What is the evidence that an animal resulting from crossbreeding a dog with a wolf takes the ruling of a dog regarding the issue of decreased reward [for keeping it], and is there a consensus among the Salaf on this ruling?

An animal born from two parents, one of which is pure and the other impure, or one is permissible to eat and the other is not, takes the ruling of the less pure or permissible of the two. Thus, it becomes impure or forbidden, and this is the view of the majority of scholars. This has been narrated from some of the Salaf regarding the mule, as it is born from a donkey and a horse.

An animal born from a dog and a pure animal is ruled to be impure and forbidden, giving precedence to the dog. If it is born from a dog and a wolf, and the wolf is forbidden to eat and impure according to many scholars, then there is no doubt about the impurity of their offspring.

As for the prohibition of keeping this offspring of a dog and a wolf, and the statement that keeping it diminishes reward, as is the case with keeping a dog, its reasoning is clear: it is a part born from a dog along with another animal, so it takes the ruling of a dog in terms of impurity and the prohibition of selling it. Therefore, it is forbidden to buy or sell the animal born from a wolf and a female dog, known as a husky. If we rule it impure and forbidden to sell, then it appears to take most of the rulings of a dog, so it is forbidden to keep, and keeping it diminishes reward.