the Companions from objecting to him, especially since his son is the narrator of the report, so how could that have been hidden from him! It is also possible that he favored the Arabian horses as well, but the narrator did not mention it due to the prevalence of the Arabian horses and the scarcity of the pack horses. The report of Makhul, which we narrated, points to the correctness of this interpretation. Their drawing an analogy to a human being is not sound, because an Arabian human has no impact in war superior to others, unlike the Arabian horse in comparison to others. And Allah knows best.

1646- Issue: He said: (And no share is given for more than two horses.)

He means that if a man has horses with him, four shares are given for two horses, and one share for their owner, and no more than that is given. Abu Hanifa, Malik, and al-Shafi'i said: No share is given for more than one horse, because it is not possible to fight on more than that, so no share is given for what exceeds it, just like what exceeds two horses. Our evidence is what al-Awza'i narrated, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to assign shares for horses, and he would not assign shares for a man for more than two horses, even if he had ten horses with him. From Azhar ibn Abd Allah, that Umar ibn al-Khattab wrote to Abu Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah to assign two shares for a horse, and four shares for two horses, and one share for their owner, making it five shares, and whatever was above two horses were considered reserve mounts (jana'ib). Sa'id narrated both of these in his "Sunan" (1). Furthermore, there is a need for the second, as continuously riding one weakens it and prevents fighting upon it, so a share is assigned for it just like the first, unlike the third, for it is dispensable.

1647- Issue: He said: (And whoever raids on a camel, and is unable to afford anything else, two shares are allocated for him and his camel.)

Ahmad explicitly stated this, and its apparent meaning is that no share is given for a camel if it is possible to raid on a horse. Another narration from Ahmad states that a share is assigned for the camel, and he did not stipulate the owner's inability to afford anything else. Something similar to this was narrated from al-Hasan; because Allah the Almighty says: "And what you did not spur any horses or camels for" (1). Furthermore, it is an animal upon which racing for a wager is permissible, so a share is assigned for it, like the horse. What confirms this is that the permissibility of racing...