One is that the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not own these funds as people own their property, nor did he dispose of them as kings dispose of their possessions. Both private owners and kings may spend their wealth on permissible things: the former for their personal purposes, and the latter in the interests of their kingdom. Such was the position of a prophet who was also a king, like David and Solomon. Allah Most High said:

“So give or withhold without account.”

That is: give to whomever you wish and withhold from whomever you wish; you will not be called to account. Our Prophet, however, was a servant and Messenger: he gave only to those whom he was commanded to give to, and withheld only from those from whom he was commanded to withhold. Thus, he spent wealth only in worship of Allah and obedience to Him.

(Another) is that a prophet’s property is not inherited, even if he is a king, for the prophets leave no inheritance. If even the kings among the prophets did not own wealth as people ordinarily own their property, how could the foremost of the Messengers, who was a servant and Messenger, have been an owner in that sense?

(Another) is that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, spent on himself and his dependants only what they needed, spending all the remaining wealth in obedience to Allah and retaining no surplus for himself. This is not how property owners act. Rather, all the wealth he administered was the wealth of Allah and His Messenger, meaning that Allah commanded His Messenger to spend it in obedience to Him. It is therefore obligatory to obey him in its distribution, just as it is obligatory to obey him in everything else he commands. For whoever obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah, and in this he conveys Allah’s commands.