Islamic Fiqh > Endowments (waqf) and property > Hiba: the gift > The donor, the donee and shufa
Contents
Updated on 25 September 2026 at 6:57 PM
This part of the chapter on the hiba (the gift) gathers the cases where donor and recipient disagree or deliberate over acceptance: the legitimacy of the hiba, asking for a gift, its acceptance or refusal, the gifts of rulers, the hiba made with or without compensation, and what is taken out of mere embarrassment. The positions of the four schools are set side by side, supported by their classical references and by the reports handed down from the Prophet and the Companions.
The hiba is legitimate according to the Book, the Sunnah and the consensus. As for the Book, the proof is the word of Allah:
"If they yield to you a part of their wealth of their own accord, then consume it wholesomely and with delight"
Surah An-Nisa, 4
that is: if their souls are pleased with some of that, then gift them something of yours. And His word:
"who give their wealth, despite their love for it, to the relatives, the orphans, the needy and the traveler"
Surah Al-Baqarah, 177
As for the Sunnah, among it is what Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him):
"Exchange gifts, and you will love one another"Narrated by al-Bukhari in "Al-Adab al-Mufrad" (594) and by al-Bayhaqi (6/169); a hasan hadith
"If I were invited to a foreleg of mutton, I would accept the invitation, and if I were given a foreleg as a gift, I would accept it"Narrated by al-Bukhari (4883)
"The Messenger of Allah used to accept the gift and reward it" (words of Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her)Narrated by al-Bukhari (2445)
"O Muslim women, let no neighbor despise the gift of a neighbor, even if it be a sheep's foreleg"Narrated by al-Bukhari (2427) and Muslim (1030)
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: this prohibition of despising is addressed to the woman giving the gift, and its meaning is: let a neighbor not withhold charity or a gift from her neighbor out of belittling what she has; rather, let her give generously whatever she can, even if little, such as a sheep's foreleg, which is better than nothing ("Sharh Sahih Muslim", 7/120). He also said: our companions said that doing so with relatives and with neighbors is better than with others ("Rawdat al-Talibin", 4/180).
So the little must not be scorned to the point of withholding it, nor should the recipient disdain to accept the little. It is recommended for the recipient to pray for the giver, and when the recipient prays for him, it is recommended for the giver to pray for him as well ("Rawdat al-Talibin", 4/180).
Imam al-Haramayn (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the basis of it is the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and there is no doubt that it was in practice in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him); its establishment therefore passes by mass transmission (tawatur), and it is the individual reports that convey the details of its rulings. Such is the way of every foundation of the principles of the Sharia ("Nihayat al-Matlab", 8/407).
As for the consensus, a great number of scholars transmitted it on the legitimacy of the hiba. Al-Imrani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the hiba is a recommended practice, and the Muslims agreed on its being recommended ("Al-Bayan", 8/107-108). Ibn al-Mundhir (may Allah have mercy on him) said: everyone whose words we preserve among the people of knowledge agreed that when a man gifts his young child a specific house or a specific slave, hands it to him with his own hand and calls witnesses to it, the hiba is complete ("Al-Ijma'", 600, and "Al-Ishraf", 7/83). Al-Damiri (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the ummah agreed on the recommended nature of the hiba, for it is a cause of affection and mutual love ("Al-Najm al-Wahhaj", 5/536).
Al-Khatib al-Shirbini (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the consensus was concluded on the recommended nature of the hiba in all its types; Allah the Most High said:
"Cooperate with one another in righteousness and piety"
Surah Al-Ma'idah, 2
and the hiba is righteousness; and because it is a cause of affection and mutual love, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Exchange gifts, and you will love one another" (a hasan hadith whose takhrij preceded). He likewise accepted the gift of the Muqawqis, a disbeliever, and kept from it Maria the Copt, by whom he had a child; and he accepted the gift of the Negus, a Muslim, made use of it, and also sent him gifts in return ("Mughni al-Muhtaj", 3/486).
The term "al-kashih" cited in the hadith means "the enemy", for charity cuts off hostility and does away with it (a sahih hadith narrated by Ibn Khuzaymah in his "Sahih" (2387) and by al-Bayhaqi in "Al-Kubra" (13002)).
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: our companions said that doing so with relatives and neighbors is better than with others ("Rawdat al-Talibin", 4/180). Al-Imrani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the hiba to relatives is better, by the word of the Most High:
"who give their wealth, despite their love for it, to the relatives"
Surah Al-Baqarah, 177
for He began with them, and preference begins with the more important, then the more important ("Al-Bayan", 8/108-109). He then mentions the hadiths mentioned above.
In the gift, the neighbor whose door is nearest is given precedence over the one whose door is far, by the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her):
"I said: O Messenger of Allah, I have two neighbors; to which of them should I give? He said: To the nearer of the two to you by the door"Narrated by al-Bukhari (2140); cited in "Matalib Uli al-Nuha" (4/380)
Asking for a gift is called "isti'thab". Al-Jawhari said: al-i'thab is the acceptance of the hiba, and al-isti'thab is asking for the hiba; the people "tawahabu", that is, each gifted the other; a man is "wahab" or "wahaba", that is, very generous in giving away his wealth ("Tahdhib al-Asma", 3/369, and "Lisan al-Arab", 1/803).
The jurists in general held that asking for a gift may be obligatory, recommended, or merely permitted.
According to the most correct view among the Shafi'is, it is obligatory to ask for the gift of water when the giver of the water does not need it and the time is too short to seek water; for in that case the water is deemed already found and the favor (minna) is not weighty. If the giver needs it for immediate or imminent thirst, or needs it immediately for something else, or the time allows seeking water, then asking is not obligatory ("Al-Majmu'", 2/280, and "Mughni al-Muhtaj", 1/238-239).
Abu al-Walid Ibn Rushd (may Allah have mercy on him) said, in the question of asking for water for ablutions: Ibn al-Qasim was asked about a man on a journey whose water had run short while his companions had water: do you think he should ask them for water for his ablutions or perform tayammum? He replied: in a place rich in water, I see no harm in it; as for the place where water is hard to find, I hope that leaving it off is broader (in grace).
Muhammad ibn Rushd said: it is obligatory for a man to seek water for his ablutions when he lacks it and finds no one from whom to buy it, while he has the means at an equivalent price, among those near him whom he thinks will not withhold it and will give it to him, as in "Al-Mudawwana". The words "I see no harm in it," in Ashhab's transmission of this book, indicate that he may leave off seeking in a place rich in water where he is confident that stinginess will not be shown to him in it; since what is sought to be avoided in asking is that asking itself be disapproved, being told there is no disapproval in this asking indicates that obligation attaches to it, because purity is required for prayer. And his words at the end of the question, "I hope that leaving off asking is broader in the place where water is hard to find," indicate that, in his view, there is no latitude for leaving off asking where water is plentiful, which is what we said. With Allah is success ("Al-Bayan wa-l-Tahsil", 1/45-46).
The scholars adduced the permissibility of asking for a gift by what al-Bukhari narrated from Abu Sa'id (may Allah be pleased with him): a group of the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) set out on a journey and halted near a tribe of the Arabs and asked them for hospitality, but they refused to host them. The chief of that tribe was then stung, and everything that did him no good was sought for him. Some of them said: go to those people who have halted near them; perhaps one of them has something. They came to them and said: O people, our chief has been stung and we have tried everything that does him no good; does anyone among you have anything? Some of them said: yes, by Allah, I recite an incantation; but by Allah, we asked you for hospitality and you did not host us, and I will not recite for you until you set a payment for us. They agreed with them on a flock of sheep. The man went off, spat upon him and recited "Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds"; he was as if released from a bond and walked off feeling no harm.
He said: they paid them the payment agreed upon. Some said: divide it. The one who had recited said: do not do so; let us go to the Prophet (peace be upon him), tell him what happened and see what he commands us. They came back to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and told him, and he said: and how would you know it was an incantation? Then he said: you have done well; divide it and allot me a share with you. And the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) smiled (narrated by al-Bukhari, 5417).
Al-Bukhari said in his "Sahih": chapter of the one who asks something of his companions; and Abu Sa'id narrated that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Allot me a share with you."
Ibn Batal (may Allah have mercy on him) said: asking a gift of an affable friend is good when it is known that what he asks pleases the soul and gladdens him to give ("Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari", 7/88). The hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: his words, "chapter of the one who asks something of his companions," mean that it is permitted, whether the thing itself or a benefit, that is, without disapproval in that, when he knows the goodness of their souls ("Fath al-Bari", 5/200).
Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated: the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent us out, appointing Abu Ubaydah over us to go out and meet a caravan of Quraysh, and he provisioned us with a waterskin of dates, having nothing else to give us. Abu Ubaydah gave us a date at a time. Jabir said: I asked: what did you do with them? He said: we sucked them as an infant sucks, then drank water over them, and that sufficed us for our day until night; and we would beat the leaf sheaths of the palms with our staffs, soak them in water and eat them. We went along the seashore when a mass rose for us on the seashore like a huge dune. We came to it: it was a creature called "al-anbar" (the sperm whale). Abu Ubaydah said: it is a dead creature. Then he said: no, rather we are the emissaries of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), we are in the way of Allah, and you have been compelled: eat.
Jabir said: we stayed by it a month, three hundred of us, until we grew fat. I saw us ladle oil from the socket of its eye by the bucketful and cut from it chunks as big as a bull, or the size of a bull; Abu Ubaydah took thirteen men from among us, seated them in the socket of its eye, cut one of its ribs and set it upright, then saddled the greatest camel we had, which passed beneath it, and we provisioned ourselves from its meat and its dried strips. When we reached Madinah we came to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and told him, and he said: "It is a provision Allah has brought out for you; do you have any of its meat to feed us?" Jabir said: so we sent some of it to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and he ate it (narrated by Muslim, 1935).
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: in this is proof that there is no harm in a man asking, from the wealth and goods of his companion, to be directed toward a path of good; and this is not the asking that is forbidden: that applies to strangers, for gain and other aims, while this is for companionship, affability and being directed to good ("Sharh Sahih Muslim", 13/86).
The jurists differed over the hiba and the gift: is accepting them obligatory or recommended? The majority of jurists, the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is and Hanbalis according to the madhhab, held that accepting the hiba and the gift is not obligatory, for that entails harm: the burden of the favor owed (minna). They adduced what Salim ibn Abdullah narrated from his father: the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to give Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) a stipend, and Umar would say to him: give it, O Messenger of Allah, to one who is more in need of it than I. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said to him:
"Take it and use it or give it as charity; whatever comes to you from this wealth while you are neither seeking it out nor asking for it, take it; and what is not so, do not force yourself to it"Narrated by al-Bukhari (1404) and Muslim (1045); the wording is Muslim's
Salim said: for that reason Ibn Umar would never ask anyone for anything and would never refuse anything given to him.
They said: the Prophet's command in this is a command of recommendation. Al-Tabari said: the scholars differed over the meaning of his words (peace be upon him) to Umar, "whatever comes to you from this wealth, take it," after their agreement that it is a command of recommendation and right guidance; the correct view in my judgment is that he (peace be upon him) recommended to his ummah accepting the gift of every giver whose gift is lawful, whether ruler or subject. For the Messenger (peace be upon him) said to Umar: "whatever Allah has brought you of this wealth while you are neither seeking it out nor asking, accept it"; so he recommended to him accepting all that Allah brought him of wealth, by all its channels, without singling out one channel over others, except what he (peace be upon him) excepted: what comes by an unlawful channel, which it is not lawful for him to accept, such as one who seizes a Muslim man's property by force and then gives that very property to another, while the recipient knows it was seized, stolen or embezzled; if he accepts it, returning it becomes obligatory upon him ("Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari" by Ibn Batal, 3/507-508, and "Fath al-Bari", 3/338).
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the scholars differed over one to whom wealth comes: is accepting it obligatory or recommended? On three schools related by Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari and others; the correct and well-known view held by the majority is that it is recommended, except the ruler's gift; as for the ruler's gift, some forbade it, some permitted it and some disliked it; the correct view is that if the unlawful predominates in what is in the ruler's hand, it is forbidden, and likewise if he gives to one who does not deserve; if the unlawful does not predominate, it is permissible, provided the holder has no impediment barring him from deserving to take. A group said: taking is obligatory, from the ruler and others; and others said: it is recommended in the ruler's gift specifically. And Allah knows best ("Sharh Sahih Muslim", 7/134-135).
It is narrated from Urwah ibn al-Zubayr and Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib that Hakim ibn Hizam (may Allah be pleased with him) said: I asked the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and he gave me, then I asked him and he gave me, then I asked him and he gave me, then he said: "O Hakim, this wealth is a sweet green fruit; whoever takes it with a generous soul, blessing is placed in it for him, and whoever takes it seeking it out, no blessing is placed in it for him; he will be like the one who eats and is never filled; the upper hand is better than the lower hand." Hakim said: I then said: O Messenger of Allah, by Him Who sent you with the truth, I will never ask anyone for anything after you until I part from this world. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) would call Hakim to receive a stipend, but he refused to accept it from him; then Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) called him to give it to him, and he refused to accept anything from him. Umar said: I call you to witness, O company of Muslims, that I am offering Hakim his right from this fay' and he refuses to take it. Hakim never asked anyone after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) until he died (narrated by al-Bukhari, 1403, and Muslim, 1035).
The bearing of the hadith, as Ibn Taymiyyah says, is that Hakim (may Allah be pleased with him) told the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he would accept nothing from anyone, and the Prophet (peace be upon him) affirmed him in that, as did the caliphs after him; and this is proof of the permissibility of returning, even without asking or seeking it out ("Majmu' al-Fatawa", 25/97).
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: no one is compelled to accept a gift, a charity, a bequest or a loan, and a woman is not compelled into marriage so that her mahr may be taken; for that entails harm through the burden of the favor owed for the gift, the charity and the bequest, and the compensation in the loan ("Al-Mughni", 4/289).
The Hanbalis said: returning a hiba is disliked, even if it is small, by the hadith of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), raised to the Prophet (peace be upon him): "If a foreleg or a shin were gifted to me, I would accept it" (narrated by al-Bukhari, 2429); perfume especially, by the hadith "three things are not to be returned," among which he counted perfume; and by the hadith of Ahmad from Ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him), raised to the Prophet: "Do not return the gift" (a sahih hadith narrated by Imam Ahmad in his "Musnad" (3838), by al-Bukhari in "Al-Adab al-Mufrad" (157), and by Ibn Hibban in his "Sahih" (5603)).
It is learned from this that accepting a gift and a hiba is not obligatory, even if they come without asking or seeking it out for oneself; this is the madhhab; and according to Imam Ahmad, accepting them is obligatory.
Returning it is permitted for reasons, such as intending to take it under an exchange contract, by the hadith of Jabir, among its wording: the Prophet (peace be upon him) said to him: "Sell me this camel of yours." He said: I replied: no, it is yours. He said: no, sell it to me. Narrated by Muslim. Or the giver not being content with the usual reward, because of the hardship that accepting involves at that point; or the gift coming after asking and seeking it out for itself, by Umar's hadith: "whatever Allah has brought you of this wealth while you are neither seeking it out nor asking, take it; and what is not so, do not force yourself to it" (narrated by al-Bukhari, 1647, and Muslim, 1045). Seeking it out was explained by Ibrahim al-Harbi as seeking the thing, raising oneself toward it and making overtures for it; or to cut off the favor (minna) when the taker owes a favor for it.
Returning the hiba may become obligatory when the recipient knows that the giver, that is, the donor, gave out of embarrassment: he must then return his gift to him. Ibn al-Jawzi said so in "Al-Adab": it is a good view, because the purposes are taken into account in contracts according to us.
Likewise, returning the gift of the game of one in ihram is obligatory; for he (may blessings and peace be upon him) returned to Sa'b ibn Jaththamah the gift of the wild donkey and said: "We returned it to you only because we are in ihram" (narrated by al-Bukhari, 1729, and Muslim, 1193).
The tendency is that when one knows the giver gave out of embarrassment, either returning is obligatory or compensation is obligatory, the compensation being its like or better than it; and what was mentioned tends to apply to the foul-mouthed man, from whom one fears he will seize upon whoever does not reward him with satire and praise; when that is known of him, he must then compensate him for his gift, to escape his covenant and rescue himself from the tearing of his honor and from committing the sin of backbiting.
Whoever intercedes for another, who then offers him a gift, must return it to him, by what is in the hadith of Abu Dawud: "Whoever intercedes for his brother, who then gives him a gift and he accepts it, has come through a great door of the doors of riba" (a hasan hadith narrated by Abu Dawud, 3541, and by al-Tabarani in "Al-Kabir", 8/238, 7928).
Ibn Rajab (may Allah have mercy on him) said in the fiftieth maxim after the hundred: among them is the gift to one who intercedes for him with the ruler and the like: it is not permitted; the Qadi mentioned it and Ahmad hinted at it, for it is like a wage, and intercession is among the general interests, so taking a wage for it is not permitted; and Ahmad stated in Salih's narration, regarding one who has a deposit and delivers it and is then offered a gift, that he accepts it only with the intention of recompense.
Ahmad said: it is not befitting for the suitor, when he has asked a woman for people, to accept a gift from them; for the suitor is like the intercessor, who is forbidden to accept a gift ("Al-Furu'", 4/483, "Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat", 4/392-393, and "Matalib Uli al-Nuha", 4/379-381).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: when a garment is lent to a naked man, accepting it becomes binding upon him, as accepting water becomes binding when it is gifted to him, and the bucket and the rope when they are lent to him. It is said: he is not obliged to accept it, just as accepting is not binding upon him if a hiba is given to him, nor accepting money for hajj and expiations. And an argument has been related that accepting the hiba becomes binding upon him: the shame of his private parts remaining exposed is a greater harm than the harm of the favor that attaches to things, according to those of our companions who say accepting money for hajj is binding; accepting the garment is stronger, for the garment's obligation does not depend on its existence but on the ability to obtain it, like water in ablutions; evidence: were he able to obtain the garment from lawful things, it would become binding upon him, whereas obtaining what he performs hajj with from lawful things is not binding upon him.
The first view, which is the well-known one, is that accepting a loan usually involves no favor, unlike accepting a hiba; so accepting the loan becomes like accepting water and earth for purification, and like directing someone to the road to the mosque; what counts is not the existence of the garment but the ability, which is already present, unlike accepting a hiba, which harms him by the right owed to the giver and by the possibility of a favor being charged to him ("Sharh al-Umdah", 4/338).
Imam Ahmad, in a transmission chosen by a group of his companions (and Ibn Hazm), held that accepting the hiba is obligatory, by what Salim ibn Abdullah narrated from his father: "the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to give Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) a stipend, and Umar would say to him: give it, O Messenger of Allah, to one who is more in need of it than I. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said to him: Take it and use it or give it as charity; whatever comes to you from this wealth while you are neither seeking it out nor asking for it, take it; and what is not so, do not force yourself to it." Salim said: for that reason Ibn Umar would never ask anyone for anything and would never refuse anything given to him (narrated by al-Bukhari, 1404, and Muslim, 1045; the wording is Muslim's; "Al-Furu'", 4/483, "Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat", 4/392-393, "Matalib Uli al-Nuha", 4/379-381, and "Al-Muhalla", 9/152-153).
The scholars differed over the ruling on the gifts of rulers: is it lawful for a man to accept them or not? Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Ibn Jarir al-Tabari said: as for the ruler's gift, some forbade it, some permitted it and some disliked it; the correct view is that if the unlawful predominates in what is in the ruler's hand, it is forbidden, and likewise if he gives to one who does not deserve; if the unlawful does not predominate, it is permissible, provided the holder has no impediment barring him from deserving to take. A group said: taking is obligatory, from the ruler and others; and others said: it is recommended in the ruler's gift specifically. And Allah knows best ("Sharh Sahih Muslim", 7/135).
Imam al-Bukhari said in his "Sahih": chapter of the one to whom Allah gives something without asking or seeking it out. Then it is narrated from Salim that Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) said: I heard Umar say: the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to give me a stipend and I would say: give it to one more in need of it than I. He said: "Take it: if something comes to you from this wealth while you are neither seeking it out nor asking for it, take it; and what is not so, do not force yourself to it" (narrated by al-Bukhari, 1404 and 6744, and Muslim, 1045).
Ibn Batal (may Allah have mercy on him) said: al-Tahawi said: the meaning of this hadith does not concern charities, but the wealth the imam divides among the rich and the poor of the Muslims; that wealth was given to people not out of poverty, but for the rights they held in it; the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) therefore disliked for Umar, when he gave him, his words "give it to one more in need of it than I," for he only gave it for a reason other than poverty; then he said to him: "take it and use it," as Shu'ayb related from al-Zuhri; this shows it is not from the wealth of charities, for it does not befit the poor man to take from charities what it befits him to keep as wealth, whether after asking or otherwise; then he said: "if something comes to you from this wealth," whose ruling is this, "take it."
Al-Tabari said: the scholars differed over the meaning of his words (peace be upon him) to Umar, "whatever comes to you from this wealth, take it," after their agreement that it is a command of recommendation and right guidance. Some said: it is the Prophet's (peace be upon him) recommendation to everyone given a gift to accept it, whoever the giver may be, ruler or commoner, righteous or sinner, once he is among those whose gift is lawful.
Among those who said so: it is narrated from Abu Hurayrah that he said: "No one gives me a gift but I accept it; but as for asking, no." The like is narrated from Abu al-Darda'. Aisha accepted from Muawiyah. Habib ibn Abi Thabit said: I saw the gifts of al-Mukhtar coming to Ibn Umar and Ibn Abbas, and they accepted them. Uthman ibn Affan said: the ruler's gifts are the flesh of a sound gazelle. Sa'id ibn al-As sent gifts to Ali ibn Abi Talib, who accepted them and said: "Take what they give you." Muawiyah granted al-Husayn four hundred thousand. Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Ali ibn al-Husayn was asked about the ruler's gifts; he said: if you know it comes from seizure or bribery, do not accept it; if you do not know, accept it; for charity had been given in meat for Barirah, and she gifted that meat to the household of the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: "For her it is charity, and for us it is a gift"; and he said: "What is sinful is upon them, and what is pleasant is for you." Alqamah, al-Aswad, al-Nakha'i, al-Hasan al-Basri and al-Sha'bi accepted it.
Others said: rather it is the Prophet's (peace be upon him) recommendation to his ummah to accept the gift of one who holds no authority; as for the ruler, some said accepting his gift is unlawful and some disliked it. Among those who said so: it is related that "Khalid ibn Usayd gave Masruq thirty thousand, who refused to accept them; he was told: had you taken them you would have joined kinship ties. He said: consider the case of a thief digging into a house: would I care whether I took this or took that?" Ibn Sirin, Abu Ruzayn and Ibn Muhayriz did not accept anything from the ruler. Hisham ibn Urwah said: Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr sent me and my brother five hundred dinars; my brother said: return them; "no one ate of them while free of need of them except that Allah made him need them."
Ibn al-Mundhir said: Muhammad ibn Wasi', al-Thawri, Ibn al-Mubarak, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and a group disliked the ruler's gifts. Others said: rather it is a recommendation to accept the ruler's gift specifically. It is narrated from Ikrimah that he said: "We accept only from rulers."
Al-Tabari said: the correct view in my judgment is that it is his (peace be upon him) recommendation to his ummah to accept the gift of every giver whose gift is lawful, ruler or subject. For the Messenger (peace be upon him) said to Umar (may Allah be pleased with him): "whatever Allah has brought you of this wealth while you are neither seeking it out nor asking, accept it"; so he recommended to him accepting all that Allah brought him of wealth, by all its channels, without singling out one channel over others, except what he (peace be upon him) excepted: what comes by an unlawful channel, which it is not lawful for him to accept, such as one who seizes a Muslim man's property by force and then gives that very property to another, while the recipient knows it was seized, stolen or embezzled; if he accepts it, returning it becomes obligatory upon him.
It is then objected: if the matter is as you described, such that it is not unlawful for anyone to accept the gift of anyone whose disposal of his wealth is lawful, except a gift Allah has forbidden accepting, what then is the reason for the conduct of the one who returned the rulers' gifts and refrained from accepting the emirs' gifts, when the Prophet (peace be upon him) recommended accepting the gift of everyone? He is answered: whoever returned any of it, whatever his predominant case, judged that he does not take wealth by that channel, and considered that the safest for his religion and the most protective of his honor was to leave accepting it; since the command to accept is not firm and obligatory, but a recommendation to accept what is undoubtedly lawful; when there is ambiguity, the right course is to leave accepting it, and what is not certainly lawful does not fall under the Prophet's (peace be upon him) command to Umar to accept it; thus he placed it in the rank of doubtful things from which one cannot guarantee that whoever falls into them will not incur the unlawful.
If it is then said: what do you say of one who accepted without ascertaining where the wealth came from or for what purpose it had been set aside? It is answered: that divides into three categories: what you know with certainty to be lawful, I do not prefer to return; what you know with certainty to be unlawful, I do not permit accepting; and what I know neither its destination nor the causes of its acquisition: that is what spares me the burden of investigating its causes and imposes on me, on the face of it, the judgment that he is more entitled to it than anyone, so long as no claimant establishes a right over him, just as I judge that what is in the hands of the most just of judges is more rightfully his so long as no one establishes a right over him; so he (peace be upon him) equalized between the ruling on the best of creatures and the worst in this: it falls to me to equalize between accepting each one's gift and returning it according to what is lawful and unlawful, even if they differ in that the righteous is more deserving of delight in the acceptance of his gift than the sinner ("Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari" by Ibn Batal, 3/507, 510).
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: a section on the ruler's gifts: Imam Abu Abdullah (may Allah have mercy on him) scrupulously avoided them, forbade his sons and his uncle to take them, boycotted them when they took them, shut the doors between himself and them when they took them, would eat nothing from the houses of those who took them nor benefit from anything done there, and ordered them to give as charity what they had taken. He acted so only because their wealth is mixed with what they take unlawfully, injustice and other, so that it becomes a doubtful matter; the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "The lawful is clear and the unlawful is clear, and between them are ambiguous matters which many people do not know; whoever guards against the ambiguous preserves his religion and his honor, and whoever falls into the ambiguous is like a shepherd pasturing around a sanctuary, on the verge of falling into it" (narrated by al-Bukhari, 52). The Prophet (peace be upon him) also said: "Leave what makes you doubt for what does not make you doubt." Ahmad adduced that a group of the Companions abstained from the ruler's wealth, among them Hudhayfah, Abu Ubaydah, Mu'adh, Abu Hurayrah and Ibn Umar; and Abu Abdullah did not deem it unlawful.
He was indeed asked: is the ruler's wealth unlawful? He said: no, but I prefer abstention from it. In another transmission he said: there is no Muslim who has no right in these dirhams; how could I say it is bribery when al-Hasan, al-Husayn, Abdullah ibn Ja'far and many of the Companions used to accept Muawiyah's gifts?
It is narrated from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "There is no harm in the ruler's gifts, when the lawful they give you is greater than the unlawful." And he said: "Do not ask the ruler for anything; if he gives you, take; for what the treasury (bayt al-mal) contains of lawful is greater than what it contains of unlawful."
Umar ibn Shabbah al-Bahtri related in "Kitab al-Qada'" that al-Hasan, Ibn Sirin and al-Sha'bi entered upon Umar ibn Hubayrah, who ordered a thousand dirhams for each of them and two thousand dirhams for al-Hasan. Al-Hasan took his gift and Ibn Sirin refused to take it. Ibn Sirin was told: why do you not take it? He said: until it is made general among the people. Al-Hasan said: by Allah, were a thief to take your cloak and mine and then decide to return my cloak to me, I would say: I will not accept mine until you return Ibn Sirin's to him; I would love for you to be poorer than you are, O Ibn Sirin. This is because the ruler's gifts carry a ground of authorization and lawfulness, for they have many sources: the fay', charity and others ("Al-Mughni", 6/338).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: I saw the treatise that Shaykh Abu Umar Ibn Abd al-Barr dictated when it reached him, while he was at Shatibah, that people had reproached him for eating the food of rulers and accepting their gifts:
Tell whoever rejects my eating the food of the emirs that your ignorance has its place among the fools; for following the righteous of the Companions and the Successors, the imams of the religion among the Muslims and the bygone forebears, is the criterion of the religion. Zayd ibn Thabit, who was among those firmly rooted in knowledge, used to accept the gifts of Muawiyah and his son Yazid; Ibn Umar, for all his scrupulousness and merit, used to accept the gifts of his in-law al-Mukhtar ibn Abi Ubayd, eat his food and take his gifts; and al-Mukhtar was not an upright man.
Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, who was filled with knowledge from the crown of his head to the thongs of his sandals, said to a man who asked him: I have a neighbor who deals in riba and does not shun the unlawful in his earnings, and he invites me to his food when I come; he replied: "what is pleasant is yours and the sin is his, so long as you do not know the thing itself to be unlawful." Uthman ibn Affan was asked about the ruler's gifts; he said: the flesh of a sound gazelle. Al-Sha'bi, who was among the great Successors and their scholars, tutored the sons of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, accepted their gifts and ate their food.
Ibrahim al-Nakha'i and the rest of the scholars of Kufah, and al-Hasan al-Basri, despite his asceticism and scrupulousness, and the rest of the scholars of Basrah, and Abu Salamah ibn Abd al-Rahman, and Aban ibn Uthman, and the seven jurists, except Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, used to accept the gifts of rulers and emirs; al-Hasan and al-Sha'bi accepted Ibn Hubayrah's gift when they asked him about his standing with Abd al-Malik; and Sufyan al-Thawri, for all his merit and scrupulousness, used to say: "the ruler's gifts are dearer to me than the visits of brothers, for brothers exact gratitude while the ruler does not."
Reports of this kind from the scholars and the virtuous are many, and people have compiled whole chapters on it. Ahmad ibn Khalid, jurist of al-Andalus and its scholar, had in this a book which he was led to compile because of the reproach of his countrymen for his accepting the gifts of Abd al-Rahman al-Nasir: the latter had moved him to Madinat al-Zahra near Cordoba, lodged him in one of the houses of the great mosque beside him, and granted him a livelihood of food, drink, condiment and sweetmeat; he has, like his like, a share in the treasury, and the one responsible for the admixture there is the ruler; as Abdullah ibn Mas'ud said: what is pleasant is yours and the sin is his, so long as you do not know the thing itself to be unlawful.
The meaning of this saying of Ibn Mas'ud is agreed upon by the scholars: "so long as you do not know the thing itself to be unlawful, taken outside its lawful channel," like bread and its like of food and clothing, and all such: things bought by seizure or theft, or taken by manifest injustice without ambiguity; this is what no one disputes is prohibited, along with the loss of integrity of the one who declares the garment lawful and takes it and owns it; and no scholar of the Successors is known to have scrupulously avoided the ruler's gifts except Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib in Madinah and Muhammad ibn Sirin in Basrah, and both were a model of scrupulousness; and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and the people of detachment, scrupulousness and asceticism, followed their path. May Allah have mercy on them all.
Detachment from the world is among the best of virtues, yet it is not lawful for the one Allah has granted success and who has detached himself to declare unlawful what Allah has made lawful of it; and the self-admiring people of our age censure appetites while they declare the prohibited and the blameworthy lawful; their likeness, in my view, is that of those who asked Abdullah ibn Umar about the prohibition of killing lice and nits; he said to the questioners: where are you from? They said: from the people of Kufah. He said: you ask me about this when you killed al-Husayn ibn Ali?!
Abdullah ibn Umar narrated from the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he said: "What comes to you without asking, take it and use it." Abu Sa'id al-Khudri and Jabir ibn Abdallah narrated the like of its meaning from the Prophet (peace be upon him); in the hadith of one of them: "it is only a provision Allah has granted," and in the wording of some narrators: "do not then repel the provision of Allah." All of this, in the view of the people of knowledge, is a composite built upon what they agreed upon, which is the truth: for one who knows a thing to be unlawful in itself, it is not lawful. And Allah knows best ("Jami' al-Masa'il" of Ibn Taymiyyah, 3/309-312).
Ibn Muflih (may Allah have mercy on him) said: a section: as for the wealth of the treasury (bayt al-mal), if he knows it is lawful or unlawful, or knows both are in it, or doubts the unlawful in it, the ruling is as preceded. An absolute ruling cannot therefore be given; the discussion concerns the predominant case, and the predominant case is that it contains lawful and unlawful, and in it is the well-known dispute mentioned earlier; hence the disagreements about it multiplied.
A group of our companions said: working with the ruler and accepting his gifts is permitted; in "Al-Targhib" it was qualified by the just ruler, and in "Al-Tabsirah" by the one whose justice predominates; in one transmission it is disliked. Ahmad was asked about its gift and dealing with them and said he disliked both, yet its gift was dearer to him than charity; he said: it is better than the visit of brothers, and the wage of teaching is better than both, as our shaykh reported. He also said: it is not unlawful; and he also said: he dies in his religion but does not work with them; and he orders his boycott and expulsion if he does not desist.
Ahmad boycotted his sons, his uncle and his cousin when they took them; the Qadi said this implies the permissibility of boycotting for taking a doubtful thing, and he permitted it only because the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) boycotted over matters of similar import, such as Ibn Mas'ud's boycott of the one who laughed at a funeral, and Hudhayfah's for tying the thread of the ihram garment; and Umar ordered the boycott of Sabigh for his questioning about "Adh-Dhariyat", "Al-Mursalat" and "An-Nazi'at".
Ibn al-Zubayr said: "Either Aishah desist or I will forsake her," and he forsook her. Al-Khallal said: it seems Ahmad made allowance for one who took them out of need; when they took them while free of need, he would boycott them and then speak with them; and that, in his view, without an outright severance of conversation, for they have, even if they were free of need, a strong argument.
Ahmad was asked: do you think one who has taken from the divan should give it back? He said: yes. He likewise disliked the soldier's dealings and answering his invitation; he means the one who takes the unlawful, the oppressor. Abdullah ibn Muhammad Furan transmitted from Ahmad in "Al-Halal wa-l-Haram" that al-Zuhri and Makhul said: eat; "this is from the ruler's wealth"; as Ali (peace be upon him) said: "the treasury, into which the wicked and the righteous enter; it may reach a man and he eats of it."
As for an inheritance containing lawful and unlawful, or wealth a man has earned: it is returned to its owners; if he does not know them and has no power over them, he gives it as charity. Some said: because the treasury has no specific claimant to whom it may be returned, and because of the general affliction it involves; a group of the Successors abstained from it, as did those after them. Some of the forebears justified it by the remaining claimants not having taken. Ibn al-Jawzi said it: it is nothing, for he takes his right and the right of those others remains standing in a place of wrong, and wealth is not held in common.
Ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas, Aishah, al-Hasan, al-Husayn, Abdullah ibn Ja'far (may Allah be pleased with them), a group of the Successors and others accepted from it, as did Malik and al-Shafi'i. Uthman was asked about the ruler's gifts; he said: the flesh of a sound gazelle. Ibn Abd al-Barr said: al-Sha'bi, al-Nakha'i, al-Hasan, Abu Salamah ibn Abd al-Rahman, Aban ibn Uthman and the seven jurists, except Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, used to accept the ruler's gifts; and al-Thawri, for all his scrupulousness and merit, used to say: it is dearer to me than the visit of brothers. Whoever passes his gift on to another: in Ahmad's view it is not disliked for the second, for it is disliked only for the first, out of favoritism ("Al-Furu'", 2/504-506).
Al-Ghazali (may Allah have mercy on him) said: al-Shafi'i and Malik (may Allah be pleased with them both) accepted the gifts of the caliphs and rulers, while knowing that their wealth was mixed with the unlawful ("Ihya Ulum al-Din", 2/123).
Al-Mawwaq al-Maliki (may Allah have mercy on him) said: as for the caliphs' gifts, they are permissible without any doubt, for the people agreed on accepting the gift of the caliphs, both those approved and those disapproved, and what is wrongfully given in it is little within the much.
Ibn Rushd said: his words, "accepting from the tax collectors is a blemish," mean, in my view, the collectors of the tax who were appointed only to receive the wealth and collect it, without dividing it on its lawful purposes by ijtihad. As for the emirs to whom the caliph or his successor delegated the receiving of the wealth and its disbursement on its purposes by their ijtihad, like al-Hajjaj and his like among the emirs of lands to whom all affairs are delegated: their gifts are like the caliphs' gifts.
As for the judges, the soldiers and the governors, they may take their livelihoods from the collectors appointed over their hands, even if the tax is lawful but the collector is not just in his division: the majority permit taking the gift from them, and some disliked it. Even if the tax mixes lawful and unlawful: the majority dislike taking from it, and some permit it. And if the tax is unlawful: some forbid taking a gift or a livelihood for a post among the posts, and this is related from Malik; some permit it and some dislike it ("Al-Taj wa-l-Iklil", 5/143, "Al-Bayan wa-l-Tahsil", 17/342, and "Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil", 7/193).
An example of disagreement is related in "Al-Muhit al-Burhani" (6/189), about "grits (suwayq) that have been rolled, or a garment that has been dyed or sewn": the recipient said: "you gifted it to me and I built on it and planted; you gifted it to me while it was neither rolled, nor dyed, nor sewn, and I myself rolled it, dyed it and sewed it"; and the giver said: "no, I gifted it to you as it is"; the word is then the recipient's. The same applies when they differ over the building of a house or the adorning of a sword.
It is stated in "Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah": a man who held a house said to another: "you gave it to me as charity and permitted me to take possession of it, and I took possession of it": the word is the giver's; and if the one in whose hand the house is said: "it was in my hand and you then made of it a charity toward me," and his words are valid, and the one toward whom the charity was made said: "no, it was at that time in my hand and you took it without my permission": the word is the one toward whom the charity was made (4/399).
In "Durrar al-Hukkam, commentary on Majallat al-Ahkam": if the giver and the recipient differ, the giver saying: "the money handed over was a loan," and the recipient saying: "rather, a hiba," the word, with the oath, belongs to the one who handed it over (2/355).
The jurists differed in the case of an absolute hiba, that is, one not stipulated with a reward or without it, when the two parties then differ: the giver says: "I only gifted for a reward," and the recipient says: "rather, you gifted to me without reward": is the word the giver's or the recipient's?
The Malikis and the Shafi'is, in one view, held that the word is the giver's, for it is not permitted for the thing to leave his ownership except against a substitute ("Al-Muhadhdhab", 1/448, and "Al-Bayan", 8/136).
The Malikis said: if the hiba takes place absolute, that is, not stipulated with a reward, and the two parties then differ, one saying "I only gifted for a reward" and the other "you gifted to me without reward," the word is the giver's, whether custom (urf) witnesses for him or witnesses neither for him nor against him. But if custom witnesses for the recipient, in that he is like the giver, who does not seek a reward in his gift, the word is then the recipient's. This is when the recipient has taken possession of the hiba; as for before taking possession, the giver is believed absolutely, even if custom witnesses against him.
The giver is believed in his claim of a reward in a hiba other than coined money, such as dinars and dirhams; as for coined money, there is no reward in it, for custom is that people only gift in quest of reward what admits varied purposes, and coined money admits no varied purposes; gifting it in quest of reward is contrary to custom. Hence the giver is not believed in the intention of reward except by a condition set by the giver at the time of the hiba, or by a custom that is acted upon, the substitute then being goods or food; and what takes the place of the condition is custom, unlike unbroken jewelry. The difference between coined money and jewelry is that minting is an easy craft that does not transform the original, unlike jewelry-making, which is a craft taken into account and has made it like a valued thing ("Al-Sharh al-Kabir" with "Hashiyat al-Dasuqi", 5/517, "Hashiyat al-Adawi", 2/339, "Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil", 7/117-118, "Mawahib al-Jalil", 8/23-24, "Al-Taj wa-l-Iklil", 5/26-27, and "Tathbir al-Mukhtasar", 5/26).
A related question cited in "Al-Qunya" (chapter of claims) and "Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah" (4/399): the dispositions of a sick person are valid and are only rescinded after his death; this was disputed, and the word is with the one who denies rescission. It is said: the word is with the one who claims the sickness, for he denies the perpetuity of the contract and of ownership.
The Shafi'is and the Hanbalis stated explicitly: when someone takes another's property out of embarrassment, such as asking another for money in an assembly so that it is handed over solely out of embarrassment, or being given a gift whose giver he knows gave it out of embarrassment and not of his own accord, he does not come to own it and may not dispose of it, even if no request was made by the taker. The criterion is mere knowledge that the owner handed it over out of embarrassment, magnanimity, or a desire for good. Among this is the case of one who sits with people eating and they invite him to eat with them, while he knows this stems purely from their embarrassment: he may not eat of their food; just as it is forbidden for a guest to stay in his host's house beyond the period of religious hospitality, which is three days, so that the host feeds him out of embarrassment.
What is taken out of embarrassment takes the ruling of usurped property, and the taker must return it or compensate for it, and the compensation must be at the value of what he took or ate of their provisions ("Mughni al-Muhtaj", 3/286, "Tuhfat al-Muhtaj" with al-Shirwani's glosses, 7/7, and "Nihayat al-Muhtaj", 5/166).
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (may Allah have mercy on him) said: consider the citation of the consensus that whoever has something taken from him by way of embarrassment, without his consenting to it, is not owned by the taker; they justified it by saying it involves coercion by the sword of embarrassment, and is thus like coercion by the actual sword; indeed, many face that sword and bear its repeated wounds rather than face the first, fearing for their magnanimity and their standing, which the wise prefer and for which they feel the utmost fear ("Al-Fatawa al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kubra", 3/30).
The Hanbalis said: if the recipient knows he was given to out of embarrassment, returning becomes obligatory, that is, returning the gift to the giver. Ibn al-Jawzi (may Allah have mercy on him) said so in "Al-Adab": it is a good view, because the purposes are taken into account in contracts according to us ("Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat", 4/393, "Matalib Uli al-Nuha", 4/380, and "Manar al-Sabil", 2/353).