Meat of hunted animals

18-5-2016 | IslamWeb

Question:

My question has to do with the meat of hunted animals and what has been slaughtered by the People of the Book.
1- We have read this fatwa of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen about the meat of hunted animals: “But if it is still alive and able to move, then you must properly slaughter it and mention the name of Allaah over it when slaughtering it. If you do not do that and it dies, then it becomes haram for you…” The first question is: why is it that if I shoot an animal and it is still alive but then dies later, then it is haram, but if the animal dies straight away, then it is halal without slaughtering it properly?
2- Also, it says in the shaykh’s response that if you do not say Bismillaah out of forgetfulness when pulling the trigger, then the meat of the hunted animal is also haram: “But attention must be paid to mentioning the name of Allaah when pulling the trigger, because if you do not mention the name of Allaah, then it is haram to eat it, even if you forget…”
3- Also, is the slaughtered meat halal if the people of the book (jews and Christians) intentionally do not mention the Basmalah when slaughtering it? We have heard an opinion that even if they intentionally do not mention the Basmalah or pronounce the name of some saints, it is still halal, how sound is this opinion?
4- If People of the Book hunt with a dog or with arrows or rifles and kill the animals without mentioning the Basmalah when pulling the trigger, are their killed animals halal then?
Answer:

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah and that Muhammad sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention ) is His slave and Messenger. 

We will answer your questions in the following points:

1- If a person catches an animal from hunting, and it has a stable life by which it may live long, then such an animal is not lawful to eat except after slaughtering it according to sharee'ah, because it takes the ruling of a domesticated animal that is not lawful to eat except after slaughtering it in an Islamic way. Ibn Qudaamah may Allaah have mercy upon him said:

“If a person catches an animal that has a stable life by which he may live long and he was not able to slaughter it until it died, then it is not lawful regardless of whether it has an injury with which it may live or not. This is the view of Maalik, al-Layth, Ash-Shaafi’i, Is-haaq, Abu Thawr and the scholars of the Hanafi School of jurisprudence. This is because an animal in such a state takes the ruling of a live animal; the evidence is that ‘Umar may Allaah be pleased with him was severely wounded with wounds that lead to his death, and he admonished the people and his commandments were accepted as valid while in that condition. He was not exempted from performing the prayer and other acts of worship [even though he was in a very critical state]; and also because the hunter did not slaughter the animal despite being able to do so, so it is like an animal that is not hunted.” The inference he (Ibn Qudaamah) made to ‘Umar, mar may Allaah be pleased with him is to indicate that despite his deadly wounds, his acts were permissible, just like other living people.

2- Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen stated the difference of opinion among the scholars regarding the ruling of saying the Basmalah when slaughtering an animal and hunting an animal; he stated four different views. He favored the fourth view, which is the opinion chosen by Ibn Taymiyyah may Allaah have mercy upon him as well. He mentioned the reason of favoring this opinion, saying, “This is the view supported by evidence.” If you are confused about the reason for the prohibition although the person who forgot is not held accountable, then the answer is that he is not held accountable as far as khitaab at-takleef (i.e. the address related to the action of the servants in terms of obligation) is concerned, but there is another aspect, which is khitaab al-wadh'a (i.e. the address related to the action of the servants in terms of declaration, like making of a thing a cause [sabab] or preventative factor [maani’] etc.), like whether the thing is valid or defective. It is for this reason that if a person destroys something, out of forgetfulness, he must guarantee it. For more benefit, please refer to fatwa 314854. Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen may Allaah have mercy upon him said in Ash-Sharh Al-Mumti’, “Whoever damaged something that has a value must guarantee it, regardless of whether he did so knowingly, or out of ignorance, or out of forgetfulness, or while remembering, or intentionally or by mistake; he must guarantee it in all cases.”

3- The statement that the animals slaughtered by the People of the Book are lawful to us even if they did not mention the Name of Allaah on them is a narration by Imaam Ahmad, and it was reported by Al-Kawsaj in his questions to Imaam Ahmad and Is-haaq ibn Raahawayh, as he said, “I said: A Christian slaughtered an animal but did not mention the name of Allaah on it?” Imaam Ahmad said, “It is acceptable.” Ibn Raahawayh said the same thing. Among his evidence is what Al-Khateeb Ash-Shirbeeni of the Shaafi'i School of jurisprudence said in his book Mughni Al-Muhtaaj:

“Even if he did not mention the Name of Allaah intentionally, it is lawful, because Allaah permitted us to eat the animals slaughtered by the People of the Book, saying (what means): {…and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you.} [Quran 5:5]; while they do not mention the Name of Allaah. As regards the saying of Allaah (which means): {And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allaah has not been mentioned.} [Quran 6:121]; what is meant is the animals on which other than the Name of Allaah was mentioned, meaning what was slaughtered for idols; the evidence is the saying of Allaah (which means): {…and that which has been dedicated to other than Allaah.} [Quran 16:115]”

4- Most scholars are of the view that the animal on which other than the Name of Allaah is mentioned when slaughtering is forbidden, such as mentioning the name of Christ, for example; but there is one narration from Ahmad that says that it is lawful, and this was reported from some Companions. Ibn al-Qayyim may Allaah have mercy upon him said, “Abul-Barakaat said in his Muharrar, 'If they (the People of the Book) mentioned a name other than the Name of Allaah on it, then there are two narrations reported in this regard (from Imaam Ahmad), and the most correct one in my opinion is that it is forbidden. Ash-Shaafi’i, Maalik, and Abu Haneefah and his companions said, 'The animals which they slaughtered while mentioning the name of Christ are forbidden.''” The evidence for the view that it is lawful to eat the meat of animals slaughtered by the People of the Book is the saying of Allaah (which means): {and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you.} [Quran 5:5] This issue and the one before it are a matter of ijtihaad (independent reasoning), and each view is considerable. A person may act according to what he believes to be the preponderant opinion, and the layman follows the view of the mufti who issued the fatwa to him.

5- The Muslim is not different from a person from the People of the Book regarding not mentioning the Name of Allaah when hunting an animal. Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni, “The Muslim and a person from the People of the Book are the same in regard to hunted animals and slaughtering....” But before this, he said, “It a person does not mention the Name of Allaah on hunted animals whether deliberately or out of forgetfulness, then the meat of these animals is unlawful to eat...”

For more benefit, please refer to fataawa 90161 and 85051.

Allaah knows best.

www.islamweb.net