每位地主都有义务使用其土地。若业主在使用土地方面需要帮助，则由公库(Bait ul-Mal)予以协助。若他连续三年荒废土地的使用，该土地便会被收回，并交给另一人。欧麦尔·伊本·哈塔布说："圈占土地的人，三年之后便不再对其拥有权利。"耶哈亚·伊本·阿丹转述自阿慕尔·伊本·舒阿াইব，他说："先知ﷺ曾将土地赐予穆扎尼那部落或朱哈尼那部落的一些人，他们却荒废了。另有人来耕种了这块地。欧麦尔说：'若这块地是我或艾布·伯克尔所赐，我就会把它归还给那些人。但既然是安拉的使者ﷺ所赐，我便不会这样做。'"他又说："凡荒废土地三年而不加使用，另一人前来使用，则此地归他所有。"欧麦尔所说的意思是，这块地未被使用的时间不超过三年。若是艾布·伯克尔所赐，则未满三年；若是欧麦尔所赐，同样未满三年。而安拉的使者ﷺ所赐之地，已经超过三年，因此不能归还给原受赐之人。

Every landlord is obliged to use his land. The owner, who is in need of help for using the land, is helped by the Bait ul-Mal. If He neglects the use of the land for three continuous years it is taken from Him and given to another person. ’Umar ibn Al-Khattab said: “The one who fences (something) has no right in it after three years.” Yahya ibn Adam reported from Amru ibn Shu’aib, who said: “The Prophet (pbuh) granted land to some people from Mazina or Johaina and they neglected it. Other people came and cultivated it. ’Umar said: ‘If the land was granted by me or by Abu Bakr, I would have returned it back (to those people). But since it was granted by the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) I would not.’ And He said: ‘Whoever neglected a land for three years without using it and another person came and used it, it becomes his.”’ What is meant by the words of ’Umar is that the land was not used for more than three years. If it was a grant from Abu Bakr, then less than three years had passed and if it was from ‘Umar, less than three years had passed as well. As a grant from the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), however more than three years had passed, so it could not be returned back to those who were given the grant.

Abu Ubayd在《Al-Amwal》一书中转述，Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzni说，先知ﷺ曾将整个al-Aqeeq赐予他。他说，在'Umar执政时期，'Umar对Bilal说：“安拉的使者ﷺ赐给你那片土地，并不是为了让你圈起来不让别人使用，而是为了让你去耕种。所以你能力所及地耕种多少就取多少，其余的请归还。”因此，圣门弟子的共识（Ijma'a）是：谁荒废自己的土地三年，就要收回这块土地，交给另一个人。

Abu Ubayd reported in the book of Al-Amwal from Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzni that the Prophet (pbuh) had granted Him all of al-Aqeeq. He said that during the time of ’Umar, He (’Umar) said to Bilal, “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) did not grant you the place to fence it against the people but to use it. So take of it as much as you can afford and return the rest of it.” Therefore it is Ijma’a of the Sahabah that whoever neglected his land for three years, would have the land taken away from Him and given to another person.

这样,地主可以用自己的工具、种子、牲畜和劳力在其土地上耕种;他也有权雇佣工人来耕作。如果他自己无法耕种,国家可以帮助他。如果地主不这样做,他就必须将土地交给他人耕种,作为无偿的封赐。如果他既不这样做又仍然占有土地,则给予他三年的期限。如果他荒废土地达三年之久,国家将从他手中收回,并将其封赐给他人。 雅哈亚·本·阿丹在《哈拉智之书》中记载,优努斯传述自穆罕默德·本·伊斯哈格,后者传述自阿卜杜拉·本·艾布·伯克尔,他说:“比拉勒·本·哈里斯·本·穆兹尼来到安拉的使者ﷺ那里,请求他赐予某块土地;先知ﷺ便赐给他一大片土地。欧麦尔执政后,对比拉勒说:‘比拉勒啊,你向安拉的使者ﷺ请求赐予大片土地,他便赐给了你;而安拉的使者ﷺ从不拒绝别人所求的赏赐,但你无法管理这片土地。’比拉勒说:‘是的。’欧麦尔说:‘那么,你看看自己能够管理并持有的部分,至于你无法利用的部分,就交给我们,以便分给穆斯林。’比拉勒说:‘我指安拉起誓,对于安拉的使者ﷺ赐予我的土地,我绝不这样做。’欧麦尔说:‘我指安拉起誓,你必须这样做。’于是欧麦尔从他手中取回了他无法利用的那部分,并将其分给了穆斯林。” 很明显,拥有土地却无法耕种、并荒废三年之久的人,国家将从他手中收回土地并交给他人,正如欧麦尔·本·哈塔卜对穆兹尼的比拉勒所做的那样,即关于卡巴利亚矿地的那片土地。

In this way the landlord is allowed to plant upon his land by use of his tools, seeds, animals and labour; and He has the right to employ labourers to work on it. If He cannot use it then the State may help him. If the landlord does not do this He has to give it to another person, to plant upon it, as a grant without recompense. If He does not do this and He keeps hold of it He is given a period of three years. If He neglects it for three years, the State will take it from Him and grant it to someone else. It is narrated by Yahya ibn Adam in the book of Al-Kharaj that Yunus narrated from Muhammad ibn Ishaq from ’Abdullah ibn Abu Bakr, who said: “Bilal ibn al-Harith ibn al-Muzni came to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and asked that He grant Him a certain land; the Prophet (pbuh) granted Him a large piece of land. When ’Umar took the authority He said to Bilal, ‘O Bilal you asked the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to grant you large land so He granted it to you; and the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was not used to holding back anything He was asked to give and you can’t manage this land.’ Bilal said: ‘Yes.’ ’Umar said: ‘So look at the part which you can manage and hold it, and the part which you are not able to use give it to us so as to divide it amongst Muslims.’ Bilal said: ‘I swear by Allah I will not do that to a land the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) gave to me.’ ’Umar said: ‘By Allah you must do it.’ So ’Umar took from Him the part He could not use and divided it amongst the Muslims.” It is quite clear that the person who owns land but cannot plant upon it and who neglects it for three years, will have it taken from Him by the State and given to another person, as ’Umar ibn Al-Khattab had done with Bilal al-Muzni with regard to the land of the mines of al-Qabliyah.

综上所述,土地可以通过圈围、哈里发的授予、耕种、继承和买卖而取得所有权。关于从荒废三年的人手中收回土地的相关文字,提到的是圈围土地的人,以及被哈里发授予土地的人,却没有提到其他类型的地主,例如继承人、耕种土地的人和买受人。那么,一个人拥有的任何土地若被荒废三年,哈里发是否有权将其收回并交给他人?还是这一规定仅针对圈围死地者和被哈里发授予土地者?为回答这一问题,我们注意到:从处分土地和占有土地的角度看,圈围与购买、继承或其他任何取得所有权的方式并无二致。若圈围土地者出售该地,他将拥有其价款,因为这是以财产交换而获得的权利,因此可以获得补偿。此外,若圈围土地者去世,土地的所有权将转移给他的继承人,如同其他财产一样,他们可以处分,并依照伊斯兰教法规则在他们之间分配。这也与哈里发授予某人一块土地的情形相似。因此,圈围土地者与获得土地授予者,并不具有某种特殊的优越性,使他们有别于其他地主,从而使在土地荒废三年时收回土地的规定专属于他们而排除通过其他方式取得所有权的地主。他们也不具有那种优越性,使圈围和授予土地成为荒废三年后收回土地的限制条件。 关于有人主张经文只specifically提到了这两种情形，因而表示限定的论点，这种说法并不成立。因为这并非对某种性质的描述，所以从疏于耕种的人手中收回土地，只是因为他是通过圈地或赐予而获得土地的。这段经文实际上是规定了一种泛指（Mutlaq）情形中的一个具体成员：如果某类所有者疏于耕种，土地就会被收回。经文本身是普遍性的，提到通过圈地和赐予取得所有权，只是提到了泛指范畴中的一个成员，而不是限定，并不排除其他情形。 然而，如果经文是针对某一具体事件而言的，就需要对其加以考察。如果经文包含了理由（Illah），那么它就成为该理由所涉事项上的一般性经文。本段所讨论的经文表明了理由，即三年后因为荒废耕种而收回土地。土地荒废三年是收回的理由（Illah）。因此，从圈地者手中收回土地，是因为他荒废了三年，而不是因为他是圈地所有者，也不是因为圈地所有者又荒废了土地。圈地本身并不表明它是收回土地的理由，无论是单独圈地，还是圈地与荒废相结合，都不能说明这一点。真正表明收回理由的，只是荒废本身。 由此可见，荒废土地是一个与所规定的法律裁定同有同无的理由（Illah）。凡是所有者荒废土地满三年的情形，无论他是通过圈地、赐予、继承还是其他方式取得土地，都应当收回。如果圈地所有者没有荒废土地满三年，则不应从他手中收回。

In conclusion, land is owned by fencing, by granting from the Khalifah, by cultivation, by inheritance and by trading. The texts, which came concerning taking the land from the one who neglected it for three years, have mentioned the one who fenced the land, and the one who was granted the land by the Khalifah. They did not mention other types of landlords, such as the inheritor, the one who cultivates the land and the buyer. So, does ignoring any land for three years owned by a person allow the Khalifah to take it from Him and give it to another? Alternatively, is this specific to the one who fenced a dead land, and the one who was granted the land by the Khalifah? To answer this question we notice that fencing of the land is like buying it or inheriting it or any other means of ownership from the angle of disposal of the land, and possession of it. If the one who fenced the land sold it He would own its price because it is a right in exchange of property, so it is allowed to be recompensed for it. In addition, if the one who fenced the land died, the ownership of the land is transferred to his inheritors like the rest of the properties which they dispose of, and they are divided amongst them according to the Shari’ah rules. This is also similar to the one to whom the Khalifah grants a piece of land. Therefore, the one who fences a land and the one who is granted a land, do not have any specific merit that distinguishes them from the other landlords, which would make taking the land from them, if it was neglected for three years, specific to them to the exclusion of the rest of the landlords, who own the land through other means of ownership. Nor do they have that merit that makes the fencing and the granting of land as a constraint for taking the land if it was neglected for three years. With regards to the argument that the texts specifically mentioned them alone, this does not indicate constraint, because this is not a description, which means that taking the land from the one who neglects it, is only because He owned it by fencing or granting. It is rather a text that stated one single member of the Mutlaq (unrestricted), where land is taken from one type of owner if He neglects it. The text is general and mentioning ownership by fencing and granting is just a mention of one member of the Mutlaq (unrestricted) not a restriction that excludes other than them. However, if the text came regarding an incident, it has to be examined. If it included reasoning, then it becomes a general text in the reasoned matter. The text in question indicates reasoning, which is taking the land after three years because of neglecting its farming. The neglect of the land for three years is the reason (Illah) for taking it. The reason for taking the land from the one who fenced it is thus because He neglected it for three years, not because He is an owner by fencing, or because He is an owner by fencing who neglected the land. Fencing of the land does not indicate it is the reason for taking it, neither by itself (fencing) nor by combining it with neglecting. Rather neglecting alone is the matter which indicates the reason (Illah) for taking it. Thus neglecting the land is a reason (Illah) which revolves with the reasoned rule, in existence and absence. Wherever neglecting of the land by its owner for three years occurred, it would be taken from Him whether He owned it by fencing or by granting or by inheritance or by any other means. If the owner by fencing did not neglect his land for three years it would not be taken from him.

此外,正如欧麦尔(愿真主喜悦他)在先知穆罕默德ﷺ的圣训中所说的:"圈围土地者,便不再拥有……"的"圈围"(Ihtijar),是对土地所有权的一种间接表述。通常,土地的主人会用石块环绕土地的边界来圈围土地,以使人们知道这是他的财产,并与他人的财产区分开来。圈围并不一定要在土地周围摆放石块才算圈围者。相反,在土地边界种植植物或树木、挖掘沟渠,或进行任何表明其拥有该土地的工作,这一切都称为"圈围"(Ihtijar),而对土地做这些事的人就被称为圈围者(Muhtajir)。先知穆罕默德ﷺ在另一段由艾布·达乌德传述的圣训中说:"谁用围栏圈围了一块土地……"该圣训表明,根据"圈围"一词的语言含义,给土地设围栏是对其所有权的一种间接表述。从语言学上讲,"Ihtajara"一词指把某物放在怀中或拥抱某物。对土地而言的"Ihtijara"(圈围),意味着拥抱了它,即拥有了它的所有权。因此,该圣训的含义是:无论谁拥抱(拥有)了一块土地,三年之后便不再拥有任何权利,无论他是在土地边界上放置石块,还是用围栏圈围了它,或是做了任何表明其拥有该土地的事情。

In addition, fencing of the land as mentioned by ’Umar (ra.) in the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh): “Anyone who fences a land (Muhtajir) has no....” is an indirect expression of its ownership; as it is usual that the owner of the land fences the land by encircling its borders with stones, so as to be known as his property, and be differentiated from the property of others. It is not a condition that He puts stones around it so as to be called a fencer. Rather, to put plants or trees on the borders of the land or to dig a ditch, or carry out any work which indicates that He possesses it, all this is called (Ihtijar), and the one who does that to a land is called a fencer (Muhtajir). The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) says in another Hadith that is narrated by Abu Dawud: “Whoever encircled a land by a fence...” The Hadith implies that walling (fencing) of the land is an indirect expression of its ownership, according to the linguistic meaning of the word “fenced.” Linguistically, the word Ihtajara refers to something one puts in his lap or embraces. Ihtijara (walled) with respect to a land, means one embraced it, meaning ownership of it. Therefore the meaning of the Hadith will be that whoever embraced a land (owned it), has no right after three years, whether He put stones on its borders, or He encircled it by a fence, or He did anything that indicates his ownership of it.

这是关于该问题的论证。然而，关于欧麦尔所遵循的做法，以及其他教友保持沉默的事情：欧麦尔下令，将真主的使者ﷺ赐予穆扎伊那的土地，而由他人耕种的，交给耕种者，并阻止穆扎伊那取走它。他还说：“谁让一块土地荒废三年而不耕种，而他人耕种了它，那么这块地归耕种者所有。”欧麦尔的这段话是普遍性的，正如他所说：“谁让一块土地荒废……”他还对毕拉勒·本·哈里斯·穆兹尼说：“真主的使者ﷺ没有赐给你土地让你用来围起来防范众人，而是赐给你让你使用它，所以你只取你能够经营的部分，把其余的归还。”他实际上从他手中取回了他无力使用的部分。在没有明确证据表明特指的情况下，将这一裁决限定于已被赐予的土地是不允许的，而应保持其普遍性。事件发生在被赐予土地的人身上，这只是对某一事件的陈述，并不局限于那一事件。

This is the argument with regard to the text. However, with regard to what ’Umar followed, and the rest of the companions kept silent on, ’Umar ordered that the land which the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) granted to Mazina which others cultivated, be given to those who cultivated it, and He prevented Mazina from taking it. He also said: “Whoever neglected a land for three years without cultivating it, and some other person cultivated it, it would be his.” This speech of ’Umar is general, as He said: “Whoever neglected a land…” He also said to Bilal ibn al-Harith al- Muzni “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) did not grant you land to fence it against the people, rather He granted it you to use it, so take the part which you can manage, and return the rest of it.” He actually took from Him that which He was unable to use. Limiting this decision to granted land alone without a clear evidence of specification is not allowed, rather it should stay general. The fact that the incident occurred with the person who was granted the land is just an expression about an incident, and is not limited to that incident.

因此,凡是荒废土地达三年之久的地主,无论他取得该土地所有权的方式为何,其土地都将被收回并交给他人。关键在于土地是否被荒废,而不在于取得所有权的方式。认为这意味着无正当理由侵占他人财产,是不正确的。这是因为伊斯兰教法赋予土地所有权一种不同于动产所有权或建筑物所有权的含义:它使土地所有权以耕种为目的。若土地在教法所规定的期限内被荒废,地主便是忽视了其所有权的本义。教法规定土地所有权可通过耕种、赠予、继承、购买或其他方式取得,同时也规定因疏于管理而可剥夺其所有权。这一切都是为了使土地得到持续的耕种和利用。

Therefore, every landlord who neglects the land for three years has his land taken from Him and given to another, whatever his means of ownership of the land was.What matters is the neglecting of the land and not the means of its ownership. It is not true to say that this means taking the property of people without right. This is because Shar’a gave land ownership a meaning different to that of the ownership of moveable properties or the ownership of buildings: it made land ownership for cultivating it. If it was neglected for the period determined by the Shar’a, then the landlord would have ignored the meaning of its ownership. Shar’a has made the ownership of the land for farming whether by cultivation, granting, inheritance, buying or other means. It also made the stripping of the ownership of it, by negligence. This is all for the purpose of continual farming and use of the land.