The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: 'Whoever seizes the adornments of others through unjust oppression will have that adornment made into seven layers around his neck on the Day of Resurrection, and he will be humiliated by it.' This indicates that taking something by force is an intolerable sin. This hadith has been narrated by Bukhari and Muslim.

Salim narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “Whoever takes anything from the land without right will be sunk into the seven earths on the Day of Resurrection.” [Narrated by Bukhari].

Ya‘la ibn Murrah narrated that he heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: “Whoever takes land without its right will be tasked with carrying its soil to the gathering place.” [Narrated by Ahmad].

From him, he heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: “Whoever unjustly takes a handspan of land, Allah will task him with digging it to the depth of the seven earths, then it will be hung around him until the Day of Resurrection when judgment is passed.” [Narrated by Ahmad].

Ibn Umar narrated that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “Let no one milk another’s livestock without permission. Would any of you like his storehouse to be broken into and his food taken? The udders of their livestock store their food for them.” [Narrated by Muslim]. Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhi narrated from Samurah that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “If one of you comes across livestock, if its owner is present, seek his permission. If he permits, milk and drink. If no one is there, call out three times. If someone responds, seek permission. If no one responds, milk and drink but do not take anything.” At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah narrated from Ibn Umar that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever enters an orchard may eat but not take anything away.” At-Tirmidhi said: This is a strange hadith. At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah narrated from Rafi‘ ibn Amr Al-Ghifari, who said: “I was a boy throwing stones at the Ansar’s palm trees. They caught me and brought me to the Prophet (ﷺ). He said, ‘Boy, why are you throwing stones at the palms?’ I said, ‘To eat.’ He said, ‘Do not throw stones; eat what falls beneath them.’ Then he patted my head and said, ‘O Allah, fill his stomach.’”

(1) “Let no one milk…”: This prohibits taking or using someone’s property without permission, whether milk or otherwise, for both the needy and others, except in dire necessity where no carrion is available. In such cases, one may eat and must compensate the owner, per our view and the majority. [Al-Nawawi].

(2) “Milk and drink…”: This is based on the Ansar’s custom of not denying travelers or the hungry. The hadith implies using another’s property requires permission, explicit or implied. Explicit permission is primary, but if no one is present, customary permission suffices. For those without such a custom, only the direly needy may drink and compensate. [From Al-Kawkab Ad-Durri]. Ibn Al-Malik said this is allowed only in necessity, fearing death or being stranded, with compensation when able. [From Al-Marqah].

(3) “May eat…”: Scholars say this and the milking hadith depend on local customs. If the item is precious to the owner, eating it without permission is impermissible. [From Arf Ash-Shadhi].

(4) “Eat what falls…”: This is due to the common custom of allowing fallen fruit, especially for children. Otherwise, even fallen fruit is another’s property, like dates on the tree. [From Al-Marqah].

Ibn Umar narrated that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “Let no one milk another’s livestock without permission. Would any of you like his storehouse to be broken into and his food taken? The udders of their livestock store their food for them.” [Narrated by Muslim]. Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhi narrated from Samurah that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “If one of you comes across livestock, if its owner is present, seek his permission. If he permits, milk and drink. If no one is there, call out three times. If someone responds, seek permission. If no one responds, milk and drink but do not take anything.” At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah narrated from Ibn Umar that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever enters an orchard may eat but not take anything away.” At-Tirmidhi said: This is a strange hadith. At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah narrated from Rafi‘ ibn Amr Al-Ghifari, who said: “I was a boy throwing stones at the Ansar’s palm trees. They caught me and brought me to the Prophet (ﷺ). He said, ‘Boy, why are you throwing stones at the palms?’ I said, ‘To eat.’ He said, ‘Do not throw stones; eat what falls beneath them.’ Then he patted my head and said, ‘O Allah, fill his stomach.’”

(1) “Let no one milk…”: This prohibits taking or using someone’s property without permission, whether milk or otherwise, for both the needy and others, except in dire necessity where no carrion is available. In such cases, one may eat and must compensate the owner, per our view and the majority. [Al-Nawawi].

(2) “Milk and drink…”: This is based on the Ansar’s custom of not denying travelers or the hungry. The hadith implies using another’s property requires permission, explicit or implied. Explicit permission is primary, but if no one is present, customary permission suffices. For those without such a custom, only the direly needy may drink and compensate. [From Al-Kawkab Ad-Durri]. Ibn Al-Malik said this is allowed only in necessity, fearing death or being stranded, with compensation when able. [From Al-Marqah].

(3) “May eat…”: Scholars say this and the milking hadith depend on local customs. If the item is precious to the owner, eating it without permission is impermissible. [From Arf Ash-Shadhi].

(4) “Eat what falls…”: This is due to the common custom of allowing fallen fruit, especially for children. Otherwise, even fallen fruit is another’s property, like dates on the tree. [From Al-Marqah].

If someone passes by a tree or plant while traveling and feels hungry, they may eat from it as much as is necessary, but they should not take any with them.

I was with the Prophet ﷺ, and I used to climb the date palm trees and shake the branches to make the dates fall. The Prophet ﷺ said to me: 'Do not do this, but gather what falls.' Then the Prophet ﷺ placed his hand on my head and prayed: 'O Allah, make him a person of good character.'

Sa‘id ibn Zaid narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever revives dead land, it is his, and an unjust root has no right.” [Narrated by Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi, and Abu Dawud]. Malik narrated from Urwah similarly. At-Tirmidhi said: This is a good, strange hadith. At-Tabarani narrated in his Mu‘jam Al-Kabir and Al-Awsat from Mu‘adh that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “A man has only what his leader willingly gives.”

(1) “It is his”: The land becomes his, but Abu Hanifah requires the leader’s permission. His two companions, Ash-Shafi‘i, and Ahmad cite the hadith’s generality. The hadith “A man has only what his leader willingly gives” supports requiring permission, as both relate to the same incident. [From Al-Marqah]. Radd Al-Muhtar says the Imam’s view is preferred, as stated in Al-Khaniyya and Al-Multaqa, followed by At-Tahawi and the texts. Ad-Durr Al-Mukhtar says for a Muslim, permission is disputed; for a non-Muslim, it is required; for a protected person, ownership is not possible.

(2) “An unjust root…”: One who plants or sows in another’s land without permission has no right to keep it. The owner may uproot it without compensation. [From Al-Marqah]. Al-Hidayah says if one usurps land and plants or builds, the owner may uproot without compensation. If uprooting harms the land, the owner may compensate for the building or plants’ value when uprooted, and they become his, considering both parties and avoiding harm.

Imam Maqil narrated it from Hadrat Urwah. Tirmidhi says that this hadith is hasan gharib.

the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: 'Good wealth is that which the ruler gives with pleasure. It is forbidden to take someone's wealth without permission or by force.'

Beware of not cursing anyone, and do not take anyone's wealth without their permission and without their consent.

Anas narrated: The Prophet (ﷺ) was with one of his wives when another Mother of the Believers sent a servant with a plate of food. The wife in whose house the Prophet was struck the servant’s hand, causing the plate to fall and break. The Prophet (ﷺ) gathered the pieces, collected the food, and said, “Your mother was jealous.” He detained the servant until a plate was brought from the house of the wife who broke it. He gave the intact plate to the one whose plate was broken and kept the broken one in the house of the breaker. [Narrated by Bukhari].

(1) “Struck the servant’s hand…”: At-Turbishti said this hadith does not relate to usurpation or borrowing but to guaranteeing damaged items. Al-Qadi said its relevance is that the striker was charged with replacing the plate, as it broke due to her unjust act. Destroying another’s property directly or indirectly through aggression is a form of usurpation. [From Al-Marqah].

(2) “Gave the intact plate…”: Abu Hanifah’s view is that for items with a like, the equivalent is due; for valued items, their value is due. If asked why a plate, a valued item, was replaced with another plate, it was out of courtesy, not obligation, as both plates belonged to the Prophet (ﷺ). Alternatively, it was by mutual agreement, or plates were similar then, like counted similar items, allowing substitution. [From Al-Marqah]. At-Tahawi in Mushkil said vessels are valued, not like items, so how was one replaced? Some vessels are like items, especially today, as are some clothes. It may be a settlement, not a ruling. [From Arf Ash-Shadhi]. Hanafi doctrine in Al-Hidayah states that for usurped items with a like (e.g., measured or weighed), the equivalent is due; for items without a like, their value on the day of usurpation is due. Counted similar items, like walnuts or eggs, are like measured items, requiring their equivalent. Most scholars say this hadith contradicts Hanafis, as vessels are not like items, so they interpret it as formal compensation or both vessels being the Prophet’s. Some, like Ibn At-Tin, say it supports Hanafis, depending on whether vessels are like or valued items. [From Al-Kawkab Ad-Durri].

The Noble Messenger of Allah ﷺ prohibited striking the face and striking the private parts, and other similar forms of disfigurement (however, such actions are not prohibited in the case of retribution).

There is no harm in taking light items from the spoils on the camels (which are heavy). This is the saying of Imam Shafi'i whenever he spoke about it. It is also the saying of Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Abu Yusuf, and Imam Muhammad bin al-Hasan (may Allah have mercy on them). Imam Tahawi says: You have found the permissibility of this in the hadiths from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

Abdullah ibn Yazid narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) forbade robbery and mutilation. [Narrated by Bukhari]. Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated from Al-Hasan that he saw no harm in robbery at weddings or feasts, as did Ash-Sha‘bi. This is the view of Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf, and Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan. At-Tahawi said: We found the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) permitted this. Abdullah ibn Qurt narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “The most beloved days to Allah are the Day of Sacrifice and the Day of Arafah.” Camels were brought to him, five or six, vying for which to start with. When they fell, he said something lightly I did not understand. I asked the person beside me, who said, “He said, ‘Whoever wishes, let him take.’” This shows that what Allah permits people to take, they may take, unlike the forbidden robbery in the first narration, which is taking without permission. [From Al-Marqah].

(1) Ibn Battal said prohibited robbery refers to Arab raids, as in the pledge of Ubadah. Ibn Al-Mundhir said it is taking someone’s property without permission, against their will. The prohibition may apply to a group taking from spoils without division. Scholars differ on scattering items for children or at weddings. Malik and Ash-Shafi‘i disliked it; Hanafis permitted it. [From Umdat Al-Qari and Al-Marqah].

Imran ibn Husayn narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “No jalab, janab, or shighar in Islam. Whoever robs is not of us.” [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi].

(1) “No jalab…”: Al-Qadi said jalab in racing is having someone follow and urge the horse; janab is keeping an unridden horse alongside to switch to if the ridden one tires. Jalab and janab in zakat were explained in the zakat chapter. Shighar is marrying one’s sister to another in exchange for his sister without dowry, derived from a deserted town, as the contract lacks dowry. The hadith indicates this contract’s invalidity, as it would otherwise exist in Islam, per most scholars. The invalidity stems from sharing intimacy as dowry. Abu Hanifah and Ath-Thawri say the contract is valid with dowry of the like. Ibn Al-Humam said the negation targets shighar’s essence, i.e., no dowry and intimacy as dowry. We negate this essence, invalidating such a marriage, but allow a marriage with an invalid dowry, requiring dowry of the like, as with a marriage naming wine as dowry. [From Al-Marqah]. Ayyad said there is no dispute on prohibiting shighar initially. If it occurs, Kufis, Al-Layth, Az-Zuhri, and Ata enforce it with dowry of the like; Malik and Ash-Shafi‘i invalidate it. [From Sharh Az-Zarqani]. Hanafis and Ash-Shafi‘i say the condition is invalid, not the marriage; Malik and Ahmad have two narrations. [From Sharh Al-Qari].

(2) “Whoever robs…”: This relates to the prior three, as taking wealth unjustly, like jalab and janab in horses, is a form of robbery. Similarly, causing distress, as in zakat’s jalab and janab, or shighar leaving women’s rights on husbands or guardians, is robbery. [From Al-Kawkab Ad-Durri].

Samurah narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever finds his exact property with a bankrupt person is most entitled to it, and the buyer follows the seller.” [Narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and An-Nasa’i]. At-Tabarani narrated from him that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever has goods stolen or lost and finds them with someone selling them is most entitled to them, and the buyer seeks the price from the seller.”

(1) At-Turbishti said this refers to usurped, stolen, or lost property. This was discussed in the chapter on bankruptcy and deferment. [From Al-Marqah].

Samurah narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever finds his exact property with a bankrupt person is most entitled to it, and the buyer follows the seller.” [Narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and An-Nasa’i]. At-Tabarani narrated from him that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever has goods stolen or lost and finds them with someone selling them is most entitled to them, and the buyer seeks the price from the seller.”

(1) At-Turbishti said this refers to usurped, stolen, or lost property. This was discussed in the chapter on bankruptcy and deferment. [From Al-Marqah].

It is also narrated in this manner in the Sahih Sittah - another hadith

In the case of damage being discovered by fire or light, the liability for damage or the absence of liability depends on the following two scenarios: If the fire or light causes damage, the liability for the damage is general and applies universally. For this reason, Imam al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) narrates that if someone lights a fire and it damages another person's property during the day, the owner of the fire will not be liable for the damage at night, as the fire would have been extinguished by then. Similarly, if the fire spreads and damages something, the owner of the fire will not be held responsible, provided that the fire was lit with proper caution. However, if the owner does not take proper precautions and the fire spreads, causing damage, the owner will be held liable. In such a scenario, a person can light a fire near their own property without causing any harm to others, and if no damage is caused, there will be no liability. The Prophet (ﷺ) stated that there is no liability for damage caused by fire if it is discovered. The liability for damage caused by fire also does not apply when the fire is lit at a time when it is very intense and spreading, as the intensity of the fire at the initial time of lighting it would have been different. Therefore, if the fire spreads due to its intensity, the person who lit the fire will not be held liable, provided they took proper precautions. Otherwise, they will be held liable. From the principles and rules.

And you recite it in the prayer.

Qubaysah Al-Bajali narrated: The sun eclipsed during the Messenger of Allah’s (ﷺ) time, and he prayed as you pray. [Narrated by At-Tahawi]. Muslim’s narration adds: “Everything promised to you, I saw in this prayer. Hellfire was brought, when you saw me retreat, fearing its heat. I saw in it the man with the hooked stick dragging his intestines in the fire, who stole pilgrims’ belongings with his stick, saying, ‘It caught on my stick,’ if noticed, or taking it if unnoticed. I saw the woman who tied her cat, neither feeding it nor letting it eat from the ground’s creatures, until it died of hunger. Then Paradise was brought, when you saw me advance to my place. I stretched my hand to take its fruit for you to see, then decided not to.” [From Al-Marqah].

(1) “Prayed as you pray”: This was explained in the eclipse chapter. [From Al-Marqah].

This is narrated by Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud. In Abu Dawud's narration, only the word 'particularly' is mentioned - if there is no negligence on the part of the one who takes possession, he will not be held responsible for the loss of the borrowed item.

The one who keeps a trust is not a traitor (in the matter of the entrusted thing).

If the borrowed item is lost and there is no negligence, then there will be no liability. And if the borrower does not have a house, then there will be no liability for the loss of the borrowed item.

If a person leaves any property in trust with someone else, and that property is lost, the trustee will not be held responsible.

Samurah narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “The hand is responsible for what it takes until it returns.” [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah]. Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Bayhaqi narrated from Amr ibn Shu‘ayb from his father from his grandfather that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “There is no guarantee on the borrower or trustee unless they transgress.” Ibn Majah narrated from him that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever is entrusted with a deposit has no guarantee.” Abdur-Razzaq narrated from Umar ibn Al-Khattab: “Borrowed items are like deposits; there is no guarantee unless transgressed.” Ibn Abi Shaybah and Abdur-Razzaq narrated from Ali: “The borrower incurs no guarantee.”

(1) Scholars differ on borrowing. Hanafis say it is a trust; if it perishes without transgression, there is no guarantee, per Ali, Ibn Mas‘ud, Al-Hasan, An-Nakha‘i, Ash-Sha‘bi, Ath-Thawri, Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz, Shurayh, Al-Awza‘i, Ibn Shubrumah, and Ibrahim. Shurayh judged thus for eighty years in Kufa. Ash-Shafi‘i and Ahmad say it is guaranteed, per Ibn Abbas, Abu Hurairah, Ata, and Ishaq, citing this hadith, Safwan ibn Umayyah’s hadith, and Abu Umamah’s. Hanafis cite the subsequent hadiths and say this hadith supports them, as “return” is obligatory without implying guarantee. If guarantee were implied, it would apply to pledges and deposits. [From Umdat Al-Qari]. Al-Hidayah says the usurper must return the item while it exists, per “The hand is responsible…” and “No one may take his brother’s property in jest or earnest; if taken, return it.” Safwan’s hadith is shaky in chain and text, per Al-Tamhid. Even if sound, “guaranteed” means guaranteed return, or a borrowing with a guarantee condition is guaranteed per Hanafis. Abu Umamah’s hadith does not indicate guarantee, as Allah says: “Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due” (An-Nisa: 58). If a trust perishes, return is not required. [From Umdat Al-Qari].

Samurah narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “The hand is responsible for what it takes until it returns.” [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah]. Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Bayhaqi narrated from Amr ibn Shu‘ayb from his father from his grandfather that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “There is no guarantee on the borrower or trustee unless they transgress.” Ibn Majah narrated from him that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever is entrusted with a deposit has no guarantee.” Abdur-Razzaq narrated from Umar ibn Al-Khattab: “Borrowed items are like deposits; there is no guarantee unless transgressed.” Ibn Abi Shaybah and Abdur-Razzaq narrated from Ali: “The borrower incurs no guarantee.”

(1) Scholars differ on borrowing. Hanafis say it is a trust; if it perishes without transgression, there is no guarantee, per Ali, Ibn Mas‘ud, Al-Hasan, An-Nakha‘i, Ash-Sha‘bi, Ath-Thawri, Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz, Shurayh, Al-Awza‘i, Ibn Shubrumah, and Ibrahim. Shurayh judged thus for eighty years in Kufa. Ash-Shafi‘i and Ahmad say it is guaranteed, per Ibn Abbas, Abu Hurairah, Ata, and Ishaq, citing this hadith, Safwan ibn Umayyah’s hadith, and Abu Umamah’s. Hanafis cite the subsequent hadiths and say this hadith supports them, as “return” is obligatory without implying guarantee. If guarantee were implied, it would apply to pledges and deposits. [From Umdat Al-Qari]. Al-Hidayah says the usurper must return the item while it exists, per “The hand is responsible…” and “No one may take his brother’s property in jest or earnest; if taken, return it.” Safwan’s hadith is shaky in chain and text, per Al-Tamhid. Even if sound, “guaranteed” means guaranteed return, or a borrowing with a guarantee condition is guaranteed per Hanafis. Abu Umamah’s hadith does not indicate guarantee, as Allah says: “Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due” (An-Nisa: 58). If a trust perishes, return is not required. [From Umdat Al-Qari].

Qatadah narrated that Anas said: There was a panic in Medina, so the Prophet (ﷺ) borrowed a horse from Abu Talhah called Al-Mandub, rode it, and upon returning said, “We found nothing, and we found it a sea.” [Agreed upon].

(2) “Borrowed a horse”: This permits borrowing, which is granting benefit without compensation, per Abu Bakr Ar-Razi. Al-Karkhi and Ash-Shafi‘i say it is permitting benefit, not ownership, so the borrower cannot lease it. The first is sounder, as the borrower may lend it, unlike mere permission. Leasing is not allowed as it is stronger than borrowing, and a thing does not entail its equal or stronger. [From Umdat Al-Qari].