Yahya related to me that Malik said, "I consider that if a man dies and he has not paid zakat on his property, then zakat is taken from the third of his property (from which he can make bequests), and the third is not exceeded and the zakat is given priority over bequests. In my opinion it is the same as if he had a debt, which is why I think it should be given priority over bequests." Malik continued, "This applies if the deceased has asked for the zakat to be deducted. If the deceased has not asked for it to be deducted but his family do so then that is good, but it is not binding upon them if they do not do it."

Malik continued, "The sunna which we are all agreed upon is that zakat is not due from someone who inherits a debt (i.e. wealth that was owed to the deceased), or goods, or a house, or a male or female slave, until a year has elapsed over the price realised from whatever he sells (i.e. slaves or a house, which are not zakatable) or over the wealth he inherits, from the day he sold the things, or took possession of them." Malik said, "The sunna with us is that zakat does not have to be paid on wealth that is inherited until a year has elapsed over it."  

مالِكٌ؛ أنَّهُ قالَ: إنَّ الرَّجُلَ إذا هَلَكَ، ولَمْ يُؤْدِّ زَكاةَ مالِهِ، إنِّي أرى أنْ يُؤْخَذَ ذلِكَ مِن ثُلُثِ مالِهِ. ولاَ يُجاوَزُ بِها الثُّلُثُ. وتُبَدَّأ عَلى الوَصايا. وأراها بِمَنزِلَةِ الدَّيْنِ عَلَيْهِ. فَلِذلِكَ رَأيْتُ أنْ تُبَدَّأ عَلى الوَصايا قالَ: وذلِكَ إذا أوْصى بِها المَيِّتُ. قالَ: فَإنْ لَمْ يُوصِ بِذلِكَ المَيِّتُ فَفَعَلَ ذلِكَ أهْلُهُ. فَذلِكَ حَسَنٌ. وإنْ لَمْ يَفْعَلْ ذلِكَ أهْلُهُ. لَمْ يَلْزَمْهُمْ ذلِكَ.

قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: السَّنْةُ عِنْدَنا الَّتِي لاَ اخْتِلاَفَ فِيها، أنَّهُ لاَ تَجِبُ عَلى وارِثٍ زَكاةٌ، فِي مالٍ ورِثَهُ فِي دَيْنٍ، ولاَ عَرْضٍ، ولاَ دارٍ، ولاَ عَبْدٍ، ولاَ ولِيدَةٍ، حَتّى يَحُولَ عَلى ثَمَنِ ما باعَ مِن ذلِكَ، أوِ اقْتَضى، الحَوْلُ، مِن يَوْمَ ما باعَهُ وقَبَضَهُ. قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: السُّنْةُ عِنْدَنا أنَّهُ لاَ تَجِبُ عَلى وارِثٍ، فِي مالٍ ورِثَهُ، الزَّكاةُ. حَتّى يَحُولَ عَلَيْهِ الحَوْلُ.  

Yahya said that Malik said, concerning two associates, "If they share one herdsman, one male animal, one pasture and one watering place then the two men are associates, as long as each one of them knows his own property from that of his companion If someone cannot tell his property apart from that of his fellow, he is not an associate, but rather, a co-owner " Malik said, "It is not obligatory for both associates to pay zakat unless both of them have a zakatable amount (of livestock). If, for instance, one of the associates has forty or more sheep and goats and the other has less than forty sheep and goats, then the one who has forty has to pay zakat and the one who has less does not. If both of them have a zakatable amount (of livestock) then both of them are assessed together (i.e the flock is assessed as one) and both of them have to pay zakat. If one of them has a thousand sheep, or less, that he has to pay zakat on, and the other has forty, or more, then they are associates, and each one pays his contribution according to the number of animals he has - so much from the one with a thousand, and so much from the one with forty. Malik said, "Two associates in camels are the same as two associates in sheep and goats, and, for the purposes of zakat, are assessed together if each one of them has a zakatable amount (of camels). That is because the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, 'There is no zakat on less than five head of camels,' and Umar ibn al-Khattab said, 'On grazing sheep and goats, if they come to forty or more - one ewe.' " Yahya said that Malik said, "This is what I like most out of what I have heard about the matter." Malik said that when Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "Those separated should not be gathered together nor should those gathered together be separated in order to avoid paying zakat," what he meant was the owners of livestock. Malik said, "What he meant when he said, 'Those separated should not be gathered together' is, for instance, that there is a group of three men, each of whom has forty sheep and goats, and each of whom thus has to pay zakat. Then, when the zakat collector is on his way ,they gather their flocks together so that they only owe one ewe between them. This they are forbidden to do. What he meant when he said, 'nor should those gathered together be separated,' is, for instance, that there are two associates, each one of whom has a hundred and one sheep and goats, and each of whom must therefore pay three ewes. Then, when the zakat collector is on his way, they split up their flocks so that they only have to pay one ewe each. This they are forbidden to do. And so it is said, 'Those separated should not be gathered together nor should those gathered together be separated in order to avoid paying zakat.' " Malik said, "This is what I have heard about the matter."  

قالَ يَحْيى: قالَ مالِكٌ: فِي الخَلِيطَيْنِ إذا كانَ الرّاعِي واحِدًا، والفَحْلُ واحِدًا، والمُراحُ واحِدًا، والدَّلْوُ واحِدًا: فالرَّجُلاَنِ خَلِيطانِ. وإنْ عَرَفَ كُلُّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما مالَهُ مِن مالِ صاحِبِهِ قالَ: والَّذِي لاَ يَعْرِفُ مالَهُ مِن مالِ صاحِبِهِ لَيْسَ بِخَلِيطٍ. إنَّما هُوَ شَرِيكٌ. قالَ مالِكٌ: ولاَ تَجِبُ الصَّدَقَةُ عَلى الخَلِيطَيْنِ حَتّى يَكُونَ لِكُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما ما تَجِبُ فِيهِ الصَّدَقَةُ. قالَ مالِكٌ: وتَفْسِيرُ ذلِكَ؛ إذا كانَ لِأحَدِ الخَلِيطَيْنِ أرْبَعُونَ شاةً فَصاعِدًا، ولِلْآخَرِ أقَلُّ مِن أرْبَعِينَ شاةً، كانَتِ الصَّدَقَةُ عَلى الَّذِي لَهُ أرْبَعُونَ شاةً. ولَمْ تَكُنْ عَلى الَّذِي لَهُ أقَلُّ مِن ذلِكَ، صَدَقَةٌ. قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: فَإنْ كانَ لِكُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما ما تَجِبُ فِيهِ الصَّدَقَةُ جُمِعا فِي الصَّدَقَةِ. ووَجَبَتِ الصَّدَقَةُ عَلَيْهِما جَمِيعًا. فَإنْ كانَتْ لِأحَدِهِما ألْفُ شاةٍ، أوْ أقَلُّ مِن ذلِكَ، مِمّا تَجِبُ فِيهِ الصَّدَقَةُ. ولِلْآخَرِ أرْبَعُونَ شاةً أوْ أكْثَرُ، فَهُما خَلِيطانِ. يَتَرادّانِ الفَضْلَ بَيْنَهُما بِالسَّوِيَّةِ. عَلى قَدْرِ عَدَدِ أمْوالِهِما، عَلى الألْفِ بِحِصَّتِها. وعَلى الأرْبَعِينَ بِحِصَّتِها. قالَ، وقالَ مالِكٌ: الخَلِيطانِ فِي الإبِلِ بِمَنزِلَةِ الخَلِيطَيْنِ فِي الغَنَمِ. يُجْمَعانِ فِي الصَّدَقَةِ جَمِيعًا، إذا كانَ لِكُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما ما تَجِبُ فِيهِ الصَّدَقَةُ. وذلِكَ أنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ قالَ: «لَيْسَ فِيما دُونَ خَمْسِ ذَوْدٍ مِنَ الإبِلِ صَدَقَةٌ». وقالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الخَطّابِ: وفِي سائِمَةِ الغَنَمِ إذا بَلَغَتْ أرْبَعِينَ شاةٌ.قالَ يَحْيى: قالَ مالِكٌ: وهذا أحَبُّ ما سَمِعْتُ إلَيَّ فِي هذا. وقالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الخَطّابِ: لاَ يُجْمَعُ بَيْنَ مُتَفَرِّقٍ، ولاَ يُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَ مُجْتَمِعٍ خَشْيَةَ الصَّدَقَةِ. أنَّهُ إنَّما يَعْنِي بِذلِكَ أصْحابَ المَواشِي. قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: وتَفْسِيرُ لاَ يُجْمَعُ بَيْنَ مُتَفَرِّقٍ أنَّهُ يَكُونَ النَّفَرُ الثَّلاَثَةُ الَّذِينَ يَكُونُ لِكُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُمْ أرْبَعُونَ شاةً، وقَدْ وجَبَتْ عَلى كُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُمْ فِي غَنَمِهِ الصَّدَقَةُ. فَإذا أظَلَّهُمُ المُصَدِّقُ جَمَعُوها، لِئَلاَّ يَكُونَ عَلَيْهِمْ فِيها إلاَّ شاةٌ واحِدَةٌ. فَنُهُوا عَنْ ذلِكَ. وتَفْسِيرُ قَوْلِهِ: «ولاَ يُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَ مُجْتَمِعٍ» أنَّ الخَلِيطَيْنِ يَكُونُ لِكُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما مائَةُ شاةٍ وشاةٌ، فَيَكُونُ عَلَيْهِما فِيها ثَلاَثُ شِياهٍ. فَإذا أظَلَّهُما المُصَدِّقُ، فَرَّقا غَنَمَهُما. فَلَمْ يَكُنْ عَلى كُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما إلاَّ شاةٌ واحِدَةٌ. فَنُهِيَ عَنْ ذلِكَ. فَقِيلَ: لاَ يُجْمَعُ بَيْنَ مُتَفَرِّقٍ، ولاَ يُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَ مُجْتَمِعٍ. خَشْيَةَ الصَّدَقَةِ. قالَ: فَهذا الَّذِي سَمِعْتُ فِي ذلِكَ.  

Yahya said that Malik said, "The position with us concerning a man who has zakat to pay on one hundred camels but then the zakat collector does not come to him until zakat is due for a second timeand by that time all his camels have died except five, is that the zakat collector assesses from the five camels the two amounts of zakat that are due from the owner of the animals, which in this case is only two sheep, one for each year. This is because the only zakat which an owner of livestock has to pay is what is due from him on the day that the zakat is (actually) assessed. His livestock may have died or it may have increased, and the zakat collector only assesses the zakat on what he (actually) finds on the day he makes the assessment. If more than one payment of zakat is due from the owner of the livestock, he still only has to pay zakat according to what the zakat collector (actually) finds in his possession, and if his livestock has died, or several payments of zakat are due from him and nothing is taken until all his livestock has died, or has been reduced to an amount below that on which he has to pay zakat, then he does not have to pay any zakat, and there is no liability (on him) for what has died or for the years that have passed.  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِي الرَّجُلِ تَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ الصَّدَقَةُ. وإبِلُهُ مِائَةُ بَعِيرٍ. فَلاَ يَأْتِيهِ السّاعِي حَتّى تَجِبَ عَلَيْهِ صَدَقَةٌ أُخْرى. فَيَأْتِيهِ المُصَدِّقُ وقَدْ هَلَكَتْ إبِلُهُ إلاَّ خَمْسَ ذَوْدٍ قالَ مالِكٌ: يَأْخُذُ المُصَدِّقُ مِنَ الخَمْسِ ذَوْدٍ، الصَّدَقَتَيْنِ اللَّتَيْنِ وجَبَتا عَلى رَبِّ المالِ. شاتَيْنِ: فِي كُلِّ عامٍ شاةٌ. لِأنَّ الصَّدَقَةَ إنَّما تَجِبُ عَلى رَبِّ المالِ يَوْمَ يُصَدِّقُ مالَهُ. فَإنْ هَلَكَتْ ماشِيَتُهُ أوْ نَمَتْ، فَإنَّما يُصَدِّقُ المُصَدِّقُ ما يَجِدُ يَوْمَ يُصَدِّقُ. وإنْ تَظاهَرَتْ عَلى رَبِّ المالِ صَدَقاتٌ غَيْرُ واحِدَةٍ، فَلَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أنْ يُصَدِّقَ إلاَّ ما وجَدَ المُصَدِّقُ عِنْدَهُ. فَإنْ هَلَكَتْ ماشِيَتُهُ أوْ وجَبَتْ عَلَيْهِ فِيها صَدَقاتٌ، فَلَمْ يُؤْخَذْ مِنهُ شَيْءٌ مِنها حَتّى هَلَكَتْ ماشِيَتُهُ كُلُّها، أوْ صارَتْ إلى ما لاَ تَجِبُ فِيهِ الصَّدَقَةُ، فَإنَّهُ لاَ صَدَقَةَ عَلَيْهِ ولاَ ضَمانَ فِيما هَلَكَ. أوْ مَضى مِنَ مالِهِ.  

Malik said, "If a man has four awsuq of dates he has harvested, four awsuq of grapes he has picked, or four awsuq of wheat he has reaped or four awsuq of pulses he has harvested, the different categories are not added together, and he does not have to pay zakat on any of the categ ries - the dates, the grapes, the wheat or the pulses - until any one of them comes to five awsuq using the sa of the Prophet ﷺ as the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, 'There is no zakat (to pay) on anything less than five awsuq of dates. 'lf any of the categories comes to five awsuq, then zakat must be paid. If none of the categories comes to five awsuq, then there is no zakat to pay. The explanation of this is that when a man harvests five awsuq of dates (from his palms), he adds them all together and deducts the zakat from them even if they are all of different kinds and varieties. It is the same with different kinds of cereal, such as brown wheat, white wheat, barley and sult, which are all considered as one category. If a man reaps five awsuq of any of these, he adds it all together and pays zakat on it. If it does not come to that amount he does not have to pay any zakat. It is the same (also) with grapes, whether they be black or red. If a man picks five awsuq of them he has to pay zakat on them, but if they do not come to that amount he does not have to pay any zakat. Pulses also are considered as one category, like cereals, dates and grapes, even if they are of different varieties and are called by different names. Pulses include chick- peas, lentils, beans, peas, and anything which is agreed by everybody to be a pulse. If a man harvests five awsuq of pulses, measuring by the aforementioned sa, the sa of the Prophet ﷺ he collects them all together and must pay zakat on them, even if they are of every kind of pulse and not just one kind." Malik said, ''Umar ibn al-Khattab drew a distinction between pulses and wheat when he took zakat from the Nabatean christians. He considered all pulses to be one category and took a tenth from them, and from cereals and raisins he took a twentieth." Malik said, "If some one asks, 'How can pulses be added up all together when assessing the zakat so that there is just one payment, when a man can barter two of one kind for one of another, while cereals can not be bartered at a rate of two to one?', then tell him, 'Gold and silver are collected together when assessing the zakat, even though an amount of gold dinars can be exchanged for many times tha tamount of silver dirhams.' " Malik said, regarding date palms which are shared equally between two men, and from which eight awsuq of dates are harvested, "They do not have to pay any zakat on them. If one man owns five awsuq of what is harvested from one piece of land, and the other owns four awsuq or less, the one who owns the five awsuq has to pay zakat, and the other one, who harvested four awsuq or less, does not have to pay zakat. This is how things are done whenever there are associates in any crop, whether the crop is grain or seeds that are reaped, or dates that are harvested, or grapes that are picked . Any one of them that harvests five awsuq of dates, or picks five awsuq of grapes, or reaps five awsuq of wheat, has to pay zakat, and whoever's portion is less than five awsuq does not have to pay zakat. Zakat only has to be paid by someone whose harvesting or picking or reaping comes to five awsuq." Malik said, "The sunna with us regarding anything from any of these categories, i.e. wheat, dates, grapes and any kind of grain o rseed, which has had the zakat deducted from it and is then stored by its owner for a number of years after he has paid the zakat on it until he sell sit, is that he does not have to pay any zakat on the price he sells it for until a year has elapsed over it from the day he made the sale, as long as he got it through (chance) acquisition or some other means and it was not intended for trading. Cereals, seeds and trade-goods are the same, in that if a man acquires some and keeps them for a number of years and then sells them for gold or silver, he does not have to pay zakat on their price until a year has elapsed over it from the day of sale. If, however, the goods were intended for trade then the owner must pay zakat on them when he sells them, as long as he has had them for a year from the day when he paid zakat on the property with which he bought them."  

مالِكٌ: إنَّ الرَّجُلَ إذا كانَ لَهُ ما يَجُدُّ مِنهُ أرْبَعَةَ أوْسُقٍ مِنَ التَّمْرِ، أوْ ما يَقْطُفُ مِنهُ أرْبَعَةَ أوْسُقٍ مِنَ الزَّبِيبِ، وما يَحْصُدُ مِنهُ أرْبَعَةَ أوْسُقٍ مِنَ الحِنْطَةِ، وما يَحْصُدُ مِنهُ أرْبَعَةَ أوْسُقٍ مِنَ القِطْنِيَّةِ؛ إنَّهُ لاَ يُجْمَعُ عَلَيْهِ بَعْضُ ذلِكَ إلى بَعْضٍ. وإنَّهُ لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ فِي شَيْءٍ مِن ذلِكَ زَكاةٌ. حَتّى يَكُونَ فِي الصِّنْفِ الواحِدِ مِنَ التَّمْرِ، أوْ فِي الزَّبِيبِ، أوْفِي الحِنْطَةِ، أوْ فِي القِطْنِيَّةِ، ما يَبْلُغُ الصِّنْفُ الواحِدُ مِنهُ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ، بِصاعِ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ. كَما قالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ ﷺ: «لَيْسَ فِيما دُونَ خَمْسَةِ أوْسُقٍ مِنَ التَّمْرِ صَدَقَةٌ». وقالَ: وإنْ كانَ فِي الصِّنْفِ الواحِدِ مِن تِلْكَ الأصْنافِ ما يَبْلُغُ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ، فَفِيهِ الزَّكاةُ. فَإنْ لَمْ يَبْلُغْ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ فَلاَ زَكاةَ فِيهِ. قالَ مالِكٌ: وتَفْسِيرُ ذلِكَ أنْ يَجُدَّ الرَّجُلُ مِنَ التَّمْرِ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ. وإنِ اخْتَلَفَتْ أسْماؤُهُ وألْوانُهُ، فَإنَّهُ يُجْمَعُ بَعْضُهُ إلى بَعْضٍ، ثُمَّ يُؤْخَذُ مِن ذلِكَ الزَّكاةُ. وإنْ لَمْ يَبْلُغْها، فَلاَ زَكاةَ فِيهِ.قال، قالَ مالِكٌ: وكَذلِكَ الحِنْطَةُ كُلُّها. السَّمْراءُ والبَيْضاءُ والشَّعِيرُ والسُّلْتُ، ذلِكَ كُلُّهُ صِنْفٌ واحِدٌ. فَإذا حَصَدَ الرَّجُلُ مِن ذلِكَ كُلِّهِ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ، جُمِعَ عَلَيْهِ بَعْضُ ذلِكَ إلى بَعْضٍ، ووَجَبَتْ فِيهِ الزَّكاةُ. فَإنْ لَمْ تَبْلُغْ ذلِكَ، فَلاَ زَكاةَ فِيهِ. قالَ مالِكٌ: وكَذلِكَ الزَّبِيبُ كُلُّهُ. أسْوَدُهُ وأحْمَرُهُ. فَإذا قَطَفَ الرَّجُلُ مِنهُ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ، وجَبَتْ فِيهِ الزَّكاةُ. وإنْ لَمْ يَبْلُغْ ذلِكَ، فَلاَ زَكاةَ فِيهِ. قالَ مالِكٌ: وكَذلِكَ القِطْنِيَّةُ هِيَ صِنْفٌ واحِدٌ. مِثْلُ الحِنْطَةِ والتَّمْرِ والزَّبِيبِ، وإنِ اخْتَلَفَتْ أسْماؤُها وألْوانُها والقِطْنِيَّةُ: الحِمَّصُ، والعَدَسُ، واللُّوبِيا والجُلْبانُ. وكُلُّ ما ثَبَتَتْ مَعْرِفَتُهُ عِنْدَ النّاسِ أنَّهُ قِطْنِيَّةٌ. فَإذا حَصَدَ الرَّجُلُ مِن ذلِكَ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ بِالصّاعِ الأوَّلِ، صاعِ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ. وإنْ كانَ مِن أصْنافِ القِطْنِيَّةِ كُلِّها، لَيْسَ مِن صِنْفٍ واحِدٍ مِنَ القِطْنِيَّةِ. فَإنَّهُ يُجْمَعُ ذلِكَ بَعْضُهُ إلى بَعْضٍ، وعَلَيْهِ فِيهِ الزَّكاةُ. قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: وقَدْ فَرَّقَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الخَطّابِ بَيْنَ القِطْنِيَّةِ والحِنْطَةِ، فِيما أُخِذَ مِنَ النَّبَطِ. ورَأى أنَّ القِطْنِيَّةَ صِنْفٌ واحِدٌ. فَأخَذَ مِنها العُشْرَ، وأخَذَ مِنَ الحِنْطَةِ والزَّيْتِ نِصْفَ العُشْرِ. قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: فَإنْ قالَ قائِلٌ: كَيْفَ تُجْمَعُ القِطْنِيَّةُ بَعْضُها إلى بَعْضٍ فِي الزَّكاةِ حَتّى تَكُونَ صَدَقَتُها واحِدَةً، والرَّجُلُ يَأْخُذُ مِنها اثْنَيْنِ بِواحِدٍ يَدًا بِيَدٍ، ولاَ يُؤْخَذُ مِنَ الحِنْطَةِ اثْنانِ بِواحِدٍ يَدًا بِيَدٍ؟ قِيلَ لَهُ: فَإنَّ الذَّهَبَ والوَرِقَ يُجْمَعانِ فِي الصَّدَقَةِ. وقَدْ يُؤْخَذُ بِالدِّينارِ أضْعافُهُ فِي العَدَدِ مِنَ الوَرِقِ يَدًا بِيَدٍ. قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: فِي النَّخْلِ يَكُونُ بَيْنَ الرَّجُلَيْنِ، فَيَجُدّانِ مِنها ثَمانِيةَ أوْسُقٍ مِنَ التَّمْرِ: إنَّهُ لاَ صَدَقَةَ عَلَيْهِما فِيها. وإنَّهُ إنْ كانَ لِأحَدِهِما مِنها ما يَجُدُّ مِنهُ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ، ولِلْآخَرِ ما يَجُدُّ أرْبَعَةَ أوْسُقٍ، أوْ أقَلَّ مِن ذلِكَ، فِي أرْضٍ واحِدَةٍ، كانَتِ الصَّدَقَةُ عَلى صاحِبِ الخَمْسَةِ، ولَيْسَ عَلى الَّذِي جَدَّ أرْبَعَةَ أوْسُقٍ أوْ أقَلَّ مِنها، صَدَقَةٌ.قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: وكَذلِكَ العَمَلُ فِي الشُّرَكاءِ كُلِّهِمْ. فِي كُلِّ زَرْعٍ مِنَ الحُبُوبِ كُلِّها تُحْصَدُ، أوْ نَخْلٍ يُجَدُّ، أوْ كَرْمٍ يُقْطَفُ، فَإنَّهُ إذا كانَ كُلُّ رَجُلٍ مِنهُمْ يَجُدُّ مِنَ التَّمْرِ، أوْ يَقْطِفُ مِنَ الزَّبِيبِ، خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ. أوْ يَحْصُدُ مِنَ الحِنْطَةِ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ، فَعَلَيْهِ فِيهِ الزَّكاةُ، ومَن كانَ حَقُّهُ أقَلَّ مِن خَمْسَةِ أوْسُقٍ، فَلاَ صَدَقَةَ عَلَيْهِ. وإنَّما تَجِبُ الصَّدَقَةُ عَلى مَن بَلَغَ جِدادُهُ أوْ قِطافُهُ أوْ حِصادُهُ خَمْسَةَ أوْسُقٍ. قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: والسُّنَّةُ عِنْدَنا، أنَّ كُلَّ ما أُخْرِجَتْ زَكاتُهُ مِن هذِهِ الأصْنافِ كُلِّها، التَّمْرِ والحِنْطَةِ والزَّبِيبِ والحُبُوبِ كُلِّها. ثُمَّ أمْسَكَهُ صاحِبُهُ بَعْدَ أنْ أدّى صَدَقَتَهُ سِنِينَ. ثُمَّ باعَهُ، أنَّهُ لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ فِي ثَمَنِهِ زَكاةٌ، حَتّى يَحُولَ عَلى ثَمَنِهِ الحَوْلُ مِن يَوْمَ باعَهُ. إذا كانَ أصْلُ تِلْكَ الأصْنافِ مِن فائِدَةٍ أوْ غَيْرِها. ولَمْ يَكُنْ لِلتِّجارَةِ. وإنَّما ذلِكَ بِمَنزِلَةِ الطَّعامِ والحُبُوبِ والعُرُوضِ. يُفِيدُها الرَّجُلُ ثُمَّ يُمْسِكُها سِنِينَ. ثُمَّ يَبِيعُها بِذَهَبٍ أوْ ورِقٍ، فَلاَ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِ فِي ثَمَنِها زَكاةٌ حَتّى يَحُولَ عَلَيْها الحَوْلُ مِن يَوْمَ باعَها. فَإنْ كانَ أصْلُ تِلْكَ العُرُوضِ لِلتِّجارَةِ فَعَلى صاحِبِها فِيها الزَّكاةُ حِينَ يَبِيعُها، إذا كانَ قَدْ حَبَسَها سَنَةً، مِن يَوْمَ زَكّى المالَ الَّذِي ابْتاعَها بِهِ.  

Malik said, "The sunna that we are all agreed upon here (in Madina) and which I have heard from the people of knowledge, is that there is no zakat on any kind of fresh (soft) fruit, whether it be pomegranates, peaches, figs or anything that is like them or not like them as long as it is fruit." He continued, "No zakat has to be paid on animal fodder or herbs and vegetables of any kind, and there is no zakat to pay on the price realised on their sale until a year has elapsed over it from the day of sale which counts as the time the owner receives the sum."  

مالِكٌ: أنَّهُ قالَ السُّنَّةُ الَّتِي لاَ اخْتِلاَفَ فِيها عِنْدَنا، والَّذِي سَمِعْتُ مِن أهْلِ العِلْمِ، أنَّهُ لَيْسَ فِي شَيْءٍ مِنَ الفَواكِهِ كُلِّها صَدَقَةٌ. الرُّمّانِ، والفِرْسِكِ، والتِّينِ، وما أشْبَهَ ذلِكَ، وما لَمْ يُشْبِهْهُ. إذا كانَ مِنَ الفَواكِهِ. قالَ: ولاَ فِي القَضْبِ ولاَ البُقُولِ كُلِّها صَدَقَةٌ. ولاَ فِي أثْمانِها إذا بِيعَتْ، صَدَقَةٌ، حَتّى يَحُولَ عَلى أثْمانِها الحَوْلُ مِن يَوْمَ يَبِيعُها، ويَقْبِضُ صاحِبُها ثَمَنَها.  

Yahya said that Malik was asked about whether a man who gave some sadaqa, and then found it being offered back to him for sale by some one other than the man to whom he had given it, could buy it or not, and he said, "I prefer that he leaves it."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سُئِلَ مالِكٌ عَنْ رَجُلٍ تَصَدَّقَ بِصَدَقَةٍ، فَوَجَدَها مَعَ غَيْرِ الَّذِي تَصَدَّقَ بِها عَلَيْهِ، تُباعُ، أيَشْتَرِيها؟ فَقالَ: تَرْكُها أحَبُّ إلَيَّ.  

Malik said, "Payment of all types of kaffara, of zakat al-fitr and of the zakat on grains for which a tenth or a twentieth is due, is made using the smaller mudd, which is the mudd of the Prophet ﷺ except in the case of dhihar divorce, when the kaffara is paid using the mudd of Hisham, which is the larger mudd."  

قالَ مالِكٌ: والكَفّاراتُ كُلُّها، وزَكاةُ الفِطْرِ، وزَكاةُ العُشُورِ، كُلُّ ذلِكَ بِالمُدِّ الأصْغَرِ، مُدِّ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ. إلاَّ الظِّهارَ. فَإنَّ الكَفّارَةَ فِيهِ بِمُدِّ هِشامٍ، وهُوَ المُدُّ الأعْظَمُ.  

Yahya related to me that Malik had seen that the people of knowledge used to like to pay the zakat al-fitr after dawn had broken on the day of the Fitr before they went to the place of prayer. Malik said, "There is leeway in this, if Allah wills, in that it can be paid either before setting out (for the prayer) on the day of Fitr or afterwards."  

مالِكٌ؛ أنَّهُ رَأى أهْلَ العِلْمِ يَسْتَحِبُّونَ أنْ يُخْرِجُوا زَكاةَ -[٤٠٦]- الفِطْرِ، إذا طَلَعَ الفَجْرُ مِن يَوْمِ الفِطْرِ، قَبْلَ أنْ يَغْدُوا إلى المُصَلّى.قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: وذلِكَ واسِعٌ، إنْ شاءَ اللهُ، أنْ يُؤَدُّوا قَبْلَ الغُدُوِّ مِن يَوْمِ الفِطْرِ و بَعْدَهُ.  

Yahya related to me that Malik said, "A man does not have to pay zakat for the slaves of his slaves, or for some one employed by him, or for his wife's slaves, except for anyone who serves him and whose services are indispensable to him, in which case he must pay zakat. He does not have to pay zakat for any of his slaves that are kafir and have not become muslim, whether they be for trade or otherwise."  

قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: لَيْسَ عَلى الرَّجُلِ فِي عَبِيدِ عَبِيدِهِ، ولاَ فِي أجِيرِهِ، ولاَ فِي رَقِيقِ امْرَأتِهِ، إلاَّ ما كانَ مِنهُمْ يَخْدُمُهُ، ولاَ بُدَّ لَهُ مِنهُ. ولَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ زَكاةٌ فِي أحَدٍ مِن رَقِيقِهِ، ما لَمْ يُسْلِمْ. لِتِجارَةٍ كانُوا، أوْ لِغَيْرِ تِجارَةٍ.  

Malik said, "I have heard people of knowledge saying that the kaffara specified by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ for a man who has intercourse with his wife during the day in Ramadan is not due from someone who, on a day when he is making up the fast of Ramadan, breaks his fast by having intercourse with his wife, or whatever. He only has to make up for that day." Malik said, "This is what I like most out of what I have heard about the matter."  

قالَ مالِكٌ: سَمِعْتُ أهْلَ العِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ: لَيْسَ عَلى مَن أفْطَرَ يَوْمًا مِن قَضاءِ رَمَضانَ بِإصابَةِ أهْلِهِ نَهارًا أوْ غَيْرِ ذلِكَ، الكَفّارَةُ الَّتِي تُذْكَرُ عَنْ رَسُولِ اللهِ ﷺ فِي مَن أصابَ أهْلَهُ نَهارًا فِي رَمَضانَ. وإنَّما عَلَيْهِ قَضاءُ ذلِكَ اليَوْمِ. قالَ مالِكٌ: وهذا أحَبُّ ما سَمِعْتُ فِيهِ إلَيَّ.  

Yahya related to me, and I (myself) heard Malik say, "The best that I have heard about some one who has to fast for two consecutive months because of having killed someone by mistake or having pronounced the dhihar form of divorce, becoming very ill and having to break his fast, is that if he recovers from his illness and is strong enough to fast, he must not delay doing so. He continues his fast from where he left off. Similarly, a woman who has to fast because of having killed some one by mistake should not delay resuming her fast when she has become pure after her period. She continues her fast from where she left off. No one who, by the Book of Allah, has to fast for two consecutive months may break his fast except for a reason - illness or menstruation. He must not travel and break his fast." Malik said, "This is the best that I have heard about the matter."  

قالَ يَحْيى، سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: أحْسَنُ ما سَمِعْتُ فِي مَن وجَبَ عَلَيْهِ صِيامُ شَهْرَيْنِ مُتَتابِعَيْنِ، فِي قَتْلِ خَطَإٍ أوْ تَظاهُرٍ، فَعَرَضَ لَهُ مَرَضٌ يَغْلِبُهُ، ويَقْطَعُ عَلَيْهِ صِيامَهُ أنَّهُ إنْ صَحَّ مِن مَرَضِهِ وقَوِيَ عَلى الصِّيامِ، فَلَيْسَ لَهُ أنْ يُؤَخِّرَ ذلِكَ. وهُوَ يَبْنِي عَلى ما قَدْ مَضى مِن صِيامِهِ. وكَذلِكَ المَرْأةُ الَّتِي يَجِبُ عَلَيْها الصِّيامُ فِي قَتْلِ النَّفْسِ إذا حاضَتْ بَيْنَ ظَهْرَيْ صِيامِها، أنَّها إذا طَهُرَتْ، لاَ تُؤَخِّرُ الصِّيامَ. وهِيَ تَبْنِي عَلى ما قَدْ صامَتْ. ولَيْسَ لِأحَدٍ وجَبَ عَلَيْهِ صِيامُ شَهْرَيْنِ مُتَتابِعَيْنِ فِي كِتابِ اللهِ، أنْ يُفْطِرَ إلاَّ مِن عِلَّةٍ، مَرَضٍ، أوْ حَيْضَةٍ. ولَيْسَ لَهُ أنْ يُسافِرَ فَيُفْطِرَ. قالَ مالِكٌ: وهذا أحْسَنُ ما سَمِعْتُ فِي ذلِكَ.  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What I have heard from the people of knowledge is that if a man succumbs to an illness which makes fasting very difficult for him and exhausts him and wears him out, he can break his fast. This is the same as with a sick man in the prayer, who finds standing to be too difficult and exhausting, (and Allah knows better than the slave that it is an excuse for him and that it really cannot be described). If the man is in such a condition he prays sitting, and the deen of Allah is ease. Allah has permitted a traveler to break the fast when traveling, and he has more strength for fasting than a sick man. Allah, the Exalted, says in His book, 'Whoever among you is ill or on a journey (must fast) a number of other days,' and Allah has thus permitted a traveler to break his fast when on a journey, and he is more capable of fasting than a sick man. And this is what I like most of what I have heard and this matter has consensus upon it.  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: الأمْرُ الَّذِي سَمِعْتُ مِن أهْلِ العِلْمِ؛ أنَّ المَرِيضَ إذا أصابَهُ المَرَضُ الَّذِي يَشُقُّ عَلَيْهِ الصِّيامُ مَعَهُ، ويُتْعِبُهُ، ويَبْلُغُ مِنهُ ذلِكَ، فَإنَّ لَهُ أنْ يُفْطِرَ. وكَذلِكَ المَرِيضُ إذا اشْتَدَّ عَلَيْهِ القِيامُ فِي الصَّلاَةِ، وبَلَغَ مِنهُ بِعُذْرِ ذلِكَ مِنَ العَبْدِ، ومِن ذلِكَ ما لاَ تَبْلُغُ صِفَتُهُ. فَإذا بَلَغَ ذلِكَ مِنهُ، صَلّى وهُوَ جالِسٌ. ودِينُ اللهِ يُسْرٌ. وقَدْ أرْخَصَ لِلْمُسافِرِ، فِي الفِطْرِ فِي السَّفَرِ. وهُوَ أقْوى عَلى الصِّيامِ مِنَ المَرِيضِ. قالَ اللهُ فِي كِتابِهِ: ﴿فَمَن كانَ مِنكُم مَرِيضًا أو عَلى سَفَرٍ فَعِدَّةٌ مِن أيّامٍ أُخَرَ﴾ [البقرة ٢: ١٨٤ - ١٨٥] فَأرْخَصَ اللهُ لِلْمُسافِرِ، فِي الفِطْرِ فِي السَّفَرِ. وهُوَ أقْوى عَلى الصِّيامِ مِنَ المَرِيضِ. فَهذا أحَبُّ ما سَمِعْتُ إلَيَّ. وهُوَ الأمْرُ المُجْتَمَعُ عَلَيْهِ.  

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard the people of knowledge telling people not to fast on the day in Shaban when there was doubt (about whether it was Shaban or Ramadan), if they intended by it the fast of Ramadan . They considered that whoever fasted on that day without having seen (the new moon) had to make up that day if it later became clear that it was part of Ramadan. They did not see any harm in voluntary fasting on that day. Malik said, "This is what we do, and what I have seen the people of knowledge in our city doing."  

مالِكٌ؛ أنَّهُ سَمِعَ أهْلَ العِلْمِ يَنْهَوْنَ عَنْ أنْ يُصامَ اليَوْمُ الَّذِي يُشَكُّ فِيهِ مِن شَعْبانَ. إذا نَوى بِهِ صِيامَ رَمَضانَ. ويَرَوْنَ أنَّ عَلى مَن صامَهُ، عَلى غَيْرِ رُؤْيَةٍ، ثُمَّ جاءَ الثَّبْتُ أنَّهُ مِن رَمَضانَ؛ أنَّ عَلَيْهِ قَضاءَهُ. ولاَ يَرَوْنَ، بِصِيامِهِ تَطَوُّعًا، بَأْسًا. قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: وهذا الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا. والَّذِي أدْرَكْتُ عَلَيْهِ أهْلَ العِلْمِ بِبَلَدِنا.  

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the people of knowledge did not disapprove of people fasting using tooth-sticks at any hour of the day in Ramadan, whether at the beginning or the end, nor had he heard any of the people of knowledge disapproving of or forbidding the practice. Yahya said that he heard Malik say, about fasting for six days after breaking the fast at the end of Ramadan, that he had never seen any of the people of knowledge and fiqh fasting them. He said, "I have not heard that any of our predecessors used to do that, and the people of knowledge disapprove of it and they are afraid that it might become a bida and that common and ignorant people might join to Ramadan what does not belong to it, if they were to think that the people of knowledge had given permission for that to be done and were seen doing it. Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "I have never heard any of the people of knowledge and fiqh and those whom people take as an example forbidding fasting on the day of jumua. Fasting on it is good, and I have seen one of the people of knowledge fasting it, and it seemed to me that he was keen to do so."  

مالِكٌ؛ أنَّهُ سَمِعَ أهْلَ العِلْمِ لاَ يَكْرَهُونَ السِّواكَ لِلصّائِمِ فِي رَمَضانَ. فِي ساعَةٍ مِن ساعاتِ النَّهارِ لاَ فِي أوَّلِهِ ولاَ فِي آخِرِهِ. ولَمْ أسْمَعْ أحَدًا مِن أهْلِ العِلْمِ يَكْرَهُ ذلِكَ، ولاَ يَنْهى عَنْهُ. وقالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ، فِي صِيامِ سِتَّةِ أيّامٍ بَعْدَ الفِطْرِ مِن رَمَضانَ: إنَّهُ لَمْ يَرَ أحَدًا مِن أهْلِ العِلْمِ والفِقْهِ يَصُومُها. ولَمْ يَبْلُغْنِي ذلِكَ عَنْ أحَدٍ مِنَ السَّلَفِ. وإنَّ أهْلَ العِلْمِ يَكْرَهُونَ ذلِكَ، ويَخافُونَ بِدْعَتَهُ. وأنْ يُلْحِقَ بِرَمَضانَ ما لَيْسَ مِنهُ، أهْلُ الجَهالَةِ والجَفاءِ. لَوْ رَأوْا فِي ذلِكَ رُخْصَةً عِنْدَ أهْلِ العِلْمِ. ورَأوْهُمْ يَعْمَلُونَ ذلِكَ. وقالَ يَحْيى: وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: لَمْ أسْمَعْ أحَدًا مِن أهْلِ العِلْمِ والفِقْهِ. ومَن يُقْتَدى بِهِ. يَنْهى عَنْ صِيامِ يَوْمِ الجُمُعَةِ. وصِيامُهُ حَسَنٌ. وقَدْ رَأيْتُ بَعْضَ أهْلِ العِلْمِ يَصُومُهُ. وأُراهُ كانَ يَتَحَرّاهُ.  

Malik was asked whether someone who went into a mosque to do itikaf for the last ten days of Ramadan and stayed there for a day or two but then became ill and left the mosque, had to do itikaf for the number of days that were left from the ten, or not, and if he did have to do so, then what month should he do it in, and he replied, "He should make up whatever he has to do of the itikaf when he recovers, whether in Ramadan or otherwise. I have heard that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ once wanted to do itikaf in Ramadan, but then came back without having done so, and then when Ramadan had gone, he did itikaf for ten days in Shawwal. Some one who does itikaf voluntarily in Ramadan and some one who has to do itikaf are in the same position regarding what is halal for them and what is haram. I have not heard that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ ever did itikaf other than voluntarily." Malik said, that if a woman did itikaf and then menstruated during her itikaf, she went back to her house, and, when she was pure again she returned to the mosque, at whatever time it was that she became pure. She then continued her itikaf from where she left off. This was the same situation as with a woman who had to fast two consecutive months, and who menstruated and then became pure. She then continued the fast from where she had left off and did not delay doing so.  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ زِيادٌ: وسُئِلَ مالِكٌ عَنْ رَجُلٍ دَخَلَ المَسْجِدَ لِعُكُوفٍ فِي العَشْرِ الأواخِرِ مِن رَمَضانَ. فَأقامَ يَوْمًا، أوْ يَوْمَيْنِ. ثُمَّ مَرِضَ. فَخَرَجَ مِنَ المَسْجِدِ. أيَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ أنْ يَعْتَكِفَ ما بَقِيَ مِنَ العَشْرِ، إذا صَحَّ، أمْ لاَ يَجِبُ ذلِكَ عَلَيْهِ، وفِي أيِّ شَهْرٍ يَعْتَكِفُ، إنْ وجَبَ ذلِكَ عَلَيْهِ؟ فَقالَ مالِكٌ: يَقْضِي ما وجَبَ عَلَيْهِ مِن عُكُوفٍ. إذا صَحَّ، فِي رَمَضانَ، أوْ غَيْرِهِ. قالَ مالِكٌ وقَدْ بَلَغَنِي أنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ أرادَ العُكُوفَ فِي رَمَضانَ. ثُمَّ رَجَعَ فَلَمْ يَعْتَكِفْ. حَتّى إذا ذَهَبَ رَمَضانُ، اعْتَكَفَ عَشْرًا مِن شَوّالٍ. قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ زِيادٌ، قالَ مالِكٌ والمُتَطَوِّعُ فِي الِاعْتِكافِ، والَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الِاعْتِكافُ، أمْرُهُما واحِدٌ. فِيما يَحِلُّ لَهُما، ويَحْرُمُ عَلَيْهِما. ولَمْ يَبْلُغْنِي أنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ كانَ اعْتِكافُهُ إلاَّ تَطَوُّعًا. قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ زِيادٌ، قالَ مالِكٌ، فِي المَرْأةِ: إنَّها إذا اعْتَكَفَتْ، ثُمَّ حاضَتْ فِي اعْتِكافِها، إنَّها تَرْجِعُ إلى بَيْتِها. فَإذا طَهُرَتْ رَجَعَتْ إلى المَسْجِدِ أيَّةَ ساعَةٍ طَهُرَتْ، ولاَ تُأخِّرُ ذلِكَ، ثُمَّ تَبْنِي عَلى ما مَضى مِنَ اعْتِكافِها. قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ زِيادٌ، قالَ مالِكٌ: ومِثْلُ ذلِكَ، المَرْأةُ، يَجِبُ عَلَيْها صِيامُ شَهْرَيْنِ مُتَتابِعَيْنِ. فَتَحِيضُ، ثُمَّ تَطْهُرُ. فَتَبْنِي عَلى ما مَضى مِن صِيامِها. ولاَ تُؤَخِّرُ ذلِكَ.  

Malik said, "There is no harm in someone who is in itikaf entering into a marriage contract as long as there is no physical relationship. A woman in itikaf may also be betrothed as long as there is no physical relationship. What is haram for someone in itikaf in relation to his womenfolk during the day is haram for him during the night." Yahya said that Ziyad said that Malik said, "It is not halal for a man to have intercourse with his wife while he is in itikaf, nor for him to take pleasure in her by kissing her, or whatever. However, I have not heard anyone disapproving of a man, or woman, in itikaf getting married as long as there is no physical relationship. Marriage is not disapproved of for someone fasting." "There is, however, a distinction between the marriage of someone in itikaf and that of someone who is muhrim, in that some one who is muhrim can eat, drink, visit the sick and attend funerals, but cannot put on perfume, whilst a man or woman in itikaf can put on oil and perfume and groom their hair, but cannot attend funerals or pray over the dead or visit the sick. Thus their situations with regard to marriage are different." "This is the sunna as it has come down to us regarding marriage for those who are muhrim, doing itikaf, or fasting.  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ زِيادٌ، قالَ مالِكٌ: لاَ بَأْسَ بِنِكاحِ المُعْتَكِفِ نِكاحَ المِلْكِ. ما لَمْ يَكُنِ المَسِيسُ. والمَرْأةُ المُعْتَكِفَةُ أيْضًا، تُنْكَحُ نِكاحَ الخِطْبَةِ. ما لَمْ يَكُنِ المَسِيسُ. قالَ: ويَحْرُمُ عَلى المُعْتَكِفِ مِن أهْلِهِ بِاللَّيْلِ، ما يَحْرُمُ عَلَيْهِ مِنهُمْ بِالنَّهارِ. قالَ مالِكٌ: ولاَ يَحِلُّ لِرَجُلٍ أنْ يَمَسَّ امْرَأتَهُ وهُوَ مُعْتَكِفٌ. ولاَ يَتَلَذَّذُ مِنها بِشَيْءٍ، بِقُبْلَةٍ، ولاَ غَيْرِها. قالَ زِيادٌ، قالَ مالِكٌ: ولَمْ أسْمَعْ أحَدًا يَكْرَهُ لِلْمُعْتَكِفِ، ولاَ لِلْمُعْتَكِفَةِ أنْ يَنْكِحا فِي اعْتِكافِهِما. ما لَمْ يَكُنِ المَسِيسُ. ولاَ يُكْرَهُ لِلصّائِمِ أنْ يَنْكِحَ فِي صِيامِهِ. وفَرْقٌ بَيْنَ نِكاحِ المُعْتَكِفِ، وبَيْنَ نِكاحِ المُحْرِمِ. أنَّ المُحْرِمَ يَأْكُلُ، ويَشْرَبُ، ويَعُودُ المَرِيضَ، ويَشْهَدُ الجَنائِزَ، ولاَ يَتَطَيَّبُ. [والمُعْتَكِفُ] والمُعْتَكِفَةُ، يَدَّهِنانِ، ويَتَطَيَّبانِ، ويَأْخُذُ كُلُّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما مِن شَعَرِهِ، ولاَ يَشْهَدانِ الجَنائِزَ، ولاَ يُصَلِّيانِ عَلَيْها، ولاَ يَعُودانِ المَرْضى. فَأمْرُهُما فِي النِّكاحِ مُخْتَلِفٌ. قالَ زِيادٌ، قالَ مالِكٌ: وذلِكَ لِما مَضى مِنَ السُّنَّةِ، فِي نِكاحِ المُحْرِمِ، والمُعْتَكِفِ، والصّائِمِ.  

Malik said that he meant someone who, when he prostrated, kept his body close to the ground.  

قالَ: يَعْنِي الَّذِي يَسْجُدُ ولاَ يَرْتَفِعُ عَنِ الأرْضِ يَسْجُدُ وهُوَ لاَصِقٌ بِالأرْضِ.  

Malik said, "In my opinion, and Allah knows best, nothing is taken from what comes out of mines until what comes out of them reaches a value of twenty gold dinars or two hundred silver dirhams. When it reaches that amount there is zakat to pay on it where it is on the spot. Zakat is levied on anything over that, according to how much of it there is as long as there continues to be a supply from the mine. If the vein runs out, and then after a while more becomes obtainable, the new supply is dealt with in the same way as the first, and payment of zakat on it is begun on it as it was begun on the first.

Malik said, "Mines are dealt with like crops, and the same procedure is applied to both. Zakat is deducted from what comes out of a mine on the day it comes out, without waiting for a year, just as a tenth is taken from a crop at the time it is harvested, without waiting for a year to elapse over it."  

قالَ مالِكٌ: أُرى، - واللهُ أعْلَمُ - أنْ لاَ يُؤْخَذُ مِنَ المَعادِنِ مِمّا يَخْرُجُ مِنها شَيْءٌ، حَتّى يَبْلُغَ ما يَخْرُجُ مِنها قَدْرَ عِشْرِينَ دِينارًا عَيْنًا، أوْ مِائَتَيْ دِرْهَمٍ. فَإذا بَلَغَ ذلِكَ، فَفِيهِ الزَّكاةُ مَكانَهُ. وما زادَ عَلى ذلِكَ، أُخِذَ مِنهُ بِحِسابِ ذلِكَ، ما دامَ فِي المَعْدِنِ نَيْلٌ. فَإنِ انْقَطَعَ عِرْقُهُ، ثُمَّ جاءَ بَعْدَ ذلِكَ نَيْلٌ، فَهُوَ مِثْلُ الأوَّلِ تَبْتَدِأُ فِيهِ الزَّكاةُ. كَما ابْتُدِئَتْ فِي الأوَّلِ.

قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: والمَعْدِنُ بِمَنزِلَةِ الزَّرْعِ. يُؤْخَذُ مِنهُ مِثْلُ ما يُؤْحَذُ مِنَ الزَّرْعِ يُؤْخَذُ مِنهُ إذا خَرَجَ مِنَ المَعْدِنِ مِن يَوْمِهِ ذلِكَ. ولاَ يُنْتَظَرُ بِهِ الحَوْلُ. كَما يُؤْخَذُ مِنَ الزَّرْعِ، إذا حُصِدَ، العُشْرُ. ولاَ يُنْتَظَرُ أنْ يَحُولَ عَلَيْهِ الحَوْلُ.  

Malik said, "The position which we are agreed upon, and which I have heard the people of knowledge mentioning, is that rikaz refers to treasure which has been found which was buried during the jahiliyya, as long as neither capital is required, nor expense, great labour or inconvenience incurred in recovering it. If capital is required or great labour is incurred, or on one occasion the mark is hit and on another it is missed, then it is not rikaz."  

قالَ، قالَ مالِكٌ: الأمْرُ الَّذِي لاَ اخْتِلاَفَ فِيهِ عِنْدَنا. والَّذِي سَمِعْتُ مِن أهْلِ العِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ: إنَّ الرِّكازَ إنَّما هُوَ دَفْنٌ يُوجَدُ مِن دَفْنِ الجاهِلِيَّةِ. ما لَمْ يُطْلَبْ بِمالٍ، ولَمْ تُتَكَلَّفْ فِيهِ نَفَقَةٌ، ولاَ كَبِيرُ عَمَلٍ، ولاَ مَؤُونَةٌ. فَأمّا ما طُلِبَ بِمالٍ، وتُكُلِّفَ فِيهِ كَبِيرُ عَمَلٍ، فَأُصِيبَ مَرَّةً، وأُخْطِىءَ مَرَّةً، فَلَيْسَ بِرِكازٍ.  

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard the people of knowledge say, "Women do not have to raise their voices when they are doing talbiya, and a woman should only speak loudly enough to hear herself." Malik said, "Some one who is in ihram should not raise his voice when doing talbiya if he is in a mosque where there are groups of people. He should only speak loudly enough for himself and those who are near him to be able to hear, except in the Masjid alHaram and the mosque at Mina, where he should raise his voice." Malik said, "I have heard some of the people of knowledge recommending (people to do) talbiya at the end of every prayer and at every rise on the route."  

مَالِكٌ ؛ أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ أَهْلَ الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ: لَيْسَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ رَفْعُ الصَّوْتِ بِالتَّلْبِيَةِ. لِتُسْمِعِ الْمَرْأَةُ نَفْسَهَا۔ قَالَ يَحْيَى، قَالَ مَالِكٌ: لَا يَرْفَعُ الْمُحْرِمُ صَوْتَهُ بِالْإِهْلَالِ فِي مَسَاجِدِ الْجَمَاعَاتِ يُسْمِعُ نَفْسَهُ، وَمَنْ يَلِيهِ. إِلَاّ فِي الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ، وَمَسْجِدِ مِنًى، فَإِنَّهُ يَرْفَعُ صَوْتَهُ فِيهِمَا۔ قَالَ مَالِكٌ : سَمِعْتُ بَعْضَ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ يَسْتَحِبُّ التَّلْبِيَةَ دُبُرَ كُلِّ صَلَاةٍ، وَعَلَى كُلِّ شَرَفٍ مِنَ الْأَرْضِ۔  

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard the people of knowledge say, "If someone goes into ihram to do hajj on its own, he cannot then go into ihram to do umra.'' Malik said, "This is what I have found the people of knowledge in our city doing."  

مَالِكٌ ؛ أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ أَهْلَ الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ: مَنْ أَهَلَّ بِحَجٍّ مُفْرَدٍ، ثُمَّ بَدَا لَهُ أَنْ يُهِلَّ بَعْدُ بِعُمْرَةٍ، فَلَيْسَ لَهُ ذلِكَ۔ قَالَ مَالِكٌ : وَذلِكَ الَّذِي أَدْرَكْتُ عَلَيْهِ أَهْلَ الْعِلْمِ بِبَلَدِنَا۔  

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard some of the people of knowledge say, "If someone goes into ihram to do umra and then wants to go into ihram to do hajj as well, he can do so, as long as he has not done tawaf of the House and s'ay between Safa and Marwa. This is what Abdullah ibn 'Umar did when he said, 'If I am blocked from the House we shall do what we did when we were with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.' He then turned to his companions and said, 'It is the same either way. I call you to witness that I have decided in favour of hajj and umra together. ' " Malik said, "The companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ went into ihram to do umra in the year of the farewell hajj, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to them, 'Anyone that has a sacrificial animal with him should go into ihram to do hajj and umra together, and he should not come out of ihram until he has finished both.' "  

null null  

Malik said, "Someone who does umra in Shawwal, Dhu'l-Qada or Dhu'l-Hijja and then goes back to his people, and then returns and does hajj in that same year does not have to sacrifice an animal. Sacrificing an animal is only incumbent on some one who does umra in the months of hajj, and then stays in Makka and then does hajj. A person not from Makka who moves to Makka and establishes his home there and does umra in the months of the hajj and then begins his hajj there is not doing tamattu. He does not have to sacrifice an animal nor does he have to fast. He is in the same position as the people of Makka if he is one of those who are living there." Malik was asked whether a man from Makka who had gone to live in another town or had been on a journey and then returned to Makka with the intention of staying there, regardless of whether he had a family there or not, and entered it to do umra in the months of the hajj, and then began his hajj there, beginning his umra at the miqat of the Prophet ﷺ or at a place nearer than that, was doing tamattu or not? Malik answered, "He does not have to sacrifice an animal or fast as someone who is doing tamattu has to do. This is because Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, says in His Book, 'That is for someone whose family are not present at Masjid al-Haram. '  

قَالَ يَحْيَى، قَالَ مَالِكٌ: مَنِ اعْتَمَرَ فِي شَوَّالٍ، أَوْ ذِي الْقَعْدَةِ، أَوْ ذِي الْحِجَّةِ، ثُمَّ رَجَعَ إِلَى أَهْلِهِ، ثُمَّ حَجَّ مِنْ عَامِهِ ذلِكَ فَلَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ هَدْيٌ. إِنَّمَا الْهَدْيُ عَلَى مَنِ اعْتَمَرَ فِي أَشْهُرِ الْحَجِّ. ثُمَّ أَقَامَ حَتَّى الْحَجِّ. ثُمَّ حَجَّ قَالَ مَالِكٌ: وَكُلُّ مَنِ انْقَطَعَ إِلَى مَكَّةَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْآفَاقِ، وَسَكَنَهَا، ثُمَّ اعْتَمَرَ فِي أَشْهُرِ الْحَجِّ. ثُمَّ أَنْشَأَ الْحَجَّ مِنْهَا، فَلَيْسَ بِمُتَمَتِّعٍ. وَلَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ هَدْيٌ، وَلَا صِيَامٌ. وَهُوَ بِمَنْزِلَةِ أَهْلِ مَكَّةَ، إِذَا كَانَ مِنْ سَاكِنِيهَا. وَسُئِلَ مَالِكٌ عَنْ رَجُلٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ مَكَّةَ خَرَجَ إِلَى الرِّبَاطِ، أَوْ إِلَى سَفَرٍ مِنَ الْأَسْفَارِ، ثُمَّ رَجَعَ إِلَى مَكَّةَ. وَهُوَ يُرِيدُ الْإِقَامَةَ بِهَا. كَانَ لَهُ أَهْلٌ بِمَكَّةَ، أَوْ لَا أَهْلَ لَهُ بِهَا. فَدَخَلَهَا بِعُمْرَةٍ فِي أَشْهُرِ الْحَجِّ، ثُمَّ أَنْشَأَ الْحَجَّ، وَكَانَتْ عُمْرَتُهُ الَّتِي دَخَلَ بِهَا مِنْ مِيقَاتِ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ، أَوْ دُونَهُ. أَمُتَمَتِّعٌ مَنْ كَانَ عَلَى تِلْكَ الْحَالَةِ؟ فَقَالَ مَالِكٌ: لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ مَا عَلَى الْمُتَمَتِّعِ مِنَ الْهَدْيِ، أَوِ الصِّيَامِ. وَذلِكَ أَنَّ اللهَ ﷻ، يَقُولُ فِي كِتَابِهِ: ﴿ذَلِكَ لِمَن لَمْ يَكُنْ أَهلُهُ حَاضِرِي ⦗٥٠٢⦘ المَسجِدِ الحَرَامِ﴾ [البقرة ٢: ١٩٦]  

Malik said, "It is not halal to eat any game that has been hunted in the Haram, or has had a dog set after it in the Haram and then been killed outside the Haram. Anyone that does that has to pay a forfeit for what has been hunted. However, some one that sets his dog after game outside the Haram and then follows it until it is hunted down in the Haram does not have to pay any forfeit, unless he set the dog after the game near to the Haram. The game should not be eaten, however. If he set the dog loose near the Haram then he has to pay a forfeit for the game."  

قَالَ مَالِكٌ: كُلُّ شَيْءٍ صِيدَ فِي الْحَرَمِ، أَوْ أُرْسِلَ عَلَيْهِ كَلْبٌ فِي الْحَرَمِ، فَقُتِلَ ذلِكَ الصَّيْدُ فِي الْحِلِّ. فَإِنَّهُ لَا يَحِلُّ أَكْلُهُ. وَعَلَى مَنْ فَعَلَ ذلِكَ، جَزَاءُ ذلِكَ الصَّيْدِ۔ فَأَمَّا الَّذِي يُرْسِلُ كَلْبَهُ عَلَى الصَّيْدِ فِي الْحِلِّ. فَيَطْلُبُهُ حَتَّى يَصِيدَهُ فِي الْحَرَمِ. فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُؤْكَلُ، وَلَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ فِي ذلِكَ جَزَاءٌ. إِلَاّ أَنْ يَكُونَ أَرْسَلَهُ عَلَيْهِ، وَهُوَ قَرِيبٌ مِنَ الْحَرَمِ. فَإِنْ أَرْسَلَهُ قَرِيبًا مِنَ الْحَرَمِ، فَعَلَيْهِ جَزَاؤُهُ  

Malik said, "Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, says, 'O you who trust, do not kill game while you are in ihram. Whoever of you kills game intentionally has to pay a forfeit commensurate with what he has killed in cattle which two men from among you shall judge, a sacrificial animal which reaches the Kaba, or else he makes a kaffara of either feeding poor people or the equivalent of that in fasting, so that he may taste the consequences of what he has done.' " (Sura 5 ayat 95). Malik said, "Someone who hunts game when he is not in ihram and then kills it while he is in ihram is in the same position as someone who buys game while he is in ihram and then kills it. Allah has forbidden killing it, and so a man who does so has to pay a forfeit for it. The position that we go by in this matter is that a forfeit is assessed for anyone who kills game while he is in ihram." Yahya said that Malik said, "The best that I have heard about someone who kills game and is assessed for it is that the game which he has killed is assessed and its value in food is estimated and with that food he feeds each poor man a mudd, or fasts a day in place of each mudd. The number of poor men is considered, and if it is ten then he fasts ten days, and if it is twenty he fasts twenty days, according to how many people there are to be fed, even if there are more than sixty." Malik said, "I have heard that a forfeit is assessed for someone who kills game in the Haram while he is not in ihram in the same way that it is assessed for some one who kills game in the Haram while he is in ihram ."  

قَالَ يَحْيَى، قَالَ مَالِكٌ: قَالَ اللهُ،: ﴿يّا أّيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لا تَقْتُلُوا الصَّيدَ وَأَنْتُمْ حُرُمٌ وَمَن قَتَلَهُ مِنْكُم مُتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَاءٌ مِثْلُ مَا قَتَلَ مِنَ النَّعَمِ يَحْكُمُ بِهِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِنْكُمْ هَديًا بَالِغَ الكَعْبَةِ أَو كَفَّارَةٌ طَعَامُ مَسَاكِينَ أَو عَدْلُ ذَلِكَ صِيَامًا لِيَذُوقَ وَبَالَ أَمْرِهِ﴾ [المائدة ٥: ٩٥]، قَالَ مَالِكٌ: فَالَّذِي يَصِيدُ الصَّيْدَ وَهُوَ حَلَالٌ، ثُمَّ يَقْتُلُهُ وَهُوَ مُحْرِمٌ. بِمَنْزِلَةِ الَّذِي يَبْتَاعُهُ وَهُوَ مُحْرِمٌ، ثُمَّ يَقْتُلُهُ. وَقَدْ نَهَى الله عَنْ قَتْلِهِ. فَعَلَيْهِ جَزَاؤُهُ. قَالَ مَالِكٌ: وَالْأَمْرُ عِنْدَنَا أَنَّهُ مَنْ أَصَابَ الصَّيْدَ وَهُوَ مُحْرِمٌ حُكِمَ عَلَيْهِ. قَالَ مَالِكٌ: أَحْسَنُ مَا سَمِعْتُ فِي الَّذِي يَقْتُلُ الصَّيْدَ، فَيُحْكَمُ عَلَيْهِ فِيهِ، أَنْ يُقَوَّمَ الصَّيْدُ الَّذِي أَصَابَ، فَيُنْظَرَ كَمْ ثَمَنُهُ مِنَ الطَّعَامِ، فَيُطْعِمَ كُلَّ مِسْكِينٍ مُدًّا. أَوْ يَصُومَ مَكَانَ كُلِّ مُدٍّ يَوْمًا. وَيُنْظَرَ كَمْ عِدَّةُ الْمَسَاكِينِ. فَإِنْ كَانُوا عَشَرَةً، صَامَ عَشَرَةَ أَيَّامٍ. وَإِنْ كَانُوا عِشْرِينَ مِسْكِينًا، صَامَ عِشْرِينَ يَوْمًا. عَدَدَهُمْ مَا كَانُوا، وَإِنْ كَانُوا أَكْثَرَ مِنْ سِتِّينَ مِسْكِينًا. قَالَ يَحْيَى، قَالَ مَالِكٌ: سَمِعْتُ أَنَّهُ يُحْكَمُ عَلَى مَنْ قَتَلَ الصَّيْدَ فِي الْحَرَمِ وَهُوَ حَلَالٌ، بِمِثْلِ مَا يُحْكَمُ بِهِ عَلَى الْمُحْرِمِ، الَّذِي يَقْتُلُ الصَّيْدَ فِي الْحَرَمِ وَهُوَ مُحْرِمٌ  

Yahya related to me that Malik said, "Someone whose passage to the House is blocked by an enemy is freed from every restriction of ihram, and should sacrifice his animal and shave his head wherever he has been detained, and there is nothing for him to make up afterwards." Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that when the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and his companions came out of ihram at al-Hudaybiya they sacrificed their sacrificial animals and shaved their heads, and were freed from all the restrictions of ihram without having done tawaf of the House and without their sacrificial animals reaching the Kaba. There is nothing known about the Messenger of Allah ﷺ ever telling any of his companions, or anybody else that was with him, to make up for anything they had missed or to go back to doing anything they had not finished doing.  

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ حَلَّ هُوَ، وَأَصْحَابُهُ بِالْحُدَيْبِيَةِ. فَنَحَرُوا الْهَدْيَ. وَحَلَقُوا رُؤُوسَهُمْ. وَحَلُّوا مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَبْلَ أَنْ يَطُوفُوا بِالْبَيْتِ. وَقَبْلَ أَنْ يَصِلَ إِلَيْهِ الْهَدْيُ. ثُمَّ لَمْ نَعْلَمْ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ أَمَرَ أَحَدًا مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ، وَلَا مِمَّنْ كَانَ مَعَهُ، أَنْ يَقْضُوا شَيْئًا، وَلَا يَعُودُوا لِشَيْءٍ.  

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard the people of knowledge say, "Someone who dedicates a sacrificial animal for compensation or as part of the hajj should not eat from it."  

وَحَدَّثَنِي عَنْ مَالِكٍ أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ أَهْلَ الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ لاَ يَأْكُلُ صَاحِبُ الْهَدْىِ مِنَ الْجَزَاءِ وَالنُّسُكِ  

Malik said, "Someone who has a nosebleed on the day of jumua while the imam is giving the khutba and he leaves and does not come back until the imam has finished the prayer, should pray four rakas.''

Malik said that someone who prayed a raka with the imam on the day of jumua, then had a nosebleed and left and came back and the imam had prayed both rakas, should complete the prayer with another raka as long as he had not spoken.

Malik said, "If some one has a nosebleed, or something happens to him and he has no alternative but to leave, he does not have to ask permission of the imam if he wants to leave on the day of jumua."  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: مَن رَعَفَ يَوْمَ الجُمُعَةِ، والإمامُ يَخْطُبُ، فَخَرَجَ فَلَمْ يَرْجِعْ، حَتّى فَرَغَ الإمامُ مِن صَلاَتِهِ. فَإنَّهُ يُصَلِّي أرْبَعًا.

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ، فِي الَّذِي يَرْكَعُ رَكْعَةً مَعَ الإمامِ يَوْمَ الجُمُعَةِ، ثُمَّ يَرْعُفُ فَيَخْرُجُ، فَيَأْتِي وقَدْ صَلّى الإمامُ الرَّكْعَتَيْنِ كِلْتَيْهِمِا: أنَّهُ يَبْنِي بِرَكْعَةٍ أُخْرى ما لَمْ يَتَكَلَّمْ.

قالَ مالِكٌ: لَيْسَ عَلى مَن رَعَفَ، أوْ أصابَهُ أمْرٌ لاَ بُدَّ لَهُ مِنَ الخُرُوجِ، أنْ يَسْتَأْذِنَ الإمامَ يَوْمَ الجُمُعَةِ، إذا أرادَ أنْ يَخْرُجَ.  

Malik said, "If the imam stops off on a journey in a town where jumua is obligatory and he gives a khutba and takes the jumua prayer for them, then the people of the town and any other people present do the jumua prayer with him."

Malik said, "If the imam gathers people for prayer while he is travelling in a town where the jumua prayer is not obligatory, then there is no jumua for him, nor for the people of the town, nor for anyone else who joins them for the prayer in congregation, and the people of the town and anyone else who is not travelling should complete the prayer."

Malik added, "A traveller does not have to do jumua "  

قالَ يَحْيى: قالَ مالِكٌ: وإذا نَزَلَ الإمامُ بِقَرْيَةٍ تَجِبُ فِيها الجُمُعَةُ، والإمامُ مُسافِرٌ. فَخَطَبَ وجَمَّعَ بِهِمْ، فَإنَّ أهْلَ تِلْكَ القَرْيَةِ وغَيْرَهُمْ يُجَمِّعُونَ مَعَهُ.

وقالَ مالِكٌ: وإنْ جَمَّعَ الإمامُ وهُوَ مُسافِرٌ، بِقَرْيَةٍ لاَ تَجِبُ فِيها الجُمُعَةُ، فَلاَ جُمُعَةَ لَهُ، ولاَ لِأهْلِ تِلْكَ القَرْيَةِ. ولاَ لِمَن جَمَّعَ مَعَهُمْ مِن غَيْرِهِمْ. ولْيُتْمِمْ أهْلُ تِلْكَ القَرْيَةِ وغَيْرُهُمْ، مِمَّنْ لَيْسَ بِمُسافِرٍ، الصَّلاَةَ.

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: ولاَ جُمُعَةَ عَلى مُسافِرٍ.

(with regards to above) Malik said, "I believe that was during rain."  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: أُرى ذلِكَ كانَ فِي مَطَرٍ.  

Malik said, "I do not consider that his words, 'has not discharged anything' refer to anything other than the discharges that break wudu."  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: لاَ أرى قَوْلَهُ: ما لَمْ يُحْدِثْ، إلاَّ الإحْداثَ الَّذِي يَنْقُضُ الوُضُوءَ.  

Yahya related to me that Malik said, "The sunna concerning the time of prayer on the ids of Fitr and Adha - and there is no disagreement amongst us about it - is that the imam leaves his house and as soon as he has reached the place of prayer the prayer falls due."

Yahya said that Malik was asked whether a man who prayed with the imam could leave before the khutba, and he said, "He should not leave until the imam leaves."  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: مَضَتِ السُّنَّةُ الَّتِي لاَ اخْتِلاَفَ فِيها عِنْدَنا، فِي وقْتِ الفِطْرِ والأضْحى، أنَّ الإمامَ يَخْرُجُ مِن مَنزِلِهِ قَدْرَ ما يَبْلُغُ مُصَلاَّهُ، وقَدْ حَلَّتِ الصَّلاَةُ.

قالَ يَحْيى: وسُئِلَ مالِكٌ عَنْ رَجُلٍ صَلّى مَعَ الإمامِ يَوْمَ الفِطْرِ، هَلْ لَهُ أنْ يَنْصَرِفَ قَبْلَ أنْ يَسْمَعَ الخُطْبَةَ؟ فَقالَ: لاَ يَنْصَرِفُ حَتّى يَنْصَرِفَ الإمامُ.  

Malik said that Nafi said, "I do not believe that Abdullah ibn Umar related it from anyone other than the Messenger of Allah ﷺ."  

قالَ يَحْيى، قالَ مالِكٌ: قالَ نافِعٌ: لاَ أُرى عَبْدَ اللهِ (٣) حَدَّثَهُ إلاَّ عَنْ رَسُولِ اللهِ ﷺ.  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say that there was no harm in washing the mouth and cleaning the nose with only one handful of water.  

سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ فِي الرَّجُلِ يَتَمَضْمَضُ ويَسْتَنْثِرُ مِن غَرْفَةٍ واحِدَةٍ: إنَّهُ لاَ بَأْسَ بِذلِكَ.  

Malik said, "That is the sunna about which there is no dispute among us."  

قالَ مالِكٌ: «وعَلى ذَلِكَ السُّنَّةُ الَّتِي لا اخْتِلافَ فِيها عِنْدَنا»  

Yahya said that Malik spoke about a man who died and had a debt owing to him and there was one witness, and some people had a debt against him and they had only one witness, and his heirs refused to take an oath on their rights with their witness. He said, "The creditors take an oath and take their rights. If there is anything left over, the heirs do not take any of it. That is because the oaths were offered to them before and they abandoned them, unless they say, 'We did not know that our companion had extra,' and it is known that they only abandoned the oaths because of that. I think that they should take an oath and take what remains after his debt."  

قالَ يَحْيى: قالَ مالِكٌ فِي «الرَّجُلِ يَهْلِكُ ولَهُ دَيْنٌ، عَلَيْهِ شاهِدٌ واحِدٌ، وعَلَيْهِ دَيْنٌ لِلنّاسِ، لَهُمْ فِيهِ شاهِدٌ واحِدٌ. فَيَأْبى ورَثَتُهُ أنْ يَحْلِفُوا عَلى حُقُوقِهِمْ مَعَ شاهِدِهِمْ. قالَ: فَإنَّ الغُرَماءَ يَحْلِفُونَ ويَأْخُذُونَ حُقُوقَهُمْ، فَإنْ فَضَلَ فَضْلٌ لَمْ يَكُنْ لِلْوَرَثَةِ مِنهُ شَيْءٌ، وذَلِكَ أنَّ الأيْمانَ عُرِضَتْ عَلَيْهِمْ قَبْلُ، فَتَرَكُوها. إلّا أنْ يَقُولُوا لَمْ نَعْلَمْ لِصاحِبِنا فَضْلًا، ويُعْلَمُ أنَّهُمْ إنَّما تَرَكُوا الأيْمانَ مِن أجْلِ ذَلِكَ. فَإنِّي أرى أنْ يَحْلِفُوا ويَأْخُذُوا ما بَقِيَ بَعْدَ دَيْنِهِ»  

Yahya said, "I heard Malik say that if a man pledges his garden for a stated period and the fruits of that garden are ready before the end of that period, the fruits are not included in the pledge with the real estate, unless it is stipulated by the pledger in his pledge. However, if a man receives a slave-girl as a pledge and she is pregnant or she becomes pregnant after his taking her as a pledge, her child is included with her. "A distinction is made between the fruit and the child of the slave-girl. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, 'If someone sells a palm which has been pollinated, the fruit belongs to the seller unless the buyer stipulates its inclusion.' The undisputed way of doing things in our community is that if a man sells a slave-girl or an animal with a foetus in its womb, the foetus belongs to the buyer, whether or not the buyer stipulates it. The palm is not like the animal. Fruit is not like the foetus in its mother's womb. Part of what clarifies that is also that it is the usage of people to have a man pawn the fruit of the palm apart from the palm. No one pawns the foetus in its mother's womb whether of slaves or animals."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ، فِيمَن رَهَنَ حائِطًا لَهُ إلى أجَلٍ مُسَمًّى، فَيَكُونُ ثَمَرُ ذَلِكَ الحائِطِ قَبْلَ ذَلِكَ الأجَلِ: إنَّ الثَّمَرَ لَيْسَ بِرَهْنٍ مَعَ الأصْلِ، إلّا أنْ يَكُونَ اشْتَرَطَ ذَلِكَ، المُرْتَهِنُ فِي رَهْنِهِ. وإنَّ الرَّجُلَ إذا ارْتَهَنَ جارِيَةً وهِيَ حامِلٌ، أوْ حَمَلَتْ بَعْدَ ارْتِهانِهِ إيّاها: إنَّ ولَدَها مَعَها «قالَ مالِكٌ:»وفُرِقَ بَيْنَ الثَّمَرِ وبَيْنَ ولَدِ الجارِيَةِ. أنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ﷺ قالَ: «مَن باعَ نَخْلًا قَدْ أُبِّرَتْ فَثَمَرُها لِلْبائِعِ، إلّا أنْ يَشْتَرِطَهُ المُبْتاعُ»، قالَ: والأمْرُ الَّذِي لا اخْتِلافَ فِيهِ عِنْدَنا، أنَّ مَن باعَ ولِيدَةً، أوْ شَيْئًا مِنَ الحَيَوانِ، وفِي بَطْنِها جَنِينٌ، أنَّ ذَلِكَ الجَنِينَ لِلْمُشْتَرِي، اشْتَرَطَهُ المُشْتَرِي أوْ لَمْ يَشْتَرِطْهُ، فَلَيْسَتِ النَّخْلُ مِثْلَ الحَيَوانِ، ولَيْسَ الثَّمَرُ مِثْلَ الجَنِينِ فِي بَطْنِ أُمِّهِ «-[٧٣٠]- قالَ مالِكٌ:»ومِمّا يُبَيِّنُ ذَلِكَ أيْضًا: أنَّ مِن أمْرِ النّاسِ أنْ يَرْهَنَ الرَّجُلُ ثَمَرَ النَّخْلِ، ولا يَرْهَنُ النَّخْلَ، ولَيْسَ يَرْهَنُ أحَدٌ مِنَ النّاسِ جَنِينًا فِي بَطْنِ أُمِّهِ مِنَ الرَّقِيقِ، ولا مِنَ الدَّوابِّ۔»  

Yahya said that he had heard Malik say, "The undisputed way of doing things in our community concerning pledges is that in cases where land or a house or an animal are known to have been destroyed whilst in the possession of the broker of the pledge, and the circumstances of the loss are known, the loss is against the pledger. There is no deduction made from what is due to the broker at all. Any pledge which perishes in the possession of the broker and the circumstances of its loss are only known by his word, the loss is against the broker and he is liable for its value. He is asked to describe whatever was destroyed and then he is made to take an oath about that description and what he loaned on security for it. "Then people of discernment evaluate the description. If the pledge was worth more than what the broker loaned, the pledger takes the extra. If the assessed value of the pledge is less than what he was loaned, the pledger is made to take an oath as to what the broker loaned and he does not have to pay the extra which the broker loaned above the assessed value of the pledge. If the pledger refuses to take an oath, he has to give the broker the extra above the assessed value of the pledge. If the broker says that he doesn't know the value of the pledge, the pledger is made to take an oath on the description of the pledge and that is his if he brings a matter which is not disapproved of." Malik said, "All this applies when the broker takes the pledge and does not put it in the hands of another."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ الَّذِي لا اخْتِلافَ فِيهِ عِنْدَنا فِي الرَّهْنِ، أنَّ ما كانَ مِن أمْرٍ يُعْرَفُ هَلاكُهُ مِن أرْضٍ، أوْ دارٍ أوْ حَيَوانٍ، فَهَلَكَ فِي يَدِ المُرْتَهِنِ، وعُلِمَ هَلاكُهُ فَهُوَ مِنَ الرّاهِنِ، وإنَّ ذَلِكَ لا يَنْقُصُ مِن حَقِّ المُرْتَهِنِ شَيْئًا، وما كانَ مِن رَهْنٍ يَهْلِكُ فِي يَدِ المُرْتَهِنِ، فَلا يُعْلَمُ هَلاكُهُ إلّا بِقَوْلِهِ، فَهُوَ مِنَ المُرْتَهِنِ. وهُوَ لِقِيمَتِهِ ضامِنٌ. يُقالُ لَهُ: صِفْهُ. فَإذا وصَفَهُ، أُحْلِفَ عَلى صِفَتِهِ، وتَسْمِيَةِ مالِهِ فِيهِ، ثُمَّ يُقَوِّمُهُ أهْلُ البَصَرِ بِذَلِكَ، فَإنْ كانَ فِيهِ فَضْلٌ عَمّا سَمّى فِيهِ المُرْتَهِنُ، أخَذَهُ الرّاهِنُ. وإنْ كانَ أقَلَّ مِمّا سَمّى، أُحْلِفَ الرّاهِنُ عَلى ما سَمّى المُرْتَهِنُ، وبَطَلَ عَنْهُ الفَضْلُ الَّذِي سَمّى المُرْتَهِنُ، فَوْقَ قِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ. وإنْ أبى الرّاهِنُ أنْ يَحْلِفَ، أُعْطِيَ المُرْتَهِنُ ما فَضَلَ بَعْدَ قِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ. فَإنْ قالَ المُرْتَهِنُ: لا عِلْمَ لِي بِقِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ. حُلِّفَ الرّاهِنُ عَلى صِفَةِ الرَّهْنِ، وكانَ ذَلِكَ لَهُ، إذا جاءَ بِالأمْرِ الَّذِي لا يُسْتَنْكَرُ» قالَ مالِكٌ: «وذَلِكَ إذا قَبَضَ المُرْتَهِنُ الرَّهْنَ. ولَمْ يَضَعْهُ عَلى يَدَيْ غَيْرِهِ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik speak about two men who had a pledge between them. One of them undertook to sell his pledge, and the other one had asked him to wait a year for his due. He said, "If it is possible to divide the pledge, and the due of the one who asked him to wait will not be decreased, half the pledge which is between them is sold for him and he is given his due. If it is feared that his right will be decreased, all the pledge is sold, and the one who undertook to sell his pledge is given his due from that. If the one who asked him to wait for his due is pleased in himself, half of the price is paid to the pledger. If not, the pledgee is made to take an oath that he only asked him to wait so that he could transfer my pledge to me in its form.' Then he is given his due immediately." Yahya said that he heard Malik say about a slave whose master had pledged him and the slave had property of his own, "The property of the slave is not part of the pledge unless the broker stipulates that."  

قالَ يَحْيى، سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: وفِي الرَّجُلَيْنِ يَكُونُ لَهُما رَهْنٌ بَيْنَهُما. فَيَقُومُ أحَدُهُما بِبَيْعِ رَهْنِهِ. وقَدْ كانَ الآخَرُ أنْظَرَهُ بحَقِّهِ سَنَةً. قالَ: «إنْ كانَ يَقْدِرُ عَلى أنْ يُقْسَمَ الرَّهْنُ. ولا يَنْقُصَ حَقُّ الَّذِي أنْظَرَهُ بِحَقِّهِ، بِيعَ لَهُ نِصْفُ الرَّهْنِ الَّذِي كانَ بَيْنَهُما. فَأُوفِيَ حَقَّهُ. وإنْ خِيفَ أنْ يَنْقُصَ حَقُّهُ. بِيعَ الرَّهْنُ كُلُّهُ. فَأُعْطِيَ الَّذِي قامَ بِبَيْعِ رَهْنِهِ، حَقَّهُ مِن ذَلِكَ. فَإنْ طابَتْ نَفْسُ الَّذِي أنْظَرَهُ بِحَقِّهِ، أنْ يَدْفَعَ نِصْفَ الثَّمَنِ إلى الرّاهِنِ. وإلّا حُلِّفَ المُرْتَهِنُ، أنَّهُ ما أنْظَرَهُ إلّا لِيُوقِفَ لِي رَهْنِي عَلى هَيْئَتِهِ. ثُمَّ أُعْطِيَ حَقَّهُ عاجِلًا» قالَ: وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ، فِي العَبْدِ يَرْهَنُهُ سَيِّدُهُ، ولِلْعَبْدِ مالٌ: «إنَّ مالَ العَبْدِ لَيْسَ بِرَهْنٍ. إلّا أنْ يَشْتَرِطَهُ المُرْتَهِنُ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik speak about someone who pledged goods as security for a loan, and they perished with the broker. The one who took out the loan confirmed its specification. They agreed on the amount of the loan, but challenged each other about the value of the pledge, the pledger saying that it had been worth twenty dinars, whilst the broker said that it had been worth only ten, and that the amount loaned on security was twenty dinars. Malik said, "It is said to the one in whose hand the pledge is, 'describe it.' If he describes it he is made to take an oath on it and then the people of experience evaluate that description. If the value is more than what was loaned on security for it, it is said to the broker, 'Return the rest of his due to the pledger.' If the value is less than what was loaned on security for it, the broker takes the rest of his due from the pledger. If the value is the exact amount of the loan, the pledge is compensated for by the loan." Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about two men who have a dispute about an amount of money loaned on the security of a pledge - the pledger claiming that he pledged it for ten dinars and the broker insisting that he took the pledge as security for twenty dinars, and the pledge is clearly in the possession of the broker - is that the broker is made to take an oath when the value of the pledge is fully known. If the value of the pledge is exactly what he swore that he had loaned on security for it, the broker takes the pledge as his right. He is more entitled to take precedence with an oath since he has possession of the pledge. If the owner of the pledge wants to give him the amount which he swore that he was owed, he can take the pledge back. If the pledge is worth less than the twenty dinars he loaned, then it is said to the pledger, 'Either you give him what he has sworn to and take your pledge back, or you swear to what you said you pledged it for.' If the pledger takes the oath, then what the broker has increased over the value of the pledge will become invalid. If the pledger does not take an oath, he must pay what the broker swore to." Malik said, "If a pledge given on security for a loan perishes, and both parties deny each other's rights, with the broker who is owed the loan saying that he gave twenty dinars, and the pledger who owes the loan saying that he was given only ten, and with the broker who is owed the loan saying the pledge was worth ten dinars, and the broker who owes the loan saying it was worth twenty, then the broker who is owed the loan is asked to describe the pledge. If he describes it, he must take an oath on its description. Then people with experience of it evaluate that description. If the value of the pledge is estimated to be more than what the broker claims it was, he takes an oath as to what he claimed, and the pledger is given what is over from the value of the pledge. If its value is less than what the broker claims of it, he is made to take an oath as to what he claims is his. Then he demands settlement according to the actual value of the pledge. The one who owes the loan is then made to take an oath on the extra amount which remains owing against him to the claimant after the price of the pledge is reached. That is because the broker becomes a claimant against the pledger. If he takes an oath, the rest of what the broker swore to of what he claimed above the value of the pledge is invalidated. If he draws back, he is bound to pay what remains due to the broker after the value of the pledge."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ، فِيمَنِ ارْتَهَنَ مَتاعًا فَهَلَكَ المَتاعُ عِنْدَ المُرْتَهِنِ. وأقَرَّ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الحَقُّ بِتَسْمِيَةِ الحَقِّ. واجْتَمَعا عَلى التَّسْمِيَةِ. وتَداعَيا فِي الرَّهْنِ. فَقالَ الرّاهِنُ: قِيمَتُهُ عِشْرُونَ دِينارًا. وقالَ المُرْتَهِنُ: قِيمَتُهُ عَشَرَةُ دَنانِيرَ، والحَقُّ الَّذِي لِلرَّجُلِ فِيهِ عِشْرُونَ دِينارًا قالَ مالِكٌ: «يُقالُ لِلَّذِي بِيَدِهِ الرَّهْنُ: صِفْهُ. فَإذا وصَفَهُ، أُحْلِفَ عَلَيْهِ. ثُمَّ أقامَ تِلْكَ الصِّفَةَ أهْلُ المَعْرِفَةِ بِها. فَإنْ كانَتِ القِيمَةُ أكْثَرَ مِمّا رُهِنَ بِهِ. قِيلَ لِلْمُرْتَهِنِ: ارْدُدْ إلى الرّاهِنِ بَقِيَّةَ حَقِّهِ، وإنْ كانَتِ القِيمَةُ أقَلَّ مِمّا رُهِنَ بِهِ، أخَذَ المُرْتَهِنُ بَقِيَّةَ حَقِّهِ مِنَ الرّاهِنِ، وإنْ كانَتِ القِيمَةُ بِقَدْرِ حَقِّهِ، فالرَّهْنُ بِما فِيهِ» قالَ يَحْيى: وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا: يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِي الرَّجُلَيْنِ يَخْتَلِفانِ فِي الرَّهْنِ. يَرْهَنُهُ أحَدُهُما صاحِبَهُ، فَيَقُولُ الرّاهِنُ: أرْهَنْتُكَهُ بِعَشَرَةِ دَنانِيرَ، ويَقُولُ المُرْتَهِنُ: ارْتَهَنْتُهُ مِنكَ بِعِشْرِينَ دِينارًا. والرَّهْنُ ظاهِرٌ بِيَدِ المُرْتَهِنِ. قالَ: يُحَلَّفُ المُرْتَهِنُ حَتّى يُحِيطَ بِقِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ. فَإنْ كانَ ذَلِكَ. لا زِيادَةَ فِيهِ ولا نُقْصانَ عَمّا حُلِّفَ أنَّ لَهُ فِيهِ، أخَذَهُ المُرْتَهِنُ بِحَقِّهِ. وكانَ أوْلى بِالتَّبْدِئَةِ بِاليَمِينِ. لِقَبْضِهِ الرَّهْنَ وحِيازَتِهِ إيّاهُ، إلّا أنْ يَشاءَ رَبُّ الرَّهْنِ أنْ يُعْطِيَهُ حَقَّهُ الَّذِي حُلِّفَ عَلَيْهِ. ويَأْخُذَ رَهْنَهُ» قالَ: «وإنْ كانَ الرَّهْنُ أقَلَّ مِنَ العِشْرِينَ الَّتِي سَمّى، أُحْلِفَ المُرْتَهِنُ عَلى العِشْرِينَ الَّتِي سَمّى، ثُمَّ يُقالُ لِلرّاهِنِ: إمّا أنْ تُعْطِيَهُ الَّذِي حَلَفَ عَلَيْهِ، وتَأْخُذَ رَهْنَكَ، وإمّا أنْ تَحْلِفَ عَلى الَّذِي قُلْتَ أنَّكَ رَهَنْتَهُ بِهِ، ويَبْطُلُ عَنْكَ ما زادَ المُرْتَهِنُ عَلى قِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ، فَإنْ حَلَفَ الرّاهِنُ بَطَلَ ذَلِكَ عَنْهُ، وإنْ لَمْ يَحْلِفْ لَزِمَهُ غُرْمُ ما حَلَفَ عَلَيْهِ المُرْتَهِنُ» قالَ مالِكٌ: «فَإنْ هَلَكَ الرَّهْنُ، وتَناكَرا الحَقَّ، فَقالَ الَّذِي لَهُ الحَقُّ: كانَتْ لِي فِيهِ عِشْرُونَ دِينارًا. وقالَ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الحَقُّ: لَمْ يَكُنْ لَكَ فِيهِ إلّا عَشَرَةُ دَنانِيرَ. وقالَ الَّذِي لَهُ الحَقُّ: قِيمَةُ الرَّهْنِ عَشَرَةُ دَنانِيرَ. وقالَ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الحَقُّ: قِيمَتُهُ عِشْرُونَ دِينارًا، قِيلَ لِلَّذِي لَهُ الحَقُّ: صِفْهُ. فَإذا وصَفَهُ أُحْلِفَ عَلى صِفَتِهِ، ثُمَّ أقامَ تِلْكَ الصِّفَةَ أهْلُ المَعْرِفَةِ بِها، فَإنْ كانَتْ قِيمَةُ -[٧٣٣]- الرَّهْنِ أكْثَرَ مِمّا ادَّعى فِيهِ المُرْتَهِنُ، أُحْلِفَ عَلى ما ادَّعى، ثُمَّ يُعْطى الرّاهِنُ ما فَضَلَ مِن قِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ، وإنْ كانَتْ قِيمَتُهُ أقَلَّ مِمّا يَدَّعِي فِيهِ المُرْتَهِنُ، أُحْلِفَ عَلى الَّذِي زَعَمَ أنَّهُ لَهُ فِيهِ، ثُمَّ قاصَّهُ بِما بَلَغَ الرَّهْنُ، ثُمَّ أُحْلِفَ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الحَقُّ عَلى الفَضْلِ الَّذِي بَقِيَ لِلْمُدَّعى عَلَيْهِ، بَعْدَ مَبْلَغِ ثَمَنِ الرَّهْنِ، وذَلِكَ أنَّ الَّذِي بِيَدِهِ الرَّهْنُ صارَ مُدَّعِيًا عَلى الرّاهِنِ، فَإنْ حَلَفَ بَطَلَ عَنْهُ بَقِيَّةُ ما حَلَفَ عَلَيْهِ المُرْتَهِنُ مِمّا ادَّعى فَوْقَ قِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ، وإنْ نَكَلَ لَزِمَهُ ما بَقِيَ مِن حَقِّ المُرْتَهِنِ بَعْدَ قِيمَةِ الرَّهْنِ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about a man who rents an animal for a journey to a specified place and then he goes beyond that place and further, is that the owner of the animal has a choice. If he wants to take extra rent for his animal to cover the distance overstepped, he is given that on top of the first rent and the animal is returned. If the owner of the animal likes to sell the animal from the place where he over-steps, he has the price of the animal on top of the rent. If, however, the hirer rented the animal to go and return and then he overstepped when he reached the city to which he rented him, the owner of the animal only has half the first rent. That is because half of the rent is going, and half of it is returning. If he oversteps with the animal, only half of the first rent is obliged for him. Had the animal died when he reached the city to which it was rented, the hirer would not be liable and the renter would only have half the rent." Malik said, "That is what is done with people who overstep and dispute about what they took the animal for." Malik said, "It is also like that with some one who takes qirad-money from his companion. The owner of the property says to him, 'Do not buy such-and-such animals or such- and-such goods.' He names them and forbids them and disapproves of his money being invested in them. The one who takes the money then buys what he was forbidden. By that, he intends to be liable for the money and take the profit of his companion. When he does that, the owner of the money has an option. If he wants to enter with him in the goods according to the original stipulations between them about the profit, he does so. If he likes, he has his capital guaranteed against the one who took the capital and over stepped the mark." Malik said, "It is also like that with a man with whom another man invests some goods. The owner of the property orders him to buy certain goods for him which he names. He differs, and buys with the goods something other than what he was ordered to buy. He exceeded his orders. The owner of the goods has an option. If he wants to take what was bought with his property, he takes it. If he wants the partner to be liable for his capital he has that."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِي الرَّجُلِ يَسْتَكْرِي الدّابَّةَ إلى المَكانِ المُسَمّى. ثُمَّ يَتَعَدّى ذَلِكَ المَكانَ ويَتَقَدَّمُ: إنَّ رَبَّ الدّابَّةِ يُخَيَّرُ، فَإنْ أحَبَّ أنْ يَأْخُذَ كِراءَ دابَّتِهِ إلى المَكانِ الَّذِي تُعُدِّيَ بِها إلَيْهِ، أُعْطِيَ ذَلِكَ. ويَقْبِضُ دابَّتَهُ. ولَهُ الكِراءُ الأوَّلُ. وإنْ أحَبَّ رَبُّ الدّابَّةِ، فَلَهُ قِيمَةُ دابَّتِهِ مِنَ المَكانِ الَّذِي تَعَدّى مِنهُ المُسْتَكْرِي، ولَهُ الكِراءُ الأوَّلُ. إنْ كانَ اسْتَكْرى الدّابَّةَ البَدْأةَ. فَإنْ كانَ اسْتَكْراها ذاهِبًا وراجِعًا، ثُمَّ تَعَدّى حِينَ بَلَغَ البَلَدَ الَّذِي اسْتَكْرى إلَيْهِ، فَإنَّما لِرَبِّ الدّابَّةِ نِصْفُ الكِراءِ الأوَّلِ، وذَلِكَ أنَّ الكِراءَ نِصْفُهُ فِي البَدْأةِ، ونِصْفُهُ فِي الرَّجْعَةِ. فَتَعَدّى المُتَعَدِّي بِالدّابَّةِ، ولَمْ يَجِبْ عَلَيْهِ -[٧٣٤]- إلّا نِصْفُ الكِراءِ الأوَّلِ. ولَوْ أنَّ الدّابَّةَ هَلَكَتْ حِينَ بَلَغَ بِها البَلَدَ الَّذِي اسْتَكْرى إلَيْهِ. لَمْ يَكُنْ عَلى المُسْتَكْرِي ضَمانٌ. ولَمْ يَكُنْ لِلْمُكْرِي، إلّا نِصْفُ الكِراءِ». قالَ: «وعَلى ذَلِكَ أمْرُ أهْلِ التَّعَدِّي والخِلافِ، لِما أخَذُوا الدّابَّةَ عَلَيْهِ» قالَ: «وكَذَلِكَ أيْضًا مَن أخَذَ مالًا قِراضًا مِن صاحِبِهِ، فَقالَ لَهُ رَبُّ المالِ: لا تَشْتَرِ بِهِ حَيَوانًا ولا سِلَعًا كَذا وكَذا لِسِلَعٍ يُسَمِّيها، ويَنْهاهُ عَنْها، ويَكْرَهُ أنْ يَضَعَ مالَهُ فِيها، فَيَشْتَرِي الَّذِي أخَذَ المالَ الَّذِي نُهِيَ عَنْهُ، يُرِيدُ بِذَلِكَ أنْ يَضْمَنَ المالَ، ويَذْهَبَ بِرِبْحِ صاحِبِهِ، فَإذا صَنَعَ ذَلِكَ فَرَبُّ المالِ بِالخِيارِ، إنْ أحَبَّ أنْ يَدْخُلَ مَعَهُ فِي السِّلْعَةِ عَلى ما شَرَطا بَيْنَهُما مِنَ الرِّبْحِ، فَعَلَ. وإنْ أحَبَّ، فَلَهُ رَأْسُ مالِهِ ضامِنًا عَلى الَّذِي أخَذَ المالَ وتَعَدّى» قالَ: «وكَذَلِكَ أيْضًا، الرَّجُلُ يُبْضِعُ مَعَهُ الرَّجُلُ بِضاعَةً، فَيَأْمُرُهُ صاحِبُ المالِ أنْ يَشْتَرِيَ لَهُ سِلْعَةً بِاسْمِها. فَيُخالِفُ فَيَشْتَرِي بِبِضاعَتِهِ غَيْرَ ما أمَرَهُ بِهِ، ويَتَعَدّى ذَلِكَ. فَإنَّ صاحِبَ البِضاعَةِ عَلَيْهِ بِالخِيارِ. إنْ أحَبَّ أنْ يَأْخُذَ ما اشْتُرِيَ بِمالِهِ، أخَذَهُ. وإنْ أحَبَّ أنْ يَكُونَ المُبْضِعُ مَعَهُ ضامِنًا لِرَأْسِ مالِهِ، فَذَلِكَ لَهُ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about someone who consumed an animal without the permission of its owner, is that he must pay its price on the day he consumed it. He is not obliged to replace it with a similar animal nor does he compensate the owner with any kind of animal. He must pay its price on the day it was consumed, and giving the value is more equitable in compensation for animals and goods." Yahya said that he heard Malik say about someone who consumes some food without the permission of its owner, "He returns to the owner a like weight of the same kind of food. Food is in the position of gold and silver. Gold and silver are returned with gold and silver. The animal is not in the position of gold in that. What distinguishes between them is the sunna and the behaviour which is in force. Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "If a man is entrusted with some wealth and then trades with it for himself and makes a profit, the profit is his because he is responsible for the property until he returns it to its owner. "  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِيمَنِ اسْتَهْلَكَ شَيْئًا مِنَ الحَيَوانِ بِغَيْرِ إذْنِ صاحِبِهِ، أنَّ عَلَيْهِ قِيمَتَهُ يَوْمَ اسْتَهْلَكَهُ، لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أنْ يُؤْخَذَ بِمِثْلِهِ مِنَ الحَيَوانِ، ولا يَكُونُ لَهُ أنْ يُعْطِيَ صاحِبَهُ، فِيما اسْتَهْلَكَ شَيْئًا مِنَ الحَيَوانِ، ولَكِنْ عَلَيْهِ قِيمَتُهُ يَوْمَ اسْتَهْلَكَهُ، القِيمَةُ أعْدَلُ ذَلِكَ فِيما بَيْنَهُما فِي الحَيَوانِ والعُرُوضِ» قالَ: وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: فِيمَنِ اسْتَهْلَكَ شَيْئًا مِنَ الطَّعامِ بِغَيْرِ إذْنِ صاحِبِهِ فَإنَّما «يَرُدُّ عَلى صاحِبِهِ، مِثْلَ طَعامِهِ بِمَكِيلَتِهِ مِن صِنْفِهِ، وإنَّما الطَّعامُ بِمَنزِلَةِ الذَّهَبِ والفِضَّةِ، إنَّما يَرُدُّ مِنَ الذَّهَبِ الذَّهَبَ، ومِنَ الفِضَّةِ الفِضَّةَ، ولَيْسَ الحَيَوانُ بِمَنزِلَةِ الذَّهَبِ فِي ذَلِكَ. فَرَقَ بَيْنَ ذَلِكَ السُّنَّةُ، والعَمَلُ المَعْمُولُ بِهِ» قالَ يَحْيى، وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «إذا اسْتُودِعَ الرَّجُلُ مالًا فابْتاعَ بِهِ لِنَفْسِهِ ورَبِحَ فِيهِ. فَإنَّ ذَلِكَ الرِّبْحَ لَهُ، لِأنَّهُ ضامِنٌ لِلْمالِ. حَتّى يُؤَدِّيَهُ إلى صاحِبِهِ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "The way of doing things generally agreed upon in our community in the case of a man who dies and has sons and one of them claims, 'My father confirmed that so-and- so was his son,' is that the relationship is not established by the testimony of one man, and the confirmation of the one who confirmed it is only permitted as regards his own share in the division of his father's property. The one testified for is only given his due from the share of the testifier." Malik said, "An example of this is that a man dies leaving two sons, and 600 dinars. Each of them takes 300 dinars. Then one of them testifies that his deceased father confirmed that so-and-so was his son. The one who testifies is obliged to give 100 dinars to the one thus connected. This is half of the inheritance of the one thought to be related, had he been related. If the other confirms him, he takes the other 100 and so he completes his right and his relationship is established. His position is similar to that of a woman who confirms a debt against her father or her husband and the other heirs deny it. She must pay to the person whose debt she confirms, the amount according to her share of the full debt, had it been confirmed against all the heirs. If the woman inherits an eighth, she pays the creditor an eighth of his debt. If a daughter inherits a half, she pays the creditor half of his debt. Whichever women confirm him, pay him according to this. Malik said, "If a man's testimony is in agreement with what the woman testified to, that so- and-so had a debt against his father, the creditor is made to take an oath with one witness and he is given all his due. This is not the position with women because a man's testimony is allowed and the creditor must take an oath with the testimony of his witness, and take all his due. If he does not take an oath, he only takes from the inheritance of the one who confirmed him according to his share of the debt, because he confirmed his right and the other heirs denied it. It is permitted for him to confirm it."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ المُجْتَمَعُ عَلَيْهِ عِنْدَنا، فِي الرَّجُلِ يَهْلِكُ ولَهُ بَنُونَ. فَيَقُولُ أحَدُهُمْ: قَدْ أقَرَّ أبِي أنَّ فُلانًا ابْنُهُ: إنَّ ذَلِكَ النَّسَبَ لا يَثْبُتُ بِشَهادَةِ إنْسانٍ واحِدٍ. ولا يَجُوزُ إقْرارُ الَّذِي أقَرَّ إلّا عَلى نَفْسِهِ فِي حِصَّتِهِ مِن مالِ أبِيهِ. يُعْطى الَّذِي شَهِدَ لَهُ قَدْرَ ما يُصِيبُهُ مِنَ المالِ الَّذِي بِيَدِهِ» قالَ مالِكٌ: «وتَفْسِيرُ ذَلِكَ أنْ يَهْلِكَ الرَّجُلُ، ويَتْرُكَ ابْنَيْنِ لَهُ، ويَتْرُكَ سِتَّمِائَةِ دِينارٍ، فَيَأْخُذُ كُلُّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما ثَلاثَمِائَةِ دِينارٍ، ثُمَّ يَشْهَدُ أحَدُهُما أنَّ أباهُ الهالِكَ أقَرَّ أنَّ فُلانًا ابْنُهُ. فَيَكُونُ عَلى الَّذِي شَهِدَ لِلَّذِي اسْتُلْحِقَ، مِائَةُ دِينارٍ. وذَلِكَ نِصْفُ مِيراثِ المُسْتَلْحَقِ، لَوْ لَحِقَ. ولَوْ أقَرَّ لَهُ الآخَرُ أخَذَ المِائَةَ الأُخْرى. فاسْتَكْمَلَ حَقَّهُ وثَبَتَ نَسَبُهُ. وهُوَ أيْضًا بِمَنزِلَةِ -[٧٤٢]- المَرْأةِ تُقِرُّ بِالدَّيْنِ عَلى أبِيها أوْ عَلى زَوْجِها. ويُنْكِرُ ذَلِكَ الوَرَثَةُ، فَعَلَيْها أنْ تَدْفَعَ إلى الَّذِي أقَرَّتْ لَهُ بِالدَّيْنِ قَدْرَ الَّذِي يُصِيبُها مِن ذَلِكَ الدَّيْنِ. لَوْ ثَبَتَ عَلى الوَرَثَةِ كُلِّهِمْ. إنْ كانَتِ امْرَأةً ورِثَتِ الثُّمُنَ، دَفَعَتْ إلى الغَرِيمِ ثُمُنَ دَيْنِهِ، وإنْ كانَتِ ابْنَةً ورِثَتِ النِّصْفَ، دَفَعَتْ إلى الغَرِيمِ نِصْفَ دَيْنِهِ. عَلى حِسابِ هَذا يَدْفَعُ إلَيْهِ مَن أقَرَّ لَهُ مِنَ النِّساءِ» قالَ مالِكٌ: «وإنْ شَهِدَ رَجُلٌ عَلى مِثْلِ ما شَهِدَتْ بِهِ المَرْأةُ أنَّ لِفُلانٍ عَلى أبِيهِ دَيْنًا. أُحْلِفَ صاحِبُ الدَّيْنِ مَعَ شَهادَةِ شاهِدِهِ. وأُعْطِيَ الغَرِيمُ حَقَّهُ كُلَّهُ. ولَيْسَ هَذا بِمَنزِلَةِ المَرْأةِ. لِأنَّ الرَّجُلَ تَجُوزُ شَهادَتُهُ. ويَكُونُ عَلى صاحِبِ الدَّيْنِ، مَعَ شَهادَةِ شاهِدِهِ، أنْ يَحْلِفَ. ويَأْخُذَ حَقَّهُ كُلَّهُ. فَإنْ لَمْ يَحْلِفْ أخَذَ مِن مِيراثِ الَّذِي أقَرَّ لَهُ، قَدْرَ ما يُصِيبُهُ مِن ذَلِكَ الدَّيْنِ. لِأنَّهُ أقَرَّ بِحَقِّهِ. وأنْكَرَ الوَرَثَةُ. وجازَ عَلَيْهِ إقْرارُهُ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik speak about a man who died and left properties in Aliya and Safila (outlying districts of Madina). He said, "Unirrigated naturally watered land is not in the same category as irrigated land unless the family are satisfied with that. Unirrigated land is only in the same category as land with a spring when it resembles it. When the properties are in one land, and are close together, each individual property is evaluated and then divided between the heirs. Dwellings and houses are in the same position."  

قَالَ يَحْيَى سَمِعْتُ مَالِكًا يَقُولُ فِيمَنْ هَلَكَ وَتَرَكَ أَمْوَالاً بِالْعَالِيَةِ وَالسَّافِلَةِ إِنَّ الْبَعْلَ لاَ يُقْسَمُ مَعَ النَّضْحِ إِلاَّ أَنْ يَرْضَى أَهْلُهُ بِذَلِكَ وَإِنَّ الْبَعْلَ يُقْسَمُ مَعَ الْعَيْنِ إِذَا كَانَ يُشْبِهُهَا وَأَنَّ الأَمْوَالَ إِذَا كَانَتْ بِأَرْضٍ وَاحِدَةٍ الَّذِي بَيْنَهُمَا مُتَقَارِبٌ أَنَّهُ يُقَامُ كُلُّ مَالٍ مِنْهَا ثُمَّ يُقْسَمُ بَيْنَهُمْ وَالْمَسَاكِنُ وَالدُّورُ بِهَذِهِ الْمَنْزِلَةِ  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about injury to a domestic animal, is that the one who injures it must pay the amount by which he has diminished the animal's price." Yahya said that he heard Malik speak about a camel who attacked a man and he feared for himself and killed it or hamstrung it. He said, "If he has a clear proof that it was heading for him and had attacked him, there are no damages against him. If there is no clear proof except his word, he is responsible for the camel."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِيمَن أصابَ شَيْئًا مِنَ البَهائِمِ، إنَّ عَلى الَّذِي أصابَها قَدْرَ ما نَقَصَ مِن ثَمَنِها» -[٧٤٩]- قالَ يَحْيى: وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا: يَقُولُ فِي الجَمَلِ يَصُولُ عَلى الرَّجُلِ، فَيَخافُهُ عَلى نَفْسِهِ، فَيَقْتُلُهُ أوْ يَعْقِرُهُ، فَإنَّهُ: «إنْ كانَتْ لَهُ بَيِّنَةٌ عَلى أنَّهُ أرادَهُ، وصالَ عَلَيْهِ، فَلا غُرْمَ عَلَيْهِ، وإنْ لَمْ تَقُمْ لَهُ بَيِّنَةٌ إلّا مَقالَتُهُ. فَهُوَ ضامِنٌ لِلْجَمَلِ»  

Yahya related that he heard Malik say that if a man gave a washer a garment to dye and he dyed it, and then the owner of the garment said, "I did not order you to use this dye," and the washer protested that he had done so, then the washer was to be believed. It was the same with the tailor and the gold-smith. They took an oath about it unless they produced something they would not normally have been employed to do. In that situation their statement was not allowed and the owner of the garment had to take an oath . If he rejected it and refused to swear, then the dyer was made to take an oath. Yahya said, "I heard Malik speak about a dyer who was given a garment and he made a mistake and gave it to another man and the one to whom he gave it wore it. He said, 'The one who wore it has no damages against him, and the washer pays damages to the owner of the garment. That is when the man wears the garment which was given him without recognizing that it is not his. If he wears it knowing that it is not his garment, he is responsible for it.' "  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «فِيمَن دَفَعَ إلى الغَسّالِ ثَوْبًا يَصْبُغُهُ، فَصَبَغَهُ، فَقالَ صاحِبُ الثَّوْبِ: لَمْ آمُرْكَ بِهَذا الصِّبْغِ؟ وقالَ الغَسّالُ: بَلْ أنْتَ أمَرْتَنِي بِذَلِكَ، فَإنَّ الغَسّالَ مُصَدَّقٌ فِي ذَلِكَ، والخَيّاطُ مِثْلُ ذَلِكَ، والصّائِغُ مِثْلُ ذَلِكَ، ويَحْلِفُونَ عَلى ذَلِكَ، إلّا أنْ يَأْتُوا بِأمْرٍ لا يُسْتَعْمَلُونَ فِي مِثْلِهِ، فَلا يَجُوزُ قَوْلُهُمْ فِي ذَلِكَ، ولْيَحْلِفْ صاحِبُ الثَّوْبِ، فَإنْ رَدَّها، وأبى أنْ يَحْلِفَ. حُلِّفَ الصَّبّاغُ» قالَ وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: فِي الصَّبّاغِ يُدْفَعُ إلَيْهِ الثَّوْبُ فَيُخْطِئُ بِهِ، فَيَدْفَعُهُ إلى رَجُلٍ آخَرَ حَتّى يَلْبَسَهُ الَّذِي أعْطاهُ إيّاهُ: «إنَّهُ لا غُرْمَ عَلى الَّذِي لَبِسَهُ، ويَغْرَمُ الغَسّالُ لِصاحِبِ الثَّوْبِ، وذَلِكَ إذا لَبِسَ الثَّوْبَ الَّذِي دُفِعَ إلَيْهِ عَلى غَيْرِ مَعْرِفَةٍ، بِأنَّهُ لَيْسَ لَهُ، فَإنْ لَبِسَهُ وهُوَ يَعْرِفُ أنَّهُ لَيْسَ ثَوْبَهُ فَهُوَ ضامِنٌ لَهُ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about a man who refers a creditor to another man for the debt he owes him is that if the one referred to goes bankrupt or dies, and does not leave enough to pay the debt, then the creditor has nothing against the one who referred him and the debt does not return to the first party." Malik said, "This is the way of doing things about which there is no dispute in our community." Malik said, "If a man has his debt to somebody taken on for him by another man and then the man who took it on dies or goes bankrupt, then whatever was taken on by him returns to the first debtor."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِي الرَّجُلِ يُحِيلُ الرَّجُلَ عَلى الرَّجُلِ بِدَيْنٍ لَهُ عَلَيْهِ، أنَّهُ إنْ أفْلَسَ الَّذِي أُحِيلَ عَلَيْهِ، أوْ ماتَ فَلَمْ يَدَعْ وفاءً، فَلَيْسَ لِلْمُحْتالِ عَلى الَّذِي أحالَهُ شَيْءٌ، وأنَّهُ لا يَرْجِعُ عَلى صاحِبِهِ الأوَّلِ» قالَ مالِكٌ: «وهَذا الأمْرُ الَّذِي لا اخْتِلافَ فِيهِ عِنْدَنا» قالَ مالِكٌ: «فَأمّا الرَّجُلُ يَتَحَمَّلُ لَهُ الرَّجُلُ بِدَيْنٍ لَهُ عَلى رَجُلٍ آخَرَ. ثُمَّ يَهْلِكُ المُتَحَمِّلُ. أوْ يُفْلِسُ. فَإنَّ الَّذِي تُحُمِّلَ لَهُ، يَرْجِعُ عَلى غَرِيمِهِ الأوَّلِ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "If a man buys a garment which has a defect, a burn or something else, which the seller knows about and that is testified against him or he confirms it, and the man who has bought it causes a new tear which decreases the price of the garment, and then he learns about the original defect, he can return it to the seller and he is not liable for his tearing it. "If a man buys a garment which has a defect of a burn or flaw, and the one who sold it to him claims that he did not know about it, and the buyer has cut the garment or dyed it, then the buyer has an option . If he wishes, he can have a reduction according to what the burn or flaw detracts from the price of the garment and he can keep the garment, or if he wishes to pay damages for what the cutting or dyeing has decreased of the price of the garment and return it, he can do so. "If the buyer has dyed the garment with a dye which increases the value, the buyer has an option. If he wishes, he has a reduction from the price of the garment according to what the defect diminishes or if he wishes to become a partner with the one who sold the garment he does so. The price of the garment with a burn or flaw is looked at. If the price is ten dirhams, and the amount by which the dyeing increased the value is five dirhams, then they are partners in the garment, each according to his share. In this reckoning is the amount by which the dyeing increases the price of the garment."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «إذا ابْتاعَ الرَّجُلُ ثَوْبًا وبِهِ عَيْبٌ مِن حَرْقٍ أوْ غَيْرِهِ قَدْ عَلِمَهُ البائِعُ. فَشُهِدَ عَلَيْهِ بِذَلِكَ. أوْ أقَرَّ بِهِ. فَأحْدَثَ فِيهِ الَّذِي ابْتاعَهُ حَدَثًا مِن تَقْطِيعٍ يُنَقِّصُ ثَمَنَ الثَّوْبِ. ثُمَّ عَلِمَ المُبْتاعُ بِالعَيْبِ. فَهُوَ رَدٌّ عَلى البائِعِ. ولَيْسَ عَلى الَّذِي ابْتاعَهُ غُرْمٌ فِي تَقْطِيعِهِ إيّاهُ» قالَ: «وإنِ ابْتاعَ رَجُلٌ ثَوْبًا وبِهِ عَيْبٌ مِن حَرْقٍ أوْ عَوارٍ، فَزَعَمَ الَّذِي باعَهُ أنَّهُ لَمْ يَعْلَمْ -[٧٥١]- بِذَلِكَ. وقَدْ قَطَعَ الثَّوْبَ الَّذِي ابْتاعَهُ. أوْ صَبَغَهُ. فالمُبْتاعُ بِالخِيارِ، إنْ شاءَ أنْ يُوضَعَ عَنْهُ قَدْرُ ما نَقَصَ الحَرْقُ أوِ العَوارُ مِن ثَمَنِ الثَّوْبِ، ويُمْسِكُ الثَّوْبَ، فَعَلَ. وإنْ شاءَ أنْ يَغْرَمَ ما نَقَصَ التَّقْطِيعُ أوِ الصِّبْغُ مِن ثَمَنِ الثَّوْبِ، ويَرُدُّهُ، فَعَلَ. وهُوَ فِي ذَلِكَ بِالخِيارِ. فَإنْ كانَ المُبْتاعُ قَدْ صَبَغَ الثَّوْبَ صِبْغًا يَزِيدُ فِي ثَمَنِهِ، فالمُبْتاعُ بِالخِيارِ. إنْ شاءَ أنْ يُوضَعَ عَنْهُ قَدْرُ ما نَقَصَ العَيْبُ مِن ثَمَنِ الثَّوْبِ. وإنْ شاءَ أنْ يَكُونَ شَرِيكًا لِلَّذِي باعَهُ الثَّوْبَ، فَعَلَ. ويُنْظَرُ كَمْ ثَمَنُ الثَّوْبِ وفِيهِ الحَرْقُ أوِ العَوارُ. فَإنْ كانَ ثَمَنُهُ عَشَرَةَ دَراهِمَ، وثَمَنُ ما زادَ فِيهِ الصِّبْغُ خَمْسَةَ دَراهِمَ، كانا شَرِيكَيْنِ فِي الثَّوْبِ لِكُلِّ واحِدٍ مِنهُما بِقَدْرِ حِصَّتِهِ. فَعَلى حِسابِ هَذا يَكُونُ ما زادَ الصِّبْغُ فِي ثَمَنِ الثَّوْبِ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about some one who gives a gift not intending a reward is that he calls witnesses to it. It is affirmed for the one to whom it has been given unless the giver dies before the one to whom it was given receives the gift." He said, "If the giver wants to keep the gift after he has had it witnessed, he cannot. If the recipient claims it from him, he takes it." Malik said, "If some one gives a gift and then withdraws it and the recipient brings a witness to testify for him that he was given the gift, be it goods, gold, silver or animals, the recipient is made to take an oath. If he refuses, the giver is made to take an oath. If he also refuses to take an oath, he gives to the recipient what he claims from him if he has at least one witness. If he does not have a witness, he has nothing . " Malik said, "If someone gives a gift not expecting anything in return and then the recipient dies, the heirs are in his place. If the giver dies before the recipient has received his gift, the recipient has nothing. That is because he was given a gift which he did not take possession of. If the giver wants to keep it, and he has called witnesses to the gift, he cannot do that. If the recipient claims his right he takes it."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِيمَن أعْطى أحَدًا عَطِيَّةً لا يُرِيدُ ثَوابَها، فَأشْهَدَ عَلَيْها. فَإنَّها ثابِتَةٌ لِلَّذِي أُعْطِيَها. إلّا أنْ يَمُوتَ المُعْطِي قَبْلَ أنْ يَقْبِضَها الَّذِي أُعْطِيَها» قالَ: «وإنْ أرادَ المُعْطِي إمْساكَها بَعْدَ أنْ أشْهَدَ عَلَيْها. فَلَيْسَ ذَلِكَ لَهُ. إذا قامَ عَلَيْهِ بِها صاحِبُها، أخَذَها» قالَ مالِكٌ: «ومَن أعْطى عَطِيَّةً. ثُمَّ نَكَلَ الَّذِي أعْطاها. فَجاءَ الَّذِي أُعْطِيَها بِشاهِدٍ يَشْهَدُ لَهُ أنَّهُ أعْطاهُ ذَلِكَ. عَرْضًا كانَ أوْ ذَهَبًا أوْ ورِقًا أوْ حَيَوانًا. أُحْلِفَ الَّذِي أُعْطِيَ مَعَ شَهادَةِ شاهِدِهِ. فَإنْ أبى الَّذِي أُعْطِيَ أنْ يَحْلِفَ، حُلِّفَ المُعْطِي. وإنْ أبى أنْ يَحْلِفَ أيْضًا، أدّى إلى المُعْطى ما ادَّعى عَلَيْهِ. إذا كانَ لَهُ شاهِدٌ واحِدٌ. فَإنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ شاهِدٌ، فَلا شَيْءَ لَهُ» قالَ مالِكٌ: «مَن أعْطى عَطِيَّةً لا يُرِيدُ ثَوابَها ثُمَّ ماتَ المُعْطى، فَوَرَثَتُهُ بِمَنزِلَتِهِ، وإنْ -[٧٥٤]- ماتَ المُعْطِي، قَبْلَ أنْ يَقْبِضَ المُعْطى عَطِيَّتَهُ، فَلا شَيْءَ لَهُ. وذَلِكَ أنَّهُ أُعْطِيَ عَطاءً لَمْ يَقْبِضْهُ. فَإنْ أرادَ المُعْطِي أنْ يُمْسِكَها، وقَدْ أشْهَدَ عَلَيْها حِينَ أعْطاها، فَلَيْسَ ذَلِكَ لَهُ، إذا قامَ صاحِبُها أخَذَها»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "The way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute, is that if a man gives sadaqa to his son - sadaqa which the son takes possession of or which is in the father's keeping and the father has had his sadaqa witnessed, he cannot take back any of it because he cannot reclaim any sadaqa." Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things in our community in the case of someone who gives his son a gift or grants him a gift which is not sadaqa is that he can take it back as long as the child does not start a debt, which people claim from him, and which they trust him for on the strength of the gift his father has given him. The father cannot take back anything from the gift after debts are started against it. "If a man gives his son or daughter something and a woman marries the man, and she only marries him for the wealth and the property which his father has given him and so the father wants to take that back, or, if a man marries a woman whose father has given her a gift and he marries her with an increased bride-price because of the wealth and property that her father has given, then the father says, 'I will take that back,' then the father cannot take back any of that from the son or daughter if it is as I have described to you."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا الَّذِي لا اخْتِلافَ فِيهِ، أنَّ كُلَّ مَن تَصَدَّقَ عَلى ابْنِهِ بِصَدَقَةٍ قَبَضَها الِابْنُ. أوْ كانَ فِي حَجْرِ أبِيهِ فَأشْهَدَ لَهُ عَلى صَدَقَتِهِ. فَلَيْسَ لَهُ أنْ يَعْتَصِرَ شَيْئًا مِن ذَلِكَ. لِأنَّهُ لا يَرْجِعُ فِي شَيْءٍ مِنَ الصَّدَقَةِ» قالَ وسَمِعْتُ مالِكًا: «يَقُولُ الأمْرُ المُجْتَمَعُ عَلَيْهِ عِنْدَنا فِيمَن نَحَلَ ولَدَهُ نُحْلًا، أوْ أعْطاهُ عَطاءً لَيْسَ بِصَدَقَةٍ. إنَّ لَهُ أنْ يَعْتَصِرَ ذَلِكَ. ما لَمْ يَسْتَحْدِثِ الوَلَدُ دَيْنًا يُدايِنُهُ النّاسُ بِهِ. ويَأْمَنُونَهُ عَلَيْهِ. مِن أجْلِ ذَلِكَ العَطاءِ الَّذِي أعْطاهُ أبُوهُ. فَلَيْسَ لِأبِيهِ أنْ يَعْتَصِرَ مِن ذَلِكَ شَيْئًا، بَعْدَ أنْ تَكُونَ عَلَيْهِ الدُّيُونُ. أوْ يُعْطِي الرَّجُلُ ابْنَهُ أوِ ابْنَتَهُ. فَتَنْكِحُ المَرْأةُ الرَّجُلَ. وإنَّما تَنْكِحُهُ لِغِناهُ. ولِلْمالِ الَّذِي أعْطاهُ أبُوهُ. فَيُرِيدُ أنْ يَعْتَصِرَ ذَلِكَ الأبُ. أوْ يَتَزَوَّجُ الرَّجُلُ المَرْأةَ قَدْ نَحَلَها أبُوها النُّحْلَ. إنَّما يَتَزَوَّجُها ويَرْفَعُ فِي صِداقِها لِغِناها ومالِها. وما أعْطاها أبُوها. ثُمَّ يَقُولُ الأبُ: أنا أعْتَصِرُ ذَلِكَ. فَلَيْسَ لَهُ أنْ يَعْتَصِرَ مِنِ ابْنِهِ ولا مِنِ ابْنَتِهِ شَيْئًا مِن ذَلِكَ. إذا كانَ عَلى ما وصَفْتُ لَكَ»  

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "What is done in our community about a slave who finds something and uses it before the term which is set for finds has been reached, and that is a year, is that it is against his person. Either his master gives the price of what his slave has used, or he surrenders his slave to them as compensation. If he withheld it until the term was reached which is set for finds and he used it, it is a debt against him which follows him and it is not against his person and there is nothing against his master in it."  

قالَ يَحْيى: سَمِعْتُ مالِكًا يَقُولُ: «الأمْرُ عِنْدَنا فِي العَبْدِ يَجِدُ اللُّقَطَةَ فَيَسْتَهْلِكُها، قَبْلَ أنْ تَبْلُغَ الأجَلَ الَّذِي أُجِّلَ فِي اللُّقَطَةِ وذَلِكَ سَنَةٌ، أنَّها فِي رَقَبَتِهِ، إمّا أنْ يُعْطِيَ سَيِّدُهُ ثَمَنَ ما اسْتَهْلَكَ غُلامُهُ، وإمّا أنْ يُسَلِّمَ إلَيْهِمْ غُلامَهُ، وإنْ أمْسَكَها حَتّى يَأْتِيَ الأجَلُ الَّذِي أُجِّلَ فِي اللُّقَطَةِ ثُمَّ اسْتَهْلَكَها، كانَتْ دَيْنًا عَلَيْهِ. يُتْبَعُ بِهِ، ولَمْ تَكُنْ فِي رَقَبَتِهِ، ولَمْ يَكُنْ عَلى سَيِّدِهِ فِيها شَيْءٌ»