Muslim

Hadith Commentary: Benefits and Issues: Ibn Abbas (radi Allahu anhuma) said the words, "You have done very badly," because from their statement it apparently seemed that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) had not clarified the ruling regarding the dhab (monitor lizard), whereas a Messenger is sent precisely for the clarification of rulings.

Hadith Commentary:
Rather, he (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would prohibit it.
This refutes the Hanafi position, who consider the lizard (sahnah) to be unlawful (haram).
The complete explanation will come later, insha’Allah.
Here, this hadith is cited because it mentions eating on a dining spread (dastarkhwan).

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
The name of Umm Hufayd radi Allahu anha is Huzaylah bint Harith, who is the maternal aunt of Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu.
Her other sisters are as follows:
Umm Khalid ibn Walid, whose name is Lubabah Sughra;
the mother of Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu, whose name is Lubabah Kubra;
and Umm al-Mu’minin Maymunah bint Harith radi Allahu anha.
All four are daughters of Harith ibn Hazn Hilali.

(2)
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah established his chapter heading from the word "ma’idah," which is used for a dining spread.
Its mention is found in the Noble Qur’an, and indeed, one of the surahs of the Qur’an is named after it.
(‘Umdat al-Qari: 14/399, 400)

Chapter of Sahih Bukhari Hadith Number: 7358: «بَابُ الأَحْكَامِ الَّتِي تُعْرَفُ بِالدَّلاَئِلِ، وَكَيْفَ مَعْنَى الدِّلاَلَةِ وَتَفْسِيرِهَا:»
Relevance between the Chapter and the Hadith:
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, through this chapter, has indicated towards several important issues. Thus, Abdul Haq al-Hashimi rahimahullah writes:
«هذا الباب متعلق بتعليم طريقة الإجتهاد، و قد تكون معرفة الأحكام من عموم النص، و دلالة النص، و غيرها من أنواع الدلائيل المذكورة فى أصول الفقة.» [لب اللباب فی تراجم والابواب : 244/5]
“This chapter is based on the teaching of the method of ijtihad so that the knowledge of rulings may be acquired from the generality of the text, the indication of the text, and other types of evidences mentioned in the principles of jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh).”

Muhammad Zakariya Kandhlawi rahimahullah writes that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah established this chapter in Kitab al-I‘tisam for this purpose, and in the same way, he established various types of chapters so that, through these chapters, two necessary matters may be indicated to the scholars of usul: firstly, that the principles of the Shari‘ah are of four types, «الكتاب، و السنة، و الإجماع، و القياس» and the second principle is that «عبارة النص، إشارة النص» and to indicate towards its implication. Thus, he writes:
«أن الإمام البخاري قد أشار فى ”كتاب الاعتصام“ بتراجم عديدة إلى مسائل الأصول كما ترى، فهكذا أشار لهذه الترجمة إلى أمرين قد نبه عليهما أصحاب الأصول، الأول: ما قالوا ان أصول الشرع أربعة: الكتاب، و السنة، و الاجماع، و القياس، وأشار إلى هذه الأربعة بقوله: التى تعرف بالدلائل . . . . . و الأمر الثاني، هو ما ذكروه من تقسيم الاستدلال من الكتاب و السنة إلى أقسام عديدة معروفة عندهم من عبارة النص، و إشارته و دلالته و اقتضائه، فأشار إلى هذا الأمر الثاني بقوله، و كيف معنى الدلالة.» [الابواب و التراجم: 767/6]
“It becomes clear from this information that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah had several objectives through the chapter, which he resolved through the ahadith under the chapter. But at the same time, it should also be mentioned that Muhammad Zakariya Kandhlawi rahimahullah divided the legal proof (hujjah shar‘iyyah) into four things, which has been mentioned in the previous lines. Three things: the Book, the Sunnah, and consensus (ijma‘), these are definitive proofs, but analogy (qiyas), based on the principles of jurisprudence, is not a definitive proof; rather, we can call it a manifest proof, meaning that the mujtahid in whom there is no (true) religion. Therefore, the relevance between the chapter and the hadith will be from this aspect: the first hadith which is narrated from Aisha radi Allahu anha, its relevance to the chapter is that Aisha radi Allahu anha understood through rational indication that ablution (wudu) cannot be performed with a cloth, because the words of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did not indicate this issue. Therefore, from the word «توضأ», that woman understood something else, but Umm Aisha radi Allahu anha understood that what was meant by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was to obtain purity by wiping the cloth over the body.”

Allamah Qastallani rahimahullah writes:
«و مطابقة الحديث للترجمة فى قوله توضئي بها فإنه وقع بيانه للسائلة بما فهمته عائشة رضي الله عنها و أقرها النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم على ذالك لأن السائلة لم تكن تعرف أن تتبع الدم بالفرصة يسمي توضوا فلما فهمت عائشة غرضه بينت للسائلة ما خفي عليها . . . . .» [ارشاد الساري : 109/12]
“The second hadith, which is narrated from Umm Hufayd bint al-Harith ibn Hazn, its relevance to the chapter is that the noble Companions radi Allahu anhum were eating sahina in the presence of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, and it is impossible for anything unlawful to be present on the table of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. Therefore, from this hadith, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah gave an example of legal indication (dalalah shar‘iyyah): when sahina was eaten by others at the table of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, it became known that it is lawful. Therefore, this hadith is relevant to that part of the chapter «الأحكام التى تعرف بالدلائل» because the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did not prohibit its consumption, and sahina was placed on the table of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. Therefore, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam not prohibiting something is also a proof in legal rulings, and similarly, in the hadith of Sayyidah Aisha radi Allahu anha, she understood and recognized the statement of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, so the relevance of this hadith will also be from this aspect. Thus, from here, the relevance between the chapter and the hadith will be established.” Allamah Ibn al-Qayyim rahimahullah, shedding light on this issue regarding what the practices of the people of Madinah were after the Companions radi Allahu anhum and the Rightly Guided Caliphs, comments as follows:
“The practice of the people of Madinah in relation to the muftis, rulers, and markets was according to the ruling of «محتسبين», and the subjects could not oppose these people. So if the mufti issued a fatwa, the governor would implement it, and the market inspector (muhtasib) would act accordingly. In this way, the fatwa would become the practiced norm. However, this is not worthy of consideration; rather, the actions of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, his caliphs, and the Companions radi Allahu anhum are the Sunnah. Therefore, neither of these two things should be confused with the other. Thus, in our view, giving judgment based on this practice is more severe, and in comparison, the other thing (the practice of the later people of Madinah), if it is contrary to the Sunnah, is most deserving of being abandoned.”

Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan Bhopali rahimahullah, commenting on this issue, writes:
“The practice of the people of Madinah, contrary to Imam Malik rahimahullah and his adherents, is not a proof against any authentic hadith, because they too are only a part of the Ummah (i.e., not the whole). Therefore, it is possible that the authentic report did not reach them.” [حصول المامول من علم الاصول : ص 59]
The sum of all this discussion is that the only criterion is the Prophetic Sunnah. Any practice contrary to it—whether it is from the people of Madinah, Kufa, Basra, Sham, Yemen, Egypt, Damascus, or, hypothetically, any well-known or unknown scholarly or non-scholarly city—can never become the criterion.

Imam Shafi‘i rahimahullah says:
«كيف أترك الخبر لأقوال أقوام لو عامرتهم لما حجتهم بالحديث .» [الاحكام فى اصول الاحكام للامدی : 165/2]
“How can I abandon the report (i.e., the hadith of the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) for statements? If I had been among those people, I would have debated with them regarding the proof of the hadith.”
Thus, the only criterion is the Qur’an and Hadith; this is the sum of the discussion.

Hadith Commentary:
The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) did not personally like to eat lizard (sahnah) by nature, but the Companions (radi Allahu anhum) ate it at his dining spread.
He did not prohibit them from doing so.
Lizard (sahnah) cannot be considered unlawful (haram) at all; rather, it is a staple food of the Arabs,
especially those Arabs who are desert dwellers.
Thus, Firdawsi says: "By eating the milk of camels and lizards, the Arabs have reached their present state."
From this hadith, Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) has provided an example of legal (shar‘i) inference: when lizard was eaten by others at the dining spread of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), it is understood that it is lawful (halal). If it were unlawful (haram), he would not have allowed it to be placed on his dining spread, let alone eaten.

Hadith Commentary:
In one narration it is stated:
The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) ate ghee and cheese, but left the dhab (spiny-tailed lizard) out of dislike.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Hibah, Hadith: 2575)

In another narration it is stated:
Among those gifts was also milk, and the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) drank it. Ibn Abbas (radi Allahu anhu) says:
If the dhab had been unlawful, it would not have been placed on the dining mat of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam).
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-At’imah, Hadith: 5402)

It is narrated from Ibn Umar (radi Allahu anhu) that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said regarding the dhab:
“I do not eat it, nor do I declare it unlawful.”
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Dhaba’ih wa al-Sayd, Hadith: 5536)

Khalid ibn al-Walid (radi Allahu anhu) ate the dhab that was placed on the dining mat of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) while the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) was watching him.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Dhaba’ih wa al-Sayd, Hadith: 5537)

Ibn Abbas (radi Allahu anhu) deduced from these indications and evidences that although the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) did not personally like to eat it, nevertheless it was eaten in his presence and he did not say anything about it. If it had been unlawful, it would not have been placed on the dining mat of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), let alone eaten in his presence.

Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) has presented this hadith as an example of legal indication (dalalat shar‘iyyah).

Hadith Commentary: However, the meat of the lizard (sahnah) was not liked by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, while the Companions radi Allahu anhum ate it, from which the permissibility of eating lizard (sahnah) is clearly established.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
In another narration, it is explicitly mentioned that when the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) extended his hand towards the lizard, he was informed that it was the meat of a lizard. He felt aversion towards it, and thus he withdrew his hand from it, which was then eaten by Khalid ibn al-Walid (radi Allahu anhu). (Sahih al-Bukhari, al-At‘imah, Hadith: 5400) A complete explanation of this hadith will be provided later.

(2)
The sole intent of Imam al-Bukhari (rahimahullah) is to establish that cheese is lawful (halal) and its consumption is permissible.