What is the basis for your settled opinion on the issue of the sacrificial animal? Is it obligatory or a recommended practice?

Eid Abbasi : What is the basis for your settled opinion on the issue of the sacrificial animal? Is it obligatory or a recommended practice? If it is a recommended practice, how do we deal with the hadith of Umm Salama in Muslim, which states: ? It is known that al-San'ani quoted al-Shafi'i as saying: "And attributing the matter to intention indicates that it is not obligatory."

The Shaykh : The reality is that this is a doubt that has no value from the perspective of the texts of the Shari'ah. We say that attributing a command to human intention has a very great connection to our previous topic; that is, a person is obligated in worship and obedience, so he must intend it, perform it, and rise to it. If he does not intend it, Allah (Mighty and Majestic) does not impose it on him as an obligation and restrict him to it. No, the point here is that he attributed the ruling for one who intends to sacrifice to human intention. This aspect is very clear in the Noble Qur'an itself: . Therefore, adhering to this understanding—unfortunately, attributing this understanding to some of the Imams—results in an analogy based on this understanding that adherence is not obligatory. Why? Because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) attributed it to our will. Everything we are commanded to do requires our will and intention to perform it. Therefore, before knowing what is reserved for us and what is hidden from us regarding such questions, we said that intention is of two types: cosmic intention and legislative intention. The discussion is not about cosmic intention, but about legislative intention. You must do it, and if you do not do it, the matter shifts from legislative intention to cosmic intention, because nothing happens in this universe against the will of Allah (Mighty and Majestic). So here, when Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: , why did He attribute adherence to will? Because all legislative obligations are linked to it.
An example of what we are saying, although the verse is sufficient and comprehensive in that, but by way of elaboration, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . Here too, intention is attributed to the human being regarding what? Regarding Hajj, which is one of the five pillars of Islam. Does that mean Hajj is not obligatory? The answer is no, but every obligation requires an intention issued from this person for him to be obligated. Otherwise, if he has no intention, there is no obligation on him. Therefore, the pen is lifted from three, as you know, in the hadith in "Sahih": .
Other than that?

Eid Abbasi : Added to the above is that this hadith: is not presented or conveyed for the purpose of.

The Shaykh: Yes.

Eid Abbasi : Explaining the ruling on the sacrificial animal, but rather to explain something else; which is that he should not take anything from his head or his nails. As for what is specifically conveyed for that purpose, it is a hadith, for example: . Here is the explanation of the ruling, while that one is an explanation of the prohibition of taking anything from his nails or hair.

The Shaykh : Correct.

Eid Abbasi : What is the age that is sufficient for the sacrificial animal, with an explanation of the term "jadh'a"?
...