Section II: Redemption from Hunting and its Expiation
Firstly: Expiation for killing game while in Ihram
1. Ruling of the expiation for killing game:
It is generally wajib to expiate for killing game by offering recompense. [1079] There is a difference of opinion regarding someone not in ihram killing game in the Sacred Precinct. Consensus on this generally being the case was related by Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Rushd, and Ibn Qudamah.
2. Expiation for killing game:
If a person in ihram kills game, he is given the choice whether to: slaughter a similar animal and distribute it among the needy; appraise the value of the game and buy them (i.e. the needy) staple food with its value; or fast a day for each mudd of staple food he would have been required to distribute in feeding the needy. As for if one in ihram kills something that does not resemble any domestic animal, he chooses between feeding the needy and fasting. This is the position of the majority: the Malikis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
3. Where to slaughter the hady that is a recompense for hunting:
It is wajib that hady that is a recompense for hunting be slaughtered in the Sacred Precinct. This is the position of the majority: the Hanafis, Shafi`is, Hanbalis, and Ibn Hazm.
4. Distributing the charity amongst the needy residents of the Sacred Precinct:
It is a condition that the charity be distributed amongst the needy residents of the Sacred Precinct. [1080] Ibn `Uthaymin says: “The needy residents of the Sacred Precinct are the poor people within the Sacred Precinct, whether they are inside or outside of Mecca, as long as they are within the boundaries of the Sacred Precinct. There is no difference whether they are Meccans or from faraway lands. Thus, if we find that our pilgrims are poor, slaughter what is wajib upon us in terms of hady, and give that to them, then no harm is done.” (Al-Sharh al-Mumti`, 7/204-205) This is the position of the Shafi`i and Hanbali schools. This is the chosen position of al-Shinqiti, Ibn Baz, and Ibn `Uthaymin.
5. Where to fast:
It is permissible to fast anywhere. Consensus on this was related by Ibn `Abd al-Barr and Ibn Qudamah.
6. Offering the fast days continuously:
It is not a condition that the fast days be observed continuously. Consensus on this was related by al-Nawawi.
Secondly: Recompense for hunting
1. What is meant by analogous:
Mithli (analogous) is a wild animal that has a domestic analogue; i.e. a resemblance in form and appearance to camels, cattle, sheep, or goats. This is the position of the majority: the Malikis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
2. What the Companions judged to be analogues:
It is wajib to follow whatever the Companions judged to be analogues. If nothing has been related from with respect to a particular animal, then its status is determined by two upright experts. This is the position of the Shafi`i and Hanbali schools and a group of the Salaf. This is the chosen position of Ibn `Uthaymin.
3. What is wajib to offer as recompense for hunting:
The analogues for various animals are: a camel for an ostrich, a cow for an antelope or onager, a ram for a hyena, a doe goat for a gazelle, a female kid for a rabbit, a weaned female kid for a jerboa, and a male kid for a for a mastigure. Whatever does not have an analogue is referred to two upright judges. This is the position of the Shafi`i and Hanbali schools.
4. What is due for hunting birds:
Pigeons and doves of all varieties are analgous to an adult sheep or goat according to most scholars. [1081] Ibn al-Mundhir says: “There is consensus among them that the pigeons of the Sacred Precinct are analogous to a sheep or goat. Al-Nu`man is alone in saying that its value is due.” (Al-Ijma`, p. 54) For everything else, the value of the bird is due whether it is smaller or larger than it. This is the position of the Shafi`i and Hanbali schools and a group of the Salaf.
Thirdly: Hunting in the Sacred Precinct
Hunting in the Sacred Precinct is haram for those in ihram and those not in ihram. Consensus on this was related by Ibn al-Mundhir and al-Nawawi.
Fourthly: What is not game
1. Vermin and insects:
Vermin and insects are not included in the prohibition of hunting. [1082] i.e. There is no recompense for killing them. This is the position of the majority: the Hanafis, Shafi`i, and Hanbali schools.
2. Killing the five nasty creatures:
One in ihram may kill the five nasty creatures: kites, crows, mice, scorpions, and mordacious [1083] Kalb `aqur is any animal that bites, attacks, and frightens people, such as lions, tigers, panthers, wolves, etc. This is the position of the majority. Some say what is meant by kalb is only dogs, and no other animal takes the same ruling other than wolves. animals. This is by agreement of the four schools of jurisprudence.
3. Killing harmful animals:
A person in ihram may kill whatever harms him whether or not the animal is harmful by nature. Consensus on this was related by Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Hazm.
Fifthly: The Ruling of Eating Game and Leading Others to It
1. Game that was hunted for one’s sake:
If game was killed for one’s sake, it is haram to eat of it. This is the position of the majority: the Malikis, Shafi`is, Hanbalis, Dawud al-Zahiri, and some of the Salaf.
2. If someone not in ihram hunts and feeds one in ihram from it, is it halal for the one in ihram?
If one not in ihram hunts game and feeds it to a person in ihram without the latter having helped him with hunting in any way, then it is halal for the person in ihram to eat. This is by agreement of the four schools of jurisprudence.
3. A person in ihram pointing out game to someone not in ihram who then kills it:
Jurists have differed regarding when a person in ihram points out game to someone not in ihram who then kills it. They are of two positions:
The first position: If a person in ihram points out game to someone not in ihram who then kills it, then recompense is due from the person in ihram. This is the position of the Hanafi and Hanbali schools and a group of the Salaf. This is the chosen position of Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Shinqiti.
The second position: If a person in ihram points out game to someone not in ihram, then he has done wrong, but nothing is due of him. This is the position of the Maliki and Shafi`i schools.
4. A person in ihram pointing out game to someone else also in ihram who then kills it:
Jurists have differed regarding a person in ihram pointing out game to someone else also in ihram who then kills it. They are of two positions:
The first position: If a person in ihram points out game to someone else also in ihram who then kills it, then the one who pointed it out has done wrong but no recompense is due of him. This is the position of the Maliki and Shafi`i schools. This is the chosen position of al-Shinqiti.
The second position: If a person in ihram points out game to someone else also in ihram who then kills it, then recompense is due from both of them. [1084] The Hanafi position is that a full recompense is due from both. The Hanbali position, which is the choice of Ibn Taymiyyah, is that they split the recompense. This is the position of the Hanafi and Hanbali schools. This is the chosen position of Ibn Taymiyyah.
feqhia
