Muslim

Hadith Commentary:
Benefits and Issues:
➊ If a hunting dog catches the prey and it dies, then its catching is, by consensus, considered as slaughtering.
➋ However, if the dog catches it alive, or there remains enough life in it that it can be slaughtered, then it must be slaughtered.
➌ Similarly, if another dog joins in the hunt and the prey is slaughtered, then it will be permissible.

Hadith Commentary:
This pertains to trained dogs; if they kill the game but do not put it in their mouths to eat, then that animal may be consumed. However, such trained dogs are extremely rare nowadays, except for whom Allah wills.

Hadith Commentary:
From this hadith, it is understood that if a dog, after hunting, eats from the game itself, then it should not be eaten, because there is a concern that the dog caught the game not for its owner but for itself. However, in the narration from Abu Tha’labah al-Khushani radi Allahu anhu, it is mentioned that even if the dog eats from it itself, it is still permissible for the owner to eat it.
(Sunan Abi Dawud, al-Sayd, Hadith: 2852)
The hadith scholars have presented several ways to reconcile these narrations, which are as follows:
➊ Allamah ‘Ayni rahimahullah has declared the hadith of Abu Dawud weak due to Dawud ibn ‘Amr.
(‘Umdat al-Qari: 476/14)
But the narration we have mentioned does not contain this narrator.
That hadith is in: 2848.
This hadith is of hasan (good) grade.
➋ Its interpretation has been made in such a way that the hunting dog caught the game, killed it, and left it for the owner, then went away from there, and later returned and ate some of it. In this situation, it is permissible for the owner to eat it. Since Abu Tha’labah radi Allahu anhu was poor and needy, permission was given for him; whereas ‘Adi ibn Hatim was wealthy, so permission was not given for him.
In any case, Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah has mentioned other aspects as well, (Fath al-Bari: 745/9)
However, caution demands that if the dog eats from it itself, the owner should not eat it.
And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary:
The "ghallah" is that which is thrown by means of a "ghaleel" (slingshot), which kills the animal by its weight and does not tear the flesh.

Maulana Waheed-uz-Zaman rahimahullah has declared game hunted by a gun to be lawful, because the bullet from a gun penetrates into the flesh by tearing it.

The fatwa of the majority of scholars is that when another dog joins in (the hunt), then eating (of the game) is not permissible.

Many scholars do not consider game hunted by a gun, if it dies before ritual slaughter (dhabh), to be lawful.

Caution is in this, and Allah knows best what is correct.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
A "mi‘rad" refers to a stick whose one edge is sharp or has a sharp blade of iron attached to it. If its point or sharp edge wounds the animal, then it is considered a valid slaughter (dhabihah), and eating it is permissible.
If the animal is struck with the broad side of that stick and dies due to the blow, then it falls under the ruling of "mauqūdhah" (carrion).
Eating it is not permissible.

(2)
The difference between the two is that when the animal is struck with the point or sharp edge of the stick, it is cut, whereas when struck with the broad side, it is not cut but rather crushed.
When it is cut, blood flows, so it is considered as slaughtered; whereas when the skin is merely ruptured, this does not occur.

Hadith Commentary:
That which is mauqudh (killed by a blow), is carrion; further details have already been mentioned previously.
Hafiz Sahib states: "And in it is the prohibition of eating the game from which the dog has eaten, even if the dog is trained." (Fath)
If the dog is trained (mu‘allam), even then, when it eats from the game, eating that game becomes prohibited.
From the addition of the word "your dog" (kalbik), it is established that buying and selling a trained dog is permissible.
(Fath)

Hadith Commentary:
From this hadith, it is understood that if, along with the hunting dog, other dogs also joined, and it is not known which dog killed the prey, or it is not known whether the name of Allah (Bismillah) was recited over the other dogs or not, then in such a case, that prey will not be lawful (halal).
If it is known that the name of Allah was recited over the other dogs as well, then that prey will also be lawful (halal).
However, if the prey killed by the other dogs is found alive and there is an opportunity to slaughter it (according to Islamic law), then it will be permissible to eat such prey.

Hadith Commentary:
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah intends to establish that engaging in hunting as an occupation is permissible so that one may support oneself through it. And if a person has another occupation and means of livelihood, and occasionally hunts for recreation, then doing so is permissible. However, it is not permissible to be constantly preoccupied with hunting merely as a pastime, as indicated by the statement of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam:
“Whoever takes up residence in the wilderness becomes hard-hearted, and whoever is persistently engaged in hunting becomes heedless.”
(Sunan Abi Dawud, al-Sayd, Hadith: 2859)
In any case, adopting hunting as a pastime for mere amusement is contrary to the dignity of a believer.

Hadith Commentary:
He is the son of Hatim, the famous generous man of the Arabs, who became Muslim. Thus, this hadith is evidence for those who consider the recitation of "Bismillah" as a proof of permissibility (halal).
Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah said that the same ruling applies to hawks, falcons, and all hunting birds as applies to dogs: it is permissible to eat their game when they are released for hunting after reciting "Bismillah."
Adi, like his father, was generous and lived a long life.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
There are two ways in which an animal becomes lawful (halal) to eat:
The first is that at the time of slaughtering, the name of Allah is mentioned, that is, reciting "Bismillah" is necessary.
The statement of Allah, the Exalted, is:
“Eat of that (animal) upon which the name of Allah has been mentioned at the time of slaughtering.” (: al-An‘am: 118)
The second way is that when releasing a hunting dog, "Bismillah" is recited, provided that the dog is trained.
Being trained means that such a dog is released for hunting which runs after the prey, stops when commanded to stop, and when it catches the prey, it does not eat from it.
In a hadith, it is mentioned that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said to Abu Tha‘labah al-Khushani (radi Allahu anhu):
“If you hunt with a trained dog and you mention the name of Allah when releasing it, then there is no harm in eating (the prey). And if you hunt with an untrained dog, and you get the chance to slaughter it (the prey), then you may also eat it.”
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Dhaba’ih wa al-Sayd, Hadith: 5478)
(2)
According to our view, there are two conditions for eating the prey hunted by a hunting dog:
➊ The dog must be trained.
➋ The name of Allah must be mentioned at the time of releasing it.
Without these two conditions, the hunted animal will not be lawful (halal).

Hadith Commentary: By the blessing of Allah's name, even such game becomes lawful.

Hadith Commentary:
➊
A "mi‘raadh" refers to an arrow whose tip does not have a point (blade).
If it strikes an animal or something else with its side, causing the flesh to be crushed and the animal to die without blood flowing, then eating such an animal is not permissible. However, if after being wounded, the animal is caught alive and, mentioning the name of Allah, it is slaughtered, then it is lawful (halal).
If it strikes with its point, causing the flesh to tear and blood to flow, then if the name of Allah was mentioned at the time of throwing, in this case its meat may be eaten; that is, by the blessing of Allah’s name, this type of game is lawful.

➋
In this hadith, another manner of worshipping Allah by means of His names is described: that if, at the time of releasing the hunting dog, the name of Allah was mentioned, and the hunting dog does not eat from the animal itself but completely restrains itself, then eating its meat without slaughtering is permissible.
This is solely due to the blessing of Allah’s name.

➌
The meaning of this hadith is that if the name of Allah was mentioned at the time of releasing the dog, then it is not permissible to use such an animal (i.e., eat its meat) even if the dog itself does not eat from it.
In any case, the purpose of Imam Bukhari rahimahullah is to explain the interpretation of this noble verse:
“The most beautiful names belong to Allah, so call on Him by them.” ()
One way of calling upon Him is described in this hadith.
And Allah is the One whose help is sought.

Hadith Commentary:
The majority of scholars have issued a legal verdict (fatwa) based on this hadith, and the hadith narrated by Abu Shu’bah, which Abu Dawud has transmitted, is weak, whereas this hadith of ‘Adi radi Allahu anhu is strong.
Acting upon this is preferable.
‘Adi radi Allahu anhu, like his father Hatim, is renowned for his generosity.
He accepted Islam in the year of the conquest of Makkah and, along with his tribe, remained steadfast upon Islam. He participated in the conquests of Iraq, then remained with ‘Ali radi Allahu anhu, and lived to the age of 68 years (Fath al-Bari).

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
There are two conditions regarding the game hunted by a hunting dog:
If, at the time of releasing it, the name of Allah (Bismillah) was recited, and the dog restrained the game for the hunter without eating from it itself, then it is permissible to eat such game.
The command of Allah, the Exalted, is:
“Eat of what they (the hunting animals) have caught for you, but mention the name of Allah over it.” ()
(2)
From this hadith, it is understood that there are two situations regarding game hunted with a pointed stick:
If the animal dies due to the point or sharp edge, then it is permissible to eat it. But if it dies due to being struck with the broad side, then it is not permissible to eat it. However, Imam Awza‘i, Mak‘hul, and the jurists of Sham (rahimahumullah) say that any game hunted with a pointed stick is permissible to eat unconditionally, whether it is torn by the broad side or cut by the point or sharp edge. Similarly, Abu Darda and Fadala bin Ubaid (radi Allahu anhuma) also did not consider there to be any harm in this.
(‘Umdat al-Qari: 14/478)
In any case, the hadith contains the details, and action will be taken accordingly.
And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary:
The meaning of striking with the width is that the shaft of the arrow hits the hunted animal sideways.
And due to the weight and impact, it dies.
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has brought this hadith here in the explanation of doubtful matters, that in the presence of another dog, there arose a doubt as to which dog actually caught the prey.
The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, in order to remove this doubt, forbade eating such a hunted animal.
Among the Arabs, it was customary to train hunting dogs.
Islamic law has permitted that if such a trained dog is released after saying “Bismillah” and it catches the prey, and the prey dies before the owner reaches it, then such a hunted animal is lawful (halal).
From this hadith, it is also evident that any animal over which “Bismillah” is not recited is unlawful (haram) and carrion (maytah); this is the view of the Ahl al-Hadith and the Zahiris, and Imam Shafi‘i rahimahullah says that the slaughtered animal of a Muslim is lawful in every case, whether he intentionally or forgetfully omits “Bismillah.”
From this hadith, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah derived the meaning of the chapter that in this animal there arose a doubt as to which dog killed it.
And he forbade eating it, so it is understood that one should avoid doubtful matters.
(Wahidi)

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
If the hunting animal is struck by the arrow on its side (i.e., with the flat of the blade), it will die due to the blow. The Noble Qur’an has declared animals that die from a blow to be unlawful (haram). On this basis, an animal that dies from the blow of an arrow that struck it on its side is also unlawful.

(2)
Among the Arabs, it was customary to train hunting dogs. Islamic law has permitted that if a trained dog is released after reciting “Bismillah” and it catches the prey, and if the prey dies before the owner reaches it, then that animal is lawful (halal) and its consumption is permissible. However, if “Bismillah” is not recited over the dog, then the prey killed by it is unlawful (haram) and carrion. But if another dog joins the hunting dog and the prey is found dead, then it cannot be said with certainty which dog killed the animal; that is, the presence of the other dog causes doubt. The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) forbade eating such prey in order to remove this doubt.

(3)
From this, it is understood that one should avoid doubtful matters. In reality, in such situations, the original ruling of everything is considered—whether it is prohibition, permissibility, or doubt. It is unlawful to eat the hunting animal before it is slaughtered. When there is doubt as to whether “Bismillah” was recited over it or not, the unlawfulness of such an animal will not be removed without certainty. This principle is established from this hadith of Hudhayfah ibn Haatim (radi Allahu anhu). And Allah knows best.

Explanation:
The main discussion of this hadith will come in the Book of Hunting, insha’Allah ta’ala. It is understood from this that, from the general ruling regarding the impurity of dogs, there is an exception for the game hunted by trained dogs, subject to the known mentioned conditions.

Hadith Commentary:
1.
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has clarified in another narration that Hazrat Adi bin Hatim radi Allahu anhu inquired about hunting with dogs.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Dhaba’ih wa al-Sayd, Hadith: 5487)
But at this point, the purpose of mentioning this hadith is not to explain the rulings and issues of hunting, but rather to present the arguments of those who consider the saliva of the dog to be pure, regardless of whether the inference is correct or incorrect. The reasoning of those who consider the saliva of the dog (lu‘ab al-kalb) to be pure is as follows: if it were impure (najis), the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam would certainly have commanded that every place on the hunted animal where the dog bit it should be washed, because saliva would have been present there.
Since he did not give such a command, therefore it is pure. However, this reasoning is among the ambiguous arguments.
In the presence of explicit ahadith, it holds no weight.
In clear ahadith, the saliva of the dog has been declared impure, which we have already explained earlier. Moreover, this reasoning is not based on explicit statement (mantuq) but rather on what is left unmentioned (maskut ‘an), meaning that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam remained silent regarding washing those places, so their purity is established. However, just as he did not command the washing of the saliva, similarly he did not command the cleaning of the blood flowing from the wounds—so should this blood also be considered pure? The real matter is that hunters are aware that its blood and saliva are washed.
Imam Malik rahimahullah used to say that if the saliva of the dog were impure, then eating its hunted game would not be permissible. But the hadith scholar Isma‘ili has answered this by saying that the hadith indicates that the killing of the game by the dog stands in place of its ritual slaughter (dhabh); in this, there is neither proof of impurity nor its negation.
The evidence for this is that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did not command the washing of the blood flowing from the wound, and there was no need to mention what was already established. Similarly, the impurity of the dog’s saliva and the command to wash it were already established in light of other statements, so it was not mentioned here.
(Fath al-Bari: 1/366)
2.
When a dog or any other animal or bird is trained for hunting, this distinguishes it from other animals. Therefore, the difference between the game hunted by an ordinary dog and that hunted by a trained dog is a natural matter. In fact, even between a dog trained by a Muslim and one trained by a non-Muslim, there is a difference in inclination and method.
Other discussions regarding hunting will be mentioned later in the Book of Slaughter and Hunting (Kitab al-Dhaba’ih wa al-Sayd). In any case, the apparent purpose of presenting the hadith of the trained dog (kalb mu‘allam) is that, generally, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah does not hold the view of the purity of the dog’s saliva.
And this is the intended point.

Hadith Commentary:
Benefits and Issues:
If a person hunts with an arrow and the game disappears after being struck by the arrow, and there is no mark on it except that of his arrow, and the hunter has pursued it and it has not sat down, then according to Imam Abu Hanifah, it is permissible to eat it. This is also the well-known opinion of Imam Ahmad. According to the Shafi'is, it is not permissible. One opinion of Imam Malik is that it is permissible, and another opinion is that if a night passes, then it is not permissible; otherwise, it is permissible. In the case of drowning, since there is a possibility that it died due to drowning, it is not permissible. From this, it is understood that if two causes are combined somewhere—one establishing permissibility and the other establishing prohibition—then the ruling will be according to the cause of prohibition.

Hadith Commentary:
Vocabulary of the Hadith:
(1)
Mi‘raadh:
A thick stick,
an arrow without feathers,
a staff with an iron tip,
or a pointed stick.
(2)
Kharaq:
To pierce and enter inside,
that is, to cause blood to flow from it.

Benefits and Issues:
(1)
A dog or hunting animal that is trained for hunting and has acquired the training,
and obeys the hunter’s command,
if it is released upon the prey with the recitation of “Bismillah” and it hunts,
then eating that prey is unanimously permissible.
According to Imam Malik and Abu Hanifah, if one forgets to recite “Bismillah” over the slaughtered animal or the hunted prey,
then eating that slaughtered animal or prey is permissible; and according to Imam Ahmad, if one forgets to recite “Bismillah” over the slaughtered animal,
then eating it is permissible,
but if one forgets to recite “Bismillah” over the hunted prey,
then eating it is not permissible.
(al-Mughni, vol. 12, no. 290)
However, according to Imam Shafi‘i, reciting “Bismillah” over the slaughtered animal and the hunted prey is Sunnah,
not obligatory,
therefore, whether one leaves it out intentionally or forgetfully,
eating it is permissible.
The position of the majority of scholars is correct,
that in the case of intentionally omitting “Bismillah,” eating is not permissible.
According to Imam Ahmad, hunting with a black dog is not permissible.

(2)
If the prey is hunted with a mi‘raadh and it strikes with its broad side,
so that no blood flows from the prey, then it falls under the ruling of mawqūdhah (the animal killed by a blow), whose consumption is not permissible.
This is the position of the majority of the imams: Abu Hanifah,
Malik,
Shafi‘i,
Ahmad,
Ishaq, and others.
If a hunting rifle causes blood to flow,
then its prey will be permissible;
if, like a slingshot, it does not cause blood to flow,
then it will not be permissible without slaughtering.
(al-Mughni, vol. 12, p. 283)

Urdu Footnote:
Note:
(In the chain of narration, "Mujalid" is weak.)

Explanation:
1:
The meaning is that if, in addition to the arrow, there is an effect from any other thing on this game animal, such that there is a possibility that its death occurred due to this other effect, then such game is not lawful (halal).

Explanation:
1:
When the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said that you have recited "Bismillah" only over your own dog, its meaning is that he (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) did not consider it permissible to eat the game of a dog with which other dogs had participated.

Explanation: 1:

Waqidh:
It refers to game that is killed with a stick, stone, or such a weapon that does not have a sharp edge.
From this hadith, the ruling is established that when an arrow or another similar sharp-edged weapon is used for hunting, then that game is lawful (halal), and if it is killed with a blunt object, then it is not lawful (halal).

Explanation:
1:
If, after being struck by the arrow, the hunted animal fell into the water due to the arrow and then the hunter caught it, then it is lawful (halal), because now there remains no doubt that it died by drowning in the water.

Explanation:
1:
A trained animal means that when it is released for hunting, it runs towards the prey; when it is stopped, it stops; and when it is called back, it returns. Several rulings are derived from this hadith:

(1)
The game hunted by a trained dog is permissible and lawful (halal).

(2)
The dog must be mu‘allam, i.e., it has been trained for hunting.

(3)
This trained dog must have been sent for hunting; thus, if it brings back prey on its own without being sent, eating it is not lawful. This is the opinion of the majority of scholars.

(4)
At the time of sending the dog for hunting, “Bismillah” must be pronounced.

(5)
No other dog should participate in the hunt along with the trained dog; if another dog participates, the aspect of prohibition will prevail and this game will not be lawful.

(6)
The dog should not eat from the game but rather preserve it for its owner; only then will the game be lawful, otherwise not.

Benefits and Issues:
➊
Hunting with a dog is lawful and permissible.

➋
The condition is that the dog must be trained,
and it must act upon its owner's instructions as is due.
That is, if it is released and commanded to chase, it should chase,
and if it is called back, it should return.

➌
Furthermore, it is also required that the dog hunts upon being released by its owner.
If it hunts and brings the prey on its own initiative, it will not be lawful.

➍
When releasing the dog, one should say "Bismillah, Allahu Akbar."
If one forgets, it is excused,
and the prey is lawful,
because the name of Allah is in the heart of every Muslim.
However, if one intentionally omits it, the prey will not be lawful.

➎
The dog should not eat from the prey, but rather restrain it for its owner; and if it has eaten from it, the prey will not be lawful.

➏
If the prey is alive, then one should say "Bismillah, Allahu Akbar" and slaughter it.

➐
If another dog joins these dogs and it is not known which one killed the prey,
or it is not known whether "Bismillah" was recited over the other dog or not,
then the prey will not be lawful.
If it is known that "Bismillah" was also recited over the other dog,
then without doubt, it will be lawful.

➑
Hunting with a spear is also lawful and permissible,
provided that "Bismillah" is recited before throwing,
and the prey is struck with the sharp edge and wounded.
If it is struck with the broad side and the prey dies, it will not be lawful.

➒
According to some scholars (Imam Shawkani, Sayyid Sabiq, and Allamah Yusuf Qaradawi, etc.),
the bullet and pellets of a gun are under the same ruling.
That is, their hunted prey is also lawful,
because in their view, the bullet of a gun also tears the prey and causes blood to flow.

➓
However, if prey is killed by a slingshot and dies from its blow, it is not lawful because it does not tear,
nor does it cause blood to flow,
rather, it clearly dies from the blow of the slingshot.

Benefits and Issues:
The consumption of doubtful (mushkook) game is not permissible (halal).

Benefits and Issues:
This narration is weak with this chain of transmission.
But in meaning, it is authentic.
Because this matter has been mentioned in other authentic narrations.
Therefore, some scholars have also declared this narration authentic.
However, the mention of the falcon (baaz) in it is, according to them, objectionable (munkar).
That is, it is contrary to the authentic narrations.

Benefits and Issues:
When it is certain that the game has died due to his own arrow,
then it is lawful (halal),
provided that the meat has not become spoiled.

It is understood that if, at the time of releasing them, the basmala (Bismillah) was recited—even if it was recited by someone else—then the game is lawful (halal).

Urdu marginal note:
"Not for you" means that the dog is not trained, therefore its game is not lawful. The repetition of the hadith to this extent is to explain all the details, and it is also intended to clarify that this hadith is not gharib (i.e., it does not have only one or two chains of transmission).

It is permissible to hunt with a trained and disciplined dog, and there is a difference between the hunting of trained and untrained dogs. From this hadith, it is also understood that hunting with arrows and similar things, such as a gun, is also permissible. However, the condition for this is that the arrow or the bullet from the gun must cause the hunted bird or animal to bleed; it should not merely kill it by striking it as a blow. That is, hunting should be done with these means in the same manner as with a sharp-edged object. If the arrow or gun is used after reciting "Bismillah" and the hunted animal dies, then that game is lawful (halal); otherwise, it will be impermissible. However, if the hunter forgets to mention the name of Allah when firing the gun, then in such a case, it is permissible to eat that game, because Allah Ta'ala has forgiven this Ummah for mistakes and forgetfulness. And Allah knows best.

However, it is necessary that it (the animal) has not become foul-smelling, nor has it been eaten by any predatory animal.

English Translation:

A mi‘raadh is a special type of arrow which has neither feathers nor a point. It is simply like a stick. Its blow can kill the prey, whereas in hunting with an arrow it is necessary that the point of the arrow strikes so that the animal bleeds out and dies. If the arrow is released after reciting “Bismillah” and the animal dies due to bleeding out, then this is considered equivalent to ritual slaughter (dhabh), therefore its consumption is permissible. However, if the animal dies due to a blow (i.e., blunt force), then ritual slaughter is a condition; otherwise, that animal will be unlawful (haram). The same ruling applies to hunting done with a gun.

(1) When a hunting dog is released for hunting, one should recite “Bismillah” at the time of releasing it, because this is the command of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam). The same ruling applies to arrows and other hunting instruments: hunting should only be done after reciting “Bismillah” over them.

(2) From this blessed hadith, it is also understood that hunting in the manner mentioned in the noble hadith is a permissible and lawful act. It does not fall under the category of vain amusement (lahw wa la‘ib) that has been prohibited. If hunting were forbidden, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would never have permitted it.

(3) Keeping dogs as a hobby is not permissible; however, it is allowed for the purpose of hunting. Similarly, the buying and selling of dogs is generally prohibited, but some jurists permit the buying and selling of such “trained” dogs.

(4) If a trained dog is released for hunting after reciting “Bismillah,” and it hunts for its owner, and in the process the prey dies before being slaughtered, it is still permissible to eat it. However, if the prey is found alive, it is necessary to slaughter it with “Bismillah.” It should be remembered that the ruling regarding the saliva of a trained hunting dog is the same as that of an untrained dog: it is haram. This is why the sacred law has not permitted eating from the prey that the dog has eaten, even if it is only a small portion. The wisdom behind this appears to be that the true well-wishers of the Ummah and creation should keep them safe from the dangerous consequences of the dog’s poisonous germs… sallallahu alayhi wa sallam… For further details, see: (Sunan Nasai (Urdu) vol. 1, pp. 318-322, Darussalam edition)

(5) Incidentally, this hadith also teaches that if a dog is released to hunt a particular animal, but the dog hunts another animal for its owner, it is also permissible to eat it, because the dog hunted it for its owner.

(6) Hunting with a dog is permissible, but there are two conditions: the dog must be released after reciting “Bismillah,” and no other dog should be involved for which “Bismillah” was not recited at the time of release. The dog must be trained for hunting, meaning it catches the prey for its owner, not for itself. The sign of this is that it only catches the prey and does not eat it. If it eats it, it will not be considered trained. Some scholars have also stipulated that the dog should not maul the prey to death, but rather seize it so that the animal dies from bleeding; otherwise, an animal that dies from mauling is not lawful.

(7) The prey of a dog released by a person whose slaughtered animal is lawful is also lawful, for example: a Muslim, a Jew, or a Christian. The prey of a dog released by a person whose slaughtered animal is not lawful is also not lawful, for example: an idolater, a Magian, a fire-worshipper, etc. And Allah knows best.

Benefits and Issues:
➊
A trained dog, when released after pronouncing the takbir, renders the animal it hunts lawful (halal) to eat.

➋
If the dog eats from the game itself, then the remaining part of that animal is unlawful (haram); it should also be given to the dog to eat.

➌
If two dogs participate in the hunt, and the takbir is pronounced over one but not the other, then the animal is still unlawful (haram), because it is possible that the animal was killed by the other dog.

Benefits and Issues:
(1)
A mi‘rad is a type of arrow that consists only of a pointed piece of wood; it does not have an iron tip or anything similar attached to it.

(2)
If the mi‘rad strikes the game animal with its pointed end, it penetrates the body and causes a wound; in this case, it serves the function of a regular arrow, and thus, in this situation, the game is lawful (halal). However, if it strikes with its broad side, it hits like a stick; if the animal dies from this, it is unlawful (haram).

Benefits and Issues:
➊ When an arrow penetrates the body of the game and wounds it, the game hunted with such an arrow, which was released after pronouncing the takbir, is lawful (halal).

➋ The effect of a rifle bullet or pellets, due to their speed, is similar to that of an arrow; therefore, game hunted with them is also lawful (halal).
And Allah knows best.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه البخاري، الذبائح والصيد، باب التسمية علي الصيد، حديث:5475، ومسلم، الصيد والذبائح، باب الصيد بلكلاب المعلمة والرمي، حديث:1929.»
©Explanation:
➊ From this hadith, it is understood that hunting for food or to obtain benefit is permissible.
➋ Whether the hunting is done with a hunting dog or with hunting birds, all are permissible and eating them is lawful (halal). There are two conditions for this: one is that when releasing the dog, it is necessary to say "Bismillah" (in the name of Allah). The second is that the dog must be trained, that is, it must be a taught (mu‘allam) dog.
➌ If the trained dog eats from the hunted animal, then the game becomes unlawful (haram), and it is not permissible to eat it.
➍ If the hunted animal is in sound condition and the dog has not eaten from it, then it is permissible to eat it. At this point, it should also be noted that if the dog caught the game with its teeth and it died, then eating it is lawful; but if it died due to a blow from the dog's body, then it is unlawful.
➎ If the game is still alive when the person reaches it, then it should be slaughtered (dhabiha), and if it has already died, then eating it as it is, is lawful.
➏ From this hadith, it is also understood that the hunting dog must be released by the owner himself after reciting "Bismillah." If the dog attacks the game on its own and kills it, then such game is not lawful. This is the opinion of the majority of scholars. However, there is a group whose opinion is that only the dog being trained is a condition; releasing it intentionally is not a condition.
➐ Similarly, from this hadith, hunting with other means such as a spear or arrow is also established.
➑ When shooting an arrow, it is also necessary to mention the name of Allah. Thus, it is established that saying "Bismillah" is obligatory for hunting; however, if one forgets to say "Bismillah," there is no harm. This is the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah, and according to Imam Malik rahimahullah and, in one narration, Imam Ahmad rahimahullah, and among the Companions, the opinion of Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhuma is that even if "Bismillah" is deliberately omitted, eating such game is still lawful. According to them, reciting "Bismillah" at the time of slaughter or hunting is Sunnah, not obligatory. The opinion of the Zahiri school is that eating game over which "Bismillah" was omitted is unlawful in all cases.
➒ The preferred opinion appears to be that if it is certain that the name of Allah was deliberately not mentioned over the slaughtered animal, then it should not be eaten; but in case of doubt, if the slaughterer is a devout Muslim, then one should eat it after saying "Bismillah." And if a bird or similar animal, after being struck by an arrow, falls into water, then it should not be eaten, because there is doubt as to whether it died from the arrow or from drowning in the water.
© Hadith Narrator:
«حضرت عدی بن حاتم رضی اللہ عنہ » ‘Adi bin Hatim Ta’i.
Like his father, he was extremely generous.
In the month of Sha‘ban, 7 AH, he presented himself in the service of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam and embraced Islam.
When many Arab tribes apostatized, he and his people remained steadfast upon the truth and veracity of Islam.
The first zakat that reached Abu Bakr radi Allahu anhu was the zakat of ‘Adi radi Allahu anhu and his people.
He was present at the conquest of Madain.
He participated in battles alongside Ali radi Allahu anhu.
During the Battle of Jamal, he lost his eye.
His examples of generosity and nobility are very well-known and famous.
He lived for one hundred and twenty years and passed away in 68 AH.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه البخاري، الذبائح والصيد، باب إذا وجد مع الصيد كلبًا أخر، حديث:5486.»©Explanation:
From this hadith it is understood that the principle regarding hunting is that if the animal is wounded by a sharp-edged object and dies due to the flowing of blood, then it is lawful (halal) to eat it. However, if it dies due to a blow or strike from something (i.e., not a sharp object), then it is unlawful (haram) to eat it.

Benefit:
In this hadith, a legal ruling regarding hunting is mentioned: if an animal is struck with the *mi‘raadh* (the broad middle part of an arrow) and is caught alive, then it may be slaughtered and eaten. However, if it dies due to the *mi‘raadh*, then eating it is forbidden. Also, see the next hadith.
If, before shooting an arrow or the like at an animal, one recites «بسم الله والله اكبر», and then the animal dies, it is lawful (halal). But in the situation mentioned in the hadith, slaughtering (dhabh) is necessary.

Benefit:
In this hadith, some rulings regarding hunting are mentioned. A hunting dog is one that, when commanded to stop, halts at that place, and when ordered to catch something, runs after it; and after catching the hunted animal, does not eat it itself but brings it to the owner. One should avoid matters that are doubtful between lawful (halal) and unlawful (haram); both the lawful is clear and the unlawful is clear.