| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) Muslim (8) (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Musnad Ahmad 184 |
| In-book reference | : Book 2, Hadith 101 |
| صَحِيح (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 2555 |
| In-book reference | : Book 10, Hadith 49 |
| Sunnah.com reference | : Book 4, Hadith 47 |
| English translation | : Book 4, Hadith 666 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 4, Hadith 645 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 77 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 92 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 18 |
| In-book reference | : Book 1, Hadith 18 |
| English translation | : Book 1, Hadith 18 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 342 |
| In-book reference | : Book 16, Hadith 10 |
| English translation | : Book 16, Hadith 342 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 1204 |
| In-book reference | : Book 49, Hadith 6 |
| English translation | : Book 49, Hadith 1204 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 143 |
إنَّ اللهَ يَقُولُ لأَهْلِ الجَنَّةِ : يَا أهْلَ الجَنَّةِ . فَيَقُولُون : لَبَّيْكَ رَبَّنا وسَعْدَيْكَ ، والخَيْرُ في يَدَيْكَ. فَيَقُولُ : هَلْ رَضِيتُم ؟ فَيَقُولُونَ : وَما لَنا لَا نَرْضَىى يَا رَبّ ، وَقَدْ أَعْطَيْتَنا مَا لمْ تُعْطِ أَحَداً مِنْ خَلْقِكَ . فَيَقُولُ : أَلا أُعْطِيكُمْ أَفْضَلَ مِنْ ذَلِك ؟ فَيَقُولُونَ : يَا رَبّ وأيُّ شيءٍ أَفْضَلُ مِنْ ذَلِك ؟ فَيَقُولُ : أٌحِلُّ عَلَيْكُمْ رِضْواني ، فَلا أَسْخَطُ عَلَيْكُمْ بَعْدَهُ أَبداً
رواه البخاري (وكذلك مسلم والترمذي)
| Reference | : Hadith 40, 40 Hadith Qudsi |
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Marwan ibn al-Hakam decided about a man who had made a vow to abstain from intercourse with his wife, that when four months had passed, it was a divorce and he could return to her as long as she was in her idda.
Malik added, "That was also the opinion of Ibn Shihab."
Malik said that if a man made a vow to abstain from intercourse with his wife and at the end of four months he declared his intent to continue to abstain, he was divorced. He could go back to his wife, but if he did not have intercourse with her before the end of her idda, he had no access to her and he could not go back to her unless he had an excuse - illness, imprisonment, or a similar excuse. His return to her maintained her as his wife. If her idda passed and then he married her after that and did not have intercourse with her until four months had passed and he declared his intent to continue to abstain, divorce was applied to him by the first vow. If four months passed, and he had not returned to her, he had no idda against her nor access because he had married her and then divorced her before touching her.
Malik said that a man who made a vow to abstain from intercourse with his wife and continued to abstain after four months and so divorced her, but then returned and did not touch her and four months were completed before her idda was completed, did not have to declare his intent and divorce did not befall him. If he had intercourse with her before the end of her idda, he was entitled to her. If her idda passed before he had intercourse with her, he had no access to her. This is what Malik preferred of what he had heard on the subject.
Malik said that if a man made a vow to abstain from intercourse with his wife and then divorced her, and the four months of the vow were completed before completion of the idda of the divorce, it counted as two pronouncements of divorce. If he declared his intention to continue to abstain and the idda of the divorce finished before the four months the vow of abstention was not a divorce. That was because the four months had passed and she was not his on that day.
Malik said, "If someone makes a vow not to have intercourse with his wife for a day or a month and then waits until more than four months have passed, it is not ila. Ila only applies to someone who vows more than four months. As for the one who vows not to have intercourse with his wife for four months or less than that, I do not think that it is ila because when the term enters into it at which it stops, he comes out of his oath and he does not have to declare his intention."
Malik said, "If someone vows to his wife not to have intercourse with her until her child has been weaned, that is not ila. I have heard that Ali ibn Abi Talib was asked about that and he did not think that it was ila."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 29, Hadith 19 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 29, Hadith 1173 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2610 |
| In-book reference | : Book 40, Hadith 5 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 38, Hadith 2610 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu Hazim ibn Dinar from Said ibn al-Musayyab that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade the sale with uncertainty in it.
Malik said, "An example of one type of uncertain transaction and risk is that a man intends the price of a stray animal or escaped slave to be fifty dinars. A man says, 'I will take him from you for twenty dinars.' If the buyer finds him, thirty dinars goes from the seller, and if he does not find him, the seller takes twenty dinars from the buyer."
Malik said, "There is another fault in that. If that stray is found, it is not known whether it will have increased or decreased in value or what defects may have befallen it. This transaction is greatly uncertain and risky."
Malik said, "According to our way of doing things, one kind of uncertain transaction and risk is selling what is in the wombs of females - women and animals - because it is not known whether or not it will come out, and if it does come out, it is not known whether it will be beautiful or ugly, normal or disabled, male or female. All that is disparate. If it has that, its price is such-and-such, and if it has this, its price is such-and-such."
Malik said, "Females must not be sold with what is in their wombs excluded. That is that, for instance, a man says to another, 'The price of my sheep which has much milk is three dinars. She is yours for two dinars while I will have her future offspring.' This is disapproved because it is an uncertain transaction and a risk."
Malik said, "It is not halal to sell olives for olive oil or sesame for sesame oil, or butter for ghee because muzabana comes into that, because the person who buys the raw product for something specified which comes from it, does not know whether more or less will come out of that, so it is an uncertain transaction and a risk."
Malik said, "A similar case is the selling of ben-nuts for ben-nut oil. This is an uncertain transaction because what comes from the ben-nut is ben-oil. There is no harm in selling ben-nuts for perfumed ben because perfumed ben has been perfumed, mixed and changed from the state of raw ben-nut oil."
Malik, speaking about a man who sold goods to a man on the provision that there was to be no loss for the buyer, (i.e. if the buyer could not re-sell the goods they could go back to the seller), said, "This transaction is not permitted and it is part of risk. The explanation of why it is so, is that it is as if the seller hired the buyer for the profit if the goods make a profit. If he sells the stock at a loss, he has nothing, and his efforts are not compensated. This is not good. In such a transaction, the buyer should have a wage according to the work that he has contributed. Whatever there is of loss or profit in those goods is for and against the seller. This is only when the goods are gone and sold. If they do not go, the transaction between them is null and void."
Malik said, "As for a man who buys goods from a man and he concludes the sale and then the buyer regrets and asks to have the price reduced and the seller refuses and says, 'Sell it and I will compensate you for any loss.' There is no harm in this because there is no risk. It is something he proposes to him, and their transaction was not based on that. That is what is done among us."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 75 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1365 |
Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Amr ibn Hazm from Umar ibn Abdal-Aziz from Abu Bakr ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Harith ibn Hisham from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If anyone goes bankrupt, and a man finds his own property intact with him, he is more entitled to it than anyone else."
Malik spoke about a man who sold a man wares, and the buyer went bankrupt. He said, "The seller takes whatever of his goods he finds. If the buyer has sold some of them and distributed them, the seller of the wares is more entitled to them than the creditors. What the buyer has distributed does not prevent the seller from taking whatever of it he finds. It is the seller's right if he has received any of the price from the buyer and he wants to return it to take what he finds of his wares, and in what he does not find, he is like the creditors."
Malik spoke about some one who bought spun wool or a plot of land, and then did some work on it, like building a house on the plot of land or weaving the spun wool into cloth. Then he went bankrupt after he had bought it, and the original owner of the plot said, "I will take the plot and whatever structure is on it." Malik said, "That structure is not his. However, the plot and what is in it that the buyer has improved is appraised. Then one sees what the price of the plot is and how much of that value is the price of the structure. They are partners in that. The owner of the plot has as much as his portion, and the creditors have the amount of the portion of the structure."
Malik said, "The explanation of that is that the value of it all is fifteen hundred dirhams. The value of the plot is five hundred dirhams, and the value of the building is one thousand dirhams. The owner of the plot has a third, and the creditors have two-thirds."
Malik said, "It is like that with spinning and other things of the same nature in these circumstances and the buyer has a debt which he cannot pay. This is the behaviour in such cases."
Malik said, "As for goods which have been sold and which the buyer does not improve, but those goods sell well and have gone up in price, so their owner wants them and the creditors also want to seize them, then the creditors choose between giving the owner of the goods the price for which he sold them and not giving him any loss and surrendering his goods to him.
"If the price of the goods has gone down, the one who sold them has a choice. If he likes, he can take his goods and he has no claim to any of his debtor's property, and that is his right. If he likes, he can be one of the creditors and take a portion of his due and not take his goods. That is up to him."
Malik said about someone who bought a slave-girl or animal and she gave birth in his possession and the buyer went bankrupt, "The slave-girl or the animal and the offspring belong to the seller unless the creditors desire it. In that case they give him his complete due and they take it."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 89 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1375 |
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 12 |
| In-book reference | : Introduction, Hadith 12 |
| مُتَّفق عَلَيْهِ (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Mishkat al-Masabih 5494 |
| In-book reference | : Book 27, Hadith 115 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Zubair `Aliza'i) |
| Reference | : Ash-Shama'il Al-Muhammadiyah 228 |
| In-book reference | : Book 34, Hadith 4 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 1024 |
| In-book reference | : Book 42, Hadith 61 |
| English translation | : Book 42, Hadith 1024 |
Malik related to me from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a son of al-Mutawakkil had a mukatab who died at Makka and left (enough to pay) the rest of his kitaba and he owed some debts to people. He also left a daughter. The governor of Makka was not certain about how to judge in the case, so he wrote to Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan to ask him about it. Abd al-Malik wrote to him, "Begin with the debts owed to people, and then pay what remains of his kitaba. Then divide what remains of the property between the daughter and the master."
Malik said, "What is done among us is that the master of a slave does not have to give his slave a kitaba if he asks for it. I have not heard of any of the Imams forcing a man to give a kitaba to his slave. I heard that one of the people of knowledge, when someone asked about that and mentioned that Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, said, 'Give them their kitaba, if you know some good in them' (Sura 24 ayat 33) recited these two ayats, 'When you are free of the state of ihram, then hunt for game.' (Sura 5 ayat 3) 'When the prayer is finished, scatter in the land and seek Allah's favour.' " (Sura 62 ayat 10)
Malik commented, "It is a way of doing things for which Allah, the Mighty, the Majestic, has given permission to people, and it is not obligatory for them." Malik said, "I heard one of the people of knowledge say about the word of Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, 'Give them of the wealth which Allah has given you,' that it meant that a man give his slave a kitaba and then reduce the end of his kitaba for him by some specific amount."
Malik said, "This is what I have heard from the people of knowledge and what I see people doing here."
Malik said, "I have heard that Abdullah ibn Umar gave one of his slaves his kitaba for 35,000 dirhams, and then reduced the end of his kitaba by 5,000 dirhams."
Malik said, "What is done among us is that when a master gives a mukatab his kitaba, the mukatab's property goes with him but his children do not go with him unless he stipulates that in his kitaba."
Yahya said, "I heard Malik say that if a mukatab whose master had given him a kitaba had a slave- girl who was pregnant by him, and neither he nor his master knew that on the day he was given his kitaba, the child did not follow him because he was not included in the kitaba. He belonged to the master. As for the slave-girl, she belonged to the mukatab because she was his property."
Malik said that if a man and his wife's son (by another husband) inherited a mukatab from the wife and the mukatab died before he had completed his kitaba, they divided his inheritance between them according to the Book of Allah. If the slave paid his kitaba and then died, his inheritance went to the son of the woman, and the husband had nothing of his inheritance.
Malik said that if a mukatab gave his own slave a kitaba, the situation was looked at. If he wanted to do his slave a favour and it was obvious by his making it easy for him, that was not permitted. If he was giving him a kitaba from desire to find money to pay off his own kitaba, that was permitted for him.
Malik said that if a man had intercourse with a mukataba of his and she became pregnant by him, she had an option. If she liked she could be an umm walad. If she wished, she could confirm her kitaba. If she did not conceive, she still had her kitaba.
Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us about a slave who is owned by two men is that one of them does not give a kitaba for his share, whether or not his companion gives him permission to do so, unless they both write the kitaba together, because that alone would effect setting him free. If the slave were to fulfil what he had agreed on to free half of himself, and then the one who had given a kitaba for half of him was not obliged to complete his setting free, that would be in opposition to the words of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. 'If someone frees his share in a slave and has enough money to cover the full price of the slave, justly evaluated for him, he must give his partners their shares, so the slave is completely free . ' "
Malik said, "If he is not aware of that until the mukatab has met the terms or before he has met them the owner who has written him the kitaba returns what he has taken from the mukatab to him, and then he and his partner divide him according to their original shares and the kitaba is invalid. He is the slave of both of them in his original state."
Malik spoke about a mukatab who was owned by two men and one of them granted him a delay in the payment of the right which he was owed, and the other refused to defer it, and so the one who refused to defer the payment exacted his part of the due. Malik said that if the mukatab then died and left property which did not complete his kitaba, "They divide it according to what they are still owed by him. Each of them takes according to his share. If the mukatab leaves more than his kitaba, each of them takes what remains to them of the kitaba, and what remains after that is divided equally between them. If the mukatab is unable to pay his kitaba fully and the one who did not allow him to defer his payment has exacted more than his associate did, the slave is still divided equally between them, and he does not return to his associates the excess of what he has exacted, because he only exacted his right with the permission of his associate. If one of them remits what is owed to him and then his associate exacts part of what he is owed by him and then the mukatab is unable to pay, he belongs to both of them. And the one who has exacted something does not return anything because he only demanded what he was owed. That is like the debt of two men in one writing against one man. One of them grants him time to pay and the other is greedy and exacts his due. Then the debtor goes bankrupt. The one who exacted his due does not have to return any of what he took."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 39, Hadith 3 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 39, Hadith 1494 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 1077 |
| In-book reference | : Book 43, Hadith 27 |
| English translation | : Book 43, Hadith 1077 |
| Sunnah.com reference | : Book 50, Hadith 10 |
| Arabic/English book reference | : Book 50, Hadith 1214 |
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (ra):
| Reference | : Hadith 10, 40 Hadith an-Nawawi |
| Grade: | Sahih (Al-Albani) | صحيح (الألباني) | حكم : |
| Reference | : Sunan Abi Dawud 1905 |
| In-book reference | : Book 11, Hadith 185 |
| English translation | : Book 10, Hadith 1900 |
Malik said, The best of what I have heard about a mukatab whose master frees him at death, is that the mukatab is valued according to what he would fetch if he were sold. If that value is less than what remains against him of his kitaba, his freedom is taken from the third that the deceased can bequeath. One does not look at the number of dirhams which remain against him in his kitaba. That is because had he been killed, his killer would not be in debt for other than his value on the day he killed him. Had he been injured, the one who injured him would not be liable for other than the blood-money of the injury on the day of his injury. One does not look at how much he has paid of dinars and dirhams of the contract he has written because he is a slave as long as any of his kitaba remains. If what remains in his kitaba is less than his value, only whatever of his kitaba remains owing from him is taken into account in the third of the property of the deceased. That is because the deceased left him what remains of his kitaba and so it becomes a bequest which the deceased made."
Malik said, "The illustration of that is that if the price of the mukatab is one thousand dirhams, and only one hundred dirhams remain of his kitaba, his master leaves him the one hundred dirhams which complete it for him. It is taken into account in the third of his master and by it he becomes free."
Malik said that if a man wrote his slave a kitaba at his death, the value of the slave was estimated. If there was enough to cover the price of the slave in one third of his property, that was permitted for him.
Malik said, "The illustration of that is that the price of the slave is one thousand dinars. His master writes him a kitaba for two hundred dinars at his death. The third of the property of his master is one thousand dinars, so that is permitted for him. It is only a bequest which he makes from one third of his property. If the master has left bequests to people, and there is no surplus in the third after the value of the mukatab, one begins with the mukatab because the kitaba is setting free, and setting free has priority over bequests. When those bequests are paid from the kitaba of the mukatab, they follow it. The heirs of the testator have a choice. If they want to give the people with bequests all their bequests and the kitaba of the mukatab is theirs, they have that. If they refuse and hand over the mukatab and what he owes to the people with bequests they can do that, because the third commences with the mukatab and because all the bequests which he makes are as one."
If the heirs then say, "What our fellow bequeathed was more than one third of his property and he has taken what was not his," Malik said, "His heirs choose. It is said to them, 'Your companion has made the bequests you know about and if you would like to give them to those who are to receive them according to the deceased's bequests, then do so. If not, hand over to the people with bequests one third of the total property of the deceased.' "
Malik continued, "If the heirs surrender the mukatab to the people with bequests, the people with bequests have what he owes of his kitaba. If the mukatab pays what he owes of his kitaba, they take that in their bequests according to their shares. If the mukatab cannot pay, he is a slave of the people with bequests and does not return to the heirs because they gave him up when they made their choice, and because when he was surrendered to the people with bequests, they were liable. If he died, they would not have anything against the heirs. If the mukatab dies before he pays his kitaba and he leaves property which is more than what he owes, his property goes to the people with bequests. If the mukatab pays what he owes, he is free and his wala' returns to the paternal relations of the one who wrote the kitaba for him."
Malik spoke about a mukatab who owed his master ten thousand dirhams in his kitaba, and when he died he remitted one thousand dirhams from it. He said, "The mukatab is valued and his value is taken into consideration. If his value is one thousand dirhams and the reduction is a tenth of the kitaba, that portion of the slave's price is one hundred dirhams. It is a tenth of the price. A tenth of the kitaba is therefore reduced for him. That is converted to a tenth of the price in cash. That is as if he had had all of what he owed reduced for him. Had he done that, only the value of the slave - one thousand dirhams - would have been taken into account in the third of the property of the deceased. If that which he had remitted is half of the kitaba, half the price is taken into account in the third of the property of the deceased. If it is more or less than that, it is according to this reckoning."
Malik said, "When a man reduces the kitaba of his mukatab by one thousand dirhams at his death from a kitaba of ten thousand dirhams, and he does not stipulate whether it is from the beginning or the end of his kitaba, each instalment is reduced for him by one tenth."
Malik said, "If a man remits one thousand dirhams from his mukatab at his death from the beginning or end of his kitaba, and the original basis of the kitaba is three thousand dirhams, the mukatab's cash value is estimated. Then that value is divided. That thousand which is from the beginning of the kitaba is converted into its portion of the price according to its proximity to the term and its precedence and then the thousand which follows the first thousand is according to its precedence also until it comes to its end, and every thousand is paid according to its place in advancing and deferring the term because what is deferred of that is less in respect of its price. Then it is placed in the third of the deceased according to whatever of the price befalls that thousand according to the difference in preference of that, whether it is more or less, then it is according to this reckoning."
Malik spoke about a man who willed a man a fourth of a mukatab or freed a fourth, and then the man died and the mukatab died and left a lot of property, more than he owed. He said, "The heirs of the first master and the one who was willed a fourth of the mukatab are given what they are still owed by the mukatab. Then they divide what is left over, and the one willed a fourth has a third of what is left after the kitaba is paid. The heirs of his master gets two-thirds. That is because the mukatab is a slave as long as any of his kitaba remains to be paid. He is inherited from by the possession of his person."
Malik said about a mukatab whose master freed him at death, "If the third of the deceased will not cover him, he is freed from it according to what the third will cover and his kitaba is decreased according to that. If the mukatab owed five thousand dirhams and his value is two thousand dirhams cash, and the third of the deceased is one thousand dirhams, half of him is freed and half of the kitaba has been reduced for him." Malik said about a man who said in his will, "My slave so-and-so is free and write a kitaba for so-and- so", that the setting free had priority over the kitaba.
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 39, Hadith 15 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3318 |
| In-book reference | : Book 47, Hadith 370 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 3318 |
| Grade: | Da'if (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Sunan Ibn Majah 3859 |
| In-book reference | : Book 34, Hadith 33 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 34, Hadith 3859 |
Another chain reports a similar hadith.
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Sunan Ibn Majah 2858 |
| In-book reference | : Book 24, Hadith 106 |
| English translation | : Vol. 4, Book 24, Hadith 2858 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Sunan Ibn Majah 3956 |
| In-book reference | : Book 36, Hadith 31 |
| English translation | : Vol. 5, Book 36, Hadith 3956 |
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had asked Ibn Shihab whether someone doing itikaf could go into a house to relieve himself, and he said, "Yes, there is no harm in that."
Malik said, "The situation that we are all agreed upon here is that there is no disapproval of anyone doing itikaf in a mosque where jumua is held. The only reason I see for disapproving of doing itikaf in a mosque where jumua is not held is that the man doing itikaf would have to leave the mosque where he was doing itikaf in order to go to jumua, or else not go there at all. If, however, he is doing itikaf in a mosque where jumua is not held, and he does not have to go to jumua in any other mosque, then I see no harm in him doing itikaf there, because Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, says, 'While you are doing itikaf in mosques,' and refers to all mosques in general, without specifying any particular kind."
Malik continued, "Accordingly, it is permissiblefor a man to do itikaf in a mosque where jumua is not held if he does not have to leave it to go to a mosque where jumua is held."
Malik said, "A person doing itikaf should spend the night only in the mosque where he is doing itikaf, except if his tent is in one of the courtyards of the mosque. I have never heard that someone doing itikaf can put up a shelter anywhere except in the mosque itself or in one of the courtyards of the mosque.
Part of what shows that he must spend the night in the mosque is the saying of A'isha, 'When the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was doing itikaf, he would only go into the house to relieve himself.' Nor should he do itikaf on the roof of the mosque or in the minaret."
Malik said, "The person who is going to do itikaf should enter the place where he wishes to do itikaf before the sun sets on the night when he wishes to begin his itikaf, so that he is ready to begin the itikaf at the beginning of the night when he is going to start his itikaf. A person doing itikaf should be occupied with his itikaf, and not turn his attention to other things which might occupy him, such as trading or whatever. There is no harm, however, if some one doing itikaf tells some one to do something for him regarding his estate, or the affairs of his family, or tells someone to sell some property of his, or something else that does not occupy him directly. There is no harm in him arranging for someone else to do that for him if it is a simple matter."
Malik said, "I have never heard any of the people of knowledge mentioning any modification as far as how to do itikaf is concerned. Itikaf is an act of ibada like the prayer, fasting, the hajj, and such like acts, whether they are obligatory or voluntary. Anyone who begins doing any of these acts should do them according to what has come down in the sunna. He should not start doing anything in them that the muslims have not done, whether it is a modification that he imposes on others, or one that he begins doing himself. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, practised itikaf, and the muslims know what the sunna of itikaf is."
Malik said, "Itikaf and jiwar are the same, and Itikaf is the same for a village-dweller as it is for a nomad."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 19, Hadith 3 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 19, Hadith 695 |
Malik said, "The best of what I have heard about a mukatab who injures a man so that blood-money must be paid, is that if the mukatab can pay the blood-money for the injury with his kitaba, he does so, and it is against his kitaba. If he cannot do that, and he cannot pay his kitaba because he must pay the blood-money of that injury before the kitaba, and he cannot pay the blood-money of that injury, then his master has an option. If he prefers to pay the blood-money of that injury, he does so and keeps his slave and he becomes an owned slave. If he wishes to surrender the slave to the injured, he surrenders him. The master does not have to do more than surrender his slave."
Malik spoke about people who were in a general kitaba and one of them caused an injury which entailed blood-money. He said, "If any of them does an injury involving blood-money, he and those who are with him in the kitaba are asked to pay all the blood-money of that injury. If they pay, they are confirmed in their kitaba. If they do not pay, and they are incapable then their master has an option. If he wishes, he can pay all the blood-money of that injury and all the slaves revert to him. If he wishes, he can surrender the one who did the injury alone and all the others revert to being his slaves since they could not pay the blood-money of the injury which their companion caused."
Malik said, "The way of doing things about which there is no dispute among us, is that when a mukatab is injured in some way which entails blood-money or one of the mukatab's children who is written with him in the kitaba is injured, their blood-money is the blood-money of slaves of their value, and what is appointed to them as their blood-money is paid to the master who has the kitaba and he reckons that for the mukatab at the end of his kitaba and there is a reduction for the blood-money that the master has taken for the injury."
Malik said, "The explanation of that is say, for example, he has written his kitaba for three thousand dirhams and the blood-money taken by the master for his injury is one thousand dirhams. When the mukatab has paid his master two thousand dirhams he is free. If what remains of his kitaba is one thousand dirhams and the blood-money for his injury is one thousand dirhams, he is free straightaway. If the blood-money of the injury is more than what remains of the kitaba, the master of the mukatab takes what remains of his kitaba and frees him. What remains after the payment of the kitaba belongs to the mukatab. One must not pay the mukatab any of the blood- money of his injury in case he might consume it and use it up. If he could not pay his kitaba completely he would then return to his master one eyed, with a hand cut off, or crippled in body. His master only wrote his kitaba against his property and earnings, and he did not write his kitaba so that he would take the blood-money for what happened to his child or to himself and use it up and consume it. One pays the blood-money of injuries to a mukatab and his children who are born in his kitaba, or their kitaba is written, to the master and he takes it into account for him at the end of his kitaba."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 39, Hadith 6 |
There are many narrations such as this reported from the Prophet ﷺ mentioning Ar-Ru'yah (seeing Allah) and that the people will see their Lord, and mentioning the Foot and similar to these things. And the chosen approach concerning this with the people of knowledge from the A'immah such as Sufyãn Ath-Thawri, Mãlik bin Anas, Sufyan bin 'Uyainah, Ibn Al Mubãrak, Waki' and other than them, is that they report these narrations then say: "We report these Hadith as they are, and we believe in them, and it is not to be said, 'how?" This is the path and approach which the people of Hadith have chosen - that they report these narrations as they have come, they are believed in, they are not explained,1 doubts are not to be cast upon them, and it is not to be said "how?" - This is the order of the people of knowledge which they chose and took as their approach.
The meaning of his statement in the Hadith: "And He will make them recognize Him" is "He manifests Himself to them in His Glory."
1:That is, their "how" is not to be brought into question.
| Grade: | Sahih. [Abu 'Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan Sahih. (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2557 |
| In-book reference | : Book 38, Hadith 35 |
| English translation | : Vol. 4, Book 12, Hadith 2557 |
| Grade: | [Its isnad is Sahih, al-Bukhari (89) and Muslim (1479)] (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Musnad Ahmad 222 |
| In-book reference | : Book 2, Hadith 139 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafic from Abdullah ibn Umar that a man cursed his wife in the time of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and disowned her child. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, separated them and gave the child to the woman.
Malik said, "Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, said, 'The testimony of men who accuse their wives but do not have any witnesses except themselves is to testify by Allah four times that he is being truthful, and a fifth time, that the curse of Allah will be upon him, if he should be a liar. She will avoid punishment if she testifies by Allah four times that he is a liar, and a fifth time, that the wrath of Allah shall be upon her, if he should be telling the truth. ' "(Sura 24 ayat 6).
Malik said, "The sunna with us is that those who curse each other are never to be remarried. If the man calls himself a liar, (i.e. takes back his accusation), he is flogged with the hadd-punishment, and the child is given to him, and his wife can never return to him. There is no doubt or dispute about this sunna among us. "
Malik said, "If a man separates from his wife by an irrevocable divorce by which he cannot return to her, and then he denies the paternity of the child she is carrying, whilst she claims that he is the father, and it is possible by the timing, that he be so, he must curse her, and the child is not recognised as his."
Malik said, "That is what is done among us, and it is what I have heard from the people of knowledge."
Malik said that a man who accused his wife after he had divorced her trebly while she was pregnant, and he had at first accepted being the father but then claimed that he had seen her committing adultery before he separated from her, was flogged with the hadd-punishment, and did not curse her.
If he denied the paternity of her child after he had divorced her trebly, and he had not previously accepted it, then he cursed her.
Malik said, "This is what I have heard."
Malik said, "The slave is in the same position as the free man as regards making accusations and invoking mutual curses (lian). He acts in the lian as the free man acts although there is no hadd applied for slandering a female-slave."
Malik said, "The muslim slave-girl and the christian and jewish free woman also do lian when a free muslim marries one of them and has intercourse with her. That is because Allah - may He be blessed and Exalted, said in His Book, 'As for those who accuse their wives,' and they are their wives. This is what is done among us.
Malik said that a man who did the lian with his wife, and then stopped and called himself a liar after one or two oaths and he had not cursed himself in the fifth one, had to be flogged with the hadd-punishment, but they did not have to be separated.
Malik said that if a man divorced his wife and then after three months the woman said, "I am pregnant," and he denied paternity, then he had to do lian.
Malik said that the husband of a female slave who pronounced the lian on her and then bought her, was not to have intercourse with her, even if he owned her. The sunna which had been handed down about a couple who mutually cursed each other in the lian was that they were never to return to each other.
Malik said that when a man pronounced the lian against his wife before he had consummated the marriage, she only had half of the bride price.
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 29, Hadith 35 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 29, Hadith 1192 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 2 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 68 |
وإذا أمسى قال: أَمْسَيْـنا وَأَمْسـى المُـلكُ للهِ رَبِّ العـالَمـين ، اللّهُـمَّ إِنِّـي أسْـأَلُـكَ خَـيْرَ هـذهِ اللَّـيْلَة ، فَتْحَهـا ، وَنَصْـرَهـا ، وَنـورَهـا وَبَـرَكَتَـهـا ، وَهُـداهـا ، وَأَعـوذُ بِـكَ مِـنْ شَـرِّ ما فـيهـاِ وَشَـرِّ ما بَعْـدَهـا
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 89 |
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 217 |
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم { قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ الْفَلَقِ * مِن شَرِّ مَا خَلَقَ * وَمِن شَرِّ غَاسِقٍ إِذَا وَقَبَ * وَمِن شَرِّ النَّفَّاثَاتِ فِي الْعُقَدِ * وَمِن شَرِّ حَاسِدٍ إِذَا حَسَدَ }
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم { قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ * مَلِكِ النَّاسِ * إِلَهِ النَّاسِ * مِن شَرِّ الْوَسْوَاسِ الْخَنَّاسِ * الَّذِي يُوَسْوِسُ فِي صُدُورِ النَّاسِ * مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ } (ثلاث مرات)
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 76 |
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ {قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ الْفَلَقِ* مِن شَرِّ مَا خَلَقَ* وَمِن شَرِّ غَاسِقٍ إِذَا وَقَبَ* وَمِن شَرِّ النَّفَّاثَاتِ فِي الْعُقَدِ* وَمِن شَرِّ حَاسِدٍ إِذَا حَسَدَ}
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ {قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ* مَلِكِ النَّاسِ* إِلَهِ النَّاسِ* مِن شَرِّ الْوَسْوَاسِ الْخَنَّاسِ* الَّذِي يُوَسْوِسُ فِي صُدُورِ النَّاسِ* مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ} بَعْدَ كُلِّ صَلاَةٍ.
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 70 |
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Sulayman ibn Yasar said, ''Umar ibn al-Khattab, Uthman ibn Affan, andZayd ibn Thabit gave the grandfather a third with full siblings". Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us and what I have seen the people of knowledge in our city doing is that the paternal grandfather does not inherit anything at all with the father. He is given a sixth as a fixed share with the son and the grandson through a son. Other than that, when the deceased does not leave a mother or a paternal aunt, one begins with whoever has a fixed share, and they are given their shares. If there is a sixth of the property left over, the grandfather is given a sixth as a fixed share."
Malik said, "When someone shares with the grandfather and the full siblings in a specified share, one begins with whoever shares with them of the people of fixed shares. They are given their shares. What is left over after that belongs to the grandfather and the full siblings. Then one sees which is the more favourable of two alternatives for the portion of the grandfather. Either a third is allotted to him and the siblings to divide between them, and he gets a share as if he were one of the siblings, or else he takes a sixth from all the capital. Whichever is the best portion for the grandfather is given to him. What is left after that, goes to the full siblings. The male gets the portion of two females except in one particular case. The division in this case is different from the preceding one. This case is when a woman dies and leaves a husband, mother, full sister and grandfather. The husband gets a half, the mother gets a third, the grandfather gets a sixth, and the full sister gets a half. The sixth of the grandfather and the half of the sister are joined and divided into thirds. The male gets the share of two females. Therefore, the grandfather has two thirds, and the sister has one third."
Malik said, "The inheritance of the half-siblings by the father with the grandfather when there are no full siblings with them, is like the inheritance of the full siblings (in the same situation). The males are the same as their males and the females are the same as their females. When there are both full siblings and half-siblings by the father, the full siblings include in their number the number of half-siblings by the father, to limit the inheritance of the grandfather, i.e., if there was only one full sibling with the grandfather. They would share, after the allotting of the fixed shares, the remainder of the inheritance between them equally. If there were also two half-siblings by the father, their number is added to the division of the sum, which would then be divided four ways. A quarter going to the grandfather and three-quarters going to the full siblings who annex the shares technically allotted to the half-siblings by the father. They do not include the number of half-siblings by the mother, because if there were only half-siblings by the father they would not inherit anything with the grandfather and all the capital would belong to the grandfather, and so the siblings would not get anything after the portion of the grandfather.
"It belongs to the full siblings more than the half-siblings by the father, and the half-siblings by the father do not get anything with them unless the full siblings consist of one sister. If there is one full sister, she includes the grandfather with the half-siblings by her father in the division, however many. Whatever remains for her and these half-siblings by the father goes to her rather than them until she has had her complete share, which is half of the total capital. If there is surplus beyond half of all the capital in what she and the half-siblings by the father acquire it goes to them. The male has the portion of two females. If there is nothing left over, they get nothing."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 27, Hadith 31 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 27, Hadith 1079 |
Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that al-Qasim ibn Muhammad said, ''I heard Abdullah ibn Abbas say, when a man asked him about a man making an advance on some garments and then wanting to sell them back before taking possession of them, 'That is silver for silver,' and he disapproved of it."
Malik said, "Our opinion is - and Allah knows best that was because he wanted to sell them to the person from whom he had bought them for more than the price for which he bought them. Had he sold them to some one other than the person from whom he had purchased them, there would not have been any harm in it."
Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things among us concerning making an advance for slaves, cattle or goods is that when all of what is to be sold is described and an advance is made for them for a date, and the date falls due, the buyer does not sell any of that to the person from whom he has purchased it for more than the price which he advanced for it before he has taken full possession of what he has advanced for. It is usury if he does. If the buyer gives the seller dinars or dirhams and he profits with them, then, when the goods come to the buyer and he does not take them into his possession but sells them back to their owner for more than what he advanced for them, the outcome is that what he has advanced has returned to him and has been increased for him."
Malik said, "If someone advances gold or silver for described animals or goods which are to be delivered before a named date, and the date arrives, or it is before or after the date, there is no harm in the buyer selling those goods to the seller, for other goods, to be taken immediately and not delayed, no matter how extensive the amount of those goods is, except in the case of food because it is not halal to sell it before he has full possession of it. The buyer can sell those goods to some one other than the person from whom he purchased them for gold or silver or any goods. He takes possession of it and does not defer it because if he defers it, that is ugly and there enters into the transaction what is disapproved of:
Malik said, "If someone advances for goods to be delivered after a time, and those goods are neither something to be eaten nor drunk, he can sell them to whomever he likes for cash or goods, before he takes delivery of them, to some one other than the person from whom he purchased them. He must not sell them to the person from whom he bought them except in exchange for goods which he takes possession of immediately and does not defer."
Malik said, "If the delivery date for the goods has not arrived, there is no harm in selling them to the original owner for goods which are clearly different and which he takes immediate possession of and does not defer."
Malik spoke about the case of a man who advanced dinars or dirhams for four specified pieces of cloth to be delivered before a specified time and when the term fell due, he demanded delivery from the seller and the seller did not have them. He found that the seller had cloth but inferior quality, and the seller said that he would give him eight of those cloths. Malik said, "There is no harm in that if he takes the cloths which he offers him before they separate. It is not good if delayed terms enter into the transaction. It is also not good if that is before the end of the term, unless he sells him cloth which is notthetypeof cloth for which he made an advance.
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 31, Hadith 70 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 31, Hadith 1361 |
Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab said, "The first person to deduct zakat from allowances was Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan." (i.e. the deduction being made automatically) .
Malik said, "The agreed sunna with us is that zakat has to be paid on twenty dinars (of gold coin), in the same way as it has to be paid on two hundred dirhams (of silver)."
Malik said, "There is no zakat to pay on (gold) that is clearly less than twenty dinars (in weight) but if it increases so that by the increase the amount reaches a full twenty dinars in weight then zakat has to be paid. Similarly, there is no zakat to pay on (silver) that is clearly less than two hundred dirhams (in weight), but if it increases so that by the increase the amount reaches a full two hundred dirhams in weight then zakat has to be paid. If it passes the full weight then I think there is zakat to pay, whether it be dinars or dirhams." (i.e. the zakat is assessed by the weight and not the number of the coins.)
Malik said, about a man who had one hundred and sixty dirhams by weight, and the exchange rate in his town was eight dirhams to a dinar, that he did not have to pay any zakat. Zakat had only to be paid on twenty dinars of gold or two hundred dirhams.
Malik said, in the case of a man who acquired five dinars from a transaction or in some other way which he then invested in trade, that, as soon as it increased to a zakatable amount and then a year elapsed, he had to pay zakat on it, even if the zakatable amount was reached one day before or one day after the passing of a year. There was then no zakat to pay on it from the day the zakat was taken until a year had elapsed over it.
Malik said, in the similar case of a man who had in his possession ten dinars which he invested in trade and which reached twenty dinars by the time one year had elapsed over them, that he paid zakat on them right then and did not wait until a year had elapsed over them, (counting) from the day when they actually reached the zakatable amount. This was because a year had elapsed over the original dinars and there were now twenty of them in his possession. After that there was no zakat to pay on them from the day the zakat was paid until another year had elapsed over them.
Malik said, "What we are agreed upon (here in Madina) regarding income from hiring out slaves, rent from property, and the sums received when a slave buys his freedom, is that no zakat is due on any of it, whether great or small, from the day the owner takes possession of it until a year has elapsed over it from the day when the owner takes possession of it."
Malik said, in the case of gold and silver which was shared between two co-owners, that zakat was due from any one whose share reached twenty dinars of gold, or two hundred dirhams of silver, and that no zakat was due from anyone whose share fell short of this zakatable amount. If all the shares reached the zakatable amount and the shares were not equally divided, zakat was taken from each man according to the measure of his share. This applied only when the share of each man among them reached the zakatable amount, because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had said, "There is no zakat to pay on less than five awaq of silver."
Malik commented, "This is what I prefer most out of what I have heard about the matter."
Malik said, "When a man has gold and silver dispersed among various people he must add it all up together and then take out the zakat due on the total sum ."
Malik said, "No zakat is due from some one who acquires gold or silver until a year has elapsed over his acquisition from the day it became his."
| USC-MSA web (English) reference | : Book 17, Hadith 7 |
| Arabic reference | : Book 17, Hadith 587 |
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
فأتى الأقرع فقال: أي شيء أحب إليك؟ قال: شعر حسن، ويذهب عني هذا الذى قذرني الناس ، فمسحه فذهب عنه وأعطي شعراً حسناً. قال: فأي المال أحب إليك؟ قال: البقر، فأعطي بقرة حاملاً،وقال بارك الله لك فيها.
فأتي الأعمى فقال: أي شيء أحب إليك؟ قال: أن يرد الله إلي بصري فأبصر الناس، فمسحه فرد الله إليه بصره. قال: فأي المال أحب إليك؟ قال: الغنم، فأعطي شاة والداً. فأنتج هذان وولد هذا، فكان لهذا واد من الإبل، ولهذا واد من البقر، ولهذا واد من الغنم.
ثم إنه أتى الأبرص في صورته وهيئته، فقال له: رجل مسكين وابن سبيل قد انقطعت بي الحبال في سفري، فلا بلاغ لي اليوم إلا بالله ثم بك، أسألك بالذي أعطاك اللون الحسن، والجلد الحسن، والمال، بعيراً أتبلغ به في سفري، فقال: الحقوق كثيرة. فقال : كأني أعرفك، ألم تكن أبرص يقذرك الناس فقيراً، فأعطاك الله ؟! فقال : إنما ورثت هذا المال كابراً عن كابر، فقال: إن كنت كاذباً فصيرك الله إلى ما كنت.
وأتى الأقرع، فقال له مثل ما قال لهذا، ورد عليه مثل ما ردّ هذا، فقال ...
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 65 |
| In-book reference | : Introduction, Hadith 65 |
| Reference | : Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 359 |
| In-book reference | : Book 18, Hadith 7 |
| English translation | : Book 18, Hadith 359 |
وما ندم من استخار الخالق، وشاور المخلوقين المؤمنين وتثبَّت في أمره، فقد قال سبحانه ﴿وَشـاوِرْهُـم في الأمْـرِ فَـإِذا عَـزَمْـتَ فَتَوَكّـلْ عَلـى الله﴾
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 74 |
| Reference | : Hadith 33, 40 Hadith Qudsi |
Khubaib was bought by the sons of Al-Harith bin 'Amir bin Naufal bin 'Abd Manaf. It was Khubaib who had killed Al-Harith in the battle of Badr. Khubaib remained a prisoner with those people for a few days till the sons of Al-Harith resolved to kill him.
When Khubaib (May Allah be pleased with him) got wind of this plot, he borrowed a razor from one of Al- Harith's daughters in order to remove his pubic hair. Her little son crawled towards Khubaib because of her carelessness. Later on, she saw her son on his thigh and the razor was in his hand. She got scared so much that Khubaib noticed the agitation on her face and said: "Are you afraid that I will kill him? No, I will never do that." She later remarked (after Al-Khubaib got martyred): "By Allah! I never saw a prisoner better than Khubaib." She added: "By Allah! I saw him once eating of a bunch of grapes in his hand while he was chained and there was no such fruit at that time in Makkah. Probably it was a boon which Allah bestowed upon Khubaib."
When they took him out of the Haram of Makkah to kill him outside its boundaries, Khubaib requested them to let him offer two Rak'ah of voluntary prayer. They allowed him and he offered two Rak'ah prayer. Then he said: "Had I not apprehended that you would think that I was afraid of death, I would have prolonged the prayer. O Allah! Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them." He then recited these poetic verses:
'I do not care how they kill me as long as I get martyred in the Cause of Allah as a Muslim. I received my death for Allah's sake. If Allah so desires, He will bless, the amputated limbs of the torn body.'
Then the son of Al-Harith killed him. It was Khubaib who set the tradition for any Muslim sentenced to death in captivity to offer two Rak'ah of voluntary prayer. On that day the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) informed his Companions of the martyrdom of Khubaib. Later on, when some disbelievers from Quraish were informed that 'Asim had been martyred, they sent some people to fetch a significant part of his body to ascertain his death. (This was because) 'Asim had killed one of their chiefs. So Allah sent a swarm of wasps, resembling a shady cloud, to hover over the body of 'Asim and to shield him from their messengers, and thus they could not cut off anything from his body.
[Al- Bukhari].
| Reference | : Riyad as-Salihin 1509 |
| In-book reference | : Book 16, Hadith 45 |
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 |
| Grade: | Sahih (Darussalam) [ al-Bukhari (2462) and Muslim (1691). (Darussalam) |
| Reference | : Musnad Ahmad 391 |
| In-book reference | : Book 3, Hadith 1 |
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ {قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ * اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ* لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ* وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ كُفُواً أَحَدٌ}.
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ {قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ الْفَلَقِ* مِن شَرِّ مَا خَلَقَ* وَمِن شَرِّ غَاسِقٍ إِذَا وَقَبَ* وَمِن شَرِّ النَّفَّاثَاتِ فِي الْعُقَدِ* وَمِن شَرِّ حَاسِدٍ إِذَا حَسَدَ}.
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ {قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ* مَلِكِ النَّاسِ* إِلَهِ النَّاسِ* مِن شَرِّ الْوَسْوَاسِ الْخَنَّاسِ* الَّذِي يُوَسْوِسُ فِي صُدُورِ النَّاسِ* مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ} ثُمَّ يَمْسَحُ بِهِمَا مَا اسْتَطَاعَ مِنْ جَسَدِهِ يَبْدَأُ بِهِمَا عَلَى رَأْسِهِ وَوَجْهِهِ وَمَا أَقبَلَ مِنْ جَسَدِهِ
(يفعلُ ذلك ثلاثَ مرَّاتٍ)
| Reference | : Hisn al-Muslim 99 |