Reading from the author's text with commentary and collation of manuscripts: "Likewise, the dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection); because His saying, the Exalted:
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: "Likewise, the dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection) because His saying, the Exalted [Al-Ma'idah 5:5] is equal, and although they consider this lawful, and we do not consider it lawful, not everything they consider lawful is lawful, and because two pieces of evidence have contradicted each other"
The Shaykh : he is not
The reader: Yes "not everything they consider lawful is lawful"
The Shaykh : It is like that in my copy, but there is a problem in it
The reader: In my copy it says "in the printed edition it is lawful for us"
The Shaykh : Ah?
The reader: It is lawful for us
The Shaykh : It is lawful for us here, but in the reading "halal" there is a problem. What is the problem?
The student: The news of "laysa" (is not)
The Shaykh : That it is the news of "laysa" (is not) necessitates that it be in the accusative case. Yes
The student: Halal (lawful)
The Shaykh : Not everything they consider lawful is lawful. Is there still a problem? But in our copy, in the past tense, there is no problem. Yes
The reader: "And because two pieces of evidence have contradicted each other, one prohibiting and one permitting, so the prohibiting one is more appropriate. And because slaughtering for other than Allah, and in the name of other than Him, we know with certainty"
The Shaykh : And in the name of other than Him
The reader: Yes, listen
The Shaykh : And in the name of other than Him, "bi" (in the name of) with the genitive case
The reader: Yes "And because slaughtering for other than Allah, and in the name of other than Him, we know with certainty that it is not from the religion of the Prophets (peace be upon them), so it is from the shirk (associating partners with Allah) that they introduced. So the meaning for which their slaughtered animals became lawful is absent in this case. And Allah knows best. If it is said: As for when they invoke other than Allah upon it by saying 'In the name of Christ' or the like, its prohibition is clear. But if they do not invoke anyone, but intend the slaughter for Christ, or for a star or the like, what is the basis for its prohibition? It is said: The indication to that has already been mentioned. And that is that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, has prohibited what is slaughtered upon the idols, and that necessitates its prohibition, even if the one slaughtering is from the People of the Book, because if the prohibition were due to it being idolatrous, there would be no difference between slaughtering upon the idol and elsewhere. And because when He permitted us the food of the People of the Book, it indicated that the food of the mushrikin (those who associate partners with Allah) is haram (forbidden), so specifying what is slaughtered upon the idol necessitates a new benefit. Also, He mentioned the prohibition of what is slaughtered upon the idols and what is dedicated to other than Allah; and what the People of the Book dedicated to other than Allah has entered into what is dedicated to other than Allah. So likewise, everything slaughtered upon the idols"
The Shaykh : In my copy, it says "in what is slaughtered." Do you have a copy? And the other?
The reader: Where is its location?
The Shaykh : Likewise, in what is slaughtered upon the idols. Yes
The reader: "So likewise, in what is slaughtered upon the idols. And if the one from the People of the Book slaughters upon the statues they have erected in the churches, it is slaughtered upon the idols. And it is known that the ruling of that does not differ by the presence or absence of the idol. It was only prohibited because he intended by his slaughter the worship of the idol and its exaltation. And these idols, it has been said, are from the statues, and it has been said, they are not the statues. They said: There were three hundred and sixty stones around the House, and the people of the jahiliyyah (the pre-Islamic age of ignorance) used to slaughter upon them and spread the meat upon them, and they used to exalt these stones and worship them and slaughter upon them. And if they wished, they would replace these stones with stones that were more impressive to them than them. And indicating that is the saying of Abu Dharr in the hadith of his Islam: 'Until I became like the red idol,' meaning that he would become red from being stained with blood"
and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them
وطعام الذين أوتوا الكتاب حل لكم وطعامكم حل لهمThe Shaykh : he is not
The reader: Yes "not everything they consider lawful is lawful"
The Shaykh : It is like that in my copy, but there is a problem in it
The reader: In my copy it says "in the printed edition it is lawful for us"
The Shaykh : Ah?
The reader: It is lawful for us
The Shaykh : It is lawful for us here, but in the reading "halal" there is a problem. What is the problem?
The student: The news of "laysa" (is not)
The Shaykh : That it is the news of "laysa" (is not) necessitates that it be in the accusative case. Yes
The student: Halal (lawful)
The Shaykh : Not everything they consider lawful is lawful. Is there still a problem? But in our copy, in the past tense, there is no problem. Yes
The reader: "And because two pieces of evidence have contradicted each other, one prohibiting and one permitting, so the prohibiting one is more appropriate. And because slaughtering for other than Allah, and in the name of other than Him, we know with certainty"
The Shaykh : And in the name of other than Him
The reader: Yes, listen
The Shaykh : And in the name of other than Him, "bi" (in the name of) with the genitive case
The reader: Yes "And because slaughtering for other than Allah, and in the name of other than Him, we know with certainty that it is not from the religion of the Prophets (peace be upon them), so it is from the shirk (associating partners with Allah) that they introduced. So the meaning for which their slaughtered animals became lawful is absent in this case. And Allah knows best. If it is said: As for when they invoke other than Allah upon it by saying 'In the name of Christ' or the like, its prohibition is clear. But if they do not invoke anyone, but intend the slaughter for Christ, or for a star or the like, what is the basis for its prohibition? It is said: The indication to that has already been mentioned. And that is that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, has prohibited what is slaughtered upon the idols, and that necessitates its prohibition, even if the one slaughtering is from the People of the Book, because if the prohibition were due to it being idolatrous, there would be no difference between slaughtering upon the idol and elsewhere. And because when He permitted us the food of the People of the Book, it indicated that the food of the mushrikin (those who associate partners with Allah) is haram (forbidden), so specifying what is slaughtered upon the idol necessitates a new benefit. Also, He mentioned the prohibition of what is slaughtered upon the idols and what is dedicated to other than Allah; and what the People of the Book dedicated to other than Allah has entered into what is dedicated to other than Allah. So likewise, everything slaughtered upon the idols"
The Shaykh : In my copy, it says "in what is slaughtered." Do you have a copy? And the other?
The reader: Where is its location?
The Shaykh : Likewise, in what is slaughtered upon the idols. Yes
The reader: "So likewise, in what is slaughtered upon the idols. And if the one from the People of the Book slaughters upon the statues they have erected in the churches, it is slaughtered upon the idols. And it is known that the ruling of that does not differ by the presence or absence of the idol. It was only prohibited because he intended by his slaughter the worship of the idol and its exaltation. And these idols, it has been said, are from the statues, and it has been said, they are not the statues. They said: There were three hundred and sixty stones around the House, and the people of the jahiliyyah (the pre-Islamic age of ignorance) used to slaughter upon them and spread the meat upon them, and they used to exalt these stones and worship them and slaughter upon them. And if they wished, they would replace these stones with stones that were more impressive to them than them. And indicating that is the saying of Abu Dharr in the hadith of his Islam: 'Until I became like the red idol,' meaning that he would become red from being stained with blood"