Salama ibn al-Akwaʿ the shares of both a foot soldier and a horseman during the expedition of Dhū Qarad, then this is permissible according to the sounder of the scholars’ two opinions. Some scholars do not permit it, as noted above.

Likewise, if the ruler says, “Whatever anyone takes is his,” and the spoils are not divided, this is permissible according to one of the scholars’ two opinions. This is the apparent position of Ahmad’s school. According to the other opinion, it is not permissible; this is the well-known position of al-Shāfiʿī’s school. There is disagreement within both schools.

The question of “war booty in later times” rests on a principle of this kind. Examples include the spoils taken by the Seljuk Turks and those the Muslims took from the Christians in the frontier regions of Syria and Egypt. Regarding these spoils, some jurists—such as Abū Muhammad al-Juwaynī and al-Nawawī—ruled that a Muslim may neither purchase anything from them, nor have sexual relations with any female captive taken among them, nor acquire ownership of any of their wealth. This opinion led to harmful consequences whose extent Allah knows.

Abū Muhammad ibn Sibāʿ al-Shāfiʿī opposed them, ruling that the ruler is under no obligation whatsoever to distribute the spoils or set aside their fifth, and that he may give preference to a foot soldier, deprive some combatants of a share, and favor others. He claimed that the conduct of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, supported this. This opinion contradicts scholarly consensus, while the preceding opinion is likewise invalid and objectionable. Both are deviations.

The correct position in such cases is that if the ruler says, “Whatever anyone takes is his,”