And the expiation for hunting is either a similar animal, if available, or its value in dirhams, with which food is purchased to feed every poor person a mudd (a quarter of a sa').
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "And the expiation for hunting" means that one is given the choice regarding the expiation. Accordingly, the "wa" (and) is a conjunction, and "bi-jaza'" (with an expiation) is conjoined to his statement "bi-fidyah" (with a ransom), but it is with the repetition of the operative particle, which is the "ba" (with). As for what it relates to, it remains, meaning one is given the choice regarding the expiation for hunting: either a similar animal, if it has one. If it has a similar animal, and if it does not have a similar animal, it has another ruling. Accordingly, we say that hunting is of two types: a type that has a similar animal among livestock, and its expiation is that similar animal, by the saying of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He: [Al-Ma'idah 5:95] Three things.
And whenever "aw" (or) comes in the Qur'an, it is for the purpose of choice. Some exegetes have made this a rule. So, one is given the choice between a similar animal, if it has one. So what is done with the similar animal? It is slaughtered and given in charity to the poor of the Haram (sacred precinct), by His saying, the Exalted:[Al-Ma'idah 5:95] "Or its value in dirhams, with which food is purchased to feed every poor person a mudd (a quarter of a sa'), or fasting for one day for every mudd (a quarter of a sa')."
Or its value in dirhams. What is valued? Is it the value of the similar animal or the value of the hunted animal? According to the madhhab (school of jurisprudence), it is the value of the similar animal, because it is the obligatory item in the kaffarah (expiation). It was said that it is the value of the hunted animal, because if one deviates from the similar animal, the value becomes obligatory, so the thing being valued is the hunted animal. The madhhab says that the similar animal is valued because it is the original obligation. If it is the original obligation, then its value is obligatory. Some say that the hunted animal is valued because when one deviates from the similar animal, it becomes like a hunted animal that has no similar animal, and the expiation for a hunted animal that has no similar animal is its value. But the madhhab is that the pronoun in "its value" refers to the similar animal. In dirhams, with which food is purchased to feed every poor person a mudd (a quarter of a sa'), or fasting for one day for every mudd (a quarter of a sa'). And his saying: "with which food is purchased" is not by way of example and not by way of specification. Meaning, one has the option to value it in dirhams, i.e., the similar animal, and then take out from the food he has what is equal to these dirhams. So the author's saying "with which food is purchased" is by way of what? Illustration, not specification. Meaning, if he has food, he values the similar animal and then takes out from the food he has the amount of its value, feeding every poor person a mudd (a quarter of a sa'), or fasting for one day for every mudd (a quarter of a sa').
And whoever of you kills it intentionally - the penalty is an equivalent from sacrificial animals to what he killed, as judged by two just men among you as an offering [to Allah] delivered to the Ka'bah, or an expiation: the feeding of needy people or the equivalent of that in fasting
ومن قتله منكم متعمداً فجزاء مثل من قتل من النعم ... أو كفارة طعام مساكين أو عدل ذلك صياماًAnd whenever "aw" (or) comes in the Qur'an, it is for the purpose of choice. Some exegetes have made this a rule. So, one is given the choice between a similar animal, if it has one. So what is done with the similar animal? It is slaughtered and given in charity to the poor of the Haram (sacred precinct), by His saying, the Exalted:
as an offering [to Allah] delivered to the Ka'bah
هدياً بالغ الكعبةOr its value in dirhams. What is valued? Is it the value of the similar animal or the value of the hunted animal? According to the madhhab (school of jurisprudence), it is the value of the similar animal, because it is the obligatory item in the kaffarah (expiation). It was said that it is the value of the hunted animal, because if one deviates from the similar animal, the value becomes obligatory, so the thing being valued is the hunted animal. The madhhab says that the similar animal is valued because it is the original obligation. If it is the original obligation, then its value is obligatory. Some say that the hunted animal is valued because when one deviates from the similar animal, it becomes like a hunted animal that has no similar animal, and the expiation for a hunted animal that has no similar animal is its value. But the madhhab is that the pronoun in "its value" refers to the similar animal. In dirhams, with which food is purchased to feed every poor person a mudd (a quarter of a sa'), or fasting for one day for every mudd (a quarter of a sa'). And his saying: "with which food is purchased" is not by way of example and not by way of specification. Meaning, one has the option to value it in dirhams, i.e., the similar animal, and then take out from the food he has what is equal to these dirhams. So the author's saying "with which food is purchased" is by way of what? Illustration, not specification. Meaning, if he has food, he values the similar animal and then takes out from the food he has the amount of its value, feeding every poor person a mudd (a quarter of a sa'), or fasting for one day for every mudd (a quarter of a sa').