Judge Abū al-Aṣbaġ remarked, “This reveals inconsistency in his response and contradiction in his words, for ordering that the cloaks be burned is a far harsher measure than giving this adulterated bread to the poor. Ibn ʿAtāb adhered more closely to his own principles and was more consistent in what he said.”

If the ruler does not choose to punish the cheat either by donating the goods in charity or by destroying them, he must still block the harm that fraud would inflict on the public—either by removing the adulteration itself or by selling the tainted goods to someone who knows their condition and will not use them to deceive others.

ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Ḥabīb related: “I asked Muṭraf and Ibn al-Mājishūn—since we have been prohibited, on the authority of Ashhab, from giving adulterated goods in charity—‘What, in your view, is the correct course with a person who adulterates merchandise or cheats in weight?’ They replied, ‘He should be punished with beating, imprisonment, and expulsion from the marketplace. As for large quantities of bread or milk, or adulterated musk or saffron, they are neither to be distributed piece by piece nor to be confiscated outright.’

ʿAbd al-Malik continued, ‘Nor should the governor return the items to their owner. Instead, he must appoint someone trustworthy to sell them on the owner’s behalf. When there is a large amount of bread, it should be broken up and then given back to him. Honey, clarified butter, and milk that he has adulterated are to be sold to buyers who will consume them, with the adulteration clearly disclosed to them. This is how adulterated commodities are to be handled.’ He concluded, ‘That is the clarification I received from Mālik’s companions and others.’⦗1⦘