Nasai

Hadith Commentary:
Imam Shafi'i rahimahullah and Imam Ahmad rahimahullah have taken evidence from this very hadith and have deemed it impermissible to revoke a gift (hibah). Only the father is permitted to revoke a gift (hibah) that he has given to his children. This is based on another hadith which has already been mentioned above. As for Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah, he has held that if a person gives a gift (hibah) to a non-relative (ajnabi), then revocation is permissible as long as the gifted item remains in its original state and no compensation has been received for it.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
The example mentioned in the hadith shows that after giving a gift (hibah), taking it back is forbidden, because a gift is not a child’s plaything. However, if there is a legitimate (shar‘i) reason, it can be taken back. For example:
If a father has given a gift (hibah) only to one son and ignored the others, then he should take his gift back.
It is mentioned in the hadith:
“It is not permissible for a man to take back his gift once given, except a father is permitted to take back what he has given to his child.”
(Sunan Abi Dawud, Al-Buyu‘, Hadith: 3539)
(2)
It should be noted that just as taking back a gift is forbidden, similarly, returning a gift without any legitimate (shar‘i) impediment is also a disliked (makruh) act.
Among the legitimate impediments are: giving a gift to incline those in authority, the soothsayer’s sweetmeats, the wage of a prostitute, or a gift given from something unlawful—such gifts should be returned.
It should also be noted that regarding close relatives (mahram), a hadith is narrated that a gift given to them should not be taken back.
(Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim: 2/52)
This hadith is weak and not suitable as evidence.
And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary:
From this hadith, it is derived that after the recipient of a gift (mowhoob lahu) has taken possession, it is forbidden and impermissible to retract the gift. And when retraction is impermissible, then after one year has passed over the recipient, zakat becomes obligatory upon him.
This is the position of the Ahl al-Hadith, and according to Imam Abu Hanifah, since retraction is permissible (even though it is disliked according to him), zakat is not obligatory upon either the giver (wahib) or the recipient (mowhoob lahu), and by employing this legal device (hila), both can avoid zakat.

Hadith Commentary:
➊
It is not permissible to take back a gift after giving it. Thus, in one narration it is stated:
"The one who takes back his gift is like a dog that vomits and then licks it up."
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Hibah, Hadith: 2621)
Licking up one’s own vomit is forbidden; therefore, taking back a gift (hibah) is also forbidden.
This is clarified by another hadith.
The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:
"It is not lawful for a man to take back his gift once he has given it, except for a father who gives something to his child; he may take it back."
(Sunan Abi Dawud, al-Buyu', Hadith 3539)

➋
In the hadith presented by Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah, after describing the state of the dog, the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said that such a bad example is not appropriate for us. But observe the cunning of those who employ legal stratagems (hiyal): according to them, there is no harm in taking back a gift from someone, even if the gift has remained with the recipient for a whole year.
In this regard, a hadith is presented in which the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:
"A man has more right to his gift as long as he has not been compensated for it."
(Sunan Ibn Majah, al-Hibat, Hadith: 2387)
This hadith is not a valid proof because in its chain is Ibrahim ibn Isma'il ibn Mujamma', who is weak, and also 'Amr ibn Dinar is a narrator whose hearing from Abu Hurayrah radi Allahu anhu is not established.
Even if it were authentic, what is meant is a gift (hibah) given with the intention of receiving compensation; regarding an absolute gift, the position of taking it back is not established from this hadith.

➌
Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah has spoken correctly that these schemers have opposed the statements of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, which is an extremely dangerous act in Islam.
The second reprehensible act of these schemers is that, through legal stratagem, they have also dropped the obligation of zakat.
Although the person to whom the gift was given kept it in his possession for a whole year after accepting it, during which zakat became obligatory upon it, then due to the donor's retraction, its ownership reverted to the original owner from the first day. Therefore, zakat should have been obligatory upon him as well, but the schemers dropped zakat from both parties, whereas zakat is an obligation of Islam, and dropping it in any way is not permissible. Then these individuals started a debate about the permissibility and enforcement of legal stratagems, arguing that if someone has committed this folly, it should in any case be enforced. But our position is that what is not permissible cannot be enforced.

➍
In any case, both objections of Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah are, in their place, irrefutable: one is opposing the hadith, and the other is dropping the Islamic obligation of zakat through stratagem.
May Allah grant them guidance.
Amin.

Hadith Commentary:
The apparent meaning of the hadith is that it is forbidden to take back a gift (hibah) or charity (sadaqah). However, according to another hadith, an exception is made for the gift (hibah) that a father gives to his children; in this case, it is permissible to take it back.
This is the legal verdict (fatwa) of Imam Shafi‘i rahimahullah and Imam Malik rahimahullah, while Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah has considered taking it back to be disliked (makruh), not forbidden (haram).

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
The implication of these ahadith is that it is forbidden (haram) to take back a gift (hibah) or charity (sadaqah) after giving it, as Qatadah (rahimahullah) states:
“We consider it to be as forbidden as vomiting.”
(Sunan Abi Dawud, Buyu‘, Hadith: 3538)
However, according to one hadith, the gift (hibah) that a father gives to his children is exempted from this warning.
The words of the hadith are as follows:
The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said:
“A man should not give a gift to someone and then take it back, except a father is permitted to take back what he has given to his child.”
(Sunan Abi Dawud, Buyu‘, Hadith: 3539) (2)
In the aforementioned ahadith, not only is the ruling regarding taking back a gift (hibah) mentioned, but the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) also described the reprehensibility and vileness of this act.
From an economic perspective, the prominent aspect in taking back a gift is that it prevents any real benefit from being derived.
And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary: Benefits and Issues: According to the majority of the jurists of the Ummah, the ruling for charity (sadaqah) and gift (hibah) is the same: it is not permissible to take them back. However, based on an authentic hadith, in the case of a gift (hibah), the father is an exception; he may take back what he has given as a gift to his child. The Hanafis agree with the majority regarding charity (sadaqah), but in the case of gifts (hibah), they differ from the majority. According to the Hanafis, if a gift (hibah) is given to a relative—whether it is a child or any other relative—then it cannot be taken back. If something is given as a gift (hibah) to a non-relative (ajnabi) and he has not given anything in exchange, and the gifted item is still present, then it may be taken back. Although this is religiously (diyanatan) disliked, if the non-relative to whom the item was gifted agrees to return it, or if a judge (qadi) rules in favor of its return, then despite being disliked, it is permissible. The purpose of likening this act to the behavior of a dog is to express its extreme reprehensibility, just as in prayer (salah), to express strong aversion and prohibition, pecking like a dog or sitting like a dog has been forbidden. Likewise, in the case of returning charity (sadaqah), the same analogy has been given. Despite this, according to the Hanafis, returning charity (sadaqah) is not permissible. Furthermore, the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) permitted the father to take back what he gave, but according to the Hanafis, he cannot take it back, whereas, on the contrary, a non-relative (ajnabi) can take it back.

Explanation:
1:
From this, the reprehensibility and abhorrence of taking back a gift (hibah) becomes clear.
Firstly, such a person has been likened to a dog.
Secondly, the item that was given as a gift has been described as vomit, which a person finds extremely repulsive.

Benefits and Issues:
➊
The meaning of hibah is to give something to someone without compensation.
Its purpose is solely to attain the pleasure of Allah and to show kindness to a believer; therefore, taking it back is equivalent to nullifying one’s own good deed.
And knowingly wasting a good deed is a very bad thing.

➋
One benefit of hibah is that it increases mutual love and respect among Muslims.
By taking back something that was given as hibah, not only is this objective lost, but mutual love and respect are also diminished; thus, the harm outweighs the benefit.

➌
The purpose of likening this act to the behavior of a dog is to instill aversion to this deed.

➍
A father may take back a gift given to his child, because the property of the child is considered as his own property.
See: (Hadith: 2377)

Benefits and Issues:
(1)
Giving charity is a very great virtue, and taking back charity after giving it is tantamount to nullifying it, and wasting one’s good deed is a very bad thing.

(2)
The fact that resemblance is given to a dog shows that this is a very evil act; therefore, one should completely abstain from it.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه البخاري، الهبة، باب هبة الرجل لامرأته والمرأة لزوجها، حديث:2589، ومسلم، الهبات، باب تحريم الرجوع في الصدقة بعد القبض، حديث:1622.»©

Explanation:
This hadith indicates the prohibition of taking back a gifted item; however, a father is exempted regarding a gift given to his children, as is mentioned in the following hadith.

But the Hanafi school holds that it is permissible to take back a gifted item, and some Hanafis have interpreted this hadith by saying that the statement of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, "like a dog..." indicates non-prohibition, because a dog is not legally accountable (ghayr mukallaf), and its own vomit is not forbidden for it.

We say that when a dog is not legally accountable, then it is not correct to say that its vomit is lawful or unlawful for it, because lawfulness and unlawfulness pertain to those branches (of law) for which someone is held accountable, just as it is not correct to say about trees and stones that they are blind or sighted, since they are not the locus of blindness or sight. Therefore, in this hadith, the analogy is not in terms of lawfulness or unlawfulness.

And when this analogy is not in terms of lawfulness or unlawfulness, then it cannot serve as evidence for lawfulness or unlawfulness at all.

The prohibition is established by an explicit text, so that alone should be taken as evidence.

As for the analogy, its purpose is to express the repugnance of this forbidden act, to instill aversion to it, to manifest its severe filthiness, and to present a dreadful image of the scene.

Alas! How could a human being ever like to descend to the level of a dog, and then descend even further to the point that he first vomits and then licks up his own vomit?

Benefit:
It is established from this hadith that one should not take back a gift after giving it; taking back a gift is forbidden (haram). Thus, in one hadith it is stated: “The one who takes back his gift is like the one who vomits and then licks it up.” [صحيح البخاري : 2621]
Just as licking up one’s own vomit is forbidden (haram), likewise, taking back a gift (hibah) is also forbidden (haram).