The juristic proof for that is the application of the statement of al-Imam as-Sadiq (a.s.) given in the collection of sound traditions stating that if ‘a bird’ possesses its two wings, it belongs to him who takes it. Indeed, this application implicitly includes a bird that previously belonged to another person who had captured it, but escaped and flew away.

It is held that this tradition is connected to the tradition reported by Muhammad ibn Fadl and others wherein it is stated: “I asked him about catching a pigeon, worth one dirham or half of a dirham. He replied: ‘If you know its owner, return it to him.’ “

We hold that this text and others that are similar - even if connected to a preceding absolute text - mention about whether the bird came under the control of its previous owner. This is learnt from the context of his statement, ‘return it to him’. It is evident from the order to return it, which presumes the knowledge that someone previously owned the bird. As for the view that entitlement is by mere hunting efforts - without actual capturing - we have discussed this in the text in the tradition reported by Muhammad ibn Fadl will not be applicable on account of the capture of ‘return’ (radd) to it not being true.

After considering the absolute (general) along with the tradition narrated by Ibn-Fadl, the detailed statement between a case when a person had gained control over a two-winged bird and had it under his possession and control, and the other case whereby he might have gained ownership merely by capturing it. In the first case, it would not be lawful for a person who captures it upon its escape, while in the second case it would be lawful.