What is the meaning of the scholars' statement: "The original ruling regarding slaughter and private parts is prohibition"?

Al-Huwayni: May Allah honor you, our Shaykh, the scholars like Ibn Rajab and others said that the original ruling regarding slaughter and private parts is prohibition?

The Shaykh : Yes, the original ruling regarding slaughter and private parts is prohibition.
Al-Huwayni: And regarding the prohibition of private parts, does this mean that if I am invited to someone's home and meat is served to me, I should ask about it because it is possible that it was not slaughtered properly or something similar? And why did they specify only these two?

The Shaykh : As for the original ruling regarding the prohibition of private parts, this does not require research or discussion because the hadith on that is explicit: up to the end of the hadith in which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke during the Farewell Pilgrimage. As for the claim that the original ruling regarding sacrifices is prohibition, linking them with private parts, this is something that has not passed me in what I have read of the scholars' books. Now the responsibility lies with the transmitter and the narrator. If someone says this, we do not hesitate to not act upon it except with the following detail: I do not see it correct to make a general statement that the original ruling regarding sacrifices is prohibition without some qualification. If a Muslim lives in a country where he knows for certain that the people of the country slaughter according to the Sunnah, for example, they do not kill by stunning as is the reality in European countries and others, then there is no place for this prohibition in such a country. And conversely, if a Muslim lives in a land of disbelief and it is their custom that they do not slaughter their animals but rather kill them by stunning, then the aforementioned statement applies. And there is a third scenario, a middle ground between the first and the last, which is a country where some slaughter according to the Shari'ah and some violate the Shari'ah. In this case, we say . But perhaps Ibn Rajab meant a different meaning, and it is necessary to review the preceding speech and its context. Do you remember the occasion on which he said this word?
Al-Huwayni: No.

The Shaykh : Okay, do you remember the source where he said this?
Al-Huwayni: I think he referred to it in *Jami' al-'Ulum wa al-Hikam*.

The Shaykh : And under which hadith? For example, ?
Al-Huwayni: By Allah, I do not know because my memory of it is distant, but I remembered it. However, he mentioned it in the context of a topic, meaning as an aside.

Another questioner : O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : I found that some scholars likeThe Shaykh : Al-Sa'di, in one of his poems, says that: The original ruling regarding meats is prohibition.

The Shaykh : The original ruling regarding meats, not mentioning sacrifices for example or slaughters, this is more reasonable.

The questioner : He says: "The original ruling regarding meats,
And the soul and wealth of the protected,

The Shaykh : This is very reasonable, because most animal meats are forbidden, and only what the Shari'ah has explicitly permitted is allowed. This is very reasonable. Therefore, for some reason I mentioned earlier, we must return to Ibn Rajab's wording to be certain first of its exact phrasing, and then of its preceding and following context. Now it is eleven o'clock minus five minutes; you have five minutes left.
So understand, may Allah guide you, what fills [the mind]."