Bukhari

Chapter of Sahih Bukhari Hadith No: 3075: «بَابُ مَا يُكْرَهُ مِنْ ذَبْحِ الإِبِلِ وَالْغَنَمِ فِي الْمَغَانِمِ:»
Relevance between the Chapter Heading and the Hadith:
In the chapter heading, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah intended to establish that it is not permissible to slaughter the camels and goats of war booty before their distribution. At this point, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah likely wants to prove that in the abode of war (dar al-harb), whatever things are available for eating—such as fruits, bread, curry, etc.—their consumption without permission is permissible. To establish this issue, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah set up a chapter in «كتاب الخمس» as follows: «باب ما يصيب من طعام فى أرض العدو», by which he, in agreement with the majority, explicitly stated its permissibility. However, if the warriors slaughter animals without permission, this would not be correct.
Allamah Muhallab rahimahullah says:
«. . . . . و ذالك ان القصة وقعت فى دار السلام لقوله فيها ”بذي الحليفة“.» [فتح الباري، ج 6، ص: 234]
This incident took place in the abode of Islam, i.e., at the place of Dhu’l-Hulayfah. The noble Companions radi Allahu anhum slaughtered animals from the war booty before its distribution and without permission. The meat was not yet put in the pot to cook, but the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam ordered that it be overturned. The commentators have drawn attention to a complex issue: the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam ordered the pots filled with meat to be overturned, but the question arises—since the meat was war booty and collectively owned by the Muslims, why did the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam order it to be wasted?
Allamah Ibn al-Munir rahimahullah says:
“When an animal is slaughtered without the permission of the Imam, in a manner of transgression, then the slaughtered animal becomes «ميته».” [المتواري، ص: 183]
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, also reasoning from this incident, inclines to the same issue: that the slaughtered animal became «ميته», and according to the ahadith, a «ميته» animal is considered impure (najis), which is why the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam ordered it to be destroyed.
Ibn al-Munir rahimahullah mentioned another inclination of Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, saying:
«وكأن البخاري رحمه الله اقتصر لهذا المذهب أو حمل الاكفاء على العقوبة بالمال و إن كان ذالك المال لا يختص بأولئك الذين ذبحوا، لكن لما تعلق به طمعهم كانت النكاية حاصلة لهم قال و إذا جوزنا هذا النوع من العقوبة فعقوبة صاحب المال فى ماله أدنى.» [فتح الباري، ج 6، ص: 232]
“That is, it is possible that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah interpreted ‘overturning the pots’ as a financial punishment (i.e., ta’zir mali), even though the property (the animals) in the incident of slaughter was not the individual property of the involved warriors, but their greed was certainly attached to it. Therefore, by the loss of the meat, they were given a financial penalty.”
Imam Qurtubi rahimahullah says:
«المأمور باكفائه انما هو المرق عقوبة للذين تعجلو، و أما نفس اللحم فلم يتلف، بل يحتمل على أنه جمع و رد إلى المغنم لأن النهي عن أضاعة المال تقدم، و الجناية بطبخه لم تقع من الجميع إذ حملتهم أصحاب الخمس . . .» [ارشاد الساري للقسطلاني، ج 5، ص: 447]
“In reality, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam only ordered the broth to be overturned, not the meat to be wasted. It is also possible that the meat was later included in the war booty. Because in one narration from the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, there is a prohibition on wasting wealth. Furthermore, the admission of guilt was made individually by a few people; there were some among the recipients of the fifth (khums) who were not involved in this act, and they had a right in the meat. Since there is no explicit narration stating that the meat was ordered to be wasted, therefore, according to the principles of Shari’ah, its ruling becomes clear and determined. Thus, regarding «للحوم الحمر اهليه», the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said that it is impure and ordered it to be destroyed. If the same ruling applied to this meat, then the narration in the incident of the chapter would have contained the same order. This proves that in the mentioned incident, the meat of the animal was not declared impure like the meat of domesticated donkeys (humur ahliyya) and was not ordered to be destroyed.”
Abu Zakariya al-Misri al-Shafi’i rahimahullah also holds this view. [منتحة الباري شرح صحيح البخاري، ج 6، ص: 189]
Thus, the commentators have mentioned various explanations:
Some said that this incident took place in the abode of Islam (dar al-Islam); some said that there was a scarcity of animals; some said that the slaughter was based on a manner of transgression. [الأبواب والتراجم، ج 4، ص: 322]
Therefore, the relevance between the chapter heading and the hadith is that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam ordered the pots to be overturned. These words are mentioned in the wording of «فأمر بالقدور», and this is interpreted as indicating dislike (karahah). Thus, from here, the relevance between the chapter heading and the hadith is established.

Hadith Commentary:
The meaning of Rafi‘ radi Allahu anhu’s statement is that we cannot slaughter animals with a sword merely because there is a fear of war in the coming days.
Lest the swords become blunt.
So should we then slaughter with bamboo sticks, since they also have an edge?
Bones are the food of the jinn; if they are used for slaughter, they will become impure (najis).
Nails are the knives of the Abyssinians; at that time, the Abyssinians were disbelievers, so the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam forbade resembling them.
The correspondence between the chapter heading and the hadith is evident.
Hafiz (Ibn Hajar) rahimahullah says:
“And the point of the chapter heading from this hadith is his sallallahu alayhi wa sallam’s command to overturn the pots, for this indicates the dislike (karahah) of what they did—slaughtering without permission.”
That is, the meaning of the chapter is clear from the fact that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam overturned the pots,
because their slaughter was disliked (makruh) due to being without permission.
The broth was poured away.
“As for the meat, it was not destroyed; rather, it is understood that it was gathered and returned to the spoils of war (maghanim).”
That is, instead of destroying the meat, it was collected and included among the spoils of war.
And Allah knows best what is correct.

Hadith Commentary:
➊
The intention of Hazrat Rafi‘ bin Khadij radi Allahu anhu was that there was a fear that war with the enemy might break out at any moment, and if we start slaughtering animals with our swords, they will become blunt and will not be usable against the enemy, and we do not have knives with us. Therefore, permission should be granted to slaughter with a reed (sar kanday).
Since the purpose of slaughtering is to let the impure blood flow, and that can also be achieved with a reed,
for this reason, the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:
Whatever thing causes blood to flow, you may slaughter with it. However, the tooth is bone, and bone is the food of the jinn, which will become impure by slaughtering, and the Abyssinians (Habashis) slaughter with nails, and at that time the Abyssinians were disbelievers, so he forbade adopting their resemblance.

➋
Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah says:
The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam ordered the pots to be overturned because the animals whose meat was being cooked had been slaughtered before the permission and distribution of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, so he ordered this as a punishment.

➌
From this hadith, it appears that you (the Prophet) caused property to be wasted, whereas in other ahadith you have prohibited wasting property? One way to reconcile these is that, in general circumstances, the ruling is that property should not be wasted; however, for some benefit or as a disciplinary action, it is permissible to do so, as the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did.
This is also supported by the incident of Hazrat Hudhayfah radi Allahu anhu mentioned in Sunan an-Nasa’i, that once the chief of a village brought water for him in a silver vessel, so he threw the vessel along with the water back at him.
(Sunan an-Nasa’i, az-Zeenah, Hadith: 5303)

Explanation:
1:
Before the division, these hasty people rushed upon this jointly owned war booty, slaughtered the goats, and set the pots on the fire. So the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) declared this looted wealth to be unlawful and ordered that the pots placed on the fire be overturned.

Benefits and Issues:
➊
It has been deduced from this hadith that since a camel is equivalent to ten goats, therefore, ten people can jointly offer a sacrifice with one camel. However, this reasoning is not clear, because it is possible that at that time, due to camels being fewer and goats being more plentiful, the price of one camel was considered equal to that of ten goats.
Or, the rate may have been set because the camel was of high quality and the goats were lean.
See: (Fath al-Bari: 9/775)
And when distributing war booty, the value of the shares is kept equal.

➋
Before the distribution of war booty, no warrior is allowed to take possession of any item from the booty.

➌
At times, a financial penalty may also be imposed for a mistake.

➍
In this hadith, the reference to Dhu’l-Hulayfah is not to the well-known location that is the miqat for the people of Madinah, but rather, it is in the region of Yemen. (Muhammad Fuad Abdul Baqi, Hashiyah Sunan Ibn Majah)