if he entered [their land] as a thief and found a lost item, he announces it in the Abode of Islam, because their wealth is permissible for him, and then its ruling becomes the same as that of his spoils of war. It is possible that it is considered spoils of war for him, and does not require announcement because, in outward appearance, it is from their wealth, and their wealth is spoils of war.

944 - Issue: He said: (And if the finder has died, its owner is a creditor to his estate for it).

The sum of this is that if the finder dies while the lost item is present in its physical form, his heir stands in his place regarding the completion of its announcement if he died before the year passed, and he [the heir] owns it after the completion of the announcement. If he dies after the year has passed, the heir inherits it like the rest of the deceased's wealth. Whenever its owner comes, he takes it from the heir just as he would take it from the one from whom it was inherited. If the item is missing, its owner is a creditor to the deceased for its equivalent if it is among those things having equivalents, or for its value if it is not so, and he takes that from his estate if it is sufficient for that. If the estate is insufficient, the creditors compete for its substitute, whether it perished after the time of settlement [the completion of the year] by his act or by other than his act, because it entered into his ownership upon the passage of the year. If he knows that it perished before the year passed without his negligence, then there is no guarantee (daman) upon him, and there is nothing for its owner, because it is an amanah (trust) in his hand that perished without his negligence, so he is not liable for it, like a deposit (wadi'ah). Similarly, if it perished after the year had passed before he took ownership of it, without negligence, according to the view of those who believe that it does not enter into his ownership until he takes possession of it. The discussion on that has already passed. As for if he did not know of its destruction and did not find it [in his estate] (1), the apparent meaning of Al-Khiraqi's statement is that its owner is a creditor to his estate for it, whether it was before the year or after it, because the principle is its persistence. It is possible that the finder is not obligated with anything and the right of its owner lapses, because the principle is the freedom of the finder's liability from it. It is also possible that it may have perished without his negligence, so his liability is not burdened due to uncertainty. And it is possible that if death was before the year, there is nothing upon him because it was a trust with him and no violation on his part was known, and the principle is the freedom of his liability from it. If he died after the year, then it is in his estate;