Benefits of the hadith of the wild ass hunted by Abu Qatadah.

The Shaykh : And in this hadith is evidence for the permissibility of a person in the state of ihram eating from game, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ate from it, and because the Companions who were with Abu Qatadah also ate from it. And in it is evidence that it is forbidden for a person in the state of ihram to assist a person not in the state of ihram in hunting what is forbidden for the person in the state of ihram to hunt. And this thing is forbidden for some and permissible for others. So the hunting here is forbidden for some people and permissible for other people. If someone asks, how can we describe one specific thing as both forbidden and permissible? We say: because of the difference in the aspect. And I think we referred to this meaning in the case of if a person prays in a garment that is forbidden for him, is his prayer valid or not? And we said that there is scholarly disagreement in the issue, looking at the fact that the prohibition is divided, meaning it is not on one aspect but on two aspects. So here we say there is evidence that it is forbidden for a person in the state of ihram to assist anyone in hunting what is forbidden for the person in the state of ihram to hunt. And in it is also evidence that it is recommended for the mufti to do what makes the questioner reassured by the fatwa. The evidence for this, or the aspect of the indication, is that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So they ate until their hearts were reassured. And Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) followed the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in such a matter. For when the Tatars besieged Damascus, and that was in Ramadan, he (may Allah have mercy on him) issued a fatwa for the soldiers to break their fast, and issued a fatwa for the others not to break their fast. As for the others, they said, how can they break their fast when they are not traveling and not sick, but rather they are residents? And the cause for breaking the fast is either illness or travel. But he said that fighting is a permit for breaking the fast. And he cited as evidence for this that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was in the expedition of the conquest in Ramadan and ordered his Companions to break their fast and encouraged them, but did not make it obligatory upon them. And in the second or third time, he made it obligatory upon them and said: He attributed their order to break the fast to the fact that it would make them stronger when facing the enemy. And the first night, which was the travel, was not obligatory or a command from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). He said, and this indicates the permissibility of breaking the fast for the sake of jihad in the path of Allah, even if the person is in his own land. The important thing is that he (may Allah have mercy on him) would walk among the soldiers with a piece of bread, eating it in front of them in order to reassure them about this fatwa that he had issued. And in it is also evidence for the frankness of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and their distance from the prohibitions of Allah. For they saw this wild ass and did not give permission to Abu Qatadah. Rather, after he had mounted and saddled his horse and remained for a moment, perhaps the ass might have escaped with it, and he forgot his whip and spear, and he asked them to hand it to him, but they refused. All of this indicates that they (may Allah be pleased with them) were not affected by the blame of blamers in the matter of Allah, and it was not possible for them to violate the sanctities of Allah for the sake of this world. If someone asks, did the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) not stay at the house of al-Sa'b ibn Jathamah and he offered him a wild ass, and he returned it to him? So when he saw what was on his face, he said: ? So we say that reconciling between them is a matter of disagreement. Some of the scholars preferred the hadith of al-Sa'b ibn Jathamah and said that the hadith of al-Sa'b ibn Jathamah was during the Farewell Pilgrimage, and the hadith of Abu Qatadah was during the Expedition of Hudaybiyyah, and there were four years between them. And only the later is taken from the guidance of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). And this is undoubtedly the stronger position. But we do not resort to preferring one over the other except where reconciliation is impossible, and reconciliation is possible here. For al-Sa'b ibn Jathamah only hunted it for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) when he stayed with him as a guest, and he (may Allah be pleased with him) was hospitable and was a runner, meaning quick to start running, so he ran at an ass and killed it and brought it to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and he returned it. As for the hadith of Abu Qatadah, he did not hunt it for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). They said, and what supports this reconciliation is what the people of the Sunan narrated with a good chain from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: And this reconciliation is necessary because it is possible, and reconciling between the texts when possible is obligatory, because reconciling between them requires acting with both of them, while preferring one requires leaving the other. Okay, yes.