as waste, nor corruption, and it is not prohibited (14). As for the Mushaf (copy of the Quran), it is not to be burned out of respect for it, and because of what was previously mentioned regarding Salim's statement about it. An animal is not to be burned due to the prohibition of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) from punishing with fire except the Lord of fire (15), and due to the sanctity of the animal itself, and because it does not fall under the category of 'possessions' that are commanded to be burned. There is no disagreement regarding this. The saddle or harness of a mount is also not to be burned. Ahmad explicitly stated this because it is needed (16) for beneficial use, [and because it is an attachment] (17) to what is being burned, so it resembles the cover of the Mushaf and its bag. Al-Awza'i said: Its saddle and padding should be burned. Our argument is that it is something worn by an animal, so it should not be burned, like the garments of the one who stole from the spoils. The garments that the stealer from the spoils is wearing are not to be burned because it is not permissible to leave him naked, nor is what he stole to be burned because it belongs to the spoils of the Muslims. It was said to Ahmad: 'What should be done with what he obtained through theft (18)?' He replied: 'It should be returned to the spoils.' Al-Awza'i stated the same. His weapons are also not to be burned because he needs them for combat, nor his provisions because that is not something that is usually burned. All of that, or what the fire leaves behind of iron or otherwise, belongs to its owner because his ownership was established over it and nothing was found to annul it; he was merely punished by the burning of his possessions, so what did not burn remains as it was. It is possible that the Mushaf should be sold and its price given in charity, due to what Salim said regarding it. If he has books of Hadith or knowledge with him, it is appropriate that they should not be burned either, because the benefit of that returns to the religion, and the intention is not to harm him in his religion; rather, the intent is to harm him in some aspect of his worldly life.
Section: If his baggage was not burned until he acquired other possessions, or he returned to his country, then what he had with him (19) at the time of the theft should be burned. Ahmad explicitly stated this regarding one who returns to his country. He said: 'It is appropriate that what he had with him in the land of the enemy be burned.' If he dies before his baggage is burned, it is not to be burned. Ahmad explicitly stated this because (20) it is a punishment, so it lapses with death, like the Hudud punishments. Also, upon death, it passes to his heirs, so burning it would be a punishment for someone other than the perpetrator. If he sold his possessions or gave them away, it is possible that they should not be burned because they have become the property of someone else,
(14) In (B): "nuhiya" (is prohibited). (15) Its citation was previously mentioned on page 139. (16) In the original, (A), and (B): "ilayhi" (to it). (17) In the original, (A), and (B): "wa-li-annahu tabi'" (and because it is an attachment). (18) In (A): "min" (from). (19) In (M) there is an addition: "min" (of). (20) In (M): "li-annaha" (because it [feminine, referring to punishment]).
