zakat, whether it is a mixing of ownership (khultat al-a'yan), which is when the livestock is shared between them, with each of them having (1) a joint share—such as if they inherit a nisaab (threshold), buy it together, or it is gifted to both, and they leave it as is—or a mixing of attributes (khultat al-awsaf), which is when each person's wealth is distinct (2), but they mix them and share the attributes we will mention. This is the case regardless of whether they are equal in the partnership or different, such as one man having one sheep and another having thirty-nine, or forty men having forty sheep, with each one of them having one sheep, as Ahmad stated. This is the view of Ata, al-Awza'i, al-Shafi'i, al-Layth, and Ishaq. Malik said: Mixing only has an effect if each of the partners possesses a nisaab. This was also narrated from al-Thawri and Abu Thawr, and it was chosen by Ibn al-Mundhir. Abu Hanifa said: It has no effect at all, because the ownership of each one is less than the nisaab, so no zakat is due upon him, just as if he had not mixed with another. Abu Hanifa's argument, regarding the case where they mix two nisaabs, is that each of them owns forty sheep, so one sheep becomes due upon him, based on his (peace be upon him) saying: "For forty sheep, there is one sheep" (3). Our evidence is what al-Bukhari narrated in the hadith of Anas, the beginning of which we mentioned (4): "Wealth should not be combined between separate owners, nor separated from combined owners out of fear of zakat; and whatever is between two partners, they shall take account between them equally." This taking of account (taraju') only comes into effect according to our view regarding the mixing of attributes. His saying: "Wealth should not be combined between separate owners" applies when it belongs to a group; for a single individual combines his own wealth together, even if it is in different places, and likewise (5) it should not be separated from combined owners. Also, because mixing has an effect in reducing the burden, it is permissible that it has an effect on zakat, like pasturing (6) and irrigation; and their analogy, while contradicting the textual evidence (nass), is not to be accepted.