—amputation ordered against him; only the baggage of the one who committed ghulul is to be burned, while his other belongings remain untouched.

According to Mālik, anyone who steals something from the booty after it has been secured is liable to have his hand cut off. ʿAbd al-Malik, however, held that the matter must be assessed: if what he took over and above his allotted share reaches the value of a quarter-dīnār, the amputation is carried out; if it falls short of that, no amputation is due. Others maintained that no amputation applies at all, for the thief is a co-owner in an undivided property and the ḥadd is not enforced against one who merely betrays a trust.

Whoever has intercourse with a slave girl taken as booty must pay a dower equal to her like, placing it back into the collective spoils. The scholars disagreed about whether the ḥadd is also mandatory in his case: Mālik affirmed it, whereas ʿAbd al-Malik and others waived it because of the element of shared ownership.

If someone commits ghulul and then repents after the army has dispersed, he must give what he took—or its value—in charity to the poor Muslims.

No one is permitted to make personal use of a mount, weapon, or provisions from the booty except in a case of pressing necessity, and then only for a short time. This, in my view, is the soundest position transmitted from Mālik, related by ʿAlī ibn Ziyād and ʿAbdullāh ibn Wahb; any opinion contrary to it has no foundation. For Allah has apportioned the spoils as He stated in His Book and has forbidden any illicit appropriation of them; nothing from them is lawful except what the evidence expressly exempts. I have clarified this point in detail in al-Tamhīd.