If the one who offers the 'Id sacrifice eats all of it, what is required of him?

The questioner : And among them is: if the one who offers the sacrifice eats all of it, is he required to guarantee the portion that was designated, or does the name apply in two ways?

The Shaykh : Is it required of them? Do you have it like this? I hold that it is required, but let it be a copy. Is it required of him? Yes.

The presenter : And if he gives in charity first what the name applies to, that suffices him; because giving in charity with the whole third is recommended, not obligatory, according to the well-known view in the school of jurisprudence,

The Shaykh : But in this issue, the correct view is that he is not required to give in charity with the third, because he is not required to give it in charity first, so he is not required to do so second. And this is among the rights of Allah. So if he eats it all, he guarantees the least amount that the name of meat applies to. The least amount that the name of meat applies to? The least amount that the name of meat applies to? Hmm? How much? How much does it weigh?

The presenter : Four kilos. Four kilos.

The Shaykh : How much is a quarter of a kilo in size, I mean?

The presenter : Yes?

The Shaykh : Is this one bigger?

The presenter : May Allah conceal [our faults].

The Shaykh : Before the transfer, I mean.

The presenter : Better.

The Shaykh : Four kilos is bigger than this one.

The presenter : Yes, indeed. Because

The Shaykh : Very well. Yes.

The presenter : And from it.

The Shaykh : Your statement is good, yes.

The presenter : And among them. What?

The Shaykh : Yes, because it is obligatory to give in charity with the third.

The presenter : Yes.

The Shaykh : It is correct that, yes, the sacrificial animals must be such that one eats from them and feeds others.

The presenter : But.

The Shaykh : The correct view is that it is also obligatory for you, because the command is one. Some said that the command regarding eating is by way of permissibility, and regarding charity is by way of obligation. They reasoned this by saying that charity is for the benefit of others, and eating is for your benefit. But he said that even if it were for my benefit, I am commanded to be generous with the blessing of Allah. For this reason, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded that a piece be taken from every camel. From a hundred camels, a piece was taken from each camel, cooked, and he ate from its meat and drank from its broth. Yes. Yes. And even if it were said to be on the basis of reality, it would have a valid aspect.
He gave a horse in charity to a man, but the man lost it, and he wanted to buy it. He said: Do not repeat in your charity.
So the default is that what a person gives out for Allah, he does not benefit from it in this world. Even the town from which one migrates for Allah, it is not permissible to reside in it. So what was said regarding permissibility has a valid aspect, but I see that it is not by way of permissibility, but by way of worship, as evidenced by the fact that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded that a piece be taken from every camel.