the principal is destroyed, I do not think that the agent has a guarantee held against him because the stipulation of guarantees in qirad is null and void."
Malik spoke about an investor who gave qirad money to a man and the man stipulated that he would only buy palms or animals with it because he sought to eat the dates or the offspring of the animals and he kept them for some time to use for himself. He said, "That is not permitted. It is not the sunna of the Muslims in qirad unless he buys it and then sells it as other goods are sold."
Malik said, "There is no harm in the agent stipulating on the investor a slave to help him provided that the slave stands to gain along with him out of the investment, and when the slave only helps him with the investment, not with anything else."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 32, Hadith 6 |
Malik said, "The best of what is said about a man who buys the mukatab of a man is that if the man wrote the slave's kitaba for dinars or dirhams, he does not sell him unless it is for merchandise which is paid immediately and not deferred, because if it is deferred, it would be a debt for a debt. A debt for a debt is forbidden."
He said, "If the master gives a mukatab his kitaba for certain merchandise of camels, cattle, sheep, or slaves, it is more correct that the buyer buy him for gold, silver, or different goods than the ones his master wrote the kitaba for, and that must be paid immediately, not deferred."
Malik said, "The best of what I have heard about a mukatab when he is sold is that he is more entitled to buy his kitaba than the one who buys him if he can pay his master the price for which he was sold in cash. That is because his buying himself is his freedom, and freedom has priority over what bequests accompany it. If one of those who have written the kitaba for the mukatab sells his portion of him, so that a half, a third, a fourth, or whatever share of the mukatab is sold, the mukatab does not have the right of pre-emption in what is sold of him. That is because it is like the severance of a partner, and a partner can only make a settlement for a partner of the one who is mukatab with the permission of his partners because what is sold of him does not give him complete rights as a free man and his property is barred from him, and by buying part of himself, it is feared that he will become incapable of completing payment because of what he had to spend. That is not like the mukatab buying himself completely unless whoever has some of the kitaba remaining due to him gives him permission. If they give him permission, he is more entitled to what is sold of him."
Malik said, "Selling one of the instalments of a mukatab is not halal. That is because it Is an uncertain transaction. If the mukatab cannot pay it, what he owes is nullified. If he dies or goes bankrupt and he owes debts to people, then the person who bought his instalment does not take any of his portion with the creditors. The person who buys one of the instalments of the mukatab is in the position of the master of the mukatab. The master of the mukatab does not have a share with the creditors of the mukatab for what he is owed of the kitaba of his slave. It is also like that with the kharaj, (a set amount deducted daily from the slave against his earnings), which accumulates for a master from the earnings of his slave. The creditors of his slave do not allow him a share for what has accumulated for him from those deductions."
Malik said, "There is no harm in a mukatab paying off his kitaba with coin or merchandise other than the merchandise for which he wrote his kitaba if it is identical with it, on time (for the instalment) or delayed. "
Malik said that if a mukatab died and left an umm walad and small children by her or by someone else and they could not work and it was feared that they would be unable to fulfil their kitaba, the umm walad of the father was sold if her price would pay all the kitaba for them, whether or not she was their mother. They were paid for and set free because their father did not forbid her sale if he feared that he would be unable to complete his kitaba. If her price would not pay for them and neither she nor they could work, they all reverted to being slaves of the master.
Malik said, "What is done among us in the case of a person who buys the kitaba of a mukatab, and then the mukatab dies before he has paid his kitaba, is that the person who bought the kitaba inherits from him. If, rather than dying, the mukatab cannot pay, the buyer has his person. If the mukatab pays his kitaba to the person who bought him and he is freed, his wala' goes to the person who wrote the kitaba and the person who bought his kitaba does not have any of it."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 39, Hadith 7 |
| Grade: | Da’if (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Sunan Ibn Majah 4336 |
| In-book reference | : Book 37, Hadith 237 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 37, Hadith 4336 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 262 |
| Reference | : Bulugh al-Maram 742 |
| In-book reference | : Book 6, Hadith 35 |
| English translation | : Book 6, Hadith 761 |
[Al- Bukhari and Muslim].
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 259 |
| In-book reference | : Introduction, Hadith 259 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 803 |
| In-book reference | : Book 33, Hadith 50 |
| English translation | : Book 33, Hadith 803 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki from Tawus al Yamani that from thirty cows, Muadh ibn Jabal took one cow in its second year, and from forty cows, one cow in its third or fourth year, and when less than that (i.e. thirty cows) was brought to him he refused to take anything from it. He said, "I have not heard anything about it from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. When I meet him, I will ask him." But the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died before Muadh ibn Jabal returned.
Yahya said that Malik said, "The best that I have heard about some one who has sheep or goats with two or more shepherds in different places is that they are added together and the owner then pays the zakat on them. This is the same situation as a man who has gold and silver scattered in the hands of various people. He must add it all u p and pay whatever zakat there is to pay on the sum total."
Yahya said that Malik said, about a man who had both sheep and goats, that they were added up together for the zakat to be assessed, and if between them they came to a number on which zakat was due, he paid zakat on them. Malik added, "They are all considered as sheep, and in Umar ibn al-Khattab's book it says, 'On grazing sheep and goats, if they come to forty or more, one ewe.' "
Malik said, "If there are more sheep than goats and their owner only has to pay one ewe, the zakat collector takes the ewe from the sheep. If there are more goats than sheep, he takes it from the goats. If there is an equal number of sheep and goats, he takes the ewe from whichever kind he wishes."
Yahya said that Malik said, "Similarly, Arabian camels and Bactrian camels are added up together in order to assess the zakat that the owner has to pay. They are all considered as camels. If there are more Arabian camels than Bactrians and the owner only has to pay one camel, the zakat collector takes it from the Arabian ones. If, however, there are more Bactrian camels he takes it from those. If there is an equal number of both, he takes the camel from whichever kind he wishes."
Malik said, "Similarly, cows and water buffaloes are added up together and are all considered as cattle. If there are more cows than water buffalo and the owner only has to pay one cow, the zakat collector takes it from the cows. If there are more water buffalo, he takes it from them. If there is an equal number of both, he takes the cow from whichever kind he wishes. So if zakat is necessary, it is assessed taking both kinds as one group."
Yahya said that Malik said, "No zakat is due from anyone who comes into possession of livestock, whether camels or cattle or sheep and goats, until a year has elapsed over them from the day he acquired them, unless he already had in his possession a nisab of livestock. (The nisab is the minimum amount on which zakat has to be paid, either five head of camels, or thirty cattle, or forty sheep and goats). If he already had five head of camels, or thirty cattle, or forty sheep and goats, and he then acquired additional camels, or cattle, or sheep and goats, either by trade, or gift, or inheritance, he must pay zakat on them when he pays the zakat on the livestock he already has, even if a year has not elapsed over the acquisition. And even if the additional livestock that he acquired has had zakat taken from it the day before he bought it, or the day before he inherited it, he must still pay the zakat on it when he pays the zakat on the livestock he already has "
Yahya said that Malik said, "This is the same situation as some one who has some silver on which he pays the zakat and then uses to buy some goods with from somebody else. He then has to pay zakat on those goods when he sells them. It could be that one man will have to pay zakat on them one day, and by the following day the other man will also have to pay."
Malik said, in the case of a man who had sheep and goats which did not reach the zakatable amount, and who then bought or inherited an additional number of sheep and goats well above the zakatable amount, that he did not have to pay zakat on all his sheep and goats until a year had elapsed over them from the day he acquired the new animals, whether he bought them or inherited them.This was because none of the livestock that a man had, whether it be camels, or cattle, or sheep and goats, was counted as a nisab until there was enough of any one kind for him to have to pay zakat on it. This was the nisab which is used for assessing the zakat on what the owner had additionally acquired, whether it were a large or small amount of livestock.
Malik said, "If a man has enough camels, or cattle, or sheep and goats, for him to have to pay zakat on each kind, and then he acquires another camel, or cow, or sheep, or goat, it must be included with the rest of his animals when he pays zakat on them "
Yahya said that Malik said, "This is what I like most out of what I heard about the matter."
Malik said, in the case of a man who does not have the animal required of him for the zakat, "If it is a two-year-old she-camel that he does not have, a three-year-old male camel is taken instead. If it is a three- or four- or five-year-old she-camel that he does not have, then he must buy the required animal so that he gives the collector what is due. I do not like it if the owner gives the collector the equivalent value."
Malik said, about camels used for carrying water, and cattle used for working water-wheels or ploughing, "In my opinion such animals are included when assessing zakat."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 17, Hadith 24 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 17, Hadith 603 |
Malik related to me that he heard that Abu Salama ibn Abd ar- Rahman and Sulayman ibn Yasar were both asked, "Does one pronounce judgement on the basis of an oath with one witness?" They both said, "Yes."
Malik said, "The precedent of the sunna in judging by an oath with one witness is that if the plaintiff takes an oath with his witness, he is confirmed in his right. If he draws back and refuses to take an oath, the defendant is made to take an oath. If he takes an oath, the claim against him is dropped. If he refuses to take an oath, the claim is confirmed against him."
Malik said, "This procedure pertains to property cases in particular. It does not occur in any of the hadd-punishments, nor in marriage, divorce, freeing slaves, theft or slander. If some one says, 'Freeing slaves comes under property,' he has erred. It is not as he said. Had it been as he said, a slave could take an oath with one witness, if he could find one, that his master had freed him.
"However, when a slave lays claim to a piece of property, he can take an oath with one witness and demand his right as the freeman demands his right."
Malik said, "The sunna with us is that when a slave brings somebody who witnesses that he has been set free, his master is made to take an oath that he has not freed him, and the slave's claim is dropped."
Malik said, "The sunna about divorce is also like that with us. When a woman brings somebody who witnesses that her husband has divorced her, the husband is made to take an oath that he has not divorced her. If he takes the oath, the divorce does not proceed . "
Malik said, "There is only one sunna of bringing a witness in cases of divorce and freeing a slave. The right to make an oath only belongs to the husband of the woman, and the master of the slave. Freeing is a hadd matter, and the testimony of women is not permitted in it because when a slave is freed, his inviolability is affirmed and the hadd punishments are applied for and against him. If he commits fornication and he is a muhsan, he is stoned. If he kills a slave, he is killed for it. Inheritance is established for him, between him and whoever inherits from him. If somebody disputes this, arguing that if a man frees his slave and then a man comes to demand from the master of the slave payment of a debt, and a man and two women testify to his right, that establishes the right against the master of the slave so that his freeing him is cancelled if he only has the slave as property, inferring by this case that the testimony of women is permitted in cases of setting free. The case is not as he suggests (i.e. it is a case of property not freeing). It is like a man who frees his slave, and then the claimant of a debt comes to the master and takes an oath with one witness, demanding his right. By that, the freeing of the slave would be cancelled. Or else a man comes who has frequent dealings and transactions with the master of the slave. He claims that he is owed money by the master of the slave. Someone says to the master of the slave, 'Take an oath that you don't owe what he claims'. If he draws back and refuses to take an oath, the one making the claim takes an oath and his right against the master of the slave is confirmed. That would cancel the freeing of the slave if it is confirmed that property is owed by the master."
Malik said, "It is the same case with a man who marries a slave-girl and then the master of the slave-girl comes to the man who has married her and claims, 'You and so-and-so have bought my slave-girl from me for such an amount of dinars. The husband of the slave-girl denies that. The master of the slave-girl brings a man and two women and they testify to what he has said. The sale is confirmed and his claim is considered true. So the slave-girl is haram for her husband and they have to separate, even though the testimony of women is not accepted in divorce."
Malik said, "It is also the same case with a man who accuses a free man, so the hadd falls on him. A man and two women come and testify that the one accused is a slave. That would remove the hadd from the accused after it had befallen him, even though the testimony of women is not accepted in accusations involving hadd punishments."
Malik said, "Another similar case in which judgement appears to go against the precedent of the sunna is that two women testify that a child is born alive and so it is necessary for him to inherit if a situation arises where he is entitled to inherit, and the child's property goes to those who inherit from him, if he dies, and it is not necessary that the two women witnesses should be accompanied by a man or an oath even though it may involve vast properties of gold, silver, live-stock, gardens and slaves and other properties. However, had two women testified to one dirham or more or less than that in a property case, their testimony would not affect anything and would not be permitted unless there was a witness or an oath with them."
Malik said, "There are people who say that an oath is not acceptable with only one witness and they argue by the word of Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, and His word is the Truth, 'And call in to witness two witnesses, men; or if the two be not men, then one man and two women, such witnesses as you approve of.' (Sura 2 ayat 282). Such people argue that if he does not bring one man and two women, he has no claim and he is not allowed to take an oath with one witness."
Malik said, "Part of the proof against those who argue this, is to reply to them, 'Do you think that if a man claimed property from a man, the one claimed from would not swear that the claim was false?' If he swears, the claim against him is dropped. If he refuses to take an oath, the claimant is made to take an oath that his claim is true, and his right against his companion is established. There is no dispute about this with any of the people nor in any country. By what does he take this? In what place in the Book of Allah does he find it? So if he confirms this, let him confirm the oath with one witness, even if it is not in the Book of Allah, the Mighty, the Majestic! It is enough that this is the precedent of the sunna. However, man wants to recognise the proper course of action and the location of the proof. In this there is a clarification for what is obscure about that, if Allah ta'ala wills."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 36, Hadith 7 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 36, Hadith 1411 |
In tu-adh-dhib-hum fa-innahum 'ibaaduk. Wa in tagh-fir lahum fa-innaka antal azizul hakim.
Translation: "If Thou punish them, lo! they are Thy slaves, and if Thou forgive them, (lo! the are Thy slaves).Lo! Thou, only Thou, art Mighty, the wise".Surah Maa-idah, 118.
The Being that possesses great power, if He wills, He may forgive the criminal. The One that is all Wise, there is Wisdom and benefit in every act of His. The reason for Sayyidina Rasulullah Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam reciting this aayah while standing and also in the ruku and sajdah, and repeating it many times, is to bring to mind the two attributes of Allah, namely the attributes of justice and forgiveness. The whole scene on the day of qiyaamah will be of these two things. It is stated that Imaam Aa'zam Abu Hanifah RA. also recited the following aayah the whole night:
Wamtaazul yauma ayyuhal mujrimun.
Translation: "But avaunt ye, O ye guilty, this day!" Surah Yaseen, 58.
In this aayah too the scene of qiyaamah is portrayed. That today the sinners should separate and distinguish themselves. What a severe and nerve-chilling command this is. Today they are together with the pious and holy people and benefiting from the barakaat (blessings) they receive, but at this moment the sinners will be separated from them. May the Most Merciful Allah with His Grace keep those pious souls under His shadow, otherwise it is really a time for great trials.
| Grade: | Sahih Isnād (Zubair `Aliza'i) |
| Reference | : Ash-Shama'il Al-Muhammadiyah 275 |
| In-book reference | : Book 40, Hadith 15 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3180 |
| In-book reference | : Book 47, Hadith 232 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 3180 |
Another narration of Al-Bukhari is: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "One night two men came to me and took me to a blessed land." (The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) told of the same incident as above) and said, "After a while of walking we came upon a pit like an oven, narrow at the top and wide at the bottom with fire raging in it. When the flames rose up (the people in it) also rose up till they were about to come out; and when the fire subsided they, too, would go down with it. In it were naked men and women." (The remainder of the Hadith is the same as the above Hadith except that at the end of it, the Messenger of Allah said: "We came upon a river of blood in the middle of which there was a man standing, and at the bank of the river there was a man with plenty of stones before him..." In this narration we also find: "They made me climb the tree and they made me enter an abode so beautiful the like of which I have never seen before. There (I saw) old men and youth." In this narration we also find: "'The first house you entered was the abode of the believers in general, and the other house was the abode of the martyrs. I am Jibril (Gabriel), and this is Mika'il. Raise your head.' I looked up and saw something like clouds. They said to me, 'That is your abode.' I said, 'Shall I enter it?' They said, 'You have not completed your term of life yet. When you do, you will certainly enter it."'
[Al-Bukhari]
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 1546 |
| In-book reference | : Book 17, Hadith 36 |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 5862 |
| In-book reference | : Book 29, Hadith 120 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 92 |
| Grade: | Sahih Isnād (Zubair `Aliza'i) |
| Reference | : Ash-Shama'il Al-Muhammadiyah 397 |
| In-book reference | : Book 54, Hadith 12 |