What is the ruling on eating from an animal slaughtered by one who forgot to mention the name of Allah? And a mention of Ibn Hazm's statement.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : So now we return to Ibn Hazm's statement that the one who slaughters and does not mention the name of Allah is originally required to mention the name of Allah; so why did he say: if he forgot, his slaughter is not to be eaten? What is the evidence?
The Shaykh : This requires specific evidence regarding Ibn Hazm, who adopted the rule: "There is no accountability for forgetfulness." Did he bring the evidence? Specific evidence. This is general evidence:Sunan Abi Dawud 2819 This is not sufficient to prove that the slaughter of one who forgot to mention the name is not to be eaten; so he would have contradicted the application of the rule he adopted. Did he bring a text? I do not think so.
The questioner : He brought His saying - Exalted is He - :[Al-Ma'idah 5:4] .
The Shaykh : From where do I tell you this principle.
The questioner : No more; meaning this is what he found ... Ibn Hazm.
The Shaykh: Yes.
Eid Abbasi : ... but the general texts are cited as evidence.
The Shaykh : No; meaning he sometimes contradicts; for example, it is well known that he does not hold to analogical reasoning, yet you find him sometimes ... .
The questioner : It is harder than analogical reasoning by induction, following the logician, saying: since this is more dangerous than analogical reasoning.
The Shaykh : So this means I do not have [an answer] regarding this question?
The Shaykh : This requires specific evidence regarding Ibn Hazm, who adopted the rule: "There is no accountability for forgetfulness." Did he bring the evidence? Specific evidence. This is general evidence:
Eat not of (meats) on which Allah's name hath not been pronounced
لا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليهThe questioner : He brought His saying - Exalted is He - :
and mention the name of Allah
وَاذْكُرُوا اسْمَ اللَّهِThe Shaykh : From where do I tell you this principle.
The questioner : No more; meaning this is what he found ... Ibn Hazm.
The Shaykh: Yes.
Eid Abbasi : ... but the general texts are cited as evidence.
The Shaykh : No; meaning he sometimes contradicts; for example, it is well known that he does not hold to analogical reasoning, yet you find him sometimes ... .
The questioner : It is harder than analogical reasoning by induction, following the logician, saying: since this is more dangerous than analogical reasoning.
The Shaykh : So this means I do not have [an answer] regarding this question?
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.