and blessings be upon him, said: “Begin with yourself.” (1) Thus, he may not give preference to another, because he is obliged to save himself from perishing before saving someone else. This is the well-known position of the madhhab.

Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, held that in this case a person may give preference to another with his property. However, the position of the madhhab on this matter is more correct: it is not permissible—unless the general welfare of the Muslims requires that he give the other preference. In that case, we may say that there is nothing wrong with it. For example, if the needy companion is a man whose services are of benefit in jihad in the path of Allah, or a scholar who benefits people through his knowledge, while the owner of the water or food is an ordinary Muslim, then we may say that, in this case, in consideration of the public interest, he may give preference to the other. But where no public interest is involved, there is no doubt that a person must reserve for himself the food by which he alone, and not his companion, can save himself.

If a person has abundant food and finds someone compelled by necessity to have it, he is obligated to provide it to him.

In summary: if someone is compelled by necessity to consume another person’s property itself, then if its owner is likewise compelled by necessity to have it, the owner has the greater right to it and may not give preference to another with it. But if the owner is not compelled by necessity to have it, then he must provide it to the person in need. Must he provide it free of charge, or at its value?

The answer is that the scholars differed over this. Some of them said: It is obligatory that he