Reading from the author's text with commentary and collation of manuscripts: "And as for accepting gifts from them on their festival day
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: Yes, yes "And as for accepting gifts from them on their festival day, we have previously mentioned from 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that he was presented with a Nowruz gift and he accepted it, and Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated in al-Musannaf, he said: Jarrir narrated to us from Qabus from his father that a woman asked 'A'ishah, saying: We have neighbors who are Zoroastrians, and when they have their festival, they send us gifts. She said: As for what is slaughtered for that day, do not eat it, but eat from their trees.
And he said: Waki' narrated to us from al-Hasan ibn Hakim from his mother from Abu Burdah that he had Zoroastrian neighbors, and they used to send him gifts on Nowruz and Mehrigan, and he used to say to his family: Whatever is fruit, eat it, and whatever is other than that, return it. All of this indicates that the festival has no effect in preventing the acceptance of their gifts; rather, its ruling is the same whether it is on the festival or otherwise; because there is no assistance to them in their rituals of disbelief in that. However, accepting gifts from disbelievers, whether from the People of War or the People of the Covenant, is a separate issue in itself; it contains disagreement and detail, and this is not the place for it"
The Shaykh : This is strange from the Shaykh (may Allah have mercy on him), because accepting their gifts on their festivals means, it indicates that you feel it is approval, approval of their festivals. But there are reports from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and perhaps the Companions only accepted them at that time because of the strength of Islam, and that people would not be deceived by it, and that the disbelievers also know that the Muslims are higher than them.
However, in our present time, if one accepts a gift from them during their festivals, they would be overjoyed and say that the Muslims have agreed with us that this day is a festival. Therefore, we must distinguish in this matter and say: if it is feared that the disbelievers will become arrogant, will exalt themselves, or will assume that this is our approval of their festivals, then the gift should not be accepted, whether it is of a type that requires ritual slaughter or not. Yes.
The reader: "And it is only permissible to eat from the food of the People of the Book during their festival if it is purchased, given as a gift, or obtained by other means, provided they did not slaughter it for the festival. As for the slaughter of the Zoroastrians, the ruling in it is known; it is forbidden according to the majority. As for what the People of the Book slaughter for their festivals, and what they slaughter to draw near to other than Allah, similar to how Muslims slaughter their gifts and sacrifices to draw near to Allah the Exalted, such as what they slaughter for Jesus or the planet Venus, there are two narrations from Ahmad. The most famous of them in his texts is that it is not permissible to eat it, even if they did not invoke the name of other than Allah the Exalted upon it. The prohibition of that was transmitted, and the prohibition was transmitted"
The Shaykh : And it was transmitted, I believe it was transmitted, or...
The Reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: "And the prohibition of that was transmitted from Aisha and Abdullah ibn Umar. Al-Maimuni said: I asked Abu Abdullah about the slaughter of the People of the Book, and he said: If it is of what they slaughter for their churches, they intentionally leave off the invocation. They only slaughter for Jesus"
The student: ...
The Shaykh : ...
The student: In their churches, so it is not lawful.
The Shaykh : And what did he say?
The student: And it was of what they slaughter in their churches.
The Shaykh : So it is not lawful, and after that...
The student: He said: They leave off the invocation.
The reader: This is in the printed edition
The Shaykh : Yes.
The reader: And he says: Yes. "This is not in the manuscripts"
The Shaykh : He said: If they are...
The reader: If it is...
The Shaykh : If they are of what they slaughter, they slaughter for their churches...
The reader: In the printed edition, "after this is added: 'so it is not lawful. He said: They leave off the invocation'"
The Shaykh : So it is not lawful. The apparent view is more correct because it is a conditional clause that requires a response. Yes.
The reader: "He said: If it is of what they slaughter for their churches, it is not lawful. He said: They intentionally leave off the invocation. They only slaughter for Jesus. It was also mentioned that he asked Abu Abdullah about one of the People of the Book who slaughtered and did not invoke the name, and he said: If it is of what they slaughter for their churches, Ibn Umar said: They intentionally leave off the invocation in it. They only slaughter for Jesus. And Ibn Umar disliked it, except that Abu al-Darda' interpreted that their food is lawful. And the most I saw from him was dislike of eating what they slaughtered for their churches."
And he said: I asked Abu Abdullah about the slaughter of a woman from the People of the Book who did not invoke the name, and he said: If she was forgetful, there is no harm. And if it is of what they slaughter for their churches, they may intentionally leave off the invocation in it.
And al-Marwazi said: It was read to Abu Abdullah[Al-Ma'idah 5:3] He said: Upon the idols. And he said: Everything slaughtered upon the idols is not to be eaten.
And Hanzala said: My uncle said: I dislike everything slaughtered for other than Allah, and the churches if they slaughter for them. And what the People of the Book slaughter with the meaning of ritual slaughter, there is no harm in it. And what they slaughter intending other than Allah, I do not eat it. And what they slaughter in their festivals, I dislike it.
And Ahmad narrated from al-Walid ibn Muslim from al-Awza'i: I asked al-Maimun, "
The Shaykh : He said: I asked...
The reader: Is it correct, O Shaykh, like this?
The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: The expression is straightforward.
The Shaykh : Which of them?
The reader: And Ahmad narrated from al-Walid ibn Muslim from al-Awza'i: He said: I asked al-Maimun...
The Shaykh : Al-Maimun, al-Maimun...
The reader: Yes, yes, yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: "He said: I asked al-Maimun about what the Christians slaughtered for their festivals and their churches, and he disliked eating it. Hanzala said: I heard Abu Abdullah say: It is not to be eaten because they dedicated it to other than Allah. And everything else is to be eaten."
And Allah the Mighty and Majestic only made lawful of their food that upon which the name of Allah was mentioned. Allah the Mighty and Majestic said:[Al-An'am 6:121] And He said: [Al-Baqarah 2:173] So everything slaughtered for other than Allah, its meat is not to be eaten.
And Hanzala narrated from Ata regarding the slaughter of a Christian who says the name of Jesus: He said: Eat it. Hanzala said: I heard Abu Abdullah being asked about that, and he said: Do not eat it. Allah the Exalted said:[Al-An'am 6:121] So I do not see this as ritual slaughter. And what is dedicated to other than Allah, Abu Abdullah's argument with the verse is proof that the dislike in his view is a dislike of prohibition. And this is the view of the majority of the early companions. Al-Khallal said in the chapter on caution regarding eating what the Christians and People of the Book slaughtered for their festivals and their slaughters, and the slaughters of the People of the Book: "
The Shaykh : And the slaughters...
The reader: "And the slaughters of the People of the Book for their churches"
The Shaykh : The apparent view with the genitive case is better.
The reader: "And the slaughters of the People of the Book for their churches. Everyone who narrated from Abu Abdullah narrated the dislike in it, and it is scattered in these chapters. And what Hanzala said in these two matters was mentioned from Abu Abdullah: 'And do not eat what upon which the name of Allah was not mentioned and what was dedicated to other than Allah.' Indeed, the answer from Abu Abdullah is regarding what was dedicated to other than Allah."
As for the invocation and leaving it off, all his companions narrated from him that there is no harm in eating what they did not invoke the name upon, except at the time they slaughter for their festivals and churches. That is the meaning of his saying:[Al-Ma'idah 5:3] And in the view of Abu Abdullah, the interpretation of [Al-An'am 6:121] is that he meant by it carrion. "
The Shaykh : He meant...
The reader: He meant...
The Shaykh : He meant, yes.
The reader: "He meant by it carrion. And I have extracted it in its place. And al-Khallal's intention is that Ahmad's prohibition was not solely for the sake of leaving off the invocation, for that does not make it forbidden in his view. Rather, it was because they slaughtered for other than Allah, whether they invoked other than Allah or did not invoke Allah or other than Him, but their intention was slaughter for other than Him"
The Shaykh : The slaughter, but...
The reader: "But their intention was slaughter for other than Him"
The Shaykh : The slaughter...
The reader: "The slaughter for other than Him. And Ibn Abi Musa said: One should avoid eating everything the Jews and Christians slaughtered for their churches"
The Shaykh : Eating everything...
The Reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : And one should avoid eating everything...
The reader: "And one should avoid eating everything the Jews and Christians slaughtered for their churches and their festivals. And what is slaughtered for the planet Venus is not to be eaten."
And the second narration is that it is disliked but not forbidden. And this is what the Qadi and others mentioned, and I think they took that from what Abdullah ibn Ahmad transmitted.
He said: I asked my father about what is slaughtered for the planet Venus, and he said: I do not like it. I said: Is it forbidden to eat it? He said: I do not say it is forbidden, but I do not like it. And that is because he affirmed the dislike without the prohibition. And it can be said that he hesitated to call it forbidden because what is disputed in its prohibition and where the evidence conflicts, such as marrying two sisters who are slaves and the like, is it called forbidden according to two narrations, like the two narrations from him regarding what is disputed in its obligation: is it called obligatory according to two narrations? And some of our scholars stated the dislike without explaining whether he meant prohibition or mere disapproval.
Abu al-Hasan al-Amidi said: What is slaughtered for other than Allah, such as churches, the planet Venus, the sun, and the moon. Ahmad said: What is dedicated to other than Allah, I dislike it. Everything slaughtered for other than Allah, and the churches, and what they slaughter in their festivals, I dislike it. As for what the People of the Book slaughter with the meaning of ritual slaughter, there is no harm in it. And this is also the school of Malik: he dislikes what the Christians slaughter for their churches, or what they slaughter in the name of Jesus or the cross, or the names of their past rabbis and monks. "
And he said: Waki' narrated to us from al-Hasan ibn Hakim from his mother from Abu Burdah that he had Zoroastrian neighbors, and they used to send him gifts on Nowruz and Mehrigan, and he used to say to his family: Whatever is fruit, eat it, and whatever is other than that, return it. All of this indicates that the festival has no effect in preventing the acceptance of their gifts; rather, its ruling is the same whether it is on the festival or otherwise; because there is no assistance to them in their rituals of disbelief in that. However, accepting gifts from disbelievers, whether from the People of War or the People of the Covenant, is a separate issue in itself; it contains disagreement and detail, and this is not the place for it"
The Shaykh : This is strange from the Shaykh (may Allah have mercy on him), because accepting their gifts on their festivals means, it indicates that you feel it is approval, approval of their festivals. But there are reports from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and perhaps the Companions only accepted them at that time because of the strength of Islam, and that people would not be deceived by it, and that the disbelievers also know that the Muslims are higher than them.
However, in our present time, if one accepts a gift from them during their festivals, they would be overjoyed and say that the Muslims have agreed with us that this day is a festival. Therefore, we must distinguish in this matter and say: if it is feared that the disbelievers will become arrogant, will exalt themselves, or will assume that this is our approval of their festivals, then the gift should not be accepted, whether it is of a type that requires ritual slaughter or not. Yes.
The reader: "And it is only permissible to eat from the food of the People of the Book during their festival if it is purchased, given as a gift, or obtained by other means, provided they did not slaughter it for the festival. As for the slaughter of the Zoroastrians, the ruling in it is known; it is forbidden according to the majority. As for what the People of the Book slaughter for their festivals, and what they slaughter to draw near to other than Allah, similar to how Muslims slaughter their gifts and sacrifices to draw near to Allah the Exalted, such as what they slaughter for Jesus or the planet Venus, there are two narrations from Ahmad. The most famous of them in his texts is that it is not permissible to eat it, even if they did not invoke the name of other than Allah the Exalted upon it. The prohibition of that was transmitted, and the prohibition was transmitted"
The Shaykh : And it was transmitted, I believe it was transmitted, or...
The Reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: "And the prohibition of that was transmitted from Aisha and Abdullah ibn Umar. Al-Maimuni said: I asked Abu Abdullah about the slaughter of the People of the Book, and he said: If it is of what they slaughter for their churches, they intentionally leave off the invocation. They only slaughter for Jesus"
The student: ...
The Shaykh : ...
The student: In their churches, so it is not lawful.
The Shaykh : And what did he say?
The student: And it was of what they slaughter in their churches.
The Shaykh : So it is not lawful, and after that...
The student: He said: They leave off the invocation.
The reader: This is in the printed edition
The Shaykh : Yes.
The reader: And he says: Yes. "This is not in the manuscripts"
The Shaykh : He said: If they are...
The reader: If it is...
The Shaykh : If they are of what they slaughter, they slaughter for their churches...
The reader: In the printed edition, "after this is added: 'so it is not lawful. He said: They leave off the invocation'"
The Shaykh : So it is not lawful. The apparent view is more correct because it is a conditional clause that requires a response. Yes.
The reader: "He said: If it is of what they slaughter for their churches, it is not lawful. He said: They intentionally leave off the invocation. They only slaughter for Jesus. It was also mentioned that he asked Abu Abdullah about one of the People of the Book who slaughtered and did not invoke the name, and he said: If it is of what they slaughter for their churches, Ibn Umar said: They intentionally leave off the invocation in it. They only slaughter for Jesus. And Ibn Umar disliked it, except that Abu al-Darda' interpreted that their food is lawful. And the most I saw from him was dislike of eating what they slaughtered for their churches."
And he said: I asked Abu Abdullah about the slaughter of a woman from the People of the Book who did not invoke the name, and he said: If she was forgetful, there is no harm. And if it is of what they slaughter for their churches, they may intentionally leave off the invocation in it.
And al-Marwazi said: It was read to Abu Abdullah
those which are sacrificed on stone altars
وما ذبح على النصبAnd Hanzala said: My uncle said: I dislike everything slaughtered for other than Allah, and the churches if they slaughter for them. And what the People of the Book slaughter with the meaning of ritual slaughter, there is no harm in it. And what they slaughter intending other than Allah, I do not eat it. And what they slaughter in their festivals, I dislike it.
And Ahmad narrated from al-Walid ibn Muslim from al-Awza'i: I asked al-Maimun, "
The Shaykh : He said: I asked...
The reader: Is it correct, O Shaykh, like this?
The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: The expression is straightforward.
The Shaykh : Which of them?
The reader: And Ahmad narrated from al-Walid ibn Muslim from al-Awza'i: He said: I asked al-Maimun...
The Shaykh : Al-Maimun, al-Maimun...
The reader: Yes, yes, yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: "He said: I asked al-Maimun about what the Christians slaughtered for their festivals and their churches, and he disliked eating it. Hanzala said: I heard Abu Abdullah say: It is not to be eaten because they dedicated it to other than Allah. And everything else is to be eaten."
And Allah the Mighty and Majestic only made lawful of their food that upon which the name of Allah was mentioned. Allah the Mighty and Majestic said:
And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned
ولا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليهand that which has been dedicated to other than Allah
وما أهل به لغير اللهAnd Hanzala narrated from Ata regarding the slaughter of a Christian who says the name of Jesus: He said: Eat it. Hanzala said: I heard Abu Abdullah being asked about that, and he said: Do not eat it. Allah the Exalted said:
And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned
ولا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليهThe Shaykh : And the slaughters...
The reader: "And the slaughters of the People of the Book for their churches"
The Shaykh : The apparent view with the genitive case is better.
The reader: "And the slaughters of the People of the Book for their churches. Everyone who narrated from Abu Abdullah narrated the dislike in it, and it is scattered in these chapters. And what Hanzala said in these two matters was mentioned from Abu Abdullah: 'And do not eat what upon which the name of Allah was not mentioned and what was dedicated to other than Allah.' Indeed, the answer from Abu Abdullah is regarding what was dedicated to other than Allah."
As for the invocation and leaving it off, all his companions narrated from him that there is no harm in eating what they did not invoke the name upon, except at the time they slaughter for their festivals and churches. That is the meaning of his saying:
and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah
وما أهل لغير الله بهAnd do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned
ولا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليهThe Shaykh : He meant...
The reader: He meant...
The Shaykh : He meant, yes.
The reader: "He meant by it carrion. And I have extracted it in its place. And al-Khallal's intention is that Ahmad's prohibition was not solely for the sake of leaving off the invocation, for that does not make it forbidden in his view. Rather, it was because they slaughtered for other than Allah, whether they invoked other than Allah or did not invoke Allah or other than Him, but their intention was slaughter for other than Him"
The Shaykh : The slaughter, but...
The reader: "But their intention was slaughter for other than Him"
The Shaykh : The slaughter...
The reader: "The slaughter for other than Him. And Ibn Abi Musa said: One should avoid eating everything the Jews and Christians slaughtered for their churches"
The Shaykh : Eating everything...
The Reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : And one should avoid eating everything...
The reader: "And one should avoid eating everything the Jews and Christians slaughtered for their churches and their festivals. And what is slaughtered for the planet Venus is not to be eaten."
And the second narration is that it is disliked but not forbidden. And this is what the Qadi and others mentioned, and I think they took that from what Abdullah ibn Ahmad transmitted.
He said: I asked my father about what is slaughtered for the planet Venus, and he said: I do not like it. I said: Is it forbidden to eat it? He said: I do not say it is forbidden, but I do not like it. And that is because he affirmed the dislike without the prohibition. And it can be said that he hesitated to call it forbidden because what is disputed in its prohibition and where the evidence conflicts, such as marrying two sisters who are slaves and the like, is it called forbidden according to two narrations, like the two narrations from him regarding what is disputed in its obligation: is it called obligatory according to two narrations? And some of our scholars stated the dislike without explaining whether he meant prohibition or mere disapproval.
Abu al-Hasan al-Amidi said: What is slaughtered for other than Allah, such as churches, the planet Venus, the sun, and the moon. Ahmad said: What is dedicated to other than Allah, I dislike it. Everything slaughtered for other than Allah, and the churches, and what they slaughter in their festivals, I dislike it. As for what the People of the Book slaughter with the meaning of ritual slaughter, there is no harm in it. And this is also the school of Malik: he dislikes what the Christians slaughter for their churches, or what they slaughter in the name of Jesus or the cross, or the names of their past rabbis and monks. "