Hadith 3943

(2) The statement: "He only allocated shares for them, etc.": It is stated in (Mercy of the Ummah): They agreed that if the spoils were divided and taken possession of, and then reinforcements arrived, the reinforcements would have no share in it. However, if the reinforcements arrived after the battle ended but before the spoils were taken to the abode of Islam or before they were divided, Abu Hanifa said: They are entitled to a share as long as the spoils have not been taken to the abode of Islam or divided. Malik and Ahmad said: They are not entitled to a share in any case. As for Shafi‘i, there are two opinions: one that they are entitled to a share, and the other that they are not. Ibn al-Humam said: If reinforcements join in the abode of war before the spoils are taken to the abode of Islam, according to Shafi‘i, there are two opinions about whether the reinforcements share in the spoils. What we mentioned is based on the premise that ownership is not complete for those who acquired the spoils until they are taken to the abode of Islam. Thus, it is permissible for the reinforcements to share in them if there is evidence for it. The right of the reinforcements is not cut off except by three things: taking the spoils to the abode of Islam, dividing them in the abode of war, or the leader selling the spoils before the reinforcements arrive. This is based on our established principle that confirms or negates the right. As for what Shafi‘i cited as evidence from [Narrated by Bukhari] from Abu Huraira (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sent Aban on an expedition toward Najd. Aban and his companions arrived at Khaybar after the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had conquered it, and he did not allocate shares for them. There is no evidence in this, because the arrival of reinforcements in the abode of Islam does not necessitate their participation, and Khaybar became an abode of Islam immediately upon its conquest. Thus, their arrival occurred when the spoils were already in the abode of Islam. As for the allocation of shares to Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari, as narrated in [Narrated by Bukhari and Muslim], he said: We heard of the departure of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) while we were in Yemen. So, I set out with two brothers of mine, migrating to him, with me being the youngest. One was Abu Burda, and the other was Abu Ruhm, along with fifty-some men from my people. We boarded a ship, which took us to the Negus, where we met Ja‘far ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) and his companions. Ja‘far said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sent us here and ordered us to stay, so stay with us. We stayed until we came to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) when he conquered Khaybar. He allocated shares for us, but he did not allocate shares for anyone who was absent from the conquest of Khaybar except for the people of our ship. Ibn Hibban said in his Sahih: He gave them from the fifth of the fifth to win their hearts, not from the spoils, and this is sound. Do you not see that he did not give to others who did not witness it? Some Shafi‘is interpreted this as them having witnessed it before the spoils were taken, contrary to their school, as they make no distinction in the lack of entitlement whether the arrival was before or after taking the spoils, as long as it was after the conquest. In summary: According to us, the cause is crossing the boundary between the abode of Islam and the abode of war with the intention of fighting. According to Shafi‘i, it is witnessing the battle. Thus, according to us, those who acquire the spoils and the reinforcements share in the spoils because they are equal in this cause. This is taken from the commentaries of (The Kanz).

(٢) قوله: إنما أسهم لهم إلخ: قال في (رحمة الأمة): واتفقوا على أنهم إذا قسموا الغنيمة وحازوها، ثم اتصل بهم مددلم يكن للمدد في ذلك حصة، فإن اتصل المدد بعد انقضاء الحرب وقبل حيازة الغنيمة في دار الإسلام أو بعد أنأخذوها وقبل قسمتها. قال أبو حنيفة: يسهم لهم ما لم تحز إلى دار الإسلام أو يقسموها. وقال مالك وأحمد: لا يسهملهم على كل حال. وعن الشافعي قولان، أحدهما: يسهم، والثاني: لا يسهم، انتهى. وقال ابن الهمام: وإذا لحقه المددفي دار الحرب قبل أن يخرجوا الغنيمة إلى دار الإسلام شاركهم المدد فيها عن الشافعي فيه قولان، وما ذكرناه بناء علىما مهدناه من أن الملك لا يتم للغانمين قبل إحراز الغنيمة بدار الإسلام، فجاز أن يشاركهم المدد إذا قام به الدليل،ولا ينقطع حق المدد إلا بثلاثة أمور: الإحراز بدار الإسلام والقسمة بدار الحرب وبيع الإمام الغنيمة قبل لحاقالمدد هذا، وعلى ما حققناه المبني تأكد الحق وعدمه. وما استدل به الشافعي من (صحيح البخاري) عن أبي هريرة قال: بعث صلي الله عليه واله وسلم أبانا على سرية قِبَل نجد، فقدم أبان وأصحابه على رسول الله صلي الله عليه واله وسلم بخيبر بعد ما فتحها، إلى أنقال: فلم يقسم لهم، لا دليل فيه؛ لأن وصول المدد في دار الإسلام لا يوجب شركة، وخيبر صارت دار إسلامبمجرّد فتحها، فكان قدومهم والغنيمة في دار الإسلام. وأما إسهامه لأبي موسى الأشعري على ما في (الصحيحين) عنه، قال: بلغنا مخرج رسول الله صلي الله عليه واله وسلم ونحنباليمن، فخرجنا مهاجرين إليه أنا وأخوان لي أنا أصغرهم، أحدهما: أبو بردة، والآخر: أبو رهم في بضع وخمسينرجلًاً من قومي، فركبنا سفينة، فألقتنا إلى النجاشي، فوافينا جعفر بن أبي طالب وأصحابه عنده، فقال جعفر: إنرسول الله صلي الله عليه واله وسلم بعثنا ههنا وأمرنا بالإقامة فأقيموا معنا، فأقمنا حتى قدمنا، فعافينا رسول الله صلي الله عليه واله وسلم حين افتتح خيبر،فأسهم لنا ولم يسهم لاحد غاب عن فتح خيبر إلا أصحاب سفينتنا، فقال ابن حبان في صحيحه: إنما أعطاهم منخمس الخمس؛ ليستميل قلوبهم لا من الغنيمة، وهو حسن. ألا ترى أنه لم يعط غيرهم ممن لم يشهدها وحمل بعض الشافعية على أنهم شهدوا قبل حوز الغنائم خلافمذهبهم؛ فإنه لا فرق عندهم في عدم الاستحقاق بين كون الوصول قبل الحوز أو بعده بعد كونه بعد الفتح. حاصله:أن السبب عندنا هو مجاوزة الدرب الفاصل بين دار الإسلام ودار الحرب على قصد القتال. وعند الشافعي شهودالوقعة، فالغانمون والمدد هما يشتركان عندنا في الغنيمة؛ لاستوائهما في هذا السبب. أخذته من شروح (الكنز).